The Populist Moment

29:49I understand, but it's July of 2026, okay? By next year, by a year from now, we're in it. We're in the race for 28. This is not that far off. And think about somebody, a candidate out there, who goes on all of those shows, who's telling you, who's delivering this message. That we're against the wars, against the corruption, against all of this insanity. it's going to be uh the hosts of those shows and the audience of the audiences of those shows are going to be primed to be receptive to that type of invitation i mean it's like it's it it could not be more set up that all of these guys and i think in a lot of ways on these issues they represent super majorities of the american people that they're like it's like yeah we hate wokeness and the open borders and the COVID restrictions and the entire, all the fruit that the Democratic establishment gave us.

30:51We hate all of that. And we also hate that Donald Trump has turned his back on his own people and launched this stupid war. We also hate all of that too. That is exactly where they're all at. And tell me that that's not perfect fertile ground for a populist candidate. Now, I will say that in within that dynamic, it is in with within that, you know, context that I was just so interested to see what happened with with with Roe Kahana and Jeremy Scahill yesterday. You know, I brought it up. I was I was interested. Jank hadn't seen it yet, but I saw then today it was going super viral. um and everybody of course all of the zionists are are flipping out over it but um so the the drop site guys who i've been you know promoting for quite a while now i mean they really just have been doing incredible work but jeremy scahill and ryan grimm um and they got a great team uh of people over there but they had rokan on he was talking about this this incident in israel where he he was held up there by some settlers in the west bank and then some idf guys evidently came along and weren't of much help.

32:09But at one point, Jeremy Scahill, who is a great journalist and was doing his job here, started pushing Rokihana over his support for Iron Dome and the apparent double standards in when self-defense is justified and who has a right to do what exactly. So here, let's go to this tape here. Here is Rokihana, who in many ways is filling that lane of like a populist candidate who seems to have intentions on running in 28. Here's him sparring with the great Jeremy Scahill. Israeli civilians are dying in these attacks because of the apartheid. You know, do Palestinians have a right to kill Israeli soldiers, Congressman?

32:52On October 7th, when they attacked the military bases in the Gaza envelope, did the Qasem brigades and Soraya al-Quds have a right to kill Israeli soldiers? Yes or no? on october 7th did palestinians have a right to attack israeli military bases in the gaza envelope yes or no i mean i i think october 7th attack was a terrorist attack so i don't just a terrorist attack when they the first targets that were hit on the morning of october 7th were multiple military bases did palestinian forces have a right to attack those military bases i i am not for violent violence in any way. I mean, I am for making sure that we end the occupation.

33:35Do they have a right to do it, Congressman? Do they have a right to attack Israeli soldiers? No, I'm not going to say that Hamas had a right to attack Israeli soldiers or kill Israelis. I don't think that advances peace or advances Palestinian statehood. Does Israel have a right to drop a single bomb in Gaza in response to October 7? I believe Israel had the right to get people who killed the civilians, but not in the way they went about it, which I've said is genocide. But the Palestinians don't have a right to attack the very military bases that are running the killing operations on October 6, 2023, or October 5, 2023.

34:21It's a double standard. You're saying there are ways that Israel should be able to kill Palestinians, but there is never a condition under which Palestinians can attack armed, uniformed soldiers of a force that is still considered an occupying force under international law. I don't make it make sense to me how those I come from a tradition of King and Gandhi. My father, grandfather was in jail. I'm aware of that. You can pause it there. So, I mean, part of the reason now this is interesting, there's a little bit of an aside from the broader topic of today's rant. But I loved this moment. I don't know why part of it.

35:01And I guess it is part of why I just love this, why I am, why I host a show like this and why I do this. I love logic. And I love these kind of interesting, you know, little moments where someone's found an inconsistency in someone's thinking. I particularly like this question also. So, you know, I completely forgot this. And I did not, you know, this is not something I've used a lot in debates, but I did ask this exact question of Noam Dwarfman, the owner of the Comedy Cellar, when I was on his podcast. And it's one of those ones that does cut right to the chase. If I remember, he had a lot of trouble with it and ultimately wouldn't answer.

