ome kind of a program where they had to volunteer for something. So he and some other students volunteered, remember this is high school, these are just kids, volunteered to go to Israel and they worked on a kibbutz or something. But part of it is they volunteered to do some work for the IDF. They weren't in the IDF. They were like unpaid interns sweeping sidewalks and doing stuff like that. So he wasn't carrying a gun. He wasn't going to war for the IDF. He wasn't a member of the IDF. He was a student who was having an experience in another country that included some stuff that was unimportant and student-like for a military force.

Now should you be comfortable with that just because I said well he didn't actually pledge his allegiance to another country, it was just a student experience? Are you uncomfortable with that to know that somebody who had a substantial experience with another country that's an ally of the United States in his youth? How many of you have a problem with that? Because I think voters will hear the story and they'll believe he had joined the military. Probably a third of conservatives will now forever believe he fought in the Israeli military, probably a third, and will never be talked out of it because that's how the fake news works. It's pretty sticky.

Now what's interesting of course is that Shapiro is Jewish, and therefore the question will be which party is more anti-Semitic. So will there be more Republicans who are on the extreme side saying oh no that's one more reason we can't vote for them? Well that shouldn't make any difference because nobody, I don't think any Republicans would vote for Kamala Harris because you picked a Jewish vice president. So that's probably zero impact on the Republican side. And I don't think the Republicans would necessarily, well I just don't think the Republicans will vote differently because of this in any way.

But we all are asking the question, hey aren't there a lot of progressives over in the Democrat Party who are not so pro-Israel at the moment, maybe a little bit more pro-Palestinian, maybe Michigan, maybe the Squad? And the answer is yeah, that's probably going to be an issue. But it depends how he talks about the situation too. I think what he says today will be more important than whatever he said in the past.

And let me say this. I think it's important to know what the candidates thought in the past. I think it's important to know that Trump was once a Democrat. I think that's important. I think it's important to know if Kamala Harris used to have far more left-leaning opinions but maybe she's been talked into something more centrist to get elected. I think we need to know about the past. But I firmly believe that if you can defend why you changed your mind, we should allow that. I like people who can change their minds. That's not a negative.

It used to be, I remember, Democrats or who was it, I think mostly the Republicans would complain about the other candidate flip-flopping. You remember that used to be the thing. You're a flip-flopper. And I used to say you mean somebody updated their thinking with new information? Why are we mad at that? I want the person who can update their thinking with new information. And we've seen it happen. I want to know I've seen it. I don't want somebody to go into office and say I have the same opinions I had when I was 20. That would scare the hell out of me. I need somebody who is mentally flexible and capable of changing their opinion.

So I think it's important to know that Kamala had some instincts that were left-leaning and she might bring that into the office. But if she could defend her new opinions then I would feel differently about it. For example if somebody said well I used to think universal health care like one single payer was the only way to go but now I think it would be impractical because the country really wants private health insurance too and there's no way you could get there anyway so now I think I'll just want to lower prices for health care. So you could imagine her explaining it in a way where you'd say oh well if you can make the argument that suggests that you understand the argument for that new opinion. So look for ability to defend the current opinion. That would be far more important.

So we're going to be talking almost non-stop about anti-Semitism just because Shapiro is in the race. We'll see how that goes. But again most people don't vote for anybody who's the vice president anyway. So he's in favor of a two-state solution in Israel. He thinks Netanyahu is the worst leader ever. Well there you go.

Now I think there's going to be a lot of talk about what the critics will say, some kind of split loyalty, which I don't see in evidence, but that'll be part of the story. People will suspect he's got split allegiance and again there's no evidence of that. It's not illegal to visit another country and have an experience.

So let's talk about how clean the elections will be coming up. So as you're all aware in 2020 there were a great number of people who questioned the election, whether it was fair. But we've had four years since then so thank God all the problems have been fixed. What? Nothing's different? Well let's do a little rundown of what we know about the coming election.

Number one, attorney generals from Virginia and Missouri and Wyoming are going to look into ActBlue. That's a big fundraising entity for the Democrats that according to O'Keefe, James O'Keefe and his investigation, according to them they've been laundering large donations from God knows where, maybe a foreign country, we don't even know, through the names of elderly who don't know their names are being used because you can't give big dollar amounts, you know there's limits. But you can say oh a million people donated a little bit each, but they're fake donors. They're real people, they're just elderly people who are never going to check and nobody will ever know that they didn't really donate. So the evidence seems pretty strong there's something sketchy going on there.

So one of the biggest sources of money for the Democrats might be fake. But hey that's just one element of an election is the funding. So just because the funding might be fake that doesn't mean anything else is fake. People I don't want you to get all crazy about doubting things just because the funding for the Democrats is probably fraudulent. And we do expect that some of the largest donors are also blackmailed. So I wouldn't believe anything about the funding sources. But hey that's just one part of an election. I mean it does affect it so it does seem that crime would be already affecting the outcome. But remember there are lots more elements to an election so it's not all about the funding.

There's also the media. See MSNBC says it's a life or death choice if you pick Trump. So somebody named Tara Setmayer said on MSNBC, and I quote, "Women voters are looking at this election as a life or death choice. The binary choice is democracy or Trump and for women it's our lives or Trump." Okay so all right. So the media is totally fixed and they're just going to give you scary