In Vilkon, Caribbean regions, episode 80, I have on show today's special guest, Dr. Professor Benjamin Braddock, who I first met once in a brothel in Medellin. He was completely passed out on stomach, and I saved him from two prosthes, a tri-rob. Meantime, he has changed now profession. He is now, he wants me to tell you he is narco-trafficker, but is nothing so glamorous. In fact, he helped Nicolas Salo smuggle cigarettes from Canadian border. But in fact, his beloved nun, for a long time he has been pursued relentlessly by a New World Order. But how should I put it? I don't like Renaissance men, but he's man of many talents. He is this, a man after my kidney. After my kidney is this, I think is old English saying.

He writes many good articles for American Greatness and for Counter magazine and certain others. A recent article he has on ivermectin and how this was withheld as a treatment by the pharmaceutical industry and other interests, we will talk this today, as well as in general the conspiracy against the body and the problem with American political life after the January It was an insurrection, but not in the way they think. And welcome to show Benjamin Braddock. BIN JABBAR-EKATYK, PRODUCER, BIN JABBAR-EKATYK, PRODUCER, BIN JABBAR-EKATYK, PRODUCER, PRODUCER, PRODUCER, PRODUCER, PRODUCER, PRODUCER, PRODUCER, PRODUCER, PRODUCER, PRODUCER, PRODUCER, PRODUCER, PRODUCER, PRODUCER, PRODUCER, PRODUCER, PRODUCER, PRODUCER, PRODUCER, PRODUCER, PRODUCER, PRODUCER,

Please, you know, I have a friend in Tunisia, he says that I could be the amir al-Muminin, I could be the commander of the faithful one day and perhaps even restart the Fatimid Caliphate North Africa. That is for another time. Ben, welcome to show you are much beloved by many, and you are one of a bridge between the non-frog world and the normie world. You write quite amazing articles. Welcome to the show. You have this article coming up soon now on Book Review, I believe. Yeah. Thanks for having me on. I have an article coming up soon. Well, it's a book review of Breakfast with the Dirt Cult by Samuel Finlay, a wonderful book. And I think it's very timely right now because, you know, as they pretend to be winding down the Afghan war. I don't know if it'll happen.

They say now they want to leave a thousand guys there to, I guess, get... Benjamin, sorry to interrupt. I heard an interruption. I think New World Order scrambling our message. You were saying it's very relevant now, something like this, yes? Yeah, I think so. Now we have the Afghan war kind of becoming part of history instead of an act of engagement. And you get a good glimpse, you know, from this book of what one soldier's experience of the war was, what it was like. And it's—his style of writing, you know, you can feel the Afghan heat almost. You know, you can almost smell the villages, this kind of thing. I think that, you know, that part, that's relevant. But then also he talks about problems of life for a decent foundational American who's

trying to—he's kind of caught between two alienating cultures, between that of Afghanistan but then also of the United States. He's from Oklahoma, raised as a good Protestant descendant of farmers. kind of thing, and so he also talked some about the problems of consumerism, feminism, some of these things. So he has these nice tangents that he goes on that feels very relevant. And some of his observations about the military bureaucracy also, because you see that coming into public view now. This wasn't so obvious at the time that he was writing this. But I think now that the generals are saying a lot of these things publicly, behaving certain ways, you start to see what a lot of these guys saw 20 years ago. So very good book. Yes, I like this book very much.

Everyone should get Samuel Finley, Breakfast with the Dirt Coat, is the book Ben Braddock is talking about with upcoming review soon in IM 1776, I believe is the publication. But everyone should get this book. And reading this, it is so good that it make me angry that he had to self-publish. And I understand if I have to self-publish his unusual, crazy book, but his book is really a great war memoir that in a normal society would have been given massive recognition by now would have been made into a movie and so forth, and instead the movies that, you know, they have this kind of when they address at all the enemy of the soldier, it is done, I believe, in this very narcissistic, dishonest way from the left.

So, for example, I don't know if you remember, Ben, there was a movie about a sniper in Iraq. I'm not talking about American sniper, but the one with Jake Gyllenhaal. Do you know this movie? Yeah, I know that one. Yeah. So it's that one or certain moments also in American sniper or in HBO miniseries Generation Kill where they lightly touch on the enemy of the soldier. But from my point, it's always this narcissistic leftist state. So, oh, they realize it is immoral because it is, therefore, the oil or something stupid like this, whereas this book, I think, is—the reason it makes me angry is the voice of the soldier today captured perfectly and is completely edited out of movies, mass media, articles,

anything, completely edited out, their disillusionment with not just the ways of war, but the ways was being carried out, but why it was being carried out badly, and with, of course, home life and the degradation of American society while these wars were happening. I am going on a bit about this, but anything else you'd like to say about this problem? I know you know many soldiers and so forth. Yeah. I mean, I think one of the biggest things that's most relevant and kind of alarming is that the military is changing so radically as an institution that men are really running out of places for good outlets for masculinity. They've put us all out to pasture. It's hard to be a farmer getting access to the land. It's hard to be a soldier.

It's hard to really find a manly occupation anymore at this level, and so that's why people have to start going out and becoming mercenaries as Africa opens up for the new century. I believe that's where the future is. Yes, Ben, I was going to ask you about this precise later on show, but just before we end of the first segment and come back perhaps to talk on Ivermectin article you wrote, a very groundbreaking article and many other such things. I wanted to ask you about this mercenary problem you just mentioned. I have many friends in militaries, they like my book and so forth, their ambition is to get the training and become a private military contractor, possibly in Africa or somewhere other places will find employment after. Is this a path you see forward?

Because we are being told by many the military is not on our side, you need to quit the military, you need to not join. But I believe in the times that are coming that people on our side and people like us need the training. What do you think? I don't know. Yes, I mean, you can still get very valuable skills. they're still going to need, you know, just because they've gone woke doesn't mean that they don't need army Rangers anymore. You know, they, they need these guys. And what a lot of this stuff is really over is, you know, as we have more of a shift to relying on technology like drones, they, they're trying to appeal more to the, you know, Pete Buttigieg college grad types, not to the traditional recruiting pool, but they still need those guys.

They still, you know, the assumption is just that, you know, the same people from the South and from flyover country, those parts of America, that they're still going to join the military because, you know, they just assume that there won't be that many other options, right? So it's kind of, they take these guys for granted, but they can't really, you know, They can't continue to project the military power that we have to project to maintain the empire. They can't do that without these kind of men, because it all falls apart. Yes, I believe—sorry to interrupt, but I believe 80 percent of combat force are white men, most of them from places like Tennessee foothills, Appalachia. And you cannot have war, whatever these people may claim. You cannot have drone-based war.

I mean, Iran easily hacked their drone, captured it, took all of its technology. I think people with relatively rudimentary tech skills can neutralize a drone-based army. So they still need men who can fight. I just believe that the military will become, even more than it is, a jobs program for women and minorities, another graft welfare program, but the real fighting will be carried out by contractors and mercenaries. What do you think? I don't know. I think that's spot on, but I think there's still going to be a lot of, you know, you still have to have the training to get to this, so they'll still have to maintain the combat programs to create a pipeline for, you know, Blackwater or whoever else will come along as contractors.

But yeah, I think it's still a viable path as long as you're conscious of the nature of the thing. You go in for the right reasons and not just to get shot up for some pointless war. You have to keep your loyalties in line. And that's the first loyalty is to God, your family, and yourself. America has been turned from a nation state to an open air labor camp, and it is what it is. And maybe one day we'll have a kind of military to where you can join and fight in it, and the mission be worthy of sacrifice. But until then, you know, treat it as a jobs program, treat it as a way to get the necessary training to whether you can then go off to El Salvador and become a bodyguard for all the new Bitcoin millionaires that are moving down there or a warlord. Yes, I believe they will.