35:36I think he just said, I don't know, or something like that and wouldn't answer it. But I think I asked a more specific version of the question. Like I started getting into like, hey, when since you sit here and you're always talking about Israel's right to exist and Israel's right to defend itself. At what point do we ask about the Palestinians right to exist and their right to defend themselves? When do they have a right to defend themselves? When is it legit for a Palestinian to kill an IDF soldier? And the reason why it's an interesting question to ask is because it gets into a lot of these double standards.

36:10It's like, look, man, if you nobody, right, including I mean, I've never heard anyone. I've heard some wild shit. I've never heard anyone, no matter even the most pro-Pali leftist you could think of, has ever said that Israel didn't have a right to shoot militants in Israel proper on October 7th. So like if Hamas militants broke into Israel on October 7th and let's say they killed a few, you know, girls at a music festival and then they turn around and there was an IDF soldier with a gun and he shot that guy. Nobody denies he had a right to kill that guy. He was in the middle of committing a violent act, you know.

36:52But OK, what about just like the people of Gaza? Do they have a right to kill IDF soldiers over the last three years? This is a military force that is systematically slaughtering your people by the tens of thousands. Do you have a right? And, of course, the question, you know, because Ro Khanna is going to sit here and say Israel has the right to go kill those Hamas. They have a right to drop bombs in Gaza as long as they're attacking the people who came here and killed people on October 7th. So then Jeremy Scahill goes, OK, but then do Gazans have the right to kill IDF soldiers in Israel? And as he correctly points out, there were a lot of IDF soldiers killed on October 7th.

37:31Now, that's not the extent of it. But Jeremy Scahill is very clearly here saying, what if it was, you know, thought experiment? What if that was the extent of it? Would you then be sitting here and saying that was their right to defend themselves? Because if you support Israel dropping bombs on Hamas, but you don't support Gazans being able to target IDF soldiers who are enforcing a goddamn genocide over the last three years. and a brutal occupation for decades before that, then there's an obvious contradiction. So of course, anyway, one of the things that I find interesting about this is that all of the Zionists freak out over it this morning.

38:09In fact, I think the tweet that I just sent you that you just played, how did they characterize it? It was, I'm sorry, here it's leftist. Help us kill the Jews, Ro, Ro Kahana. No, that's way too crazy for me. Sorry. You know, they're characterizing this as if. You know, yes, that's what happened here is that Jeremy Scahill said, come kill the Jews. No, he was actually it was Socratic questioning is what Jeremy Scahill was doing, finding a contradiction in his own policy. But this is what they have to pretend. Listen, I believe me, as you guys know, I've done a lot of of debates on this topic over the last few years.

38:54less recently just because it doesn't, I don't know. You know, I'm actually, by the way, I'm kind of itching. Let's get a big debate going. It's been a little while since I've done like a big one. But it also just seems like all of the topics I've been debating have been so clearly just one. What are we even debating anymore? Or should I go debate whether, let's get into a debate over whether the 12 day war was halftime or we had totally destroyed the nuclear threat. Like, what are we debating? All right, guys, let's take a moment and thank our sponsor for today's show, which is Prolon. If you want to be your most radiant this summer, check out Prolon's five-day fasting mimicking diet.

39:31It makes it easy to target fat loss, support lean muscle, and reset your metabolism. So you look and feel your best all summer long. In just five days, Prolon works at the cellular level to rejuvenate you from the inside out and help you hit your summer goals. Prolon, as I've been telling you about for a while now, guys, it's a plant-based nutrition program. They have soups, snacks, beverages, and they're all designed to nourish your body while keeping it in a fasting state. So you trick your cells into thinking that you're fasting and it triggers cellular rejuvenation and renewal. It was developed over decades at USC's Longevity Institute.

