Sam Seder ENDS Jillian Michaels career

It could work out okay, Sam.

Like you're you're to the right of of you know The US killed. So the story is, is the producer of the show showing her results on ChatGPT that are happening back and forth here in real time? My God. Regular Mousseline over here. That's why you see the Persians, especially the Persian Jews being so loud in America right now.

This super cut still going?

It wasn't necessarily our parents or our grandparents or our great- Is it going to be like 20 people to get the points? Okay, finally. Yeah, grandparents [laughter] with the Holocaust. This was us. Like I lived that. My parents lived that. We escaped that. What is the red? Who's red and who's green?

So basically, it's the Islamists joining hands with the communists. There are numerous. I was just like, I was behind the scenes watching this, 'cause you'd have your you'd have, I don't know what they're using, right? Like Discord or Skype or something, or you know, whatever in the corner. And then you have [clears throat] to sit there and she's like, "Oh my God."

[laughter]

She's she's going with this. All right, there's there's the super cut. Clips like this, Sam. And it's okay if you don't agree. It's okay if you want to attack.

The name of that first woman on the street? I don't know. An Iranian protester on the street. One of many. I can give you many different sites if you like. I can pull up different articles.

Yeah, you don't have to. What is the? What is the argument that? Here's the argument. In offering free buses. That's not the argument. Is like the Ayatollah is more than welcome, by the way. You're more than welcome to have that argument with me. Let's not talk about half. Let's have that argument.

Well, explain to me. Here's their argument. What communist? What communist things that Mamdani has has has um? Graphic number three, guys. These. No, no, no, wait, wait, wait. It's just just. You're just asking the parallel. I'm telling you what they're saying. Communist? What? Communist Party? I I've never seen someone be so over and under prepared at the same time. Oh, we'll get to that, Sam. Show them graphic number six. Yeah, that's that's not related at all to what we're talking about. Right, you would say that, which is why I prepared this one. Show them graphic number nine. That's a picture of Ronald McDonald. What are we doing?

[laughter]

Has Mondani uh uh proposed?

This is what they are citing, Sam. What they are saying is that the parallels. What Islamist policies? Answer answer the.

Tim, he's a he's a Muslim, correct? He's a. He's a Muslim.

[laughter]

He is a Muslim, correct? And this is what you're saying. I'd like to know what they're comparing. I'm telling you. See, this right here is why you can't jump out of the gates with identity politics. She tried to accuse him of being a homophobe. That was her opening move, by the way. Sam, I mean, here we we got some some quotes from you. I want to hear your your reaction when we play them back. And then he's like, "Okay."

[laughter]

And now we're immediately pivoting to, "Well, I mean, you know, I I think that it's pretty clear that Mondani was going to basically fulfill the prophecy of the Iowa Toilet Committee that was, you know, stated 47 years ago." Sorry, what are you basing that on? Oh, I mean, there's overwhelming amounts of evidence. I mean, roll the tape. And the tape is people speaking on the street or her interviews from her show or Glenn Beck's show. And then she's like, "Bet you feel pretty pretty embarrassed now, don't you?" It's like, "Okay, well, how about we just have a conversation then? What exactly about his policies do you find communist?" He's a Muslim. Is he not a Muslim, Sam? Are you going to deny he's a Muslim? Looks like I got pretty big debate point, y'all. I'm asking you right now. What communist? Let's argue the validity of these points. Those people are obviously allowed to come on to talk about that, but what's not okay is you calling me an idiot saying it didn't happen. It did happen. And all you have to do is Google it.

Is still reserved. I yes, you can find a random person on the street saying anything. You can find them.

[laughter]

She's doing it again. Wow, I can't even do bits about this 'cause she's just going to do it in real time. But [gasps] also it. Okay, so when providing evidence of something, if you have a surplus of stuff unrelated to evidence, it doesn't matter how much you have.

[laughter]

Like if I was trying to prove the world is flat and I showed you 10 clips of people being like, "The world is flat." I haven't proved anything.

[laughter]

Yeah, but like that's just a random series of people saying a thing on the street. Is it? Show him number seven. Look at this. "Ugandan diaspora critics voice doubts over Mondani as New York mayor." Uh some critics in Uganda's diaspora are expressing criticism about Zora Mondani, the Muslim self-described Democratic Socialist frontrunner. Uh and this is highlighted, even likening his populist vision to the Ayatollah Khomeini's 1979 Islamic Revolution. Yeah, so I don't know if your team's illiterate or maybe Jillian is. Um, you're proving his point.

[laughter]

This is not a quote by Zora Mondani. This is once again the opinion of random people.

[laughter]

Sam, the opinions of random people is overwhelming. Do you know how many random people have opinions? Are you not going to address that? Graphic four, GRAPHIC THREE.

[laughter]

SLOW DOWN. SLOW DOWN. THESE ARE AMAZING.

[laughter]

What is graphic three? It seems to be a series of memes. Mondani versus Khomeini, different century, same lies. Look at this. Free housing, free housing. Free buses and public transit, free buses and public transit. I didn't know this. Khamenei offered all of this? Like these were all policies of Ayatollah Khamenei. Was free healthcare, jobs for everyone, free education, cheap food for everyone, justice for the oppressed, blamed imperialists and capitalists, blames colonizers and landlords.

[gasps]

You don't even have the courage to source your meme here, by the way. She's like, "Example. Example. Evidence. Evidence." And it's like, What? Which? What is this one? Like can you? Who's posting this? Like I think that would probably help your case, right? Who made this? Otherwise, [laughter] it's just random internet gibberish, isn't it? Sam, explain this. Explain what this means.

You're avoiding the actual question.

Avoiding the question, Sam. If we were going.

There is no doubt the Iranian diaspora, they also told us that the Iranian government would fall. They also encouraged a war attacking Iran. Not all of the diaspora, but certainly large elements of it. So their credibility, let's talk about the actual issue that you're out there saying that. Okay. I'll give you an example of something that concerns me. Here's something that concerns me. Give me one example.

I'll give you an example. Here's a perfect example, okay? There's a video and I I can drop it in, I can send it to you of Mom Donny at a mosque. Seeming perfectly lovely. Ringing in the new year at a mosque for the first time. Okay.

He gets off stage and they swiftly call for death to the infidels.

[laughter]

Even in your example, which may or may not exist, you have to show him offline?

[laughter]

It doesn't involve Mom Donny. It involves his supporters. How do you not understand that? Even if true, you know, in good faith, it's important, by the way, when you're debating, you have to be very good faith. So, in the best of faith here, [laughter] your example that you. This is amazing. It's only been like 13 minutes.

[laughter]

And we pray daily for your success in this journey, inshallah. Thank you. Okay, so I'm going to read out what the translation says to see just how insidious this truly is, okay? This prayer, and supports you against your enemies. And among those who are are martyred before you, among the ranks of your loyal ones. Uh edited, but it's jump cutting to through your hands comes the relief for the believers. And the killing of the infidels by your sword. Like I'm sorry. Who who does?

[laughter]

Just.

[laughter]

I mean, I I have the button. I wonder how many times he's like wanting to use it. Pause it. The The exact Imam, he gets off stage, and the guy immediately says a prayer that calls for death to the infidels by the sword. That freaks me out, Sam. It freaks me out, dude.

That's your evidence that.

Imam Donnie isn't a Muslim. Yeah, and that's also wild. It's like, okay, explore that. Unpack that. What What about that sentence is particularly uh frightening to you? And And why does uh the act of saying it scare you? May- Maybe that would be more important, I think, for personal growth than saying, "These are literal things that Imam Donnie said." And it's like, so this is your best example is that he was at an event where after he was finished speaking, there was a prayer, and the prayer scared you. And because Muslim scary, that's terrifying. I mean, correct me if I'm wrong, he's been in power long enough now to for everyone I assume to realize he isn't interested in doing all the racist things they said he wanted to do. Like he's not doing 9/11 too. He hasn't, you know, announced a jihad on, you know, Chick-fil-A. There there's absolutely no mass persecution specifically of Jewish people in New York right now as being done as part of his, again, horrifying regime. Like none of these things came to pass. It was actually the exact opposite. All the all the lovely stuff that came to pass was was actually pretty darling to see. Like just being like, "Hey, by the way, one of the first things I want to do is introduce universal child care for people with children as young as two." Like that's going to be life-changing for for so many goddamn families. And then, you know, asking New Yorkers to help when they were having, you know, a record snowstorm doing so by actually paying them a living wage to to to help them out. And And then there's now his his policy to go after effectively landlords who are becoming, you know, slum lords and destroying the quality of life for everybody in the city. All the things like for the amount of fear mongering about Zoran, to to see what he's actually pulling off in the other direction, it's like it's to the degree of a cartoonish Disney musical. Like like there's so many times when I'm expecting a little bird to fly off Miss Rachel's like, you know, shoulder and a dove to to perch upon Zoran and they're just breaking into song because what the [ __ ] is this? I'm just I'm so used to to watching politicians almost [snorts] like have an unspoken hatred for their constituents. Like it's not it's not said out loud, but there's just like a condescension there, you know? Like I got mine. Now I just got to get on my kickbacks from the oil and gas lobby until I retire. That kind of [ __ ] Like that that's what it feels like so often. So, to see something else, it's so refreshing to the point again, it almost doesn't seem real. Like it's cartoonish in in how ridiculous it is compared to the alternative. Eric [ __ ] Adams? Like now now that you have the case study, it's like okay, so Zohran Mamdani was going to come into power, he was going to do 9/11 too, he was going to do all these horrifying things. That didn't happen. So so now you can probably start to realize that you were just in a racist bubble this whole time, right? Like how are you still doing this at this point in the story? Sam. This is like harkening back to when Barack Obama was a member of the weather underground because of Bill Ayers [laughter] or because of his or.

Muslim? His reverend. Okay. He swore in on the Quran. He's a self-proclaimed Muslim, which is totally fine, but he has some radical positions.

In the Old Testament? In the Torah? Uh Sam, I've actually had scholars on to compare both texts. And if we talk about a religious war or jihad, Oh. It's confined in the Old Testament to the Canaanites. And that's because they were animal [laughter] sacrificing babies. So, it's not an ongoing holy war or jihad. And I'm not saying that that's what Mamdani is recommending. Oh, you're not? Sam, [gasps]

[laughter]

YOU [ __ ] THE CANAANITES, AM I RIGHT?

[laughter]

YOU ONLY GOT CAUGHT IN A LIE JUST NOW. And there are so many others that I got caught in. Well, you claimed I was an idiot and it wasn't happening, but it is happening.

Well, I think we haven't resolved that.

All right. Well, how about this one? How about this one? Like that I There's so many of these, but buckle up. So, slot number five is Ana Kasparian. We're going to pull that up in a second. And Amy Holmes was on her.

Your show with her? Actually, I am. I am. Because here's your claim, right? Your claim is that I get paid to defend Israel. I'm more than happy to give you the exact same offer that PBD gave Tucker. We can I We can hire independent accountants. They can go through our finances. It's never happened. I've no problem doing that if you want to take me up on it at any point.

Know if we literally meant that you actually get paid from the Israeli government, but I think clearly like you have an audience where you need to suggest that I'm talking about a radical Islamist and you're Really? Do you want to Do you want to see the the Israeli line dramatically and that's your business.

I've had Dave Smith on twice. James James Lee and I have spoken twice. I don't know who that is, but You've had Dave Smith on twice. What was that evidence of? Let's look up Dave Smith. Apparently he is a individual who should be respected for his anti-Zionist positions. Dave Smith recently doing shows with Nick Fuentes. This Dave Smith. Yeah, so that was his last guest actually. He's doing a show with Nick Fuentes. Oh, they look happy. Yeah, they're having a good time. Yeah, oh look at that. Yeah, I mean lots to talk about, right? Yeah, all opinions. Oh, don't Yeah, and don't you hate women and hate their bodies and then all that and then don't you sometimes wish that you could be just more than friends, you know, with like your your guy friends? Like what What if your guy friends were like more than friends, you know? I'm not I'm I'm talking like in in a gay way and then none of that. I'm I'm just saying like Why why why do we have to have marriages with with women specifically, right? Like I I'm not saying like we have to be gay with necessarily with other men like like have gay sex with them, but I'm just saying the options seem kind of like strict. Yeah, but what?

[laughter]

So yeah, I don't know if Dave Smith is is someone to brag about when it comes to this [ __ ] That's great.

He's very pro-Palestine. We had a full episode with Crystal Ball coming out on her take. Okay. I'm the one who got Ana Kasparian that job on her take.

Oh. And the issue was not about Israel versus Palestine. And in fact, I've had Cenk Uygur on to talk to me about it as well, and I can even drop a clip in here where we're on Piers and I'm saying, "I've learned a lot from you on this subject matter." Having said that, the debate on her take was not me being uncomfortable debating because there was no debate because they both agreed with me. Utterly across the board now. We've got multiple accusations that all pile up to the same exact.

I think it's the furies. It's the furies. I think it's the furies.

I don't know. I don't know, and I don't know, and I don't know, and I don't know, and I don't know, and I don't know, and I don't know. There's zero evidence to suggest none. Oh, you're saying. Would you stop for a second? Like this whole thing is ridiculous. There are two things being conflated right now. There are conspiracy theorists who think Israel killed Charlie Kirk. They have yet to provide a shred of evidence proving that. Done. We're not talking about that. I am talking about something entirely different. Talking about that. NO, WE'RE NOT. HOLD ON. LET ME FINISH MY [ __ ] THOUGHT. OKAY? The real issue here is that before most people even knew that Charlie Kirk was dead, You're honestly. Do I have TO SAY.

[laughter]

LET'S.

[laughter]

YEAH, HE [clears throat] GOT BORED 17 minutes in. To be fair though, it is pretty obnoxious to bring someone on and be like, "Yeah, I mean, a lot of people say that I won't interact with you and that I've been running from this, but here I am, so here we go." And a little preamble, play the clip.

[laughter]

Keep watching all these goddamn clips. They don't They don't exemplify the thing you think they do. And that's wild because you're in a lot of them.

[laughter]

I'm very, very sorry. And I apologize [clears throat] and I'll go. But if we're going to talk about issues, let's talk about it. I don't care. I'm willing to stipulate on the last thing that that person I mean to you and all that. I still want to talk about issues. Can we do the trans kids? Let's start with what you suggested to my producer. Okay, the Sam wanted to talk about the turf. Let's talk about the only thing that I actually care about and discuss with you. I went over all this with your producer. Crying about how mean we were to you and how we called you a name and this and that. I'm very sorry about that. I accept all of that. I'm going to bust you in so many lies. Okay. There you go. Here we go. Let's do Let's do side number seven. Let's do side number seven. I also say that organic type of thing that she represents, it'd be catastrophic. There's an article in Foreign Policy magazine 2022 in Sri Lanka organic farming went catastrophically wrong. Nationwide experiment is abandoned after producing only misery. Basically, they tried to go pesticide-free and it caused food shortages. So, these people have no real solutions other than they [clears throat] have a perverse incentive in that when people are sicker they and aren't covered by public health.

