Joe Rogan Experience #2461 - Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.

Joe Rogan podcast. Check it out. >> The Joe Rogan Experience. >> TRAIN BY DAY. JOE ROGAN PODCAST BY NIGHT. All day. >> I like them. But if it's just me wearing them, I feel stupid. >> Why do you wear them? >> I like it cuz it locks me in. Just locks me in. The only thing I hear is that person's voice and I I can't hear Jaime's chair moving. I I can't hear Anything else. And it just like makes me really like focused on the conversation only. >> I have ADHD. I was at 11 siblings

and I have seven kids. So I can work. [laughter] I can focus >> no matter what. >> No matter what. >> It's a skill. It's a thing to learn. You know, if you if you're the person that can focus without distraction, you're in a good >> You're a good person to be in the job you're at. >> Yeah. >> What is it like? So, since you've been appointed, I I haven't talked to you uh on a podcast since >> I know. >> Yeah. [laughter] >> Um it it's the best job I could ever have. I

I feel like I was designed for the job and I just have so much fun. I mean, it's a It's a target-rich environment. So, there's so many ways that you can effective and be effective and improve people's lives every single day. Part of that is because the agency was just such a mess. You know, it was it wasn't doing health care. It was doing sick care and just managing the, you know, all of these perverse incentives. It have us spending5 trillion dollars a year, two to three times per capita what any other nation spends. And

we have the Sickest population in the world. We have the highest chronic disease burden in the world. and you were the best at medicine in this country, but that's when people get sick. You'd rather get sick here than any place in the world, but you're more likely to be sick here than any place in the world. [laughter] And you know, and then it was just a big political patronage um operation and it still is. And you Know, we're putting an end to that now. I mean the the amount of fraud that goes through that place

we lose just in Medicaid and Medicare hundred billion dollars a year and it's all just this really you know shocking blatant fraud where that's become industrialized. I mean there there is foreign nations like Russia, everybody's heard of Somalia, but also Cuba has this operation in Florida where it's um [clears throat] they open up these Little um they open up um these these PO boxes for durable medical equipment is like knee braces and wheelchairs and then they don't have any knee braces or wheelchairs but they have patient and identification numbers. So, they just claimed to be

shipping them to people. And we found one hotel. It had like 129 rooms in it. Everyone was a different company that was selling durable medical equipment. And we go in and shut them down and they immediately Go back to Cuba. The whole thing is apparently run by the Cuban government, but Russia is doing the same thing with hospices in >> Where do they get the patient ID numbers? >> They get they can buy those numbers, you know, they on the black market. >> Really? [snorts] >> Yeah. And Russia does the same thing um in Los

Angeles with hospice care. So there's there's more hospice care in Los Angeles than the entire rest of the country combined. It's all fraudulent. And we're just pumping hundreds of millions of dollars into these fraudulent operations. The same thing that the Somali did in in Ethiopia. A lot of that money was going back to Boang and you know terror groups over there. But they were it was a lot of it was based the Medicare and stuff is different and we're we're able to we're going to be able to catch almost all of That now because we're

using AI to do it. It was never used before. There was no effort at program integrity. In fact, the Biden administration deliberately purposely ordered them. They ended the program integrity office. So they went from hundreds of people to six people and they said, "We don't want you doing program integrity. We just want you doing enrollments." And um and so we got all this fraud. It was most of it came from these waiverss That the states got, all the states got them for home care and community care. So, you know, 30 years ago, Medicaid, Medicare play,

if you got a hernia operation, we paid for that. And you could tell somebody got the hernia operation cuz they had the scar, they used a licensed nurse, they used a licensed doctor, was all documented. Then they some of the states said, you know, we're sending a whole lot of people to the hospital and If and we don't have home care providers. Oh, if you if we if you let us pay family members to do home care, the patient won't have to go to the hospital. They won't have to go to the emergency room and

we'll save a lot of money. So, it was well-intentioned, but then what happened is people immediately started abusing it. So today, if you um [clears throat] these are services that are not normally played by family members, performed by family members, Buying groceries for your grandmother and bringing them home, you now get paid for that, balancing your grandmother's checkbook, driving her to a to a medical visit. So um so then you had these you know organized fraud where and this what happened in Minnesota these um these organized crime companies would come in and say you designate

this family this you designate all your children have autism now even if they didn't and we're going to now pay Providers for each of them and we'll give you a few thousand dollars to do it but then they would collect all the money and that's what was happening It's happening all over the country because there was no it's very very difficult there the guard rails on that system were very pvious and anybody can defraud it. If you are inclined to do fraud this was you know this was an irresistible opportunity. >> How long was this

going on for? Like When did this fraud begin? Do you believe >> it really accelerated during the Biden administration? We expected to pay for the the Minnesota program just for autism care for kids who have autism. The kids need the care because, you know, they go to maybe a special school, but then they come home from school and the parents aren't there because they're working. Who's going to take care of them? Um, so in legitimate Circumstances, you would want to pay for that. But what happened is they just started this wholesale fraud. We expected the

cost of that program to be about $3 million a year in Minnesota in Minneapolis. It got up in over a three-year period. It got up to $400 million a year. So they, you know, it was all fraudulent almost. >> I just don't understand. So this accelerated during the Biden Administration, but when did it begin? Like how long has it been going on program integrity? They told specifically they told people in my agency and I've talked to them, we don't want to do program integrity anymore. We now just want to focus everything on enrollments. In other

words, enrolling more people in Obamacare and the and the programs. And you know, you could say there was um bad motives there because one, the states don't pay the states pay A tiny fraction of it, but it's all goes to the federal government. So the states don't really want to do uh fraud uh detection because all that money is coming into their estate and then every time you enroll somebody you're registering them to vote and so you know they may have had ulterior motives let me put it that way. Um but you know right now

what we're doing is we're saying to the states we have audited you. We expect that we believe that 50% Of the uh program dollars you're spending were fraudulent or possibly fraudulent. You show us a corrective action that you're going to take or we're going to withdraw that money the next time. The money is not being withdrawn from individuals. But we're not reimbursing the state for it until like they told us. Now the red states have all said, "Yeah, we'll do it." But Maine, Minnesota, California, New York have said, "No, we're not going to." Basically, they

sent us corrective action. That was just, you know, it was ridiculous. So, is there financial incentive? Is is are these people that are making all this money from fraud, are they donating to any specific groups? Like is there a direct turn? >> The the Cubans in Florida and Florida, you know, they get mad at Trump because They say, "Oh, all the states you're designating are blue states." That's just because the blue states refuse to cooperate. But Florida is a red state and we're really going after them. were shutting down all durable medical equipment reimbursements for

the whole state because it was all being run it was probably being run by the Cuban government cuz this is >> but I don't understand how no one saw it no one from the government saw it and Would there be a reason why they weren't looking for it other than they just wanted it they were only thinking about recruitments but were they al was anybody making money outside of these crime organizations >> I would say No, the money was not the states were making money, >> right? But there was a lot of talk online about

donations to parties and donations to NOS's and don't >> that that is probably true too although I don't have any evidence of that. >> No evidence. Okay. Um so it really just >> you wouldn't have you know even if you get those kind of donations it's not the kind of proof that I would talk about because you cannot prove that >> right >> that that donation you know motivated the bad behavior >> but it just it really highlights how ideologically captured some people are that because it's the right-wing going After this Medicaid fraud that somehow

or another that fraud is okay and that fraud's not that big a deal that there's who what I mean like what's the all told number that's been stolen from from this stuff over the if you had to take a wild guess I it's at least hundred billion dollars a year >> hundred billion a year >> just from Medicaid and Medicare >> that that anybody would not want to stop that kind of crime because it's attached To the wrong party is it just shows you how weird this country is right now. >> Yeah. I mean I

listen I was a Democrat my whole life and you know one of the thing and then I you know >> what are you now >> now I'm kind of first of all I it's illegal for me now to vote in any state so I don't really have a party affiliation because you know they challen um I was a New York state Resident but when I was running they sued me and they said oh you don't really live in New York you live in California. I said, "Yeah, but my driver's license is from New York. My

law license is from New York. I have an address in New York. My car is registered in New York. My falconry license is New York. My hunting licenses in New York. My fishing license New York. And I intend to return to New York." And there were hundreds of cases Just black letter laws saying if the only measure is if you intend to return there at some point we got crooked judges and they said no you're not a New York resident. I'd already said I'm not a California resident. I don't intend to stay there. So now

I'm not leg you know I'm I'm not legally allowed to vote in any state. But you know, I saw this with um the party. My father hated partisanship because he thought it was dishonest And he said you should he always had told us you should vote for the man not the party or the you know he said the man because at that time it was predominantly men. But um I saw this when Trump um you know I grew up in a Democratic party that was very anti-NAFTA. it was against working people and labor unions. Then

