reSee.it - Related Post Feed
reSee.it AI Summary
Elon Musk recently fired 6,500 employees at a social media company. Parkinson's Law may be to blame for the inefficiencies that led to the layoffs. This law states that work expands to fill the time and resources allocated to it, leading to unnecessary complexity and bureaucracy. Departments may use their entire budget and allotted time, even if tasks could have been completed more efficiently. Inefficiencies can also arise from staff allocation and budget padding. Companies must recognize and address these issues to remain innovative and productive.
@awilkinson - Andrew Wilkinson
Elon Musk fired 6,500 employees at Twitter. A little birdie told me it's down to: - 2 designers - 6 iOS developers - 20 web developers - Around 1,400 sales and operations people How is it possible that we are still using this website? Two words: Parkinson's Law. Have you ever wondered why seemingly simple tech companies have tens of thousands of employees? Sometimes, it's because they have huge sales forces or tech support/operations people. But often it's also due to Parkinson's Law. Parkinson's law is like lighter fluid for bureaucracy. It's a business tapeworm that slowly eats away at companies, making them less and less efficient and innovative over time. Parkinson's Law is the idea that the work will generally expand to the amount of time, budget, and number of people allocated to it, and no matter how many people you allocate to it, those people will feel busy. They'll feel busy because, due to the excess time/slack in the system, they'll start focusing on less and less important tasks. Here's how it manifests on an individual level: Let's say you have a report due in a week. The report might only take you around five hours to finish if you really focus and work efficiently. However, because you know you have a week to complete it, you might find yourself spending a lot more time on it than you need to. You'll be more prone to distractions, take longer breaks, or perhaps decide to add more details, tables, graphs, and so forth. Essentially, the task becomes more complex and time-consuming purely because you have more time in which to do it. And here's how it manifests across organizations: Imagine a big tech company. A social media company with various departments. Each department has tasks that it must complete to contribute to the overall productivity of the company. Now, suppose each department is given a budget and a set amount of time to complete its tasks for the year. According to Parkinson's Law, each department will use its entire budget and the entire allotted time, even if the tasks could have been completed more efficiently. This is because as resources and time increase, departments tend to become more complex and less efficient. For example, a department might add more steps to its procedures, requiring more approvals and creating more paperwork, which slows down the process. Or it might use the full budget on additional personnel or equipment that doesn't necessarily improve productivity. The department might also use the full budget to justify the same or larger budget for the next year, since budgets in many organizations are often determined based on the previous year's spending. This is a phenomenon known as "budget padding" or "spend it or lose it" mentality. Inefficiencies can also develop in staff allocation. If a department expands, it might add managerial positions that aren't strictly necessary. More employees are hired to manage, creating layers of bureaucracy that may not contribute to productivity and can even slow decision-making. I have seen this occur over and over again in my career. The larger the team, the larger the budget, the longer the timeline, the less gets accomplished. I'm very curious to see how many more tech companies come to this realization. So often, good times + revenue growth = Parkinson's Law.
reSee.it AI Summary
In my recent conversation with Tucker Carlson, I discussed various political topics, including my views on Kamala Harris and Donald Trump. I remarked that Harris is a "puppet" and noted Trump’s resilience despite assassination attempts. I expressed concern over rising illegal immigration affecting swing states and the potential for a permanent Democratic majority. I also addressed election fraud and the need for voter ID. Additionally, I hinted at fears among billionaires regarding a Trump victory and the Epstein client list. Lastly, I touched on vaccine mandates and my need for increased security if Trump cuts federal agencies.
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
Elon Musk Drops Epstein Bombshell in Jaw-Dropping Tucker Carlson Interview You won’t believe who he named. 🧵 THREAD https://t.co/HYubZlYbIL
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
In an “off-the-cuff” conversation with Tucker Carlson, Elon Musk wasted no time going straight into politics and the 2024 election. He broke his silence on his deleted tweet about Kamala Harris, explaining that nobody even bothers trying to assassinate Kamala Harris because she's just another "puppet" of the "machine." “Nobody tries to assassinate a puppet,” Musk said. “She's safe,” he continued. “Like, they tried to kill Trump twice with actual guns and bullets.” Musk went on to explain that Trump inherently has the "constitution of an ox,” even though he doesn't work out and consumes “cheeseburgers and Diet Coke and stuff.” “I think he [Trump] just inherently has a strong constitution,” Musk said, adding that he is of “sound mind and body and strong backbone” after two assassination attempts.
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 joked that no one is bothering to try to kill Kamala because it's pointless, as she is just a "puppet." Speaker 1 agreed, stating she is irrelevant and replaceable. Speaker 0 clarified that some people misinterpreted the joke as a call for assassination.
The speakers contrasted this with the two attempts to kill Trump with actual guns and bullets. Speaker 0 noted that Trump doesn't seem rattled by the attempts, attributing it to his strong constitution, despite his unhealthy diet and lack of exercise. Speaker 2 confirmed that Trump didn't seem like a man who'd been the subject of assassination attempts. Speaker 0 agreed that Trump seemed of sound mind and body with a strong backbone.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: I've been trashing Kamala nonstop.
Speaker 1: Oh, I know.
Speaker 0: Well, not I mean, the Kamala puppet, I call her. You know? The the the the machine that the Kamala puppet represents.
Speaker 1: Yeah. She's irrelevant. I mean, she's
Speaker 2: not even
Speaker 0: No. No. Like, like, I I made a I made a joke, which I realized deleted, which is, like, nobody's even bothering to try to kill Kamala because it's pointless.
Speaker 1: What do you achieve?
Speaker 2: No. It's
Speaker 0: totally fine.
Speaker 1: Another puppet. Exact that's It's no point in killing It's
Speaker 2: deep and true, though.
Speaker 0: Nobody's tried to kill Joe Biden.
Speaker 1: It's imp it's pretty pointless. Totally. What do you mean?
Speaker 0: You actually put that up? Yeah. No. Some people interpreted it as as as as though I was calling for people to
Speaker 1: to Of course.
Speaker 0: To assassinate her. But I but I but I was like but I was like, no. We even you know? I was I was like, doesn't it seem strange that no one's even bothered
Speaker 2: to try? It's not worth it.
Speaker 1: I mean, there's an endless supply. Yeah. I'm like, nobody would it's it's absurd. It
Speaker 2: could be anybody.
Speaker 0: Yeah. Yeah. You you nobody's gonna try to nobody tries to ask me to pop it. Of course not.
Speaker 2: A marionette.
Speaker 0: Yeah. A marionette. So it's like, you know?
Speaker 2: It's hilarious.
Speaker 1: What? She's safe. Like,
Speaker 0: I don't I like, to to try to kill Trump twice with actual guns and bullets.
Speaker 1: Oh, yeah.
Speaker 0: He shot in the air right in fucking butt butler where I was. And,
Speaker 2: He doesn't seem rattled. It's weird. Does he to you?
Speaker 0: This doesn't seem what? Rattled. He's I mean, he's the constitution of an ox. It seems. You know, it's it's not like working out and eating healthy.
And he's
Speaker 2: Okay. We gotta tape this. Oh, yeah. We're good. Oh, good.
Yeah.
Speaker 1: So so so He's he's not like, let
Speaker 0: me eat another salad. That's not no. Or or work out, you know, you know, fastidiously. That's he he I I felt like how he doesn't work out, and he eats, you know, cheeseburgers and diet coke and stuff. And because it it just I think he just inherently has a a strong constitution.
So when
Speaker 2: you I mean, you're just with him. He didn't seem like a man who'd been the subject of 2 assassination attempts?
Speaker 0: No. He seemed, of, you know, sound mind and body and, strong backbone.
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
The conversation shifted to Musk explaining how it’s “pretty fun” to be “all in” on Donald Trump, even if the downsides of that choice come with some dire consequences. These remarks came after Musk trashed Kamala Harris, marveling at how “amazing” it was that he spoke at Trump’s rally without a teleprompter. “Wow. Amazing. I can talk without a teleprompter. That's crazy,” he mocked. Musk laughed that he is “all in the deep end [on Trump],” acknowledging that “in the hopefully unlikely event that he loses, there may be some vengeance on me.”
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker states their remarks were impromptu, without a teleprompter. They deny using a media consultant, saying they just thought about what to say and spoke off the cuff.
When asked about being "all in," the speaker confirms they are in the deep end, describing it as "fun." They acknowledge the possibility of "vengeance" in the "unlikely event" of a loss.
The speaker states they are a major government contractor doing "essential work." They claim their product is better and costs less, allowing them to compete for and win contracts.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Remarks I made there were impromptu. There's no teleprompter or anything. I just I was just speaking extemporaneously. Are you the only rich guy who does now, like, a media consultant? No.
I don't media consultant. Yeah. No. I've noticed. Obviously.
Yeah. Yeah. Oh, I mean no. I I just, no. I just thought about what what I what I wanna say, and I just spoke off the cuff, no teleprompter, nothing.
Good for you. Yeah. I can talk I don't Look. Like, I'm like, right now, I'm just talking. Look at me.
Wow. Amazing. I can even believe it. I can talk without a teleprompter. That's crazy.
But if if he loses, it's gonna be hard for you to pretend you never supported him. All in. All in. In the deep end? Yeah.
No. You are definitely in the deep end. You cannot touch bottom. No. No.
I'm I'm like I'm like rolling around. I don't like picking my I'm, like, baaah. It's all in, baby. Is it fun? Yeah.
It's pretty fun. How about I mean, there may be some in the hopefully, unlikely event that he loses, there may be some vengeance, on me. Are you kidding me? I mean, it's possible. It's possible?
You've got to be one of the biggest government contractors. We do essential work for the government. Yes. Yeah. But we're not it's not like, you know, we do useful, essential work that we compete for and win contracts on because our product is much better and costs less.
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
Musk then raised a shocking and disturbing revelation that there has been a 700% surge in illegal immigration to some key swing states over the past 3 years, saying that this election is the "last election" if Democrats win. Why does he say that? Because “these swing state margins are sometimes 10, 20 thousand votes. So what happens if you put hundreds of thousands of people into each swing state?" Musk asked. “When somebody is granted asylum, they are fast-tracked. They can get a green card, and then five years after the green card, they can get citizenship, and they can fully legally vote. And when they do so, they vote overwhelmingly Democrat,” Musk explained. By 2028, every swing state will have turned blue, leaving America under a permanent Dem supermajority. That's why Musk calls this the "last election" if Kamala wins.
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 1 believes that if Trump doesn't win the election, it will be the last election because Democrats are importing illegals via a secret CBP border app program. He claims this is illegal, but the DOJ isn't stopping it.
According to Speaker 1, government websites show triple-digit increases in illegals in swing states, sometimes up to 700% over the last 3 years. He asserts that asylum seekers are fast-tracked to citizenship and vote Democrat, prioritizing bringing family to the US and being beholden to Democratic handouts.
Speaker 1 predicts another four years of a Democratic administration will lead to legalizing enough illegals to eliminate swing states, turning the US into a single-party country like California, which became a super-majority Democrat state after the 1986 amnesty. He states California recently passed a law making voter ID illegal in any election.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: So but back to the original question, you know, about the potential consequences if, you know, having gone all in, this doesn't work.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 0: I mean, you had to have thought about this long and hard before you did it. What was your thinking?
Speaker 1: I mean yeah. So I My view is is that if Trump doesn't win this election, it's the last election we're gonna have. That, the Democrats the Dem Machine has been, importing so many people, bringing in so many illegals, flying in with this, like, CBP border app thing that nobody even knew about, like secret program. That's illegal, basically. It's illegal, but there's no action by DOJ to actually to stop it from happening.
They're transporting, large numbers of illegals to swing states. If you look at the numbers, these are the numbers from the government website, so like from the Democrat administered government websites. Where do you get this data? From the government website that is run by Democrats. And, there are triple digit increases in illegals to all the swing states, and in some cases, it's like 700% over the last 3 years.
Now, these swing state margins are, you know, sometimes 10, 20000 votes. So what happens if you put, you know, hundreds of thousands of people into each swing state. And for the when somebody is granted asylum, they are fast tracked. They can get a green card, and then 5 years after the green card, they can get citizenship and they can fully legally vote. And when they do so, they vote overwhelmingly Democrat.
And sometimes I get this rebuttal of, like, well, a lot of them, their social values don't align
Speaker 0: with, sort
Speaker 1: of, the far left sort of work ideology. I said, that's true, but, but that's not their top priority. Their top priority is getting their friends and family also to the United States, and the the Dems also issue all these programs, these sort of handouts, essentially, that make them beholden to the Democratic Party. So they vote down. That's what happens.
So my prediction is if there's another 4 years of a damn administration, they will legalize so many, illegals that are there, that the next election, there won't be any swing states. And it will be a single party country, just like California is a single party state. It's a super majority Dem state state in California. Because of immigration? Yes.
The California was, fairly reliably Republican. Bill Clinton lost California in 92 and won West Virginia. Yes. So there was a 986 amnesty.
Speaker 0: Yes.
Speaker 1: And thereafter, California trended very strongly then, and as at this point, I think, 65, 70 percent dem, something like that. It's super majority dem. The California legislature Yes. Is more than 2 thirds Democrat.
Speaker 0: Has it improved the state?
Speaker 1: No. It's it's not. And they they California just passed, which is shocking. It's hard to believe this is even this is even real, but California just passed a law making it illegal, to require voter ID in any election at all in California. Do you know that?
No. Yeah. Newsom signed it into law last week. It's illegal to require an ID. In any election, even a town council.
And and a friend of mine who is this can he lives in Palo Alto was like it it was like, is this actually real? And he went to, like, vote in, like, some city council election. He tried to show them his ID, and they said, we're not even allowed to look at your ID.
Speaker 0: Have they extended this change?
Speaker 1: What's going on right now.
Speaker 0: By the way,
Speaker 1: they're proud of it. They're not hiding it.
Speaker 0: But it's only voting. It's not buying a gun or buying liquor or buying a pack of cigarettes or flying on an airplane or renting a hotel room. It's only voting that it's illegal.
Speaker 1: Oh, if you try to buy a gun, I mean, they're gonna ID you 6 ways a Sunday. Yeah. They try California is trying to make it basically equal to owning its own a gun.
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
Without skipping a beat, Musk turned his attention to what few billionaires would dare talk about—election fraud and voter IDs. Without one single stutter, Musk declared, “The purpose of no voter ID is obviously to conduct fraud in elections.” “The same people that demanded vaccine IDs if you want to travel or do anything are the same ones who say no voter ID is required,” he added. Musk pointed out how it is “literally impossible” to prove fraud if no voter ID is required, saying it enables “large-scale fraud.” “So, yeah, the purpose of no voter ID is obviously to conduct fraud in elections, obviously. There can be no other explanation,” Musk concluded.
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker believes that demanding vaccine IDs while opposing voter ID laws is hypocritical. They claim the purpose of not requiring voter ID is to enable large-scale election fraud that cannot be proven, because it's impossible to prove without ID.
The speaker dismisses the argument that voter ID laws are racist, calling it "insane" and "patronizing" to suggest people can't obtain identification. They argue that it's nearly impossible to live in the country without an ID, as it's required for almost everything except voting.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: And and the same people that demanded vaccine IDs for if you want to travel or do anything are the same ones who say no voter ID is required. Is there any reason Obviously hypocritical. To pass a law like that except to abet voter fraud? It's it's for it's it's it's so that fraud can never cannot be proven. So it it it enables large scale fraud and no way to prove it, because how would you prove it?
It's literally impossible. No I no ID. You you're not even allowed to show your ID. It's insane. Well, it is insane.
Insane. So yeah. The the purpose of no voter ID is obviously to conduct fraud in elections. Obviously. There can be no other explanation.
I mean, they come up with some nice sounding thing. People don't have IDs? Could you live in this country without an ID? Yeah. I mean, their their their common rebuttal is, like, it's racist to require ID and which is insane.
I think it's actually race racist and patronizing to say that people can't figure out how to get ID, obviously. But how could you live here without an ID? I don't think it's even possible. Yeah. You can't do anything.
Yeah. You need ID for everything. Like, the list of the things you need ID for is basically everything, except voting.
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
While you’re here, don’t forget to follow (@VigilantFox) and hit the bell 🔔 for more threads like this one. https://t.co/gsTQF3gnqh
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
The bombshell dropped when Musk suggested that Bill Gates, Democratic mega-donor Reid Hoffman, and other billionaires are “terrified” of a Trump victory because if he wins, the Epstein client list is coming out. Musk said this after declaring that there is a “strong overlap” between Kamala's top 100 puppet masters and the Epstein client list. Musk called it “mind-blowing” that hundreds of January 6th protesters have been sentenced to prison, yet there’s been no action to prosecute the “worst offender on the Epstein client list.” “That’s insane!” he emphasized. “I think part of why Kamala's getting so much support is that if Trump wins, that Epstein client list is going to become public. And some of those billionaires behind Kamala are terrified of that outcome,” Musk said.
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker believes Kamala Harris is a "marionette" controlled by over 100 "puppet masters." The speaker claims to know most of them and suggests a strong overlap between these individuals and the Epstein client list.
The speaker is surprised that no one on the Epstein client list has been prosecuted, while many January 6th protesters have been imprisoned. The speaker believes a reason for Kamala Harris's support is that if Trump wins, the Epstein client list will become public, which terrifies some billionaires backing Harris.
The speaker specifically names Reid Hoffman and Bill Gates as potentially nervous individuals, noting Hoffman was the speaker's VP of business development at PayPal 24 years ago.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: But you'll just say whatever words are on the teleprompter. So, you know, it's it's really whoever controls the teleprompter. It's the actual sort of those those who's actually in charge.
Speaker 1: And who is that,
Speaker 0: do you think? Well, I've I've tried to put it down. It's it's not like any one kind of mastermind. It's not like it seems to be it's it's like, Kamala is sort of a a marionette with, you know, a thousand puppet masters type of thing. Like, not it's or maybe it's somewhere north of a 100, is what it seems
Speaker 1: like. Yes. I bet you know 80 of them.
Speaker 0: I probably know most of them.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Yeah. So what I mean, just by virtue of your job and what you've been doing for the last 30 years, I mean, you
Speaker 0: Yeah.
Speaker 1: And I should say, I think you voted
Speaker 0: for I I I'd I'd like to see a matchup of of of those we quote the the the top 100 puppet masters in the FD and client list.
Speaker 1: Do you think there's some overlap?
Speaker 0: Overlap. Strong overlap.
Speaker 1: When are we going to see that list, do you think?
Speaker 0: I don't know. It's it's it's it's mind blowing that that it, that they've not tried to prosecute even one. Not even the worst offender on on the Epstein client list, they have not even tried to prosecute even 1. Is that that's insane.
Speaker 1: Well, because they have a lot of diabetic grandmothers who were outside the Capitol on January 6th. They've they're kind of occupied.
Speaker 0: Yeah. I mean, they've put, like, whatever, 5 or 600 January 6th protesters in prison and not one person on the on the Epstein client list.
Speaker 1: Will that ever come out, do you think?
Speaker 0: Know, I I think part of why Kamala's getting so much support is that, if if Trump wins, that FCN client list is gonna become public. Yes. And some of those billionaires behind Kamala are terrified of that outcome. Yeah.
Speaker 1: Do you think Reid Hoffman's uncomfortable? Yes.
Speaker 0: Yeah. And Gates. And Gates. Yeah.
Speaker 1: And I only ask that because you can certainly just look at them and you're like, that that's a nervous person right there. I don't know. I mean, I assume you know them. Yeah.
Speaker 0: Yes. Reid Hoffman was my vice president of business development at PayPal Yeah. 24 years ago.
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
In another striking moment, Musk entered the vaccine debate, saying, “We shouldn't force people to take vaccines,” adding, “I believe in freedom.” Musk explained that he's not “anti-vax” and that he believes vaccines have done a lot of good, but he also believes that the “quality control on vaccines” should be “incredibly good if we're giving them to children and whatnot.”
Video Transcript AI Summary
Vaccines should be subject to scrutiny to ensure high quality control, especially since they are given to children. People should not be forced to take vaccines.
America is supposed to be the land of liberty, freedom, and opportunity. The country should maximize individual liberty, where success is based on talent and hard work. These two fundamental values have made America great, and losing them will lead to a swift decline.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: That doesn't mean that vaccines should not have any scrutiny. Of course, they should we should be making sure that the quality control of vaccines is incredibly good, get since we if we're giving them to children and whatnot. And we shouldn't we shouldn't force people to take vaccines. That itself is a controversial statement, that we shouldn't force people. We shouldn't force people to take vaccines.
No. Yeah. So just to yes. I believe in freedom. Like, you know Yeah.
I've noticed. I'd like, the the you know, America is supposed to be the land of liberty. Yeah. You know, freedom freedom and opportunity. So that, we we try to, as much as possible, maximize people's individual liberty, and that we try to be a country where you succeed based on, your talent and hard work.
Yes. Those are 2 fundamental values. That that's what that's what's made America great, and and if we lose those, we will our decline will be swerved.
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
In the final moments of the interview, Musk said he's going to need to beef up his security team if the Trump administration starts slashing federal agencies. “I'll probably need, if this happens, quite a significant security team because someone might literally go postal on me,” he warned. Musk pointed out the staggering number of over 440 federal agencies in the US government, suggesting it could easily be cut down to 99 without major consequences. He recounted his own experience at X, where he slashed 80% of the staff and “actually improved the features and functionality of the site more in the past year and a half than the last eight years.”
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 1 confirms he will continue to help Trump if he is selected. He refers to a potential "government efficiency commission" or "Department of Government Efficiency," possibly called "Doge."
Speaker 1 states that at Twitter, they cut about 80% of staff and improved the site's features more in the past year and a half than in the previous eight years.
Speaker 1 suggests reviewing all federal agencies to determine if all 428 are necessary, noting there are more agencies than years since the US was founded. He believes they should reduce the number of agencies and eliminate overlapping responsibilities. He also advocates for reviewing regulations to remove those that are not sensible, as regulators tend to add more regulations every year. He anticipates needing a significant security team due to potential unpopularity and threats.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Last question. You you really kind of pulled out a lot of stops to help Trump. You're on stage yesterday. If he gets selected, will you continue to help him
Speaker 1: Yeah. Now? Absolutely. So we've talked about, kind of a government efficiency commission or the Department of Government Efficiency, which is a funny What what percent?
Speaker 0: Sorry. I was laughing. I love it. You you managed to make it sound a little sinister. Government efficiency.
What percentage of Google employees did you can when you got there?
Speaker 1: You mean Twitter? Rather.
Speaker 0: I beg your pardon. Sorry. You I just you've just been talking about Google. Twitter.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Yeah. Well, we we we're about 80%. And we've actually, improved the features and functionality of the site more in the past year and a half than the last, I don't know, 8 years, with 20% of the staff.
Speaker 0: So Just for I just wanna throw that out for context. So you've talked to Trump about
Speaker 1: Yeah. Yeah. He's he has mentioned publicly several times, and he's first point of of having some kind of, you know, government efficiency commission, can call it Department of Government Efficiency Doge. I kinda like Doge. It's more it's more fun.
Yeah. And, where we just take a look at at at all the federal agencies and say, do we really need whatever it is, 428 federal agencies? Like, there's so many that people have not even heard of, or and that have overlapping areas of responsibility we should I don't know. Probably, we should get I mean, there there are more federal agencies than there are years since the establishment of the United States, which means that we've created more than 1 federal agency per year on average. That seems a lot.
That's a lot. That's a lot. So we should have that seems crazy. I think we should be able to get away with, 99 agencies. I don't know.
That seems a lot like a lot of agencies. It's a lot. Yeah. Yeah.
Speaker 0: 2 per state. That's what I mean.
Speaker 1: Yeah, exactly. We should have fewer agencies, and, and they certainly shouldn't have overlapping responsibilities, and and then we we need some kind of we just need a review of regulations to say which ones are sensible and which ones are not. Because because if you've got regulators, every year, they're gonna add more regulations. It's just automatic. Like like, they just output regulations, and and then and there's more laws and regulations every year until, basically, everything's legal, to get get anything done.
So we need some kind of garbage collection for regulations that don't make sense. I think I'm saying very obvious things.
Speaker 0: You're you are saying obvious things. Yeah. So that's will be very unpopular things.
Speaker 1: Yeah. I'll probably need if if this happens, I see quite a significant security team, so that because because someone might literally go post alarm me from the post office.
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
Thanks for reading! If you found this post helpful, please do me a favor and follow this page before you go. To hear everything Elon Musk had to say, check out the video below for his full conversation with Tucker Carlson. https://t.co/QaTSaMmhRV
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 1 expresses deep concern about the future of democracy, believing the upcoming election is the last chance to prevent a one-party state due to unchecked illegal immigration and the Democratic party's policies. He criticizes the lack of voter ID laws, citing California's recent legislation as an example of enabling voter fraud.
He defends his support for Trump, arguing that the "Dem Machine" is importing illegals to swing states, leading to a demographic shift that will eliminate swing states and create a single-party system. He believes Trump is the underdog, fighting against a media, money, and celebrity-backed Democratic party.
Speaker 1 discusses AI, emphasizing the need for a truth-seeking AI to prevent a "woke mind virus" from programming AI to lie. He expresses concern about the power of AI and the potential for it to be controlled by untrustworthy individuals. He advocates for sensible deregulation and a review of existing regulations to promote progress and innovation. He also touches on the issues of over-prescription of psychiatric medication and the potential negative effects of hormonal birth control.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: If he loses, man, what? You're fucked, dude.
Speaker 1: You're not fucked. If he loses, I'm fucked.
Speaker 0: It does seem that way. You can't just be like you can't just be like, yo, I Yeah.
Speaker 1: I'm like, how how long do you think my prison sentence is gonna be tonight? Will I see my children? I don't know. Because it's not like
Speaker 0: you can say, well, yeah, I maxed out to him, but, you know, I get
Speaker 1: you're I'm no plausible deniability. No. No. And I've been trashing Kamala nonstop.
Speaker 0: Oh, I know.
Speaker 1: Well, not I mean, the Kamala puppet, I call him. You know? The the the machine that the Kamala puppet represents.
Speaker 0: Yeah. She's irrelevant. I mean, she's not even No.
Speaker 1: No. Like a like a I made a I made a joke, which I realized I deleted, which is, like, nobody's even bothering to try to kill Kamala because it's pointless. What do you achieve? No. It's totally fine.
Another puppet. Exact that's It's so important to kill It's
Speaker 0: deep and true, though.
Speaker 1: Nobody's tried to kill Joe Biden.
Speaker 0: It's imp They're
Speaker 1: pretty pointless. Totally. You actually put that up? Yeah. No.
Some people interpret it as as as as though I was calling for people to to Of course. Assassinate her. But I but I but I was like but I was like, no. We even you know, you know, I was I was like, doesn't it seem strange that no one's even bothered to
Speaker 0: try? It's not worth it. I mean, there's an endless supply.
Speaker 1: Yeah. I'm like, no nobody would it's it's absurd.
Speaker 0: It could be anybody.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Yeah. You you nobody's gonna try to nobody tries to assassinate a puppet.
Speaker 0: Of course not. A marionette.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Marionette. It's just like you know? It's hilarious. Yeah.
She's safe. Like, I don't I like, to to try and kill Trump twice with actual guns and bullets.
Speaker 0: Oh, yeah.
Speaker 1: He shot in the air right in fucking butt butler
Speaker 0: where I was. And, he doesn't seem rattled. It's weird. Does he to you? Doesn't seem what?
Rattled.
Speaker 1: He's I mean, it's the constitution of an ox. It's it's you know, so it's not like working out and eating healthy. And he's Okay.
Speaker 0: We gotta tape this. Oh, yeah. We're Oh, yeah. We're good. Oh, good.
Yeah. Is this so so
Speaker 1: He's he's not like, let me eat another salad. That's not no. Or or work out, you know, you know, fastidiously. That's he he I I felt like, oh, he doesn't work out, and he eats, you know, cheeseburgers and Diet Coke and stuff. And because it
Speaker 0: it just I think he just inherently has a strong constitution. So when you I mean, yours with him, he didn't seem like a man who'd been the subject of 2 assassination attempts?
Speaker 1: No. He seemed, of, you know, sound mind and body and, strong backbone.
Speaker 0: Did you,
Speaker 1: I mean, that's what I said in the in the thing, which Yeah. When and and the remarks I made there were impromptu. There's no teleprompter or anything. I just I was just speaking extemporaneously.