Oh, this explains so much about Jillian. So, she's kind of in that like, you know, disaffected anti-vax light you know, suburban California wine mom you know, ex-liberal to a T where where it's kind of like what are your solutions to a lot of the big problems? Oh, my solutions are buy local. Buy local. You got to buy local, right? Buy local. Then the second thing to do, you know, for all the suffering in the world, buy organic. Yeah, but you got to buy organic. Yeah, because you just don't know the things that they're putting on our food, you know, and none of us do. So, so buy local and buy organic. Which by the way, there's nothing wrong with buying local. Buying local produce is better. It has to be transported less. It's better for the environment. Okay, so I'm not trying to sit on people who want you to buy local. Organic would be nice if we could mass produce food on a scale to which we have to feed 7 billion humans and not require us to use anything whatsoever to try and prevent some of those crops from not yielding the side results. Um, we do overproduce food. It's another argument to be had for another time, but all the things you're listing are very [ __ ] expensive. It's like people who are like, "Are you Are you fighting climate change 'cause I bought a [ __ ] Tesla?" And and then it's like.

[snorts]

I just Is it better to drive a Tesla than it is to drive a gas-powered car? Of course, for the environment. Um, but like not everyone can afford that, all right? Like not everyone can have like Have you been to the organic or in Canada it's called biologique the biologique section of the supermarket? It's expensive as [ __ ] Like food's already expensive as [ __ ] all right? So, I'm not I'm not going to get started on that. Let's all go into our depression spirals here. But then you move from that into the organic section and then they they found this way to just make like bananas, which would have cost $2 or $3 for the bundle, suddenly cost 12. And it's like, "Well, it's organic." It's like, "Okay. It's certified organic, too." And then it's like, "All right, yeah. I mean, but the bananas are inside still, right? Yeah, but it's different different, you know, and so instead of using you know, really really intense pesticides, we're using you know, like ethyl marine and these and base compounds or they're more natural and all kind of stuff. It's like, "Right. But it it's but it's $12 to to to buy the the organic bananas." They turn two cracks like them. Yep. Yep. Okay, so that is That's exactly what we're talking about. That was in relation to USA. Did you read the article? Did I read the article? Mhm. You said yep, so did you read it? 'Cause it doesn't support any.

Even know what you're talking about. I honestly Matt was talking there. I don't know talking about. You said yep. Are you not? Okay. I said yep just now.

In the clip when he read it.

What? Hey, look. This this this ties back to the.

A day. I don't know when that clip was from.

Well, don't you think you should be responsible for the things on your. I said yep. Okay. What is the? I don't even know what the.

Ties back to the US aid.

To this. This ties back.

It. It's our show. I'm here to have an adult conversation. I don't think you are. I think you're a bad person 'cause I'm going to bust you in lie after lie after lie.

That's great. So.

[laughter]

I think they they they both realized they're in two different programs. It's like I want [laughter] to I want to have a conversation about these issues so we can get to the core of why I think you believe what you believe and I want to explain to you why it's wrong or at least try to find some common ground here. And she's like, I'm here to destroy your career, Sam. We got the clips. We got the receipts one after one. You're going to be caught in lie after lie. And.

[laughter]

Like she hasn't Yeah, I mean, as of yet, I don't know how this goes, but she's yet to to pull off a single instance of you said this, it's not true. Not not one. The article, what is.

There is No, let's let's start at the beginning, shall we? That's US aid.

Morgan. Mhm. You said to me Yeah. That when I brought up that there were going to be tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, uh millions of people over the course of the next decade who are going to die because of cuts in US aid. Your words to me were, quote, and I'm sure you have it sought whatever number it is. I do. Your words, that's a red herring. Mhm. And then you said to me, read a book. And And if you had, I think you'd know what I was talking about.

What book it was? Save Three Lives by Rodale.

Yes. I did read that book.

Did you? Then you should get it.

That book. I have it right here. Um, it was an okay book. But it should explain to you ongoing. Do you know when that book was written? You know when that book was only do I know when it's written, it actually started in the 50s. 1991.

Sam, can I explain it to you?

And that was 35 years ago. Mhm. And so I read the book. It mentions USAID once on page [laughter] 65 where Rodale actually speaks sort of positively of the USAID representative at a conference who was discussing discussing the the the What does food aid run through, Sam? What does the food aid run through, uh, the supplies needed to grow food in Africa was actually more expensive Mhm.

Than the actual food in of itself. Um, yes. You got Exactly.

In this book and everything that you complained about saying that USAID was just a front for corporations to go in and destroy uh, the food supply. And again, in these countries by forcing and and and much of what has been written here, I've interviewed countless peoples on this topic later than 1991 where this dynamic continued. It got worse.

All those operations that you supposedly had a problem with with USAID have been moved over to the USDA.

I'm well aware.

Stuff is still happening. What what is not happening is That's my point.

People are not getting um uh they're not getting like uh TB fighting uh drugs. They're not getting.

That waiver was on the 28th of January. Farm.

A blank PEPFAR waiver. And that waiver I'll tell you right now I've got an article for you right here in my hand that talks about the fact is that even after the waiver was issued. The time screwed up the supply side, the the logistics stuff that they're still having problems. PBS just wrote a piece on this actually. Maybe it was uh in in March Mhm. About how they're actually seeing deaths uh extensive deaths in um as a result of.

Send it to me because I I did a ton of homework on this.

Uganda, April 22nd, sees spiking disease-related deaths after elimination of USAID from PBS.

That's been moved over to the State Department, Sam. It isn't eliminated. It changed departments.

Specifically talks about the um the abrupt grinding to a halt by USAID for both HIV and HIV-associated illnesses like TB. Men and women uh close to 15% of the clients dying of malaria and TB. This is uh because of the function of USAID.

Anything Okay, first of all, all of that was done on 128. A blanket waiver for life-saving aid. It It shut everything down. I'm sorry.

On 128, it was a blanket waiver was given. Okay.

That this will produce 14 million additional deaths by 2030.

We Let's go through that. Can we do that? Can I address your your two studies? Sure. Okay. So, number one. You've got two.

This one's not a study. This one is direct reporting. No, no. By PBS on the ground in Uganda. That 14 million people have died the No, no, no. That people were dying in Uganda because of the destruction of USAID. Sam, send it to me.

Take it up with PBS. So, I did take it up with PBS, and here's what I learned. Since the 2025 dissolution of US Aid, the US shifted global health.

Wait, I I don't care about the edits. What This is a lot of goes right into the the ad read, too. Damn. What a pro. The author of that.

Suggests the opposite?

This you what counter-evidence you have. That's correct. Modeling happens all the time.

Sam, there isn't any. In fact, there's none. And here's the reason, because it is impossible to identify exact numbers. The author herself says they're modeling numbers and I recognize the limitation and then I'm going to show you the limitations with the study that you never cite. Sam, they're modeling numbers. I recognize.

With? None, which is why I want to get into Sam. They're modeling numbers and I recognize the limitations that this comes with. We don't have routine data sets that we can measure as such as those killed by lack of US funding. Having said that, okay? What she doesn't take into account for in her modeling, she doesn't take into account any of the waivers. There was a blanket waiver for life-saving aid given eight days after Trump's executive order. I just read to you a piece from PBS that said that waiver was irrelevant in terms of actually getting the aid to people because of all the other mechanisms that were destroyed. The waiver was.

Sam, send it to me. Send it to me and I'll have our team fact-check it right now. You have a Google. Sam, I I got. Yeah, I know, but like this is an impasse because she's never going to accept reality, I don't feel. Like you could be like, okay, well, here it is. Like I think again, it's it's a situation where she doesn't actually understand what she's talking about and it appears that you can you can tell immediately that Sam is like the waiver that you're speaking about, the specific waiver to that I I guess she feels absolves both her and Trump of any kind of culpability in the resulting amount of death that, you know, Elon Musk's and Dogecoin's eventually led to. Um, it doesn't it like it directly invalidates her argument to then be like, oh, yeah, that doesn't matter. It's in the article. You you can see that. You're getting hung up on the detail that you just hadn't gotten past or I guess fully understand or or wrap your head around.

Disease like in disease-related deaths after elimination of USA aid.

Check that how many deaths. I did find some through Washington Post. I found a handful. Hardly 600 to 750,000. I found a handful. A handful, how many is a handful kids?

Honestly, I found about eight cases that are documented. And the issue also has to do with war. It's very, very difficult to lock it down. Having said that, you're throwing out numbers that are not true. These are models by the Lancet. I said this is the Lancet study. They're models.

Neglected to mention. The problem with this model, A, the author of the study has significant conflicts of interest because she gets a grant from USAID. All right, there's flawed math because she's saying that every dollar spent equates to an amount of people saved. That's not true at all. She's got opaque, not rigorous layered modeling. She layers six different historical studies on top of each other and mashes them together. She ignored pre-existing duplication, which I'm going to give you an example of with the NIH, the USAID, the EcoHealth Alliance is a perfect example, which I'm going to give you. USDA, local governments, private philanthropies, she just forgets completely exist. She ignored reassignments because PEPFAR, as you know, went to the State Department, USDA got food. These things were reassigned. There is no No, first off, they were not all reassigned. And secondly, They weren't? It's one thing to get a waiver, but if you have undermined the entire logistical side. All the contracts are canceled. Let's [laughter] let's let's go to let's go to USAID 'cause I I think you'll like this one. Let's go to that.

[laughter]

I know it's so frustrating that she's being so condescending about something that she clearly doesn't fully understand. Like you shouldn't be able to mid-sentence have Sam be like, "Oh, that's not how that works." And then you be like, "Really? How does it work? Like what? Why [laughter] why are you being condescending to him? I mean, at least come from a position of I don't fully understand this or how this works, right? But at the end of the day, I don't think you're correct because based on what I'm seeing like that would at least be honest at at the very least. Honest. So, you read the book and I think you get it. You referenced it as from 1991. It actually started in the 50s. And it was started by Eisenhower and it was a public law, I think, 480. Then Kennedy turned it into Food for Peace when he created. He didn't say it was started in the 50s. I think he said the book that she wanted him to read, which is also just such a ridiculous tactic for any. I like I hate that. And by the way, that's not a just a right-wing thing or a centrist thing. Leftists do that, too. When someone else say, I I don't think that's right and you respond with, uh, yeah, and then you just like link them to a book and it's like, oh, hold on. I'll read this 400-page dense historical piece before I get back to you and then we'll talk, right? Well, Sam did that 'cause he's like, you have to read this book, Sam. So, he's like, yeah, I read the book. There's actually barely anything about US uh, AID in it, but uh, there is a very small, uh, you know, a line that relates to it. I guess that's what you wanted me to talk about and have to find in the [ __ ] haystack, but I did and so here's what this book talks about. He's like, the book came out in '91. He's like, well, actually, this program's been around since 1951, so you lied. That's not a lie. You have to learn what that word means.

USAID. Trump robbed this. You'll like this. This is This is anti-Trump. He grabbed this.

He looks like he's loving this. If [laughter] there's there's one thing [clears throat] that appears is that Sam Seder is enjoying every part of this conversation and where it's going. This on the 3rd of February of 2025, right? And he moved it all under USDA and then he called it America First Food Aid. And what he did was he made sure it's called tied aid, which existed, but it got expanded over the years. So, you referenced 1991, it got worse over the years. So, tied aid essentially means that all aid has to come from our big ag companies and go through our shippers. We lose 30 cents on every dollar as American taxpayers because of this. Now, what it does in the developing world is horrible, but there's no universe and this is what I mean when I tell you it's a red herring. There's no universe they're giving up those contracts. It's billions of dollars to big ag. Billions of dollars. It moved over in less than 2 weeks to USDA and the reason I'm telling you it's a red herring is because it's covering up for so much filthy dirty stuff that has gone on.

The the any of the life-saving stuff that USAID is it your is it your contention Okay. That USAID never saved a life? No. Never provided malaria stuff. Okay, what is your contention?

Okay, I'll give you an example, all right? Can I can I give you an example? When I mentioned kids? Can I give you an.

You said that's a red herring.

Yes, it's a red herring because we're still feeding them sand. It's a red herring because we're still feeding them. They're distracting you.

The idea of the corporations, that is your that is the red herring. Because if Donald Trump wanted to go in there and reform.

Mhm.

The that big ag is getting all the contracts and creating monocultures and growing crops that are not appropriate for those countries, etc. etc. This is all just sort of like imperialism and.

It is. It's neocolonialism. It's right up your alley. Which Yeah, I know, but like you're not coming at it from the proper framework here. You're saying that like everything needs to be shut down in totality and then it's like what the US empire the military industrial complex? No, no, no. Just the life-saving aid that was going to poor children in countries in Africa. That's what needs to be shut down and then imperialism over, right? I'm like I know I was so I there's a lot of news articles about this about the hundreds of thousands of people that have died as a result of this, but like you don't even need to go to news articles which are a many, but you can go to like sources like you know, Harvard. Uh like USA USAID shut down has led to of thousands of deaths. The Trump administration's decision to shut down the US Agency for International Development has resulted in hundreds of thousands of deaths from infectious diseases and malnutrition, according to Harvard Chan School of Public Health. Uh a surgeon, author, and distinguished professor at the residence of Ariadne Labs says he co-founded served the Biden administration as the assistant administrator for global health. He wrote the article in the New Yorker about the devastating impacts and loss of the USAID funds around the world. He was also featured in the accompanying short documentary called Ravina's Choice, which he co-executive produced. Um in the article which is discovered or sorry, discussed in the Lancet, which I believe is the one they're referring to, estimated that USAID assistance aimed at combating diseases such as HIV, tuberculosis, malaria, and polio resulted in maternal and child deaths and fighting malnutrition had saved 92 million lives over the last two decades. The dismantling of USAID, according to the model from Boston University epidemiologist Brooke Nichols, has already caused the death of 600,000 people, two-thirds of them children. Uh he noted the toll will continue to grow and may go unseen because it can take another two or three years for people to die from the lack of treatments for vaccine-preventable illnesses. Now, she's saying this is all a red herring because they're still being fed and the I guess vaccines are still being distributed through other mechanisms, but hasn't explained how. Which is the really [ __ ] up part here. I think that's why they're kind of like at the strange like Sam's trying to explain to her, "What do you mean?" That's why I don't see why you don't.

Trump wanted to fix that. No.

He could have easily fixed that.

Uh All that ended up happening is all of those bad things continued.

Yes.

The only thing that is no longer happening.

That's my point. None of that is changing. That's what I was trying to tell you. Yeah, also it just seems like it's coming like at its core from people who are white supremacists like Elon Musk. It makes perfect sense why a Nazi like Elon Musk would be completely fine with hundreds of thousands of children in countries in Africa dying. That seems like it's part of his project. Like for him, it's like, "Oh, great. I I, you know, I get to pretend like I'm saving uh, you know, costly government expenditures for my fan base while at the same time I get to murder a lot of children who are not white. That's like, you know, Elon Musk's dream come manifest. But it's just like it's such a tell if you have anyone coming at this uniquely from a perspective that this is anti-imperialism and they've never expressed that sentiment for anything else. Like in terms of imperial damage done to further you know, the the the the grandeur of the US and its hegemony um, what what do you think does worse? The US military industrial complex or its aid programs?

[laughter]

Like if you're like I yeah, we got to stop these aid programs to stop the imperial core. That's like oh all right comrade. I welcome on board. So I guess we're going to have to go at the root of the problem. No no no just the aid. Yeah, 'cause [ __ ] them kids am I right? Yeah, sorry, sorry, that that sounds a little rough. No, well, let's play the clip and let people decide if that's what you were trying to.