Trump said that he was anti NAFTA. [clears throat] All of a sudden the Democratic Party was pro NAFTA. And that's what turned my head the first time. And then, you know, when I was um then I saw how they when Trump questioned vaccines during the 2016 election, the Democratic party was it was kind of that [clears throat] skepticism and the concerns were spread evenly across the party. My uncle Ted Kennedy was very much on the side of medical freedom. Um and it was evenly spread, but as soon as Trump said that, It became part of

the dogma of that party. And then, you know, when I ran, we were um you know, it was I one of the things I ran against was the Ukraine war. And um and the Democrats were always the anti-war party. But as soon as Trump questioned that war, they became the pro-war party and they invited the CIA director to speak at the Democratic convention. And it just is it's the the ent the party's only agenda is we hate Trump and anything he says We're going to do the opposite of it. And I it makes me very

sad for the party. And I don't think it's a sustainable way to, you know, to operate. No, there there there has to be some sort of an appeal to people in the middle that left when things went crazy. Just let us know you're not crazy anymore. let us know you've abandoned a lot of this crazy stuff and also like recognize what's good for everybody, right? Hundreds of billions of dollars Of fraud is not good for any of us, the whole country. So, we should all be together on this one thing. Like, this is terrible. This

is stealing from your tax money, all of our tax money, >> us American citizens, we should all be united on stopping any kind of fraud. Forget about who who's the [ __ ] president and what what's the who's who's going to get responsibility for it? Who's going to take who's going to get the accolades? Like, who cares? Stop Fraud. Stop. We're all together. You shouldn't have criminals from other countries living here just stealing money from Medicaid. That seems like that should be a bipartisan issue in a rational society. >> Yeah. And you know on the

you know I saw this the craziness when we did the uh the Tylenol findings because you know the science is really clear that and there were there are dozens I read 76 studies over a week and And when you know when we were looking at this and the the studies that support Tylenol safety are very weak and they have huge holes in them. There's overwhelming science that says you shouldn't take it particularly, you know, it's okay normally. You shouldn't take it during pregnancy and particularly the last days of pregnancy or in the parinatal period, prenat

parinatal period which is immediately after pregnancy. you don't Want to take it because the association with the Tylenol usage at that point and neurodedevelopmental [clears throat] disease is very very high and and uh and pretty clear. And so we issued a warning. We didn't ban Tylenol. We just sent a letter out to all doctors saying be careful about um we we didn't want to ban it during pregnancy because as bad as it is, it's the best thing. It's better than taking ibuprofen or or aspirin. >> Why why is aspirin there? >> They have because of

rise syndrome. It has a clear association with ry syndrome and they all have problems. >> What is that word? Ry syndrome. >> Ry r e r y r y. >> What is that? >> It's um I'm not sure exactly what it does. >> Put that into our wonderful sponsor perplexity. And if you put aspirin use and rise syndrome, you'll you'll see the >> So, is this just with pregnant women or with people in general? >> Pregnant in pregnancy or young children. >> Oh, well, so baby aspirin. Didn't they always used to have children? >> Yeah.

I don't know if they do it anymore. >> Rise syndrome is a rare but serious condition causing sudden brain swelling and liver damage primarily in children and teens recovering from viral infections like flu or chickenpox become Very rare due to reduced aspirin use in kids. Wow. Aspirin. >> Yes. >> I always thought of aspirin as like the most natural and healthy out of all those things that you take for pain. >> Oh, I think it is pretty safe. But >> it's um >> avoid aspirin. And what's that word? You say it [laughter] >> isn't salicyate

containing. >> Cellocate containing meds in children, Teens with flu, chickenpox, or cold. Use acetamophen or ibuprofen instead. vaccinate against flu and chickenpox and screen newborns for metabolic risks. So, it's acetaminophen is the issue in Tylenol, right? Yeah. >> Because I read this terrible story about a lady who died during COVID because she not from CO, from Tylenol. She just kept taking Tylenol. >> Well, Tylenol shuts down your liver if you take enough of it. >> That's what happened to her. >> But what I was saying is, you know, when we issued this warning, it was

immediately condemned by the Democrats. Oh, you know, here's Trump and Kennedy doing, you know, weird science again. >> And then you had all of these videos, these viral videos on TikTok of pregnant women eating [clears throat] out eating Tylenol. >> Yeah. To say [ __ ] Trump. >> It's crazy. I hope they didn't really do it. I hope they were pretending cuz that's so dumb. It's just so stupid. Why would you even want to risk that? Like, how is that not a a thing that you just abandon all party affiliation and go the health of

my child? This is science. They're not saying don't take Tylenol. Like, you could still buy Tylenol. >> It's It's a good thing to know that if you take too much of something, it's bad. There's a lot of things that are Fine if you take one or two pills, but if you're that poor lady with COVID, you just keep taking it over and over and over again, you'll die. We should know that. It doesn't mean you shouldn't take aspirin or you shouldn't take Tylenol, but it just means know when to take it and when not to

take it and know how much to take. Like that's all information that everybody should want to be out there. The fact that people want to connect that to Trump and I'm Going to take as I'm going to take Tylenol while I'm pregnant. Like [gasps] is this what like imagine the aliens watching us and going this they're not ready. They're not ready for sophisticated time traveling technology. These [ __ ] dopes like what are they doing? They're fighting over nonsense, you know, and it's like it's all heavily accelerated by social media. >> Yeah. Yeah. I mean,

the algorithms um just amplify that polarization. Yes. They're just telling you what you want to hear and and validating your worldview all the time. >> And also just outraging you. Just outraging you all the time. I've been off it for a while now. It's like it frees your brain. It's like all the the weirdness of thinking about nonsense in the world just kind you're aware of it peripherilally, but it it's not in your face all day, which I think Most people are dealing with a lot more even than I was. And they're just bombarded by

sensation, bombarded by anger and frustration and angst. And it kind of liberates the darkest impulses of the human spirit. I mean, I don't I don't use it either, but I got, you know, I post stuff, but you know, if I started reading my comments and take them seriously. >> No, it's terrible. I genuinely thought When you uh joined forces with Trump and then Tulsi did as well, I was like, "Okay, maybe this will unite us more and make more people realize that there's a lot of people that are being left out that are in the

center of all this and we can all come together and work together." That's what I thought naively. You know, obviously once you guys got in there, it was you guys were MAGA and like health is bad [laughter] and don't Don't stop the dyes. Like no matter what it was, people like [clears throat] were ideologically opposed to you being correct about anything because now you're connected with Trump. So, it's like I was watching liberals the the people that are always worried about food ingredients just dismissing all of this talk about preservatives and glyphosate and red dye

and all these different things and it is just an ideological thing. >> Yeah. Um I mean it's uh it's like it's dogma and it's part of it's tribalism. It's these, you know, these uh these connectors in our brain that evolved over millions of years living in these little tribal communities and you know, and now you've got um >> now you've got machines that can activate those parts of the brain and you know, they're being manipulated all the time. >> Yeah. >> And then there's a bunch of people that are commenting that aren't even real people.

There's that too. There's a lot of manipulation that's going on on social media where who knows who's doing it. There's a bunch of different groups doing it, but they they're not real people that are outraged. They're not real human beings that are saying these things and they can kind of shift a narrative into a certain direction Sometimes. It's a fascinating time to be alive, you know. Um, as far as uh what you thought this job was going to be before you get in, before you got in and what it became, what what was your expectations

when you got in? Like, did did anything really surprise you? Um, I [clears throat] mean, you know, I try to go into every part of my life without expectations and uh and just focus on really narrowly on what I'm doing day by day. And that Actually makes me a lot more resilient because if you don't have expectations, you never get disappointments and so you can never get crushed. And um uh but I would say that um you know I had not spent a lot of my life hanging out with Republicans and what I imagine that

they were talking about um [clears throat] is exactly the opposite of you know now I'm in an administration that surrounded by immensely talented people and um and They're immensely idealistic and you know nobody I always imagine the Republicans would get together and they'd be thinking about how do we screw the poor and how do we you know reduce tax on the rich >> and [clears throat] all they're just narrowly focused on how do we solve these big problems and how do we make our country work >> and [clears throat] the level of idealism that I

see at every level in The white house and you [clears throat] know in my agency is uh is uh is inspiring and then the level of of the capabilities just the you know the competence of the people who I'm surrounded with the I think the thing that shocked me most was how bad the agency was how um you know just how inefficient how nobody seemed to care that people were getting sicker and sicker nobody was taking accountability of the fact we're The health agency and yet we have the worst health of And we're the richest

health agency in the world. You know, I I think HHS is the is the sixth biggest country in the world. If you look at it, at its budget, it's got the biggest budget in the federal government, bigger than the defense budget. And yet we are absolutely miserable at what we did. I mean they, you know, we're literally presiding over this cliff >> where every [clears throat] American is Getting we're people are just 77% of American kids can't qualify for military service and nobody's asking why is that happening. We've gone when I was a kid, the

um [clears throat] the the typical pediatrician would see one case of of juvenile diabetes over a 40 or 50 year career. Today, 38% [clears throat] of teens are diabetic or pre-diabetic. So, one out of every three kids who walks through this office door. Why Isn't anybody noticing as the autism rates have gone from one in 10,000 in 1970? And people knew what autism was. They knew what it looked like in 1970. They did the biggest epidemiological study in history to answer the question, what is the percentage? And they came up with 0.8 per 10,000. So

less than 1 in 10,000. And today it's 1 in 31. In California, it's one in 19 and one in 12.5 boys. >> That's crazy. >> We are, you know, >> that's so crazy. One in 12.5 boys is crazy. >> And when my uncle was president, you know, I was a 10-year-old boy. >> We spent zero on chronic disease. Zero. And today we spend $4.3 trillion a year. And uh it's the fastest growing item in the federal budget. And it's existential. We we can't sustain it. And the Republicans and Democrats have been arguing for years About

whether we do singlepayer, Obamacare, this or that. It's all about throwing money. How who gets to keep the money and we're throwing a system that's completely broken. It's not health system getting sicker and sicker. >> It's like changing deck chairs on the Titanic. Why is nobody focusing on how do we get people healthy? because that's how you solve the health care cost problem. Right now, 40 cents out of every dollar that you spend in federal taxes is going to mo to healthcare and about 90% of that is chronic disease. So, you know, it it's clear