There's a lot of ways you can go. They will have Bitcoin death squads. And I feel be I think maybe we begin next segment. We talk about this and about your ideas on ivermectin, on the COVID fiasco in America and on health in general. What do you say? Should we take a short break to get a drink, Ben? Yeah. Yeah, I need to refill. Very good. We will be right back. Yes. Welcome back to the show and I have to say sometime you may hear me slurping or drinking during this show. I have to state again. I never, ever have even one drink during my regular monologue shows, because even one drink during that can make you sound very slow-minded, let me put it this way. But I think when I have guests on, drinks are for convivial atmosphere, and I am having

here, I found at great difficulty real Spanish cider. They're very dry and traditional is to pour from great height. I don't know. do this just to impress women, because a lot gets wasted, but they say it has something to do with aerating it or getting the probiotics inside it. I don't know. But I'm having a very nice Spanish cider talk to our friend Benjamin Braddock. You can find him at Graduated Ben on Twitter. He make wonderful tweet, everyone like, but also he has articles, like I say, American greatness and counter and soon I am 1776 and other place very good articles on this segment I'd like to talk about his recent article on ivermectin and how it was denied as a medical treatment by pharmaceutical industry and so forth but

first Ben we should tell the people you are like me you're a tropical whoring gentlemen you're a you're a horror master of tropical horse is this not true uh i've been accused of that yes uh where uh where do you recommend uh men find uh most uh let's say friendly nice good-looking uh woman's for relaxation in what countries well you know i actually i was asked that on uh when i was on ben shapiro's podcast he was wanting to know He wanted to know very intensely, and I spilled the beans there on some of my favorite places, and then the next time I went, it was just full of these sex tourists, these horrible people. I have impregnated Ben Shapiro's system twice anyway, go on. Oh, congratulations. Yeah, but these places get ruined when the tourists show up, and they don't know how

how to behave and then suddenly, you know, women don't even walk in the streets anymore. You know, Medellin was, this happened there, and the only women who walk in the streets take your cell phone, so. Yes. Yeah, I keep, I have to keep my favorite places kind of close to the vest to, you know, preserve the ambiance. You know, there was a small town in the mountains in Columbia where the place got overrun by tourists. It was horrible. And I had to actually hire some of the local cartels in one of the communist militia organizations. I had to stage a drug war to behead some tourist, and so everyone was scared. You know, the State Department issues a travel advisory, you can't go in the—and then everything became nice again.

It was a—restored the charm of the town, and I think more people should do this. Yes. This happens. And I do think that our friends need advices on where to find friendly women for easy relief. Let me put this easy. But I have an artist online. He tells me to encourage men to go to strip club, because for a relative low price, a woman, a strip club woman, will give you sex orders not just in champagne room, but even outside champagne room will give you for relative low price, they are looking to turn tricks and so forth. And his theory is that we should encourage this, because, of course, none of my listeners have this problem, but in general in America the incel problem leads, I think, to many political problems.

For example, somebody go to Big Shitty, move to Big Shitty for job, feels alone there, And much of the power of shitlib ideology come from this, this false belief that adopting it will get you sex wars with a liberal woman in the big shitty. And like I keep saying, only the very big top shitlib, like Bill Clinton or someone like Harvey Weinstein, this only works for them. Anyway, this autist friend I have believes that if we can convince such men to see prostitutes In the United States, the most, according to him, readily available prostitute is the strip club girl who you can pay relatively little, he claims, for acts, even, you know, you get a lap dance and you offer her something. What do you think about this theory, Ben?

Well, my own thoughts on this idea have mostly been around the concept of open borders for hotties. I think we should have an immigration policy that's completely focused on aesthetics. And in this way, we can really revitalize the dating scene. We can make, not just for sex, but for romance. We'll bring in, pass out green cards in the south of France, left and right. I think this would be a great thing for our country. Yes, the southern French cuties will want to escape the diversities. Anyone who's been to southern France, it's been completely overrun by the French government with their orcs. They overran it with mass migration. Southern France is especially badly hit. But I think you're right, and I would like to recommend people read Scott Laughlin article.

I forget the name, but he, a wonderful, funny writer. He has an article precisely on this, how immigration policy should be redirected to allow beautiful foreign women to come to America. I think you may be right, because what my artist friend misses is it's easy for an omega and an alpha to hire a prostitute, right? The omega and the alpha are actually kindred human types. But in the vast majority of men in the middle, especially the ones who would be led to think adopting liberal ideology would get you a girl or something ridiculous like this. They wouldn't be very likely to hire a prostitute. It's a step too far for them. My friend, Menequin On4, says this also. What do you think? Oh, I agree, absolutely, because I think the people who would be inclined to order a prostitute

are the same kind who are able to get girls on their own here. So that's not really who's being locked out of the market, so I think this would be the way to do it is flood the market, you know, in the bubble. We have a huge bubble in the dating market right now and, you know, lots of overpriced assets and we've just got to bring that down. Yes, yes, American white women have such exceedingly inflated vision of themselves, more so than historical European nobility, that I think what you're proposing is correct. America with attractive women. I think Delicious Tacos was on this show recently. He believes something very similar. And by the way, Tacos, I don't know if you agree with this, but he mentioned that it's actually very hard for straight men to get STD even from prostitute.

I know this, okay, this is not family show, it's maybe a savory subject for some, but But this, I think, good time to move to the Dr. Fauci issue, Ben, because if people remember, and they don't, that this is not Dr. Fauci's first foray into fraud. In the 1980s, he was the promoter of the HIV-AIDS fraud. And what I mean by that, you don't have to believe in Peter Duesberg or any of these strange theories that HIV doesn't cause AIDS. No, no, no. like that. But it's absolutely true. There is a book called The Myth of Straight AIDS, something like this. And he was one of the principal panic-mongers. He spread panic in the 1980s that, oh, AIDS is going to kill all of us, and it will spread beyond the initial target population of the virus, and that straight people were at risk

from it, which is not generally true at all. And I wanted to use maybe you want to talk this to Dr. Fauci's follies now. He repeats this, but now much more successfully. He has successfully implanted panic about this second virus, the Wuhan flu. And I know you've thought at length about this, Ben. And do you want to comment on this problem and on how the medical establishment exemplified by this maroon, this bureaucratic maroon, Dr. Fauci, how they've bungled everything around Wuhan flu, including the treatments for it. Yeah, it's followed the same pattern, right? So when Fauci was running around in the 80s, he was warning that it was possibly airborne. You might get it from close contact with people who had HIV, right? It was going to come from the straits any day now.

And at one point, he even recommended that we consider putting heterosexuals on AZT as a preventative. And if you know about AZT, AZT will kill you far faster than HIV will. But a population that was never in danger from AIDS, to have millions of people put on this horribly toxic drug with all these terrible side effects, and there was a problem and giving it to people who just had HIV anyway, right? That was killing a lot. Ben, I'm amazed to hear that. I'm sorry, this is the first time. He proposed giving it to people as a preventative when AZT is a pure poison. AZT, I mean, maybe those homos who had AIDS would have died anyway. They had HIV, not AIDS. They would have died anyway, eventually. But that is what killed them. The AZT is what killed them in such large numbers

in the 80s and 90s, Ben. Yeah, yeah, if you weren't on AZT, your life expectancy was at least double that of the people who were, right? So it was, if you look at the film Dallas Buyers Club, you see it in there. They did do a good job of covering this. And, you know, so he was saying, and when I came across that quote, you know, doing some research for another article I was writing, I was shocked that this would even be considered, But this tells you how demented this guy was. Of course, you know, he was, and maybe he became demented because he was spending so much time hanging out in the bath houses. He said this was to observe how this would be spread or something. But I don't know. I've never, that's never sparked my epidemiological curiosity. So I don't know about that guy.

But you get a replay of this though because he was also holding back a lot of treatments that were effective. Things like I think it was pentamidine or something like this was used for the pneumonia that would present with advanced AIDS. A lot of treatments that would actually, they were effective at combating a lot of the problems that AIDS would induce. And these treatments, you couldn't get them through any normal route. This was kind of the plot of Dallas Buyers Club. They're smuggling in things from Mexico and other countries because there was no access to it here. And it wasn't the medical establishment that was discovering a lot of treatments, a lot of treatments that are still in use today.

It was renegade doctors and then patient groups, just people who kind of independently formed and started to look at what is this disease that we're dealing with and how do we treat it. And we've seen that a lot during COVID too. The vanguard of this whole thing has been the anons online and people just creating kind of their own informal coalitions and some very prominent doctors too. You have like the frontline COVID care alliance with Dr. Pierre Corey, Paul Merrick, who's a very talented refugee from South Africa. He's a bore, he has a good bore blood. He's the top intensive care doctor, has more publications than anyone on intensive care. And people who've developed national guidelines for things and they've looked into treatments. They were saying early on,

They knew by the third or fourth patient that they weren't dealing with a viral disease. This is a problem. They've treated it all along as a viral disease. This is how Fauci and the NIH and all of these organizations have done it. So they have something they call supportive care, which is basically you take water and Tylenol and then go to the hospital if you can't breathe. Anyone with half a grain of sense who was operating in a clinical environment and seeing what was happening with COVID patients, they were seeing blood clotting very early on. And they were seeing that this was an inflammatory disease and that there were a lot of things going on that you had to treat aggressively. And so with COVID, it's one of those things where you have a very, even if you're in a

high risk group, you have a very good shot if you treat it early and aggressively. With treatments that are safe, a lot of them are vitamins. There's no potential downside to taking vitamin D or B vitamins or something like this. It doesn't harm you. It's not like we're talking about a toxic drug that you have to look out for side effects on. A lot of these doctors and researchers are saying early on, you have to put people on anticoagulants. You have to give them steroids when they get to the inflammatory stage of the disease. And since it was tried as a sort of a natural experiment, then now they moved on to, OK, well, ivermectin in a clinical setting, there's a lot of success with it. They said that they attacked Trump for talking about hydroxychloroquine, and they put out

these fake papers that said it doesn't work. Finally, maybe a month ago— Maybe a month ago, they come out and admit, okay, well actually this does cut the problem significantly. But you have to combine it with another drug called bromhexane to get the coverage. And some people have some side effects from it. So I do prefer ivermectin and some of the other things over that, but it did work. And- Some people have side effects to bromhexane or ivermectin? Sorry, too, hydroxychloroquine. Ah, yes, yes. So some older people can develop irregular heart rhythms when they take it. It's not a big deal for most people. I've taken the stuff when I've been in malaria-infested regions of South America. Everyone took it. Everyone in tropical country, you could buy it over the counter until recently.