40:06This is backed by top US medical centers. Prolon has been shown to support biological age reduction, metabolic health, skin appearance, fat loss with muscle protection, energy, and a healthier relationship with food. So if you're ready for your own reset, for a limited time, Prolon is offering our listeners 15 % off site-wide plus a$40 bonus gift when you subscribe to their five-day program. Just visit prolonlife.com slash P-O-T-P. That's P-R-O-L-O-N-L-I-F-E dot com slash P-O-T-P to claim your 15 % discount and your$40 bonus gift. prolonlife.com slash POTP. All right, let's get back into the show.

40:50Anyway, but this topic has come up a lot over the last few years, and it really always is right at the heart of the Israel-Palestine debate, is that the only way to defend the Israeli status quo is on some level to just value Israeli life more than Palestinian life, to give them super rights and the Palestinians not full rights or something like that. So Israel does have the right to defend themselves. They don't. And part of the reason why there's so much freak out over Jeremy Scahill leading this line of questioning is that it goes right to the heart of the entire Zionist worldview. It really destroys it.

41:28You know, this is, it's funny because they have been trained in their Hasbro training. One of the things that they say all the time, you may have noticed, is they say moral equivalency. for whatever reason, this is something you just shout. It's well, the idea it's not for whatever reason. The idea was always that if you ever this was like back in the day, I think this doesn't work as much anymore, but they used to do this a lot was they would just shout, you know, blood libel, moral equivalency. So if you ever start talking about any Israeli atrocity that they committed against the Palestinians, they go moral equivalency.

42:04And what that means is what they're accusing you of doing is equating the two sides. And that's an automatic sin because we all know that you have to come in this as the Israelis are up here and the Palestinians are down here. So as soon as you start mentioning that Israel did something bad, you're guilty of trying to equate the two things. And you can see the obvious tactic in that. and it's interesting because I don't think any critic of Israel has ever been trying to equate the two things. The violence that the Israelis commit against the Palestinians should not be equated to the violence that the Palestinians commit against the Israelis because they are not equal.

42:45They are not the same. One of the differences is that Israel kills far, far, far more. No, no. You could also argue that another one of the differences is that Israel does it in a more advanced, systematized, statist manner. Like Israel does their killing from orders down, you know, command of the chain command to an air force that delivers a bomb. Whereas non-state actors yelling Allah Akbar come in and kill whatever they can find on the other. One is more brutal and primitive. I will certainly grant that. They're all intentional killing and one of them stacks up much higher numbers. But anyway, the thing that's interesting is that while they will yell moral equivalency, they recoil at the idea of a universal standard.

43:43You know, like why? As the great Scott Horton once said on this show, why do we need two standards when one will do just fine? You know, when is it right? You know, this is a conversation about when is it morally justified to use violence? And I think that the only real coherent answer to that is in self-defense, you know, and that is what that is what has been the obvious norm in civilization. Like, aside from state actors, just amongst civilized people, that's what we all know that when can you use violence? Well, I mean, to thwart an attack, like if someone attacks you, you can defend yourself.

44:27Other than that, you can't just go be violent toward people. You can't be, you know, that's aggression and that's wrong. And so if you want to say that the Palestinian or excuse me, if you want to say that the Israeli has a right to kill a violent Palestinian who's invaded Israel, like, OK, fine. But then the Palestinians also have a right to kill a violent Israeli invading Gaza or the West Bank. So anyway, none of that is really the point of the episode. Just some thoughts that came up there. What is the point of the episode is that you're watching something here. You're watching a politician who, by the way, and I think Jeremy, there was a period.

45:13It was a real interesting episode. I recommend people go watch it. I recommend people watch the drop site shows in general, read their stuff. They're great. They're free, by the way, too, if you want to sign up. But one of the things that was interesting there is that you have a politician, you know, so Jeremy, when he was talking about this after Rokahana got off of the show, he even was kind of saying, look, man, like I'm not sitting here trying to like ruin Rokahana. He's done a lot of good stuff, but I'm just doing my job here. And I agree with him on that. And Rokahana certainly has been one of the best members of Congress on this topic.