and Americans don't want to be sick. You know, they're being made sick. they're being the obesity rates have gone from 5% in kids when I was a kid to now close to 20% and in adults uh 70% of adults are obese or overweight that was not true when we were kids and it's not Because Americans got indolent or lazy or hungry it's because they were being mass poisoned and um you know the the the vested interests that are making money on keeping. Everybody makes money on keeping us sick. The food companies make money on getting

us sick, but pharma makes money on keeping us sick. The insurance you would think insurance would want to keep you well, but it doesn't. It actually makes more money if More people are sick. The hospitals. >> Why? How does the insurance company make more money if people are sick? >> Well, I mean, think of it this way. If you're Lloyds of London, do you want one ship to and you're you're ensuring all the ships in the ocean, do you want one ship to sink a year or do you want a thousand to sink? If a

thousand sink, everybody's going to be paying you premiums to ensure themselves Against that eventuality. And you're making money on the friction. So, you're making the money that comes into this. You're making your money on the money that comes to the system. So the more that you pump up that volume of money, the more you make. So you know, nobody is interested, nobody is economically incentivized to make people well. And we are not going to get well until we align those economic incentives with the health Outcomes that we want, which is nobody gets sick. We end

the chronic disease epidemic. And that's what we're doing now. We're trying to realign all those perverse incentives that reward you. I mean, for example, the medical system pays out on feebased service. That means that the more tests the doctor orders for you, the more drugs he prescribes you, um the more contact he has with you, the the richer he gets. So he is not incentive incentivized to Get you well. We ought to be paying them a flat fee at the beginning of the year and saying anything any cause from this patient the rest of the

year come out of your pocket and then he's like okay how do I get this guy from getting sick and he starts studying nutrition books and you know that's actually an interesting idea. [laughter] It seems so captured at this point. It's going to be difficult to unravel all that. It it's difficult but it's not Impossible and we're doing it. >> You know, three years from now, you're going to see a different health care model in [snorts] our country. >> Talking about it has a big impact because most people are just not aware of how the

whole system works and what is actually wrong with it. You know, most people just hear about it. Health care, people are sick, they need health care. Why would they cut healthare? Cutting healthcare is bad. That's what They would just immediately think. And I think most people they they think of the fraud stuff and they want to dismiss it. Like they I've heard all these people dismiss this Nick Shirley kid and what he exposed in in Minneapolis. But the the reason why is because it's the wrong party. If this was a Democrat that was exposing Republican

fraud, then they would be all into it. They would be it would be on every newspaper. But instead, they're trying to dismiss it as Not, you know, not relevant. >> Yeah. And it to me it's weird because I know Democrats are human beings and they care about the same things that I do. I've known all of these guys, almost all of them for many of them for 40 years. Bernie Sanders I've known for 40 years. >> Their only solution is more money to the system. A system that is broken, that is making us sicker and

sicker. And what President Trump wants to do is he wants to fix the system. Stop. Most of that Money is not going to the patient. It's going to the insurance companies and the PBMs and all of these middlemen that are, you know, are milking the system. And that's why [clears throat] President Trump says, you know, the answer is to not pay the insurance company. It's to pay the the the consumer directly and put him make him the CEO of his own healthcare so that he can spend money. he's now incentivized to do prevention and to

maybe do holistic medicine or Take vitamins or, you know, take vitamin D, which, you know, is, as you know, is kind of miraculous. Um, [clears throat] or to um or to do alternatives, you know, to do preventative care. And [clears throat] he wants to say he's going to want to save money right now. you nobody nobody is in that position of accountability. We we need to make them the CEO of their own health so that they have Responsibility and they're going to pay the cause if they get sick. Government pays but they then decide to

allocate that how to allocate that money and then we need to make the system transparent and that's you know one of the things that we're doing. where during his first term, Trump passed a transparency bill, but because Trump had passed, everybody wanted transparency. If you if you're a woman, you're Pregnant, you want to know how much it's going to cost you to to have that baby. There's no way you can find that out for most of them. You can go nine months on a phone every day, how much it's going to cost, and you'll never

get a straight answer. And so, you know, in New York, uh, for example, what we're doing now is we're going to make all of the hospitals and all the providers post a menu of their prices So that are available to everybody and that are available on a website that we're creating. So, if you want an MRI and you there's 40 places around your home that offer MRIs, you can't right now figure out what they cost. Now, you're going to be able to go and look at them all in a single page and figure out what

the cheapest one is. If you go to a restaurant, the price are on the menu. If you go to buy a car and the guy said to you, "Yeah, you can buy the car, But I'm not going to tell you how much it costs till after you bought it." Nobody would operate that way, but that's how our medical system operates. So, I looked at we have a mockup of the of this website. We're right now during the Biden administration because Trump had passed that law, the Biden administration just refused to enforce it. So we're in

the same position now where there's no transparency. We're changing that now. We sent out We've sent out over a thousand letters to hospitals, you know, warning letters. These you got to post them right now. And we're going to and we just u finalized new regulations. If they don't do that, they're going to pay a huge fine. So, I saw the mockup of the um of the website and I said I asked the question um how much does it cost in the hospitals within a mile of Manhattan of a baby? One of them was there were

About 30 hospitals that you I could visualize on one page. One of them was $1,300. That was the lowest. The highest was 22,000. In Detroit, it is the cheapest place to have a baby is about uh $5,000 and the most expensive is 60,000. And it's the same service, the same quality care. Nothing changes except that price. Why do we have that information chaos? We have it because the industry wants to Hide what it's doing. And so there's no market, there's no ability for people to make good choices. And when you know the um I met

I was staying with Dr. Oz during the transition at his house in Florida. And one day uh Prime Minister Rudd who was the former prime minister of Australia came by and he had after he was prime minister he had been appointed to run a commission to reduce healthcare costs and improve quality and they were very successful but he said the number One thing that they did at change everything was price transparency was showing people the price of what they're going to pay. So, we're now going to do that and um and people will be able

to shop and you know now we also have to we also have to shift all of those that money away from the insurance companies and put it in the hands of you know of the public so that they have are incentivized maximum incentivized to make good choices. >> So, as far as making good choices with like food, I I like what you guys did. I love what you guys did with the food pyramid. Essentially flipped it on its head, which is kind of crazy that for the longest time we were being told that the most

important things, the primary diet should be grains and rice and wheat and and now it's things that we've known for a long time. It's whole food, actual real food. That's what you're supposed to be eating. The the problem is getting People to change their habits and change their ways. And if people don't start eating good food and if people don't start taking care of their body, how what other things can you even imagine would shift this trend? >> Well, here's what's going to happen. First of all, the food pyramid. I inherited a food pyramid from

the the first week I was I came into office one year and two weeks ago. A week after I got in, I was handed the Food pyramid that the Biden administration had. It wasn't even the food pyramid. They gotten rid of that. They just were doing the dietary guidelines. So, it was the recommendations that would go be reflected in the food pyramid. [gasps] It was hundreds of pages long and it was incomprehensible and it was driven by all the merkantile impulses that had corrupted the food pyramid for 50 years. And it was it was Written

by lobbyists. It was written by the food industry lobbyists in the same impulse that put Froot Loops at the top of the food pyramid which isn't even a food. >> Froot Loops were at the top of the >> were at the top recommendation of the food pyramid. You can ask them to look up the old food pyramid. >> I need to see where Froot Loops stand. Don't they throw some vitamins on Froot Loops? Is it like vitamin rich? >> Oh yeah. As if that's good for you. It's good [laughter] for you. >> They add vitamins.

Do they even addit the cyanide and you know it wasn't going to make it any better for you? >> No. No, I'm joking obviously. >> But um >> but um >> it was a ridiculous. So >> the law so how did >> so then what we did is we got the best nutritionists in the country. You know We got Mark Heyman and we got the nutritionists from the best universities in the country and we put them all in a room and I thought it was going to take a month. It took 11 months because they

fought over every recommendation and everything is cited in source so that we know we have good science. But you know some of the stuff was ra because of regulatory malpractice all these years. Some of the studies simply haven't been done. So there are knowledge gaps which We should not have. So um so now we have a food pyramid where and because of the old food pyramid people didn't like the food on it and they were going to ultrarocessed food which was okay on the food pyramid. So now 70% of the food that our kids eat

is ultrarocessed food. 70% of the calories they got and it's just poisoning them. And they took off the good stuff like a whole milk which is nutrientdense which is feeding their brain. We have two generations of kids That grew up without milk, without the proper nutrients for their brain. We have the first country in the face of the earth that has chronic obesity and in the same people malnutrition. So you have [laughter] immensely obese people and they're malnourished. They're medically malnourished. It's because the food pyramid was so messed up. So, so what's going to happen

now, Joe, is that we are going to be able to drive that. We're going to be able to change Dietary culture. Just the food pyramid is going to change dietary culture. And here's how. um Brooke Rollins, who's an incredible USDA secretary, she um had she administers $45 million a day that she gives out to food subsidies or school lunches, the Wix program, the SNAP program, uh Indian Health Services, and all of these other programs. And and so those programs now are going to get good food because the dietary guidelines dictate what they can and Cannot

feed kids. Military and the VA also are changing. Now I, you know, this week I met with a guy, Chef Robert Irvine, who is a television chef. He's been hired by Pete Hess to come in and change all the military meals. military and he's on already on f five bases. By the end of this month, he'll be on 20. [clears throat] What he's done is the food that we give our military is so bad, they won't eat it. So, they're Going out and they're spending their money on um fast food. And fast food is not