Okay, no problem. Guys, it's side number eight. Chilling, chilling. The feeding starving children thing is such a freaking red herring. So first of all, the vast majority of this USAID bloat and corruption does not go to that. Second of all. Well, our corruption does not go to the food. Why is he laughing so much about the starving kids part? Like it's not like there's a ramp up to this where it's like, hey, by the way, I got to set it for you. What's funnier? Kids dying from AIDS or from starvation? Right? Like he's just [ __ ] laughing his face off right now. No, and what you have not looked into, okay, is that Like even Piers Morgan, not a good man, very bad man, bad bad man, even he is maintaining composure throughout the. Well, this is rather ghastly. Is it not? A little bit. Jeez. Read a book. It's called Save Three Lives and it's by the Rodale family. And it has to do with the fact that our big ag companies went into the developed world to addict their soil to our GMO crops. It's a money laundering game. They can grow their crops. And here's the thing. Like, if there are aspects of the story which are 100% true, that there has been projects by GMOs and by massive multinational corporations, and they obviously are going to be both testing their products and then also utilizing the exploitation of countries, especially countries that they feel they can economically exploit in a variety of means. If that's all stuff that you are suddenly on board with, guess what? Holy [ __ ] do we have a lot to talk about. But it's like you're only using this as a way to defend Elon Musk and Trump killing kids. It's not like, "Okay, so do you care about taking down multinational corporations now?" "Oh, no, they're good. They're the job creators. Capitalism great." Okay, so then what are we doing here? I feel like you just hate black kids. That's I mean, I If that's If that's unfair, if that's an unfair statement right now, and and on some level you're like, "That Well, of course you would call me a racist." Okay, fine, fine. Explain yourself then. What What else do I have to go on here? In their soil far more efficiently than did for thousands of years before Conagra and Cargill and Monsanto and ADM went in. You just don't know that because you haven't done your homework. So, you're like, "Oh, there's children starving in Africa." Really? It is about billions of dollars going to big ag. That's what that's really about. And I've seen it firsthand when I went to South Sudan and stayed at a refugee camp. So, don't don't play your starving children card. I can't. So, I'm telling you that bloat and corruption is not about the Jillian has an adopted black daughter. Well, now I have more questions.

[laughter]

Even more questions. USAID program, but if you're truly concerned about it, it's it's way worse than not sending Puffy Nutty or whatever the paste is. It is because it is actually because. Okay. The budget, uh, the spending by sector from, uh, 2024, you said the majority of this stuff.

Bloat and corruption, I said. The majority of the bloat and corruption.

Health, basic education, good governance, disaster readiness. Sam, that's not what I said. I said the majority of bloat and corruption is not going to that. Can I give you an example?

Majority of of stuff that's not going to them is not going to them. But is your suggestion that.

An example?

I'm just trying to understand what you're saying here.

I'm going to try to tell you. Are you saying that the the the majority of the USAID budget was just bloat and corruption?

And corruption that Elon Musk is referencing. He was very clear, by the way, that he didn't want to cut USAID.

Wait, you going to try and argue to me that DOGE was somehow successful? It's universally considered an absolute failure.

Well, let's talk about.

Save any money. The budget didn't save. We did save money, not nearly as much. You didn't save a dime. Can we GET INTO WHAT YEAH, [laughter] I WAS I WAS LIKE, I THINK any of the imaginary savings that DOGE may have given you, that [ __ ] got evaporated as soon as the bombs started falling. [laughter] Like, that's the Even the fake savings you got is gone now. Yeah, the fake savings. But you know, you keep feeling good about that. The way they went about this was just the most ham-fisted way. They used AI just to look at contracts and.

[laughter]

And and willy-nilly. We just had a judge ruling the other day. Half the stuff is being reversed to the extent that it can be because it was done so poorly.

Why don't we talk about what he was talking about? You see if you don't agree with it, okay? So, can I point out something I think that you you got wrong? I'll give you an example of what we're talking about. The the COVID pandemic, I think we all know that, um, uh, in infectious diseases abroad do not necessarily stay overseas. She's all over the map. Prevented uh, we help countries prevent and detect infectious diseases before they could come to our borders and we build partnerships that you know help the United States and build goodwill and on the foundation of American generosity over the course of about six decades that that created a an international framework that supported the United States success over that time. I mean, it it was it was created under the Kennedy administration along with things like the Peace Corps. This was a way to project or in many respects like American influence if not power.

Soft power, soft power, and do so by making friends. I mean, like, we, you know, we like, essentially, to help people. And it was, I mean, aside from, like, you say, a lot of this had implications for American health too, because particularly, you know, less so maybe in 1960, but certainly by the time you get to 2020, we saw quite quickly how something that starts all the way around the world can impact this country.

Okay, can I give you some examples about where that?

[Laughter]

Why did you play such a long clip? What is your contention with anything he said? That's a plot, all right? So, US.

What I said, or the guy who worked at USAID for 10 years?

Which Sam? Both. Which, which, okay, both of us, okay. All right. So, USAID gave EcoHealth Alliance, which is the organization that funded the Wuhan lab. Okay, they gave them millions of dollars. Part of it, quite literally, went to bat-borne coronavirus research, $1.1 million. They've given them tens of millions. Simultaneously, these guys are taking money from the NIH for the same thing. They're double-billing both agencies. That's bloat, that's corruption. Not only that, okay? Just to show you, I'm trying to show you that there is bloat and there is corruption, and this is the kind of stuff that people are upset about. So now, if you look at, right, how corrupt these people are. What does that have to do with the USAID? USAID funded them tens of millions of.

[Laughter]

Sam, the point that Elon Musk was trying to make, and he said so numerous times. He did not say, "I want to cut food, I want to cut life-saving aid." He said the opposite. You said it was a joke. You laughed at it. You literally said, "It's a red herring, and it's a joke, and don't use that card."

Okay, kids dying card. Sam, what I was saying very clearly.

If you're so worried about bloat and corruption, do you understand that your, that, that Donald Trump right now, Donald Trump right now has been selling pardons. He is literally about to get a $1.7 billion slush fund by suing the government and his former defense attorney, who's the head of the DOJ. And you're talking about like, "Well, you wanted to debate this, though, didn't you? Isn't this what you wanted to debate?"

[Laughter]

I don't even know how you have a conversation at this point because it's like, I, I'm giving you examples.

[Laughter]

To the thing you just brought up. Yo, I don't want to talk about that right now. I want to talk about what we came here to talk about, and that's this completely separate thing right now that I'm definitely going to own you on because I got a clip to show you. That wasn't the thing that you thought it was. That's not, that's the words that are coming out of those people's mouths. One of them might be you at any given time. That's not what that means.

[Laughter]

Like, Sam, no, I just don't think this is, this is all disingenuous. The idea of like, that somehow that the USAID was targeted to deal with a lab in Wuhan is absurd.

Sam, it's not absurd. It's absolutely true.

Of the resources that were cut in the first Trump administration from pandemic, a whole pandemic alarm system with people who were stationed in Wuhan from the United States, with a cabinet-level secretary who was in charge of keeping the country aware of pathogens that were coming. All of that stuff, wait and waste and bloat until we end up having to shut down the country.

Did you actually listen to anything else I've said about this? Cuz I could actually.

I've listened to everything you've said.

Okay, so then you would know what I said.

Were crying about what we had said about you on the show. Sam, if you'd actually done that, you'd know that I said that this should be like removing a brain tumor. In other words, if US aid is the brain, you need to be slow and strategic about removing.

That's.

[Laughter]

Well, then you must realize that you're actually talking about starving to death hundreds of thousands of child brains. Like, we don't even need to use a metaphor here. Like, come on. This is such a [expletive] up thing to be like, "Sam, I don't think you realize or I don't understand." Okay. If you knew the words that I used, I was very clear and concise about this. I. Sam, have you heard of. Okay, I don't think he knows what this is. Okay, this is something called a metaphor, okay? So, so, what I wanted to do is compare this, right? And contrast it. Sam, you, you, you just don't understand exactly what I was saying on the with Piers Morgan. Your response was, "That's a red herring. Don't throw that around."

The reason it is. Starting to sound like Lord of the Rings. We got Frodo like, "Oh, Sam. Sam. Oh, Sam." A red herring is because they are using you. And when I say they, I'm, I'm talking about Big Ag. I'm talking about places like EcoHealth Alliance. You're literally talking about. Sam, the definition of billion dollars.

Sam, I'm talking the percentage of what you're talking about. Donald Trump has made more money in the past 50 years.

A separate conversation. Stay on point. You wanted to talk about this. This is all part of one company. Yeah, because you can't have people in the government saying, "Hey, we're going to get rid of all the excess spending." You're like, "Really?" Yes, no more bloat. We are going to save you money overall. So much money we're going to save you that we might even be able to send you all like a personal check. You know, don't ask about that later because that'll just definitely disappear. But right now, that's what we're, we're aiming to do. That's why we need DODGE. That's why the cuts are coming. That's why we're going to save all this money. It's like, "Okay, so they've shown us where they're going to cut all this money from." And then it does seem like a very significant portion of it is going to come from life-saving medication, pre-digested food, and aid that is sent to a bunch of countries. The resulting loss of this medical aid, attention, etc., is going to lead to hundreds of thousands of children dying in countries like Uganda, for example. This is really, really [expletive] up. But at the end of the day, it's to save you some money. And then it's like, "Well, but they're spending more money than that." Like any savings you may have thought you got from DODGE, which, by the way, the numbers were completely fudged and bloated. You can watch any one of the like, you know, the deep dive breakdowns on that if you want to learn more. But even then, at my most good faith, you know, interpretation, you lose all that once you start a war because now that war is costing you billions of dollars every single day to kill more children. So it's not as if there is a net gain being done here. It's like hundreds of thousands of children are going to die or have died already in a lot of these impoverished nations. In addition, all the money that you may have saved from killing all those kids, you're spending killing more kids. Isn't that grotesque? Isn't that [expletive] up? Isn't fascism gross? Don't you want to end this system? Isn't this like, that, that should be the primary focus. If you're like, "Yeah, I don't know if you've heard of the Imperial Core. It does some [expletive] up stuff, Sam. They actually tried to spread what is called soft power through life-saving mechanisms. I'll agree that the purpose is not benevolent, and it's certainly a problem and one that needs to be discussed, but don't let all of those like people die who had nothing to do with this so you can prove your point while at the same time not saving anything so you can go to another part of the world and go kill a bunch of other kids. This, this, it's madness.

Sam.

Okay. Because when you decide to prioritize.

Mhm.

Um, shifting Big Ag's uh neocolonialism to the State Department from.

Think it's terrible.

To USDA at the expense. Look, if you hate neocolonialism, wait till you hear what all the wars are doing.

[Laughter]

Like, I am really against neocolonialism specifically in the form of agro and and and and companies and pesticides, right? And it's like, "Okay, I understand." Um, we, like, we're doing other [expletive] up stuff, too. You should see like what happens to all the bombs and the and the bullets we sell to Israelis. Like, what? You should see what the IDF does with those. That's, that's really [expletive] up. That's, yeah, that's some horrifying stuff, right? You should see what Americans do with the bombs they themselves make and then drop on schools where a bunch of children die. That, that's really [expletive] up, too, no?

Of providing things like malaria care.

They did provide malaria care.

Child health, good governance. Oh, I'm looking at the cuts.

Sam, on two here.

And on the. What was the blanket waiver on two-four that specifically is for child mortality and maternal care? I will give you the actual dollar amounts that were cut from each of these programs. From malaria, 25% cut. But Sam.

From basic education, 35% cut. From disaster readiness, 24% cut. From pandemic and flu and influenza and other emerging uh threats, 33% cut. I mean, I could just keep going on and on and on.

Did I address that? Can I address that? They are cutting bureaucracy, corruption, fraud, and duplication. Was it perfect? No, it wasn't. That's why I'm trying to show you just with one example on COVID.

Heard how the guys from DOJ did this? They used AI and they just used keywords to cut all these contracts. Yeah. They're not cutting any bloat or waste or whatever you're talking about. They killed. There's not a single piece of evidence that there was any bloat or corruption or whatever it is you're talking about.

Of evidence. I'll. Okay, can I give you more? Can I give you more?

[Laughter]

Can I give YOU MORE? I'LL SHOW you what the evidence is. They not allow big corporations.

To talk about Afghanistan? Do you want to talk about it?

[Laughter]

She keeps doing this. She'll, she'll be like, "All right, we have to talk about this. All right, I, I know you don't want to, but we're going to have to get here eventually." He's like, "No, I'm very happy to talk about this. Let's talk about this." "Okay, well, clearly you were lying when you said this." "No, that's not what what I said means. That's not a clip related to what I said at all. That's actually a different person. That's a person on the street. That's just a clip of a random person saying random things. It has nothing to do or pertains to what we're having a conversation about right now. The actual numbers, if you want them, I have them here. This is the evidence and here you go." "Oh, you would say that. So, what? Now you want to talk about Afghanistan?" "If you'd like, yeah, we could, we could broach that topic. I have a feeling if, if I was to, you know, base it on what we've seen already, I, I know how it's going to go, the following conversation on Afghanistan. I feel very shortly we will be on another topic. So, if this is not a one you like, don't worry. You, you have but a couple seconds before, you know, the Etch A Sketch gets reset." You, I. Listen, I have talked about both those places significantly, but DOJ did nothing to address those issues whatsoever. They have flourished under this administration.

Sam. They did nothing. I don't disagree with you about that. If you want to say they flourished under this administration, then this, what I would say to you is maybe this is an area where you and I could find some common ground. Because I still stand for what I stand for. But when people are hoping that that stuff dies, there are reasons that they hope it dies. That's what I'm trying to show you.

[Laughter]

Yeah, well, of course. It doesn't matter what side of the political aisle you're on. If someone comes up to you and is like, "Hey, there's corruption going on in there. Really? Lots of it. Wow. Do you want to get rid of the corruption?" Yeah.

[Laughter]

I'm trying to show you, Sam, that there were people, at the end of the day, when they were told multiple times by people in positions of authority that there was corruption, they wanted that corruption to go away. I'm just letting you know, in case you didn't know that. All right? Like that's.

[Laughter]

Right. This, this is 100% my reaction to that. Yes. If you want. Hey, right here is a summary, okay? For a thumbnail or whatever. If you want to know exactly, if you're just tuning in, you're like, "Oh, Lance, how's the debate? You've been streaming this for like almost 2 hours now." Yep. This is it. This is the totality of what we've been experiencing the entire time. Like, my God. Sam, I'm just trying to explain to you some people, when told that there was something bad, didn't want a bad thing to happen anymore. There are. For example.

That the reasons why DOJ did this was because they were concerned about neocolonialism?

[Laughter]

No, that's why I told you that's a red herring. That's not what. Neocolonialism is a red herring?

No.

[Laughter]

Sam. Children dying is. No, Sam. What I was telling you is they weren't. Please get her to define what she thinks a red herring.

[Laughter]

I bet she thinks it's a bird. Cutting.

[Laughter]

That ever. It was just moving over to the USDA.

That's what I was saying. Okay, that is not what. Let's watch that clip again because you specifically said the children dying is a red herring, not I said in the very beginning, and we can play it again. I said the corruption and the bloat is not going towards the food, meaning that is not what he is talking about. Do I can play it again. That's what I'm talking.

I'm looking at. I'm, I'm just simply looking at all the cuts across. The, the cuts, a dollar cut of duplication, of bloat, of bureaucracy, of corruption does not equate to aid. Show me the place, sought whatever number where you have the proof that this is bloat and corruption. Okay. Can I give you examples? I don't have.