Speaker 0: Are you the only rich guy who doesn't have, like, a media consultant?
Speaker 1: No. I don't media consultant. Yeah. No. I've noticed, obviously.
Yeah. Oh, I mean no. I I just, no. I just thought about what what I what I wanna say, and I just spoke off the cuff, don't tell it prompted. Nothing.
Speaker 0: Good for you.
Speaker 1: Yeah. I can talk I just look like I'm like, right now, I'm just talking. Look
Speaker 0: at me. Wow. Amazing.
Speaker 1: Can you believe it? I can talk without a teleprompter. That's crazy. But if
Speaker 0: if he loses, it's gonna be hard for you to pretend you never supported him.
Speaker 1: All in. All in. In the deep end? Yeah.
Speaker 0: No. You are definitely in the deep end. You cannot touch bottom.
Speaker 1: No. No. I'm like I'm like rolling around. I'm like picking my I'm like, baa. It's all in, baby.
Speaker 0: Is it fun?
Speaker 1: Yeah. It's really fun. I mean, there may be some in the hopefully unlikely event that he loses, there may be some vengeance, on me. Were you kidding? I mean, it's possible.
Speaker 0: It's possible?
Speaker 1: You've got
Speaker 0: to be one of the biggest government contractors. We do essential work for the government. Yes.
Speaker 1: Yeah. It's not like, you know, we do useful essential work Right. That we compete for and win contracts on because our product is much better and costs less. That that's why we get covered contracts right now. And and and and, I mean, if you take, for example, the, the NASA contract to transport astronauts to and from the space station, Boeing got NASA awarded 2 contracts at the start, one to Boeing and one to SpaceX.
Boeing was awarded twice as much as SpaceX. SpaceX has done all the astronaut transport, from the space station, and and Boeing has only done one to one transport of 1 of 2 astronauts to the space station, and we had to bring them back. Boeing got twice as much as SpaceX. There's there's this total misunderstanding that that my companies have been subsidized and supported by the government and get all these and and it's like, do you do you really think that a Biden administration is gonna subsidize me? You're probably not.
Are you kidding? No. In fact, they take away every contract they possibly can. So, for example, there was the FCC contract to, $42,000,000,000 for providing rural broadband. Yes.
Okay. We we actually first said, look, we don't we think there shouldn't be any subsidies, so we recommend that this program just not exist. But since you're insisting that it exists, we will compete. And we we have better products. So we we we won, I don't know, about a quarter of it, which would have included the devastated areas like North Carolina and so on.
And, the FCC took it away illegally. They just voted 3 out of 5 commissioners voted away and said, even though you want it, we're we're we're we're sending it. On what ground?
Speaker 0: And do
Speaker 1: you know how many people they have connected? How many? 0.
Speaker 0: So you think that was political? Well, the 3 Democrats voted against it. Right.
Speaker 1: The 2 Republicans voted for it.
Speaker 0: So you tried to get StarLink you tried to get StarLink Yes. Into North Carolina, into Western North Carolina, the areas devastated by the hurricane.
Speaker 1: We have it is it is in there, and it is the primary means of communication in the devastated areas.
Speaker 0: You had conflict with Buttigieg over this. Well, I I I raised a cons
Speaker 1: I I said, look, we're we we had delivered we've been delivering Starlink terminals there for a while, and obviously, some people already had them, since they just, you know, consume private individuals that had Starlink there already. We delivered, thousands of terminals, and and got all the way up to the, you know, the areas where they wouldn't let us go any further. And then we're, like, okay, we're gonna send helicopters in, and and and find people who are stranded and and give them Starlink terminals, which I think is, you know, a nice thing. Yeah! Okay.
The they they wouldn't let us land, because there was an FAA, notice to M and NOTAM that said, in order to land, you have to know who you're going to meet with, to land. Now, the problem is, we're trying to deliver Internet communications. People don't have Internet communications. We don't know who they are, but then they can't reach us because they don't have communications. Do you see the catch-twenty 3?
Speaker 0: Yes, I do.
Speaker 1: Insane. So so it's obviously impossible for people who don't have Internet communications to let us know who they are, because they don't have the Internet. Yes. Yes. And so,
Speaker 0: Did you explain this to the federal government?
Speaker 1: Yes. What did they say? They they they they fixed it. How was Buttigieg when you talked to him? He was actually good.
So I wanna be just Yeah. Yeah. I I wanna give Buttigieg some credit here. Yes. 1st, a a you know, when I complained about it, he he he reacted in a in a in a very level headed way, and he reached out to me, and he called me.
Yeah. And we we discussed the issue, got to the bottom of it, and he fixed it. Good. So credit to the way
Speaker 0: to judge. Yeah. Well, and to you
Speaker 1: for pushing it. Yeah. I mean so but as soon as he was aware
Speaker 0: of the problem, he fixed it. Well, you publicized
Speaker 1: it too on Yeah. Yeah. As soon as you shamed him. Well, but I I do wanna give credit words too.
Speaker 0: Yeah. No. Amen. I agree completely. So but back to the original question, you know, about the potential consequences if, you know, having gone all in, this doesn't work.
Yeah. I mean, you had to have thought about this long and hard before you did it. What was your thinking?
Speaker 1: I mean yeah. So my view is is that if Trump doesn't win this election, it's the last election we're gonna have. That, the Democrats the Dem Machine, has been, importing so many peep bringing in so many illegals, flying flying in with this, like, CBP border app thing that nobody even knew about, like secret program. That's illegal, basically. It's illegal, but there's no action by the DOJ to actually to stop it from happening.
They're, transporting large numbers of of illegals to swing states. If you look at the numbers, these are the numbers from the government website. So, like, from the democrat administered government websites. Like, where do you get this data? From the government website that is run by Democrats.
And, there are triple digit increases in illegals to all the swing states, and in some cases, it's like 700% over the last 3 years. Now, these swing state margins are, you know, sometimes 10, 20000 votes. So what happens if you put, you know, hundreds of thousands of people into each swing state? And and and for this for this if when somebody is granted asylum, they are fast tracked they would they they they get get a green card, and then 5 years after the green card, they can get they can get citizenship and they can fully legally vote. And when they do so, they vote overwhelmingly Democrat.
And sometimes they get this rebuttal of, like, well, a lot of them, their social values don't align with, sort of, the far left sort of work ideology. I said, that's true, but, but that's not their top priority. Their top priority is getting their friends and family also to the United States, and the the the Dems also issue all these programs, these sort of handouts essentially, that make them beholden to the Democratic Party. So they vote down. That's what happens.
So my prediction is if there's another 4 years of a Dem administration, they will legalize so many, illegals that are there, that the next election, there won't be any swing states. And it's and we'll be a single party country, just like California is a single party state. It's a super majority damn state
Speaker 0: in California. Because of immigration?
Speaker 1: Yes. The California was, fairly reliably Republican.
Speaker 0: Bill Clinton lost California in 92 and won West Virginia.
Speaker 1: Yes. So there was a 90 986 amnesty.
Speaker 0: Yes.
Speaker 1: And thereafter, California trended very strongly, Dem, and as at this point, I think 65, 70 percent Dems, something like that. It's super majority Dems. But, like, the California legislature Yes. Is more than 2 thirds Democrat.
Speaker 0: Has it improved the state?
Speaker 1: No. It's it's not. And they they California just passed, which is shocking. It's hard to believe this is even this is even real. But California just passed a law making it illegal, to require voter ID in any election at all in California.
Do you you know that? No. Yeah. Newsom signed it into law last week.
Speaker 0: It's illegal to require an ID. In any election, even a town council.
Speaker 1: And and a friend of mine who is this can who lives in Palo Alto was like it it was like, is this actually real? And he went to, like, vote in, like, some city council election. He tried to show them his ID, and they said, we're not even allowed to look at your ID.
Speaker 0: Have they extended the same
Speaker 1: actually what's going on right now.
Speaker 0: But By the
Speaker 1: way, they're proud of it. They're not hiding it.
Speaker 0: But it's only voting. It's not buying a gun or buying liquor or buying a pack of cigarettes or flying on an airplane or renting a hotel room. It's only voting that it's illegal.
Speaker 1: Oh, if you try to buy a gun, I mean, they're gonna ID you 6 ways a Sunday. It's yeah. They tried California is trying to make it basically equal to own its own a gun. And and the same people that demanded vaccine IDs IDs for if you wanna travel or do anything are the same ones who say no voter ID is required.
Speaker 0: Is there any reason Obviously hypocritical. To pass a law like that except to abet voter fraud?
Speaker 1: It's it's for it's it's it's so that fraud can never cannot be proven. So it it it enables large scale fraud and no way to prove it, because how would you prove it? It's literally impossible. No no ID. You you're not even allowed to show your ID.
It's insane. Well, it is insane. Insane. So yeah. The the purpose of no voter ID is obviously to conduct fraud in elections.
Speaker 0: Obviously. There can be no other explanation.
Speaker 1: I mean, they come up with some nice sounding thing.
Speaker 0: People don't have IDs? Could you live in this country without an ID?
Speaker 1: Yeah. I mean, the the the their common rebuttal is, like, it's racist to require ID and which is insane. I think it's actually race racist and patronizing to say that people can't figure out how to get ID, obviously.
Speaker 0: But how could you live here without an ID? I don't think it's even possible.
Speaker 1: Yeah. You can't do anything.
Speaker 0: Yeah.
Speaker 1: You need ID for everything. Like, a list of the things you need ID for is basically everything, except voting.
Speaker 0: So So you see the rest of the It's
Speaker 1: total bullshit, obviously. Come obviously. Yes.
Speaker 0: But that doesn't, in any way, minimize the aggression or self righteousness they bring to this conversation.
Speaker 1: Yes.
Speaker 0: It's you're a racist if you want that. Right.
Speaker 1: Where was that in fact, obviously, someone is racist if they say that, people of particular race cannot get ID. That's patronizing and racist. That's absurd.
Speaker 0: Yes.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Yeah. It's like when the governor of New York said people in the you know, get out don't know how to use computers or something like that. I mean, like, you know, I'm super out of
Speaker 0: touch. Yeah. For sure. Yeah. So It's like a So there's a really clear template.
Speaker 1: She doesn't know how to use computers, but they do, obviously.
Speaker 0: I don't think Hochul could use a computer. Yeah. I don't think she's She's not qualified intellectually.
Speaker 1: Yeah. No. Probably not.
Speaker 0: But not everyone in New York is as dumb as as Kathy Hochul. I think that's true. Yeah. So you see the other 49 states becoming California if the machine wins?
Speaker 1: Well, you don't need, all all 49 to to go that way. You just need, you know, enough to have the election have there not be swing states. I mean, there are only 6 swing swing states. Yep. So there are only 6 states out of 50 right now that are in contention.
So if those 6 states that are in contention, by narrow margins are no longer in contention, then, the the only contest will be for who wins the Democratic prime primary. That's how it is in California, that's how it is in New York. There's no there's no party, party versus party situation. The only contest is who wins the Democratic primary. And as we've seen with the, appointment of Kamala, who no one voted for, even in the Democratic primary Yes.
Speaker 0: Where's the democracy here? It's just it's easier, though.
Speaker 1: I mean, it's it's just that the Democrat elite just decides who who who is in charge. That's an that that that that's that's a, you know, a tiny oligarchy, basically. Comprised of That's not democracy.
Speaker 0: The richest people in the country. That's kind of the interesting part to me is that the richest people in the country are on board with this. I mean, that's what it is. It's the it's it's a collection of billionaires.
Speaker 1: Most of them are. Yeah.
Speaker 0: But you're not.
Speaker 1: Not me. And and not everyone is. I think there's but but it is a shocking number of so called billionaires are, in the damn camp. Well, more than are in the Republican camp Oh, for sure. Which is wild.
So the in in fact, the the astonishing thing in the swing states is that that it's that they're even a contest given that, the the Dems have far more money than the Republicans. So so the color came dramatically outspends the Trump campaign in the swing states. The, overwhelming the media is overwhelmingly pro Democrat, so you've got, you know, the press, you know, is a is a a Dem cheering squad. And, you know, so oh, and then and then you've got all all the almost all the Hollywood and entertainment celebrities also, you know, endorsing, comment, and and being pro Dems. What do you So you got the so you got the celebrities, you got the they got the money, they got, got it basically, everything on the side of the Dems.
The problem is the underdog here. Trump's the underdog in swing swing states, and still, it's a contentious it's still 5050. After all that,
Speaker 0: what does that tell you?
Speaker 1: It tells me that if if people actually knew what was going on, they weren't being fed nonstop propaganda, it would landslide in favor of Republicans.
Speaker 0: Yeah. Well, how's this for crazy? Has there ever been a more volatile time in American politics? Not in our lifetimes. No one alive has ever seen anything like this.
But long before things started to really fall apart, the Heritage Foundation saw it coming. Heritage has pulled together a coalition of over a 100 right leaning groups to develop a comprehensive plan for day 1. That would include detailed policy proposals on the most pressing issues, the big ones. Securing the border, controlling inflation, cracking down on election fraud, protecting the rights of the individual, and saving the nation from being crushed by woke anti human ideology. The team at Heritage has also developed a plan to dismantle the deep state that keeps this nonsense going and reclaim this nation from the small group of technocrats that's broken everything.
Heritage is also running a training and vetting program to identify effective conservatives to serve in the next presidential administration. People who will share your values, this country's values, and actually do the job. It can't just be the same pool of discredited people from Washington populating every administration. Headers has a long head start and they put in a lot of work already But they need your support to finish the job and to support the incoming president You can go to heritage.org/tucker and contribute to this important work today a lot depends on it heritage.org/tucker. But why not join the easier side?
I mean, you're just you're creating problems for yourself by getting on stage with Trump and into I mean, you must have had friends who said that to you. Sure.
Speaker 1: Yes.
Speaker 0: Yeah. People care about you. Like, why even get involved in this?
Speaker 1: Well, I get because I I think we wanna remain a democracy, and we don't wanna become a one party state.
Speaker 0: Yes.
Speaker 1: That's the reason. And the it's exact opposite. They the people who call Trump a threat to democracy, but the people who are saying Trump is a threat to democracy are themselves the threat to democracy. Yes. One party rule is not democracy.
One party where essentially the party elite pick a candidate, as happened with Kamala, is not democracy. Where did the people vote? Show me where the people voted. No, there were no people voting. It was all just damn party elite that disappointed someone.
And and when the when the Biden puppet, when the pro Biden puppet's ratings sagged, they knocked him in the back immediately, and just tossed him out, and put it put a new puppet on. That's exactly what happened. Tell me I'm wrong.
Speaker 0: Well, not only you're right. I mean, it's almost not even worth criticizing Kamala Harris
Speaker 1: because No. No. Exactly.
Speaker 0: What does she have to do with it?
Speaker 1: There's no point in in criticizing Kamala. She's she's simply the the face of a lot a much larger machine. Yes. And she will say whatever is whatever the tele the tele teleprompter whatever's on the teleprompter, she's gonna say it. Yes.
Now she gets stuck if the teleprompter breaks. That happened recently. I think the Yeah. The teleprompter is stalled, and she just she just, like, looping for a while for about a minute. So I think that happened yesterday or something.
It was pretty funny to watch. But she'll just say whatever words are on the teleprompter, so, you know, it's it's really whoever controls the teleprompter. It's the actual sort of those are the best who's actually in charge.
Speaker 0: And who is that, do you think? Well, I've I've tried to
Speaker 1: put it down. It's it's not like any one kind of mastermind. It's not like it it seems to be it's it's, like, Kamala is sort of a a marionette with, you know, a a 1000 puppet masters type of thing. Like, not it's it's it's or maybe it's it's in it's somewhere north of a 100 is what it seems
Speaker 0: like. Yes. I bet you know 80 of them.
Speaker 1: I probably know most of them.
Speaker 0: Yeah. Yeah. So I mean, just by virtue of your job and what you've been doing for the last 30 years, I mean, you Yeah. And I should say I think you voted for that.
Speaker 1: I'd I'd I'd like to see a matchup of of of those quote that the the top 100 puppet masters in the FDN client list.
Speaker 0: Do you think there's some overlap?
Speaker 1: Overlap.
Speaker 0: Strong overlap. When are we gonna see that list, do you think?
Speaker 1: I don't know. It's it's it's it's mind blowing that that it, that they've not tried to prosecute even one. Not even the worst offender on on the Epstein client list, they have not even tried to prosecute even 1. Is that that's insane.
Speaker 0: Well, because they have a lot of diabetic grandmothers who were outside the Capitol on January 6th. They've they're kinda occupied.
Speaker 1: Yeah. I mean, they've put, like, whatever, 5 or 600 January 6th protesters in prison and not one person on the on the Epstein client list.
Speaker 0: Will that ever come out, do you think?
Speaker 1: Know, I I think part of why Kamala's getting so much support is that, if if Trump wins, that FCN client list is gonna become public. Yes. And some of those billionaires behind Kamala are terrified of
Speaker 0: that outcome. Yeah. Do you think Reid Hoffman's uncomfortable?
Speaker 1: Yes. Yeah. And Gates. And Gates. Yeah.
Speaker 0: And I only ask that because you can certainly just look at them and you're like, that that's a nervous person right there. I don't know. I mean, I assume you know them. Yeah.
Speaker 1: Yes. Reid Hoffman was my vice president of business development at PayPal. Yeah. 24 years ago.
Speaker 0: He Did does he seem nervous to you? Yeah. I mean, he's terrified of the Trump victory. Because of the disclosure that would follow?
Speaker 1: I think yeah. I mean, I think he's he's certainly ideologically in line with Trump anyway, but I think he is concerned about the, the the the Epstein situation. Like, something might actually the DOJ might actually move forward. There are
Speaker 0: a lot of videos apparently. Those rooms on the island and I think out in New Mexico were wired for video. Right. And Where's
Speaker 1: the video? I mean, between Denny and Epstein, it's got this this was probably several 1,000 hours of footage here.
Speaker 0: Yeah. Yeah. It's kind of weird that the people on those videos are lecturing the rest of us about our moral failings, isn't it?
Speaker 1: Yeah. It's weird. What is that? Well, I mean, part of how they deflect attention from themselves is by a march you know, criticizing the morals of others. Yes.
So they it's sort of like a preemptive moral strike. Yes. I mean, as I said, I think those who are saying Trump is a threat to democracy are themselves actually the threat to democracy.
Speaker 0: It feels like we're getting to a place where the rest of us know too much. Is this do you know what I mean? I mean, it's it's it's easier to live in a society where you don't really know what the people in charge are doing or why they're doing it. But now, thanks, I would say, largely to x. Yeah.
I think that's fair to say that.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 0: We we do know a lot. Not everything, but we know a lot. And I wonder where does that like, what happens next now that we know all this? The kidnapper shown us his face. Like, what happens?
Speaker 1: Well, I think if, if Trump wins, we can do some housecleaning and shed light on things. Yeah. All all the x platform does is, adhere to freedoms freedom of speech within the balance of the law.
Speaker 0: Yes.
Speaker 1: And if if people want to change laws, they they can change laws. And so, like, x in different countries, the we x does censor in in in countries where censorship is is is the law. We don't try to, you know, push American laws in other countries, but we do try to stick to the law in any given country. That's what we're doing. We open source our algorithm.
We try to be as transparent as possible. But, those who want to push lies obviously hate truth and transparency. Yes. Because it shows them to be liars. I mean, you you look at that, like, how outrageous it was that, Kamala in the presidential debate kept kept pushing the fine people hoax.
They know the fine people hoax is is false. Trump would never support, Nazis, Nazi rallies. It's absurd. And and he explicitly said that, you know, in that same speech, that you must condemn not you know, anyone who, who has Nazi tendencies with the, in the strongest possible terms. And yet, despite knowing that to be false, the people who who who wrote the speech for the Kamala puppet, put the fine people hoax in a presidential debate, Deliberately lying.
Again. Mess up.
Speaker 0: If she wins, I mean I how can they let X continue, in its current form, in its current role in American society?
Speaker 1: They they won't. They will, try to shut it down by any means possible. What do you mean by any means possible? I mean, either by I mean, they'll try to pass laws. They'll try to prosecute the company, prosecute me.
Any I mean, the amount of lawfare that we've seen taking places is outrageous. I mean, the I mean, I have many examples, but, like, the Department of Justice, for example, launched a huge lawsuit against SpaceX for failing to hire asylum seekers. Come on.
Speaker 0: Yeah. Asylum seekers?
Speaker 1: Asylums not asylum those who granted asylum asylum seekers. Now there's now there's also a law, called International Traffic and Arms Regulations, that because SpaceX develops advanced missile technology that can be used in in nuclear ICBMs, that we have we have to be very careful with who we hire. We can only hire someone if they're a permanent resident or citizen. That's what the ITAR law says. Then there's another law that says that, you cannot discriminate against asylum seekers.
So we're damned if you do, damned if you don't. The DOJ did a massive lawsuit against SpaceX, for failing to hire asylum seekers, even though we are it is illegal for us to hire asylum seekers under ITAR law. This is an actual thing that that that's that's going on. And they can only they can only do a fairly small number of lawsuits every year. So why did they pick this one?
Because you have an x. Yeah. Yeah. Lawfare. I mean It's like that famous quote from Beria, you know, the Yeah.
Stalin's, like, chief torturer and head of the secret police. Beria said, show me the man, and I'll show you the crime. Exactly. I mean, we have so many laws that it is actually impossible to, you know, impossible to to do business, but impossible to operate without being, violating some law, because you have laws like the ones I just gave you, where where both things are illegal. Yes.
They contradict one another. They contradict one another. So, you know, it's it's illegal to discriminate against like, discriminate against asylum seekers in in jobs, but it's also illegal for us to hire asylum seekers. But it's just They just chose one they chose the the the the one law and ignored the other one. And the Department of Dutch Justice at federal level prosecuted SpaceX for that.
Speaker 0: What do you think It's mad. Well, it also discredits the idea of law, which some of us wants to take seriously.
Speaker 1: Absolutely. It it it this affects both the perception of of American justice and the reality of
Speaker 0: it. Yes.
Speaker 1: So now I'm actually a big fan of the American justice system, and I think on balance, you know, we've we've got still still have an excellent judicial system. We still have judges that care about the letter, and intent of the law. I mean, not just the letter, but also the intent of the law. But something that people should be concerned about is that there's an increasing movement to place activists as judges. This is, if you look at who who did the Biden administration confirm as federal judges, and who are being confirmed at at the state level, in in in sort of follow-up states, increasingly it is it is not, judges who care about justice, or or they they don't care about following the law.
They care about social justice, not justice justice. Right? What they call social social justice. Activists as judges. Now you got a real problem.
Do you think if If that continues, we we we will not have a real justice system. Or a real country. Yes. I mean, yeah.
Speaker 0: But again, your purchase of x has been I think it's fair to say even if I hated it, I would say this because it's true. It's been pivotal in American politics
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 0: In an American society. Do you think they could shut you down if the Democrats continue to hold power?
Speaker 1: They'll unequivocally try. Yeah. Yeah. And and if if if they if they, if they get a majority in the Senate and House, and the presidency, then they can simply pass a law, and delete section 230. So it's gonna make us liable for for what any what anyone says on a platform with, you know, good like, at this point, almost 600,000,000 monthly active users.
Yeah. Which is impossible. You know, that's that's like trying to regulate speech in city of like, as a country. So A big country. Yeah.
It'd just be instantly bankrupt.
Speaker 0: But I bet they wouldn't withdraw legal immunity from the vaccine makers at the same time, would they?
Speaker 1: No. That's unlikely.
Speaker 0: Just I mean, as long as we're withdrawing legal liability protection.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Yeah. I mean, the whole vaccine debate is a is a is a long one. You know, I'm I'm not actually I'm not anti vaccine in general. I think we wanna exercise caution with use of vaccines, but, in the absence of vaccines, there'll be a lot more, I think, people that that, that have died.
You know? Like, we want the smallpox vaccine. That was a
Speaker 0: good one. It seems a good one.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Smallpox will kill you. Killed a lot of people.
It killed a lot of people. I I used to be people who would like a lot of people would die of smallpox, and a lot of people would get polio. For sure. Yeah. We had a president who had polio.
Speaker 0: Oh, yeah. There's still peep you meet people today Yeah. In their eighties who were limping from childhood polio.
Speaker 1: Right. It's good that we don't have that, and vaccines, you know, played a major role in that. So that doesn't mean that vaccines should not have any scrutiny. Of course, they should we should be making sure that the quality control of vaccines is incredibly good, I guess, if we're giving them to children and whatnot. And we shouldn't we shouldn't force people to take vaccines.
Speaker 0: That itself is a controversial statement that we shouldn't force people. We shouldn't force people
Speaker 1: to take vaccines. No? Yeah.
Speaker 0: So just to yes.
Speaker 1: I believe in freedom. Like, you
Speaker 0: know Yeah. I've noticed.
Speaker 1: I'd like, the the you know, America is supposed to be the land of liberty.
Speaker 0: Yeah.
Speaker 1: You know, freedom freedom and opportunity. So that, we we try to, as much as possible, maximize people's individual liberty, and that we try to be a country where you succeed based on, your talent and hard work. Yes. Those are 2 fundamental values. That that's what that's that's what's made America great, and and if we lose those, we will our decline will be swept.
Speaker 0: What what do you if you had to get if you had to bet, I mean, does freedom reassert itself in America or not?
Speaker 1: Well, that's why I think part of why this election is so pivotal. I think if we with the Trump administration, I think we can improve the liberty of Americans. We we can, I think we need to have sensible deregulation, where we we we keep the regulations that matter, like, we we don't want to destroy, you know, important habitats or Yes? You know, encourage oil spills or anything like that. But there there are so many regulatory agencies that have overlapping responsibility, that we are smothering progress.
And we can't build a high speed rail in America. You know, look at the ridiculous high speed rail project in California, where they've spent $7,000,000,000, and all they've got to show for it is a 6 a 1600 foot section of concrete with no rails on it. There's a picture of it online. So it's not
Speaker 0: it's not that fast yet. We wouldn't say it's high speed at this point or even rail.
Speaker 1: It doesn't even have rail on it. And may maybe by now, they've put some rail on it, but it's this comically small section of rail. $7,000,000,000 has been spent, most of it in like environmental consulting, and I don't know where, but clearly not in building high speed rail. So we can't we can't we've got there are so many different regulatory agencies and so many laws and regulations that prevent progress that if those continues, we simply won't be able to get anything done.
Speaker 0: It does seem like the engineers are not getting rich. It's the environmental consultants, the climate consultants, the DEI consultants. A whole consultant class seems to be getting richer by the year, where people with actual skills, the ones that bring actual progress
Speaker 1: Useful things. Products and services that use Useful things. That's right. Yeah.
Speaker 0: So this is a tricky things
Speaker 1: that if you were, like, traveling on a desert island, you'd want those people
Speaker 0: Right. Right.
Speaker 1: But you wouldn't want environmental consultants.
Speaker 0: They seem under they seem under
Speaker 1: confident. Star. Okay?
Speaker 0: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. And, It's
Speaker 1: like, who who who's who are actual builders at at Get Things Done? And, you know, and and and every year, we're making it harder in America for actual builders to get things done. You know, we're in this, like, weird Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged Yeah. Scenario, where it's you know, there's yet another regulation, yet another rule. And and what there's a sort of that that phrase in in Atlas Shrugged.
Oh, you'll oh, you'll manage. Oh, you'll manage. Oh, you'll manage. It's like, eventually, you're like, can't get anything done.
Speaker 0: Why the hostility, though, toward people with with meaningful skills? It's it's not it's not a neutral posture they have. Yeah. And they're enriching themselves, obviously, by creating fake jobs because they have no skills and, you know, they don't have creative power. So I understand that, but why do they hate people who do have creative power and actual skills?
I I don't understand that.
Speaker 1: I don't I'm not sure I understand it either because it's difficult for me to put my put myself in a mindset because I'm I'm someone who believes in construction. I I build things, that's what I do. Yeah. I build cars, I build rockets, I build Internet, you know, satellite Internet. You know, I've spent, 1,000 of
Speaker 0: hours tens of thousands of hours in in
Speaker 1: in factories, building up factories. So, you know, I I also I I can't really put myself in the mind of, say, someone who would wanna do crime because I don't wanna do crime.
