don't admit when I get things wrong, even though I do it more. I probably do it more than anybody's ever done it. I'll bet that's true. I know that's an absurd claim, but I'll bet for a public figure I've admitted I'm wrong more than anybody ever has, possibly because I do almost every show. I say, well, I used to think this but I was wrong.

Right now, let me ask you this to see who you think was right. Jared Kushner had an estimate of how many lives were saved because of vaccinations. What number did he put on that? Now, I'm not saying it's true. I'm saying that there was a study that said that X number of lives were saved by the vaccination programs. What do you think the number was? Give me a number. Twenty million. Twenty million. Do you believe it? Do you believe that twenty million people were saved by the vaccinations? Well, if it didn't save twenty million people or something along those lines, then it probably wasn't worth it, was it? I feel like it would have to save at least twenty million or it wouldn't look like it was worth it, because twenty million is a pretty small percentage of seven and a half billion or whatever we are.

So now, do you believe, do you disbelieve the Trump administration when they say that? And I'm sure Trump will say the same. The twenty million people are saved. Do you think the Trump administration is lying to you? Because many of you are Trump supporters. You think that the person you support is lying to you on such a big question? How can you possibly support Trump if you think the vaccinations were... Is that a weird question? There's sort of a weird... Well, I don't really understand it because there's so many people who think the pandemic was just sort of the biggest thing that's happened and the vaccinations were the biggest evil that's happened. Some would say, how in the world could you support Trump if you were anti-vaccination? That makes no sense at all, does it?

All right, so I don't want to get you all worked up about that. Just to let you know that Jared thinks that twenty million people were saved by it. And the estimate is that the death rate was sixty-three percent lower than it would have been if there had not been vaccinations. Now, isn't that a pretty big difference between the vaccinations are killing people versus they saved twenty million people? So twenty million is like more than three times the Holocaust. So our difference of opinion, known in reality, just hold this in your mind. Our differences of opinion on what's real differ by three times the size of the Holocaust, right? Holocaust was six million something. But we have a twenty million death difference of opinion. Twenty million death difference. That's the world we're in. There's nothing we can't disagree with anymore.

Right now, if I had to guess, I would think that it's very unusual that we could get to this point in history without knowing for sure that the vaccinations made a difference. Do you think we could get to this point in history without knowing? Because the medical community seems pretty unified. And when I say that, I know they're rogues. Yes, they're rogue doctors. But is it true that the consensus official opinion of every major industrial country is that vaccinations worked really well? Worked meaning save people's lives, not worked in terms of slowing the spread. Is that wrong? Is there anybody who can give me a government source from a major government that said the vaccinations didn't work? Is there any government source? Bulgaria? Denmark? I don't think so. But if you have something like that, send it to me, okay? Because those who think the vaccinations didn't work, and frankly I don't know. How would I know? I mean, there's nothing I believe anymore in terms of data. But that's a really big discrepancy. Twenty million saved versus your opinion that people died because of it. Yeah, hard to explain that difference. Doesn't mean I'm right. Just means it's hard to explain.

And there's also a study that said one year after recovering from initial infection, survivors had a seventy-two percent higher risk of heart failure. So there is some data that says there's way greater risk if you get COVID to get a heart attack later, much greater risk than the vaccinations themselves. So this official data, do you think it's true? Do you believe this study that the people who got COVID are seventy-two percent more likely to get a heart attack later? Or do you believe that it's fake data and that really people are dying from the vaccinations themselves? Because it probably should be easy to separate the people who didn't get a vaccination and compare them to the other people who did get a vaccination but some of them were infected. It feels like an easy thing to test. But I do not believe this data. I do not believe this data. Do you? I don't believe it. I mean, it might be true. I'm not saying it's false. I'm just saying it's just the sort of thing I don't believe.

All right, did you see the interview, surprise interview with Joe Rogan and Mark Zuckerberg? And Rogan asked Zuckerberg about the Hunter laptop story. And Zuckerberg said that the FBI did talk to Facebook and told them in advance that they're expecting some Russian disinformation. Now, they did not say specifically that the laptop would be Russian disinformation, but they just said, hey, watch out for some Russian disinformation. And then in the news they labeled the Hunter laptop disinformation. So now what would the Facebook fact-checkers do if fifty intel people say it's real, it's disinformation? What is Facebook going to do? They're going to have to go with the official word, right? So apparently they didn't ban it, talk of the laptop. They just suppressed it, which he says directly. They suppressed it from being spread as widely as it would be. What do you think of that? Is Facebook bad for having done that? Keep in mind it was the government that told them this was fake information. The government. I feel like if the government tells you something is fake, you have to take that a little bit seriously. It turns out they were lying. So, and then I guess Facebook handled it differently than other platforms. But it's pretty damning. I'm not so sure it's damning about Facebook as it is about the FBI. I mean, it does show you that the FBI is effectively trying to run the country. That's what it seems to me.