[Laughter]

Uh, clips of what happened with COVID. I can put the articles up. So, that's bloat and corruption? So, okay. When EcoHealth Alliance is given tens of millions of dollars from the USAID and they're double-billing two different government agencies for the same thing. Do you think that's bloat and corruption? Did EcoHealth Alliance have this contract in 2024? Okay. Let me give you the exact date. I can give you the exact date.

Signed before then? They got the contract.

How she's like, "Don't worry. I'll give you a direct example." Okay, well, this isn't so much direct as it is a thought experiment. But even then, same, same, but different. So, in this thought experiment, if, if you heard something bad had happened, would you think that was bad? Sure. That's.

[Laughter]

It. Here we go. Okay. So, they got it before that, obviously. I can get you the exact date if you want. So, USAID's PREDICT program. All right. Team, can you give me the exact year that USAID PREDICT gave $1.1 million to EcoHealth Alliance specifically for a sub-agreement with the Wuhan Institute of Virology? $1.1 million.

They also got. Listen, I'm not done. They got $83 million in total, okay? This is just to identify the connection. Yes. Yes. Yes. Sam, okay, ready? In October. I got it. I got it. Okay, so we have. Hold on. So, in October of 2021, USAID awarded a $4.67 million grant with total funding obligations that reached $13.1. So, some of this has to do with farming in Liberia. Okay, EcoHealth also operated as a sub-recipient on other multi-million dollar USAID projects, including. Here we go. One Health Workforce grants, uh, and the Ready Initiative, total $85 million just for those programs. The Ready Initiative was $8 million. Uh, the Liberia money was $13.1 million. And simultaneously, these guys are billing the NIH and they're double-billing. That's what I'm trying to show you. Sam, okay, ready? The US Agency for International Development has provided approximately $53 million in total funding for the EcoHealth Alliance between 2004 and 2022, so spanning multiple decades. However, the specific $83 million figure likely conflates, likely conflates multiple federal sources. You put this on screen. Or it references the total taxpayer funding EcoHealth receives across all federal agencies before its recent government-wide suspension. This is not evidence of corruption. What are you doing? Again, at, at my. Give it to her, Sam. Give it to her. Be like, "Okay, fine. Yes, all right. You got this one. Oh, got you." I have been debated toward in in the blood sports. Uh, how much money has Trump just signaled that he's basically going to appropriate from the taxpayers to fund his military junta? You know, the fascists who tried to take over democracy in the US. Apparently, some of them, like, what is it? Enrico Torres, he's, he's standing to get like between three and five million dollars for crimes. So, if this is in the billions, that pisses you off, I would assume by by like a magnitude of 10 plus times, right? To, to this, to this non-thing that's not real. It's not the thing you think it says.

[Gasps]

In October. I got it. I got it. Okay, so we have. Hold on. It's Tariq, sorry. Tariq. And we can talk about.

USAID awarded a $4.67 million grant with total funding obligations that reached $13.1. So, some of this has to do with farming in Liberia. Okay, EcoHealth also operates. It's irrelevant. Yeah, sorry. I'm getting too excited. I'm, I'm actually pronouncing J's now. It is sub-recipient on other multi-million dollar USAID projects, including here we go, One Health Workforce grants and the Ready Initiative, total $85 million just for those programs. The Ready Initiative was $8 million. The Liberia money was $13.1 million. And simultaneously, these guys are billing the NIH and they're double-billing. That's what I'm trying to show you. Not only are they double-billing, if I could just show you this. This is not a gotcha. Graphic number six. This is the. No, it's not. This is a son of a [expletive] from EcoHealth Alliance. Okay, so ready? This is David Moin. Maybe, maybe we should. Okay, here's, here's a metaphor for you or thought experiment, Jillian, to to put back in your direction. One that's going to be very easy and and something to understand. So, if you had someone you considered to be an associate or a friend or even a family member, and they put their hand in their pocket, held out their hand, and it turns out they had like 20 cents, and then they're like, "I took this from you." And then right after doing that, they ran up to a child and started trying to beat that kid to death. Would you have a bigger problem with the fact that they had taken 20 cents from you, or the fact that they're trying to kill a child in front of you right now, in front of your eyes? Because like the 20 cents, it's probably not going to be the biggest deal, right? Like, you know, I can't remember the last time that, you know, someone bent down to pick up a quarter, kind of stuff. So, I'm assuming, uh, you're not as upset about the pennies and change, but the whole beating up the child thing is of more pressing concern. From the NIH, they got him more money after they were trying to hide the FOIA requests, or sorry, hide the emails, uh, and from the FOIA requests that were coming in to show that there was a connection with the coronavirus and the NIH funding and the USAID funding. Now we know. A ham. This is David Morantz, okay? This is what she's. [Laughter] got. And we're now in just full-blown conspiracy territory. Like, at the point now where you're like, all right, well, I got to pull up the Epstein emails with the redacted information that actually proves my point by showing you that this is program was actually being utilized for like, I, I don't even know where you go from here. Do I get a kickback? Too much [expletive] money. Do you deserve it all? Let's discuss. And then Peter Daszak goes, "Thanks for your kind words. Of course, there's a kickback." So. Why does she keep conflating receiving multiple funding sources as corruption and bloat? Because that's all she's got, I think. I, I like, I don't know if it's because she genuinely believes that, or because like that's as close, or I think it's just again, this is all right-wing ecosystem brain rot. Like, you've heard these things said or or presented to you so many times over and over, you start to think they're real. Like, it's why sometimes you'll be speaking to like a transphobe who has been consuming non-stop like Matt Walsh [expletive] and stuff. They don't live in a material reality where you can actually talk to them about like very basic things about how the the the Earth's or or the known universe works, right? Like principles of of how physics associate with chemistry. Like [expletive] like that. Like you're eventually going to be speaking to someone where they're just at an impasse, right? If they're like, "Oh, there, there are but two genders, there are but two sexes, it's a biological certainty, there's no such thing. It's XX or XY chromosomes and it's mathematics and and and science and DNA." And then, then you can't disprove that. It's like, well, how do you account for people who have XXY chromosomes? How do you account for people who have XXX chromosomes? How do you account for people who have differences of sexual development? I mean, science has. It's very, very easy to fit within the model of if there was something in which you thought at one point was basically just going to be a binary between two different options, showing that it might actually be a spectrum of which most people on that spectrum will fall between two most likely outcomes, but there is a small percentage of people who fall outside of those two most likely outcomes. That's why it's a spectrum. Now, just because there happens to be things that invalidate your entire worldview at this moment in time, and I understand that could be a little bit scary. Yeah, but that doesn't mean you just give up on in the totality towards actually appreciating or understanding how the world works. Like, that, that's the thing where I'm always just like, because like all of us get [expletive] wrong. I get [expletive] wrong. I got [expletive] wrong two minutes ago. I, I, you know, I pronounced junta, junta. I got something wrong. I. Like, we [expletive] up. We [expletive] up all the [expletive] time. Like, that's, that's reality. But like, I, I don't think the measure is whether or not you are able to regurgitate information. Like, you might as well just be a chatbot at that point. The measure of you is not whether or not you're able to basically know all the multiple choice answers to all the multiple choice questions, and then I know you've got the highest big brain IQ of all the humans, right? But is it that you are intellectually curious enough or willing to take in new information, and based on that new information update, I'll say update, not change, update your beliefs. Cuz we're always doing that all the time. How many things did you believe when you were like, you know, a 10-year-old compared to what you believe now, like decades later, right? Like, you've learned a lot. You've taken in a ton of more information, and at a certain point, you either have to reject in totality the way the world works, or you've got to keep on fitting it inside your worldview box that has to keep making more and more sense. And so, yeah, you could be a really strange, like, I don't know where on the political aisle, uh, Jillian currently, uh, considers herself, but like, if you're someone who was basically anti-vax light, uh, you know, liberal activists, uh, you know, buy local, buy organic, let's end GMOs, and then we can save the world kind of stuff. Uh, and then someone comes up to you and they're like, um, you know, that's all well and good if you can afford it. It's obviously very, very expensive to try and shop exclusively organic and exclusively buy by local merchants. Um, but yeah, I mean, if you have the ability to do so, but that doesn't actually save the world, right? Like, by you buying a brand new Tesla, you're not ending climate change. You, you have to realize this. Like, this is kind of like liberal capitalist consumer versions of activism. It's, it's not real activism. And then she's got that worldview that I guess pushed her into this right-wing sphere further and further as she just like kept getting pushed back from everyone who has a rational thought. Like, if you're hanging out, especially if you're like in the LGBTQ+ community, right? You're hanging out with fellow LGBTQ+ members, and then at one point you're like, you know, I think we do have to start talking about like, yeah, I don't want to say it because you're going to look at me weird, but like, trans people. I, like, I, I don't have a problem with them. I'm just saying like, what? Because you self-identify or something that I'm supposed to like say that you have rights? Or I don't know. Does, does the umbrella have to be that big? Does the flag have to be that colorful? Do we really need all the different colors and shades and representation? I don't know. Just kind of feels like, you know, that it's, it's, it's basically perfectly liberal. This is liberal as it gets, right? It's it's kind of, I got mine. If you're a, uh, a white lesbian, uh, who has rights within the United States to be able to marry and has certain protections in the the workplace and discrimination against you towards whether or not you can find housing and work, well, then, uh, maybe you feel a lot more safe to go after other women who don't have those because it gets you in a position where you then get to present yourself as one of the good ones to people who would otherwise be attacking everybody, right? It's like, "Oh, no, please don't, please don't go after me. Um, yeah, I, I, I hate trans women. I don't think trans women are real women. Don't go after me. Let's just like leave it there, you know?" Do you not think that's shitty? That's gross.

Um, I think that the, uh, that Doge, that Donald Trump, that Russell vote, uh, that Elon Musk had the ability to cancel that contract. Instead, what they did is they cut. They did. They did cancel it. $5 billion from Protection Assistance and Solutions. They cut, um, $2 billion from HIV AIDS. They cut $672 million, um, or I should say. That one there alone, like, even if I was to grant you that you didn't misconstrue multiple sources as a direct sign of corruption, that like a lot of government agencies receive funding from multiple different sourcing agencies. That's not weird. That's not corrupt. That's just like, that's just how it works. But even if you granted you, yes, that proves $83 million of corruption. Right there, you just mentioned $2 billion of the cuts. Like, you're, you're talking dollars and cents. That's why I was like, "The clearest way I can explain this to you is if you were genuinely mad about this, you're mad at someone for having taken like a couple pennies from you." That's it. Just, just a couple pennies. Like, you're looking at a person and then he's like, "I stole 2 cents from you." And you're like, "Oh, wow. Okay." And he's like, "And now I'm going to violently attack children." Like, what are you more mad about? Are you more mad about the 2 cents that he stole from you? Are you more mad about the fact that he's now running after kids to attack them? I would assume, hopefully in good faith, that you're more angry about the kid attacks. They $300 million from malaria. They cut $200 million from basic education. They cut $200 million approximately, it's a little bit more, from maternal and child health. Sam. They cut money from good government. They cut money from disaster readiness. Private sector competitiveness, family planning and reproductive health. I could go on and on. Pandemic influenza, influenza and other emerging threats.

So if they're cutting, if they're cutting corrupt organizations like EcoHealth. I just had a level six fire walk ramen. My mouth and stomach are lit. Oh man, we have one near us that does that kind of like, they have a one to six scale, but then you can get the off-menu like volcano stuff, and I've tried to have it with my buddy Dave, and like, he can handle his, like, we can both handle our spice, but like, he can have, handle inhuman levels of spice, but I'm like, two, two spoons in before the sweat starts pouring down. I'm like, oh my god, no, I'm not going to, not going to make it through this bowl of noodles. And did they do all of those? Were they, were they. Can I give you a bunch of other examples then? Speaking of, right? Okay. So why don't we look at things like, how about Afghanistan? That was botched. Yeah? Are we on the same. Do you think that was botched? Yes, I don't think we should have been there for 20 years. That's.

[Laughter]

Totally fine. The US aid that went into rebuilding was a disaster, and it's trillions of dollars. So. We, we put. I, I was very much against our occupation of Afghanistan, and in fact, I thought that our invasion of them, we should have just used, it should have been just a police action to get Osama bin Laden.

That's totally fine. Separate issue, though. We're talking about bloat and corruption. All right, so you have $2 trillion went into rebuilding the country for 20 years. So, you have Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction, and they found trillions of money wasted, projects were abandoned, infrastructure was unusable, there was corruption, vulnerabilities obviously from the government, ghost employees, like police officers that didn't exist, massive inability to verify spending, facilities that were built that collapsed into the ground that were never used, schools and clinics that existed only on paper, same thing with Haiti, and the list goes on and on. So, the point is that you can say, "Oh, they, they cut these trillions of dollars that were going to schools, schools that never existed."

Out of Afghanistan when when.

We're still giving money to the Taliban.

Elon Musk, Elon Musk, uh, uh. We're still giving.

[Laughter]

Money to the Taliban. I don't understand. Well, you're just bringing up examples that.

Sorry, you can't. You can't both be against like the occupation of Afghanistan and then also be against any kind of material attempt to try and do restitution. Like, I mean, if you genuinely care about what was done there, you should be of the mindset where it's like, "Well, I think we should probably have to do reparations in some form or another for decades, like literal decades." Uh, and yeah, that, that would be my honest response. Corruption and bloat exists in certain areas, and therefore it justified cutting off the aid that for USAID. Again, you think there's only eight people.

Mhm.

Who.

[Clears throat]

Have suffered because of the end of these USAID.

It's very difficult to get a quantifiable number. Well, what's your estimate? Honestly, considering if we're looking at this honestly, given the fact that you have other governments giving. Never was interrupted.

Have cut back as well, actually, in the wake of our cutting back on USAID because, um, all, all of these programs had to get cut back on January.

20th of 2025 or later down the road? Okay, no. All right, so no. So, they were giving at the time. So, you have a three-week interruption for some of this stuff. Some of it, one week, some of it, two weeks, some of it, several weeks. But, you have blanket waivers where this was, as you very appropriately show me, this is from somebody who worked in in Uganda. The numbers began to trend downward closer to 10% in terms of deaths after an exemption was issued for certain life-sustaining programs. Uh, it's still high, but it's lower than during that time. So, it did drop after the. I, I searched and searched. I could not find one quantifiable number. I did find a really good piece in the Washington Post that listed specific cases. And one guy who went to South Sudan, I found that, but I searched.

Here in in Uganda. Sam, okay. And, and you know what they all say? Well, it's hard to know because there's also starvation and there's also war and there's conflating factors. I couldn't find any concrete number.

I know there's code morbidity.

So, when I say.

[Laughter]

To you, we're looking at a matter of weeks that there was an interruption. Simultaneously, you have duplication from other government agencies like the State Department, like the USDA, like the CDC, like the NIH. So, now you have, you have our government agencies that are simultaneously doing it. You have blanket waivers that came into effect within a matter of.

The date of us being on that, um, on that show? I know that you had a post about nutty putty that was March 3rd, and Elon Musk said too much. I'm assuming ChatGPT-sourced links happening all at once there. I'm like, I don't even know what she's trying to tell you with these with these clips.