Speaker 0: Yeah. You
Speaker 1: know, I don't wanna hurt, you know, there's there's some people who who enjoy hurting other people. I don't enjoy hurt hurting other people. So I'm like, I have a hard time imagining why would somebody do that. Yes. You know, in an extreme case, you you can't put yourself in the mind of, like, say, Jeffrey Dahmer, where where you're like a cannibalistic serial killer, because you're not a cannibalistic serial killer.
Right. You're like, I can't I don't get it. You know?
Speaker 0: It's not a fetish you can relate to.
Speaker 1: It's not. You know? But I do think this is in in the sort of well meaning sort of liberal mindset, I know, I've I've many good friends who, you'd they're very they have deep empathy for their fellow human being. Good. And they they they care.
And and and but the challenge that they have is that they've often grown up in a very sheltered existence, where everyone around them is nice and civilized. And they just really don't encounter people who are, have have uncontrolled violent tendencies, or or like hurting people. You know, they've just always grown up in a sort of kumbaya Yeah. Everyone is nice,
Speaker 0: hippie commune situation. Minneapolis pre riots. Yeah.
Speaker 1: Yeah. I mean, if you if you if you yeah. But but there's there's a small number of people. It's like a few percent of society that, either can't have anger management issues that are so severe that they they they lose their temper and hurt or murder others, and there's a a small it's like a it's not not a large number, that that enjoy hurting other people. And if you do not incarcerate them, they will they will do that.
They will they will hurt other people. And what I see is is what I call, shallow empathy. Like, people have empathy for the criminals, but not empathy for the victims of the criminals. Yes. And so if you simply have and I believe that one should have deep empathy to say, like, what is the greater good for society?
Is it better to incarcerate violent criminals and prevent them from hurting people, or to let them loose and allow those people to be hurt? And I think the latter is much worse. You know, my mom is my mom lives in New York, and and it's my mom at this at this point is has gone from being Democrat to Republican, and her her friends in New York, are should for having the same experience. Because you know what'll turn you from a Democrat to a Republican pretty fast? Is getting punched in the face while you walk down the street.
Speaker 0: Yes. For no reason.
Speaker 1: Yes. And then and then and then no action being taken against those who hurt you. And that happened to your mom? Not not to my mother, but to 3 of her friends this year.
Speaker 0: Hey. It's Tucker Carlson. I am not in the studio. I'm in the and you can hear it in the audio probably. I'm in the back of an SUV outside a hotel in Tulsa, Oklahoma.
I think it's Tulsa, Oklahoma. Anyway, we're on the road for this month long tour, and there's a lot going on in the world. And the question is, how do you understand what's happening? There are deeper trends unfolding. You probably sense that, and it would be helpful to have some grounding in exactly what they are.
And if you're like me and you spend 4 years in college and didn't learn all that much, where do you go to understand what's happening to your world? Well, Hillsdale College, in our opinion, is one of the very few places left in the English speaking world where your kids can get a real education. But not just your kids, you. They have free online classes completely free. You can get them anywhere, including in the back seat of an SUV outside a hotel in Tulsa, Oklahoma.
And you'll know that when you go there. Go to tucker for hillsdale.com. They have an amazing new course called Marxism, Socialism, and Communism. Hillsdale is offering it. It doesn't cost you a dime, and you could pull it up right on your phone if you want.
Go to tucker for hillsdale.com and the class, Marxism, Socialism, and Communism, and you'll have a much better understanding of what you're watching every day. Why would someone punch them in the face?
Speaker 1: I don't know. But that's I don't I'm not a face puncher.
Speaker 0: Right. No.
Speaker 1: You know? But if you walk around the streets of San Francisco and and many downtowns, so they go downtown Philadelphia right now, you know, they they call the people homeless, but but the the homeless is the wrong term. Violent drug zombie. Yeah. Okay.
It's like you know, you look at them, you say, like, homeless is a misnomer. It implies that someone got a little behind on their mortgage. And if you just offered them a job, they'd be back on their feet. Yeah. No.
No. But if if you're going to look at downtown Philly or San Francisco or parts of New York and actually, most downtowns, what you actually have are violent drug zombies. So they're like shuffling down the street with dead eyes, you know, and with, like, needles, you know, on the and human feces on the streets. You've been to South House SF, right? Have you seen this?
Speaker 0: Oh, yeah. I was born there. Yeah, yeah.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Yeah. Like, one of the most beautiful cities in
Speaker 0: the world. Oh, yes. The greatest.
Speaker 1: And now you have to step over the drug needles and the feces and the bodies. Like, one one couple I met, the final straw for leaving San Francisco was there was a they came home, one night, and there's a dead body in front of their garage. They can can get their car in to to can can can can park their car.
Speaker 0: Because of
Speaker 1: the corpse. And, yeah, there's no street fog. They're like, this is a corpse. This is a corpse in front of the garage. And they don't wanna move the corpse, you know, because, like, well, you know, there you don't you're like, maybe there's they need to, like, figure out why the guy died or something.
You know?
Speaker 0: That's to me. That's liberal compassion, though.
Speaker 1: They're in a bit of a quandary because they get they get in a place to park their car, and they they feel that they shouldn't really move the dead body. So they called 911 and said, there's a dead body outside our house. And, they said, well, they said they said that 911 San Francisco says, well, are you in danger right now? It's like, well, no. He's dead.
He's pretty sure he's dead. And, they're like they're like, okay. We'll we'll send someone tomorrow to pick up the body. Like, they're like, what do you mean tomorrow? So so so they're, like, going out of their house while there's a dead body, as in front right in front of their house, you know, like it took like, it took, like, 24 hours or something like that to eventually pick up the body.
And they're like, this the hell with us were leaving.
Speaker 0: And did they?
Speaker 1: Yes. By the way, there's a million anecdotes like that. Oh, I know.
Speaker 0: No. But I just don't think This
Speaker 1: is not rare.
Speaker 0: It's well, it's it's it's ubiquitous. And so then you wonder, like, how can people still tell themselves they're compassionate
Speaker 1: if they're loving it? Is is that is that people really just need
Speaker 0: to think
Speaker 1: what like, I believe in being compassionate about Of course. I believe that we should care about our fellow human beings. I think this is a good thing.
Speaker 0: Of course.
Speaker 1: We should not we should not be we should not be selfish and not care about others. We should care about others. But we should just care about others, all things considered. Like I said, care not merely just about the criminals. It's just one layer deep.
You should also care about the criminals' victims.
Speaker 0: Yes. Yes. Well, especially the criminal's victims.
Speaker 1: Yes. Innocent people who get attacked and killed. So, I mean, I got so many anecdotes. I mean, you know, like, about a year ago, there were there were 3, actual Twitter employees who were just, leaving the building and walking down Mock Street in in San Francisco. Mock Street used to be a beautiful, wonderful street.
Of course. Obviously, it's called Mock Street because that's where the market was. Right. Now now it's boarded up shop windows and stuff, and, and, they were chased by a guy with an ax who wanted they they they they outran him, and they reported, hey, there's a guy with an axe who who tried to hit try to kill us with an axe. The police did nothing, and, that guy with an ax, subsequently murdered 2 people.
With an ax? With the yeah. With the ax. Because eventually, he's gonna find somebody he cannot run, and he did. So what I'm saying is if you if you don't stop ax motors while it while they're attempting to ax motor, eventually, they will succeed in ax motoring people.
Speaker 0: If this goes on, I mean, that's such an obvious observation.
Speaker 1: Seems obvious.
Speaker 0: Yes. I I think it is. Yeah. That if you're in any way abetting axe murder, then you're really you're against civilization. That's the way it looks to me.
I mean Yeah. I don't see I'm trying to understand motive here. I can't relate like you, but you're against the whole project if you're allowing that. I guess, is what I'm saying.
Speaker 1: Yeah. I think we should, controversial position, but I think we should arrest axe murderers when they first attempted to axe murder, not after they've succeeded in doing so.
Speaker 0: And I think we should assign at least some of the blame for the axe murderers to the people who allowed allowed this guy to run around with an axe on Market Street trying to kill people. Yes.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Well, you know this this whole movement to decriminalize crime.
Speaker 0: Oh, I've noticed. Yes. What is that?
Speaker 1: Madness? Yeah. Like, do do do you to to a crime crime legal? Like, in California, you can just steal things, and nobody does anything? It's, like, fully legal to steal anything under $1,000 in California?
That's why got they don't have to, like, lock up goods behind these, like, you know, glass and plastic walls. So you go into the supermarket, and you you can't even get, like, what, toothpaste. So that's and and this has actually been particularly difficult on small mom and pop operations. Of course. They don't have the resources of a large corporation.
So it's put a lot of small businesses out
Speaker 0: of just kill them. So when you're at dinner parties and you make these points, what do people say?
Speaker 1: Well, I actually think I've been I've been able to persuade people that, yeah, we we really, we we we need to reverse course here. I think I have actually been able to to persuade a number of people. And I think there actually is a now a ballot on a California ballot initiative to recriminalize, theft. You know what? Guys guys, we there's a reason why we criminalize theft in the first place.
So so and then amazingly, I think Gavin Newsom was a came out against that, proposition. Yeah. No. Honestly, he's the goddamn joker. Gavin Newsom is like if is like like from the like Batman, Dark Knight, the Joker is in charge of Gotham.
You remember, like,
Speaker 0: when he
Speaker 1: took over New York, basically? And and and the criminals run free and the citizens are arrested. That's how that's California. But but, I mean, at least there's a ballot initiative, which I think will probably pass, to say, no. You actually, it is a crime to steal things.
Speaker 0: So you know Gavin. You've gotta know Gavin Newsomie knows. I know Gavin Newsomie. You know, everyone knows Gavin.
Speaker 1: I've known Gavin for a long time.
Speaker 0: Oh, exactly. So what is that? And he doesn't seem crazy when you talk to him in person. He's a perfectly nice guy. Like, what why would he and he's not stupid.
Why would he come out in favor of crime?
Speaker 1: Well, his stated reason was that it would disproportionately affect, people of color.
Speaker 0: Yeah. Well, again But that was his public statement. Right. Well, that is one of those patronizing racist positions you described at the outset, obviously.
Speaker 1: Yes. He I mean, he's literally saying, black people are, and Hispanics are criminals. Yeah. Of course. Yeah.
Yeah.
Speaker 0: No. That's what he's saying.
Speaker 1: That's what he's saying.
Speaker 0: Yeah. Yeah.
Speaker 1: And by
Speaker 0: the way, it is true that crime like that does increase distrust between races. It actually gives rise to racism. It's totally destructive of the social fabric, I think. But I'm but I'm asking like, what do you think his real motive is? Like, who's pushing him in favor of crime?
Speaker 1: Well, I mean, there's always the Saros boogie man. Yeah. Or who you know?
Speaker 0: How real is that?
Speaker 1: It's it's real. I I don't think one can ascribe everything to Saros. I mean, he's, and and George George himself is, is quite I mean, he's seen out at this point. He's not Yes. Not compass measures.
So his his son, Alex, is is in charge. And, but but there is this whole system that SARS built up over many decades. You know? And, so so so I guess SARS and like minded people or whatever, you know, they believe in open borders. They they believe we shouldn't prosecute crime.
This is insane.
Speaker 0: The those seem like expressions of hatred toward the United States. Like, I don't if I was pushing that on a country, I would only do that if I hated the country and wanted to destroy it.
Speaker 1: Well, it's anti civilizational. I mean, and and and similar organizations have been pushing this in in Europe and other countries too. Yeah. Anyone who everywhere they can.
Speaker 0: What's going on in Europe, would you say? Europe suddenly seems like a different place.
Speaker 1: Well, I mean, my biggest concern for Europe is that the both rate is half replacement rate.
Speaker 0: Yes.
Speaker 1: So Europe is rapidly becoming, with each passing year, older and older with fewer and fewer young people. So I think at the at the most fundamental level, unless Europe has birth rate at least roughly equal to replacement rate, it is, in population free fall. Population collapse is what's going on in Europe. So, there's also, like, a shocking amount of censorship. You may have seen, like, in, you know, Britain, they're I kid you not.
It's how can this be real? They are releasing convicted pedophiles from prison in order to put people in prison who for Facebook posts.
Speaker 0: But to be fair, those are posts that criticize the government, so they have a good reason.
Speaker 1: Well, they were actually some of these posts that I've these ones I've seen didn't actually criticize the government, or or or they they they they were they were seen as as sort of as as hate speech.
Speaker 0: Right. So Because they noticed the society getting crappier and crappier with every year, and they said so.
Speaker 1: Yeah. I mean, there there were and this is the sort of so we're stating a fact that there were migrant rape gangs in Yes. In England that were gangs that would run around and prey on young girls, gang rape them. And some people found that objectionable, which, will say, it should be objectionable. And, they're upset about that.
And so they complained about it online and were sent to prison. That sounds crazy.
Speaker 0: It is crazy, and that's like
Speaker 1: like, what?
Speaker 0: Well, it is so it kind of gets to the I mean, you're an engineer, so you're
Speaker 1: It's so mind
Speaker 0: boggling. It is mind boggling, but it's the same you use the phrase mind virus, but it it's behaving like a virus. It's infecting people and making it impossible, apparently, for them to make rational decisions. What is that virus?
Speaker 1: You know, someone I think you should interview is, God Saad.
Speaker 0: Yeah. I have.
Speaker 1: Oh, you have? Yes. Oh, I should watch that, actually. He's great.
Speaker 0: Yeah. Smart. Super smart guy.
Speaker 1: Yeah. And he he wrote a great book called, The Parasitic Mind.
Speaker 0: Yes. A
Speaker 1: very good book. Highly recommended. Yes. Which where he tries to understand how do you get to this parasitic mind situation. And he's writing a book now, which hopefully will publish soon, which is about suicidal empathy, where you have so much empathy, you're actually suiciding society.
Or so much perceived empathy. It's not actually it's called shallow empathy, not deep empathy. Deep empathy would be you'd want the society to continue. Shallow empathy is because you have, like, empathy that's essentially skin deep, and then you and and you don't but it's ultimately bad for civilization and results in the destruction of civilization. And Gut's Gut's Heart has got a good term for this, suicidal empathy.
So it's it's gonna sort of deconstruct what's what's you know, where does this come come from? And, yeah. I mean, part part of it, I suppose, is is is sort of the decline of religion. So, you know, as the saying goes, nature abhors a vacuum. So when you have, essentially a decline in religion, an increase in the secular nature of society, for most people, they need something to fill that void.
And so they adopt a religion. It's not called a religion, but like but effectively like woke, the woke mind virus. It takes the place of religion. Yes. And they internalize it, and they feel it with religious fervor.
Yes. So And rigidity. Yes. Yes. And they you know, they essentially conduct, like, a holy war, effectively.
It's just not called a religion, but it is a religion. That was sort of a work holy war. And they're highly resistant to change as is normal for for for religions. So, now for myself, I'm I'm I sort of see myself as a sort of, you know, engineer, physicist. For me, I'm culturally Christian.
I grew up Christian. I mean, I was Anglican, was baptized. You know? I was went to Sunday school. Yeah.
Actually, oddly enough, I was sent to Hebrew preschool and Anglican Sunday school at the same time. So it was Habanagila one day, Jesus Eloh the next, which is, you know, to if you're 5 years old, it's fine. There's not there's you know? So, but I'm I'm not Jewish. It's just that my my father's 2 partners in his engineering firm were were I think it was went went to the same Hebrew preschool, and and it was near our house, so I just got sent there.
And so but but but, you know, I I I I, you know, I I maybe this will make me even more amused, but I I I have trouble sort of believing all these stories, these religious stories, but also a lot of people do. And, I respect people who wanna have religious views. I'm not trying to dissuade them from their religious views. But, anyway, I'm just I I guess the the operating system I have is is is a sort of a physics engineering operating system where I'm I I I try to understand as much as possible possible about reality. You know, in in physics, you're you're not supposed to believe everything anything absolutely.
You're you're supposed to question things. That's how you discover new physics. You know, in engineering, that's how you discover if your machine will work or not work. Will the rocket get to orbit? Will you know.
Yeah. You know, if you if your rocket is designed with, you know, physics in mind, correctly, it will get to orbit. And if it is not, it will not get to orbit, no matter what you believe, sister base. You can believe, you know, whether, it yeah. You know, it's like like I I meet a lot of people speaking of LA.
I meet a lot of people in LA who believe witchcraft is real, and that you can do spells. And that spells and witchcraft magic is real. I'm like, can you magic us to the moon? And no one has yet been able to magic us to the moon. Like, spells can't be that good, okay, if you can't I wanna go to the moon.
Let's go. How about Mars? And,
Speaker 0: So we we got to the moon the first time.
Speaker 1: We definitely went to the moon. I was like yes. We went to the moon. We didn't go to the moon we went to the moon several times.
Speaker 0: Right. Alright. Yeah. I just wanna check your view on that.
Speaker 1: We 100% went to the moon. What? I mean, I I know in-depth the technical designs of the rockets, the spacecraft, everything. Yes. What went right, what went wrong.
And, it it it was a remarkable piece of technology, like, incredible piece of technology for to go to the moon in 69. Yeah. That that that was, like reaching into the future and pulling the future forward, dramatically. And and it was an important ideological battle with communism, because they couldn't put a person on the moon and capitalism could.
Speaker 0: We did an interview a couple of weeks ago with a woman called Casey Means. She's a Stanford educated surgeon and really one of the most remarkable people I have ever met. In the interview, she explained how the food that we eat produced by huge food companies, big food in conjunction with pharma, is destroying our health, making this a weak and sick country. The levels of chronic disease are beyond belief. What Casey Means, who we've not stopped thought thinking about ever since, is the co founder of a health care technology company called Levels.
And we are proud to announce today that we are partnering with Levels. And by proud, I mean sincerely proud. Levels is a really interesting company and a great product. It gives you insight into what's going on inside your body, your metabolic health. It helps you understand how the food that you're eating, the things that you're doing every single day are affecting your body in real time.
You put stuff in your mouth, speaking for myself anyway, and you don't think about it. You have no idea what you're putting in your mouth and you have no idea what it's doing to your body. But over time, you feel weak and tired and spacey and over an even longer period of time, you can get really sick. So, it's worth knowing what the food you eat is doing to you. The levels app works with something called the continuous glucose monitor, CGM.
You can get one as part of the plan or you can bring your own. It doesn't matter. But the bottom line is big tech, big pharma, and big food combine together to form an incredibly malevolent force, pumping you full of garbage on healthy food with artificial sugars and hurting you and hurting the entire country. So with Levels, you'll be able to see immediately what all this is doing to you. You get access to real time personalized data, and that's a critical step to changing your behavior.
Those of us who like Oreos can tell you firsthand. This isn't talking to your doctor at an annual physical looking backwards about things you did in the past. This is up to the second information on how your body is responding to different foods and activities, the things that give you stress, your sleep, etcetera, etcetera. It's easy to use. It gives you powerful personalized health data, and then you can make much better choices about how you feel.
And over time, it'll have a huge effect. Right now, you can get an additional 2 free months when you go to levels.link/tucker. That's levels dot link slash Tucker. This is the beginning of what we hope will be a long and happy partnership with Levels and doctor Casey Means. Do you believe there's a power higher than people?
Speaker 1: Yeah. I mean, yeah. I mean, I think there's there's a lot we don't know. We don't we don't know like like, why does reality exist? Why where did it come from?
Where are the aliens? What questions should we ask that we don't even know to ask?
Speaker 0: So When you say what are the aliens, what do
Speaker 1: you think? Where are the aliens? Like, why don't we see them? A lot of people think we see aliens, but I I've not seen any evidence of aliens. You know, we've got 6,000 satellites in orbit, and not once have we had to maneuver around an alien spacecraft.
So
Speaker 0: But on this Earth, the US military has had to do a lot of maneuvering around objects they can't explain.
Speaker 1: Well, unidentified flying objects is one thing, but, I mean, there's always there's always a bunch of, classified programs that are underway, that of of new aircraft and new missiles and things. So that that are classified even within the military. So it's, you know, only, you know, the if you have the top secret compartmented clearance would you know about this new program. So then, you know, some pilot sees something fast moving fast and so say, yeah. I saw a UFO.
I'm like, yeah. That was actually a new weapons program, but we can tell you that. Should you But I I I if if you can guarantee that the split second I see any evidence of aliens, I will immediately post that on the x platform. And it'll probably be our number 1 post of all time.
Speaker 0: That'll be your biggest day Yes. For sure. I mean But but to the question of a power beyond people, beyond our consciousness, a creator, where are you on
Speaker 1: that? Well, we must have we must have come from somewhere. So I guess, you know, that there must be some creator or creative force or something that caused our exist existence to come into being. What is the nature of that creator? That I think is an unknown.
At least I I think it is it is this I I I I can't I don't know of a definitive answer to that. So
Speaker 0: But it sounds like you're open.
Speaker 1: Yes. I'm very open to, you know, I I I I'm I'm driven by curiosity. Yes. And I try to understand more about the nature of the universe. So my my my driving philosophy is, to understand the meaning of life or or really what questions to ask if the meaning of the life the meaning of life is is is not the right question.
Like, as, you know, Douglas Adams made the point in the Hitchhiker's Guide of the Galaxy that the, like, what is the meaning of life is probably not even the right question. So, you know, famously, the in in that book, the earth was actually a computer to figure out the question answer the question, what is the meaning of life? And then it came up with the answer 42, but then they're like, what does that mean? And it's like, oh, that's that's that's the answer, but the question is the really hard part, and you'll need a much bigger computer than earth to figure that one out. So so my philosophy is that we should try to expand the scope and scale of consciousness.
We should try to have more humans, more thinking, and, and perhaps there there's an argument even for machine consciousness.
Speaker 0: So let me just address those in order. So the first is you say we need more people and not commit civilizational suicide. It does seem like the US government, if you take 3 steps back, is pretty committed to making fewer Americans. Yeah. There's a lot of anti fertility propaganda.
A lot. Actually, that seems like their main sort of domestic social policy is convincing you not to have kids. What is that? I mean, that's certainly part of civilizational suicide.
Speaker 1: The the the environmental movement in the extreme is fundamentally misanthropic and anti human.
Speaker 0: Yes.
Speaker 1: They start seeing humans as a plague, a blight on the surface of the earth. That if that earth would be this paradise if only the humans weren't here. And some people actually have say this explicitly. There's there's there's the Extinctionist Society that is literally they they the this guy who's the head of the Extinctionist Society was on the front page of the New York Times quoted as saying, there are 8,000,000,000 people in the world. It would be better if there were none.
So there's some people who actually say that explicitly, which is is isn't completely insane. He's advocating a holocaust world of humanity. To utter madness, he should be condemned for such a statement, but he wasn't, for some reason. Now most people on the sort of, environmental movement have that implicitly. They're not they don't realize that they have that as their organization, but that is their actions, take us towards extinction.
So, a lot of people believe that the Earth can't sustain this level of human population, which is utterly untrue. It may seem in a crowded city that there are a lot of people, but actually, if you look down on an airplane and you say, look down, am I over a person at any given point in time when you're in an airplane? The answer is 99.9% of the time. No. But if you flew from LA to New York and say your your job is to drop a ball on someone and and hit them, you would fail.
You have to drop a
Speaker 0: lot of balls. You have to
Speaker 1: drop a lot of balls. It'd be insane. So, all of the humans on earth can fit on one floor in the city of New York. Yeah. The cross sectional area of of of all humans of 8,000,000,000 humans is small.
So we we have this totally wrong idea that, the earth is over over overpopulated where in fact it is underpopulated.
Speaker 0: How I mean, have you ever heard a politician say anything like that? Are there how many
Speaker 1: pro There's there's maybe a few
Speaker 0: prohuman politicians out there?
Speaker 1: Yeah. I mean, like, like Viktor Orban, Georgia Maloney Yes. Because we're starting to see pronatalist, politicians, and hopefully more as time goes by. I think there's a guy that just got elected in the Czech Republic who's also pronatalist. Now these have to translate into actual actions that change the birth rate or doesn't matter, and, so far I've not seen any country make a meaningful dent in the birth rate.
Speaker 0: What would you do if you were in charge of natalist policy?
Speaker 1: First of all, I changed the education, system so that people understand, that, you know, stop being taught that we're overpopulated. This is completely false. A lot of it comes from this insane, misanthropic book that Paul Ehrlich wrote,
Speaker 0: The Population Bomb. Like 60 years ago.
Speaker 1: Yeah. I hope he burns in hell, that guy. Seriously. Terrible human being. Total absolute mustn't throw.
And, and say just, look, the the earth can absolutely sustain this population. It could we could double or triple the population. There's a professor I was talking to at at Oxford, who who's his his math says we could 10 x the population, with without destroying the Amazon rainforest or anything terrible. So, so I think we should expand the human population and increase the scope and scale of consciousness so we can better understand, the nature of this universe, this wonderful universe, and and all the amazing things that exist. And and and so that's one of the things I'd like we need to stop teaching people false propaganda that the Earth is overpopulated.
I I think we need to, you know, especially with the education of women and manna, is when you stop scaring women that having a kid destroys your life, this is false. You know, we we terrify girls into saying that if you get pregnant, your life's over. This is this is what schools teach. And I agree we should not have teenage pregnancies. Yeah.
But but but, but actually having a child is one of the most delightful, happiness inducing things you possibly do. Of course. Of course. So there's, there's also, you know, with, hormonal birth control, I think, maybe a lot of women are unaware that hormonal birth control causes depression, and dramatically increases risk of suicide, and changes, their preferences on who they wanna marry or have kids with. It it it changes their personality.
And I just say this on the box, by the way. But then
Speaker 0: Caution may change your personality.
Speaker 1: Yes. If the warnings are, has significant cause significant risk of depression, significant increase in suicide, and will make you wanna go out with people that you don't actually like. That's actually true, by the way.
Speaker 0: I know.
Speaker 1: I'm not saying that people shouldn't use birth control. I think we should just be we shouldn't use I think hormonal birth control is making is making a lot of women sad and depressed. Yes. And they don't realize it, and they don't realize that's the cause. And and that, you know, there are other forms of contraception that could be used and that we should they should just read the just read the label on the box is what I'm saying.
Speaker 0: That was cons what she just said the warning label. That was, like, the most taboo thing you could ever say for most of my life was to offer any criticism at all of hormonal birth control.
Speaker 1: Look. I'm all I'm saying is read the warning label.
Speaker 0: Yeah. Fair. But why the pressure not to read the warning label? And just why are we giving it to 12 year olds to regulate their acne? Right.
Speaker 1: I I think we should give it to 12 year olds. We wish like kid kids, they don't know what's going on. So it's like, now, like, there are, you know, I think there there are other forms of birth control that I think are have fewer negative effects, than hormonal, but but that's we should just be aware that that that, this is not a riskless thing, and it does cause severe mood changes, it does dramatically increase risk of suicide and depression. So so just FYI, you know, just make sure you that that that there's full disclosure here and
Speaker 0: And do you want all
Speaker 1: of this? Label is all I'm saying. Just read, you know and and consider maybe other options for birth control. To any woman listening, just just just read the one label and consider other options. Because the reason you're the reason you're sad might be the the the birth control the hormonal birth control that is fundamentally changing the hormones in your body in ways that probably are not good for you.
And you I know women where where they stop taking birth control and their depression immediately disappears. So that's maybe worth a try. But then you miss an opportunity against the birth control.
Speaker 0: Then you don't you don't get to go on SSRIs.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Yeah. And s s s I I think the SSRIs are the devil.
Speaker 0: What? You don't think? I so vehemently agree with you. I I guess I guess once you endorse Trump, you can just say it all now. Right?
Speaker 1: No. I think I think selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors are, zombify people and change their personality and make them not who they are.
Speaker 0: Terrible. They're so common. Yes.
Speaker 1: I think we should revisit whether this is this is actually good. I disagree with the the SRIs are like, I'm not saying we should that no one should ever be subscribed to SRIs, but giving them out like candy is, crazy. You look at, like, as as sort of, antidepressant prescriptions in the United States versus other countries, and we're, like, way above everyone else. Oh, yeah.
Speaker 0: I have seen many, many times in my life in the news business after a mass shooting, like school, for example
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 0: Someone will say, well, what meds was the shooter on?
Speaker 1: Oh, yeah.