Yeah, and in countries like Brazil, you buy ivermectin over the counter, places like Mexico. And, you know, here you can't do that. You're not even allowed to try. And it's a crime. They were murdering people. I mean, this is a, you know, we're talking millions dead. This is another Holocaust. By their own logic, we should have another Nuremberg trial. Yes. Yes. I was very upset to see you posted, I think, today a tweet, either a family relative or a friend that you know who is very sick with COVID, and the doctors will simply just not allow him. I was very upset to see that. And then India is taking action against this. Someone just sent me an article. India is suing WHO, World Health Organization official, with the death penalty.

And I'm not, at least according to this article, I'm not exaggerating, India will impose the the death penalty ban for this official who denied ivermectin treatment. Yeah, yeah, and that's what should be happening here. Should be happening everywhere. Yeah, this was a family friend, and I know the man very well, an older gentleman, and I know his kids pretty well. And, you know, he's in the hospital with COVID and has double pneumonia along with it. And so the family had asked about ivermectin. And not just was it denied, the doctor laughed at them. And they're not allowed to go in and see them. And this is a crime in and of itself. The rest of the family already had COVID. They're not going to infect anyone else and they're not going to get infected.

And I think these visitation policies, they've been a way to hide what's going on the hospitals, the carnage. They were putting people on ventilators. When they knew you put them on a ventilator, they're not coming off of it. Put them on 100% oxygen, well, you have an inflammatory disease and you're going to deny them any level of carbon dioxide, which acts as an anti-inflammatory. None of this stuff made any sense unless you think of it in the context of they wanted to get to death counts as high as possible to make this as big of an emergency as possible so they could then implement this system of control that we see. Yes, Ben, I was in Brazil for much of this year and part of last year. And even normie doctors there, completely normie doctors, the type who in the United

States would be against kook treatments or conspiracy theory or whatever, it is common One knowledge by now in Brazilian medical establishment that 18 milligrams, this is what they say, 18 milligram of ivermectin every 15 days act as a prophylactic. Now, I never took it this way, but this doctor told me, take it, take it as a prophylactic. Everyone in Brazilian medical system takes it now, and apparently it works. And it's very safe, right? It is derived from, I believe, some Japanese bacteria. It came from a soil sample from outside of Tokyo. It was discovered by a devotee of Yukio Mishima back in the 1960s, and they discovered that this works to get rid of parasites, so they start using it as a veterinary medicine. It's incredibly safe.

The lack of side effects, it's actually remarkable. We have hundreds of cases every year where people die from taking Tylenol. Many of the things we normally think of as safe, they do have rare side effects. It's very hard to find that with this. Very hard to find case reports of problems with it. They hand this out in a lot of African countries to combat something called river blindness. It's a fly that bites you and lays a parasite in your bloodstream. If this happens enough times, eventually you go blind. Jimmy Carter actually had a campaign during his post-presidency to try to get this drug into distribution out into the rural areas and wherever this was a problem. And you know, some villages you would have 50% of the adult population would be completely blind by this.

You'd have just, they were being led around by children. It was crazy, and they'd come in with ivermectin and the problem has virtually disappeared. But in the countries where this was an issue where they have these ivermectin distribution campaigns, they have very, very low COVID rates. The only place you would see COVID is in areas, you know, maybe urban areas where they don't feel that they need to take this or they're not taking it enough times a year or something like that. But overall Africa has been relatively unscathed, except for countries like South Africa that don't have river blindness and they hadn't had ivermectin being distributed to the population anyway. But there was a study out of Argentina that found that when they gave it to healthcare workers,

normally a very high risk group, they had zero infections in the people they gave it to. And in the control group, they had over 200 COVID infections. So not just as a effective treatment, but as a preventative. Now, I think this is why they go after it really hard. YouTube will pull down videos. They actually took down Ron Johnson's account. He's a US Senator, right? And he was just posting from a committee hearing, you know, an official proceeding. And this wasn't allowed to be on. So they go after this particularly hard because if we start thinking about it in the context of using it as a preventative, then suddenly the justification for the emergency use authorizations for the so-called vaccines, that disappears, right? Because if you take ivermectin,

you're not gonna develop a case of heart inflammation from having spike proteins generated by your body, right, through mRNA messengers, right, all of that. And that's the thing, is the vaccines cause you to produce a bunch of this spike protein, but the spike protein is cytotoxic. It destroys the cells, causes inflammation, causes blood clots, causes problems in the heart. It can damage the blood-brain barrier, cross the blood-brain barrier, and they've looked at a longitudinal study, I think out of England, that was doing MRI scans of people's brains right before and after COVID, and they could see that there was a reduction in gray matter. And that's from a natural infection, you are exposed to spike protein, but you're exposed to a lot less of it.

When they give you the injection, it makes your muscle cells produce spike proteins for at least a few weeks. When you have a natural COVID infection, unless you have a really severe case that puts you in the hospital, the virus is mostly gone from your body by day five. So there's a lot of money at stake though. as the main manufacturer of ivermectin in the U.S., but they also just signed a deal, I think it was over $3 billion with the federal government, for the federal government to go ahead and start purchasing a drug that hasn't even been tested yet, which I think is just a repurposed ivermectin. They tweaked the molecule a little bit so you can patent it, because I buy ivermectin ten cents a tablet from India.

For the price of one nice coffee, I would have enough to act as a prophylactic for an entire year. So this stuff is extremely cheap. But they've required that they want these large-scale randomized controlled trials, and not ones from out of the country, but they prefer them either in the US or Europe to look at anything that could be added to the treatment guidelines. Well, these medicines that have been around for a long time, and so of course because they've been around for a long time, we know what their safety profile is. There's no money to be made from spending, it takes hundreds of millions of dollars to conduct these trials. And they're not funding the trials either. Fauci's organization's not paying to have any of these treatments investigated.

So because the pharmaceutical companies, they can't make any money back from their investment in getting approval for this. They don't conduct the trials. So we only get things like remdesivir that cost over $2,000 for treatment of it. That's a HIV drug, and it shows really no benefit. There was a case in India where there were some people selling fake remdesivir and they got caught for it and they'll probably be charged with murder, but the funny thing about that was the survival rate from the people who took the fake remdesivir was higher than the people who were taking the real remdesivir purchased by the government. The remdesivir, it inflames your liver and when your liver is inflamed, it secretes more

nitric oxide. And then when that happens, it travels through your bloodstream to your lungs and inflames your lungs further. And it's the last thing you would want to be taking at a late stage in COVID. But they give this to people when they're on ventilators or whatever, and it does nothing. So this has just been the biggest fraud I think we've seen in recorded history, and there's just been a tremendous amount of suffering that's been unleashed by these people, and there has to be some kind of repercussions for them. You can't let something like this happen without justice, and I think we need to assemble vamit courts and really show these people this stuff will not be tolerated. Well, on normal courts, this would require some type of Nuremberg thing.

What you're describing is, you said they wanted to get the death rate up in the beginning. Many people have said this because the ventilator had almost 100% kill rate. Why do you think they wanted to get the death rate up? So that it would be as scary as possible. If we were using effective treatments, even before we knew ivermectin worked, we knew that if you get to people with zinc, melatonin, melatonin has a very beneficial effect, vitamin D, B vitamins, things like niacin, these have very good effects against this. So even before we knew about ivermectin, we still had other supplements to take that gave people a much better outcome. So if you take aspirin throughout the course of infection, it's much more likely that you won't even go to the hospital, but you don't start to

develop the blood clots. The breathing problem, that didn't come from the way that it would normally come through the flu or something, I think. Some of the doctors I've talked to, some very good pulmonary specialists, have said that when they look in an autopsy of a patient who had the severe breathing issues and couldn't get enough oxygen and all that, when they look in the lungs and examine it really closely, the blood in the capillaries around the alveoli and around the lung tissue had tiny clots in it. So really, you couldn't get the blood flow to the lung to have the oxygen exchange. But it wasn't so much a problem with the lungs itself. Now they would become inflamed, so there's a little issue there.