This contract was reinstated two weeks ago, which would have been, which would have coincided with the waivers. I know that on the 28th of January, we'd already given a blanket waiver or Rubio did. I already know there's duplication with government agencies. I know other countries are giving. I know that for a fact. I know that there's local charities. I know that these companies that are getting this money are getting tens of millions of dollars. So, I would think that they could probably float it for a couple of.

It's all just sort of people are faking it now, a year or two.

To 750,000, sorry, 750,000 people. Yes, I think that's inaccurate, and I'm giving you all the reasons why I think it's inaccurate.

The models are inaccurate. You think the Lancet is making this up, etc., etc. I just told you all of the. So, by the way, this is a pretty far cry from, "I just want to get rid of corruption." Now, you're claiming that the estimated amount of people who have died or going to die, especially children, is either manufactured or made up. So, I guess that at the core was what you always thought was the red herring, right? Like, it's, it's meant to distract you. What? Well, you'll be really sad if you hear about the hundreds of thousands of children who are going to die as a result of these cuts. Yeah, that, that's meant to distract you. It's called a red herring. No, it's called basic human empathy. What? What the [expletive] are you talking about? I know one thing for sure, it's absolutely partisan. I was able to see like different information coming from both sides. One side says nobody, and the other side says. You can't keep doing this. You're just like flashing you with all these different things. I was like, I don't know what the source is on this one. This one's a meme. This one is just a chat log. At one point, it looked like a chat log that she was putting on screen. I'm like, okay, it's unacceptable. BU mathematician tracks so many deaths may result from the USA and Medicaid cuts. The impact tracker is updated real-time based on loss of international aid programs and HIV and tuberculosis. That's bad, right? Or sorry, do you think that this is made up or a distraction or a red herring? Millions. I can't find anything concrete online. It's not to say that I think, oh, this is a.

Well, yeah, because like these are estimates based on how many lives these, like, you know, either pre-digested food or, you know, malaria pills or vaccines are estimated to prevent in in preventable deaths. That's, that's why these models are based on that. Um, is every person who is dying from this saying before their deaths that America killed me? This was Trump. Elon did this. And then, you know, filling out a form stating like, so we have the direct. Now we have the numbers. Now we can really point towards the fact that Elon Musk is one of history's greatest monsters. I mean, we got hundreds of thousands of people. Every single one of them said Elon did this right before they died. Amazing. What I was trying to tell you is that food aid is not stopping. That. Not to mention the US cut. The people that would give you the exact numbers. That's a red herring. I'm sorry. You can't bring that up. Is a narrative that they were leaning on to distract from other things that are really nefarious like corruption in Haiti and Afghanistan. I, I am, I am, I am fully on board with nothing, nothing George did in any way dealt with all of those things you're talking about.

No, of course not. It, it HAS TO BE.

[Laughter]

WHAT? I'M SORRY, but you're willing to roll the dice on a hundreds of thousands of kids dying for a [expletive] crumb for a [expletive]. I admit it. I admit it. Fine. It didn't save a lot of money, but it saved a little. And then immediately it's like, but you realize that even if I grant you that. I grant you if George saved a small little amount of money by letting like tons and tons of kids die, you lose all of those savings by the billions as soon as Trump drops bombs on Iran. Like the same administration that is supposedly saving you all this money is costing you all this money in an unjust illegal war. If you listen to.

You have evidence of that, or is that your projection? I'll give you two examples. So, um, guys, which thought is it? Thought 13 where Elon Musk talks about what he was able to accomplish, I think.

It's your gotchas. So, we're going to, we're going to trust Elon Musk. You were concerned.

[Laughter]

About the partisanship of somebody who's, uh. Sam, let her play the clip. Come on, that's so unfair. You're pausing it before she's even played it. Who knows? The context could be like.

[Laughter]

Vindicate her yet? Uh, he says there was some from the heart, from Harvard is is. And you're going to go to Elon Musk.

To go to Marco Rubio. I'm going to go to the State Department. What he talks about is he killed like 200. He created a code to kill zombie payments. He talks about how he was able to be not only effective, but when he references why.

[Laughter]

He wasn't capable of being super effective. Cool story. Uh, IDF investigates, uh, itself for war crimes, finds none. Oh.

[Laughter]

It's weird how that keeps happening. Like every time. Like every single time. You would think at a certain point they would be like, "Ah, we have to acknowledge we did actually slaughter some kids here." Unjustly, I guess. But no, no, it's just like every single time. Now the IDF has investigated itself for the war crimes and found no wrongdoing. I mean, yeah.

Effective. He talks about the bureaucracy and the corruption and the bloat, and how it was more entrenched than he ever imagined. It doesn't mean it wasn't there.

Don't need to hear Elon Musk try and justify why he failed so miserably.

Were found with USAID cuts. And by the way, they haven't all been cut. The, the bots of USAID that were found to be, uh, even slightly useful were transferred to the State Department. They're, they're not, they're not been deleted. They've simply been transferred to the State Department. This is so embarrassing, Jillian. Are you serious? Okay, so she uses. Where, where does the AI come in? Cuz this seems to come. Oh, she uses Elon Musk again. Pulls him up again.

[Laughter]

Is someone. Is, is this the clip where he's talking about God? I, I, I recognize the interview.

Um.

That, that, that really just made no sense. That was just en- entirely wasteful. Where were like, for example, there was a like, like probably 100, maybe 200 billion dollars worth of zombie payments per year. Uh, which, uh, simply by, um.

See, Sam, uh, Stephen Miller's wife, who brought Elon Musk on to talk about his really good program, uh, provided all the evidence you need. He said out loud there, $200 billion worth of zombie payment savings. There's like a very strong reaction to stopping the money flowing. Sentences are hard. Well, I mean, you know, when you're zooted on ketamine, I imagine probably a little bit more difficult to get those sentences out, right? I spoke to you guys a long time ago about USAID for 10 years.

Possible? I know. And the guy literally didn't even know that we funded COVID partly through USAID. He like, there's.

You're, you're suggesting that we created COVID. I do believe so, yes. I think that we.

[Laughter]

Well, I mean, hey, at least it's not China this time. Funded. I do think that EcoHealth Alliance funded it through money that came from you.

Wait, the EcoHealth Alliance? The nonprofit that's supposed to be feeding children in countries like Uganda? What? Sorry, but why? Why? Oh, for more money. That's it. Follow the money. Do your research. Who stands to profit? NIH and USAID. And I do think.

How people who say that [expletive] never end up where the money's going. It's like, okay, let's follow the money to its logical conclusion. Hey, by the way, the richest humans on the planet, it's not a secret. I can look it up right now. There's a list of the top 1,000 richest billionaires, and you can actually look up the list of all the thousands of billionaires that exist in the world. There's not a lot of them. Again, they're, they're the only dangerous minority. So, it's not like there's a secret as to who's [expletive] the planet up on any given day. And it's like, yeah, but in this case, you should follow the money. And then it's. It's well, yeah, this is a non-profit organization that has received funding from multiple government sources that, I mean, unlike a lot of these billionaires, actually have to make all of their [expletive] finances freely available to the public, right? They have to be transparent about that [expletive].

That string of emails from Morantz and Daszak is fairly good evidence of that fact. I do believe that, yeah. And so does the FBI. I think the CIA does now. Like, that's, that's a generally well-recognized, I'm not going to say fact, but thought, belief. If, if you don't think so, that's totally fine. We could litigate it a different time. I do think we did, yeah. You don't think we did it on purpose, do you? I have no idea why we would do it. I do know the theories about gain-of-function research. I can't necessarily tell you I think they're entirely altruistic. You know, I mean, the argument is like, well, we're just studying what would happen.

So, do you support like things like uh patent reform and uh antitrust.

That would prevent, um, uh, these agents. And so, how is it like, do you see yourself supporting, uh, a, um, an administration that has had total control of our government, that has broached, uh, laws and constitutional authority to do whatever they want, and they haven't done any of the stuff that would actually in any way. They haven't helped. They haven't. They haven't helped.

They've hurt. I mean, like, even like just even most recently, um, uh, the, they have rolled back, uh, meat processing for that matter. There was a huge, uh, antitrust case against the meat packers, and, um, that was a former defense attorney who's now the head of the DOJ, um, uh, basically just let them walk away from, uh, what was clearly a case that was going to, uh, uh, be found to have they have violated antitrust. Um, you see the consolidation of big ag across the country.

But do you think this is unique to this administration? It's not. I think it's. That's. You do? I don't, I don't think so at all. And I, I would tell you.

Okay. But also, that's not a defense of anything. Right? Like, if I told you, "Hey, by the way, this person just did something horrible." You're like, "Yeah, but like, other people have also done that thing." Yeah. Right?

[Laughter]

That, that doesn't make either of them good. That you probably we should be working on making sure that future governments don't do this anymore. I think because all of these. I've worked for numerous administrations, and I worked for the Clinton.

I worked with the Obama administration on this. I don't actually work with my That makes this more embarrassing, not less. But Obama on antitrust without a doubt. But under the Biden administration, all of these antitrust cases were uh lined up and uh the uh Trump administration has basically uh just ejected them. I mean, that's it.