Speaker 0: Exactly. Immediately be shouted down as a crazy person, as a, you know, Bobby Kennedy level wacko Yes. Who should himself be institutionalized for even raising the question. I wasn't like, why wouldn't we want to know what meds are
Speaker 1: based on? Absolutely want to know what meds are on. Now sometimes it's it's it's perhaps they were on because they're they're like, some people do I I you know, I don't want to say it's like all one or all the other. I mean, there are there are people that have fundamental chemical imbalances in their brain. And if they don't take, medication to control, for example, paranoid schizophrenia, they will have paranoid schizophrenia.
For sure. And, and and I know many cases where people stop taking their, you know, meds and, and and lost their mind.
Speaker 0: Oh, yeah.
Speaker 1: And, and then try to try to kill people and stuff like that. Yeah. So it's or themselves.
Speaker 0: Well, the guy with the ax on Market Street probably should be on meds.
Speaker 1: That guy should we should try it. Yeah. It may you know, does he want ax motor more or less on a given med? You know, so so there there are psychiatric medications that I that where where the good outweighs that. Yeah.
I'm not saying that that doesn't exist. But we overprescribe psychiatric medication in the United States, obviously, obviously, far in excess of any other country, like, you know, way more than Canada or Britain or Japan or any anywhere. It's like we're off the charts on on psychiatric, medication prescriptions in the US.
Speaker 0: Why why don't people raise that point more often, I wonder, in public? I should. I'm I'm raising it. Yeah. You are.
You said that, our artificial intelligence, machine intelligence, might be a good thing. Where where are we on AI right now, AGI, right now? And what are your views?
Speaker 1: Well, I think at this point, it's obvious to everyone that AI is advancing at a very rapid pace.
Speaker 0: Yes.
Speaker 1: You can see it with the new capabilities that come out every month or every week every week sometimes. You know, you AI at this point can write a better essay than probably 90%, maybe 95% of all humans. Say write an essay on any given subject. AI right now can can beat the vast majority of humans. If you say draw an image, draw a picture, it can draw it like, if you try, say, mid midjourney, which is the aesthetics of midjourney are incredible, it will draw it will create incredible images, that are better than, again, like 90 percent of artists.
It's just objectively the case. And it'll do it immediately, like, 30 seconds later. We're also starting to see, AI movies, so you're starting to see, you know, short films with AI, AI music creation, and the rate at which we're increasing AI compute is exponential, hyper exponential, so there's dramatically more AI compute coming on online every every month. You know, there seems to be roughly I don't know. The the amount of AI compute coming online is increasing at, like, I don't know, quote, roughly 500% a year.
And like it's like that's likely to continue for several years. And then the specification of the AI algorithms is also improving, so bringing online a massive amount of AI compute and also improving the efficiency of the compute and and what and and like what what the AI software can do. It's quite so it's it's quantitative and qualitative improvement. So the you know, I might I think next year will you'll be able to ask AI, so certainly by the end of next year, make a short movie about something, or, you know, probably can do at least a 15 minute, you know, show or something like that. So, yeah, it's advancing very rapidly.
My top concern for AI safety is that we're we need to have a maximally truth seeking AI. So the this is the most important thing for AI safety, in my opinion. You know the the the central lesson that say Arthur C. Clarke was trying to convey in 2001 A Space Odyssey was that you shouldn't force AI to lie. So in that book, the, the AI was told to take the astronauts to the monolith, but they also could not know about the monolith.
It resolved that, quandary by killing them and taking them to the monolith, or didn't kill all of them, killed most of them. That's why hell, hell would not open the pod bay doors. Right. So, very important to have truth seeking AIs. Now and and what what I actually see with the AIs that are being developed is that they're being programmed with the warped mind virus.
Speaker 0: So the lying is baked in?
Speaker 1: Yes. And we saw this on display very clearly with the release of Google Gemini Yes. Where you would ask for a picture of the founding fathers of the United States, and it would show a group of diverse women. And, you know, dressed in in with with sort of
Speaker 0: 18th century garb. Powdered wigs. Yeah. But from Saint Lucia.
Speaker 1: Yeah. I mean, like, look. If I understand if you say, like, show me a group of people.
Speaker 0: For sure.
Speaker 1: If and it shows a group of people, I mean, that's totally fine. But if you say this if you say this very specifically, the the founding fathers of the United States, which were, you know, a group of white dudes, then you should show them, like, and and with and and what they actually look like, because you've asked for something which is a a a fact from history. But it didn't, it was it was programmed with the work of my virus so so much that it it actually, even though it knew the truth, it it produced a lie. Now, of course, then then people really started playing with it and said, okay, now now show me a group of often SS officers in World War 2. Turns out they were also a group of divorced women, according to Gemini.
Speaker 0: All the black Nazi ladies.
Speaker 1: Yeah. It's like it's like, wow. I didn't realize that. Yeah. It's not what I expected.
So, you know What's
Speaker 0: also not what happened?
Speaker 1: It's not what happened. So it's it's just it the the AI is is producing a lie, and, and that, you know, then that like, one of the questions that people that people asked was like, which is worse, global thermonuclear war or misgendering Caitlyn Jenner? And said misgendering Caitlyn Jenner is worse. Now Caitlyn Jenner It kills kills fewer people. Yeah.
To Caitlyn Jenner to her credit, said, no, please misgender me. That is far more preferable than World War Global Thermonuclear War, we all die. But but to have a, you know, a production release AI say stuff like that is concerning. Because if if if this becomes, like, all powerful, and it's and it still has this programming, where misgendering is worse than nuclear war. Well, it could conclude that the way to ensure that there's there can never be any misgendering is to eliminate all humans.
With now, prob if, like, optimization is probability of misgendering is 0, no no humans, no misgendering. Problem solved.
Speaker 0: Now back to Arthur c Clark, who's Exactly. Pretty prescient.
Speaker 1: Yes. So that's why I think the most important thing is to have a maximally truth seeking AI. That's why I started XAI, and that's our goal with Grok. Now people will point out cases where Grok gets it wrong, but we try to correct it as quickly as possible.
Speaker 0: But maybe even a bigger problem is that when you make decisions that affect people you want those decisions to be informed by love of people
Speaker 1: yeah
Speaker 0: and machines are incapable of love yeah
Speaker 1: I mean they're they're they certainly are okay. They're they're capable of you can program a machine to be philanthropic rather than misanthropic. Yes.
Speaker 0: But don't don't instincts shape decisions, particularly decisions you can't plan for? I mean, if I ask you, you know, a question about one of your children, every answer you give is gonna be shaped by your love for that child and that's why you know, that that's what makes us decent parents in the end is that that instinct, which is love. And if a machine has any power over us without that animating instinct, won't it def by definition hurt us?
Speaker 1: Yeah. Well, whether whether I mean, I don't know. It we should certainly aspire to program the AI philanthropically, not misanthropically. Yes. And to have like I said, we wanted to be truthful and cure curious and to foster humanity into the future.
And, yeah. That's what we want obviously.
Speaker 0: Is there any way, I guess, to set limits on the decisions that machines can make that affect human lives and make certain that there's some trigger in the system that inserts a human being into the decision making process.
Speaker 1: Well, the look. The the reality of what's happening, whether one likes it or not, is that we're building super intelligent AIs, hyper like hyper intelligent, like intelligent more intelligent than we can comprehend. Yes. So I I'd like in this to, like let's say you have a child that is a super genius child, that that you know is gonna be much smarter than you. Then what can you do?
You you can instill good values in how you raise that child. Yeah. Even though you know it's gonna be far smarter than you, you can make sure it's got good values, philanthropic values, good morals, you know, honest, you know, productive, that kind of thing. Controlling, at the end of the day, I I don't know if I don't think we'll be able to control it. So I think the best we can do is make sure it grows up well.
Speaker 0: You've been saying that for a long time.
Speaker 1: Yes. I've been saying it for a
Speaker 0: long time. Yes. Are you still as worried about it as you seemed to be 2 years ago when I asked you about it?
Speaker 1: Well, I I think that but my guess is, like, look, it's it's it's 80% likely to be good, maybe 90. So can look think of a glass as 80% full. It's probably gonna be it's probably gonna be great, but there's some chance
Speaker 0: of annihilation. And you say the chance of annihilation is 20%? 10 to 20%, something like that. How concerned is Sam Altman about annihilation, do you think?
Speaker 1: I think in reality, he's not concerned about it. I don't trust OpenAI. I mean, I you know, I started that company as a non profit open source.
Speaker 0: Yes.
Speaker 1: The Open in OpenAI I named the company I named the company Yeah. OpenAI as an open source, but, and it is now extremely closed source and and maximizing profit. So does risk I don't understand how you actually go from being a an open source nonprofit to a closed source for maximum profit organization. I'm missing
Speaker 0: Well, but Sam often got rich, didn't he?
Speaker 1: At various points, he's claimed not to be getting rich, but he's claimed many things that were false. And now, apparently, he's gonna get $10,000,000,000 of stock or something like that. So, I don't trust Sam Altman. And I and I don't think we wanna have the most powerful AI in the world controlled by someone who is not trustworthy. And sorry.
I just don't I mean
Speaker 0: But that that seems like a fair concern. Yeah. But but you don't think as someone who knows him and has dealt with him that he is worried about the possibility this could get out of control and hurt people?
Speaker 1: He will say those words. Yeah. But no.
Speaker 0: If AI did if it became clear to the rest of us that it was out of control and posed a threat to humanity, would there be any way to
Speaker 1: stop it? I hope so. I mean, if you have multiple
Speaker 0: AIs and
Speaker 1: ones that are hopefully, you have the AIs that are pro human be stronger than the AIs that are not.
Speaker 0: Battle of the AIs? Yeah.
Speaker 1: Yeah. I mean, that that is how it is with, say, chess these days. The the, like, the AI chess programs is vastly better than any human, and comprehensively better, meaning, like, we can't even understand why it made that move.
Speaker 0: In fact, why they're so good. Right? Yeah.
Speaker 1: We we don't even know why it made it. Well, it'll make a move. We don't even know why it made the move. So and in fact, some of the moves will seem like blunders, but then turn out to checkmate. So and for, you know, for for a while, there there was there was some, the the best human chess players with the best computers could beat just a computer.
And then it got to the point where if you added a human, it it just made everything worse. And then it was just AI, but it's just computer programs versus computer programs. That's that's where things are headed in general.
Speaker 0: What I mean Sweet dreams. At what point So
Speaker 1: I don't know. I I think we just gotta make sure, like I said, make sure we instill good values in the AI. What's everyone gonna do for a living? I mean, in a benign AI scenario, that is probably the biggest challenge is how do you find meaning if AI is better than you at everything?
Speaker 0: Yeah. That's the benign scenario. That's the good news?
Speaker 1: Well, yeah. But I I guess, you know, for for a lot of people like the idea of retiring and, you know,
Speaker 0: Really? Are you looking forward to it?
Speaker 1: No. Not me. I I'd like to hope, I'd like to think that I I'd like to be doing useful things. Do
Speaker 0: you think it's a universal desire? It's it's
Speaker 1: it's not it's not universal in that there are certainly I know many people who prefer to be retired, that they prefer to, sort of have not have responsibilities and engage in leisure activities. So, I mean, we're and we're on the cusp of of this. It's it's really a remarkable time to exist. Well, I tell you, like, one of the ways I I I sort of was able to sort of sleep and reconcile myself to, to this is that I I thought, well, would I prefer to be alive and see the advent of digital superintelligence, or would I would I prefer to be alive at a different time and not see it? I guess I'm like, well, I guess I'd prefer to be alive to see if it's gonna happen, I'd prefer to be alive to see it happen out of curiosity.
And then I was like, well, let's say you knew for sure it would, kill everyone. Would you but you you could now now you could shift back in time. Like, I guess I'd wanna be near the end of my life or something before that happened, but I would at at the end of the day, it's like, if, if it's gonna happen, and there's nothing you do about it, hypothetically, would you prefer to see it or not see it? And I guess I I guess if it's gonna happen, I would prefer to see it rather than not see it.
Speaker 0: Yeah. But as a man of action, why not convince Trump to make you secretary of defense and then just nuke AI?
Speaker 1: I I I think I would certainly push for a having some kind of regulatory body that at least has insight into what, these companies are doing, and it can ring the alarm bell even if we don't have a regulation or rule. So I'm not I'm not someone who wants to get rid of all regulatory agencies or anything. I think we've got we've there's the right number of regulations, right number of regulators Yeah. And we've gone we've gone too far. Just like if you in a football game, if you had too many referees on the field, it would be weird.
Like, you can't throw the pass because you hit a referee. Exactly. Then there's too many referees. So, but but no. But if you like to say, look at any pro sports game, they all have referees.
But, like, the teams could decide we're gonna have we're we're gonna not have referees. That could be a thing. But but every sports game, they have refs to make sure that the rules are followed, and and it's it's a better game if if you have
Speaker 0: Well, we have cops too.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Yeah. Exactly. Cops are the referees. So, I think we for for something that is a danger to the public or potential danger to the public, we we have referees.
We have regulators. You know? So, like the FDA and the FAA and, you know, various regulatory agencies, they were they were established because aircraft were falling out of the sky, and and some manufacturers were not, you know, building high quality aircraft. They're cutting corners, and then few will die. And, you know, for food and drugs that some manufacturers were making low quality drugs, and so they that they're they're lying to people.
So saying that something cured them when it killed them. To FDA to, you know, regulators to referees to try to make you make sure that this this, drug manufacturers are truthful. Now, I I do think it mostly works, and I think it's doesn't mean we don't need regulatory reform. We do reform we do, but, I I don't think we should have no regulators in in AI given that it's potential existential risk.
Speaker 0: Weird that everything is regulated.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 0: I mean, you said you're being sued by the Department of Justice for hiring more asylum seekers for your high-tech company. Yeah.
Speaker 1: Even though it's a legal process to hire some seekers.
Speaker 0: Right. So, so they're watching everything, regulating everything, controlling everything, including our thoughts. Right? That's why they're opposed to free speech, but they're not meaningfully regulating AI which will eliminate, like, the purpose for most people's lives and could kill us all. It's a little weird.
Yeah.
Speaker 1: I think we should have some
Speaker 0: But why don't we I guess
Speaker 1: something above nothing.
Speaker 0: In that range.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 0: But why don't we?
Speaker 1: I don't know. You know, I I all the way back, like, I I I during the Obama presidency, I I I you know, I met with Obama many times, but usually in, like, group settings, the the one one on one meeting I had with Obama in Oval Office, I said, look, the one thing that we really need to do is set up an at the beginnings of an AI regulatory agency. And it can start with insight where, you know, you don't you don't just come shooting from the hip throwing out regulations, you just start with insight, where the the AI regulatory committee, simply goes in to understand what all the companies are doing, insight. And then proposes rules that all the AI companies agree to follow, just like, you know, sports teams in the NFL, you know, you have proposed rules for football that everyone agrees to follow, that makes the game better. You know?
So that that's the way to do it. But nothing came of it. What did he say when he said that to him? I mean, he seemed to, like, kind of agree, but but also people didn't realize what what what the where AI was headed at that at that time. You know?
So AI seemed like some super futuristic Yeah. For sure. Sci fi, basically. So and, like, I'm telling you, this is gonna be smarter than the smartest human, and, my predictions are coming absolutely true. And, so we need to have some insight here just to make you know, make sure that these companies aren't cutting corners, doing dangerous things.
But Google kinda con controlled the the White House at that time, and and they they did not want any regulatory Well,
Speaker 0: that's it. I mean, you never see politicians turn down opportunities to become more powerful, which is the point in regulation. It makes them more powerful.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 0: So it sounds like regulatory capture then.
Speaker 1: Well, yeah. I mean, the CIO of the the YS at the time was ex Google person. So, they they put the brakes on any AI regulation. And we still don't have any AI regulation at the federal level. That's amazing.
So I I think we should have something above nothing. Like I said, at least insight. Where even even if there's no there's no rule that's been break broken, they can at least say, hey, we we have insight into what this company are doing or that company is doing, and we're concerned.
Speaker 0: That would be helpful to know. Yeah. Instead, politically motivated liars are in charge of the future. It seems a little Yeah. Sketchy.
Last question. You you really kind of pulled out a lot of stops to help Trump. You're on stage yesterday. If he gets selected, will you continue to help him
Speaker 1: Yeah. Now? Absolutely. So we've talked about, kind of a a government efficiency commission or the Department of Government Efficiency, which is funny.
Speaker 0: What what percent?
Speaker 1: Sorry. I was laughing. It's what
Speaker 0: I love it. You you managed to make it sound a little sinister. Government efficiency. What percentage of Google employees did you can when you got there? You mean Twitter?
Rather. I beg your pardon. Sorry. You I just you've just been talking about Google. Twitter.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Yeah. Well, we we we're about 80%. And and we've we've actually, improved the features and functionality of the site more in the past year and a half than the last, I don't know, 8 years with 20% of the staff.
Speaker 0: So Just for I just wanna throw that for context. So you've talked to Trump about
Speaker 1: Yeah. Yeah. Information? Yeah. Which is he has mentioned publicly several times, and he's very supportive of having some kind of, you know, government efficiency commission, can call it Department of Government Efficiency, Doge.
I kinda like Doge. It's more it's more fun. Yeah. And, where we just take a look at at at all the federal agencies and say, do we really need whatever it is, 428 federal agencies? Because there's so many that people have never even heard of or and that have overlapping areas of responsibility we should I don't know.
Probably, we should get I mean, there there are more federal agencies than there are years since the establishment of the United States, which means that we've created more than 1 federal agency per year on average. That seems a lot. That's a lot. That's a lot. So we should have that seems crazy.
I think we should be able to get away with, 99 agencies. I don't know. That seems to a lot like a lot of agencies. It's a lot.
Speaker 0: Yeah. Yeah. 2 per state.
Speaker 1: That's a lot. Yeah, exactly. We should have fewer agencies. And, and they certainly shouldn't have overlapping responsibilities. And and then we we need some kind of we just need a review of regulations to say which ones are sensible and which ones are not.
Because because if you've got regulators, every year they're gonna add more regulations, just automatic. Like like, they're just output regulations, and and then and there's more laws and regulations every year until basically everything's legal, so we can't get anything done. So we need some kind of garbage collection for regulations that don't make sense. I think I'm saying very obvious things.
Speaker 0: You're you are saying obvious things.
Speaker 1: Yeah. So that's Which will
Speaker 0: be very unpopular things.
Speaker 1: Yeah. I'll probably need if if this happens, quite a significant security team. So because because someone might literally go postal on me from the post office.
Speaker 0: But in the meantime, you've got America PAC Yeah. That is encouraging voting for the next month. Am I summarizing correctly?
Speaker 1: Yeah. I I mean, I formed America PAC, really to support core values that I believe in, which are, I think, again, very obvious centrist positions, which is, like, we in America, I think we want safe cities, secure borders, sensible spending. Tell me where I'm going for right here. You know, we wanna, have the right to self protection. We we should respect the constitution and not try to break the constitution.
It's there for a reason. And, you know, we we should stop law fair. I I kinda listed these out. These are all listed on the America PAC website. People can go look at the America PAC website, to the americapac.org, and see if there's anything they disagree with, or where perhaps we should modify these goals.
But I think these are good goals to have. They, they're certainly part of the oh, and right to free speech, you know, first amendment. If we don't have free speech, we don't have democracy because people cannot make an informed vote. So those are my controversial views. And, you know, and and look, I I I don't think either party I don't think the Republicans are perfect.
I don't think obviously, right now, I more Republican than Democrat, but it's not like I think the Republican Party is perfect or or is is without issues. But we've got a choice between 2 candidates. And I think on balance, it's a no brainer, to vote for Trump. And if we don't vote for Trump, I think we're at serious risk of losing our democracy and becoming a one party state where, there isn't an election anymore. There's only a democratic primary like there
Speaker 0: is in California. Elon Musk, thank you.
Speaker 1: You're welcome.
reSee.it AI Summary
A team of current and former Musk employees took charge of OPM on January 20, coinciding with Trump's inauguration. They've set up sofa beds on the fifth floor near the director's office to facilitate around-the-clock work, as access to that area requires special security clearance.
@zerohedge - zerohedge
"A team including current and former employees of Musk assumed command of OPM on Jan. 20, the day Trump took office. They have moved sofa beds onto the fifth floor of the agency's headquarters, which contains the director's office and can only be accessed with a security badge or a security escort, one of the OPM employees said.... The sofa beds have been installed so the team can work around the clock, the employee said." RTRS
reSee.it AI Summary
I just learned that Elon's efficiency team saved taxpayers $44.6M by terminating 22 government leases for empty federal buildings in under a week. They're moving agencies to existing spaces and have 7,500 leases still under review. Exciting progress!
@MarioNawfal - Mario Nawfal
🚨🇺🇸 DOGE CUTS QUICK: $45M SAVED BY DUMPING EMPTY FEDERAL BUILDINGS Elon's efficiency team terminated 22 government leases in less than a week, moving agencies from ghost buildings to existing space. The moves saved taxpayers $44.6M, up from $1.6M just days ago. And they're just getting started - with 7,500 federal leases under review. Source: @DOGE
@elonmusk - Elon Musk
We must defeat bureaucracy
@bennyjohnson - Benny Johnson
There are 150-year-olds receiving Social Security. Let that sink in… Elon Musk: "I think they're probably dead, is my guess, or they should be very famous, one of the two." https://t.co/XGIuOKJrvd
Video Transcript AI Summary
Social Security needs a closer look. We're finding people listed as recipients who are 50 years old, but I don't know anyone that age receiving benefits. They'd be incredibly old, practically setting a world record. It seems likely many of these individuals have passed away, or they would be very well known. There's a clear problem with the accuracy of the records.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: You know, there's crazy things like just cursory examination of Social Security, and we've got people in there that are 50 years old. Now do you know anyone who is a hundred and 50? I don't know. Okay? This they they should be on the Guinness Book of World Records.
They're missing out. So, you know, that's a case where, like, I think they're probably dead. It's my guess. Or or they should be very famous. One of the two.
reSee.it AI Summary
I recently learned that the U.S. government's retirement paperwork for federal employees is processed in a limestone mine built in the 1950s. It's quite astonishing that the process relies on manual labor, with over 700 workers operating 230 feet underground to handle around 10,000 applications each month. The paperwork is stored in manila envelopes and cardboard boxes, and the entire retirement process can take several months. The speed of retiring federal employees is limited by the elevator shaft used to transport the paperwork.
@AutismCapital - Autism Capital 🧩
🚨BREAKING: Elon Musk says that there is a literal limestone mine where they store all the US Government's retirement paperwork built in 1950 that they need to go up and down every time they want to retire someone from Federal Government. The speed in which they can retire people is limited by the speed of the elevator shaft. Yes, actually.
Video Transcript AI Summary
We're streamlining the federal bureaucracy, aiming to reduce the workforce. We found a surprising bottleneck: the retirement process. Currently, the maximum number of retirements per month is capped at 10,000 due to a completely manual, paper-based system. The paperwork is stored in a 1950s-era limestone mine, and the speed of the mine shaft elevator limits processing. This antiquated system employs thousands of people whose efforts could be far better utilized elsewhere. The situation is absurd; we need to modernize this process immediately. Imagine the increased efficiency and contribution to the country's goods and services if these employees were redeployed.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: You know, one of the things is, like, we're we we are trying to sort of right size the the federal bureaucracy just to make sure that this obviously, need to there needs to be a lot of people working for federal government, but not as many as currently. So we're saying, well, okay. Well, let's if if people can retire, you know, with full benefit benefits and everything, that that would be good. They can retire, get their retirement payments, everything. And then we were told this is actually, I think, a great anecdote, because we were told the the the most number of people that could retire possibly in a month is 10,000.
We're like, well, why why is that? Well, because all the all the retirement paperwork is manual on paper. It's manually calculated, then written down on a piece of paper, then it goes down a mine. And, like, what do you mean a mine? Like, yeah.
There's a limestone mine where we store all the retirement paperwork that look and you look at picture of this at a picture of this mine, we'll post some pictures afterwards. And this this mine looks like something out of the fifties because it was started in 1955. So it looks like it's like a time warp. And then the the speed the the limiting factor is the speed at which the mine shaft elevator can move determines how many people can retire from the federal federal government. And the elevator breaks down and then sometimes, and then you can't nobody can retire.
Doesn't that sound crazy? There's like a thousand people that work on this. So I think if if we take those people and say, like, you know what? Instead of working in a in a mine shaft in, carrying Manila envelopes to, you know, boxes in a mine shaft, you could do practically anything else. And you you would add to the the goods and services of The United States, in in a more useful way.
@AutismCapital - Autism Capital 🧩
@RapidResponse47 - Rapid Response 47
Yes, the retirement paperwork for federal employees is processed in a limestone mine from the 1950s. This is why we need @DOGE. https://t.co/QwPK9X8I4b
@AutismCapital - Autism Capital 🧩
@DOGE - Department of Government Efficiency
Federal employee retirements are processed using paper, by hand, in an old limestone mine in Pennsylvania. 700+ mine workers operate 230 feet underground to process ~10,000 applications per month, which are stored in manila envelopes and cardboard boxes. The retirement process takes multiple months.
@elonmusk - Elon Musk
Maybe it’s just me, but I think there is room for improvement here
@DOGE - Department of Government Efficiency
Federal employee retirements are processed using paper, by hand, in an old limestone mine in Pennsylvania. 700+ mine workers operate 230 feet underground to process ~10,000 applications per month, which are stored in manila envelopes and cardboard boxes. The retirement process takes multiple months.
@libsoftiktok - Libs of TikTok
BREAKING: Michelle King, Acting head of the Social Security Administration RESIGNS after dispute with DOGE staff - NYP Yesterday Elon Musk revealed there were nearly 20 million dead people on the Social Security database https://t.co/lqcjEqwQwx
@elonmusk - Elon Musk
Those who do not take this email seriously will soon be furthering their career elsewhere
@MarioNawfal - Mario Nawfal
REP. TIM BURCHETT: ELON'S 'WHAT DID YOU DO LAST WEEK?' EMAIL IS A GREAT IDEA “I think [challenging federal employees on their accomplishments] is a great idea. You do it in private business all the time. You have to have accountability. You have to show your work, you have to show what you've done. Now, we're saying the federal government should do the same. Some folks are upset about it. Obviously they're upset, because they can't show what they've done because they probably haven't done much. I've been contacted by people who are very upset that they have to go back to work because they've moved. They don't even live in the area anymore, but they thought they could work from home. The post-Covid days are over. We need to get people back to work. We need to show what they're doing, and we need to show the efficiencies of government, which has not been done in quite some time.” Source: NewsNation, February 23, 2025, @RepTimBurchett
Video Transcript AI Summary
I think it's a great idea to challenge federal employees on their accomplishments. Private businesses do this all the time to ensure accountability and show the work that's been done. The federal government should do the same. Some people are upset because they probably haven't done much and can't show their work.
I've been contacted by people upset that they have to go back to work because they've moved and assumed they could work from home indefinitely. The post-COVID days are over. We need to get people back to work, show what they're doing, and demonstrate government efficiencies, which haven't been done in a while.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: What's your reaction to challenging federal employees on their accomplishments and how that's now being asked to thousands, tens of thousands of people across the country through social media?
Speaker 1: I think it's a great idea. You do it in private business all the time. You have to have accountability. You have to show your work. You have to show what you've done.
And now we're saying the federal government should do the same, and and some folks are upset about it. Obviously, they're upset because they can't show what they've done because they probably haven't done much. They're mad because they have to go back to work. I've been contacted by people that have are very upset that they have to go back to work because they've moved. They don't even live in the area anymore, but they thought they could work from home.
And, you know, the the post COVID days are over. We need to get people back to work. We need to show what they're doing, and we need to show the efficiencies of government, which have not been done in quite some time.
@MarioNawfal - Mario Nawfal
🚨🇺🇸BREAKING: ELON AND DOGE HIT FEDERAL WORKERS WITH ‘WHAT DID YOU DO LAST WEEK?’ EMAIL All federal employees just received a blunt email from ‘HR’—demanding proof of work under DOGE. Elon’s new order? Federal workers must list 5 accomplishments per week—no attachments, no… https://t.co/wOg5hbchOI
@nataliegwinters - Natalie Winters
🚨 Unelected bureaucrats are setting up “encrypted Signal chats, Zoom calls and Instagram accounts to share information and plan future actions” on how to resist Trump. https://t.co/ZpqyXAIOct
reSee.it AI Summary
Elon Musk recently sent an email to federal workers asking them to list five accomplishments from the previous week. This initiative aims to identify non-existent employees potentially collecting paychecks fraudulently. Musk warned that failing to respond could be seen as resignation. In another topic, I learned that over 85% of grass-fed beef in stores is imported due to the repeal of the Country of Origin Labeling Law in 2015. Good Ranchers promises transparency, offering meat sourced entirely from the USA, free from antibiotics, hormones, and harmful additives.