But really, you just couldn't get the blood flow where it needed to be, because you had all these small clots, the blood was just coagulating in the vessels. This was why the blood oxygen started dropping, but it didn't present as normal acute respiratory distress. Because it looked like the acute respiratory distress you would see in some other respiratory issues. That's why they started using the ventilators. But, you know, it's like these these people are like lemmings, you know, one of them runs with an idea and then the rest chase after it. And then suddenly, you know, you have people on TV saying we have to ramp up ventilator production. But yeah, now those ventilators are in landfills. And saw a video the other day throwing them into the landfills, which they should have done

all along. It's amazing the rate of the scope of fraud is unbelievable when you have now people openly saying that they knew hydroxychloroquine or some of these things would work, but they did not want to say so because they did not want to help Trump. And how is that if people put Julius Streicher, who really just made vulgar anti-Semitic cartoons, But he was tried at Nuremberg as one of the causes of the Holocaust and hung for making cartoons. And then Obama, he droned, he drone-striked an American citizen who, as far as I can tell, was guilty of nothing but encouraging ISIS on the Internet. He didn't actually kill anyone. He was posting on the Internet, and he was drone-striked. And now you have people admitting to killing many, many more people than al-Qaeda or ISIS

ever did, okay, who say, yes, I openly knew, you know, I openly campaigned against this treatment that I knew would help save lives because I did not like Trump and the dirty, his dirty supporters. I mean, I, how is this, yes, forget very courts, there should be some kind of trial for such people perhaps. Yeah, trial or hard labor sentences. I don't know, you know, we, I think Stalin had the right idea at some points when he He had a lot of the doctors arrested and sent to gulags. Yes, Stalin, well, I can't talk about Stalin. Now, you know, I had family who was for Stalin in the 1930s, and they would have sent all the present leftoids, the people who call themselves leftists and who calls himself post-Trump socialist and this, they would have all been sent to gulag by my family, Ben.

But maybe we talk this on next segment on some political matter. What do you think? Sounds good. Very good. I do need more. Maybe you have heard me pouring the cider. I need to open other bottle then. I'll be right back. Okay. Yes, welcome back to show. We have Benjamin Braddock, doctor, professor. He discuss on less segment is a disaster of how Wuhan flu was mismanaged by a corrupt, incompetent American establishment with defossilized Dr. Fauci. Dr. Fauci is the perfect image of the grifters at the head of American establishment. By the way, I forgot to say he had some kind of patented treatment for so-called HIV in the 1990s that ended up killing everyone who it was tried on. And he has numerous other financial and other conflict of interest in this crisis, as well.

In any case, regardless, this is the biggest reason Trump was elected. I believe the manifest incompetence of American—it's really not a ruling class. I prefer to call it an occupational clique that hijacked the government and failed in numerous in the wars, in economy, and in the health part of management of human body, and most of all in busting open the borders and immigration and so forth. And this disaster of the American occupational clique led to Trump and Bernie Sanders doing so well in 2016 election. And, Benjamin, you have a very good article showing that the so-called 5 percent myth in 2020 election. And what is this myth? Well, I will let you explain it, but just to tell audience, there is this mythology

that Trump lost because 5 percent of working-class white men switched from him to Biden, as opposed to 2016. And I saw this narrative being set up since 2018. They were trying to set up the pretext for this with the Yang and other thing. We can get into that if you want. But you have very good article on how this is complete lie. And I was hoping on this segment we could talk about this and about the so-called post-Trump right of what you think come next in America and so forth. What do you think about this? Yeah, so this five percent number, I first started looking when I was writing this article to see where they were getting this, and it came from CNN exit polls. And if you've worked around politics at all, you'll know just what a joke exit polls are, particularly in the United States.

Some countries, they tend to be better, but here it's really bad. And also, this was a very bad year to poll, because with the riots, American cities burning, all of this kind of thing, people didn't want to talk to pollsters. People didn't want to talk to the media. So the ones who are willing to answer questions, they skew in a different direction, right? They're the libs who feel comfortable talking about this stuff in public, right? Whereas if a stranger calls a normal Republican in the suburbs and tries to ask if they're voting for Trump. You know, what are you going to do? Have my, you know, say yes and have my house burnt down? This is, you know, there was this campaign of terrorism against the

right and people thought that they were going to get accurate poll results. It just, it's not how it works. And you saw that too with, you know, Biden was supposed to win Wisconsin by 18 points, Michigan by 19 points, you know, Texas and Florida by five points, all of these ridiculous numbers. And it wasn't just that they were getting bad poll results, but it was that they were already trying to create a narrative that Biden was inevitable, when they knew that what was really happening was all the energy was for Trump. Biden was nowhere to be found on the campaign trail. The normal volunteers who knock on people's doors for the Democrats, they were all still hiding in their houses. And they faced a real problem,

which was trying to get their voters to go out to the polls when they're inside scared about COVID. It started out, I think, with some basis in reality, the idea that the election day vote was going to be very strongly for Trump, but the mail-in vote would tilt toward Biden. When you actually started looking into a lot of the the, you know, who was returning early votes or mail-in votes, the Republicans actually did very strong and had a better return rate in states like Michigan and Wisconsin than the Democrats had. And really, when you look at the early voter operation, the early vote for the Democrats was running behind, if you're talking absentee ballots, which is a traditional way of doing and some of the other early vote metrics, but it was running well behind Hillary in 2016.

So that was what we knew going into that weekend. But they take this 5%, you know, from the exit polls and they run with it because it fits a narrative that they want to be true. You know, they want it to be true that Trump lost because he didn't listen to them and not because the election was stolen from him, which it was. And when you actually start looking at the counties where you get real votes, not just, you know, what the CNN exit pollster tells you, you saw a different shift. There was a 5% shift, but it was more towards Trump. You know, picked up this county in Kentucky, 99% white, you know, the income level below 40,000 a year for almost everyone in the county. That shifted five points for Trump. He won Youngstown, which he hadn't won in 2016,

which is a classic white working class union bastion in Ohio. He won Mahoning County, he won Kenosha County, he won all these places. And both of those counties, he didn't win in 2016. So he was actually overperforming in these areas. And to me, it's a bit of a blood libel to suggest that the white working class is responsible for the mess that we're in right now. If there was a shift, and there were some Republicans that moved away from Trump, there was a shift. It was in the suburbs, and it was among college-educated, higher-income voters. But that had more to do with some other things, maybe because Trump didn't call out the army when the riots were happening, or something like that. But it wasn't so much about that. And it wasn't—

Or they are shitlings who got browbeaten by their wives and girlfriends for four years. Yes. And by girlfriends screaming at them, making them take a picture of their ballot to prove that they voted for Biden or something like this. There was all kinds of crazy pressure techniques. But some people would request ballots for their entire family and fill them all out themselves. Like a college student voting for grandma. you know, who she is, she's with Trump all the way, but yeah, no, his base did not abandon him. His base didn't abandon him, and they still haven't abandoned him. You know, I run in those circles a lot, right, those kind of people, they're my people. And it's still 100% Trump, I don't hear about other people, they like some other people like DeSantis and all,

but they like what he's doing as governor, they're not really so focused on him being president. And so, it's still with Trump. And I think, you know, you're fooling yourself if you think that Trump's only appeal was his issues, right? Because there were a lot of people who ran on the same issues as Trump, trying to capture the same energy. And they failed in their, you know, Republican primaries or in general elections or these other things. And it's—there's a lot more to it. And it's, you know, you can't look at it, you know, with this purely materialistic, almost Marxist conception of people just voting for what resources they can extract from the government, which is true for a lot of their side, but for our side, these people want their country back.

And the reason Trump won in the first place was, there was appeal on things like trade and I think a lot on immigration, but even more than that, it was wanting to have a country you could be proud of. It was the, you know, the intangible great again kind of thing. And we just came through eight years of Obama, an incompetent foreign policy, you know, these regime change wars in places like Libya, but terrorist attacks popping up all over the place. I mean, you know, when Trump gets in, the terrorists almost disappeared overnight. When you stop funding the counter-terror establishment, when you stop funding them, somehow the terror attacks go away. Somehow countries, Ben, like Hungary and Japan and Poland, who do have Muslims, they have

Muslim tourists there, but they don't have a counter-terror establishment, so they have no terrorist attack. It's very strange. Sorry for the—I like to go on tangents, as you know, but I think what you're saying completely true. And you mentioned the Santis. Well, what did the Santis do? Because in 2016 election and before, places like Broward County, well, country was maybe more accurate, absolutely corrupt place, Broward County outside of Miami. And in 2016, I don't know if people remember, Broward County tried to withhold their vote reporting as late as possible, right? What they were trying to do, obviously, is to see how many votes they needed to come up with to offset the rest of Florida. And it just was not enough. So that's why Trump won Florida 2016, even because.