cheap. A Big Mac meal cost 12 to$14. It's not a cheap meal. You can get a really good food for that price. You could feed yourself the whole day for that price. with good food. Mark Heyman's new book has a diet, $10 a day diet, three meals, great food. Anyway, Robert Irvine has gone into these places and he gives them all fresh food, almost all all of it Locally sourced. As it turns out, it's cheaper. The military is spending $18 a day for three meals for each soldier. He's spending $10 a day and giving them

real food, good food. and the lines now are allowed around the block and nobody's going to fast food. Everybody's fighting to get in. And what he says is it doesn't cost more. We don't need any more money. We just need to buy smarter and to be smarter about how we do it. And you know, um we're going to be able To do that. One of the things that we're doing with the dietary guidelines is the SNAP program. SNAP, we have 20 states now that have applied for SNAP waiverss and have been granted. So they you

can no longer get candy on SNAP. You can no longer get >> [clears throat] >> um soda. That was 18% of SNAP purchases. So we were taking the 63 million poorest kids in our country, giving them taxpayer funded diabetes. And then 78% Of them end up on Medicaid. Many of them being treated for diabetes. So we're paying to give them the disease and then we're paying to treat it for the rest of their lives. And we're changing that. And one of the things that Brooke is doing is she's going to require that any retailer that

accepts food stamps has to double the amount of real food in their establishment. We're working with farmers. We're working with entrepreneurs to make sure Every American get high quality food that is affordable. >> I don't know how [clears throat] anybody would be opposed to that. That all sounds fantastic. >> It's weird that they are. >> How How could you? The way you just laid it out, how could anybody be opposed to that? That all sounds great. >> I mean, what the for the soldiers that the the fact that they were getting terrible food that they

didn't want to Eat is just that's >> that's really offensive. You know, you think about what you're asking of them and then you're giving them garbage that they don't even want to eat. Like what do they how do they feel that you care about them? >> Well, and you know, one of the things that >> um uh Robert Irvine, the chef, told me, he said, you know, it cost $9 to get a frozen salmon. It cost $6 to get a fresh Salmon. So you know food food good food is actually if you cook yourself at

home the good food is much much less expensive. The problem is Americans have forgotten how to cook and so and cooking is really important because it's not a it's important for family cohesion for a sense of community. It's a daily almost sacred ritual and and you know taking that away from our lives has has amplified the spiritual meal that we're in. And one of the things we're going to Do is to start sending federal workers out to teach people how to cook. They don't have the implements. They don't have the cutting boards. They don't have,

you know, they don't know how to buy groceries, >> right? >> And you know, you can go into any any big grocery store in this country. If you go and buy a steak, it's still pretty expensive. But if you buy the cheaper cuts, it's Great meat and it is very very affordable or liver or you know all these alternatives. >> Chuck Rose, >> now you said, you know, how can you be against that? >> Well, I I told you 20 states have applied for the SNAP program and we've granted them SNAP waiverss. Why would you

want taxpayer? If you want to drink a Coke, you ought to be able to. We live in the United States. We're not going to Take anything away from anybody. But the taxpayer shouldn't be paying for it. Particularly when we're paying for it on the other end in diabetes. So this just makes sense to anybody. But 20 states have applied. Only two of them are blue states. Why? The the Bernie Sanders has been fighting for this for years, but Vermont won't apply for one. And it's all partisanship. and they're putting their hatred of Donald Trump ahead

of their love for Their own children. And until we learn to stop doing that, this, you know, the healthcare in this country is not going to improve, at least in those states. So what strategies, if any, could you ever imagine that could be implemented that would kind of unite people on these things and get them to stop being so partisan about one of the most important aspects of being a human being is staying healthy. It's it's a, you know, it's like love And health. They're all those are the the the top ones that we all

want. That it just seems insane that we would choose this as a battleground. And it it seems insane that it's connected to one party or another. It shouldn't be. It's a it should just we should all be united on at least this. And I think if people were a little healthier and they were a little more fit, they'd probably have a lot less anxiety, probably a lot less conflict when it comes to political Disagreements. Things could probably be worked out more amicably, especially among friends. It's like having good health improves virtually every aspect of your

life. >> Yeah. I mean I would say >> for everybody >> I would say two things. The food ties directly into your mental health. Yes. And we now know this is so well documented that there's a gut brain connection and that you know depression, ADHD. Chris Palmer up at Harvard is dramatically reducing the symptoms of schizophrenia simply by changing people's diets. He's using a keto diet. >> Um there are >> dramatically like what what kind of percent >> they're losing 30% of their symptoms >> really. uh um >> just from ketones >> from keto. >>

What about have they done anything with >> the same thing is true? I mean you know there there are now there's a big paper about to come out on losing a bipolar diagnosis kids who lose bipolar diagnosis simply by changing their diet. We know that ADHD is driven by all these food dies and stuff and that's very well documented. There's all of these um you go on the internet and um you look for Uh uh studies that show what happens when you change the food in prisons and juvenile detention facilities and they you know the

the they'll put it in one wing of the prison. They'll put good food and then they'll put the standard food in the in the other and the level of violence goes down by 40 45 50%. the use of restraints in juvenile detention facilities goes down 75%. The the number of incidents dramatically drops and so it's a public safety issue In the prisons and you know I've been meeting now with all the prisons they prisons have a real problem because they're allocated the state prisons are allocated to 60 cents a day to feed the prisoners and

it's [clears throat] and they're it's all >> for them it's all about shelf life. So they're just feeding them the worst kind of poison that you could possibly It's all just chemicals. >> Oh my god. >> But you know um >> well we've kind of given up on the idea of rehabilitation. It's just all about punishment. And then >> but this is also public safety. It's guard safe everything else. And the other thing in the answer to your first question about how do you sort of you know mitigate the polarization I I would say the

only way that you do that is by getting people to start talking to each other. >> Yeah. >> Because that you got to be able to find common ground with other people and if you don't talk to them you don't see their humanity. >> Right. And you know that's one of the things that you do that is so great which is you bring a lot of people on here who you disagree with and you have a civil conversation about them and you you show your curiosity about them and you you know you you get to

hear their Rationale and a lot of times I'll listen to somebody on this show I I'll say I don't like this guy and then I'll listen to his rationale and I'll think oh actually he's making a lot of sense and [clears throat] we have to uh hating people because of the label on them. >> Yeah. >> And start, [snorts] you know, listening. And it's really important we do that now because these algorithms are designed to drive us all apart. Yeah. >> And you know, we've always had political polarization in this country. I mean, I grew

up during the 60s and, you know, there were bombs going off and people being shot and, you know, all it was very, very violent and vitriolic when my dad was running and the polarization probably was the worst since the American Civil War. Um, but um [clears throat] but today when it is amplified by the algorithms, it's hard to see where it's going to end up in a Good place unless we start learning to talk to each other. It's not just the algorithm. It's just the It's also the method of communication. When you're you're only talking

to people through like angry tweets back and forth with each other. You were saying like sit down and talk to people. That's no one's doing that anymore. Very few people. There's a few FaceTime conversations going on. You see your friends if you go out with them. People are not talking That much anymore and they're not sitting down and talking. And when you do, everyone's distracted. Everyone has their phones out. Everyone's checking text messages. I I'll tell you one of the most important things that we're doing right now as part of the MA legislation from my

agency. We're going state by state and we're asking them to do bell-to-bell legislation so that um and 26 states have now already done it. So more than half the states so that Kids can't use cell phones in schools. I went to a school in Lowden County the other day and the states love them. Um I went to Lowden County and you know they had the students had fought and fought against this this uh [laughter] against getting their cell phone. So they the way they do it all of the schools school districts and states do it

differently. But in that state they can bring their cell phone to school but they have to leave it in Their backpack and and if the parent calls and needs to talk to them they can do it. Uh, but I walked into the cafeteria, 600 kids in that cafeteria and they're all talking to each other. They're sitting across the table. Nobody's looking at their laps. >> The parents, the parents came, you know, that day. I pulled the students and I said, "How many do you think this is a good idea?" And they all put their hands

up and they said, "We all hated it for The first two weeks and now we love it." >> The um the parents said, "Uh, it's the best thing that ever happened. my kid is not driving with their cell phone in the car anymore because they know they can live without it or eating dinner with the family [clears throat] and we're actually having conversations and then the the teachers in the schools love it because the disciplinary problems go down and the the test scores go through the roof, you know, because They're focusing of course >> on

work. So, it's just like a no-brainer. But again, it's that the blue states that, you know, are the hardest to convince to do it because they see it as as uh, you know, as a a Trump part of the, you know, the demonization of, you know, Trump being the tyrant or whatever. >> It's just so stupid to to not recognize the kids are distracted. Like, what why it's just one of those things like why Does that have to be a right or a left issue? It's stupid. This is a United States issue. The best way

to have a group of people that succeed in this world is make it as clear a path for them as possible. And as soon as you allow them to use their phone all day, it's too addictive. >> No one can put them down. You're going to lose 30% of your concentration or more easily, I would imagine. >> The the fact that that would be a Partisan thing is just nuts. It just shows how goofy we are. I don't I don't know how you get people to talk, though. I mean, other than I mean, I do