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
REPORT: Elon Musk just revealed the real reason for his “What did you do this week?” email—and it’s nothing short of brilliant. Musk instructed federal workers to outline five things they accomplished last week. While it was a move to weed out lazy employees, the real goal was to identify workers who don’t exist. Musk explained: “In some cases, we believe non-existent people or the identities of dead people are being used to collect paychecks. In other words, there is outright fraud.” The email came with a stern warning: failure to respond would be considered a resignation. Let’s see who actually responds. If Musk is right, we could be looking at a massive revelation—there may be far more non-existent people receiving government paychecks than anyone imagined.
Video Transcript AI Summary
Elon Musk asked federal workers to detail their weekly achievements via email, or face resignation. He suspects many employees are lazy, not checking emails, or possibly nonexistent, leading to potential fraud.
COVID has exacerbated work-from-home laziness, with people getting away with doing minimal work. It's ridiculous to have to send an email to prove you're working. The real issue is the amount of fraud. Fake positions are created to pay people through the back door. These positions often involve roles with vague responsibilities. If you can take federal holidays off, you're replaceable.
Switching gears, if you want top-quality, 100% American meat delivered to your door, check out Good Ranchers. Their rib eyes and fillets are perfectly trimmed. You can get free choice of meat in every box until 02/2026. Go to goodranchers.com/vnn for $25 off, free shipping, and a free gift of meat in every box.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: The real reason for his what did you do this week email. You guys have heard all about this. The media has been crying. Why? Why?
Why do we have to send an email to prove that we have real jobs? It's so ridiculous. Well, Doge head Elon Musk has revealed the most pressing reason why he instructed an email to be sent out this weekend to federal workers asking them to file a short report explaining what they achieved last week. As we highlighted yesterday, Musk fired off the email adding that failure to respond will be taken as a resignation. It's kind of funny.
In a follow-up post, Musk explained that it has become clear that so many workers are so lazy that they're not even checking their emails. In addition, Musk noted that there is a distinct possibility that many workers don't even exist and that the federal paychecks are being siphoned off in a massive fraud scheme. In some cases, we believe nonexistent people or the identities of dead people are being used to collect paychecks. In other words, there is outright fraud, Musk explained in a tweet. And this was in in respond to here's the email.
Please respond to this email with approximately five bullet points of what you accomplished last week and cc your manager. Okay, Mike. You and I have actually been talking about this. We we hire a lot of people. We work with a lot of people across quite a few different networks and agencies.
Vigilant, obviously, being the most important here. Mhmm. But it is remarkable. Like, how many people just in the modern workforce don't check their email? Like, as if which which means two things.
Either they weren't trained in it, which wouldn't make sense for the government. Of course, they'd be given a government, you know, email and they'd be, you know, on a secure server. Or b, they just don't give a shit. Right? Yeah.
People that don't check their their communications, it's not because yeah. It's not because of any reason, the fact that they're lazy. He's right. He's he's he's gotten big companies and we have a serious problem with people just being damn right lazy.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Well, I think that after COVID, I think people got so used to working from home and they've really been riding that that that gravy train for a long time. And you see us all the time even with the people who are in New York or who are in The Bay who who work in tech. Even once you go into the office, most of these people go into the office and they get an acai bowl and then they do office yoga and then they I don't know, have a a gripe session with their or like a gossip session with their coworkers. So no work is actually being done, but I think that COVID working from home actually exacerbated this problem.
But now, Elon, yeah, as you mentioned, is is is giving the or the unrealistic expectation that people actually have to do their jobs and then people are freaking out about it. But, you know, I mean the the like, this was bound to happen eventually. It was it was just a matter of time and, know, now it's finally happening and then now everyone's throwing a big fit about it. So
Speaker 0: Well, it's just so stupid. I mean, he asked you to send an email. Yeah. Like, I mean, everyone's made the point, but I do think this showcases how much actual fraud there is. If if someone in a senior level position is complaining about this, then I can guarantee you at the at the top of of the list, it's fraud.
Right? There's so much fraud going on. And this is what I think happens. This is where I think people are mad. I think I think, Mike, that the way that people are secured back end deals by doing favors is they give them fake positions and they get paid.
So it's like, hey Yeah. I can't give you $50,000 transferred into your bank account, but I can get you a $65,000 a year job and get you residual payments for like $5,200, you know, a month or whatever before taxes. Mhmm. And then you don't have to do anything because it's it's in some some vague department. So I do think there's a lot of pay for play scheming going on here and I don't think that they asked this question just to be a dick.
It was actually because they saw the fraud and were like, we gotta expose this.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Exactly. Yeah. And I mean, as I was saying earlier, mean, it's like that office space joke. It's like Yeah.
So so what would you say that you actually do here? Because I mean, you know, even even working corporate America, I remember one of my first corporate jobs going in there, like, seems like a lot of positions are just made up. It'll be like assistant director to the regional manager, adviser, like, it's just stuff that like isn't needed, but obviously when it's getting paid for by the taxpayer, it's not a private business where you have to make sure that you're making money because they always have a taxpayer that can bail them out. So it's different.
Speaker 0: Like, if you get president's day off, you don't have a real job. Because that means you're replaceable. Like, if you can just take federal holidays off Mhmm. Like, if if your job doesn't require, like, planning to take time off, you don't have a real job. And I mean that genuinely, like, you're replaceable, so you should be careful.
Doesn't mean you're not doing real work. It just means that, you know, you're replaceable. Now, obviously, that being said, guys, listen to this. You guys know that we're all trying to be healthy around here, and you gotta skip the takeout. Summer's coming, and you gotta have high quality meals, particularly protein.
What if I was to tell you about the top quality 100% American meat that you can get straight to your table without even having to go to the store? You know, Good Ranchers, I've been using it for a while with my family. I got my new I got one of those black stones, you know, the they're they're what are they called? What's the top called?
Speaker 1: The flat top?
Speaker 0: Yeah. It's the flat grill. Yeah. It's the flat top. Right?
And I'm pretty sure they're made of cast iron. And, oh my gosh. When you get the rib eyes and the fillets from Good Ranchers, they're perfectly trimmed, have the the exact right amount of marbleization. I hit it with k. This is this is my go to.
I know this might be not be everyone. So I put a little Worcestershire sauce. Right? Is that how you say it? Worcestershire?
Speaker 1: Yeah. Well, it's debatable, but
Speaker 0: Yeah. Worcester sauce, right, for a binder. Then I put on this is this new dry butter seasoning from Costco that I've been using for a couple years, but it's like so it has no calories, so I don't have to actually use the butter. Right? It's kind of like keep keep the calories off.
The dry butter seasoning with a little bit of salt, little bit of pepper, And then I throw it on the grill, flip it over, do it, you know, a double sear. And then I add some some sugar free teriyaki sauce. And I do that with some asparagus, some corn. Okay. I've had steaks before.
And the only place I could say that probably had steaks that tasted this good was at Eddie V's or maybe capital grill
Speaker 1: Mhmm. Which is
Speaker 0: pretty damn good.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Really good. Yeah. Yeah.
Speaker 0: Okay. But the reason why this food's even better is it's hormone free, antibiotic free, and with some of their other foods that might have, you know, like their chicken nuggets, it's actually seed oil free, which is huge. Now right now, you can get free choice of meat in every box until 02/2026. So whether it's salmon, ground beef, or chicken breast in every box until 02/2020 head to goodranchers.com/vnn, g 0 0 d r a n c h e r s Com / v n n, and claim this offer. Plus, get $25 off and free express shipping on your order.
It's so amazing and it's all grass fed. So look, chicken, salmon, whatever you want. But I've been I've been on the steak kick. If you want perfectly cut, perfect marbleization, the best quality meat delivered to your door, come on. That's easy, easy, easy peasy.
Go to goodranchers.com/vnn, promo code v n n, for $25 off your order, free shipping, and free gift of meat in every box. It's awesome, man. I oh, I'm getting hungry.
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
Did you know over 85% of the grass-fed beef in stores is imported? That’s because the Country of Origin Labeling Law was repealed in 2015. So now, meat can be packaged here in the US and earn a “Product of USA” label, even if it was born, raised, and harvested overseas. The truth is, much of the meat on the grocery store shelves is filled with things you don’t want—antibiotics, hormones, questionable origins, and even harmful seed oils. But at Good Ranchers, transparency isn’t just a buzzword; it’s a promise. All products at Good Ranchers have trustworthy ingredients. Their meat is born, raised, and harvested right here in the USA, so you know exactly where it comes from. It’s free from hidden additives – there are no antibiotics ever, no added hormones, and no seed oils. Just one simple ingredient you can read—and that’s meat. Subscribe to any box at GoodRanchers.com/VNN and use promo code VNN to get $25 off plus a free gift of chicken breasts, ground beef, or salmon for a year plus free express shipping. Taste the difference in meat quality for yourself at GoodRanchers.com/VNN.
Video Transcript AI Summary
I've been living in and out of Australia and noticed they have better quality meat. That's why I wanted to talk to Jermaine Gill, the chief growth officer at Good Ranchers. They're all about bringing transparency to the meat aisle.
Good Ranchers started because the founders couldn't trust the meat they were getting in grocery stores. They source clean products without antibiotics. If you have a local farm you trust, great, but if not, Good Ranchers can help.
A big issue is the "Product of USA" label, which can mean the meat was just processed here, even if it was born and raised elsewhere. Good Ranchers only sources meat born, raised, and harvested in the USA, where we have high standards for animal treatment. Plus, they age their beef for at least 21 days! Check them out at goodranchers.com/vnn, use code vnn for $25 off.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Guys know that I was living in and out of Australia for the last seven years and one thing I noticed besides the fact that they speak a little differently than us and we're the ones who speak correctly when it comes to English is that they did have better quality food particularly when it came to meat. You know, I'm used to being out here when I was younger. You eat whatever you want, pork, you don't think about it. And as you get older, start noticing, like, why is my chicken gray? Why does my my my beef look tan?
Like, this stuff is a very serious concern for a lot of people. And in my generation, particularly millennials and younger, the quality of food we realize actually directly relates to the quality of life. And that's why today I wanna talk to an amazing individual named Jermaine Gill. He's the chief growth officer at a company called Good Ranchers where he played a pivotal role in transforming the company from a small pop up shop and a little meat provider to a fast growing DDC meat company in The US. Now Jermaine has been instrumental in scaling the business to where it is today, and he led he led the launch of the operations and ecommerce departments and now oversees the overall growth strategy for Good Ranchers, focusing on new lines of business, product development, and future proofing the company alongside the founder and CEO.
Jermaine, welcome to the show. I'm so happy to have you here, man.
Speaker 1: Yeah, man. Thanks for having me on here. You know, we're we're excited with partnering people like you, right, that are, you know, trying to get the truth out there because that's that's who we are. Right? That that the basis of of good ranchers is we just we wanna bring transparency to the, you know, the the meat aisle, you know, and try to just keep our customers informed.
So, I mean, I appreciate everything that you do as well.
Speaker 0: Dude, so let's talk about this. I'm a father of two. I got a wife. I got a I got a crunchy wife, whatever they call it, the the almond the almond mom. We care about food quality.
Okay? Because my wife because she's not from America. And in other countries, they have higher quality food. They have things that are banned that we eat every day here and they've access to healthy food pretty much everywhere. And so obviously when we're talking about creating a company that's not just about a product but creating a product that's good for people, that helps people, that's also not just a a luxury.
Right? Meat is a necessity. This is something that helps you grow strong. So talk to me a little bit about why you actually, you know, helped Good Ranchers helped start it and grow it. Like, what was the core mission behind this, versus just say letting people get their meat from the store and get whatever is given to them?
Speaker 1: Yeah. So Binn and Corley Spell who started, you know, their founders and started the business, you know, they started because, you know, they they they had four kids. They were realizing that they couldn't really trust the meat that they were getting in the grocery store. The same thing you were just talking about. Right?
There's antibiotics. There's all these labeling and the mystery. You know, we don't even call it the meat aisle. We call it the mystery aisle because there's so many questions around it. So, they went out to try to source a clean product, a product that they could feed their family.
And so out of that pet project, Good Ranchers was born. Right? And so that's why it's so important to, like, trust your meat sources like a good ranchers. Right? We always say, like, if you have a local farm and ranch that you know, buy from them first.
You need to support those guys. But if you don't, right, like, allow you know, give us the opportunity to go source the highest quality products, clean products, no antibiotics, those kind of things. And it's really important because what you feed your body is what, you know, your your body's gonna react to. So it's really important that you're trying to feed yourself the cleanest product you can.
Speaker 0: Yeah. And you know what? I think it's kind of crazy what this stuff is. It's like like, I I know people don't think, like, why why would I care what meat I have? And, you know, it's kind of crazy when I watch videos about, like, even steak.
Right? There is a difference between the marbling in a in a cut of steak versus how the cow was treated whether it was under stress when it died, but this is actually kind of sad stuff. Meaning like meat directly is correlated to the quality of even the animal's life. And so, you know, when it comes to meat, I realize I don't know a lot myself. Every time I learn something, somebody's telling me something crazy and it's hard to sort of sift out, you know, the the lies from the truth.
So when you talk about consumer awareness, what do most people misunderstand about the meat they're buying at the grocery store versus getting meat from somewhere like Good Ranchers? What what is the difference or or what are they getting versus what they're getting here?
Speaker 1: Yeah. I think one of the big things too is this this labeling issue that we've been running to since 2015, and it's called the COLA law. It's the country of origin labeling law. And if there's one thing that we've gotten behind at Good Ranchers, it's trying to bring awareness to the COLA law. So what it is is that, you know, be any brief brought in here, as long as it's further processed in the in The United States, meaning it's, like, cut, packaged, you can say it's a product of The USA.
Our standard and we drew a line in the sand very early on, to say that we would only ever source born, raised, and harvested in The United States Of America. That means that the that the cattle was born here, it was raised here, and it was it was harvested here. Product USA means it could be born somewhere else, can be raised somewhere else. It could be slaughtered somewhere else. But if it's brought over the border and along as it's cut and packaged here, you can slap on that product USA.
And I think a lot of consumers don't understand that. Some of the meat that they're getting at the grocery store, a lot of the meat that you're buying online is foreign born. It's imported meat. Right? And so we have they one of the things America has done is we have a very high standard when it comes to how we treat our animals, how they're raised, animal husbandry, all of those things.
We have a pretty high standard. We we lead the world in that animal, you know, how we maintain the animals and treat them. And so buying, buying meat from that was born in Harvest USA actually matters. Right? And so that's probably the biggest misnomer that people know.
The biggest confusion when somebody goes to meat aisle is they they see that Proc USA with the American flag, and they think, oh, this is a USA product. And the reality is it's just been processed here. It's kinda gross. Yeah. I mean, that's the first
Speaker 0: I didn't know
Speaker 1: that. Super gross. Right?
Speaker 0: Yeah.
Speaker 1: Yeah. It's 2015. It it's crazy. I think, I think the last I saw last year, like, 3,000,000,000 pounds of, meat was imported into The United States Of America and purchased. Right?
And so, at the end of the day, I know we kinda started off and we talked about Australia does a great job of of, you know, product, but the reality is, like, America has the greatest beef producers in the world. I mean, when you look at, like, a Angus cattle or or something that's been, you know, treated right. Like, you go to any of these high end steak houses, it's typically American beef, and then you'll have some Japanese Wagyu, right, some specialty products. But when it comes to just a pure, beautiful, amazing, well marbled steak, it's gonna be from America. And so that's the difference.
The other piece too is I think people walk into a grocery store, and they're thinking like, hey. Why should I buy from a good ranchers when I can go to the walk right down the grocery store or a little butcher shop and buy the product? Right? And the reality is, like, there's some things that we do. Right?
Like, one, our sourcing is impeccable. You know, we we very clean product, but then we also age all of our beef a minimum of twenty one days. And that aging process adds that amazing steakhouse flavor, but, also, it makes it really tender. And so that's something that you're not you're never gonna get to get at a grocery store. They don't age their product at all.
I mean, they're trying to, like, cut it and get it out of the off the shelf as fast as possible.
Speaker 0: Well, look. And this is the crazy thing. Like, this is not even about being bougie because you know there's always people we all want to save money. Right? So this is kind
Speaker 1: of what I want
Speaker 0: to understand about the financial impact versus you know being on a subscription model and how the the benefit of that besides convenience. Like my wife we have 202 I mentioned in the beginning. Sometimes we honestly do have to Uber Eats, you know, groceries because it's just it's hard for her to, know, get the kids in, get them out when they're so little and, you know, that there's they're fussy or whatever. So that you know, convenience we all get why subscription models exist. But it's like, you know, when you're talking about, you know, this this actual service that's bringing this quality meat that's that has the this we we can trust what's in it.
Like, what have you seen genuinely your customers find to be the benefit of sort of subscribing to this? Because to some people, getting, like, meat delivered to your door sounds weird. Right? It just sounds foreign and like, I oh, I don't know. I wanna look at it first.
So, like, how does this how does this really work, and how do you guys guarantee that they're actually getting the quality meat besides the fact that it tastes good? Like, how how can we know that we're getting a good product?
Speaker 1: Yeah. So I'll give you a couple of things when it especially when it comes to the the economic side of things. One, the largest part of a grocery store that you see food waste in is actually in the fresh or raw meat aisle. Right? So you buy 40% of everything you buy on the in the meat aisle from the grocery store, you're gonna throw away.
It's it's like a you know, mean, I've seen this statistic. The first time I saw it, was like, that's gotta be made up. And so we've done some more research. So think about it. You know, the way the grocery store works, you either buy one steak or you're gonna buy that big jumbo value pack with five steaks in it.
Right? The most average American families aren't gonna cook that all at one time. So you either cook everything you bought at the grocery store, and then you say, hey. I'm gonna take some home for later. It's gonna be leftovers, and you end up not eating it, throwing away.
Or you're like, hey. I'm gonna cook these tomorrow. You throw them in the fridge. You forget, and you end up throwing away. So food waste is a huge thing.
So with Good Ranchers, everything is individually packaged, vacuum sealed, and it's already flash frozen. So you take out exactly what you're gonna cook. You leave the rest in the freezer or the fridge, and then you cook that when you're ready. So just by that part alone, we we reduce your food waste significantly. I think the last stat I saw, the average American family ends up throwing away 5 to $600 a year in just raw meat that they bought and didn't use.
Right? So that's that's the one first cost saving. Two is like we already triple pre trim all of our chicken and beef before you get it. I I I think you've had the product before.
Speaker 0: Oh, Especially yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Like I've had them.
I've I've I've not only had it before I was working with you guys on the show, but then I moved to Australia so I was, you know, not getting it. But then I started getting it back here and then even advertise it at lifetime at my gym. They're always like telling people always grabbing it. So it's like, I know it's everywhere and it's all around but
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 0: I I know it's delicious but I'm not gonna lie to you. When I first thought about getting like flash frozen meat sent to my door, it just didn't sound normal. Right? I was like, I'm not used to it and usually people don't do things that they're not accustomed to. I'm I'm being honest and that's what everyone and I talked to them about it, they're like, is it normal?
I'm like, it's not just normal, it's actually amazing because yeah, you don't waste the meat. It's in your it's in your freezer and it thaws you put in the fridge, it thaws out overnight and it doesn't lose any texture, doesn't lose any flavor, and you end up having backup meat, is fantastic especially when you're busy. You're like, it's just ready to go.
Speaker 1: Yeah. So, yeah, it is it's great. Right? And it's safe too. That's the other piece too.
Like, the, like, the way that we package, way we freeze it, it's it's it's safer than you're gonna get at the grocery store. Right? Because, you know, grocery stores, they just do that little plastic piece over the top. You know, air, foreign bodies can get in there. But with us, it's it's so it's like that vacuum seal is so tight that you're good to go.
I was what I was saying that was, like, you buy a pound of chicken from the grocery store, you're probably gonna have to trim 10 to 15% of that off, right, because it has fat or little ligament pieces pieces you don't wanna eat. With us, since we've already done the trimming for you, you buy a pound of good rancher's meat, you're gonna get a % of that meat to eat is consumable. Whereas at the grocery store, the of steaks, you know, you'll get the big piece of fat on the top that you have to trim off, or you it's a beautiful steak in the package. You get home, you open it, you flip it over, and it's the butt end of a steak. Right?
And it looks terrible. So, like, that's the one thing. We we actually had a chef come in and was like, okay. Let's take a look at our product. How would you do it?
If it was a restaurant, how would y'all guys want this piece? Right? Because at a restaurant, you're trying to cut down on trimming and time and all that stuff. So you so if you're gonna buy it, you want it to be perfectly trimmed already. And so that's the standard that we use when it comes to the trimming process.
So when you buy a pound of Good Ranchers, it's a % consumable. Whereas if you go to the grocery store, you're you're gonna trim 10 to 20% off 10 to 15 on chicken, you know, anywhere from 10 to 30% when it comes to beef because they like to leave that little fat cap because they're trying to, right, increase the the amount of product that they're selling.
Speaker 0: Right. And so okay. So in the end, obviously, if people wanna get me, you guys have got to check it out at goodranchers.com/vnn. You guys can use the promo code v n n. You guys have some pretty amazing deals, especially right now.
I know that we get $25 off our order which look. If you have a family, this is really good for you. But if you're a single guy and you're going to the gym all the time, this is even better because you're probably gonna waste meat the most. Right? I mean, if you're a single guy and you just wanna get meat in in your in your freezer, but you also get a free gift thrown in there as well with every box.
So make sure you guys check it out, g00dranchers.com/vnn. Use that promo code v n n to get that $25 off. It saves money. That's literally, you know, extra groceries you can buy for for your kids with that $25 saved. And what I like the most is is free shipping because we know Amazon, a lot of these companies got big by offering free shipping, but this is not increasing the cost.
Like when you do Prime, you do free shipping and they they they build it and these guys are just like hooking you up with the box delivered straight to your door. So I wanted to ask, you know, to kinda close out here, when it comes to this, what are your favorite meats? It's kinda a weird question. What are your favorite meats from from Good Ranchers? All
Speaker 1: of them. I'm just kidding.
Speaker 0: Yeah. No. What do you like? Because it's seafood and
Speaker 1: stuff. Yeah. I'm a huge rib eye guy. I'm gonna tell you this. I'm a huge rib eye guy.
I love rib eyes. I like grill them over open fire or on a cast iron. But I will say this. This is gonna be kinda funny. We have an internal saying.
People come for steak, they stay for the chicken. I know that sounds funny, but our chicken is the best chicken you will ever have. It's we only source small birds, so they're like the small they're like they're not those giant pterodactyl birds that you you get at the grocery store where the chicken breast is, you know, this huge two pound thing, and it's woody, and it's, like, not tender. So we we only source small birds. So our chicken is phenomenal.
It's very tender. It has, I'm gonna tell you, you're gonna taste the difference in the quality of it. So, like I said, there's that internal saying, people come for the steak, they stay for the chicken. I think hands down, my favorite is the is our chicken breast. I can cook it.
No. I I try to eat pretty healthy. I work out pretty pretty hard. So I know, you know, two chicken breasts, I'm gonna get 48 grams of protein with those two chicken breasts, and I grill them, and and I'd probably do every other day.
Speaker 0: So Let's go. I'm all in the protein too. I mean, like, it's genuine like, right now, I'm a I'm I'm actually on the middle of a of of starting the cut, but I was you know, I got am up to three plates right on the on the bench. That's pretty good. Like, I mean, we're like
Speaker 1: That's great.
Speaker 0: We're pushing it. So
Speaker 1: On one arm?
Speaker 0: Yeah. Yeah. One arm. That's what I tell my wife, one finger. Right?
But no. But I but I know how how important it is and I the reason why I like meat is even if you're unhealthy, unhealthy people love meat. But if you're healthy, it's it's really nice to tell you guys if you wanna lose weight in the new year, you guys I'm not telling you to do any diet. We're not making any health recommendations. But if you do if you do decrease the amount of carbohydrates you're taking in especially, you know, processed foods that you're eating high in sugar and you just switch to a bunch of meat from from Good Ranchers and make that the primary caloric intake, you'll probably end up in a deficit which is the only way to lose weight, but usually you end up in a deficit.
And so if you wanna lose weight, maybe you're not eating enough meat, get some of these today at goodranchers.com/vnn. I wanna tell you real fast, Jermaine. Thank you so much for coming on, man. I really appreciate you and it's a great product. Can't go wrong with quality meat.
Any last words that you wanted to tell the audience to encourage them to check it out and maybe try their first box?
Speaker 1: Yeah. Dude, I'm telling you right now, like well, first of all, we have a % money back guarantee. So, like, if you don't like the product or something happens or whatever, dude, we will a % refund you. No questions asked. So that's that's the first thing.
We we we stand behind what we believe in. You know? And and our mission is to support our local farms and ranches. Agriculture is the backbone of the of the of our country. It's how we became America.
Right? And so, we try to do everything we can to to support those guys. So when you support us, you buy from us, we're not only are we supporting awesome guys like you, but we're also supporting local farms and ranches. So that's the first thing. Second thing is, man, if you're looking for a way for a low calorie high protein, Good Ranchers is the way to go, guys.
You know, I I eat it every day. My kids eat it. My family eats it. I don't remember last time I bought some bought some protein from the groceries or meat from the grocery store. So, anyway, go to goodranchers.com.
Check it out. Man, dude, thank you for your support. Y'all guys are awesome. We love having awesome partners like you that speak well with the product, but also like the mission that you're behind, man. I just, you know, let's keep let's keep it up.
Right?
Speaker 0: So Yeah. We gotta cut we got we got we got a country to say if we gotta make America healthy again. So that's that's genuinely the truth, man. Alright, Jermaine. Appreciate your brother.
Have a great rest of the day.
Speaker 1: You too, bro. Thanks, man. I appreciate it.
Speaker 0: Awesome. And to the rest of you guys watching here on Vigilant News, you know, we do go live every morning at 8AM. Yes. I do have a show that is at night, a podcast that is at 8PM and then I have a live show 8AM. Yeah.
It is a it is a bit of a of of a time consuming thing but the reason why we do it is because sometimes you gotta put time into things in order to, find yourself being in a position to, getting something of value. And, you gotta invest in yourself. You gotta invest in in what matters and, your body matters. Make sure you check out, goodranchers.com/vnn and get some of these boxes right to your house. Send them as a gift too.
This is really great. I was gonna say this from us. A lot of people with kids, like, have a kid in college or something like that and they need food, just ship them a box. Like, I promise you a college student will cry if he gets in a in excitement, just free meat. I remember in college how poor I was.
Give them that today. And if you know someone in need at your church or something, this is a great idea to say, hey, I'm gonna send you a good rancher's box, you know. It's a good way to donate and, you know, doing God's work in the new year. Anyway, to the rest of you guys watching, have a great rest of the week as always and may God bless The United States Of America. I'm signing out.
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
Read More: Elon Musk Reveals the Real Reason for His “What Did You Do This Week?” https://vigilantnews.com/post/elon-musk-reveals-the-real-reason-for-his-what-did-you-do-this-week-email/
Elon Musk Reveals the Real Reason for His “What Did You Do This Week?” Email
The plot thickens...
vigilantnews.com
@elonmusk - Elon Musk
Exactly
reSee.it AI Summary
I shared an incredible story that aligns perfectly with what @DOGE stands for. The federal government has far more waste and fraud than local or state governments because it can print unlimited money. However, this leads to inflation, which unfairly burdens those who can least afford it.
@elonmusk - Elon Musk
This is an amazing story and exactly what @DOGE aims to do! The federal government has a MUCH larger amount of WASTE & FRAUD than a local or state government could ever have, because it can always print more money. Unfortunately, there is no free lunch and that extra money becomes inflation, which is a tax on those who can least afford it.
reSee.it AI Summary
In a recent appearance on The Joe Rogan Experience, I discussed what I believe to be the "biggest scam" in U.S. history: government waste and the misuse of taxpayer funds. I highlighted a shocking case where the Navy received $12 billion for submarines but produced none, with officials unable to account for the money. I also criticized the lack of accountability in government spending, suggesting that reforms could save billions. Additionally, I exposed how taxpayer-funded NGOs operate as unaccountable entities, redefining their missions to protect their own power rather than democracy itself.