But when DeSantis came in, he fired the election corrupters in Broward County. He reformed the election in the state. And Florida came back for Trump massively this time, very fast. And in Georgia, where Trump supposedly lost—I think you told me this in previous conversation—there are discrepancies at the border of Georgia and Florida and Georgia and Alabama in the vote count. So in other words—well, I'll let you say it, but there are discrepancies there. And also in West Virginia, where not many people live, Trump gained tens of thousands of votes. There's massive upswelling of support very contrary to what Trump critics from the right are saying, right? Yeah, 50,000 extra votes in West Virginia over 2016, and there's not really that many

people that live in West Virginia, so 50,000 is a lot there. And in these counties, you know, they have the same types of economies, the same types of demographics, and this such thing. But on the Georgia side of the line, they shifted away from Trump. And on the Florida and Alabama sides of the state lines, they shifted towards Trump, even though it's the same kind of people. And I think that points to the fraud not just happening in the cities, but it being scattered out where it would be harder to detect. And one of the things you can see that indicates that is that there were a lot of votes just for the presidential ticket, but not for the local congressional race. This is very suspicious because they were pushing the whole meme, vote blue no matter who.

There was a lot of emphasis on winning Congress, this kind of thing, and typically, there's less than a 1% difference in the number of votes cast for president and then the votes cast for offices further down the ballot. Some congressional districts, you're looking at a rate of like 10 percent. Just a lot of votes, they were only filled out for the very top of the ticket. The reason I think this was done was the local Republicans who held those districts had the resources to have lawyers at the vote counting centers almost immediately if they saw that something was going down in their own race. So if you leave it, you don't ruffle any feathers in the local areas, but you hide some of the fraud out in some of these counties, which is not done through counting, by the way,

or through the normal means of like you saw in Atlanta. But I think actually the machines themselves were an issue, that there was some sort of Stuxnet-type programming that was rerouting votes in a certain way. You had these voting machines in rural Georgia that had the ability to connect to the internet. They had Wi-Fi modems built in. Why would you ever put connectivity to the internet on a voting machine? None of this makes any sense. Any of these issues we raised were very legitimate. Another one was Trump won 18 out of the 20 bellwether counties. counties that have predicted the eventual winner of the presidential election perfectly going back to 1896. There were so many complete anomalies in the data that any serious political journalist

normally would write entire books on this, right? Because this is just, this is stunning, this stuff doesn't happen, you know, the simulation was broken. There's no curiosity about any of this, even if it's not even to say that the election was stolen or whatever, but just to say that this rewrote the laws of political science. No one wants to engage with it. You bring up the arguments. They just say you're crazy or something like that, but there's no substantive response to any of this. That was the case, you know, throughout the that entire period between, you know, when when the election really started after election night, you know, the the steal and through, you know, January 6th. And yeah, I mean, it's just my favorite.

My favorite anomaly, Ben, was seeing the I don't know if I can use this. I want to keep it clean, but seeing the shiboons in Atlanta are just running the vote machine over and over, the same ballot in the vote machine hundreds of times, as well as come up with suitcases. So I think the evidence doesn't matter. I mean, there's so much evidence, including, as I keep repeating, since election night, stopping the vote tabulation count is as such evidence of election fraud. And this is the kind of evidence that America itself, American State Department career officers use to judge whether there is voter fraud in foreign nations. But I suppose when it comes to, you know—so, I think the evidence has been there since election night, but is up to Trump to take advantage of this.

I will not say any more on that. But I will ask you, what is the Trump magic? Because this—what you're talking about now, the fact that actually election was stolen from Trump, that the 5 percent or so-called working-class white men who supposedly switched from Trump, that is a media myth. And what then is the Trump magic? How he win, whereas other people who, especially at state level or local level, they try to to run on his platform, but they lose. How do you explain that? Well, I think it's because he's fun. He's, he's entertaining. You know, I mean, if you think back to the 2016 primary debates, my dopamine receptors still haven't recovered from that. You know, that was the greatest television ever. He was the greatest poster of all time on Twitter.

You know, just the guy is, the guy is a showman. He has an innate instinct for a lot of these things. And that's something that it's very special, very rare. And a lot of people don't recognize that. They think you can just lift out his platform and we can have Trumpism without Trump. But that becomes very stale very quickly. And he behaves like a Brazilian billionaire. He has a hot model wife. He has, you know, you could say like working or middle-class taste, right? He doesn't have the Mark Zuckerberg aesthetic, right? He's still – Yeah, aesthetic, yes. Yeah, and I think actually, you know, Americans don't want to go too anti-aristocratic, right? We want – Yes. It's not so much that we hate the idea of elites at all, we just hate the elites that we have. Yes.

You know, Trump, you know, he was a reminder of a or emblematic of of an older American aristocracy. And I think that's what people want. You know, the kind of Gilded Age, you know, 1920 robber baron types. Right. Yeah. That's why no one got it. Yeah. People didn't get too upset over, you know, any shady business deals or, you know, tricks he pulled on New York City government or any of that. We love robber barons, you know, as long as they behave somewhat paternalistically. And that was part of his mythos too, you know, the stories of where he would, you know, stop in his limousine to, you know, help someone who was broken down on the side of the road or something like that. You know, there are all these legends that kind of emerge around how nice it was to his

employees and this kind of thing. So he was an elite who had noblesse oblige, and a lot of, you could say, tastes that were kind of similar to people who aren't rich, but as pretty much all poor Americans are, they aspire to be. And this is why I think the socialist approach doesn't work here, because as John Steinbeck said, Americans don't see themselves, they don't identify with their own class so much, see themselves as being poor, they see themselves as temporarily embarrassed millionaires. And so, I think that created a lot of his core support. And you look at the Trump boat parades, right? These boats aren't cheap. And yeah, these are guys who, they didn't go to college. Instead, they built their own business, and now they make hundreds of thousands of dollars a year.

And this is, I think, a reason for a lot of the hatred of the Trump base was just sheer jealousy. You know, these journalists who are making, you know, 40,000 a year writing for The New York Times, you know, they're upset that a plumber in Florida has a much, much better lifestyle than they do and is actually happy instead of being miserable and online all the time. Yes. Yes. No, this Ben, I watch this movie, Crazy Rich Asians or something like this about the reach of Singapore. And they're very ostentatiously opulent. And I think people enjoy seeing that from the rich, they partake, you know, they like to have just to watch it and to feel like they're part of this and so forth. And by contrast, the other kind of billionaire you mentioned, the zooker face of this with

the IKEA style, it comes off as very condescending, right, because nobody's fooled by the fake pretense to modesty and so forth. And I think Mark Ames had an article where he mentioned in Russia, if they see a billionaire on the subway, they would think he's an idiot, you know. But in the United States, you have Warren Buffett, who drives a Plymouth and goes to McDonald's with his grandchildren. And this is done as very ostentatious—I would say it's a kind of Pharisaism, where they try to show off the virtue of modesty. or thereby canceling it out. But it's very fake. And Trump was hated because he had, as you say, this old rubber baron opulent, very showy, but people love that. Is that part of the reason why you think—you told me before, Thierry, at state level, people

trying to run Trumpist campaigns generally do not work out. You told me this. Well, at the state level, you also run into another issue, which is the state-level elections, which include the federal elections for senator, but they're held at the state level. They have a different dynamic than a national campaign. A national campaign, you can be a lot more openly populist, I believe, and still pull it off. state level, there's still a lot of power exercised by the old political coalitions. So you have to have the local media somewhat on your side, not really on your side, but you have to get a good enough press coverage. You have to have the business owners who tend to be kind of on the moderate pragmatic side of things.

So it's not that you can't run as a populist, but you need to run as a pragmatic first, someone who's going to be focused on solving problems, because at a state level, people don't like ideologues. They like patronage politicians like Jim Clyburn, who's going to bring home the money, or Robert Byrd. He called himself Big Daddy and bragged about how much money he brought to West Virginia. This is what people like at a state level. You can't use the same rhetoric as when you're running for president, because you're dealing with a different coalition that you need to assemble to win in that state. Whereas at the national level, social media has more power, so you can have more of a meme candidacy, your ability to manipulate media that has some power, all of that.