All right, there's a movie called *My Son Hunter*, a Hunter Biden biopic. And I guess Gina Carano was in it as a Secret Service agent. And so it shows, it purports to show the sordid life of Hunter Biden. I'm really against this movie. This is one of the lowest things I've seen in public. Now, if the election was over, fine. Yeah, that's fine. But here's a guy who has not yet gone through the legal system. There might be some investigations about him. And I just think this is messed up. I think it's messed up to have a movie framing you and you don't get a chance to respond to the movie. I feel as though the movie should be legally banned. I feel like Hunter should have some recourse to ban it. And the reason would be justice. Because would you want to go into a situation where you might have some legal risk, and before you go in for your legal risk there's a movie that's designed just to defame you, and the movie is out in the public? I know I feel like he should have some legal recourse to, you know, at the very least have his stuff handled by people who've never seen the movie. But I get freedom of speech. I get First Amendment. And so maybe there's just nothing to do about it. But as a people, maybe we should use our own free speech to say you shouldn't watch it until after the election. I mean, obviously people are going to watch it anyway. But I think that'll be my decision. I think I won't watch it until after the election. And if it's still interesting, I'll watch it. I'll probably see all the clips before that. But the problem is that a movie is visual and it's very powerful, and this thing is going to move your opinion because it's powerful and because it's a movie. And that's very unfair to Hunter Biden.

Now, if it sounds like I'm defending Hunter Biden, I'm not. I'm defending a citizen. If you were the citizen in this situation, if you were in Hunter Biden's situation and somebody made a whole movie about you, how much do you think the dialogue in the movie is accurate? You know, when they make a movie they make up the dialogue, right? They make up the dialogue because nobody was there that remembers exactly who said what. So it's going to be an entirely fake movie which they will allege is closer to truth than it possibly could be with what they could possibly know. And I mean this seems like the worst offense against justice that I've ever seen. Hyperbole, but you know what I mean.

Now, if there's somebody here who says freedom of speech, that's the end of the story, I'd say okay, it might be the end of the story. I'm not going to push back hard against somebody who says, hey, yeah, it might be repulsive but free speech. Maybe that has to be the winning argument. I wouldn't push against that. That might have to be the winning argument. Just free speech. But you do get that it's horrible what's being done to him. And you wouldn't want this being done to you. And that's independent of what he has or has not done or what he is or is not guilty of. This is just icky. We should not be in favor of this. You should not support that movie. That's my opinion.

This student loan forgiveness thing is silly because there isn't, here's my opinion, there isn't the slightest chance this can happen. How many of you think that Joe Biden as president is going to raise our taxes by three hundred billion dollars by using the obscure COVID excuse when the pandemic's basically over? You don't think the Supreme Court is going to stop it? Even Nancy Pelosi says the president can't do that. Yeah, you're sure Biden researched it? Well, they did research it and they have a legal argument, but it's not a legal argument that could possibly stand up in the Supreme Court. Now, isn't the problem that there's nobody who would have standing to bring it? Don't I have standing? Because according to the news, my personal taxes because of my income range, my personal taxes would go up roughly the amount of one entire college education for a person. That's just my taxes. So basically I would be paying for an entire college education for one person over time. Now, I paid for my entire college education. I had some scholarships actually, so full disclosure. But I didn't have any loans. My mother worked on an assembly line wiring speakers. Her job was to stand there all day and put a copper wire around a magnet, just an assembly line making speakers. And she did that so that my siblings and I could go to college. And then worked other jobs as well. So she basically had one rule for us: you're going to college. That was my mother's one rule. You're going to college. That's it. Basically there was only one rule. Two rules. Yeah, you had to be home at five o'clock for dinner and you're going to college. That's it.

Now, I was not getting all worked up about this tax because it just seemed like another unfair thing that is the tax code. Because the tax code is completely unfair. Every part of it is unfair to somebody. Somebody likes it and it's unfair to somebody. Everything. So I wasn't too interested in it until I saw that I would be paying for somebody's entire college education. I had no idea it was going to be that high a tax. It's really pretty rugged. And even in the middle class you might be paying a few thousand extra dollars for somebody else's college. So first of all, it's offensive. We all know that. That's the obvious thing. But how in the world is the Supreme Court going to let a president raise your taxes? If it were still an emergency, I'd say sure. But it's obviously not still an em