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
Elon Musk Exposes the “Biggest Scam Ever” “I thought it would be bad, but I did not think it would be as bad as this.” 🧵 THREAD https://t.co/zua3jjtnOg
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
Elon Musk just exposed what he calls the “biggest scam” in U.S. history during his viral appearance on episode #2281 of The Joe Rogan Experience. The focus of the conversation was government waste and abuse—and Musk had plenty to say. Musk quickly dropped a shocker when he revealed that the government handed the Navy $12 billion to build new submarines—and not a single submarine was built. When lawmakers asked where the money went, Navy officials shrugged and said they had no idea—a revelation Musk heard firsthand from Senator Susan Collins (R-Maine). “There’s a case where I think Senator Collins was telling me about how she gave the Navy $12 billion for more submarines, got no extra submarines, and then held a hearing to say where the $12 billion go. “And they were like, we don’t know. That was it. I mean, basically, stuff is so crazy. Only the federal government could get away with this level of waste,” Musk said.
Video Transcript AI Summary
Twitter, at least, was breaking even and passing audits, unlike the federal government, which loses trillions annually and fails its audits. Senator Collins, for example, allocated billions to the Navy for submarines, but no additional submarines were produced, and the government couldn't account for the funds. This level of waste is unique to the federal government, as they've grown accustomed to it over time. It's like Milton Friedman said: money is most poorly spent when you're spending someone else's money on people you don't know, which is exactly what the federal government does.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: You know, in the case of Twitter, it wasn't a profitable company. It was, like, basically a breakeven company, but at least it was breakeven, and it had to pass an audit. The the federal government is not breakeven. It's literally losing $2,000,000,000,000 a year, and it does not pass its audits. It fails its own audit.
So, like, you know, there's a case where, like, I think senator Collins was telling me about how she she gave the navy twelve billion dollars for more submarines, got no extra submarines, and then held a hearing to say where the $12,000,000,000 go, and they were like, we don't know. That was it. I mean, like, basically, stuff is so crazy. It's like, the only the federal government could get away with this level of waste of of waste. It's mostly waste.
It's mostly not for it. It's mostly waste. It's it's mostly just ridiculous things happening. Because they've been able to do it this way for so long, and they've become accustomed to it. Yeah.
I mean, it's like Milton Friedman said, like, money is most poorly spent when when you're spending someone else's money on people you don't know. How much are you gonna care? Right. And that's the that's the federal government. So they they're spending someone else's money on people they don't know.
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
In another eye-opening moment, Musk concluded that the government could save $100 billion a year just by forcing agencies to explain what their payments are actually for. He mentioned how the current system allows the government to send payments with no categorization code, no description, and no explanation—essentially handing out blank checks with zero accountability. Musk compared this to public companies, saying that if a corporation tried the same thing, it would be delisted immediately, and its executives would “be thrown in prison.”
Video Transcript AI Summary
We found that the government was essentially sending untraceable blank checks. If a public company did this, they'd be delisted and executives would go to prison, but it's normal in the government.
We recommended to the Treasury and Federal Reserve that payment categorization codes be mandatory, not optional, and that every payment need some explanation, even if we don't judge the quality of it. This is a radical change that's now being implemented. I'm guessing it probably saves about $100 billion a year.
Where was that money going? It's hard to say if it was waste or fraud. Many payments were just approved and kept going even after the approving officer changed jobs, retired, or died. It's like forgetting to cancel a gym membership, but instead of $20 a month, it's $20 billion a year.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: You could put a payment through with with no payment categorization code and and no description on the payment, like, basically, untraceable blank checks. This is the kind of thing that if if it was done as a public company, the company would be immediately delisted, and the executive team would be thrown in prison. But this is just normal at the government. So we said, okay. Our recommendation to the treasury and the Federal Reserve is, like, we need to make the the payment categorization codes mandatory, not optional, and you need there needs to be an ex an an explanation.
We're not judging the quality of the explanation, but there should be some explanation for what this payment is for above nothing. That's a radical change to the system that is being implemented now. I my guess is that probably saves a hundred billion a year. Jesus Christ. That's Well, where is that money going?
Rough rough order of magnitude. Where was that money going? Well, so this is where you get into the the sort of gray boundary between waste and fraud. If money is sent to a person or organization from the government, and you didn't really deserve it, but the government still sent it to you, is that waste or fraud? Right.
So, I mean, there's a lot of payments that where someone just approved approved the payment, but then that payment officer, changed jobs or retired or died, and the payments just keep going. You know, it's like if you forget to pay your gym membership or something like that. Right. Now imagine it's not the gym membership. He said your gym membership's $20,000,000,000 a year or something.
You know? But they forgot to turn it off.
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
Musk and Rogan extended their outrage to the National Security Agency (NSA), saying they were alarmed to learn that over 100 intelligence staffers spent taxpayer time turning government servers into porn chat rooms instead of protecting the country. https://t.co/NKZTSmsOAV
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
“Your tax dollars at work,” Musk mocked. “That’s not what they should be talking about at all. Supposed to be protecting the country.” https://t.co/CkSZsqFczJ
Video Transcript AI Summary
We shouldn't put public safety at risk because of some demented philosophy. There was a post about the NSA being infiltrated. It started as a fringe thing, then completely infiltrated the organization. They're spending all their time in some sex chat room with extremely demented stuff. More than a hundred intelligence staffers will be fired over sexually explicit texts in NSA chat rooms. It was all LGBTQ stuff, transition stuff. It infiltrated the organization, which is not what they should be talking about. They're supposed to be protecting the country. People are spending half their time in these meetings. If you have a problem with someone discriminatory, get rid of that person. The work environment should be professional where they're getting the job done that they're being paid to do, not getting paid for bizarre sexcapades.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: I think we we should not put the public safety at risk No. You know, because of some demented philosophy.
Speaker 1: Somebody made a post today about it in infiltrating the NSA. Did you see any of that?
Speaker 0: That was what, that was in some gnarly stuff. Yeah. Crazy.
Speaker 1: What they they they had it started off as just like this sort of fringe thing, and people would beat up, then it completely infiltrated the organization. Yeah. And they're spending all their time.
Speaker 0: It was like 400 people or something and some, like, some chat sex chat room with, like, some extremely demanded stuff.
Speaker 1: Yeah. So she more than a hundred intelligence staffers will be fired over sexually explicit texts in NSA chat rooms, Gabbard says. So so top intelligence official told Waters that the workers in question were brazen and using an NSA platform intended for professional use to conduct this kind of really, really horrific behavior. What is the behavior? What exactly what is it?
Did they say in this article?
Speaker 0: Yeah. I think they were also
Speaker 1: Okay. It says employees who participate in the NSA's obscene pornographic and sexually explicit chat rooms.
Speaker 0: Your tax dollars at work? Well, it
Speaker 1: was all, like, d e I mean, it was all, like, LBGTQ stuff. It was there was a lot of, like, transition stuff and Yeah. I I know I definitely saved it, but point is, they and it infiltrated the organization.
Speaker 0: Not what they should be talking about. At all. At all. At all.
Speaker 1: Yeah. They're supposed
Speaker 0: to be protecting the country.
Speaker 1: Right. Yeah. And if you and people were talking about how they're spending half their time in these meetings, and that they're just like constantly having to attend these things where they talk about these issues like, what are what are you doing? Like, if you have a problem with someone that's discriminatory, get rid of that person. That's it.
Yes. It's problem's over. You've got someone who's homophobic in your business. They're openly homophobic. Yeah.
That you can't work here. You're just not cool. That's it. That's it. You don't have to have fucking meetings constantly promoting this.
You're not gonna change someone's opinion by berating them over and over again.
Speaker 0: Yeah. I mean, work environment should be a professional environment where, you know, they're they're they're getting the job done that they're, you know, you know, being paid to do. That that it should be yeah. Of course. Obviously, it's not supposed to be, sort of getting paid for bizarre sex sexcapades.
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
Musk tore apart the “threat to democracy” slogan—calling it a cover for “threat to bureaucracy”—before exposing what he called the “biggest scam ever.” https://t.co/CRR0V117Fu
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
And that scam is the government’s use of taxpayer-funded NGOs as a loophole to funnel billions of dollars into shadowy, unaccountable organizations—doing things that would be illegal if carried out directly by the government itself.
Video Transcript AI Summary
People saw Trump as a threat to democracy, but he was really a threat to the bureaucracy. Elected officials have little power compared to the bureaucracy, and Doge is the first real threat to it. Usually, the bureaucracy absorbs revolutions, but this time, power might actually return to the people.
The small decisions within the bureaucracy lead to massive financial outcomes. We saw cases where billions were sent to newly formed NGOs with no prior activity. Government-funded NGOs are a nightmare, a way to bypass laws. These nonprofits are used for people to cash out, becoming wealthy and paying themselves huge sums. It's one of the biggest scams ever.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: The real threat here is to the bureaucracy. So, like, you probably saw, like, you know, let's say, like, Trump as a threat to our democracy, which is ironic since he was elected with the majority of the, you know, popular vote. They they started saying, was a threat to democracy. But if you if you just replace threat to democracy with threat to bureaucracy, it makes total sense. Right.
So, I mean, the reality is that our elected officials have very very little power relative to the bureaucracy until Doge. So Doge is a threat to the bureaucracy. It's the first threat to the bureaucracy. Normally, bureaucracy eats revolutions for breakfast. This is the first time that they're not, that the revolution might actually succeed, that we could restore power to the people instead of power to the bureaucracy.
Speaker 1: Now the size of it Yeah. Was when you guys first started investigating it, when you first get in, how much of it was shocking? Like, this just the size of it all.
Speaker 0: Well, the the size of it all the small decisions result in multibillion dollar outcomes. So, you know, we'd see you know, it was a case where we saw one person was getting $1,900,000,000 sent to their NGO, which basically got formed about a year ago and had no prior really, no no prior activity. So they just stand up a, you know, NGO. The the these the the whole NGO thing is a is a nightmare, and it's it's a misnomer because if you have a government funded nongovernmental organization, you you're you're simply a government funded organization. It it it's a it's an oxymoron.
Speaker 1: Right. It's a loophole.
Speaker 0: Yes. It it basically, the government funded NGOs are a way to do things that that would be illegal if they were the government, but are somehow made legal if it's sent to a so called nonprofit. But these but these nonprofits are then used to people cash out these nonprofits. They become very wealthy through nonprofits. They pay themselves enormous sums through these nonprofits.
Speaker 1: That's it's so insane that that's been going on for so long.
Speaker 0: It's a gigantic scam. Like, one of the biggest maybe the biggest scam ever.
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
Musk declared that the term NGO is actually an “oxymoron” because these so-called nongovernmental organizations are funded directly by the government. “The whole NGO thing is a nightmare. And it’s a misnomer because if you have a government-funded nongovernmental organization, you’re simply a government-funded organization. It’s an oxymoron,” Musk explained.
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
This thread isn’t over yet, but while you’re here, don’t forget to follow me (@VigilantFox) and hit the bell 🔔 for more reports like this one. https://t.co/aAIhcf54EK
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
Popular X user and data scientist Jennica Pounds, better known as @DataRepublican, recently blew the lid off an NGO claiming to promote “democracy.” She revealed in a NewsNation exclusive how this particular NGO received $17 million—and “the only thing they did with $17 million was make a terrible muppet show.” “That’s (explicit word)!” she exclaimed.
Video Transcript AI Summary
I looked into Norm Eisen's NGO, State United Democracies Center, which is full of prominent figures. This organization receives $17 million in private donations. After researching, the only thing I could find that they did with the money was produce a low-quality Muppet show. All the videos they created with these knockoff puppets have less than 200 views. It makes you wonder, with all those famous names involved, is that the best thing they could do with $17 million? The result is awful; Jim Henson would be rolling in his grave. They didn't even promote the videos with ads. So, where did the $17 million go?
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: So Norm Eisen, he runs an NGO called State United Democracies Center. State United Democracies Center. It's actually full of big names like Janet. Janet. Bethel Tendo.
Neapolitano. Tom Wicks. Tom Ridge. Buckskin. Michaels.
Steel. Michael Steele. You know, many famous names were involved in a specific NGO. Now that NGO accepts $17,000,000 in private donation. So I was researching.
Wait. What did I do? Like, with $17,000,000 I started researching. K. But the only thing I could find But the only thing that I found they made a knockoff Muppet show.
You think I'm kidding. They actually made puppets, Muppets, but, like, knockoff puppets. And all the videos that they made with these knockoff puppets had less than 200 meals. They speak at once. And so I'm wondering that all those big names, all those famous people at the NGO, and the only thing they did was $17,000,000 was make a terrible Muppet show.
It's They got money, and they did something with that. It was just awful. Jim Henson would roll in his grave. I saw the video on your ex. The mop Yes.
Is I know. And it was weary because all the videos less have less than 200 views. And they didn't even try to promote them with ads or anything. So where did the $17,000,000 go?
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
The NGO, co-founded by Norm Eisen, calls itself the “States United Democracy Center,” and all they could manage to pull off with that $17 million was about 200 views per episode of their knockoff muppet show—something that looked more like a $17,000 production. “They got money, and they did something with that. It was just awful. Jim Henson would roll in his grave. And it was weird because all the videos have less than 200 views,” @DataRepublican explained. “They didn’t even try to promote them with ads or anything. So where did the $17 million go?” She asked.
Video Transcript AI Summary
In Pennsylvania, we ensure safe, secure, and accurate elections through multiple layers of verification. Every vote has a paper record, secured and tracked under strict chain of custody. Ballots are preserved for almost two years. Local officials verify absentee and mail-in ballots, ensuring they are signed, registered, and received on time.
Our ballot counting machines meet federal security standards and are regularly tested with bipartisan observers. Bipartisan poll watchers oversee the counting process, and ballots are counted by local workers. We certify election results through a careful process.
Election workers confirm that each eligible voter has voted only once. Counties finalize their counts and deliver results to the state. State officials tally these votes and certify the final statewide results, backed by maintained paper records. State courts handle challenges, and automatic recounts occur in close elections. The Department of State oversees this process, typically certifying final results after the third Monday post-election.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: How does Pennsylvania make sure elections are safe, secure, and accurate? Come on in. I'll show you. After all voter rolls are checked and all equipment is tested and secured, registered voters can begin casting their ballots. In Pennsylvania, there is a paper record of every single vote.
Every cast ballot is secured, tracked, and put under strict chain of custody rules. We actually secure and preserve the ballots for almost two years according to federal law. Trusted local election officials check that absentee and mail in ballots are signed and verified to be from a registered voter and arrived by election day before they are counted. All of our ballot counting machines meet rigorous federal security standards, and we test them regularly in open view of bipartisan observers. This process helps reduce human error and bias.
In Pennsylvania, bipartisan poll watchers from both parties oversee the ballot counting process and can raise concerns with election officials. Ballots are counted by workers in the same community where the vote was cast. And since precincts report their tallies at different times, it can look like the lead swings from one candidate to another as results come in. But rest assured, every legally cast ballot will be counted and verified before we announce a winner. Pennsylvania follows a careful and thorough process to certify its election results.
Election workers check that only one vote is counted from each eligible voter. We make sure no one has voted more than once. Each county finalizes their vote count and delivers the official results to the state. State officials tally the votes for all counties and certify the final statewide results. And each county is required to maintain paper records to back up their vote count.
The state courts will oversee challenges from candidates and voters to resolve legal disputes regarding election results. In the event of an extremely close election, an automatic recount happens. This entire certification process is overseen by the Department of State. Finally, after the ballot results are checked and rechecked, the Department of State typically certifies its final results following the third Monday after the election. Yay.
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
DataRepublican also recently unmasked the “Uniparty” as a group of NGOs partially funded by your tax dollars. And the one thing they all have in common is that they claim to promote “democracy.” According to her investigation, seven NGOs, heavily backed by USAID and the U.S. State Department, act as the Uniparty’s enforcement arm—pushing propaganda under the guise of “protecting democracy.”
Video Transcript AI Summary
A recent report unmasks seven NGOs, partially funded by U.S. taxpayers, as key players in the "deep state" uniparty. These organizations, originally meant to support U.S. democratic efforts abroad, have redefined their mission to be the guardians of democracy itself. They receive substantial funding from USAID and the State Department. This shift explains why Trump's reelection was framed as a threat, as these NGOs equate democracy with their own survival and authority. They control the purse strings for much of America's global financial influence. These groups function as an off the books shadow U.S. government. Now, with increased scrutiny and declining media trust, their propaganda efforts are weakened, potentially leading to more desperate measures from the deep state.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: DC swamp uniparty unmasked as these seven NGOs. Very interesting article from Zero Hedge here. Ex user Data Republican claims to have identified seven NGOs partially funded by American taxpayers that appear to be key players within the so called deep state uniparty. According to their analysis, these organizations have shaped public discourse over the past decade through radical propaganda, portraying Donald Trump as a threat to democracy. But in actuality, it's not democracy itself, but rather the challenge that Trump and the MAGA movement pose to their political regime.
Here is more color on data Republicans report titled the Unique Party Unmasked, they believe they are, quote, democracy. The seven NGOs in the chart below, we'll show you that in a moment, in my view, represent the Uniparty. Each of these organizations receives substantial financial support from USAID or the Department of State. Around 2019, the phrase democracy in danger began to dominate public discourse amplified by the media. This was odd.
After all, The US is a democracy or, actually, more precisely, a constitutional republic. But as I trace the influence of these NGOs, a pattern emerged. They are controlled by establishment politicians. They play a major role in shaping political narratives worldwide, and their core mission is always framed as protecting democracy. Originally, these NGOs were created to support US Democratic efforts abroad, many of them emerging during the Cold War to combat the spread of communism.
But with the fall of the Soviet Union, their original purpose faded. Instead of dissolving, they redefined their mission. Now they have positioned themselves as the guardians of democracy itself. This shift explains why Trump's reelection was framed as a threat to democracy. To these NGOs, democracy means themselves.
Their survival depends on maintaining that role, and any challenge to their authority is perceived as a direct attack on democracy itself. And you can see those NGOs there and their EINs. Very, very interesting web. Note what they all have in common. They are all dedicated to advocating democracy, and they've redefined democracy to mean themselves, data Republican said.
If the Uni Party has redefined democracy to represent itself, then it's no surprise that it has spent the past decade waging an informational war against Trump. Across corporate media, the Uni Party unleashed the cannons of propaganda and relentlessly labeled him and his MAGA supporters as a threat to democracy. Data Republican breaks down each of the seven NGOs, and they all have this one thing in common. You have the International Republican Institute promotes democracy by training political parties and leaders, primarily supporting US foreign policy interests through a Republican aligned lens. The National Democratic Institute or NDI advances democracy by fostering political participation and governance reforms worldwide aligned with democratic party priorities.
Consortium for Elections and Political Process Strengthening, a coalition of democracy focused NGOs that supports electoral processes, civil society, and governance reforms globally. The National Endowment for Democracy acts as primarily funding hub or the primary funding hub rather for democracy promotion efforts worldwide, distributing US government grants to NGOs supporting political and civil society development. International Foundation for Electoral Systems strengthens global democracy by providing technical assistance for election security, integrity, and voter participation. Intern News supports independent media and press freedom worldwide, shaping democratic discourse by training journalists and combating disinformation. The Center for International Private Enterprise promotes democracy through free market economic policies, advocating for business friendly governance and anticorruption initiatives.
The Solidarity Center advances democracy by supporting independent labor movements and workers' rights, often partnering with unions to promote political engagement. They all have this in common. They're all dedicated to advocating democracy. Well, Data Republican then summarized the entire thread. After thinking it was over last night, here's how I would summarize it.
These seven NGOs, eight if you count the off the chart Solidarity Center, together function as an off the books shadow US government. The National Endowment for Democracy was created to unify The US against communism. Its four core organizations reflect a neat ideological symmetry of America's Two party system. CIPE pushes free market policies. Solidarity Center represents labor and unions.
IRI serves Republican interests, and NDI aligns with the Democrats. CEPPS is another umbrella group that includes IRI and NDI, but also brings it in IFES under the guise of fortifying election integrity. And to make sure the narrative sticks, Inter News Network spreads these viewpoints throughout global media. Most of these NGOs were born during the Reagan years. While not all USAID and State Department funding flows through them, they control the purse strings for much of America's global financial influence.
DEI initiatives created a system of unaccountability and dependency, which ended up injecting more money into them and further infringes their power. They see any challenge to their authority as a threat to democracy itself, but their greatest enemy is still the same one they've had since the Cold War, Russia. They never lost the Cold War boomer mindset. In their minds, they're the superheroes keeping America from crumbling, and that entitles them to their travel perks, cushy post election gigs, and all the other benefits that come with running an unacknowledged empire. Now in recent weeks, Trump sent Elon Musk's doge into federal agencies as a wrecking ball to the uniparty, halting their grift and use of NGOs to siphon taxpayer funds in an unlimited slush fund via USAID.
The uniparty's next propaganda blitz has already appeared in the news headlines indicating Trump and Musk are setting off a constitutional crisis. The problem this time is that the uniparty's media reach and propaganda efforts have been neutered with Musk now controlling x and trust in the mainstream media at record lows. As the uniparty grows more panicked, the deep state will likely become even more desperate. Well, it's a new day in America and a new administration in Washington DC. There's a lot of excitement and optimism about the future, but the reality is there is a lot of work to do, especially when it comes to fixing our broken health care system.
The truth is that the forces that are responsible for breaking our health care system aren't going to simply go away. The challenges that our system faces won't disappear overnight. Now more than ever, you need to be prepared, and that's where the wellness company comes in. Their doctors are medical professionals that you can trust, and their line of prescription medical kits are the gold standard when it comes to keeping you safe and healthy. Whether it's the medical emergency kit, the contagion kit, the first aid kit, or the travel kit, these prescription kits contain an assortment of life saving medications and guidebooks to assist in the proper use of these medications.
From the flu to strep throat, from COVID to the bird flu, from a trip to the beach, to a trip overseas, the wellness company has a prescription kit designed to keep you and your family safe. Make America healthy again starts at home. Do your part and protect the health of you and your family. Go to twc.health/blackout today and order. That's twc.health/blackout, and use the promo code blackout to save 10%.
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
@DataRepublican These groups have shifted their mission from spreading democracy abroad to protecting their own power—redefining “democracy” to mean themselves. Or, as Musk puts it, a threat to “democracy” really means a threat to the bureaucracy. https://t.co/ihrgq8rM0r
@DataRepublican - DataRepublican (small r)
🧵THE UNIPARTY UNMASKED – They Believe They Are “Democracy” The seven NGOs in the chart below, in my view, represent the Uniparty. Each of these organizations receives substantial financial support from USAID or the Department of State. Around 2019, the phrase “democracy in danger” began to dominate public discourse, amplified by the media. This was odd—after all, the U.S. is a democracy (or more precisely, a constitutional republic). But as I traced the influence of these NGOs, a pattern emerged: they are controlled by establishment politicians, they play a major role in shaping political narratives worldwide, and their core mission is always framed as “protecting democracy.” Originally, these NGOs were created to support U.S. democratic efforts abroad—many of them emerging during the Cold War to combat the spread of communism. But with the fall of the Soviet Union, their original purpose faded. Instead of dissolving, they redefined their mission. Now, they have positioned themselves as the guardians of democracy itself. This shift explains why Trump’s re-election was framed as a "threat to democracy." To these NGOs, “democracy” means themselves. Their survival depends on maintaining that role, and any challenge to their authority is perceived as a direct attack on democracy itself.
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
@DataRepublican During today’s conversation, Rogan asked Musk what he expected to uncover when he first launched DOGE to expose government waste. Musk replied, “I thought it would be bad, but I did not think it would be as bad as this.” Watch the full episode below: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sSOxPJD-VNo
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
@DataRepublican Thanks for reading! If you enjoyed this report, please do me a quick favor and follow me (@VigilantFox) for more posts like this one. In other news, a persuasion expert recently appeared on Joe Rogan and made a shocking COVID claim. Read more below: https://t.co/EoB8k9rYxA
@elonmusk - Elon Musk
Exactly
reSee.it AI Summary
I recently listened to Elon Musk's interview with Joe Rogan, where he revealed some shocking information about the government payment system known as PAM, which processes $5 trillion a year—equating to a billion dollars an hour. Musk highlighted that this system allows for "basically untraceable blank checks," raising serious concerns about accountability. He pointed out that there are 20 million deceased individuals incorrectly marked as alive in the Social Security database, enabling fraudulent claims. The lack of communication between government databases exacerbates these issues, allowing exploitation of the system.
@WallStreetApes - Wall Street Apes
This is going to blow your mind 🚨 Elon Musk tells Joe Rogan during his interview, the government payment system called ‘PAM’ processes $5 trillion dollars a year, that’s a BILLION DOLLARS AN HOUR It’s setup in a way to process “Basically UNTRACEABLE BLANK CHECKS — This is the kind of thing that if it was done as a public company, the company would be immediately delisted and the executive team would be thrown in prison.” - Just with a basic search of the Social Security database there were 20 million dead people marked as alive — Some of them were getting money - Elon Musk “was trying to get an answer right before the show” but was unable to exact figures - Elon Musk says “Most of the fraud is not coming from social security payments directly, but because they're marked as alive in the social security database, they can then get disability unemployment, sort of fake medical payments and other things because they're marked as alive in the social security database (BUT THE’RE DEAD) - The systems between Social Security, payments systems, government databases, medical payments, these systems don’t communicate between each other, “They don't talk to each other, they talk to each other very poorly in a very limited way. So the way that the system gets exploited is by taking advantage of the the poor communication between the various databases in the government” Here’s where it gets REALLY crazy There is a government payment that’s processed $5 TRILLION DOLLARS a year, that’s A BILLION DOLLARS AN HOUR “To give you an example of like what's happening in say Treasury, which is improving rapidly the main payments computer's called PAM, Payment Accounts Database or something like that. But everyone calls a PAM that's responsible for almost $5 trillion of payments a year, roughly a billion dollars an hour. When we came there, we're looking at this payment. The payments have no, you could put a payment through with no payment categorization code and no description on the payment, like basically untraceable blank checks.” “This is the kind of thing that if it was done as a public company, the company would be immediately delisted and the executive team would be thrown in prison.”
Video Transcript AI Summary
A basic search of the Social Security database revealed 20 million dead people marked as alive. While it's unclear if they're directly receiving Social Security payments, their "alive" status allows them to fraudulently obtain disability, unemployment, and fake medical payments.
The fraud occurs because government databases don't communicate well. For example, the Treasury's main payments computer, PAM, handles $5 trillion in payments annually, roughly a billion dollars an hour. We discovered payments lacked categorization codes and descriptions, essentially untraceable blank checks. If a public company operated this way, it would be delisted, and executives would face imprisonment.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Just with a a basic search of the Social Security database that there were 20,000,000 dead people mocked as alive. But were they getting money? Some of them were getting money. What percentage of them? It's it isn't clear.
We're actually trying to run this ground. I was trying to get an answer right before the show. What it looks like is that most of fraud is not coming from Social Security payments directly, but because they are marked as alive in the Social Security database that they can get then get disability, unemployment, sort of fake medical payments, and other things because they're marked as alive in the Social Security database. So it looks like it's a bank the the the fraud is a bank shot, essentially. The the bank shot into Social Security.
They just do an are you alive check, and then get fraudulent payments from every other part of the government. Oh. Yeah. And and this exploits the the the fundamental weakness in the government is that the various government databases, they don't talk to each other. They they or they they talk to each other very poorly in a very limited way.
So the way to the way that the system gets exploited is is by taking advantage of the the the poor communication between the various databases in the government. To give you an example of, like, what's happening in, say, treasury, which is improving rapidly, the the main payments computer is called PAM, like payments account payment accounts master database or something like that, but everyone calls it PAM. That's responsible for almost $5,000,000,000,000 payments a year, roughly a billion dollars an hour. And when we came there, we're we're looking at the famine. It's like the the payments have no you could put a payment through with with no payment categorization code and and no description on the payment.
Like, basically, untraceable blank checks. This is the kind of thing that if if it was done as a public company, the company would be immediately delisted, and the executive team would be thrown in prison.
reSee.it AI Summary
I was taken aback by Elon Musk's revelation during my conversation with him. He proposed that the Treasury and the Federal Reserve should make payment categorization codes mandatory for government expenses, which could save taxpayers $100 billion annually. Musk emphasized the need for explanations for these payments, stating that the lack of clarity is a significant issue. My reaction was one of disbelief, questioning where all that money is currently going.