People at a state level, they want someone who, like I said, is not so much an ideologue as a pragmatist who, you know, people think that they have the best interests of everyone at heart. And this doesn't mean you have to, this doesn't mean you run as a sissy or anything like this. You know, DeSantis showed you, you can be tough and do well, but you know, DeSantis was not just a fire-breathing ideologue when he ran, right? He ran on issues like the environment. And he actually did a lot. He put a lot of funding and a lot of support into preserving, protecting, and enhancing the Florida coastlines and the manatees and this kind of thing, and people love that. And I think especially at a state coalition and even a local coalition, which is where I'd encourage people to run,

because local governments exercise an enormous amount of power, especially in areas that we care about, things like what the architecture of your community looks like, right? The planning boards and the supervisors and all of this kind of thing. There's a lot of power at the local level. But at the state and local levels, you can create more interesting coalitions, right? So they talk about like the Red-Brown Alliance. I wanna create an alliance with the Malibu Wine Moms, right? To ban use of vegetable oils in any of the restaurants this kind of thing. And that's another thing too. If you're creative enough, there's a lot of positions that have not yet been fully polarized. And so you can use these to show that you're a

reasonable person who just wants to make the quality of life better for people and to create a place that people can be proud of without having to make everything about a hyper-polarized issue. Because, you know, the extreme polarization, it's a tactic that the left uses, and when the right engages in it, it always loses ground. You saw as gay marriage morphed into trans issues that then morphed into estrogen shots for eight-year-old boys, right? It never stops. And the position on the right is what the position on the left was two years ago. You know, you have someone like Kevin McCarthy saying that the statues of the Confederates in the Capitol were all of Democrats, so he has no objection. This doesn't fool him. The party of Lincoln stuff doesn't fool anybody.

Everyone knows about realignments and parties evolving and changing over time. Everybody knows that the Democrats aren't as cool as the Dixiecrats in 1948, and they're they're not the same party. So why even pretend, right? But you have these, the people who are responsible for deciding what the platform for the candidacies are gonna be. They have no vision, they have no creativity, no thought, because it's a certain type of person that goes into that, a mid-wit really. And you don't get a lot of talented people. And the talented people a lot of times get chewed up and spit out. you'll have a talented guy who'll go in, you know, might have a extremely sharp memory, very good about, you know, not talking about certain issues too much and then gets an office

and acts on them. But then they throw them in jail because he accepted a wrist watch, you know, or a vacation weekend from someone. You know, this is, it's the tyranny of the midwits that we're facing. And so you're stuck with idiots really on both sides. And the task is to figure out how to manipulate these people to get them to do what needs to be done. Yes. To go back for a moment to what you said earlier regarding the difference between state and local races on one hand and national on the other, somebody like Chris Kobach, who I had very high hopes for, I think exemplifies what you say because he tried to run Trumpist campaigns in his state, and he lost because he refused to see, as you say, that the media, that it's

just not the same level of interest in voting in a state election as opposed to national. So he could not generate the amount of populist energy he needed. And on the other hand, he did not make alliances with the old guard of the GOP and so forth, and he lost. That is a rather dire subject, the old GOP. I prefer that they would disappear and go away. I wanted to ask you, throughout this segment, you have said what we started to talk about, this 5 percent myth that 5 percent of working class men abandoned Trump, which is absolutely not true. But it's promoted by people like Ann Coulter and others, you say, who they wanted to be be true because they want to say, oh, well, Trump did not follow their advice, and therefore

he lost the election fair and square because he lost the working class, so on and so forth. And their advice, generally, as—you know, I'm not asking you—by the way, Ben, maybe some of these are real friends. I don't want you to take open positions against them. But a lot of these people who I've been criticizing on the last few shows and recently on Twitter, they are the ones who promote this idea that the essence of Trumpism is actually that we have to be a working-class party. By the way, Trump never said that. Yes, he said workers' party. That's very different. But it was a working-class party and that we have to be focused or purely on economic issues, because cultural war issues are a distraction, which, by the way, is something

I've heard liberal shit-lib girls say for 10 years, that's a line you often hear, MSNBC, no, no, cultural war, that's a distraction. What matters is you should vote your economic interests. This is classic DNC line. And now we are seeing people supposedly on the right, on this post-Trump right, constantly promoted. I don't know if it's Coulter so much, but it's a lot of these people around, Ross Douthat, the so-called Catholic integralists, whatever they want to call themselves. But the post-Trump right keeps promoting this line you've been hinting throughout this segment, including the embrace, open embrace of the very label socialist, which I think is suicidal. So in closing this segment, I wanted to ask you if you wanted to elaborate a little bit on this, and in particular to answer.

You said you know very well first-hand the working-class tramp voters, and when you go to their meetings and so forth, Ben, are they motivated primarily by economic concerns and so forth? Because in my opinion, they're not, but what do you think? No, I never hear anything about it. You might have maybe a passing mention of inflation or something, but the issues people care about is the gender ideology being pushed on their kids in school. That's a big one. Things like abortion. Right now, actually, what we're seeing with COVID, that's become a huge thing. This censorship and this suppression of treatments. People see this and that you can't say anything online about a lot of these things without just getting your Facebook account taken away or something like this, so they're very much

more focused on the cultural war. You rarely hear about anything to do with the economy, and kind of the state of the country as a whole is something that's a common concern, but it's just like there's a lot of people who they're comfortable enough economically, you wouldn't count them as rich, but they're doing okay. That's not the top concern. Then there's some people who it's a struggle for economically. I look at their situation and I might feel kind of motivated to concentrate on some economic issues when I see people like that, but they themselves don't tend to be focused on that. They're a lot more focused on these cultural issues. because you know you can you can be poor and have dignity and you can you can

actually be happy if you have a culture to where you know you can you can be that way right where there's decency where you have you know the church isn't under attack the church is a huge source of support for people both so you know socially, in some cases economically, spiritually, all of this. This is very important to people. And, you know, Christianity is coming under attack. There's a lot of hostility from the Antifa types. And you saw they were setting some churches on fire last year. They were burning Bibles in the streets in Portland. And then just this open culture war stuff that's coming from the left, it's very anti-Christian in nature, and that you can't even speak about your convictions on things without getting fired or this or that. So, people care more about that.

They're kind of used to hard times economically, but it's this other stuff that is, I think, a lot more psychologically disturbing to them, and this is what they talk about. You know, everything being covered in rainbows now, right? And you know, these food vendors being attacked for flying American flags and all of this kind of thing. That's more of what people are focused on. Yes, I have also seen the same from what I know. I find the argument, I've talked to numerous shit lip girls that I've unfortunately known over the years, and this is their stock argument. Why do these—they don't say the word dirty, but they think it—why do these dirty rednecks and so forth, why do they worry about gay marriage and these other cultural issues when it does not concern them at all?

And they should vote their interest, which is the economic thing. And, of course, this type of girl always thinks she knows their interest. It's very condescending. Maybe such people know their own interests and know that they do not want their kids to be taught to cut off their own balls. And that is perhaps more important to them than the piddling kind of economic benefit you would throw to them, you know, a few cents in this, which is not to say that we don't want to chastise the oligarchs and the large corporations that have been captured by the left because that should be a major platform on the right, too. But this general trend on the post-Trump right to sound like a 1970s Markzoid professor with tuna-stained sport coat is pathetic, and it will not convince these people what turns

him off. I've been trying to say this, Ben. Yeah, I think the way it should be done is the way that, you know, Orban has been handling these things. And I think he's an excellent example of how to make, you know, how to tie in your economic platform with the rest of your social platform. He's very good on that. And the other thing too is, you know, if you embrace socialism, you're going to lose any inroads with the Hispanic voters. And we have made it, you know, we've done a lot better with them than we had in the past. And, you know, I think Trump is a thing for that. Partly because— You said you saw this in Florida. Oh, yeah. Well, Florida, Texas, even California. You look—a lot of the Hispanic neighborhoods in Los Angeles, those precincts, they shifted

30, 40 points towards Trump in one election. It's astounding. But, see, the integralists, they're not understanding a lot of this, because they're coming at it from the Catholic side. And what's happening here in America is the Hispanics coming here, they're converting to Pentecostalism, which is a very strident form of evangelicalism, they're converting in droves. The people are actually showing up to church, not just if you called and asked what they would identify as, but the people who are actually active. They're going into these very fundamentalist, very right-wing kind of churches. There's a cultural transformation that's taken place under their noses, and they're still thinking that they can sell Jesuit liberation theology

wrapped up in some sort of tinsel, and that this is going to appeal to these people. It's like, no, these people have changed a lot from—they're very different from how either they used to be or they were in their countries where they came from. And a lot of these countries are experiencing the same. I think that's a big reason for Bolsonaro's rise in Brazil, was for the just massive growth and Pentecostalism down there. Even Orban, who you mentioned. Sorry, go on. Puerto Rico has shifted. Puerto Rico, they've solved this change, this shift from Catholicism to Pentecostalism. And then instead of the old leftists like they used to have, now they have very conservative politicians, and they're starting to add restrictions to abortion,

and they're fighting a lot of the trans liberation stuff, and they're approaching the social issues a lot more fervently than the Catholic politicians, even though a lot of the faithful Catholics are very conservative socially. But, you know, at the political national level, you get Joe Biden types. Right. So, yes. And, you know, Trump Trump was he went in on the abortion issue in a way that Republican presidential candidates used to not do. You know, he was the only one who said that, yeah, the woman should be punished if she gets an abortion. Yeah. You know, this was something they never want to touch. They never want to touch that. They would go as far as to say, OK, maybe we shouldn't do partial birth abortion.

