people aren't catching on that it's intentionally offensive. So they're reacting as though they don't know that they're the marketing.

Anyway, ESPN's Stephen A. Smith, is it Stefan? I never know. Is it Stefan or Stephen? That name always confuses me. It can go either way, right? Stefan. I don't know. So Stefan or Stephen A. Smith says that the people going after Trump with lawfare are a bunch of cowards. And that all you're doing is showing that you're scared you can't beat him on the issues. Everything you do shows me you can't beat him. He says it's giving fodder to the argument that the election is rigged. I'm being told it's Steven, so we'll say Stephen A. Smith. So he's completely right. He's completely right. If your argument is that the elections were not rigged, then trying to rig it with lawfare right in front of the entire world while you're arguing that the election wasn't rigged, but you're rigging it right now. I mean legally. Legally, because the lawfare stuff is not itself illegal. It should be because it's being used illegally, but probably won't be actually prosecuted in any way. But yes, he's completely right. If you're going to rig the election right in front of the entire republic, everybody can see it. We all know that the lawfare is about the election. It's not about anybody having broken any laws that anybody cares about. Nobody cares about Stormy. Nobody cares about his phone call. Nobody cares about the loans he made to banks that were very happy to do business with him. Nobody cares about any of it. Nobody cares about his documents at Mar-a-Lago. Not really. I mean not real people. Nobody really cares. So it's obvious that it's all political. And yeah, he's right.

But here's what I would have to say about Stephen A. Smith. And I apologize to him for getting his name inaccurate at first. That's what a leader looks like. I always say that Black America doesn't have a leader. Now they do have people who are prominent, but they're really not good at it. You know, they're not good at it. Like Obama's good at it. And Obama, sort of love him or hate him, he was real good at the leadership stuff, right? You don't have to like where he led, but leader, definitely a leader. And I would say this: Stephen A. Smith has that leadership thing. And it feels like he is suffering from the Spider-Man curse. You know, the Spider-Man curse: with great power comes great responsibility. I can't read minds. But when I see somebody as capable as Stephen A. Smith, and when I hear him talking the way he's talking about the big issues, it feels like he just realized that he's the one who knows how to do it. He actually knows how to show leadership. So he's modeling it. It's actually very impressive.

So if he someday runs for office, and don't fool yourself, I don't think he's a Trump Republican, is he? He's just showing you that he can see the whole court, which is really rare. And then having seen the whole court, he tells you what to do about it. That makes sense. Also very rare. Very rare. So yeah, he's got the real deal. If he ever ran for office, I would definitely like his chances. I would like his chances if he ran for office. That doesn't mean I'm going to agree with him on policy. But wow, he's capable. Anyway, I like to see capable people do well.

Tim Pool tells us that his Timcast IRL show, three of his older shows from three years ago just got strikes against them. There were shows with Michael Malice, Joe Rogan, and Real Alex Jones. Now do you think that that's about something Timcast did? Or they're just trying to suppress those three other people? Now we know that there's been some move to suppress pro-Trump voices. But I'm wondering, is this a move mostly against Timcast? Because I'm trying to think, is Timcast the last serious independent voice that hasn't been taken down by the bad guys? It seems to me like it would be obvious that Tim would get targeted by the bad guys to be taken down for some lawfare or social media reason or some hoax or get canceled or something. I would imagine that there's like a whole team of people working on just putting Tim Pool out of business. Do you think that's true? Do you think there's an actual team like professionals being paid by somebody to look at ways to put him out of business? I think yes. Yeah, I think yes. There are people who are paid from somebody, could be the CIA, could be just Democrats, to put him out of business. That's what it looks like.

So here's another story. I guess Dubai has been doing some cloud seeding and maybe they went overboard and caused a bunch of flooding. Do you think they can actually geoengineer the atmosphere and make it rain where they wanted to? I don't know. I have mixed feelings about it. On one hand I think it's inevitable. We'll definitely be managing the atmosphere eventually. On the other hand I think maybe we're not ready. So we might destroy the world trying to make it better. So I think it's going to happen. It has to happen. It's inevitable. But it's dangerous. So we'll keep an eye on that.

Zuby is talking about the obesity rates on X. He gave that little chart of what the obesity was. Let me show you the rate. So this is from 1975 to current and then projected. So 1975 there was a 12% US adult obesity rate. 12%. You've seen all those old pictures of people in New York City in the 30s or whatever it is and it looks like 100% of them are thin. But 12% by 1975, that sounds about right. You know, I was there. That feels about right. 12%. 1985 it was 15%. Not much difference. So in 10 years a little bit crept up. By 1998 it was up to 25%. 2014 it was up to 35%. And by this year it's up to 42% adult obesity. 42%. And it's projected by 2031 it will reach 50%.