it on a podcast, but that's my job. I don't know how many conversations I'd be having with people who I was politically opposed to or ideologically opposed to or just didn't see eye to eye with them and wanted to know how they think. I I don't know how many Opportunities I would ever even get to do that. >> What you're doing is so important. And now you know there's a thousand people imitating you many really good podcasts but um it's teaching people to have conversations. I mean you are the best >> teacher mentor on that

and people admire you so they oh and my I have seven kids and they grew up with with devices and stuff and I would look you know I slap Them out of their hand and I I and also they couldn't concentrate on long you know long points long conversations they're like get to the point you know like I only got five seconds you got to make your point [sighs] >> and then I see um sitting for three and a half hours and listening to a Rogan podcast. That was a cultural phenomena. That was a cultural

change. This generation of kids I have so much hope for because they grew up with that and You know they want it. So I do have a lot of a hope that we're going to be able to do this. And then you know I think Charlie Kirk did that too was an example to a lot of those kids because whether you agree with him or not and he had very strong opinions that people you know considered terrible but the one thing that he really did is he talked to people he didn't agree with and he

always gave them the microphone and allowed them to amplify their voice. And Then he had a civility and he talked to them and he used logic a lot of times destructively but not in an angry way. >> And so I think you know he was teaching people uh to how to have conversations again. You're teaching people how to have conversations again. And it's, you know, I think that's uh, you know, one of the big hopes that I have for the future that people learn to talk to each other with whom they With with people who

with whom they disagree. >> It would be nice. But there's also a a real genuine problem today in the marketplace of outrage that a a lot of people um a lot of their podcasts are just focused almost entirely on on outrage and of uh like having arguments and screaming matches with people, you know, putting people down and not having civil discourse but trying to win, trying to dominate someone in an Argument, you know, trying to squash people and I guess in a sense some of that is really good because it exposes bad ideas but it

just encourages that kind of discourse where if someone's ideologically opposed to you they are the enemy and you want to destroy them and I'm I'm like okay they're just a human being like find out why they got to where they are that is a different perspective than you have and why you got to where you are and try to figure Out if there's some middle ground in there like what what do you believe like why do you believe that and find out why and and ask them and don't don't cut them off. Let them talk.

Let them express themselves. Help them if you can. Try to figure out what makes someone actually think instead of just thinking that your ideas are a part of you. They're just ideas. Like they're not you. Like some ideas you can hold in your mind and they're bad for you. They're bad. You haven't examined them. You're acting on them like they're doctrine and then you're stuck with that idea because you've already espoused it so many times. s you don't want to be a flip-flopper and so people get mad and you you get this weird cycle of

shitty communication and nobody ever breaks out of it and nothing ever gets done and there's no common ground is ever achieved and the only way you're going to ever break that is to stop talking to People like that. You got to just talk to them. Just instead of talk to them like they're the enemy, just talk to them like they're a fellow human being about some ideas and just treat them with respect. Talk to them like a person that you know in any other circumstance maybe even could be your friend. Just talk to them. People

can do that. It's possible. It just takes discipline. You have to learn how to do it. Took me a while. Took me a long time to learn how To talk to people better, but it can be done. And >> yeah, but it's technique. But as prevalent as you know that kind of vitriol is on in the podcast world >> right >> it's it is incomparable to what's happening on television because there are no conversations on television >> right that's more of what I was getting at honestly is there's some shows that do that but like

some of these CNN shows It's just these crazy ideological battles and yeah also guys pro tip you can't have [ __ ] six people at a table all yelling out for seven minutes, you don't have enough time to get a real point across and it becomes a battle of like who's got the best prepared sound bites or who's got the best uh snarky quip. It's stupid. It's a stupid way to talk about things, you know? >> I mean, Cheryl went on uh >> the view. >> Yeah, the view. And [laughter] it was and it was

that it wasn't like uh um like you say, you know, like let's have a congenial conversation with people and >> you know, allow them to to express themselves and to be fun and funny and >> Yes. >> Yeah. Well, just have a conversation with someone. if you disagree with them about certain things like they disagree with her. It would have been far more productive to have a one-on-one Conversation instead of this gaggle of hands squawking all at her. It's just like you you see it over and over again when they oppose somebody. It's like they're

all chiming in and it's just not the way you could ever like thoroughly cover a subject and they're limited by their format. That format is very limiting. It's a shitty format where you you you go to a commercial at predetermined times, period. No matter what. Like maybe you got a little leeway Here or there, but you've got to get that commercial in. And that's crazy because if you're in the middle of talking, a lot of points take a long time to flesh out. Like just think about all the stuff you just explained about Medicaid. Imagine

if you try to do that and >> you can you can't you can't do it. And it would they would try to stop you. You're too in the weeds. No one's going to pay attention to this. It's like I Don't think that's true. And I think we've learned that because of podcast because there was no production. There was no executives. There was no one there. People were just putting on a webcam and talking. And so we realized like, well, people actually do like conversations still. They just don't get a lot of them, not real ones.

You know, you get interviews where someone has like a sheet of questions. You know, you get where someone is uh, you know, Playing a role. you're playing a role of a a person who interviews people. You don't really give a [ __ ] about what this person has to say. But people do want connection. They still do. And the fact that we don't get it from social media, but most of our time is in social media is just accelerating this detachment we have from each other. And that's what people have to get past. I don't

know how to do it to tell everybody start their own podcast. >> That you know, you and I were talking before we came in here about Larry King. >> Yes. >> He did that. There were a lot of people in the 70s and 80s um David Suskind and you know all of these other people who were who were actually having conversations. >> Yeah, Larry King was great. >> Cavitt [clears throat] >> I love when he asked Jay Khaled how how'd you gain all the weight? I was Like [laughter] what did he say? >> He said

I ate too much. What do you want me to say? That's such a crazy question. How did you gain all the weight? Like what Larry? What are you talking about? That's crazy. That's a wild question to ask someone. But, you know, he would just have a conversation with you, you know, and I think uh people have a hunger for that. And uh a lot of this uh infighting comes from no face to face Communication. I think when people get a chance, especially if it's not performative, that's part of the problem like the Charlie Kirk stuff

or some of the other things that people do in front of a crowd, things become very performative when there's a bunch of people watching and cheering and and then you know how the audience feels and you play to them a little bit like h that's probably not the best way to talk about stuff. And I think human beings Naturally understand one-on-one conversations. We've had them for all of human history. So when you get a a chance to hear people talk one-on-one for hours at a time, it expands your understanding of the world. Like I now

I know how you feel about things. I I know at least for this brief three-hour conversation, I get a more of a sense of how you approach things. And then people put that into their own mind and go, "Maybe I should approach things a little Bit differently. Maybe I should think about things a little bit differently." And we miss that. You know, we're missing that. And social media robs you of that. It gives you the exact opposite of that. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> I mean, you know what Charlie Kirk was doing? You're right. You

know, it was it was less of a conversation and more of a uh sometimes it was like in in the Ring. You know, it was like being in the, you know, the ring. But it's a lot better than what's happening elsewhere, which is just blanket censorship of people and not any willingness to just shutting people down and cancelling them. >> Yeah. 100%. Well, that >> that's another weird thing that that's a Democratic party impulse because >> it was the opposite of the Democratic party I grew up with, you know, which Was unafraid of any debate.

My uncle, my father said, "We should be able to debate. We should be able to win these debates in the marketplace of ideas. If we can't, then we need to examine ourselves. >> It was a core tenant of the Democratic party. >> Yeah. And you know, the unfortunate shift in that, it's just like, you know, I remember during the Bush administration when the FCC was going After Howard Stern, it was it was this huge thing. They were trying to close down Howard Stern because Howard Stern was very critical of Bush >> and it was like

he was the guy out there fighting for free speech and they were getting fined like enormous fines enormous fines for things that he had said you know they deemed to be obscene >> you know and um that was a right-wing thing and we always thought of it as a right-wing thing and when you uh see What's happening today just like any the the wanting silence of your political opponents is the dumbest way to cut off your own hand. It's so dumb because if you can't see that this could be used against you if someone else

gets into a position of power. If all of a sudden some enormous right-wing corporation buys these social media platforms and only pushes right-wing agendas and silences all left-wing agendas. Like, do you know how [ __ ] crazy that is to Just give that kind of power willingly to an anonymous group of people that you supposedly align to cuz you're in the same tribe? It's the dumbest thing ever. And the fact that people on the left weren't outraged when they read the Twitter files and found out how much involvement there was in silencing real information and

removing people who from the White House ordered me to be removed from Instagram. I lost a million followers. insane. >> 37 hours after he got after he took the oath of office swearing to uphold the Constitution, they were ordering Mark Zuckerberg to take me down. And then you look at what's happening in England now, you know, with people going to jail for Twitter posts. >> 12,000 people this year. >> Yeah. >> 12,000 in the last year. And then this where the Magna Carta was, you know, Written and now [clears throat] there's now it's just a

it's just a dictatorship. Well, they got rid of trial by jury except for murder and rape and a couple other things. Now it's just a judge. So, you know, whatever it is, if it's a social media infraction, if it's there's no reasonable, you know, judge by a jury of your peers. No, you're you're you're getting judged by a judge. >> It's the Soviet system. It's like Kafka. I just can't believe how quick it happened when you know when you look at the social media arrests they were they were always disturbing like uh if you go

back even four or five years they had quite a few of them a year but it really ramped up really ramped up over the last year or so and it's just insane to watch and a lot of it is criticism of immigration like legitimate criticism of immigration and legitimate critic uh criticism of crimes that have been Committed and people outraged which is completely normal, but instead of like doing anything about that, they want to arrest people from complaining. And it's just really weird to watch. Yeah. And it's going to get worse with the AI. Um,

it's scary. Well, it's just strange that they couldn't do anything to stop that from happening and that anybody with anybody that's reasonable would be Willing to let that happen because their side is imposing it. That that seems like an existential threat to all critical thinking, all communication and debate. All as soon as you start arresting people for opinions, that's crazy. You now you're getting nuts. Like anything that you deem might incite violence or like outrage, people are outraged. They have a right to be outraged. If you can put them in a cage because they're outraged,

that's nuts. That's really nut. Now they have a pub law. Do you know this one? >> No. >> Oh, find that Jamie. They're trying to pass this thing. I don't know if they passed it. Where uh someone's I don't want to speak out of turn. I don't want to [ __ ] this up because it was disturbing enough without me uh misinterpreting it, but the idea was to stop people from saying things on social media that you get arrest for. Stop them From saying those kind of things in pubs. And >> where is this in