45:46And he's just in general been a good one of the best members of Congress. And I very much appreciate the fact that he's been right there with Thomas Massey and Marjorie Taylor Greene and trying to push transparency on Epstein and being against this war on Iran. And he's become a real spokesman in a lot of ways. He's filled a vacuum that you would have thought AOC or one of these other people might have taken, but they've kind of proven to be frauds. that being said, what's going on here is that he's taking a populist position and then he's being pushed on the obvious logical conclusion of that position.

46:21And he's being a politician about it. That's what you're watching here. You know, you're watching when Jeremy Scahill goes, well, what if, what if October 7th was just an attack on military, then would they have had the right to do that? And he goes, I think October 7th was a terrorist attack. And you're like, yeah, but that's not, you're not engaging with the question. You're giving a political answer. I'm in the tradition of Martin Luther King. Yeah, you're not, you're not really giving an answer to the obvious question here, because again, you're willing to say that Israel has the right to bomb Gaza, but you're not willing to say that Gazans ever have the right to defend themselves.

46:58And I guess there's a point to be made here. Look, whenever someone, when I say he's being a politician, meaning he's being political, he's like, well, let me really calculate what I say here. You're not just thinking in terms of like, what do I believe? What's the answer to this? You're going, let me think about what I say and what will be most advantageous to me, factoring in all the different, you know, interests and voters and pressure campaigns and all of these things. And when you're being political, what you're inherently doing is you're weighing out the very real factors that are all around you.

47:40Look, I'm not coming out against ever being political. That's something that every movement's going to have to do at some period in time. No matter what movement you are, if you ever get past the phase of just talking about shit and you start getting into the phase of trying to take some type of political action, assuming you're a political movement, you're going to run up against pragmatism. You know, it's going to be a force of nature. There's going to be, as there always are with all projects, there are going to be constraints based on reality that you're going to have to deal with. And so but so, for example, right, let's say, I don't know, hypothetically speaking, let's say you're you live in a country where there's slavery and you're an abolitionist, but the abolitionists represent like two percent of the population.

48:32This was the case in like 1840 in America, 1840, something around there, 1850. And OK, so in that case, you may have a politician who's like, look, I'm an abolitionist, too. I also, you know, am with you. I think slavery should be abolished. But I'm proposing a bill that says, like, I don't know, you know, I'm posing a ban on excessive beating of slaves. because look, there's majority support for that. And even though I don't think there should be slaves at all, just like you, I'm proposing this bill that says like, you can't excessively beat your slaves because this could get passed and this will at least make life better for some of the slaves.

49:17I mean, it won't give them their freedom, but hey, it's better than that. Now, look, that might be a thing that, you know, in my heart of hearts, I'm more of like the young radical. And, you know, for those of you who want to be purists, that might, you don't have to grit your teeth and go, man, that sucks. And I'm going to keep fighting to be an abolitionist. And I'm going to try to change it from 2 % of people agreeing with me to try to get that number up to as high as I can, you know, and maybe that's the correct way to go. But there's at least an argument to what that politician is saying in that moment.

49:48You know, look, these are the, I'm just one guy in this system and this is the best I can do. And this is better than not doing it. So maybe we ought to do this. now take that same scenario except 80 of the people are abolitionists and now you got a congressman coming over here going hey i'm going to introduce a bill that says no excess beating of your slaves well this now it's it's appropriate in that dynamic to go no stop being a politician dude just get up there and tell the truth because like 80 of the people are with you and the people who are against you already hate your fucking guts. Like, do you think Rokihana won over any support in the Israel lobby because he said, yeah, you guys have the right to bomb Gaza?