Now I'm here to tell you it's much worse than that because it's not evenly distributed. There are states and regions where the obesity rate is really close to 100%. I remember visiting the facility where my ailing father was on his last weeks of life. And it was a medical facility. And I remember sitting in his room for hours because I went to visit. It wasn't much to do because he was mostly just sleeping at that time. And I would just watch the people walk by in the hallway. And I started to notice, say, wow there's some big people that work here. And then I said to myself, what was the last time I saw somebody who wasn't gigantic? And I just sat there and watched people walk by his room in the hallway. And I just said, obese or not obese, they're all obese. All of them. Upstate New York. Every one of them was obese. I think there were a few 18-year-olds who weren't. Some people had part-time jobs and stuff. But every adult over 30 was a big old barrel-sized person.

So if you go to LA for example, if you're in the Hollywood area, you won't see the obesity. If you go to New York City and walk down the street in Manhattan, not a ton of obesity. If you fly in an airplane, you know you always hear the complaints about the big person in the seat next to you, but it's kind of rare. Beyond a certain size people just don't fly. I mean they do, so you hear the story, but it's rare. So airports are more thin people than large. There are some cities that are more thin people. And if you take them out of the mix, out of the average, yeah your obesity is probably 75% below a certain income level. Now it's also related to income. I would bet that below $100,000 a year I'll bet it's close to 75% obese. That's my guess.

Anyway, so did you know that one of the most influential people in American politics is an 88-year-old Swiss guy? That's something I learned today. You know we all hear about George Soros putting so much money into things and influencing them. Well apparently there's like a George Soros Jr. whose name I never heard, Hansjörg Wyss, who's 88. And he's a billionaire who's been putting in hundreds of millions of dollars into American stuff, similar to the Soros kind of activities. And to the point where he's one of the most important people in the country. He's not even in the country. He's a Swiss guy.

So the GOP is trying to crack down on this loophole that lets foreign donors put all this what they call the dark money into US elections. Anybody who thought our elections are determined by the will of the people, do you feel silly that you ever believed that? This is the stuff. There are like 15 to 20 effects that determine completely who gets to become president and what the law is. And none of them are the will of the people. It's all just different stuff. It's just money and lawfare and how they rig the system. Rig meaning the laws about how to vote. Yeah. We haven't lived in anything like a republic in a maybe ever. I don't know.

Delta Airlines is eliminating college degree requirements for all positions including pilots. Well, you know there's nothing that makes me want to fly an airplane more than knowing that they've lowered the standards for the pilots. Now on one hand I do agree that you should just pick good people whether they have a college degree or not. But I do think it's rather useful to have that standard. It does reduce the number of people who are not qualified from slipping through. So I would say that's not a good sign for America. Every time we lower a standard it's always for some good reason to increase diversity or something. But I don't think we get enough benefit for what it costs generally speaking.

So you heard the story about those 28 Google employees who occupied one of the executive offices. And they were mad because Israel was still, Google was still doing business with the Israeli government. And what did Google do? It fired all of them. So it fired all of them. Now are you surprised because you think, oh Google is so liberal and blah blah blah. Well I wouldn't be surprised. No. I think Google just did what everybody would do in that situation. So they violated their internal standards and that was good enough to fire them. So good for Google. I don't think that it fixed anything because Google apparently is completely rotted. Their employees are rotted from the inside. They're all woke mentally ill people for the most part.

Speaking of that, the NPR CEO, Ms. Maher, we find out more about her. Apparently she was a member of the Atlantic Council and the WEF. And she gave a speech at the Carnegie Endowment. That's a group. Now if you've been following Mike Benz, you would know that at least the Atlantic Council and the Carnegie Endowment are just straight up CIA entities basically. They're just intelligence entities. So it would seem that Ms. Maher is very deeply embedded with the intelligence part of the world. And she was in charge of Wikipedia. So she was the head of all knowledge for Wikipedia and then the head of NPR. And so the person who is in charge of telling us what's real is basically CIA adjacent. So just like you think.

But she's getting some pushback from, well what do these three people have in common? Gad Saad, Elon Musk, and Vivek Ramaswamy. So all three of them are criticizing NPR CEO Maher. What do those three have in common? Three of the smartest people in the world at least in terms of politics and philosophy and stuff, right? So if all three of them are piling on, you know, plus Chris Rufo, a lot of smart people, right? So the smart people have taken the following stand. Because in a speech I guess it was to the Carnegie Endowment, NPR CEO said that she believes that truth is subjective or a distraction from the pursuit or from getting things done. That the truth is subjective and a distraction. And I'm paraphrasing a little bit but this is pretty close. And it can get in the way of the pursuit of truth. I'm sorry, the pursuit of truth can get in the way of getting things done.