England? >> Yes. See if you can find it. I know I saved it, but it'll take me too long to pull it up. >> Did you find anything like that? I'm >> trying to make sure it's >> legit. Yeah. >> I mean, I wouldn't imagine it's not I mean, it's not outside the realm of what They're poss they they're capable of doing if they're arresting 12,000 people a year for social media posts. I mean, if that was happening in America and they were only arresting Republicans, I don't think you'd hear a peep out of the

Democrats. I think they think it's important. We have to stop misinformation. >> Yeah. >> It passed. >> No, I don't think it passed. You don't Think it passed? Find out if it passed or not. Okay. So, what is the act? What were they >> legislation aimed blah blah blah, but it says you're still free to converse. Know the law. I don't know. >> What was the what were they trying to Okay point free speech in UK pubs. Employer responsibilities requires employers to take reasonable steps to prevent staff from experiencing Harassment by third parties such as

customers. Well, that's normal, right? You don't want to be harassed by a cop. Concerns have been raised that debates on, for instance, gender, identity, or political matters could lead to staff complaints resulting in patrons being asked to leave if the behavior is deemed aggressive or harassing. It should not be misinterpreted as a ban on lawful, polite, or controversial speech. Who's to decide what's Controversial, though? um third-party harassment legislation focuses on addressing harassment rather than banning specific topics of conversation entirely. Just any regulation of conversation is nuts. If it's one thing you're harassing the staff owner,

I've never known a pub owner who would allow people to come in and harass his staff. He already has an economic and management incentive to not allow that. You know, it's not the kind of thing you Need to legislate. But to say that someone doesn't feel safe if people are having a civil conversation about gender identity, you don't feel safe if you work there and that you're getting harassed by people's opinions that you don't agree with. Well, that's where things get weird because then you, as we've seen, there's a lot of people that get they

get really triggered about a lot of things that are pretty normal for most folks. You know, microaggressions, Dumb [ __ ] There's a lot of people that just want to be offended. And if this is a law, that could lead to a lot more problem. It's just a slippery slope and they're not going in the right direction. And I don't know how they course correct if they've fallen this far that quickly. 12,000 arrests is crazy. That's a crazy amount of people go to jail for social media posts. >> Yeah. >> And it encourages self-censorship so

you don't get a real sense of what people want or don't want because people don't want to be involved. They don't want to go to jail. They don't want to get take a chance. the the framers of the constitution put free speech was everything to them and they put it in the first amendment because they knew all the other um rights and guarantees were dependent on it. If you have a if you have a Government that can silence its opponents. It has a license for any any kind of atrocity. >> It's just shocking that all

other Western nations haven't adopted that. Well, most of them don't have constitutions. So crazy. It's just so ridiculous. It's so ridiculous that free speech, which is like we all agree, especially in America, it's one of the most important things. The only way to find out what's Real and what's not. Got to let people talk it out. You know, I mean, when you're living in a world where the government has the power to dictate what's real and what's not real, and they don't have an obligation to be correct, you got a real problem. And if there's

no consequences for them being incorrect, and they've silenced correct speech, they've gotten away with something that's real slippery and real dangerous. And when there's a lot of Money involved and a lot of businesses involved, >> I've typed it into perplexity and it this gives [clears throat] a little context on it because the pubs were being >> the same the pub thing reverses a 2013 removal of third party harassment liability making pubs liable if staffs overhear comments deemed harassing based on protected characteristics like sex or race. Critics call it a banter ban, Fearing landlords landlords will

police conversations to avoid lawsuits, chilling speech in social venues. >> That makes it sound like if someone was doing that, the the business would be was getting in trouble versus the person who was saying it, >> right? So, uh, they removed a third party harassment liability. So, they removed the pub owner being in trouble. >> They removed that. because it says it passed. When I was Looking it up, it said it passed a couple months ago. December. >> So that makes pub owners liable again. >> Uh, >> so removed 2013 removal of third party harassment

liability. >> Made them liable. I don't think I think it's back to reverses that reverses making them liable. >> No, no, no, no. It reverses the removal of the third party harassment liability. So they removed the liability now making Pubs liable. So it now makes them liable if they overhear comments. So what this does is it encourages the pub itself to censor people, which makes sense. I mean, if you all of a sudden can now sue a pub that you went into and you didn't like this conversation about gender identity that was taking place next

to you, you have the basis of a lawsuit now. >> Yeah. So now the incentive is the pub owner to go out and police all The conversations so that if anybody if anybody crosses the guard rail, you know, the pub owner now has to go in and interrupt them, which is not a good thing. >> If you weren't a charitable person, you could imagine that there are certain groups that would have people go to places, have conversations, and set up a lawsuit. >> Yeah. You could just you could commit fraud if the pub is liable

until you pay Some cook to go in there and start yelling about transsexuals and then next thing you know you collect the lawsuit. Like that's not outside of what I think a shady person would do. If you think about what you've just talking about with all the Medicare fraud and all the other fraud that we know has happened in the world, like this is this is a giant loophole. This is a giant loophole for people to come in and sue people and silence everybody's speech. And the fact That this is uh not being recognized is

it's very disturbing that people don't understand human behavior. It's very weird. They're willing to accept this kind of stuff. when you um look at the challenges of getting things done, what has been the most frustrating in terms of what you wanted to get done and what you were actually able to get done or in the process of getting done? I mean, I've been surprised by how much President Trump has supported me on this stuff because I, you know, I'm going after the the biggest, [clears throat] you know, big pharma, >> big insurance, um the big

food, >> big food, >> and um and these have all been, you know, those were all taboos for every administration, Democratic, Republican. There was little incremental things that you could do under democratic administrations, but nothing like this Ever happened. You know, I mean, the the the agreement we made with the pharmaceutical industry could not have happened any under any other president, the MFN agreement, the most favorite nation. And the way that that worked is, you know, we've been paying for the last 40 years the highest price in the world for medicine. And so um we

we have 4.2% of the world's population here and uh over 70% of pharmaceutical profits and revenues come From the United States. Why is that? We do buy more drugs than anybody but it's because we pay higher prices. We pay two to three to five times what they're paying in Europe. Or for example, and President Trump likes to talk about this. OMIC the list price was $1350 in America. You could buy the same drug in any pharmacy in London for $88. And it's made in the same factory in New Jersey. And [clears throat] the reason that

was allowed to happen is the Europeans just said, "We're not going to allow we're not going to pay anymore for it." They would set the price and that was the maximum. There's a lot of drugs they don't have. There's a lot of cancer drugs they don't have in Europe because they just wouldn't pay the price. And um and so uh President Trump, you know, every president has Vowed to stop this. Clinton tried [clears throat] to stop it. Uh Obama, Bush, uh all of them tried and Biden all said, "We're going to get rid of the

MFN price." And none of them did anything on it. And President Trump literally called me sometimes once a day. He called late at night, 11:30 at night and you know [clears throat] say, "Where are you on MFN?" And we ended up getting the it Seemed to me even it seemed insurmountable. But he he said, "I'm going to use tariffs. I'm going to force the Europeans to raise their drug prices." And because he didn't want to he didn't we had enough leverage on the pharmaceutical companies because of our Medicaid Medicare programs that we could pretty much

force them to lower their prices and he but it would put them out of business. So and he Didn't mind he wants us to continue to be the center for innovation in this country and he also wanted the companies reshore all the all their production so that we're making all the drugs here and they're not making it elsewhere in the world. And so we sat down with them for months and uh we came to agreements with 16 of the 17 pharmaceutical companies. Now Americans are getting the lowest prices in the world. If somebody lowers The

price in Europe, we get that price or lower. And people can get that today on Trump RX. They can go for, you know, the most popular medications and get the cheapest price in the world. And not only that, but the pharmaceutical industry because we gave them certainty and because President Trump forced the European countries to raise the price that their citizens pay for drugs, we the the companies actually did well. They they increased stock values by 1.3 Trillion among them and they've all agreed to onshore their production. So Lily is building six plants here, new

plants, including one of the biggest API facilities in the world as the API or the um the the pharmaceutical ingredients that you know we ran out of during COVID. We need to be making them here because otherwise other countries can blackmail us. Fizer, Merc, they're all building um big facilities here and drug production is now going to come to The United States. We're going to be the center of the world in terms of drug production. So, and those negotiations were very, very tough and they were extraordinarily complex. We were, you know, we have a really

good suite of of um talented individuals, highc caliber individuals who've left billion-dollar businesses. One of them is a guy called Chris Clump, who's immensely talented. He walked away from a a company that does data management for 85% of the hospitals in this country and he's you know he walked away from billion dollar company divested lost a lot of money to come just because he wants to improve things. He ran the negotiations and the uh the pharmaceutical companies fell in love with him because they realized they could trust him. And we worked out this extraordinary agreement

where now Americans have gone from paying the most in the world for drugs to the least in the developed world for drugs and that's going to change everybody's experience, you know. >> Can I ask you how that applies if someone is it the same if someone has insurance or if they don't have insurance? like is how does insurance bill it versus how does someone buy on their own? >> It if they um it's going to lower price For everybody. Anybody can go on Trump RX whether they have insurance or not and they can get it

there >> and they would buy it themselves. >> Yeah. >> And so it' be at a substantially lower price than they would have had in the past. >> Exactly. >> They buy it themselves. What if people are just getting it through insurance? Do they >> again, you know, then there >> does insurance lower it as well or do they? >> Yeah, the the copay is lowered. >> Okay. >> And you know, we had the first woman to buy a drug on it. The first customer was a woman who has been trying for years to do