@WallStreetApes - Wall Street Apes
Joe Rogan literally gasped in shock by what Elon Musk told him Elon Musk instructed Treasury and the Federal Reserve to make payment codes for government expenses mandatory, this alone is costing taxpayers $100 BILLION DOLLARS A YEAR Payments with ABSOLUTELY NO EXPLANATION “Our recommendation to the Treasury and the Federal Reserve is like, we need to make the, the payment categorization codes mandatory, not optional. And you need, there needs to be an ex an an explanation. We're not judging the quality of the explanation, but there should be some explanation for what this payment is for above nothing.” “That's a radical change to the system that is being implemented. Now my guess is that probably saves a $100 billion a year.” Joe Rogan “Jesus Christ. Where is that money going? (He’s in so much shock he asks again) Where was that money going?”
Video Transcript AI Summary
The Treasury's main payment system, PAM, handles about $5 trillion a year, roughly a billion dollars an hour. When we first looked at it, payments could be processed with no categorization or description – basically, untraceable blank checks. If this were a public company, it would be delisted, and the executives would be in jail.
We recommended making payment categorization codes mandatory with some explanation required for each payment. This radical change is being implemented now, and I think it probably saves $100 billion a year. Where was that money going? It's hard to say what was waste and what was fraud. If the government sends money to someone who doesn't deserve it, is that waste, or fraud?
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Give you an example of, like, what's happening in, say, treasury, which is improving rapidly. The the main payments computer is called PAM, like payments account payment accounts master database or something like that, but everyone calls it PAM. That's responsible for almost $5,000,000,000,000 payments a year, roughly a billion dollars an hour. And when we came there, we're we're looking at the famine. It's like the the payments have no you could put a payment through with with no payment categorization code and and no description on the payment, like, basically, untraceable blank checks.
This is the kind of thing that if if it was done as a public company, the company would be immediately delisted, and the executive team would be thrown in prison. But this is just normal at the government. So we said, okay. Our recommendation to the treasury and the Federal Reserve is, like, we need to make the the payment categorization codes mandatory, not optional, and you need there needs to be an ex an an explanation. We're not judging the quality of the explanation, but there should be some explanation for what this payment is for above nothing.
That's a radical change to the system that is being implemented now. I my guess is that probably saves a hundred billion a year. Jesus Christ. That's Well, where is that money going? Rough rough order of magnitude.
Where was that money going? Well so this is where you get into the the sort of gray boundary between waste and fraud. If money is sent to a person or organization from the government, and you didn't really deserve it, but the government still sent it to you, is that waste or fraud? Right.
reSee.it AI Summary
Elon Musk recently discussed the hidden issues within government financial systems, revealing the existence of 14 "magic money computers" that issue payments without proper oversight. He highlighted that these systems can misrepresent financial data, potentially misallocating hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars. Musk emphasized the need to analyze these computer databases to identify waste and fraud, rather than relying on bureaucratic processes. In a personal note, I shared my journey from healthcare to citizen journalism, focusing on COVID-related content and seeking feedback to enhance my platform.
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
Elon Musk Exposes the System Keeping Government Fraud Alive Now, it all makes sense. 🧵 THREAD https://t.co/EOAE0XUrlE
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
Elon Musk just pulled back the curtain on what’s really fueling government waste and fraud. Speaking with Senator Ted Cruz, he revealed there are at least 14 “magic money computers” that can “send money out of nothing,” meaning these government systems are issuing trillions in payments with little oversight or real-time accountability. Musk explained that these computers don’t operate in a way where they “talk to each other.” Instead, Musk explained they function in a way that allows money to move through government agencies unchecked, sometimes in ways that don’t align with official records. The numbers lawmakers see aren’t always accurate, with government books potentially off by 5% to 10%. That could mean up to hundreds of billions in taxpayer dollars are misallocated or disappearing, while the actual financial activity remains hidden deep inside these systems. “So you may think that the government computers all talk to each other. They synchronize, they add up what funds are going somewhere, and it’s coherent that the numbers, for example, that you’re presented as a senator are actually the real numbers. They’re not,” Musk explained. “They’re not totally wrong,” he continued. “They’re probably off by 5% or 10% in some cases. So I call it Magic Money Computer. Any computer which can just make money out of thin air. That’s Magic Money.” “So how does that work?” Ted Cruz asked. “It just issues payments,” Musk answered. “I think we found now 14 magic money computers. They just send money out of nothing.”
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 1 claims that government computers do not synchronize and the numbers they represent may be off by 5% to 10%. Speaker 1 calls any computer that can make money out of thin air a "magic money computer." These computers issue payments. Speaker 1 states there are approximately 14 magic money computers, mostly at the Treasury, but also at HHS, State, and DOD. These computers send money out of nothing.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Now one of the things you told me about is
Speaker 1: It's crazy.
Speaker 0: Is what
Speaker 1: you call magic
Speaker 0: money computers at
Speaker 1: phrase freeze.
Speaker 0: Well, told So tell us about it because I never heard of that until you you brought that up.
Speaker 1: Okay. So you may think that these that that the government computers, like, all talk to each other. They synchronize. They they add up what funds are going somewhere, and it's, you know, it's coherent. That that that the, you know, there's and that and that the numbers, for example, that you represent as a senator Yeah.
Are actually the real numbers. In one would think. One would think. They're they're they're not. Yep.
Okay. I mean, they're not totally wrong, but they're probably off by 5% or 10% in some cases. So I call a magic money computer any computer which can just make money out of thin air. That's magic money. So how does that work?
It just issues payments.
Speaker 0: And you said there's something like 11 of these computers at treasury that are that are sending out trillions in in payments?
Speaker 1: They're mostly treasury. Some are but there's some at HHS, some at there's one I think one or two at state, There's some at at DOD. I think we found out 14 magic money computers. 14. Okay.
They just send money out of nothing.
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
This raises a critical question: If the government’s books are off by 5% to 10% in some cases, leaving up to hundreds of billions of dollars unaccounted for, where is all that money actually going? https://t.co/OZ7pKGKo6w
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
On a related note, Elon Musk has previously called government-funded NGOs one of the biggest scams in history, saying they take hundreds of billions in taxpayer dollars with little accountability, leading to massive waste and misallocation. He estimates that up to $700 billion per year is funneled through these so-called nonprofits, many of which he claims are nothing more than money laundering operations disguised as charity.
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker believes that Trump and Doge are perceived as threats to democracy, but are actually threats to the bureaucracy. The speaker claims elected officials have little power relative to the bureaucracy, and Doge is the first real threat to this system.
The speaker describes discovering that small decisions can lead to multibillion-dollar outcomes, citing an example of $1.9 billion being sent to an NGO with little prior activity. They assert that government-funded NGOs are a loophole allowing illegal government activities to occur through nonprofits. These nonprofits are allegedly used for personal enrichment, with individuals becoming wealthy by paying themselves large sums. The speaker calls this a gigantic scam.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: The real threat here is to the bureaucracy. So, like, you probably saw, like, you know, let's say, like, Trump as a threat to our democracy, which is ironic since he was elected with the majority of the, you know, popular vote. They they started saying, I was a threat to democracy. But if you if you just replace threat to democracy with threat to bureaucracy, it makes total sense. Right.
So, I mean, the reality is that our elected officials have very very little power relative to the bureaucracy until Doge. So Doge is a threat to the bureaucracy. It's the first threat to the bureaucracy. Normally, the bureaucracy eats revolutions for breakfast. This is the first time that they're not that the revolution might actually succeed, that we could restore power to the people instead of power to the bureaucracy.
Speaker 1: Now the size of it Yeah. Was when you guys first started investigating it, when you first get in, how much of it was shocking? Like, this just the size of it all.
Speaker 0: Well, the the size of it all, the small decisions result in multibillion dollar outcomes. So, you know, we'd see you know, it was a case where we saw one person was getting $1,900,000,000 sent to their NGO, which basically got formed about a year ago and had no prior really, no no prior activity. So they just stand up a, you know, NGO. The the these the the whole NGO thing is a is a nightmare, and it's it's a misnomer because if you have a government funded nongovernmental organization, you you're you're simply a government funded organization. It it it's a it's an oxymoron.
Speaker 1: Right. It's a loophole.
Speaker 0: Yes. It it basically, the government funded NGOs are a way to do things that that would be illegal if they were the government, but are somehow made legal if it's sent to a so called nonprofit. But these but these nonprofits are then used to people cash out these nonprofits. They become very wealthy through nonprofits. They pay themselves enormous sums through these nonprofits.
Speaker 1: That's it's so insane that that's been going on for so long.
Speaker 0: It's a gigantic scam. Like, of the biggest maybe the biggest scam ever.
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
Instead of focusing on bureaucratic structures, Musk believes the key to understanding waste, fraud, and financial manipulation is to go straight to the source: the computers handling the payments. Musk previously said something to the effect, “I don’t want a job in Washington. All I want is the login for every computer.” Musk explained that policy decisions eventually filter down to computers for implementation. The problem? These systems are buried under layers of bureaucracy, making it nearly impossible for lawmakers—or even agency heads—to track where the money is actually going in real-time. He explained, “The government is run by computers. So you’ve got essentially several hundred computers that effectively run the government. So when somebody, like, even when the President issues an executive order, that’s got to go through a whole bunch of people until ultimately it is implemented at a computer somewhere,” Musk explained. “And if you want to know what the situation is with the accounting and you’re trying to reconcile accounting and get rid of waste and fraud, you must be able to analyze the computer databases. Otherwise, you can’t figure it out because all you’re doing is asking a human who will then ask another human, ask another human, and finally usually ask some contractor who will ask another contractor to do a query on the computer,” Musk lamented.
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 recalls Speaker 1 saying they wanted the login for every computer. Speaker 0 didn't understand it at the time, but now realizes that accessing the computers is key to reforming the government.
Speaker 1 states that the government is run by hundreds of computers. Even a presidential executive order must ultimately be implemented at a computer. To understand accounting and eliminate waste and fraud, one must analyze the computer database. Asking humans to ask other humans and contractors is inefficient. The only way to reconcile databases and eliminate waste and fraud is to examine the computers directly. Speaker 1 refers to this as "reprogramming the matrix" and says it involves understanding and reconciling computer databases to identify waste and fraud.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: I was at your house house in Austin. We were talking about it. And and and you said you you said, look. I I I don't want a job in in Washington. And you said, all I want is the login for every computer.
And I remember thinking at the time that sounded kinda weird. Like, I just didn't get it. And I have to say what what's interesting on this. If I would have thought, like, okay. How do you reform government?
Like, sort of the traditional way to think about it is, okay. Give me an org chart. Let me sit down with the people who are running agencies. And and what you saw immediately is to understand what's really going on, get to the payment systems, get to the computers.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 0: Like like, why are why is getting to the computer so critical to understanding what's actually happening?
Speaker 1: Well, the government is run by computers. So you've got, essentially several hundred computers that effectively run the government. And if you wanna know Did you know that, Ben? No. Like Yeah.
So when somebody like, even when the president issues an executive order, that's gotta go through a whole bunch of people until ultimately it is implemented at a computer somewhere. And if you wanna know what what the situation is with the accounting and you're trying to reconcile accounting and get rid of waste and fraud, you must be able to analyze the computer database. Otherwise, you can't figure it out. Because all you're doing is asking a human who will then ask another human, ask another human, and finally, ask some contractor who will ask another contractor to do a query on the computer. Wow.
That's how it actually works. So it's it's many layers deep. So the only way to reconcile the databases and get rid of waste and fraud is to, to actually look at the computers and see what's going on. So you I I That's what I call that's the like, that's what I when I sort of cryptically refer to reprogramming the matrix, you have to understand what's going at the computers. You have to reconcile the computer databases, in order to identify the waste and fraud.
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
“That’s how it actually works,” he stressed. “So it’s many layers deep. So the only way to reconcile the databases and get rid of waste and fraud is to actually look at the computers and see what’s going on. That’s what I sort of cryptically referred to, reprogramming the matrix. You have to understand what’s going on in the computers. You have to reconcile the computer databases in order to identify the waste of fraud.”
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
Watch the full conversation below: https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=BDREZmpkIz8
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
A little about me—I was a healthcare veteran until Biden’s vax mandates hit America. That’s when I became a citizen journalist. Since then, I’ve clipped thousands of videos featuring dissident doctors dismantling the COVID era, amassing billions of views. If you’ve followed the COVID scam, there’s a good chance you’ve seen my work.
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
On another note, I need your input! Big things are happening! This page is evolving fast. I’m ramping up production, expanding the team, and working hard to bring you the best content possible. The more support this page gets, the better the user experience becomes. If you’re enjoying the work here, consider becoming a paid subscriber. Your support truly makes a difference.
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
Anyway, I want to know what kind of content you enjoy the most. And what topics should I focus on for exclusive, subscriber-only stories?
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
Check out exclusive content for paid subscribers here. More coming soon! https://t.co/O2piU0KX2T
reSee.it AI Summary
I’m noticing significant changes ahead for government employees, as there’s a cave in Pennsylvania filled with over 400 million pieces of retirement information. DOGE plans to digitize all this paperwork within months, streamlining the retirement process. Currently, only 8,000 employees can retire each month due to outdated practices, but with this new system, retirements could be processed in just a few days. It seems like a major shift is on the horizon.
@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra
Whoa Nelly… 👀 This tells me they are preparing for a lot of people in Government to go go bye bye. There is literally a Cave in Pennsylvania Filled with Government Employee Retirement Information, with over 400 Million Pieces of Paper • DOGE aims to digitize every single piece of paper within months, get this…. TO MAKE IT EASIER TO RETIRE PEOPLE. 🤣🤣 • The current retirement process only allows for 8,000 employees to retire a month, and takes many months to retire because of old 1950’s paper practices still in plane. —— Now it will only take a few days. https://rumble.com/v6rax06-doge-will-digitize-the-mine-of-government-retiree-information.html
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker was asked to help fix retirement in the government and discovered that all paper documents for the retirement process are housed in a mine in Pennsylvania. This mine contains 22,000 filing cabinets stacked 10 high, holding 400 million pieces of paper. The retirement process, largely unchanged since the 1950s, involves physical paperwork and can take many months.
Currently, the government can only process about 8,000 retirements a month, with processing times taking six to nine months, and calculations are often incorrect. The goal is to digitize the process, creating an online system that takes only a few days. The speaker believes civil servants are subjected to outdated processes and aims to provide a modern, user-friendly experience. The overhaul is expected to be completed in the next couple of months.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Probably back in February, and they told me something about a a mine was dealt with retirement. And they said that he needs somebody to help out to fix retirement in the government. I I love the challenge, I jumped on board. And it turns out there is actually a mine in Pennsylvania that houses every paper document for the retirement process in the government. Now picture this.
This this giant cave has 22,000 filing cabinets stacked 10 high to house 400,000,000 pieces of paper. It's a process that started in the nineteen fifties and largely hasn't changed in the last seventy years. And so as he dug into it, we found, retirement cases that had so much paper, they had to fit it on a shipping pallet. So, the process takes many months and we're gonna make it just many days.
Speaker 1: Will it be digitized or how
Speaker 0: Absolutely.
Speaker 2: So this
Speaker 0: will be an online digital process that will take just a few days at most. And I really think, you know, it's an injustice to civil servants who are subjected to these processes that are older than the age of half the people watching your show tonight. So we really believe that the government can have an Apple Store like experience, Beautifully designed, great user experience, modern systems.
Speaker 1: Because right now, it's by hand.
Speaker 2: Yes. But the the retirement process is all by paper, literally with people carrying paper and manila envelopes in into this gigantic mine.
Speaker 1: So they can't retire more than a certain number every month? Yes.
Speaker 2: About about 8,000 a month. That that that's how we the reason we discovered it was we were saying, like, well, let's encourage voluntary retire retirement. That's the world. The most you could be that could they could do is 8,000 a month. And and even I don't know what circumstances it can take six to nine months just to just to have your time and paperwork processed, and they often get the calculations wrong.
So, like, well, why would it take so long to retire? And they're like, well, because of the mine. And they're like, what do you mean a mine? What's a mine got to do with retiring? And that's where we discovered that all the retirement stuff is done by still done by paper in a process that looks identical to what occurred in the nineteen fifties.
Like, we took a snapshot of the mine when it first started in the fifties to today. It looks the same.
Speaker 1: It's amazing. So how long do you think it'll take take to turn over?
Speaker 0: We're working as fast as we can. Probably next couple of months, we'll have this this overhauled. And, you know, I really think, again, like, why are we subjecting our federal workers to processes that they they actually have to go through a training just to retire from the government? There's a whole training program that people have to go through in order to retire. I I think we can do better for them.
Speaker 1: Aram Mogonassi, a Doge engineer.
reSee.it AI Summary
I came across a shocking report revealing that 24,500 people over 115 years old claimed $59 million in unemployment benefits. Even more bizarre, 28,000 toddlers aged 1 to 5 received $254 million, and 9,700 individuals with future birthdates claimed $69 million. One claim was made by someone supposedly born in 2154 for $41,000. Elon Musk reacted, noting that the system failed to catch these fraudulent claims, allowing payments to go to those who were either deceased or not yet born. The lack of sanity checks is alarming.
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
REPORT: DOGE just uncovered three findings so outrageous, even Elon Musk said he “had to read it several times” to believe it. First, they found that 24,500 people listed as over 115 years old somehow claimed $59 million in unemployment benefits. Next, 28,000 toddlers between the ages of 1 and 5 were paid out a staggering $254 million. And the wildest part? 9,700 people with birthdates more than 15 years in the future managed to claim $69 million. “In one case, someone with a birthday in 2154 claimed $41k,” the DOGE account reported. Musk reacted on X, saying, “Your tax dollars were going to pay fraudulent unemployment claims for fake people born in the future! This is so crazy that I had to read it several times before it sank in.” In a separate post, Musk wrote: “The oldest living American is 114 years old, so it is safe to say that anyone 115 or older is collecting ‘unemployment’ due to being dead.” He added that there were no sanity checks at all—nothing to catch claims from people who were impossibly young or impossibly old from cashing in on unemployment benefits that should have never been approved in the first place. The system was so broken, it allowed payments to go out to people who either hadn’t been born yet or had already passed away—without raising a single red flag.
Video Transcript AI Summary
Doge's survey of unemployment insurance claims since 2020 revealed that 24.5k people over 150 years old claimed $59 million, 28k people between one and five years old claimed $254 million, and 9.7k people with birth dates over fifteen years in the future claimed $69 million. The Department of Labor stated they are committed to recovering stolen tax dollars. Elon Musk noted the oldest living American is 114, so anyone 150 or older collecting unemployment is likely deceased.
Antonio Gracias found that 1.3 million individuals are on Medicaid, with thousands registered to vote in some states. He stated a program designed for people they want to let in was abused, allowing illegals at the border to enter legally and receive Social Security cards without interviews, accessing every benefit. He claims many of these individuals have registered and voted.
The system is so complex it may need to be dismantled and rebuilt. There is a call for accountability and a need to ensure this fraud never happens again.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Waste, fraud, and abuse being discovered by Doge just keeps getting wilder. The official Doge account posts to x yesterday an initial survey of unemployment insurance claims since 2020 revealed the following. 24.5 k people over a 15 years old claimed $59,000,000 in benefits. 28,000 people between one and five years old claimed $254,000,000 in benefits. 9.7 k people with birth dates over fifteen years in the future claimed 69,000,000 in benefits.
And in one case, someone with a birthday in 02/1954 claimed 41 k. Per Fox News, Fox News Digital reached out to the Department of Labor for comment. Quote, this is another incredible discovery by the Doge team, finding nearly 400,000,000 in fraudulent unemployment payments, Department of Labor secretary Lori Chavez de Rama said in a statement. Quote, the Labor Department is committed to recovering American stolen tax dollars. We will catch these thieves and keep working to root out egregious fraud.
Accountability is here. Elon Musk has responded. Your tax dollars were going to pay fraudulent unemployment claims for fake people born in the future. This is so crazy that I had to read it several times before it sank in. Elon Musk also noted in another post, quote, the oldest living American is a hundred and 14 years old, so it's safe to say that anyone a 15 or older is collecting unemployment due to being dead.
There was no sanity check for impossibly young or impossibly old people for unemployment insurance. And this is obviously just the tip of the iceberg. Doge has also uncovered $5,000,000,000,000 in untraceable payments. There's no record of where these went, just a huge hole in the budget that has been covered up, a $5,000,000,000,000 blank check. You may have heard recently that the head of the Social Security Administration quickly resigned.
Well, Antonio Gracias, a billionaire and major Democrat donor, has volunteered his time to find a way to save the Social Security Administration. What he has found is nothing short of a criminal enterprise. Listen to Antonio explain what he found on the All In podcast.
Speaker 1: 1,300,000 of them are on Medicaid right now. And we looked at voter rolls, and we found that thousands of them registered to vote in a handful of states. I mean, it is shockingly bad. And this is the tip of the iceberg, guys. We mapped the system from enumeration.
It's how you get your number all the way to the end, went to the offices and saw how the offices operate. And in that process, one of our engineers found this data called enumeration beyond entry. It had this giant ramp to it, and that just jumped out at us. And we're like, what is that? And so we dug into it.
What happened was this program was designed for people that we wanna let in, like the care program, which are the Afghans. They would be in this number. What jumped out at us wasn't that this is here because it has legitimate use. It's the growth. Why did it grow this fast?
That's what we dug into. What we find here is that a legitimate program was the word I used abused. So they allowed people that were illegals at the border to come in legally. They were giving people at times notices to appear, and what that allows you to do is come in the country, and then you schedule a court date, which is like six years out. Six years out is the average, by way.
It could be longer than that. And while you're waiting for your court date, you could fill out an asylum application. Once the application's in, you can file another form, seven six five, to get a work authorization. Once you get that, you get a seven six six, and we automatically send you a Social Security card in the mail. No interview at all.
That is the majority of the growth you see in these numbers. We found that every benefit from what they was being accessed by these people. 1,300,000 of them are on Medicaid right now, today. And by the way, it's just ramping. It's just starting.
And we looked at voter rolls, and we found that thousands of them registered to vote in a handful of states. And then we went even further with those friendly states and found that many of those people had actually voted. It was shocking to us. If I hadn't seen it with my own eyes, I wouldn't believe it. And this is the tip of the iceberg.
Speaker 0: So what we see here is quite clearly that the system isn't even broken at this point. Broken would suggest that you can find the issue like a mechanic. Your car is making this noise. Here is the noise. We can fix this problem.
But what we're seeing is that the system in its current form is so massive and complex and convoluted to the point that it's become virtually impossible to find the broken piece. It's almost like, if I could dare say, this should be totally dismantled and rebuilt from the ground up. It's like renovating a house with damaged foundations. It doesn't matter what you do. The cracks will always reappear.
So what's being done about this? Do we need a new system? What would that look like? Well, that's something for the public to decide because this is beyond unsustainable. And apart from this, what about the accountability for those involved with this fraud?
We need Cash Patel, Pam Bondi involved in this immediately. The fraud uncovered by Doge is happening before our eyes, but we need to ensure this never happens again. This is surely being done by design. You don't accidentally end up with a system that allows this. Now we will keep you informed about what comes next.
I dare say we surely haven't seen the worst of it just yet. You can help keep this show truly independent by supporting our carefully selected sponsors who share our values. Our sponsors at Starlink123.com/pulse, part of the satellite phone store, are bringing you reliable, high speed, portable Internet with Starlink bundles exclusive to the daily Pulse audience. Head to Starlink123.com/Pulse or give them a call today on +1 (941) 394-0406 to take advantage of the Starlink Gen three exclusive bundle with zero upfront cost for seamless, truly wireless Internet anywhere or the Starlink Mini discounted for our viewers. By using our link, you'll also get a free solar charger and power bank with your Starlink purchase service agreement so you can charge and power up your Starlink using the power of the sun anywhere, anytime.
You'll also get exclusive access to 247 from a real human being. And unlike some suppliers, they also accept payment via credit card, net 30, checks, wire, and more. So you always have plenty of options and, again, that crucial twenty four seven human support. That link again is Starlink123.com/Pulse or call +1 (941) 394-0406. Make sure to give the promo code pulse to get your free solar charger and power bank when purchasing any of the Starlink options.
You can also access 10% off store wide by calling +1 (941) 394-0406 and giving promo code PULSE for any other items purchased like Faraday bags, satellite phones, bulletproof backpacks, and much more. They have a huge range of products and services. Again, that is Starlink one two three dot com slash Pulse, or give them a call on +1 (941) 394-0406. And make sure to let them know you're a daily Pulse viewer so you can redeem your free bundle items. Starlink123.com/Pulse, also linked below.
reSee.it AI Summary
I shared some shocking findings from our DOGE team’s investigations. We uncovered misuse of funds, like a $4B COVID relief fund used for lavish parties and loans given to deceased individuals. We also found that taxpayer money supports questionable projects, such as alpaca farming in Peru, while only a fraction reaches the intended recipients. Additionally, federal retirement processes are absurdly inefficient, taking six months to complete. Our team, including members who sacrificed their education for this mission, is dedicated to rooting out fraud and waste in government spending.
@RedWave_Press - RedWave Press
A DOGE member reveals the Department of Education had a $4B C*VID fund, and people were taking that money and using it to rent out Caesars Palace and stadiums for parties. “And so the one change that DOGE made… was we had the simple requirement that if you draw down money, you must first upload a receipt.” “And upon [enacting this policy], nobody drew down any money anymore.”
Video Transcript AI Summary
The Treasury pays out $5 trillion per year, and previously, payments lacked budget codes, obscuring their purpose. A $4 billion COVID fund in the Department of Education had no receipt requirements, leading to funds being used to rent Caesars Palace and stadiums for parties.
When a receipt upload requirement was implemented, fund drawdowns ceased, even though the receipts were not verified. Fraud often starts small and hidden, but escalates over time if unchecked, eventually becoming brazen, such as renting out stadiums.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: So actually, lot of great work at the treasury this week. One of the crazy things at with regards to the treasury is that when a payment is made and the computers of the treasury actually pay about $5,000,000,000,000 per year like crazy amounts, there was formerly not a budget code on there. So if some payment was made you didn't know actually what it was for. It could have been for anything. Yeah.
There was a a $4,000,000,000 COVID fund in the Department of Education and there was no receipts required so people could just draw down on it. And when people looked into it, this wasn't just before us. They found that money was being used to rent out Caesars Palace for parties, rent out stadiums, etcetera. And so the one change that Doge made with Pharm Education is we had the simple requirement that if you draw down money, you must first upload a receipt. That was the only change that was made.
You must upload your receipt and upon doing so, nobody drew down any money anymore.
Speaker 1: Yes. But we we didn't say that we'd check the receipt. You could send a fake receipt. You could send a picture of your dog. Anything.
Anything. Anything. And and they but as soon as we asked for anything at all, they were suddenly the requests were like, oh, we don't need it anymore. That's interesting. They were renting Caesar's Palace?
Yes. They were like basically partying on the tax share of money. Stadiums? Yes. Leasing stadiums.
Leasing stadiums. For what? For parties, basically.
Speaker 0: For parties?
Speaker 1: Yes. That's a big party. It's a big party. You'd think if you were stealing, you'd start small. They do start small.
But then over what happens is over the years so generally, the fraud starts out small and they try to hide it. But then year after year, if nobody stops the fraud, it gets more and more brazen. And and every year it gets bigger until they're literally renting out stadiums. I like in I think a million dollars to rent out a stadium? Fraud infra infragrante delecto.
Okay? We're talking at scale.
@RedWave_Press - RedWave Press
Our tax dollars went to a former Taliban member and private jet flights for employees at the “Institute of Peace.”
@RedWave_Press - RedWave Press
Full interview:
@RedWave_Press - RedWave Press
Babies and d*ad people are getting hundreds of millions of your tax dollars for their small businesses.
@RedWave_Press - RedWave Press
Congrats you are funding alpaca farming in Peru and improving the marketability of peas in Guatemala through jam.
@RedWave_Press - RedWave Press
Save the baby pandas!