So Gad Saad said, quote, truth is subjective, unquote, is precisely the key tenet of postmodernism. This is why I refer to it as the granddaddy of all parasitic idea pathogens. Well that's a lot of smart words in one sentence there. I will have to hire somebody to explain to me in my sixth grade world what that means. I think I understand.

All right. Elon Musk said, now imagine if this is programmed explicitly or implicitly into super powerful AI. It could end civilization. And he says now no need to imagine. It is already programmed into Google Gemini and OpenAI ChatGPT. So that would be talking about the idea that truth is subjective and it can get in the way of getting things done.

Vivek along the same lines said that he quoted the CEO of NPR saying, quote, our reverence for the truth might be a distraction getting in the way of finding common ground and getting things done. And says this gets to the heart of the cultural divide in the modern West. Whether you believe truth is a priority or a hindrance. Do you agree with all three of these people, Gad Saad, Elon Musk, and that this downgrading of truth in favor of getting stuff done is the problem? And that it's basically an existential problem if you throw AI in the mix. Everybody agree with that?

All right. I just agree with all three of them vigorously, as hard as I can. She's completely right. And you see it every day. Yeah, let me give you an example. Abortion. Abortion. Take the abortion thing. We have different opinions which cannot be reconciled. Do you know why they can't be reconciled? Because we'll never agree on what's true. Is it true that it's murder or is that not true? Or killing a human. I guess not murder. And so the argument is over what's true. Is it true that you're taking a human life? Now that can't be solved. Would you agree that can't be solved realistically? Realistically one of those is right you think and one of them is wrong you think. But it can't be solved. So what do you do when you have a problem that can't be solved? You make do. You do what you can do.

So what do we do as a nation when we can't decide what's true? We compromise and we just work it out. We just find some middle ground where the people who don't get what they want are not willing to stage a revolution. That's a perfect example of what she's saying. We're not going to agree what's true. But if we stop there we'd never get anything done because we do have to kind of move past, let's say, abortion. And I would say that's just an example. I would say every one of our big issues have the same issue. What's true? We don't agree on and never will. So if you allowed yourself to never try to fix anything until you found out what's true, you would never fix anything. She's completely right. It is 100% true that if you think that you know the truth and the other people don't, you're probably part of the problem. You might be right but you could also be part of the problem if you insist that the other people agree with you before you can move forward. In the real world people don't agree what's true. But often we can find a way to work together, right?

So she's 100% right. Reality is completely subjective. How many of you believe that free will is real and how many of you believe it's not? How are you ever going to solve that? One of the most basic questions of your reality is free will real. We're never going to agree with that. But can we find a way to move on? Yes we can. But I don't believe in free will and some of you do. So what would we do about the legal system if you took my point of view? There's no free will. How would you punish anybody? How would you have a justice system if nobody's really responsible for anything? Well I'll tell you how. Since I believe there's no free will but I also need to move forward somehow, I mean I need to live in the real world, I say all right I agree with you. You can't really build a system unless you punish people. So I accept a system where people who really couldn't help what they did are punished. Right? Because I can't think of a better way.

So there's a perfect example where we'll never agree what's true, free will or no free will. But we can figure out a way to make the world work. And I think I could come up with a hundred different examples where she's completely right. We'll never agree what's true but we can figure out how to take a step forward. So here's your real problem. Your real problem is that you don't agree with her about what's true. That's the real problem. The real problem is not that she understands the truth is what we imagine it is. She's 100% right about that. The part that you don't like is that her truth is different from yours. If she said everything you agreed with and then said truth is subjective, we have to figure out a way forward, you wouldn't have a problem with it. You wouldn't suppose she said, well you know we know the truth is that these fetuses are real life humans and that killing them is immoral. That's our truth. But we have to move forward somehow so we're going to compromise with the people who disagree with what's true. That framing would make you okay with it. So what's really the problem is you don't like her opinions, not that she thinks opinions are subjective.

So do I think she's part of the problem? Yes. Yeah, she's a big part of the problem. She is not just specifically part of the problem but she represents, as a number of people were saying today on X, she represents a whole infection of people who have a certain point of view which I find destructive. Right? But the fact that I find it destructive and I think that's true, does that matter? Nope. What will matter is who wins the election and you know who has power. That will matter. So I'm working on who wins the election and who has power because I can't change what's true to somebody else.

All right. This is why you watch my show by the way. I remind you that these uncomfortable things where I'm completely on the other side from you, that's why you watch. Because you're not going to see it anywhere else. I mean if you get a steady stream of Republicans are awesome, you're not getting smarter. You need somebody to tell you when your side is getting off the track a little bit, right? That's the useful thing. The useful thing is finding out when your own team is wrong because you always think the other team's wrong.