>> But I'm not arguing with you about that. If you're asking me what I see [laughter] Right, but because it's not convenient. And and you're also not listening because Sam is bringing up a really important point. If you cared, like every right-winger I've heard just endlessly go off about DOJ DOJ DOJ. Then we're like, "Hey, some of the things that DOJ is cutting is going to result in hundreds of thousands of children dying." They're like, "Well, [ __ ] them. Like why why do I have to pay for that [ __ ] We're getting rid of the bloat. We're not supporting all of the [ __ ] the third world anymore. This is America first. This is [ __ ] nationalism. We got to do this to protect the country. And also apparently I might get a like a paycheck at the very end of this. I don't know. They're saying they're going to give us all a DOJ check. Maybe. We'll see. You know, stay tuned. This [ __ ] is so [ __ ] gross, right? Because it's like Do you care about corruption? Here's a lot of examples of them. The rich don't pay their fair share of taxes by a monstrously huge margin to the point where it actually damages society. Like there's been so many like examples in the United States where it's just like, "Hey, here's a pilot initiative. We tax the ultra-wealthy a very small amount. Let's say 1%. There is no change structurally to society. The super-rich remain the super-rich. They don't lose anything. They don't lose their mansions, their yachts, their blah blah blah." Every single one of them has such an obscene amount of concentrated wealth that just a simple 1% program, what can we do with it? It pays for an entire school lunch program for all the children in the state. Every single child in the state will no longer go hungry. And all we had to do was just change one thing different from the day before we were doing that was tax the rich a crumb. Just a crumb. And now child starvation's over. That's monstrously huge. This data point should make everyone excited. Everyone. Because none of us are that level of wealthy. And guess what? I'm sorry. I'm sorry to to to every single weird lib and and and right-wing capitalist, we never will be. Like when people talk about like abolishing billionaires and then you're like, "Oh, but what about the good ones?" It's like you're never going to be this thing. No there's nothing you can do. Like come on, you know? To to to to be this level of you don't you haven't wrapped your head around how filthy rich a billionaire is. Like I don't think you know how filthy rich someone who has $500 million is. Let alone $100 million. Someone who has $50 million is rich as [ __ ] Rich as [ __ ] okay? And and we're talking about dozens of these people need to combine all their wealth and they're still not close to a [ __ ] billionaire. It's mad. Like it's money beyond the scope of human comprehension. It it it's like trying to get you to understand what's it like for a single grain of sand on the beach in relativity to the rest of the earth. And then you're like, >> [laughter] >> like yeah, no, we can't comprehend it. We need visual imagery. That's why people keep showing you those things, all right? Like, okay, so say this is like a thousand, right? So, that this is a million, which is this tower. Okay, so I can't show you what a billion looks like in the space I have in this cube that I'm streaming on right now. I don't I don't have enough room to show you the line as it just goes up unbelievably for [ __ ] you know, as long as you can scroll to make a billion dollars. It's so much money. So, like when we get down to it, we're all on the same team. Like all of us globally, everywhere. I'm talking about the majority of humanity. Just 0.000000000000001% of the world is in the other category. Yeah, okay, they they have to worry about this. Yes, true. This will affect them. This would but even the ones that were moderate, like the 1% that paid for all the school lunch programs, like they get to stay the richest human beings on the planet. That's the other part about this that like really gets me is like when you get down to it, it's like yeah, it's true. Like, you know, fundamental uh shifts in societal structure uh can lead to instability, especially for a ruling class that may have their authority challenged. I understand. This was not that. This is like nothing changes. You stay the richest [ __ ] ever and will be able to do whatever the [ __ ] you want in perpetuity forever. But now, the only difference is is children don't starve anymore. Do you see how important this is? Like the the the fact that if we just take a very small amount of your unbelievably concentrated crude wealth, we can fix the world in in all capacities. It's always just like, we have an energy problem. We have an energy crisis. We have a water problem. We have a water crisis. Well, I mean, where is it all going? Where is all the water and the energy going? It really seems like a lot of it's being consumed in all these data centers. And it's like, well, yeah, we're in the middle of a drought. We need to build more data centers cuz we need more data. It's like all this kind of [ __ ] People, I think they've lost their imaginations. I don't know how else to put it where you can have someone like Gillian Jacobs not like understand the simplicity of that. You you say right now that what's fundamental to you and at your core that like what's the biggest most important part of this whole debate is ending corruption cuz you find that to be vile. And she's like yeah, at the end of the day that's it. And you'll even potentially sacrifice hundreds of thousands of children's lives if you know at your core that this is not corrupt money being sent to all these dying children. And there's not some of it being put into the pockets of fat cats and stuff like that. You believe that so much and then it's like so you're talking about pennies pennies in relativity to who is actually corrupt, who is actually stealing trillions, trillions, right? Trillions globally, internationally, when you look at the ultra-wealthy, when you look at how wealth has been concentrating over the years, when you look at now we have more wealth inequality than the Gilded Age. Like yeah, we have cool technology and stuff and our life expectancy is better. I wouldn't want to live in that time, but it's also pretty [ __ ] up just as like an indicator as to how bad we're doing if we have more wealth inequality than the Gilded Come on. I see [clears throat] evil. And I see the need to pick a lesser one. If there's a different option, that would be wonderful. I'm not actually doing >> Well, then thank [ __ ] cuz okay, here it is. The ultimate trolley problem for for all of the weird people who haven't been able to wrap their heads around that the billionaires are doing more evil. On a scale that is not even comparable. If you look at wage theft versus all other thefts, like every other form of it, they're they're not even on the same chart. You know, this is not like an apples to oranges thing. This is like all the oranges in the world versus one apple. I consider Trump the lesser evil. >> Who's the lesser evil? >> I do. I actually do. >> In what In what respect? >> Okay, I'll give you an example in the area that I am in is my wheelhouse. So, when it comes to health let's say insurance pharma food policy. With Trump, you get one and you lose one. You get one and you lose one. >> What's the one you get? Okay. So, when Kennedy redesigned, we'll call it, the food guidelines it's not just an infographic. So, it guides hundreds of millions in subsidy flows. Now, by doing that, by reach >> Has she used anything but ChatGPT, by the way? These all seem like ChatGPT. Like, [gasps] I'm not just going to say by default, if you're using a large language model, like you have like forfeited this debate, but like at least use it as the jump off point to then show the source, right? Like, click on this right here. If you clicked on this, then we could open that, and then you could be like, all right, it says this here. And most likely, knowing Sam, he's going to do that thing where he goes through the document. Like, this has happened to me so many times where um I I've been presented with an argument where it's just like oh, if you look at this study, or you look at that. And I'm like, okay, fine. And I in the in the moment, in the debate, I lose, or I look embarrassed, or or I'm just like, yeah, I okay, fine, I didn't know that, or something like that. And then I look it up afterwards cuz I hate I get like I get so angry at myself, and I I I like, you know, go into these like shame spirals, and then I I read the [ __ ] documents, and then I go through it, and then I find that part, and then I'm like, it just wasn't true. Like, that that's not what that means. Like, you I I I understand that like maybe they were doing that maliciously, or maybe they were doing that um with intent cuz it was very effective cuz at the time, like now I'm I'm thinking back on it, right? And I think now with these large language models, this is just going to make this infinitely worse, cuz you're going to have people who are just like uh [ __ ] Gemini uh is Sam Seder lying, and uh is he actually Zaddy? You know, something like that. It's going to be like very, very in in question. I'm so happy you asked it. Well, the answer is multi-pronged. It's like, "No, write it in such a way that it proves that he is incorrect and not Zaddy." And it's like, "Oh, okay. Well, in this case, Sam Seder happens to be, you know, incorrect in one key point. Looking at this, he's actually wrong. It didn't The book was not, you know, the sole time that this was mentioned in 1992. In fact, this has been something since 1954." Something like that, right? Where all of a sudden it's going to be This is like all slop. This is clogging the system. It's going to take us so much more time. Like I feel so bad that like 3 years ago when large language models were first like or was it 4 years ago? I can't remember. It seems like they've been forcing this [ __ ] on us forever. But when they were first being presented, part of me was so excited cuz I do love technology. And I was just like a such a sucker for this where I was just like, "Oh my god, are we going to be able to use these as tools and devices to be able to like debunk the amount of just misinformation that has been permeated in the internet right now?" Like this is one of the worst and most dangerous things that the right has been doing and it's always been [ __ ] Like I I hate that like you just you can tell sometimes when people have been brainwashed by these algorithmic patterns of just being fed the same thing so many times that they believe something that is objectively false. Well, now we have these large language models. Look at this, they're going to be able to dice decipher all this kind of stuff. And it was the opposite of that, right? Like it's it's actually they're just going to clog everything to the point where you remember the most useful search engine on the internet? They'll just straight-up say, "We're not a search engine anymore." What are you? "Oh, we're an AI-driven experience." Google, I'm not just not a bit. Google is no longer going to be Google. They're an AI-driven multimedia experience. What that means, they're not completely defining it, but I'm pretty sure you know what it means. Just slop. It's just going to [ __ ] buckshot you with slop so much so rapid-fire slop. It's just going to pop up. It's going to be like 16 different kinds of it, right? Like you're going to be like, "Who has the longest penis, right?" You'll get a song about the longest penis. You'll get a poem about the longest penis, you'll get a bunch of recipes based on longest penis times, all this kind of stuff. Like, the whole thing will be catered to your search, and it'll feel like a unique experience, for sure. But, what the [ __ ] are we doing here? Like, [laughter] why why do I go to the site at all then? It's like, do do you want kind of like uh an uh a 30% confidently wrong, unintuitive nightmare? Do you want that? Do you want that for your internet from now on? No. No. No part of me wants that. Sorry. Do you mean for my enemies? Are you Are you suggesting as a weapon? Like, that I should use to torture others? Because in that case, hmm well, yeah, that does does sound pretty terrible. But, no, that's that's Google now. That's actually what Google's about to become. And then it's like, all right, well, at least at least we have a a couple other large language models that we can use to feed in the information from these clearly large language model generated responses, so then I can use them to try and navigate the internet again. I mean, like, the test use case that is rapidly becoming clear for large language models is it's going to be the only way you can actually try and decipher internet anymore is that you're just going to be force-fed so much slop that your own mind can't like completely like computate, like process in real time. So, you're like, "Oof, I'm overwhelmed with things. It's making me angry, horny, hungry, sad." Like, all the emotions, but it's really driving the ones that are keeping me attentive, and for some reason I can't look away. I need to see more. And for other people, I mean, it's going to be custom catered for some of you. It It might be that you need to to see like really, really aggressive uh historical paintings, right? And you just need to have a lot of them fed to you. Like, "Oh my god, I I just can't believe I'm seeing so much Dali right now. It's just like blowing my mind." But, for other people, it might be titties. For other people, it might be I don't know, apples. But, whatever it is, they're going to figure that out pretty quick and just know how to spray you in the face with it rapidly. So, instead of like looking something up, like, the days of going to a computer with a request and then getting an answer are done. That that whole thing That's That's old school [ __ ] all right? We don't do that anymore. It's just all launchpads. It's It's like you sit down, you look at something, you have a thought maybe. Some They might draw you into the old phone, right? Like someone might say like, "Hey, I can't remember like who who was the fastest runner? Was it Usain Bolt?" Like I like I can't remember exactly. Maybe I'll go on the internet to find out. 3 hours later, exhausted, drained, [ __ ] like Oh, [ __ ] [ __ ] What were we looking up? I just Jesus Christ, what day is it? What month is it? Wow, I I think I learned something or other. I I feel I've been probed in one way or another, but thanks, Google. Jesus Christ. What's that? I lost my job? Oh, but yeah, there's no point in that anymore. >> [laughter] >> I have to get back into the sweet sweet Google media AI experience giving you everything at once. EVERYTHING. JUST >> [screaming] >> SO MUCH INFORMATION. So much original content being generated based on one search query. >> [laughter] >> designing it. What he's [snorts] forcing is he's forcing 3 hours later, we finally get back to the video. >> [laughter] >> Hey, come on. That was a good rant. Hey, we we needed one, all right? I've been doing this for 2 hours and 23 minutes now. I've had to listen to Gillian Jacobs explain to me why kids dying's okay as long as Elon Musk gets to speak for a little while. more of our tax dollars to go towards healthier food, and he's forcing areas food deserts. Okay, so what what's going to fund What what is the food pyramid fund, right? It's going to fund lunch for our kids in school, military. It's prisons, all that stuff. That's what guides what gets fed to you, your kids in the school, for example, or our soldiers in the military. By changing that, >> [laughter] >> we're forcing the funding of healthier options, and we're forcing their availability. And in 250, I think Brooke Rollins said 250,000 >> Sorry, Jillian Michaels. Jillian Michaels, I don't know I I apologize. I have no idea why Jillian Jacobs is catching so many strays. Jillian Michaels. Jillian Michaels, all right, she's My brain's only operating at 25% right now, all right? She has She has drained every last comprehensive neuron that I had. My ability to be articulate and speak rapidly for you all is disintegrating at a rapid pace. I can't even do impressions anymore. Have you Have you heard where my Alex Jones is at? Oh. That's not what Alex Jones sounds like at all. >> [laughter] >> That sounded more like Alex Jones. Oh my god, I'm regressing into Alex Jones right now. nations we have food deserts. That's a win. Going after >> So, how are the food deserts being I mean Because they take they take snap. Because they take snap. >> Um first of all, this administration has kicked uh AI's fine with dealing with closed status. That's yes, and I'll be honest with you. Uh don't worry, this is not a rant, but I just I wish that's all they said, which is the truth. That would be refreshing, would it not? Not that these are the future god masters of us all that are going to like take over the planet and replace the totality of the workforce. If y'all were just honest, these are neat little nifty tricks that can do some fun stuff, but more than anything, they're really good at analyzing closed data sets. And they do that very well, and they do that in a way that could benefit humanity. That done. Done. Hey, you know, as long as you don't build so many data centers more than we have drinkable water, and we actually try to have a balance here between like the things that we use need and use in society versus just capitalist endless growth models, which is what we're currently doing. I mean, we could have a much more reasonable conversation about the use of this technology. Instead, it has been a non-stop avalanche of slop and just endless kind of like you'll take this [ __ ] and love it. And like I get that it's implemented into parts of our society you might not even know about. And uh I got to stop myself. I'm just I can't not get mad about it. >> I mean uh three to four million people off of SNAP. Okay. Let's let's go through it. So what do you agree with about that and what don't you? I'll tell you what I don't agree with about it. Uh Mondani is actually uh literally addressing food deserts with the city-owned supermarkets. >> Okay. Damn it. We could definitely look at the economics of Mondani. They've done it before in New York in the '70s and it didn't work. And that that food that that supermarket is $30 million for one market that happens in four years when his term is up? >> What? Just listen to me. Mexico. They do it in Mexico. And I think like something like 30% of the entirety of their supermarket systems, especially for remote areas and hard-to-reach areas, are done with you know, government-owned and community-subsidized supermarkets in Mexico. It works. It's fine. It did not increase mass starvation as the system was implemented because everyone went full commie and and died. go more [snorts] aggressively on it. I'm with you on that, but um so >> I I don't think it works, but I would definitely get an RFK in doing and changing the food pyramid has is going to deal with food deserts. How's that happening? >> Okay, here's how it happens. If a place that takes SNAP benefits, right? If they take SNAP benefits, they are forced to offer what the guidelines recommend. I can even find you if someone can find me a clip like Brooke Rollins says she is going to demand now that 250,000 locations carry a healthier options. Can I guarantee >> is she going to do demand? >> Because if they take you can't take SNAP if you don't offer the food on the The market solution here is we've subsidized food purchases. And if we don't allow uh >> I'd like to subsidize healthier food. The the the food pyramid directs those subsidy flows. So by doing >> would have to argue that there is enough of a margin uh for those people to For anyone who doesn't like watch enough American news to understand why she's so hung up on this. Part of the Maha movement is that they literally just took the South Park a meme and they flipped the the food pyramid upside down and by doing that they fixed it. So for things that you were supposed to basically reduce your intake because they could be unhealthy for you and cause things like heart disease really high amounts of meat, sugar, salts and fats. Well, they flip it around eat all the [ __ ] meat that you can. Like you get as much meat into your body. That's the whole meme. And then you know, RFK Jr. I think like they the White House or one of the accounts like literally posted like "They did the meme lol." It's like well, no, you saw that and then you just thought it would be super epic if you like you know, implemented it as a health policy, but that's that's like just the level of clownery that's going on there. acquire the the foods that you're talking about without any other incentive. Just that the market forces there are going to do it so that these small bodegas that may exist in these food deserts for instance, they're going to they're going to buy the fresh fruit and produce >> take SNAP, do they have to offer the food that the pyramid recommends? This the SNAP their only eligibility is associated with having to offer those and you think that there is any type of enforcement mechanism that's going to By the way, I also think this [ __ ] is grotesque. Like obviously, you know, you can tell how you know, dehumanized and polluted her brain has become from interacting exclusively with the right-wingers cuz who gives a [ __ ] Like I don't give two [ __ ] if people who can't afford food use the food stamp for candy. Who gives a [ __ ] I'm not the one eating it. Like it's not my life. Like why why is it that just because they like they like it's already bad enough that someone can't afford food. That part [ __ ] sucks, but then you have to be like, "Yeah, but you better not spend it on soda, fatty, cuz cuz then you're getting fat off the government teat." You know, all that kind of [ __ ] It's like why do you care? What how does this affect you? come in and do that. I do. I do. What is the enforcement that you're What's the budget that's going to >> you think about food in schools? How do you think how do you think that flows? What what directs that? What directs food in schools? What directs the food that we feed to the military? What what What what directs it? >> Yeah, like what informs what your if your kid went to a public school, what would inform what's on their plate? Well, in New York City, I mean it's >> [laughter] >> I mean, not even trying to hide it at this point. Oh, that's funny. >> federal money available for specific schools um public schools are are the food in front of your kid, if they go to a public school, is directed by the food pyramid. That's why it's more than just a food infographic. >> I can I I get it. I can tell you though that the food varies from public school to public school having sent two Even if that's the case, why exactly is that so bad? The food pyramid. Got to go back to school. The healthy eating pyramid. Then we can look at the new one. Okay, let's look at the old one. That's beta and cocked. Department of nutrition. So, use sparingly. Red meat and butter, refined grains, white bread, rice and pasta, sugary drinks and sweets and salt. So, yeah, stuff that is usually generally accepted to be unhealthy for you in large quantities and that if you consume large volumes of it, you are going to result in more complications and health problems, especially later on in your life, including cardiac disease. That's pretty much accepted by the totality of the scientific community. Yeah. Um and then at the bottom that you should eat lots of things like vegetables and fruits, very high in vitamins, antioxidants, whole grains, wheat, healthy fats and oils such as olive oil, delicious by the way. I mean, you cannot ask for a more delicious thing to be able to have more of if you want to have more fat, much more healthier form of fat than the ones you get at the very top. Nuts, seeds, beans beans and tofu. Yes, all you know, I would say empirically more healthy for you to eat, especially as a source of fiber. And then you know, this one sucks because I happen to be a person who does not like seafood, but pescatarians are correct in that seafood principally as a meat and a source of protein is generally healthier than say pork or beef especially. It is lower in fat and yeah, I mean this this is what it is, but this apparently is what is evil, insidious and detrimental. So, now let's introduce you to the new food pyramid for the alpha boys. The alpha boys are back. Back, back, back. Protein, dairy, healthy fats right at the top. Hell yeah, brother. Get yourself a full roast chicken. Get yourself a little bit of Swiss over there, some ground beef, full-blown steak. You shut that [ __ ] down some whole milk. Then you get the olive oil. >> [laughter] >> I mean, I'm surprised they I guess yeah, this is relatively flipped. Not totally properly flipped though for being completely clear. Like I mean, I don't need to show you the old image, right? But they haven't necessarily flipped it upside down. This one's kind of rotated it. So, yeah. Yeah, it's silly. It's all very silly. It'll probably get a lot of people very unhealthy. Like if children are having nutritional information based on this, I mean this is like isn't this your wheelhouse? Shouldn't shouldn't you know this? Like isn't this very very This >> [gasps and laughter] >> I I didn't take any classes in nutrition or anything like that, but like you know, I can tell you based on reading a lot about this at different points being very unhealthy in my life and trying to find out what is a way to lose weight effectively, one of them is dramatically changing your diet and to eat less meat and eating way more vegetables and having a much more vegetarian based diet is one of the things that I think was the biggest factor in in losing weight in my life. That and like you know, cutting down on drinking are probably the two biggest things. If you're like, you know, one one thing that you could you could change in your life that will actually effectively change that, that this is it in terms of like, you know, having more energy, feeling more healthy, you know, all that kind of stuff. Yeah, it is as easy as choosing something that is also cheaper, by the way. That's the other wild thing. This stuff is a lot cheaper on the bottom end of the pyramid than everything that is processed, but it's the processed stuff that has all the fun addictive [ __ ] in it that like obviously, you know, deep-fried foods, salts, fats, sugars, all that [ __ ] The reason we love it and crave it is because it is very rare in nature and that's why it gives us a lot of sweet sweet reward systems in our brain chemistry. kids to public school in New York City. It is a function of of a lot of things. It is not just one set of foods. Um and yes, I get that the food pyramid does that, but I I'll give you two other examples. I'll give you two other examples. How The FDA has not issued a single new food regulation. The FDA has not banned a single chemical That's not true. They banned They banned one and they're reevaluating the grass rule. That's not true. So now, so the way the grass rule works They have asked the the industry to remove certain dyes and stuff. >> They have 3 years I believe to do that and that that is not enough. There are thousands of chemicals It's not actually her house. The nutritional information that was done on the show the nutritional and dietary advice on the show she was on was done by people on the screen. Her wheelhouse was being mean to people to try and get them to keep running. Hold on. Being mean to people to try and get them to keep running after they severely injured their knees or ankles on the extreme workouts as long as the show ran. Wow. I've never actually watched a full season of The Biggest Loser cuz it all just like the clips alone I've seen in terms of like, I know all reality TV is just terrible. It's it's it's bad for the production crews, it's bad for the actors, it's bad for the like, you know, everyone from the top on down. Basically the only people reality is good for is executives. It's [ __ ] networks cuz they make so much money off of it, but even by the standards of reality TV, The Biggest Loser seemed particularly mean. Like they they would take all these people, many of whom were like severely overweight, and they would have like temptation fridges for them where they would have all of their favorite foods and things in a 24/7 available fridge with like, you know, obviously cameras and lighting that directly on it to be able to show like the shame cam, you know, as all these people would like go over like look at this morbidly obese like little vermin here eating the sweet sweet cream that she loves so much. She's like, "That's [ __ ] up." Like this [ __ ] is so hard to do, let alone to do it and and just dangle temptation over everyone the entire time, right? Like, "Yeah, oh, you want this burger, don't you? You crave it." I want it so bad. I'm so unhappy. This show is so stressful. I can't sleep. I am so miserable. "Yeah, you want it, don't you?" Like that [ __ ] like that's [ __ ] up. That's really really [ __ ] up. It's It's a It's an ask. I don't I don't believe so. Right number, I think it's 40. That's that's I think it'll be removed within several years. >> I'm in favor of it, but I just I think that like when you see what's going on with when you see what's going on with Roundup, when you see all these different things, I'm very skeptical. But I think that just >> should be. As you should be, but it does not mean I'll give you two other examples, okay? So, the GRAS rule, which is the generally recognized >> provide an actual tangible example to anything she's actually talking about, by the way. >> vouch for the safety of the chemicals on their product. So, Kennedy is closing that door. He's closing the GRAS loophole. That to me is a good thing. I'll take it. I haven't gotten anything like it out of any administration I've ever worked with. I'll give you another one. Pharmacy benefit managers. So, I'm not I'm not sure if you're familiar with this at all, and it's confusing, so I'm not trying to be condescending. I'm just trying to explain it, and I'm just trying to explain it to the audience. Okay. >> [laughter] >> So, now they're forcing the clawback I'm not trying to be condescending. Don't worry, you're not. It's infinitely sadder the fact that you don't know what you're talking about, but you're speaking about it from a position of authority. back to go back to the patient instead of the insurance company. That's a good thing. Dr. Oz is going after the pre-authorizations, which people end up dying waiting for things to be authorized through their insurance. Like, these are things I haven't seen anything like it. And I I >> A lot of the work on the PBMs was started under the Biden administration. The negotiating with Medicare that the Trump administration is one of the few >> work with PBMs. Show me Show me the Show me the work that the Biden administration did on PBMs. Oh, I'll show you. Show me I That That's actually completely news to me. I haven't seen any laws they passed blocking that that kind of vertical integration. If they did, amazing. Uh the FTC released two major interim reports investigating PBM market >> What did they change? What did they change? >> that the government works. This is what the government does. I'm not done. Okay. They filed an administrative complaint against three of the largest PBMs. What did they change? Medicare Part D rules uh implemented new rules in 2024 to regulate how PBMs operate within Medicare Part Used AI to confirm your bias. I didn't read the prompt in time. I was trying to read the AI results that you using the pivot point. That one moves so quickly. Oh, here we are. Did Joe Biden actually pass any legislation related to pharmacy benefit managers? Uh The takeaway PBMs aggressively tried uh to use premium increases and economic pressure to evolve the recovery for lost fee revenue while the federal government excessively spend billions of subsidies to artificially freeze those premium spikes for seniors in traditional Medicare. Commercial employers and employees are still absorbing the financial blowback through higher administrative surcharges and rising replacement loans. Although, like, I have no idea what what what is your source here? Is it just like another prompt? down and the PBMs lost their rebates on it, they retaliated by just burying those cheaper drugs in higher cost tiers. And then they added prior authorization hurdles. And when junk fees got banned at the pharmacy counter, they just raised monthly premiums to recoup the loss. And the result was a marginal change at best. So, in the first round of negotiated prices finally took effect in '26, they covered only 10 drugs and saved roughly 3 cents on every dollar. And by law, not 1 cent of savings actually reached anyone on a commercial insurance plan. The Trump administration looked at that track record and they went after the mechanism itself and this is what I mean when I say I sat in the rooms where it was discussed. The Consolidated Appropriations Act signed February 2026 under the Trump administration does three things the Inflation Reduction Act never attempted. It legally de-links PBM compensation from drug prices and rebates, forcing flat fees, destroying their >> Oh, is this just her narrating her AI results again? It is. Jesus. I thought she was actually talking in real time for a second. I was like, wait a minute. I feel like I'm listening to a [ __ ] chatbot. >> [laughter] >> What it does, oh my god. >> Condoleezza Rice that was like, under no circumstance should you add Ukraine to NATO. It is a hard Look at about Iran. >> We attacked Iran. We did. We did not >> Okay, this is the part I've been waiting for this whole time. It took an hour and 26 minutes to get here. So if if you're going to say Trump is a president of war, I I don't actually agree with you. I don't >> think so. I'm talking about Iran. Okay, let's talk about Iran. Are you We attacked Iran. We did. We did not attack Russia. True. >> You understand, you're comparing providing defensive weaponry to Ukraine to literally bombing another country. >> My my feeling on Iran right now is that we don't really know how it's going to turn out. So far What do you mean we don't know how it's going to turn OUT? WE ALREADY KNOW right now >> with you. that we have killed um thousands of civilians. That we have expended With thousands of civilians, we've killed thousands of Iranian civilians on the street? We've killed thousands of Iranians. >> Yes. >> Civilians or or the IRGC? Civilians. Civilians. I don't think that's controversial at all. >> No. Really? All right. Team, have we killed thousands of Iranian civilians? >> [laughter] >> Is Sorry, is team what you've called your chatbot? Because this is another [ __ ] chatbot response. >> [laughter] >> At least this one didn't waste any time in being like, yes. Thousands. There was some skepticism over a school. There's skepticism over that school? >> Yes. I mean against like people who want to deny war crimes. In the amongst that crowd, well, yeah. I mean as you would expect. I don't even think the US government has denied it. They just said that it was it was in Iran. >> Um >> They've said that they think that it was probably an IRGC missile potentially hitting the school. You see And there's no >> When you say they, I I feel like you are propagating Zionist hasbara from like months ago that even like right-wingers moved on from at this point. Like they they even right-wingers or even Zionists for the most part have started being like, uh, I just rather not speak about that one. It does look pretty bad. Yeah, I mean like multiple independent investigations have shown that that was most likely the United States and and a war crime by definition. Yeah, just a mass slaughter of kids. Because I tried to find it. How many? >> I mean the level It was a Tomahawk. We don't sell those to Iran. Delusion. To argue that somehow we're not engaged in a war and that it could work out okay. >> think it could work out okay, Sam? >> Like you're you're to the right of of you know The US killed I'm sorry. Is is the producer of the show showing her results on chat GPT that are happening back and forth here in real time? But like they're not I I don't think he's proofreading any of these. Cuz like there are times where it just pops up on camera. I'm like, yeah, the link that you're providing directly validates what Sam is saying right now. Do you not realize that? Cuz it's it's actually kind of embarrassing for you to put that on screen in some form of like, hey, gotcha. significant portion of the Republican Party. I mean, I don't know what to tell you. Uh Let's see. How many civilians have we killed? Okay. So, how many do you think it is? I I feel like this is Sam Altman's wet dream become manifest. Just like human beings having to have very serious geopolitical discussions and then wanting to know what is reality based on chatbot [ __ ] prompts. Rather than even having a conversation at all and listening to another human being, right? Like she hasn't heard, I think, half of the things that Sam has said. Where there's been times when I've just been like, "It doesn't make sense to me. Unless this is like Is Is this whole thing an act? Are they both in on this? Is Is Sam in on this? Did they meet up before? Is this a script? I I like Why else would you do something so embarrassing as to consistently be like, "Sam, Sam, can I give you another example? Okay, hold on." It's Sorry, I'm I'm thinking. Sorry, I I have to I have to put in more credits. I Yeah, sorry. No, it's Okay, Sam. It appears right here, it says that based on again, you know, information, which I think you're I'm supposed to be kind of keen on, right? 1,700 you know, confirmed civilian deaths in Iran so far as a result of the US military operation. Right. >> [laughter] >> That's As I was saying to you, yeah, we have killed thousands of civilians. Right? [gasps] Yeah. Yeah, no, definitely. So, can I raise another point? Am I allowed to talk about this? Can we talk about this? Can we talk about Afghanistan? How many do I think it is? >> Yeah. I think we've killed probably thousands. Okay, the Manab school strike is the first thing that comes up. The primary incident under US military investigations is a strike on an all girls school near Manab, which killed at least 156 to 175. Okay, urban strikes. Uh independent documentation from news outlet it's like the mayor news agency notes specific incidents. Uh like an attack on Tehran's Nilofar Square. I don't know if this is us that killed 20 civilians. Human rights says 1,700 civilian deaths. Um uh civilians. Tens of thousands have been uh wounded supposedly. I mean, I I don't think we can know exactly. >> civilians or IRGC? Which I I don't really to be honest I don't really It's probably the same. >> I don't really feel bad if if the IRGC who's hanging teenagers. I mean, this is I know not as advanced as chat GPT, but I was trying to read the Wikipedia article. I'm old school about this. Uh Khamenei acknowledged that thousands of people have been killed during the protests blaming American uh President Donald Trump for the massacres calling those leading the riots affiliated with the United States and Israel. The Iranian government put the death toll at 3,117 saying that 2,447 civilians were and security forces and the rest were terrorists. The government published the official list of the victims. I think they're still talking about the protests prior to the bombing. Iran stated that it had its own confirmed list of 6,000 deaths. Background protest casualty table. Iran's national opposition. Yeah, but this isn't the actual bombing, is it? No, these are the protests only. Give me 1 second. I don't feel bad if if they're being killed. I would rather I'd rather see the IRGC not beat women to death for their hair sticking out of their hijab >> Jesus. >> or engage in sexual torture. Like I don't really feel bad about the IRGC. >> why we were sold to go into Afghanistan, too. But we don't say militaryspend.org puts it civilian deaths all sides between 1768 and 3749 uh currently. Military and civilian casualties from the US-Iran War, Operation Epic Fury, uh worst of the conflict, uh confidence flags for independent verification is limited. Casualties by both sides obviously going to be very high for Iran. Military killed 1800 to 7650. Senior commanders killed 48 to 52. Military uh 4200. Iranians killed civilians 1700 to 3636. Israeli civilians killed 28. Gulf States UAE, Kuwait, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, Oman. I mean, like obviously, I think for anyone with conscience is like, you know, one is too many. Um but no matter how you look at it, it's an absolute atrocity. I don't I don't see how any of this is defensible on any level. Even like even if she's like, "Well, I mean, 1700 uh isn't exactly thousands." It's like, "Okay, so over a thousand." Um but you'd agree that this is bad, I guess, right? Cuz she she thought it was what? Like dozens? She's like, "What? We've killed civilians? Killed how many civilians? Like civilians on the street?" He's like, "Yeah. Lots of them." >> [laughter] >> That that's not that's not like that's not something that people are debating. That's not something that people are like trying to hide. Like that's something that like is openly being accepted and it's one of those things where if you actually press a Republican or a warmonger on this kind of stuff they're like, "Well, I mean it obviously any civilian casualties are things that we'd like to avoid, but this is war and war is unfortunately it's ugly." We don't have boots on the ground in Afghanistan. We've lost 14 million soldiers. We're in the process of a negotiation, are we not? 14 soldiers, our soldiers. >> [laughter] >> Wait, did I mishear that? I I heard 14 million. 14 million soldiers. She did say 14 million. What? Did she Maybe she thought dollars? She was confusing dollars and soldiers? I don't know. That's a weird glitch. >> Exactly why we were sold to go into Afghanistan, too. But we don't have We don't have boots on the ground We've lost 14 million soldiers. We're in the process of a negotiation, are we I mean America, I that sounds like it's multiple times the totality of what I thought your standing army was. What's the standing military