50:35No. So just tell the truth. You know, I see this. I watch AOC supporting Hakeem Jeffries and all this. Look at them. They're so out of step with just where their own voters are. Why not just tell the truth and be their champion. Well, for whatever reason, they're not doing it. In the case of AOC, I think it's because she's a fraud and she wants the power. And in the case of Rokana, I don't know him well enough, but I know that right there, there was a cowardice that I saw. He didn't want to say the thing that maybe would get him in trouble, even though it's obvious. It's obvious from his own...

51:14I mean, look, dude. He's supporting Iron Dome. He's supporting funding Israel while calling them a genocidal regime. I mean, what sense does that make? And why would you run in that lane? There's no energy to that. That's not where the base is. No, of course. Well, how do you feel? This is a basic question. You're not even running for office. You feel a regime's been genocidal. Where do you stand on funding them? You're against it. It was not a penny. Not a penny should go to a regime like that. All right, guys, let's take a moment and thank our sponsor for today's show, which is Quince. I love this company.

51:58I've been telling you guys a lot about them lately. Right now is the perfect time to hit reset before the autumn rush begins. Honestly, I can't think of a better place to start. Quince is all about fewer, better pieces. Their clothes are made with premium materials built to last and designed to become the ones you reach for day after day. I love quince. I have a bunch of pieces in my wardrobe from them. Quince is exactly what I like. They're simple. They look really good. They're kind of casual, but you can wear them anywhere. And they have prices that are very reasonable, which is hard to find these days.

52:32Quince specializes in everyday staples that work harder, like their ultra soft organic cotton tees and premium Mongolian cashmere sweaters. They're versatile, timeless, and transition seamlessly from casual workday to dinner out. If you're still hanging on to the same worn out basics, Quince makes it easy to upgrade. I own a bunch of their stuff. It's super nice. You would think these were super expensive luxury brands, but they're very reasonably priced. And they're not just clothing. Quince has become my go-to for everything from hotel quality bedding and bath essentials to premium cookware and travel must have.

53:09So upgrade your every day by going to quince.com slash POTP for free shipping on your orders and 365 day returns now available in Canada and the UK too. That's Q-U-I-N-C-E.com slash POTP for free shipping and 365 day returns. Quince.com slash POTP. All right, let's get back into the show. And so anyway, you just you see this. And you think about the openings. Look, I'm OK. Here still is, at least last I checked, according to the betting markets, which, as we all know, are right about everything. But last I checked, according to the betting markets, Gavin Newsom is still the favorite to be the Democratic nominee.

53:59Let's play this clip of Gavin Newsom being asked the question that he's going to be asked a million times. It is the question right now in Democratic politics. And this is the best he's come up with so far. Here's he's asked about his feelings on Israel and AIPAC. Let's play. There's been there's been some headlines. I just want to clear this up. yes or no, do you consider Israel an apartheid? I said that was directional as it relates to what Freeman was arguing about the annexation of the West Bank, so no. But in the context of its pursuit in the hard and the far right, I align with that. Just pause that one more time.

54:36Pause that, Natalie, for a second. I'm sorry. The question here is do you think Israel is a genocidal state? Play it from the beginning again. I actually want people to listen to this. Someone should just tweet this out, just the text of his answer. Look at this rambling word salad. Is Israel committing a genocide? Here, let's play. There's been some headlines. I just want to clear this up. Yes or no, do you consider Israel an apartheid? I said that was directional as it relates to what Friedman was arguing about the annexation. That was directional according to what Friedman was arguing regarding the annexation of the West Bank.

55:20this is who, who is that answer going to please? Like, is there an Israel supporter who likes that answer? Oh, no, no, no. You're not an apartheid state. You're directionally an apartheid state is regards to the annexation of the West bank. No, they're not going to like that very much. And does anybody like, I mean, Israel's had control of the West bank since 1967, But so this is your bolt. But he said so. So again, what does it even mean to annex the West Bank when they've annexed it already? But so what Gavin Newsom here is saying is that if they did formally take it, then we could call them an apartheid state.