You know, they get just just pro-life enough to string the pro-life vote along. But they don't want to go all the way over there. You know, Trump's jumped into that end of the pool, you know, both feet first. And yeah, Orban, who you mentioned, I think very powerful example of that should be followed. And he never calls his policies socialist, of course, because of Hungary's past. He calls his policies perhaps populist or even just center-right. And it's important not to emphasize that particular label of socialism. On the other hand, he seeks union with the Hungarian Protestants, of whom there are quite a few, they are Calvinists. And so I think a very good example that people in the West should follow. In any case, I think this segment getting quite long, what do you say we take a break

and come back for a closing statement of some kind. Sounds good. Very good. We will be right back. Yes, Ben, we are back. Before show end, we will talk about this problem of so-called post-Trump right, which I think is a complete scam. Mostly people who are either from the left or they are foolish and unwittingly introducing divisions into nationalist uprising against establishment. By focusing exclusively on economic problems, which I think America problem right now, not primarily economic, we want to humble the oligarchs and the big corporations that have been captured by the left in the same way that Putin or Putler, as I like to say, he humbled the unpatriotic oligarchs. But like many people, he's not very concerned with adopting an overly economic analysis

type of language, because economic ups and downs come and go, populations go through periods of wealth and periods of retrenchment, and people like the frogs—I will not maybe speak for anyone else. But people like, for example, myself, why I interest at all in politics, the prime problem, mass immigration, why this is because mass immigration permanently wrecks a country, permanently wrecks nations. Is very hard to reverse. Yes, there is possible back migration and this type of thing, but mass migration generally permanently destroys the character of a nation, changes its nature, so to speak. Similarly, we are interested in things like the so-called transgender movement. Why? Because children who are targeted by this, who are mutilated chemically or physically,

they're permanently changed. That's irreversible. When you get rid of certain animal species, that's a permanent change. So we are very much concerned with concrete environmental problem, not the crap made-up thing of global warming and climate change, but the concrete problem of the destruction of air, water, places, the extermination of species, which we do not want to see happen, or on the other hand the intrusion of poisons and chemicals into the food supply and groundwater, which destroys not just people's bodies—and that's, of course, permanent change, it kills you and destroys your physique. By that I mean your health in a very direct way. But some of these actually change a germline. So in other words, your grandchildren will be fucked up, you see.

So this reason many of us, frog, get into politics at all, otherwise I would not be interested, is because in modern context there is possibility for corruption of human nature on a mass scale and disaster on a mass scale of this type. And I wanted to ask you on this closing segment, Ben, what is motivate you in a political matter? It doesn't need, perhaps, to be this type of concern on biology and nature, which I see, however, that you have. But many right-minded people are concerned with matters that break nations. And I wonder if in this closing segment you would comment on that. I know you have some particular thoughts on the military and the power of the dollar in sustaining America and so forth. Would you care to comment? Well, the biology is foundational.

You can't overestimate the importance of it. And probably my main motivation is just the complete decline of Western civilization that that I've seen happening in my own lifetime, which is not that long. And this rapid pace of change in the wrong direction, and it's like we're on a train, hurtling for a cliff, you know? And it's a daunting situation, you know? So sometimes you even wonder, you know, is this, is it possible to change this? or is this almost a biological phenomenon? As you see in some marine life, they reach a certain stage of evolution where they become extremely ornamented and they look very advanced, but then by the next stage, everything starts falling apart, right, and they just go back to nothing. I think optimism is the best thing to keep you going.

To take the black pill, that doesn't really do anything, but depress you for the rest of your life. That's kind of where I am on that. But the biological problem has, it's shown up just in so many different levels to where it now, I think, threatens our, the basic underpinnings of civilization, right? Things like the decline in intelligence. We now have, New York City is telling people tonight to turn off their air condition because it's 100 degrees outside, and they're afraid the power grid is gonna go down. We have bridges collapsing in Washington, D.C., buildings collapsing in other places. You just have the pipeline that went down here a while back, the CEO of the company that ran it said that, yeah, you can technically do this all manually, you don't need the computers,

but the workers who knew how to do that all, you know, retired or dead. This isn't being passed down. So it's—there's both a biological problem and a cultural problem. We're not handing down a culture that will result in, you know, survival or a long-term, you know, future that's going to work for people. You know, so we have this simultaneous issue of, you know, biological problems and cultural problems that are meeting and, you know, they're now making really dangerous decisions at the basic levels of the economy, one being what they're doing with the dollar, this massive expansion of the dollar, which is driving other countries towards de-dollarification. I think you've mentioned it before, but the things that prop up the American economy are

the fact that the US dollar is the reserve currency of the world and we have the military power to back it up. And you see happening in both institutions, in the Federal Reserve and the military, they're playing with fire in the way that they are reforming or revising or revolutionizing these fundamental institutions that drive the entire American system. So if I may interrupt, I know you don't like interruptions, but if I may interrupt on this matter of the dollar and how establishment is abusing the status of dollar as reserve currency, because this recent law, FATCA, I think it's called, when you look at the name FATCA, it sounds all fat cat. Oh, they're going after the fat cats who have big million dollar bank account in Switzerland And this.

But, in fact, who they are going after, for example, is a woman who has a Swiss husband who's an engineer, and they did not report his something like $80,000 in his foreign income in Switzerland, and so IRS come after her and crush her because of that, and hundreds of thousands of dollars of fine, and this. And this law, FATCA, just to let audience know, basically makes it almost illegal for an American to have a foreign bank account, because it puts the reporting requirements on foreign banks so much that they often refuse American customers. So for example, a normal person cannot have now a Swiss bank account, and the reasoning is, oh, we're going to prevent people from hiding their income from the IRS and this.

But in fact, of course, very rich people can always hide their income from IRS. And this, like the increase in fees to renounce American citizenship, is actually a law to make hard for Americans to exit United States and to put pressure on foreign nations to not accept account of Americans, to the extent that Switzerland, who resisted Nazi Germany, Right. In World War II, Germany was going to invade Switzerland, and Switzerland mobilized 700,000 men, put them in these bunkers in the mountains, said, you will fight to the death. And Germany realized, you know, we can invade them, but we will lose two million men. So they gave up. And so Switzerland, which I'm saying resisted Nazi Germany, could not resist the United

state, because United States fat care law say, if you do not report these bank account of our citizens, we are going to cut you off from American financial markets, and nobody wants that. And so many countries forced to comply with American law on reporting bank accounts and many other financial transactions. But this goes with what you say. It is an abuse of America's ownership of the reserve currency, because although foreign countries have to comply now, they don't like it, right, they don't want to do that. And it's very petty, it's very abusive, it's not what perhaps a military empire does historically, but very similar to that, arrogance, arrogance of empire, we're going to abuse this reserve status of dollar. Is this what you're talking about, sort of?

Yeah, you know, in this way you can kind of see their own sick sexual fantasies at work, right? They're the fin doms and they're trying to turn us all into pay pigs and only fan subscribers. You know, it's the condition of being a modern American is not being a citizen, but it being a slave, you know, and you're expected to comply willingly like a cow who has a bunch of parasites attached to their back draining the blood out and you know that's this is what is uh this is no the new social compact right uh so i see yeah yeah i mean this is they're getting ready for uh decline status right i mean this is like brazil in the 80s and 90s this kind of thing like you already see them making the moves with these financial restrictions to make it a lot harder.

And I wouldn't be surprised if one day people wake up like they did in Brazil, go to the bank, find out that there's nothing left in their account, you can't withdraw any money. There was a woman in Busios who ran an inn, I was staying, and she became enamored with me. At one point at the end she was talking about divorcing her husband. I think she thought I was gonna move down there with her. But her father had kept a bunch of $100 bills in the cushions at their house when she was a little girl. And everybody in the town thought he was crazy, until the day came that they couldn't withdraw any money. And she said he went into the living room and tore open one of the couch cushions and started throwing $100 bills into the air. And said, who's crazy now? And just screaming his head off.