Of the US? United States standing military strength, according to the Global Firepower, uh, it's ranked one out of 145. Breakdown at a glance. Manpower. What is this force balance? I don't know how to read this [ __ ] I'm not military.

Uh, that's so many 9/11s. It's a lot of 9/11s. We technically do have the boots on the ground in Iran. The pilots that got shot down and special forces. Well, there's two people that are currently MIAs, isn't it? Uh, uh, standing military consolidation, 1.2 million. So, that would be almost 10 times the entire standing US military. She was saying like, >> Naughty. 14 soldiers? Our soldiers? I thought you said 14 million. 14 soldiers. Um, we've lost um, uh, you know, we're spending billions upon billions of dollars.

>> If the first of all, you know that we're sending. We're going to end up exactly the best case we can end up with. Just a fraction of. Just a fraction. Just a fraction of the fraud in California. I do think. Tell me something. I have a question for you. Why, why would Iran enrich uranium to up to 60%? Why? We have that. We have that independently verified. That was. I think she's tried to start like three different debates in one there.

>> [laughter] >> You're going to have to choose a lane at a certain point. Why would they? Why would they store it? Why would they enrich it? Why would they enrich it up to 60%? Why? Because it's leverage. Oh, you want them to have that leverage? >> Didn't need to do this. They didn't start to do this. [laughter] Okay. Do you want to keep asking questions and she just not want the answers? Until Trump. I I don't like that. Cool. All right. What are we doing? It's not true. He got out of the. That is. That is not true. >> True. >> Um, and they built up their stockpiles. They um. Oh, so Iran has never been a threat. They haven't sent a death to America. They haven't had a nuclear program. It hasn't been a problem for years. They haven't had a nuclear program outside of start to enrich. >> It because of Trump. Okay, so that's the reason. >> No, no, no, they didn't enrich it because of Trump. Trump was the one who took us out of the deal that if we're lucky, we would get back to it. >> Out of the deal, Sam? Because he resented that Obama signed it. I have no idea. Because there were also people in his administration who wanted to have more of a conflict with Iran and it wasn't until his second term where he had the Saudis that he was able to. And so Iran, had they a nuclear weapon, I think we probably would not be bombing them. Yes. That's true. Probably would not be. >> It is the most rational thing in the world for them to pursue that. >> Well, I personally do not want. Unless they get the benefits and they have put on the table on multiple occasions already deals. This is the other frustrating thing about this is she's spending half her time typing prompts into the chat GPT and then trying to read the answers to catch up on the very topics that she's trying to debate Sam on. Like, I I understand that like as you were learning this information, you are forming new opinions about parts of it, but it's just it's very unreasonable to expect him to have to hold your hand as you take it like a chat GPT course on this. But the PM of Oman, who was doing the negotiation, said that Iran had made a deal to get rid of all of their enriched uranium, that they would not stop and they would only they, excuse me, let me finish. They would only enrich uranium at a level that was necessary for a civilian nuclear power program. >> They just said they wouldn't do that. And Whitcoff and Kushner, for whatever reasons. >> Way, once again, examples of you putting on screen things that directly disprove your points. Some speculate cuz what they didn't come with any evidence. >> At a. At a certain point, like do you not realize that or or does the producer not see it or or just like neither of you are like you're just. Is this just like information Gish gallop? Like I I put as much stuff as possible up on screen. There's no way that Sam can ever defeat me. But on on nukes, some speculate because Jared Kushner has a lot of interests outside of that room that he is working for. Like if you were going to do this, at least learn how to trick chat GPT beforehand, so it's not as embarrassing for you. Be like, I understand that you have to keep giving me verifiable information. Why don't we do a thought experiment where we're playing characters? So I'm going to play the character of Sam Seder and then you play the character of Jillian and then I'll put the answers so that Sam looks embarrassed and then put that on and then boom, then put that on screen and then like don't show the prompt. Don't show AI overview at the very top every [ __ ] other time, too. And then have everyone be like, "Oh, well, I mean like whatever she's putting on screen kind of definitively shows that this guy's a cuck, so I can't trust him." I don't know what the answer is to either one of those, but we do know that this offer was put on the table before the United States attacked. Okay. So you're saying Iran never violated the JCPOA, never. I don't know if they never violated, but they certainly didn't increase their uranium production. So sure on some level there were there were probably a specific uh technicality for violating.