56:06Wow, gee, thank you. So if you said this is Israel proper and then said the millions of people who live here still aren't citizens and still can't vote and still can't participate in the government, then it's apartheid. Mm, what a satisfactory answer. All right, yeah, let's play the end of this little clip. ...of the West Bank, so no. But in the context of its pursuit in the hard and the far right, I align with that concern and that thinking that was expressed very pointedly by Tom Freeman. So you think they're potentially on the path to becoming a part of the state if they continue. My biggest concern, my red flag, is Bibi Netanyahu, period, full stop.

56:45and his opposition to the two-state solution, how he is navigating his own domestic politics as it relates to placating the far right, thus the annexation concerns, how he's influencing events that are now out of our control. And we haven't even focused much on what's happening in southern Lebanon, issues there, intended and unintended consequences, the future of Gaza, the Board of Peace, which is about Trump and Wyckoff and Jared Kushner getting their peace, if we can discuss that, and what happens to the future of the Middle East. And so, yeah, I've been very critical of him. And I say that as a guy who visited Bibi, visited right after October 7th, because of the relationship I've had, not only the Jewish community here, but my relationship to the people of Israel.

57:37And so I've long supported the state of Israel. okay listen that long-winded fidgety nervous answer is i mean this is so ripe to just be torn apart by any opponent who wants to i mean look again he's just it's very clear it's like where do you feel listen don't get me wrong okay Israel's not the most important topic alright and believe me I certainly wish we talked about it a lot less than we do and the American people don't want to be talking about this and it's a weird thing the position we're in this is true anytime you're against a thing the abolitionists you know there's a good example there but if you're an abolitionist during slavery you know you probably talk about slavery all the time but you'd like to never be talking about it because it shouldn't even be a thing that exists at all.

58:40And, you know, likewise, that's how I feel about Israel and the war in Iran and all of this. This relationship shouldn't exist. This war shouldn't exist. It shouldn't even be a thing to talk about. But and likewise, the American people care much more about the price of groceries and health care and education and the border and things like this. They care about the country they live in, their kids, their family, of course. but look there's just no question that we've been forced to talk about this because right this is the big it's a genocide that's been going on for years it's a disastrous war that's going on right now the the risks are near infinite the price tag is enormous both in terms of human life and in terms of of resources and so look this has become the topic this has been the most divisive issue politically maybe the most divisive issue of my lifetime but over the last few years certainly it has dominated and it's a very charged top the most charged of political topics and as you can see all over the place it's causing huge realignments political civil wars to be fought amongst political camps.

1:00:00Tucker Carlson and Ben Shapiro may have always been different brands of conservatism, but now they are at war. They are as opposed to each other as any group on the left and group on the right are. And so you're the front runner for the Democrats and you have to wade into this. How do you feel on this topic? And all you can offer is a word salad, just non-answer, something that tries to please everyone. All right. Well, here's what I'm laying out for you with the totality of this answer. We live in a populist moment. The populists have more advantages than they've ever had before. And we still have elections coming up and we're going to see the results of that.

1:00:43It might feel like for a moment because this war is the most unpopular war ever, but it still got launched. You know, maybe it doesn't even matter that it's the most unpopular war ever. OK, but we do have elections in this country that are who knows to what degree they're free and fair, but we do have elections and. We live in a populist moment, the populists have more tools than they've ever had before, and this is what the front runners got. And then likewise, who are the left wing populist potential candidates? we just saw Rokihana I think that's not going to cut it AOC is supporting Hakeem Jeffries she's not going to be that you know Mamdani's not born here he's young he's not ready to who's going to inherit this movement and therefore the point I'm making is that despite the fact that Donald Trump is wrapped in right wing populism and has owned it over the last decade he's gone down in flames J.D.

1:01:43Vance is down in flames now. And all they're going to have left standing is Marco Rubio, who is not going to be able to run a populist campaign. I mean, just no way. Nobody's going to buy it. The door is wide open to the right wing populist now. Now, keep in mind, think about it like this.