IVF and the drug cost $4,000 and now I think it costs uh you know something like $600 >> really. Uh so it's gonna allow you know women uh one out of every three women in this country does not have as many children as she wants and she can't have more and IVF is going to be really important because our birth rates just dropped I mean dramatically this year they dropped to 1.75. So yeah people don't understand that. You know we've had a few conversations on this podcast about population decline and people just most people are

not aware of it. They Just see how many people are on the highway. They think we're overcrowded. They don't understand this replacement number that we're going to need unless we want our population. >> The US is in a different situation than other countries. Japan is in total crisis, >> right? >> China is in an existential crisis because uh you know its population is going to drop dramatically. >> South Korea. >> Yeah. Um but you know people want to immigrate here so we can make up the deficit through immigration. It's going to you know uh and

that we have that advantage but we you know it's still the birth rate has dropped. It dropped one and a half or um it dropped from uh 1.9 this year to 1.75 and that affects social security. it affects you know it it makes it so that the cliff for social security was pushed ahead by Another year because of that uh drop in birth rate so it's um it's not a good thing and you know American women want to have babies and a lot of a third of them cannot have as many children as they want

>> um what was the push back when it came to things like removal of dyes >> the removal of eyes. Again, we were I think because of President Trump's leadership, we were able to convene the industry and Talk to them about it and a lot of them came in and said, "Yeah, you know, we know we got to change." >> Really? >> Yeah. The only one ever ask them why didn't you do it a long time ago? >> Well, they didn't have options and what we did. But didn't most of them like for cereal for

example, didn't they have to have no unnatural dyes when they sent it to Canada? >> Yeah, the ones in Canada, but in our Country, we hadn't approved a bunch of them. So, we only had one or two ve vegetable based eyes, Marty McCary, who's done a fantastic job at FDA, has now fasttracked it this year five new or seven new ones. So we're working with the industry to make sure they have the dies and they're supposed to get rid of all the dyes by the end of this year and that's gonna you know that >>

so instead they'll use just food based dyes. Yeah, just yeah vegetable Vegetable and mineralbased dies and that's you know another thing that we did again through convening industry because of President Trump's convening power um we fixed the prior authorization. So one of the most frustrating things that um [clears throat] that people go through when they encounter the health care system is is [snorts] that they have to wait for prior authorization from their insurance company. So, you go in, your Doctor tells you you need a knee replacement, and then it gets you, it takes you six

months for the company to approve, for the insurance company to approve the surgery. And and you know, it was infuriating for people and really devastating and heartbreaking for a lot of them. And we got um we got the the biggest insurance companies representing 80% of the American public all voluntarily agree to eliminate prior authorization for almost All their procedures. It's very small number now. I think 15% of the procedures still have it and those are procedures we want prior authorization because there's a potential for abuse. For example, with spinal surgeries, a lot of people don't

need the surgery and Medicaid Medicare wants to make sure that they actually need that surgery and it's beneficial to them. But for all the other ones, you will now know at point of care Whether or not your insurance. So, you go to your doctor, he says you need a knee surgery, before you leave his office, you'll know whether the insurance company approves of it or not. And that's going to dramatically change the medical experience. Another thing that we did again through convening industry is we originally got 63 the top tech companies together and that we

ended up final agreement with 405 of them to agree to stop information Blocking. So your medical records are owned by you, but you can't get access to them. A lot of times, most of the time, you're the data company won't give them to you. And so we've got them all to agree to stop do that. So by the end of this year, every American will be able to get their medical records on their cell phone. And that's going to dramatically change the medical experience. It's going to save lives because if you get hit, you know,

you Live in New Jersey, you get hit by a car in Portland, Oregon, you go to the hospital and you spend the first two hours while you're bleeding out, you know, making out clipboards now, or you come in unconscious and they don't know what to do with you. They don't know anything about you. Now, your medical records are on your cell phone. They can see if you have allergies. They can see what your blood type is. they can look at all of your, you know, previous Medical records and make a uh make good decisions about

how to treat you. And that is and also you're going to be able to sync that with um with food purchases apps so that you'll be able to go into a grocery store and the the app will tell you this one is bad for you. this, you know, this uh this choice is bad for you and offer you a better choice, etc. And there's an app like that. Yaka now, but there's a lot of them coming online now. >> What's it called? >> Yaka is the one. I think 50% of the people in France use

Yaka, but it's >> Do you spell it? >> I think it's Yu CCA. >> Okay. >> Or Yuka. I don't know. You can look it up. We use it. My wife use it. You go into the grocery store. You go into the grocery store and you uh you put it on the barcode and and it it rates each of the products about whether Or not they're you know whether it's good or healthy one and then it makes you a recommendation for a healthier one if it's if it's bad for you. And that is going to

change the food culture in our country because the the company's already changing their ingredients so that they can get better scores from the Yucka app and from other apps that are like it. It's not the only one out there. >> But what about preservatives in Processed foods? Um, they're always going to exist, right? You're always going to have certain amount of preservatives in processed foods. >> Well, I mean, first of all, we're not going to take processed foods away from people, but we're going to I think we're going to change the amount of processed foods.

One is by April we will have uh a federal definition of ultrarocessed foods first time in the history. And as soon as we do that we're going to do Front of package food labeling. So every food in your grocery store will have a label on it. It'll have maybe a green light, a red light or yellow light telling you whether or not it's going to be good for you. >> Oh wow. and that, you know, and it's going to evaluate all of the ingredients, etc. Um, so I, you know, I think we're not going to

change this overnight, but we're going to change it pretty quickly. And if you want to be Healthy, we're going to give you the information to take control of your own own health. People just don't want to be healthy and don't care. There's not much you can do about it. And most Americans want to be healthy. And they, you know, we've seen that when they're allowed to make healthy choice, they do. They do not want to be eating this poison. >> Yeah. And ironically, to people that don't want to be healthy, they feel that Way because

they're not healthy. If they wanted a >> If they were healthy, they would want to stay healthy. They just [clears throat] part of the reason why they're feeling this way is because they're unhealthy. That's why they don't care. Yeah. Well, it's also like the the mountain is so big. If you if you're 300 lb, you're like, "Oh my god, it's so much work to do something about this and not fall back on the old behaviors, you And I and I don't know other than by example how you can get a large group of people to

go along with that, you know, when when someone like Jelly Roll loses like I think it's close to 300 lb. When someone like that does that, you know, that's going to help a lot of people. So some kind of an example of a guy who just completely changed his lifestyle around could change changed what he eats >> and he did it without uh GLPs. >> Yes, he did. >> Pretty amazing. >> Um which brings me to peptides. where where are we at right now on peptides and getting them regulated and making sure it's not this

weird gray area because we know they're effective but we also know that there's a lot of push back on peptides. >> Yeah. I mean I'm a big fan of peptides. I've used them myself and used them with really good effect um [clears throat] you know with on a couple of injuries. Um what happened was there were 19 peptides that you can just so people understand the there's a there was a law written that um to allow compounding pharmacies to make compounds that were part of approved drugs. So, you know, part of approved ingredients of approved

drugs to make them [clears throat] individually for patients who could did not have access to the particular um Formulation that they needed to fit them, maybe if they had an allergy to the commercial brand or whatever. And the compounding pharmacies and peptides was part of that group. There were 19 peptides that were widely formulated by compounding pharmacies during the Biden administration. They illegally move those to category 2, which says do not formulate. It was illegal because they're not supposed to Do that unless there's a safety signal. And they didn't have a safety signal. They're not

allowed to look at efficacy. They're not allowed to say, "Well, we don't believe these are efficacious or whatever." they can only look at safety. They move those to category 2 which means do not formulate. What happened? There was huge demand for peptides. And so a black market came out and the black market is run by companies that say that they're making The peptides for animal use or for research purposes. And the um and that peptide now basically completely replaced the legal market. The legal market for peptides the um the um the the pharmacies the compounding

pharmacies were getting those peptides from FDA inspected facilities and some of them in India and China but they were the same one that the pharmaceutical industries Are buying them and we inspect those. you know, you're getting a uh a good product. You know, you're getting what you bought, what you what was advertised with the gray market. You have no idea. And a lot of this stuff that we've looked at is just, you know, is very very substandard. Oh, I'm very anxious to move not probably not all of those peptides. Some of them are in litigation,

but about 14 of them back to Making them more accessible. And FDA is in the middle of of um I think within a couple of weeks we will have announced uh some kind of new action. And my you know, my hope is that they're going to end up with they're still looking at the science. My hope is that they're going to get moved to a place where people have access from ethical suppliers. >> That's ultimately the the problem with all this black market stuff, right? A Lot of people are getting bogus peptides and they don't