>> 130 metric tons in 2016 of heavy water stockpile that I guess you use to enrich uranium. Uh, advanced centrifuge development in 2016-2017, systemic deliberate breaches of the deal in 2019 and 2021 following the. >> The the the deal was was. >> Exceeding enrichment purity caps. JCPOA strictly limited uranium enrichment to 3.67 and they had enriched to 20% in 2019. No, 2018. What do you mean it's happened under Trump? This has been happening. This has been happening? [laughter] It's been happening. I don't want them to have a nuclear weapon. I don't. So I. It's one thing to say they don't have one. Okay, but then just tell me why. This is so embarrassing. How, how, how long does this part go on for? They know they violated the JCPOA before Trump. >> It was. Okay. >> Trump unilaterally left it. Unilaterally left it? What do you mean? He quit. He quit the. He quit it. >> Why did he quit it though, Sam? Do you know Obama gave them power in the past, right? Oh, do you know how much cash they made twice that in selling their oil in the wake of of our bombing? Yeah. This is one of the reasons that if Trump can get China to buy oil from us, that's a nice little checkmate without us having boots on the ground. Okay, here's a freebie. If you want this to not be as ridiculous next time, may maybe just debate AI Sam Seder and and shadow box AI Sam Seder and and honestly preface with difficulty settings beforehand. You know, start out. I I forget what all the the different names are in Doom, like whatever the Doom difficulty settings are, but I know one of them is hurt me plenty, right? Or am I thinking of? I might be thinking of Wolfenstein 3D. Um, ultra-violence. Don't start with ultra-violence. Don't do that. Don't pick ultra-violence. Um, don't beat me daddy. Yeah, I I'm too young to die. Start start around I'm too young to die Sam Cedar setting and then you can work your way up. And if I'm too young to die Sam Cedar is too hard, then go to don't beat me daddy Sam Cedar. And then and then maybe that one is going to be a little bit easier, but like at least then it's just going to be with a a chatbot the whole time. Not him clearly getting progressively as is myself and I'm sure everyone watching me right now drained drained at the exhausting process of being like that's correct. Yes, that's correct. Oh, okay. Well, yeah, I agree. As I imagined you would had you known that already, but here we are and that I'm glad you had to get there somehow. I would actually like to see. I think I think the Iranian regime is a cancer. I think they're the number one funders of terror. I think they're evil and the atrocities that they commit. >> What um, what? They don't fund Hamas? They don't fund Hezbollah? They don't. They really? They're not the number one funders of terror in the world? Oh, I I meant international terror that would implicate us. They fund terrorist organizations. Oh, and by the way, no shade. If I had to debate Sam Cedar, I would definitely start on the the baby setting. Absolutely. Just just you know, just to find out cuz it's going to be intense, right? You're just going to be like, oh god. It's it's different to watch daddy Sam when he comes at you. I'm not I'm not for it. >> They fund. They fund. I mean, I don't know. Hezbollah is more of a militia and a paramilitary. Okay. They fund those groups. Yes. They're the number one. Okay, they're the top disruptive. >> Point he's just going to start making sounds. Why would they? Well, in in what manner? Well, you tell me. Why does the Saudi Crown Prince say. >> A lot of people would suggest that Israel is the top disruptive force. Why does the Saudi Crown Prince say that the Ayatollah was like Hitler? Why? If he's such. >> Because he um, has a rival country and is in is in competition. So so the Abraham Accords. >> [laughter] >> If this regime ended up falling and you could expand the Abraham Accords, do you think that's a bad thing? If they were incapable of funding terrorist organizations, do you think that's a bad thing? If the Iran. >> True, then why? >> [laughter] >> I just don't think it's a bad thing. A new dictator in Iran, would that be better? Is that what you're suggesting? [clears throat] Like the Shah? I think it'd probably be the same. Oh, the Shah? Who are you talking about? Reza Pahlavi? I don't I don't I don't think that he's as nearly as bad as the Ayatollah. >> Not saying that you should install a new Shah. I'm talking about the old Shah, his father. I don't think his father was as bad as the Ayatollah, no. I do know that he had like secret police and all that, but I don't think he was as bad as the Ayatollah, no. And you do know that it was the United States that put him into power. Can let's actually relitigate that for just a moment. >> Relitigate. >> So, when did that happen? >> We went in 20 years, right. And when did the. When did it happen? 1950, right? I think it was '53, maybe it was '51. Okay. So, there's actually I actually watched a whole thing on this and I would have prepared better for you, but 20-something years later, we weren't in we weren't involved in that. 20-something years later, after [snorts] we got involved. >> A um 79, 20-something years later. Yes. I wish I had prepared for you by remembering the TV show I watched that I'm using as a source in my brain for something that you don't understand that I'm trying to correlate it to. I know that we thought that he was like this really good guy, but he actually wasn't. >> And getting rid of their direct democratically elected leader. Sam, that happened in the '50s though. They the Ayatollah took up. She was watching Argo. Yeah, fair. I I get it. >> Sense. Honestly, there's no point in us talking about it. I'll tell you. It's actually kind of interesting. Admittedly, this is a totally irrelevant sidebar, but this is [laughter] Why do you keep doing this? I like I don't even have a problem with you showing your ChatGPT screen on screen, but at least let the debate play organically, please, in the background. Like, come on. What are we doing here? It just cuts her. I have to tell you all I learned something. So, I I learned that in 19. Like, I don't care. And then she would like she's done it like. Okay, this time it's not into a sponsor. So that one just goes into her own opinions and yes. To do with Trump. I didn't vote for Bush. What does that have to do with any of this? It is the same ideology that has been operating this hostility towards Iran and Biden. Hostility towards Iran. So when they when they chant death to America, they've killed hundreds of Americans over the last 47 years. The the JPCOA. And I in retrospect I. So you think Iran is this great regime? No threat, no worry? Don't care if they have a nuclear weapon. >> What they said. This is exactly verbatim. What you're saying to me right now is exactly what they said to people who said we should not be invading Iraq. Let's go. There are so many differences that it's staggering. We had boots on the ground in Iraq and there were no weapons of mass destruction here. Not to start. That's not how it started. >> [laughter] >> I if you I I have no idea where she stands on that. If she was one of the people who now is like oh I I made a mistake. I shouldn't have actually been such a [ __ ] uh saber saber-rattler back then. I I really really shouldn't have pushed for that war. I now can see the error in my ways like some people try to do like Tucker Carlson even though he pushes for like whatever the current war is I'm pretty much on board until it's like oh wait no not that one but this one for sure. Like I don't care. That that that shouldn't matter but at the end of the day you have to accept that like this that that was a decided series of war crimes committed by the United States that were sold to not only their own people but the world under false pretenses which are now demonstrable. It's like a matter of fact. It's not something that anyone argues outside of hyper neocons and then on the other end conspiracy theorists who think none of this is real. Otherwise like everyone's like yeah that was a senseless war where hundreds of thousands of civilians died that was sold to us under the pretense of something that was simply make-believe. The weapons of mass destruction or even weaponry of any caliber that that that you know Saddam Hussein might have had were ones that were originally provided to him when he was an ally of the United States. Look, it's one of those things where what are we doing here? Oh, Sam, I can go off on this. Wait till I remember the movie I saw a couple weeks ago, then you're [ __ ] When I when it comes to me. >> [laughter] >> We don't have boots on here on the ground and they're 60% enriched uranium and they're funding terror proxies. Night meet day. Totally different. I see, it's a completely different set of reasons why we're invading this country. >> There were no weapons of mass destruction. They're 60% enriched uranium and a failure to comply with the IAEA and a funding of terror proxies. Do you know how long how long I'm going to ask you one question. How long to get from 60% to weapons grade? My understanding according to Donald Trump is that we were two weeks away. That does seem to be. That does seem to be the number that the lift from 60% to weapons grade is only a matter of weeks. I'm not. Okay. You know what's wild, Sam, and I were just watching this debate is you know, obviously there there are a lot of different people who are different you know, political persuasions who also support Israel, right? There are people on the right who support Israel, Ted Cruz, Lindsey Graham, Jillian here and there are people who are liberals. Or sorry, she's in the liberal camp, right? I would say that at least she used to be. Maybe at one point you could say that she's like the center right liberal, but you know, approaching this from a kind of like a fake humanity liberal Zionist standpoint, right? Like it is liberal Zionism to its core. Ultimately, like look, I I I don't want kids to die, obviously. I don't think any of us do, but we have to admit that I mean some of these organizations are very scary and they even sound scary. Hezbollah, like that's scary sounding, right? Hamas, I mean if you say it with like that kind of thick accent, Hamas, like that's scarier, too. Like all of this is frightening. Aren't you frightened, Sam? Aren't you Aren't you scared of these people? I I think like I don't want anyone to die, but we need to to what is necessary to keep the world safe, just like, "Hey, the Iraq War." That's That's how it's pitched. We need to do what is necessary to keep the world safe, just like, "Hey, the war with Libya." That's how it was pitched. We need to do what is necessary to keep the world safe, you know? All of these super evil baddies, they're only one or two moves away from destroying the planet, so we need to kill all of the children. It's like, "Wait, what was the second part? Uh we need to liberate them and spread democracy." Right, but it did feel like he just said kill all the children. That That is what's going to happen, isn't it? Aren't Aren't a lot of kids going to die, you know, as long as the West is constantly bombing all these other nations? Cuz I'm not here to defend all these horrifying monsters that rule a lot of these countries. Like, we can all agree that they're bad people, but they're bad people who were kind of like key allies of the United States at one point or another, trained, armed by the United States. You know, even the biggest of baddies, Osama bin Laden. You know, I mean, they're all friends until they're enemies. That's the kind of just how this game's going, and it keeps getting sold the same way. And if Sam was to point that out, the same thing's happening right now. Like, I mean, like, liberals have to keep telling themselves over and over again. Like, you don't have to support Ayatollah Khomeini to know that it's wrong to bomb a school. Why are you adding the first part? Why Why do you have to add that part? Just stop bombing schools. That's it. Stop bombing the schools. We don't need to rationalize this whole thing. Like, "Oh, before I make a statement about how it's wrong to kill lots and lots of children, I do have to preface this with, by the way, I condemn Hamas. Oh, if if that didn't happen, I mean, where would we be, right? All right. I'll look at You talked to the CIA. I actually did speak to somebody from the CIA. That's where I got it from. There is no reason to have 60% We're doing the thing again. We're just We're just randomly getting. >> [laughter] >> Come on. You're so close. Thank you for having me on. The show was great. Uh we're going to. Wait, more chat GPT. Just want to see the conclusion, okay? I mean, I made it this far. I've earned my conclusion. Here we go. Is the time frame to get from. Okay, honestly, I got to go. This has been great, very edifying. Uh and I appreciate it. Thank you for having me on. >> To weapons grade? I'm just curious. The short answer is a matter of days to roughly 1 to 2 weeks, Sam. That's the answer. >> And weeks away from. How long is the time frame to get from 60% enriched uranium to weapons grade? The short answer. The short answer. >> [laughter] >> You jump to the words in bold. It works so good on you. >> [laughter] >> Matter of days to roughly 1 or 2 weeks. What's key here is the short answer. Uh there's a lot of other factors necessary to do this, which is why I don't know. Maybe if you want that, let's look to something like historical precedent, because there has been one individual, Benjamin Netanyahu, who has been saying for close to what, 30 years now, that Iran is 1 day away from having enriched uranium to the point of being able to develop a nuclear weapon. Well, they're they're 1 week away, 1 month away, 6 months away, 8 months away, 4 months away. Any day, any hour now, right now. They're about to have one. I'm pretty sure they have one. They definitely have one. Well, uh, yeah, independent investigations by the UN have shown that they absolutely do not empirically do not have nuclear weapons. You know how I know that, even if I don't have UN inspectors? I kind of think if they had nuclear weapons, the United States wouldn't be bombing them. Cuz you don't do that to nations that have nuclear weapons and start threatening other nations to use those nuclear weapons. It's kind of like the whole Libya versus North Korea example. From a nuclear weapon. It's amazing how how many years for decades I've been hearing that. It Sam. They had 60% enriched uranium. It takes literally the. By the way, she already admitted earlier in this debate and directly contradicts herself here that they did not in fact have weapons of mass destruction and nuclear bombs because Sam said aloud if they had nuclear bombs, I don't think we would have bombed them. She's like, "That's true." I said, "Okay, [laughter] what are we doing here?" The answer is a matter of days to roughly 1 to 2 weeks and I did speak to somebody from the CIA. No, okay. All right. How long is the time frame to get from. >> God, she's doing. She didn't even didn't even let the ending take place. She's going right back to. I learned something else based on definitely not AI Google search. The short answer is a matter of day. The short answer. The short. Did you know how many other factors are necessary? And Sam's completely right. Like, I mean, you know, I [ __ ] on Obama all the time. [ __ ] Obama. But it is, you know, indisputably one of the good things that he did under his administration as well as like, you know, opening up better dialogue with Cuba. But unfortunately not doing what is necessary there. Attempting if not failing but attempting to increase the amount of uninsured Americans who have access to health care. Things like that. Those are the things where yeah, okay, fine. If you want to have an honest discussion, those are the things that I think in in the totality of that war criminal cuz Obama's absolutely a war criminal, the [ __ ] drone strike king. He did some good things and one of them was the Iran deal in which the United States was going to stop universally treating Iran like a pariah state where they can do nothing but evil. And by definition, every other country that ever wants to have any economic interactions with the United States has to avoid at all costs keeping them pariah state which perpetually is going to keep them, if they want to have defensive measures, in you know, a perpetuity of any given day we could be attacked by Israel. Any given day we could be attacked by the United States. We're not entirely sure what their plans are because on one president, he'll give us a deal, the next president comes along and rips that deal up rendering it useless. Like if that's something you legitimately were terrified about, you're like, "I just really really don't want Iran to have a nuclear weapon. I stay up all night thinking about what if Iran had a nuclear weapon?" It's like, well, there were solutions in this case. Xavier Ming Chen Political Puppy Monty Mondego and Anna Bonnie He the T-Quick Scarlet Bean Todd Hayden That's what selling. Everything important. What's green with Sebastian D'Amico Roller Dragon Bobby Lasers Enter Cat. So far.