Well, if he did that now, I don't know if the $100 bills would be worth that much, but maybe the ruble would, or something like this. But yeah, I think the other countries are starting to catch on in a way that they see that the system is weakening enough that they are diversifying away from the dollar. And I'm sure they're back-channeling between Poodler and Xi about possibly creating a new reserve currency that would finally topple the dominance of the dollar. I think that's something that they're already making moves towards. I suspect that a lot of the way that COVID has been used is—you know, these people are not going to give up their position without a fight. So I think we're seeing kind of hints at a global reordering of the financial system,

the way things work to try to preserve some semblance of the status quo. They've already accepted our declining position, I believe, and I think now they're just trying to manage the collapse so that they all have soft landings while the rest of us are turned into serfs. That seems to be where it's headed. Yes. What do you think is the role of United States military decline in this? Because I only saw American power as founded on the dollar, reserve currency backed up by American military power. How do you see American military decline tied into this? And this stuff with Miley, General Miley, with the eyeliner and so forth. Yeah, well, you know, one thing, it's like they are changing their recruitment targets and this kind of thing, and it's a bit like late-stage Roman Empire there.

I think they're kind of making a calculation that they won't perhaps need the military in the same way that they did before to back it up, because they're already on the same page with the Chinese and with a lot of the other internationalists. I think a deal has already been cut, and so you'll see a transition of the military instead of being the hyper-competent force that we needed to back up the dollar by going into any country that didn't use the dollar and rocking them, and it'll be kind of like what you said, become more of a jobs program. Yes. Yes. A way to fight climate change and provide universal health care for sex changes and this kind of thing. Yes. Now, what about this General Miley and the corruption of the top brass? Do you have any thoughts on this? Yeah.

Well, we've had a problem in the military for a while, I think, to where to get to the position of officer, you have to be this type, right? You know who signs your checks. You know who the real boss is. You see these types. You see them in the upper echelons of the military. You see it all across the government institutions, people like Fauci. One of the interesting emails that came to light during the WikiLeaks thing back in 2016 was an email Fauci had sent to Hillary Clinton's chief of staff, Cheryl Mills, talking about how healthy she looked at the Benghazi hearing and her tremendous stamina. And he closed it with, you know, please tell Hillary I love her, you know, like who talks like this? But they know that they know who to suck up to.

And I think that's why you get this kind of behavior. And it's it kind of reminds me of something you've said before about the the people in charge of the tech companies aren't really in charge of the tech companies. If Mark Zuckerberg shut Maxine Waters' Facebook page down, that would all change very quickly. The military is no exception to that. And you're seeing some of the same issues there, but now the left wants to paint it as Tucker Carlson said something mean about a general. He hates the military. And I'm like, no, this is what soldiers love to do. There's no way you can express solidarity with the normal troops better than by attacking the generals and some of the top officers. It's very strange to me to see Anne Applebaum and Jennifer Rubin and this other guy I never

heard of on Twitter say that Republicans or these right-wingers are anti-patriotic for questioning the top brass. I mean, it's absurd that, yes, you're right, it's what soldiers love to do. to question the top press, especially desk jockeys and people with office arms and so forth. Yeah. And, you know, what the left likes to do and has done to institution after institution is take any institution that has respect in the eyes of the American people, butcher it, skin it, and then wear the skin suit around and demand the same level of respect. Yes. Yes. That is cuckoldry, when a conservative so-called continues to respect a zombified institution, you know, this definition of cuckoldry. But these are dark subjects.

Ben, perhaps in closing I ask you something more hopeful about perhaps what are some of your favorite books that inspire your vision of the world and so forth. I don't make a secret about books that I love. I love Celine, I love Mishima, I love Ernst Junger, and of course, I love Nietzsche. I've had shows on all of these and I love such a writer and their books. Do you want in closing to comment on one or two of your books, your favorite books and so forth? Yeah, well, I mean, I've got to give a plug here to one of my all times favorites. It's a book called Bronze Age Mindset. Well, I highly recommend it. Also, East of Eden by John Steinbeck, The Power and the Glory by Graham Greene. I think it's a very nice book.

These kind of things, the last two I mentioned, they have sort of melancholy themes, but it kind of fits the times we're in in that sense, but it shows how you can still retain your humanity and you can still, you know, live and die on your own terms in that sense. And another one I really liked that I read last year was Mind, We're of Trouble by Peter Kemp. It was his account of his time serving in the glorious national forces of Spain during the Civil War when they butchered the communists. That was just a terrific book. You can get it from a publisher friend of ours, who I don't remember, they were called Mystery Grove, are they still called Mystery Grove on Amazon? No, I think they're, maybe on Amazon, but I think on Twitter they're at by book by book. Very good book. Very good book.

But this book, Peter Kemp about his adventures in Spanish Civil War are very good. Yes. Yes. These are all good. Now, Power and Glory I never read, but I love Graham Greene, other books like The Comedians about adventures in Haiti during the time of Papa Doc Duvalier and Tyranny of the Tonto Makut, where it's a very funny book. Graham Greene was a little bit anti-American, but he does a very good job lampooning maybe classic American progressive types in this book. and glory i heard it described as a catholic novel is this true uh it's about a priest it's a uh i like a lot of graham green's books but it's it's my favorite out of them i thought it was uh very good but you know the the description is so vivid that you know you'll find yourself praying

for the priest at night uh it's kind of another one i really liked uh too was uh the outlaws by by Ernst von Salomon. It kind of fits the mood that we're in in the zeitgeist today, so. Yes, these books have something in common, which is the dissatisfaction from the right is a little bit different from dissatisfaction from the left, because dissatisfaction from left always has this emphasis, what we were talking about on this show, Ben, where the The left tries to, for example, reinterpret Trump and nationalist revolt against the establishment in purely economic terms, which to say, oh, we just need more money for them programs and people will be happy. These dissatisfied youth just need a job flipping burger or perhaps they need UPI from the nice Asian Mr. Yang.

And, unfortunately, I think this was message of terrible movie TFW, you know, GF, which tried to reinterpret frog revolt in this manner, oh, if only this poor youth had more money for them programs and this. The leftist dissatisfaction with modernity is always in terms of the stomach. The stomach is not full enough. We need more oatmeal in the stomach. We need more hummus in the stomach. They completely misunderstand what motivates the right, whereas the books you are mentioning by Graham Greene, by Ernst von Salomon, they show it is a spiritual dissatisfaction. Is this something you would agree with, maybe, in closing? Absolutely. I think you nailed the—hit the nail on the head on that one. It's the thing.

You can, like I said before, you can be poor and have dignity and have a good life. You know, if you have a good family, you have a lot there, you know, and if you have good neighbors and this kind of thing, that's the good life, and it's a spiritual thing. It's less about pure materialism. It's about man's relationships with other people and with the environment that's around them. I think that's the key to this. Will being in closing, I would say, I don't know if Trump can make a comeback, perhaps he's being extorted by grey aliens, but I hope somebody will, and become American Bolsonaro or Orban or American Putler even. But I don't know, by the way, you said you like Lukashenko, something about him before we go, yes?

Yeah, when we were discussing some of the COVID stuff, you know, he was the one guy who stood up to the IMF and World Bank people, who said, we give you these loans, but you need to shut down your country, shut down the economy. And a lot of other people did that. But the debt is piling up. You look in Central America, South America, all over the developing world, and their budget situation is horrible, and they're taking on all of this debt. And Peter Dezak's group, the EcoHealth Alliance, who funded the development of the Wuhan bioweapon, and I believe released it, they have already been talking about a land for debt swap program to where they'll take these large tracts of land in developing countries in exchange for getting the IMF to forgive the debts.

So something sinister is going on there, and I have to commend Lukashenko for having the wisdom to turn them down when they first offered, also fight back the American Color Revolution that the State Department tried to stage, and for making sure that the people in his country did well during the pandemic in terms of the healthcare and this kind of thing. Belarus has one of the lowest COVID death rates in all of Europe. And it's, yeah, because they said we're going to treat this with vodka and sauna. And that was a lot better than ventilators. No, this is good. So what we are talking about then, Ben, I don't know if America needs Lukashenko or Butler, but perhaps somebody like Orban and someone who understands that problem is not to turn us into a stomach,

but to turn into a fire of spirit. What do you think? I think you're right, but I think we might need a mafia leader in the meantime before we transition into our great national figure. I think we need a med to come in and you fight fire with fire. And it's a pathetic mafia that's running the show now. So we need some real mafiosos in there to come and shake things up. I don't know. I think maybe El Chapo might lead a successful revolution. And I think this could be very good. El Chapo, good. Or something, yes. We need our own Cosa Nostra, even if led by El Chapo or Mariah Carey. I think it's getting quite late, Vinay and Ben, of what you say we continue next time. And I go back to drinking my cider and wine here. It's a drunk night for me, what do you say? Very good. Sounds good to me.

Till next time, I'm Hal Pudler, and yes, bap out. Hal Pudler. That's good. That's not the best. I'll be a third leader Passes on the spirit of the trains. I'll marry my team. It's gonna kill each other That's largest. Yeah, I'll be a European coruscant. I should come back to sephato We can solve a penelope destroy