All right. Here's the story. I just read that Florida has banned a bunch of books. It was in the news. Is it true? You tell me. Is it a true story that Florida banned, I don't know, a few thousand books? True? No it's not true. No that's not true. Nope. It's in the news. But what is true is that they removed them from where children can see them. There are no banned books for adults in Florida. That's not a thing. There are no banned books in Florida. But both of these are treated as the truth. So NPR CEO is completely right. You can disagree whether there's a book ban in Florida. I say there's not. Other people say there is. But can we, despite having a different understanding of what's real, figure out how to go forward? Yeah. Yeah. DeSantis just has laws apparently can move those books to the non-child library places and then everybody's fine. So yeah, you don't need to know what's true. You just need to know how to handle it.

Speaking of what's true, Joe Biden has a new story about his uncle being eaten by cannibals which apparently does not pass the fact checking according to Jonathan Turley. But apparently he was in Pittsburgh doing some campaign stuff. He told the story of how his uncle Bosey in World War II was a hell of an athlete. For some reason you need to know he was a hell of an athlete. And then he flew those single engine planes. It turns out he didn't fly. He wasn't a flyer. He wasn't a pilot. And the plane he was in was not a single engine. Jonathan Turley looked into that. And he was over a war zone and I guess it actually went down for mechanical problems. It wasn't shot down as Biden says. And they never found the body because there used to be, there were a lot of cannibals for real in that part of New Guinea. So he's saying that they never found the body so that you know maybe the cannibals got him. But there was a member of the crew who did survive. And the member of the crew who did survive said watched the other crew members not being able to get out of the plane as it went into the water. So no, the cannibals did not eat his uncle. His uncle was a really good athlete who couldn't get out of an airplane that crashed in the water.

So do we need to know the truth about his uncle who was or was not eaten by cannibals? No we don't. The truth is completely irrelevant because you know it's just campaign talk and it doesn't matter anyway. So no, the truth doesn't matter. Doesn't matter a bit on that story.

Well the Kennedy family apparently, many members will appear in a big group with Biden to endorse him. Which basically is a slap in the face to their family member RFK Jr. who is running against Biden. You know who wishes their relatives had been eaten by cannibals? RFK Jr. But not only that, if cannibals ate his relatives they would be eating a better diet than the American diet. Am I right? Better diet than the American diet. At least it'd be good protein. No additives. So no I'm not recommending that cannibals eat the Kennedy family. But if they did they'd be healthier than the normal fast food diet.

I would like to give a shout out to my family, my remaining family members. I won't name them but I sure appreciate my family. Do you know what my family would never do? They would never do this. If I ran for president, my very small family group left, but my family members never would have gathered together to endorse the other guy. You know they might have sat it out. They might have said no comment if they thought the other guy was the good one to be president. But no they would not have traveled to Washington to stand with the competitor and endorse him. I hate to tell you, RFK, but your family sucks. Your family sucks. Like this is the minimum. The minimum requirement for your family not to suck is to not endorse the other guy in an election. It's not like RFK Jr. is a criminal. It's not like he has bad intentions for the country. It's not like his policies are some crazy. He's a genuine, legitimate, serious person with a serious resume running against a brain dead piece of shit to try to save the country and try to save you all, you Kennedy children, from eating that's killing you and putting stuff in your body that you shouldn't be putting in your body. And that's why you want the other guy to win. He's just trying to save children. I mean he could be wrong about some stuff. There would be no real shame in that because everybody's wrong about stuff. But really your family is going to throw you under the bus in public in this situation? I'll just say it straight out. I really like RFK Jr. I think he's great for the country. Win or lose, I think he's great for the country. But these family members suck. I mean they just suck. There's just no way around it. This is just terrible family behavior.

Speaking of RFK Jr., he's saying again unambiguously on another podcast that the CIA is guilty of murdering his uncle JFK. He says the evidence is so abundant and so definitive that if he took the case to a jury he would win in front of almost any jury. And he says it's because JFK defied the military industrial complex. They wanted to attack Cuba and JFK didn't. And they didn't like him ending the war in Vietnam which he also tried to do. So that all does make sense to me. You know the Kennedy assassination, the official story was always a little sketchy right from the beginning. You're like really? I don't know. It seems a little sketchy. There was some mighty good shooting from that guy from that upstairs. I don't know. Did he really care that much that he did that? I don't know. Never really totally made sense. But this does. Every part of the CIA killed him makes sense to me. Now I don't know what's true and what isn't. But every part of the story makes sense. It all fits together perfectly and it matches everything we know about everything.

All right. So I don't see how those same people can allow RFK Jr. to become president. So he is in mortal danger. You know there is a scenario in which RFK Jr. becomes president. Let me just say it out loud. If the CIA takes out Trump and then Biden collapses just from natural causes, RFK Jr. could be the next president. In fact I'd give him at least a one-third chanc