1:02:04if you when I said that Ben Shapiro and Tucker Carlson, they're not just opposed to each other, but they're every bit as opposed to each other as Rachel Maddow and Bill O 'Reilly are, you know, probably more because their differences actually are over something and about something. For example, let's just say it like this. I'm not saying forget even who I'd vote for because I don't know. I had a bad taste in my mouth about voting. But, you know, obviously I would vote for for some people. But let's say the candidates that really think this through, let's say the presidential race came down to it was Marco Rubio versus Roca Hanna.

1:02:43Let's say that's the race. I don't know that I'd vote for Roca Hanna. But that's the only consideration. I'd never vote for Marco Rubio, you know, and probably that's true for say, say, think about it like this, Thomas Massey, Marjorie Taylor green, Tucker Carlson, who are they voting for, for president? If it's Ro Khanna versus Marco Rubio, well, the fact that it's even a question and that probably you'd get at least one or two votes for row in that three group of three, that tells you something The dynamic isn't so much left versus right. The Cenk Uyghurs and Anikasparians of the world would vote for Rocahanna over Marco Rubio, but they would also quite likely vote for Thomas Massey over Gavin Newsom, if you get what I'm saying.

1:03:39So there's huge swaths of the American people who actually could vote for either political party in a way that is not typically the case here. And so I guess the point that I'm making is that even though Donald Trump has just crashed and burned and J.D. Vance has just crashed and burned, and in some ways it would be intuitive to go where there goes the right-wing populism, now the left-wing populism has the energy. I'm not so sure that's the case. We got lanes here that are starting to emerge. Again, we're only like a year out from where we'll be in the thick of this race. Republican establishment lane is clearly being filled by Marco Rubio.

1:04:22The Democratic establishment lane is clearly being filled by Gavin Newsom. Now you have the Democratic populist lane. Maybe Roe, maybe AOC, not exactly clear. Who's filling that right wing populist lane? That's going to be the real quick because that person is going to have an enormous advantage in terms of the fact that there's inherently right-wingers are better at being politically incorrect than left-wingers are. So when Rocahanna is kind of apologetic, doesn't really want to say it, there's a real lane right there for someone, a Thomas Massey, perhaps a Tucker Carlson, perhaps someone who could really articulate these views where they can just say it in an unapologetic way, make the establishment candidates look like crap and make the left-wing populace look like cowards because they're not willing to say the truth in an unapologetic fashion.

1:05:19And I think it's also, as I indicated earlier, I think right wing populism is preferable to left wing populism. And I think it has a way higher ceiling amongst the voters in the country. So all I'm saying is that like right now we're in a bit of a dangerous moment. It also is kind of repetitive and seems to be the same story. All the things are changing. but man coming up very soon in the future, like over the next year, next year and a half, there's the potential for things to be kicked wide open. And I think it might mean more than we realize even now that we've won over the public on so many of these most important issues.

1:05:58Okay. That's going to be the show for me for today. Really, really looking forward to this weekend. It's my first time out at levity live in Huntsville, Alabama. So see a bunch of you guys there tomorrow night. And then of course, it's great to be back in Zany's in Nashville, Tennessee, one of the best cities in America, one of the best comedy clubs in the world. ComicDaveSmith.com for all those ticket links. And then I got a bunch of stuff coming up. I mean, I'm traveling a lot this summer after, of course, Huntsville tomorrow, Nashville this weekend. Then I will be speaking at the Young Americans for Liberty event in Cincinnati, Ohio.

1:06:32I'm speaking on July 28th. Then July 30th and 31st. I'll be at the Dania Beach Improv with Rob Bernstein in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, or Dania, Florida, down there in Southern Florida, July 30th and 31st. August 13th, 14th, 15th, Skyline Comedy Club in Appleton, Wisconsin, and then ending out the summer at the best comedy club in the world, Comedy Mothership out in Austin, Texas. Go get tickets for all of those, comicdavessmith.com. Thank you guys very much for watching. I do appreciate it. Catch you next time. Peace. Thank you.