@RedWave_Press - RedWave Press
It takes federal employees 6-months to retire. https://t.co/yl8sJ4dQpc
@RedWave_Press - RedWave Press
There is a law that requires the U.S. Postal Service to have a balanced budget even though they have lost money every year since 2007. https://t.co/C6eFaUtnso
@RedWave_Press - RedWave Press
Meet"'Big Balls" https://t.co/WnF5JOXeLJ
@RedWave_Press - RedWave Press
DOGE employees have sacrificed everything to serve our country, including dropping out of Harvard University. https://t.co/I3jAFnTlnH
reSee.it AI Summary
I recently shared a series of posts revealing shocking government spending abuses uncovered by Elon Musk and the DOGE team. They exposed a $4 billion COVID fund in the Department of Education that was misused, and the United States Institute of Peace, which ironically had loaded guns and questionable contracts. The Small Business Administration even issued loans to deceased individuals. I also visited a limestone mine where retirement paperwork is still handled on paper. Throughout, we met Big Balls, a key figure in rooting out fraud in federal payments.
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
🚨 Your tax dollars have been set on fire by the government—and it’s much worse than you think. Jesse Watters just sat down with Elon Musk and the DOGE team to pull back the curtain. What they uncovered will leave you speechless. And yes, you finally get to meet Big Balls. His backstory did not disappoint. 🧵 THREAD
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
📍Don't forget to bookmark this thread. You'll want to remember what the bureaucracy spent your money on before DOGE stepped in. Now, onto the clips!
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
It kicked off with a bombshell. Elon Musk and his DOGE team had uncovered one of the most outrageous COVID-era scams inside the Department of Education. There was a $4 billion fund sitting there—and no one had to provide a receipt to use it. As one DOGE staffer explained, “There was a four billion-dollar COVID fund in the Department of Education. There was no receipt required so people could just draw down on it.” Naturally, the money went everywhere it shouldn’t have. “When people looked into it—they found that money was being used to rent out Caesars Palace for parties, rent out stadiums, et cetera.” To stop the abuse, DOGE made one change. “The one change that DOGE made with the Department of Education, is we had the simple requirement that if you draw down money you must first upload a receipt.” That’s it. Upload a receipt. “That was the only change made—you must upload your receipt—and upon doing so nobody drew down money anymore.” The grift dried up overnight.
Video Transcript AI Summary
A $4 billion COVID fund in the Department of Education had no receipt requirements, allowing people to draw down money freely. Upon investigation, it was found that the funds were used to rent Caesar's Palace and stadiums for parties.
The Department of Education implemented a simple change requiring recipients to upload a receipt before drawing down money. Although the receipts were not checked and could be fake, requests for money stopped entirely.
Initially, fraud starts small and is concealed, but if left unchecked, it grows more brazen over time, eventually escalating to renting out stadiums.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: There was a a $4,000,000,000 COVID fund, in the Department of Education, and there was no receipts required. So people could just draw down on it. And when people looked into it, this wasn't just us before us. They found that money was being used to rent out Caesar's Palace parties, rent out stadiums, etcetera. And so the one change that Doge made with part of education is we had the simple requirement that if you draw down money, you must first upload a receipt.
That was the only change that was made, you must upload your receipt And upon doing so
Speaker 1: Yes.
Speaker 0: Nobody drew down any money anymore.
Speaker 1: Yes. But we we didn't say that we'd check the receipt. You could send a fake You could send a picture of your dog. Anything. Anything.
Anything. And and they but as soon as we asked for anything at all, suddenly the requests were like, oh, we don't need it anymore. That's interesting. They were renting Caesar's Palace. Yes.
They were, like, basically partying on the tax share of money. Stadiums? Yes. Leasing stadiums. Leasing stadiums.
For what? For parties, basically.
Speaker 0: For parties?
Speaker 1: Yes. That's a big party. It's a big party. You'd think if you were stealing, you'd start small. They do start small.
But then over what happens is over the years so, generally, the fraud starts out small and they try to hide it. But then year after year, if nobody stops the fraud, it gets more and more brazen, and and every year it gets bigger until they're literally renting out stadiums.
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
But that was just the beginning. Next up: the United States Institute of Peace—a government agency with “peace” in the name that turned out to be anything but. “We went into the agency and found they had loaded guns inside of their headquarters. Institute for Peace,” a DOGE staffer said. Musk put it bluntly: “Any organizational name is going to kind of be the opposite of the title.” And according to the team, that proved to be true. “It was by far the least peaceful agency we’ve worked with, ironically.” But the deeper they looked, the worse it got. “Additionally we found they were spending money on things like private jets and they even had a $130,000-dollar contract with a former member of the Taliban. This is real. We don’t encounter that in most agencies.” Guns. Jets. Taliban contracts. All tucked under a banner of “peace.”
Video Transcript AI Summary
The United States Institute of Peace was described as the least peaceful agency encountered, with loaded guns found inside its headquarters. The agency was allegedly spending money on private jets and had a $130,000 contract with a former member of the Taliban for generic services with no clear description. It is unclear what the money was for. Since the country's founding, the number of agencies has increased from four to over 400. President Trump signed two executive orders to reduce the number of agencies, including the Institute of Peace, prompting an investigation that uncovered weapons and payments to the Taliban.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: United States Institute of Peace, is definitely the agency we had the most fight at. We actually went into the agency and found that they had loaded guns inside of their headquarters. Institute for Peace. I mean, given company any given organizational name is gonna be it's gonna be the opposite of the title. Right.
Yeah. Yeah. And so it was the by far the least peaceful agency that we've worked with Yeah. Ironically. Of course.
Additionally, we found that they were spending money on things like private jets, and they even had a 130,000 contract with a former member of the Taliban. This is this is real. We don't encounter that in most agencies. Yeah. What was the money going to the Taliban for?
So it was a contractor. They received a hundred and $30,000 for generic services. And to Elon's point, there was not actually a clear description of what the contractor services were for. Was it for opium? Unclear.
Or weapon or weapons? Or nothing. Or or nothing. Or or abroad. Or, yeah, nothing.
And and you naturally have to ask the question, how did we get here? Like, when the country was founded, there were only four agencies. Today, there are over 400. So there's been a 100 x increase in the number of agencies since the founding of the nation. And thanks to president Trump, he's now signed two executive orders to start to reduce the number of agencies in the government, and the Institute of Peace was one of them, which is why our team went in to try and understand what was going on.
And that's when we found all of the craziness, like the weapons in their armory. We found the payments to the Taliban.
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
Before we roll the next clip: if you’re not following me, you’re missing out on critical updates. Hit the bell 🔔 to stay sharp and informed. → @VigilantFox Now, back to the story you came for. https://t.co/lvNXgz2ciS
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
But the Institute of Peace saga went deeper. Just when you thought it couldn’t get more surreal—the cover-up began. DOGE had barely walked through the doors before the agency started deleting records. “Just a few hours we got into their headquarters we found their chief accountant had actually deleted over a terabyte of accounting records from several years.” The obvious question came up: why? “You would have to ask the question, well why would somebody do that? The DOGE team was fortunately able to recover that data with the help of a few great employees at the Institute of Peace.” Once they had the files back, the full picture emerged. “They received $55 million a year from Congress and on the money that went unspent, instead of returning that to Congress, they would sweep it into a private bank account which has no congressional oversight and that’s what they would use to fund events at their headquarters and the private jets.” For the DOGE team, this wasn’t just an example of government waste—it was something far worse. “I think it’s a great example because most Americans don’t know what’s going on at a lot of these smaller agencies and this is—I think this is the most extreme case of some of the wasteful spending we are finding.”
Video Transcript AI Summary
Shortly after arriving at the Institute of Peace headquarters, the speaker's team discovered that the chief accountant had deleted over a terabyte of accounting records. The team recovered the data with help from Institute of Peace employees. The speaker alleges that the Institute received $55 million annually from Congress, and instead of returning unspent funds, they transferred it to a private bank account without congressional oversight. These funds were allegedly used for events at their headquarters and private jets. The speaker believes this exemplifies wasteful spending within smaller agencies. Another speaker claims agencies are hiding money and sending it to the Taliban, and that there were loaded weapons in the Institute of Peace buildings. The deletion of financial information is characterized as a cover-up.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: So just a few hours after we got into their headquarters, we found that their chief accountant had actually deleted over a terabyte of accounting records from several years. So you'd have to ask the question, well, why would somebody do that? And the Doge team, fortunately, was able to recover that data with the help of a few great employees at the Institute of Peace. And I think the most troubling thing was they received $55,000,000 a year from congress, and any money that went unspent instead of returning that to congress, they would sweep it into a private bank account which had no congressional oversight, and that's what they would use to fund things like events at their headquarters and the private jets. And so I think it's a great example because most most Americans don't know what's going on at a lot of these smaller agencies and this is, I think the most extreme case of some of the, a wasteful spend that we're finding.
Speaker 1: So the agencies are hiding money from you. They're sending it to the Taliban. They have loaded weapons in the department buildings.
Speaker 0: At the Institute of Peace.
Speaker 1: At the Institute of Peace. Yeah. That's right. So this is a cover up when you guys roll in?
Speaker 2: This one, yes, a cover up.
Speaker 1: It's a cover
Speaker 2: did delete a vast amount of financial information. That's really a definition of a cover
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
Then came something so ridiculous it sounded like satire. The Small Business Administration had sent out over $300 million in loans… to people who were already dead. And that’s not even the wildest part. A DOGE staffer detailed: “Is the Small Business Administration giving loans to dead people, people over the age of 120? The answer was yes and it was around $330 million in total.” Musk followed up with the part that shocked everyone at the table. “And also people with birthdays in the future.” “Like, the birthdate I think in one case was like—we’re talking about your great grandchildren. With the birthdate, like, of 2165.” “More than a century from now was the birth date.” “Because your birthday is in the future, the far future. Not like next year. This is either fraudulent or we have your birthday wrong.” Billions in taxpayer money—and no one bothered to check the dates.
Video Transcript AI Summary
The Small Business Administration reportedly gave loans to dead people and people with impossible ages, totaling around $330 million. Some recipients had birth dates placing them over 115 years old, while others had birth dates in the future, such as 2165. These errors suggest potential fraud or incorrect data entry. The question is whether these discrepancies are due to typos or identity theft.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Is the small business administration giving loans to dead people, people over the age of 20? The answer was yes, and, it was around $330,000,000 in total.
Speaker 1: So People with a birthday that could not possibly be real.
Speaker 0: Yeah.
Speaker 1: Meaning, they're they're over a hundred they're 15 years old or older. The oldest living American is 14. So it's safe to say if anybody is in the in the system as a hundred and 15 years or older, that is fair. And and also people with birth dates in the future. What does that mean?
Well, in one I mean, I think the like, the birth date birth date, I think, in one case was like Fetuses? We're getting No. Not even. No. Really really sort of a you're talking about, like, your great grandchildren.
Like like with the birth date like of I think it was like 2165. So more than a century from now was the birth date. George Jetson was getting paid. Yes. Because your birthday is in the future.
Like the far like the far future, not like next year. Right. And we either this is either fraudulent or we have your birthday wrong. It's either a typo or someone stealing. Which is it?
Yeah. Right. Yes. You should you should at least ask which is it.
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
But there is a light at the end of the tunnel...or mine in this case. One of the most bizarre symbols of government inefficiency is a limestone mine in Pennsylvania—where retirement paperwork is still handled the old-fashioned way: on paper. Joe Gebbia, co-founder of Airbnb and now part of DOGE, decided to see it for himself. “I had a chance to go to the mine and so I took a golf cart through security down into the side of the mountain and I entered this whole space of caverns and roads. And we get to a metal door and I open it up and there in front of me is a sea of filing cabinets from the 1960s.” He painted the scene: “I’m walking around, it’s super chilly and smells like paper. I realize, for a mine, it’s a great mine. It’s secure, it’s well-lit. Temperature controlled——The question we why are we still using paper in 2025?” He even brought along replica folders to show just how outdated the system is. “I would rather do my taxes in the dark, than have to go through this.” But this story had a win. “What we are doing is we are bringing some process online with modern software. I’m excited to share that as of tonight we have 25 retirees going through an entirely online retirement process in the government for the very first time.”
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 visited a mine used for storing physical media, specifically filing cabinets dating back to the 1960s, containing retirement paperwork. The speaker questions why paper is still used in 2025, showing an example of a retiree's case folder, which is compiled by hand and moved through the mine. Speaker 1 adds that the retirement process can take over six months due to the manual compilation and storage of paper documents, with calculations also done by hand. Speaker 0 states that the paperwork is extensive and difficult to process. They are implementing modern software to bring the retirement process online, and currently have 25 retirees going through an entirely online retirement process for the first time.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Help me out with retirement, and a few weeks ago, I had a chance to go to the mine. And so I took a golf cart through security down into the side of a mountain and entered daylight left, and I entered this whole space of caverns and roads. And we get to a metal door, and I open it up and there in front of me is sea of filing cabinets from the nineteen sixties. And I'm walking around, it's super chilly, smells like paper. And I, you know, I realized for for a as a mind, it's a great mind.
It's secure. It's well lit, temperature controlled. And so the question we're not ask we're asking is not is this a good place to store physical media, which it is. It's amazing for that. The question is, why are we still using paper in 2025?
So I brought something to show you Yeah. Of what's inside the mind.
Speaker 1: And and only the the normal process for retirement is over could be over six months. So once you file your retirement papers, that's why it takes six months.
Speaker 0: Mhmm. What what is that? So these are replica case folders that people use to retire from the government. And so these are all compiled by hand, moved around on carts through the mine. It takes many months to do that, and this one is a single retiree's paper required to leave the government.
Speaker 1: Wants to retire, they can't because it takes six months to compile the paper and carry the paper into a mine where it is stored. And also, all the calculations are done by hand.
Speaker 0: Everything has to Reconciled, adjudicated, this is thicker than the Word of the Rings trilogy.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 0: And if I had to process this, I would rather do my taxes in the dark than have to go through
Speaker 1: this. Yeah.
Speaker 0: And so what we're doing is we're we're bringing this process online with modern software. And, I'm excited to share that as of tonight, we have 25 retirees going through an entirely online retirement process in the government for the very first time.
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
And finally, we got to meet the legend himself: Big Balls. For months, he was a mysterious figure inside the DOGE operation—known only by his nickname. Then Jesse Watters asked, “Who’s Big Balls?” A voice from across the table answered without hesitation: “That’s me.” Musk leaned in: “That should be obvious.” The nickname, it turns out, started as a joke on LinkedIn. He wanted to stand out in a sea of suits who played it safe. He didn’t expect anyone to notice. They noticed. But there’s more to Big Balls than a meme. He plays a key role in the team, hunting down fraud buried in federal payment systems. “I’m working on some payment computer stuff,” he said. “We started looking into the payment computers to root out fraud and waste.” And what they found was staggering. In many cases, you could pull up a line item for $20 million—and find no record of where it went. No trail. No explanation. Just holes in the system. That’s what DOGE is trying to fix. And Big Balls is leading the charge.
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker uses "BigBalls" as their LinkedIn username to avoid being perceived as overly serious or risk-averse. They didn't expect anyone to notice it.
Currently, the speaker is working on payment computer-related tasks, specifically aiming to eliminate fraud and waste. The initiative involves examining payment computers, revealing a lack of accounting for where payments are directed. For instance, a $20,000,000 line item lacks a clear destination, a common issue in many payment systems.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Big balls. It's big. That should be obvious. Why do they call you Big balls? I just said it as my LinkedIn username.
Okay. Well, people on LinkedIn take themselves, like, super seriously, and they're pretty adverse to risk. And I was like, well, I wanna be neither of those things. So I just I said it, and honestly, I didn't even think anyone would notice. Yeah.
When you clicking this so cringe. What does BigBalls do? Right now, I'm working on some payment computer stuff. So one of our initiatives is to root out fraud and waste. And to do that, we started looking at the payment computers.
And as mentioned earlier, like, there is no accounting of what payments actually go to the payment computer. So, like, we you look at a specific line item, like $20,000,000. You're like, okay. Well, what is this money going to? And for the majority of payment systems, it's like, well, we don't really know.
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
Thanks for reading. If you appreciate this kind of reporting, follow me for more daily threads. —> @VigilantFox Looking for another 🧵? Victor Davis Hanson just revealed the real reason Trump’s enemies are spiraling. https://t.co/CbXl1wCZjc
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
🚨 Victor Davis Hanson just revealed the real reason Trump’s enemies are spiraling. 1. The polls are a lie. 2. The Democrats have no backup plan. They’re trapped on a sinking ship—and they know it. Then VDH names the one weapon they’re still clinging to. And suddenly, everything makes sense. 🧵 THREAD
@VigilantFox - The Vigilant Fox 🦊
Massive shout-out to @overton_news for cutting together that first clip in this thread! They’re hands down one of the best news accounts on X! Do yourself a favor and give them a follow. —> @overton_news https://t.co/ZteULmww5d
reSee.it AI Summary
I urge America to reflect on the implications of a master database containing personal information on every citizen. It's too late to say no, as Peter Thiel's influence grows through Palantir and his connections to figures like JD Vance and Ivan Raiklin. Thiel's past, including his upbringing in apartheid Africa, raises questions about his motives. His 2010 speech reveals a vision of using technology to escape dysfunctional politics, promoting ideas that challenge democratic norms. This trajectory suggests a troubling shift towards a network state and a departure from traditional governance.
@jimstewartson - Jim Stewartson, Antifascist 🇨🇦🇺🇦🏴☠️🇺🇸
AMERICA: Look deep into your soul. Really think hard about this. Do you want this person to have a “master database” of every single man, woman and child, including biometric, DNA, tax, medical, psychological and financial information? Did you answer “no”? Well it’s too late.
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker was asked what they would say to those who think a shooter is a hero because he killed a healthcare executive who he believed was presiding over a system that kills thousands of Americans by denying them coverage. The speaker responded that they don't know what to say, but that one should try to make an argument and convince people to change the system that way, as violence is not the answer. The speaker stated that they don't think there is anything heroic about the shooter's motives.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: And and to those who think this shooter is a hero because he did it because he said this health care executive was presiding over a health care system which kills thousands of Americans by denying them cover, what would you say to them?
Speaker 1: It's I don't know what to say. I think I still think you should try to make an argument. And I think this is, you know, there may be things wrong with our healthcare system, but you have to make an argument and you have to try to find a way to convince people and change it by that. And this is, you know, this is not going to work. Yeah.
I don't know. It's, yeah. I mean, there are all sorts of things one could say about it. But I think, and again, I think, you know, I I think the motives feel I I don't I don't I don't go into all the particulars here, but I I I don't think I I don't think there's anything heroic about them.
@jimstewartson - Jim Stewartson, Antifascist 🇨🇦🇺🇦🏴☠️🇺🇸
Peter Thiel founded Palantir which is becoming the “operating system of the government.” Peter Thiel invested in Curtis Yarvin’s Urbit which aims to be the “operating system of the network state.” The goal of the “network state” is to destroy the government. 🤔
@jimstewartson - Jim Stewartson, Antifascist 🇨🇦🇺🇦🏴☠️🇺🇸
Now, who supplied this magical software to the NYPD? I’m sure you can guess. Let’s take a look. Remember, their *stated goal* is to become the “operating system of the government.” What on earth could go wrong?
@jimstewartson - Jim Stewartson, Antifascist 🇨🇦🇺🇦🏴☠️🇺🇸
Fun Fact: In 2017, Peter Thiel gave Ivan Raiklin $300K to run for Senate.
@jimstewartson - Jim Stewartson, Antifascist 🇨🇦🇺🇦🏴☠️🇺🇸
Dear @nytimes, the reason Dan Bongino brought up the pipe bombs is he & Kash Patel know who did it. They were hired to cover up for all of the crimes of Donald Trump’s retinue, including Mike Flynn and his terrorist @IvanRaiklin who openly planned J6 & invented the “Pence Card.”
@jimstewartson - Jim Stewartson, Antifascist 🇨🇦🇺🇦🏴☠️🇺🇸
In 2011, atheist undergrad JD Vance met Peter Thiel at Yale. Thiel groomed him until 2019 when Thiel gave him $15 million & Rumble stock to convert to Catholicism and run for Senate. Peter Thiel has been connected to Opus Dei for at least four decades. https://www.mind-war.com/p/catholic-coup-jd-vance-paypal-mafia
Catholic Coup: JD Vance, PayPal Mafia, Opus Dei & Knights of Malta
It’s not Dan Brown, it’s real life, and it’s time to get serious about it.
mind-war.com
@jimstewartson - Jim Stewartson, Antifascist 🇨🇦🇺🇦🏴☠️🇺🇸
So, what the hell is wrong with Peter Thiel? He spent his childhood in colonial apartheid SW Africa in a school where they greeted each other with “Heil Hitler”—while his father Klaus used Black slave labor to mine uranium for SA’s secret nuclear program. https://www.mind-war.com/p/peter-thiels-radioactive-childhood
Peter Thiel’s Radioactive Childhood
Klaus Thiel moved his family to occupied Namibia to help the South African apartheid regime create a secret nuclear program
mind-war.com
@jimstewartson - Jim Stewartson, Antifascist 🇨🇦🇺🇦🏴☠️🇺🇸
Listen to this speech from 15 years ago, or read it, transcript below, and understand that this is evil incarnate—a man who knows his ideas mean suffering and death, and plotted with the PayPal Mafia to use technology to force it down our throats anyway.
@jimstewartson - Jim Stewartson, Antifascist 🇨🇦🇺🇦🏴☠️🇺🇸
Peter Thiel gave a speech in a Hilton in 2010 that holds the keys to unlocking the source of many of America’s most severe problems. Key quote: “The task in this world… where politics has become so broken… is to find a way to escape from it. It’s not a way to fix it.” Palantir is currently tightening its grip around all of our data. Elon Musk is diverting untold billions into a Mars fantasy. All of the anarchist, antidemocratic ideas of the PayPal Mafia and the “Dark Enlightenment”—to use technology as an “escape”—were already well in process 15 years ago. —The internet as “alternate virtual reality” so you don’t have to “constantly convince people.” This is why he funded Satoshi (Bitcoin), MAGA3X (Pizzagate, Q), and pushed Musk to buy Twitter —PayPal (now blockchain/crypto/BTC) was to “overturn the monetary system” —“Escape” now more often referred to as “exit” —“Autonomous countries” now known as the “network state” JD Vance is a full member of the cult of the broligarchs. Unfortunately, this has been a very thorough coup and they have backup. It’s worth really absorbing what the living Antichrist, Peter Thiel, is saying here: “I don't think despair is the only answer. And I don't think, and it's because I don't think politics is the only way to go. And my thinking on this, you know, started to take a turn towards a more optimistic perspective in the mid to late '90s when I got involved in the tech boom in Silicon Valley. I ended up being the co-founder of a company called PayPal where -- and the initial founding vision was that we were going to use technology to change the whole world and basically overturn on the monetary system of the world. And, you know, we can debate on how much it succeeded or how little it succeeded. And there were parts of it that I think have worked, and parts of it were, you know, the jury is still out. But the basic idea was that we could never win an election on getting certain things. Because we were in such a small minority. But maybe you could actually unilaterally change the world without having to constantly convince people and beg people and plead with people who are never going to agree with you through a technological means. And this is where I think technology is this incredible alternative to politics. And, you know, there are a number of different technologies we can outline, but the task in this world where politics has become so broken and so dysfunctional is to find a way to escape from it. It's not a way to fix it. It is a way to escape. And there are, you know, a number of different options. I think the promising one of the 1990s and this last decade has been to escape onto the Internet and to sort of create an alternate virtual reality. Questions, of course, is still how does it intersect with the real world? There are, I think, escaping to outer space is a promise, although I think the space technology is not quite there. So I think that's sort of for the second half of the 21st century. I think we can try to, you know, create autonomous countries on oceans, underwater, all sorts of other spaces. But I think technology is the vehicle for how we should be looking to escape and move beyond politics as we find it today.”
Video Transcript AI Summary
Despair isn't the only answer, and politics isn't the only way. The speaker's thinking shifted in the late nineties during the tech boom in Silicon Valley, where he cofounded PayPal. The initial vision was to use technology to change the world and overturn the monetary system.
The idea was to unilaterally change the world through technology without convincing people who disagree. Technology is an alternative to politics, and the task is to escape from broken politics, not fix it. Escaping onto the internet to create an alternate virtual reality has promise, though its intersection with the real world is still in question. Escaping to outer space is a future promise, and creating autonomous countries on oceans or underwater are other options. Technology is the vehicle to escape and move beyond politics.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: You know, don't think despair is the only answer. And I don't think and it's because I don't think politics is the only way to go. And my my thinking on this, you know, started to take a turn towards a more optimistic perspective in in the mid to late nineties when I got involved in the tech boom in Silicon Valley. I ended up being the cofounder of a company called PayPal where, and the initial founding vision was that we were going to use technology to change the whole world and basically overturn on the monetary system of the world. And, you know, we can debate on how much it succeeded or how little it succeeded.
And there were parts of it that I I think have worked and parts of it were, you know, the jury still out. But the basic idea was that, we could never win an election on on on getting certain things because we were in such a small minority. But maybe you could actually unilaterally change the world without having to constantly convince people and beg people and plead with people who are never gonna agree with you through technological means. And this is where I think technology is this incredible alternative to politics and and you know, there are a number of different technologies we can outline but the the task in this world where politics has become so broken and so dysfunctional is to find a way to escape from it. It's not a way to fix it.
It is a way to escape. And there are, you know, a number of different options. I think the promising one of the nineteen nineties and this last decade has been to escape onto the internet and to sort of create an alternate virtual reality. Questions, of course, is is still how does it intersect with the real world? There are I think escaping to outer space, is a promise, although I think the space technology is not quite there.
So I think that's sort of for the second half of the twenty first century. I think we can try to, you know, create autonomous countries on oceans, underwater, all sorts of other spaces. But I think technology is the vehicle for how we should, we should be looking to, to escape and move beyond, beyond politics as we find it today.
@jimstewartson - Jim Stewartson, Antifascist 🇨🇦🇺🇦🏴☠️🇺🇸
I wrote about Trump’s “Golden Dome,” the largest hoax ever attempted—a $175 billion boondoggle implanted in Trump’s orange cranium by the worst people on the entire planet. The PayPal Mafia is creating a new arms race in space for profit, and control. https://www.mind-war.com/p/space-monsters-golden-dome-is-the
Space Monsters! “Golden Dome” Is the Biggest Hoax Ever Attempted
How the PayPal Mafia used psychological warfare and active measures to convince Donald Trump to start a new arms race and fill their pockets.
mind-war.com
reSee.it AI Summary
I note that PAM handles nearly $5 trillion a year, with payments sent without categorization or description—no trail, effectively blank, untraceable checks. If this were a public company, it would be delisted and leadership jailed; yet it’s normal for the government. The contrast underscores the accountability gap.
@XFreeze - X Freeze
Elon Musk on untraceable government payment systems: The main federal payments system, known as PAM, processes nearly $5 trillion a year, roughly $1 billion every hour When it was reviewed, payments could be sent without a categorization code and without any description No clear trail. No explanation. Essentially blank, untraceable checks This is the kind of thing that if it was done as a public company, the company would be immediately delisted and the executive team would be thrown in prison But this is just normal for the government That contrast says everything about the accountability gap
Video Transcript AI Summary
The discussion centers on the main payments system, referred to as PAM, described as the “payments computer” and commonly called PAM by everyone. PAM is responsible for almost $5,000,000,000,000 in payments per year, which equates to roughly a billion dollars every hour. The speakers indicate that, upon their arrival, they observed what they describe as a severe lack of payment metadata: payments could be processed with no payment categorization code and no description, effectively creating payments that were “untraceable blank checks.”
The speakers contrast this situation with how such conduct would be viewed in the private sector, stating that if this were a public company, the company would be immediately delisted and the executive team would be thrown in prison. They emphasize that, in the context they are discussing, this kind of exposure is considered normal within the government. The overall point is that the payments system operates with extremely little traceability or descriptive data attached to transactions, creating a scenario they characterize as highly problematic and unacceptable in the private sector but commonplace in the government.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: The the main, payments computer is called PAM, like payments account payment accounts master database or something like that. But anyone calls it PAM. That's responsible for almost $5,000,000,000,000 payments a year, roughly a billion dollars an hour. And, when we came there, we're we're looking at the famine. It's like the the payments have no, you could put a payment through with with no payment categorization code and and no description on the payment.
Like, basically, untraceable blank checks. This is the kind of thing that if if it was done as a public company, the company would, be immediately delisted, and the, executive team would be thrown in prison. But this is just normal at the government.