have any idea how they if they work, whether to test them. They just take a chance. They take a risk. They get a a little flyer in their email or something and uh they hear from somebody else, I got it from this place. They don't even know and they try it. And you're getting nonsense bogus peptides. I mean, we created the black market. >> Yeah. Which we do with every >> very dangerous black market, >> which they've done during prohibition. They're doing it right now with everything else. >> It's unfortunate. Um I know there's been

some talk about um uh psychedelics and I know that uh in particular I gain what's going on in Texas with the uh Ibagain initiative where uh former Governor Rick Perry and Brian Hubard have been helping a lot a lot of veterans a lot of people with Like serious opioid addictions and and this is uh the plan to have this and run some programs where you you have this very effective way of getting people off addictions that we have for some reason banned in America up until, you know, these initiatives. And I think there's some stuff

that can help a lot of people. I mean, what how many people are addicted to opioids in this country? It's pretty high. How many people >> 48,000 48 million? >> Have you looked into the ibeane stuff? >> Yeah. >> What what's your thoughts on it? I my I don't know enough and I don't think it's well documented enough about whether you know it's long-term impact on addiction but um in terms of just sort of the field of psilocybin and MDMA and there are lots and lots of good studies now that um that clearly demonstrate that

or strongly suggest that it is Effective against uh PS psd >> PTSD >> yeah PTSD sorry and um and you know also some forms of depression etc. And [clears throat] so I would say everybody in my agency and over at VA at Doug Collins agency is um very anxious to get a rule out there that will allow these kind of studies will allow access under therapeutic um settings and you know particularly to the military Soldiers who have suffered these injuries to get access to these products. We're working through that process now. And you know, you

have uh from Marty McCary, I mean, we're all working on it and trying to trying to make it happen. >> It would be great to extend that to police officers, too, probably. >> Yeah. [clears throat] >> You know, I mean, a lot of the same type of PTSD they experience, it just doesn't Get brought up as much. Um >> and if you know if you can if you can treat depression and you know uh without using SSRI putting somebody a lifetime sentence to SSRIs you can treat them. There's a number of things not just psychedelics

but a number of interventions that we're looking at that are rapid interventions are more transformative than the way that psychedelics seem to rewire your brain. And so we're looking at that as an entire category of interventions that people ought to be able to study, ought to have good access to and we should get it out to the public as quickly as possible. >> What would be the hurdles to something like that? >> Um I think that we're going to get it done. >> So how would that be implemented? Would it be implemented in a clinical

setting? Would it be some somewhere that >> well for some of them you know [clears throat] for some of them it would be that you can do you know to encourage more clinical trials and others it would be there would be very strong guideline I mean this is what we're envisioning so I can't tell you exactly what we're going to do >> but very very strong uh guidelines for therapeutic guidelines so how they're applied what kind of followup because a Lot of these things rewire your brain if you don't do followup, it doesn't work, you

know, or you have a failure rate. So, you know, those kind of protocols are all stuff that we've been developing and studying. And we're, you know, I think most of the people in the administration are anxious to make this happen as quickly as possible. And I know Doug Collins over at the VA already has, I think, 21 studies going over there. And They're, you know, they're very, very promising. >> And what are they using at the VA? Uh I think they're using combinations of MDMA and psilocybin maybe using um epigane but and you know I

I think they're looking at a number of things including io and epig. >> Um they shot down something fairly recently in California where they were going to decriminalize where they're going to decriminalize psilocybin or They were going to allow it for clinical use. But I think the problem that they had was they didn't shut they didn't say we're we're completely opposed to it. They said there's no guidelines in terms of like how's it going to be clinically applied, who are going to be the people, what's the dosage. >> Yeah. You need those guidelines because you

don't want to make the wild west. >> Exactly. >> You're going to have horror stories overnight because people, as you know, you know, some people can have very, very bad experiences on that. Also, some people are on medications and they should be very aware that this medication would re go really badly with x amount of whatever >> right the substance. >> So, I mean, you know, we're looking at ways to get it done so that it's in a very controlled setting. And so would Would you envision a place like that like once it's implemented where

someone who's suffering from depression or PTSD regardless of whether they're a soldier or cop or just a regular person could be able to go to a place like that and get treatment. >> For me, you know, personally, I would like to see that. Um but um you know I I we need to move in baby steps with this because you don't want to create a situation where >> people are getting hurt and that [clears throat] you know >> and you don't want to create a situation where mentally unstable people snap which can happen >> which

can happen. >> Yeah that's [clears throat] a that that is a these are very powerful tools you're working with. It's a >> it's like everything else you can do it wrong. Um, but it just makes sense that if you had less Depressed people, more happy people, more people connected, more people that can kind of let go of whatever traumatic experience they went through and just live a more joyful, productive life, which many people that have taken these substances have experienced. Like, it's it's not a cure all for everything. It's not going to fix everybody. It's

not even for everybody, but deny people access. You you shouldn't have a soldier who has given everything for the Country, who has suffered terribly, who has to go to Tijana to get these treatments, who has to leave our country in order to get the treatments. It doesn't make any sense. And >> no, it doesn't. Especially when so many of them have come back with these stories, guys Sean Ryan, a bunch of bunch of my friends have done it. And uh I had a good friend who uh my friend Ed Clay who runs the CPI down

in Tijana, the Cellular Performance Institute, Which is an amazing stem cell clinic down there. He went down there because he hurt his back and he got on pills and he couldn't get off of them. Did I got off of them? He's like, "Oh my god." Like more people have to be aware of this. This is this really works. This is a thing that has been shown. I think it's in the 80% range when you do one treatment of where people don't relapse and it's in a 90% range with two treatments. I mean, it's incredibly Effective.

There's nothing like it >> and yet we've been denied. It also has like no chance of you being addicted to it. It's a terrifying experience apparently or at least very very uncomfortable. It takes 24 hours. Nobody wants to hop in and do it again. It's not like, "Hey, let's party and take I gain like >> an ordeal. It's an ordeal. Exactly. And that ordeal is extremely beneficial to people but also like severs the impulse Of addiction in a lot of people like it's very successful at it. >> Yeah. I mean um I had a family

member who whose life was transformed by it. So and you know I've been in recovery for 43 years. So and I go to a meeting every day. Oh, it's pretty hard to convince me that you can fix what's wrong with you by taking something outside of you, >> but I have seen so much uh overwhelming anecdotal evidence, but also clinical studies That attest to, you know, to the effectiveness under some circumstances with some people or these um these medicines. Oh, you know, and I think you've got Jay Bachara at NIH and Marty McCary um at

FDA who are all uh you know, doing whatever they can to make this happen. >> Yeah. Well, I I sincerely hope that more people consider it. And I think one of the big hopes that we have is when you have someone like uh former Texas Governor Rick Perry who's a Republican looking at this instead of from like for the longest time that was a left-wing perspective, right? Legalized marijuana, legalized psychedelics. It was never you don't you didn't hear about it from former Republican governors like Rick Perry. But when he sees the benefit that it has

with veterans, which he cares very deeply about the veteran community, he's like, "No, this is not something to ignore just because it's connected to Hippies." You know, I don't know if you remember this, but uh Hunter Thompson during uh whatever election he covered in Fear and Loathing on the campaign trail. It's when [clears throat] >> 73 >> when he um put out that rumor that Ed Musky was addicted to >> I [laughter] Brazilian witch doctors were coming and giving him I gain it ruined that guy's career. [laughter] >> But it's so funny that he chose

that drug because uh it's like no one's addicted to that. It's it's got that's not the risk. The risk is heart attacks. The risk is you have to have your heart monitored while you're doing it. It's like it's very stressful for a lot of people. But on a clinical setting, it's shown to be incredibly effective. And I don't think we should ignore these things. I I think it's foolish. And I think that is one that seems to have a Bipartisan uh agreement on because a lot of people on the left have always been in favor

of some kind of psychedelic therapy just based on experiences they've had that were positive, you know, but seeing it from the right is very uh very encouraging because I think it's it's something for human beings. It's not for everybody, but it's something it's a tool that I have seen benefit many, many people, and we should use every tool that could help us be Healthier and happier. Period. That that shouldn't be a right or a left issue. That's just silly. It's just dumb. >> Agreed. >> Yeah. I mean, it's it's shocking that that is an unusual

perspective. But uh I think we've been propagandized for so long particularly on um certain things like you know the just the the blanket term of drugs that all of them fall into this category of you trying to escape reality and um this one is literally the Opposite. It's like you confronting reality and finding out why the pathways to certain destructive behaviors were set in your life and how to correct it. I think that'd be great for everybody. I agree. >> Yeah. Um you've got you're already a year in here plus and you know is it

going as fast as you'd hoped like some of these reforms? Is there is there what what are the like the main frustrations that you have to Deal with? Well, I mean, I didn't know what to expect and you know, I didn't know when I came in. I didn't know the president that well. So, you know, but from the beginning, he uh he was empowering me. And, you know, I never made an agreement with him about anything. But, and the first time he asked me whether I wanted to be HHS secretary, I said, "I don't think

so. I wanted to do some I wanted to be maybe a health star in the White House." And Then I thought about it for a while and thought, "No, I I really won't be effective if I unless I'm in this agency and can actually, you know, get into the weeds and has 82,000 employees and all the biggest budget in government and that would actually give me the power to to change the system." And and so then I went back to him and I said, you know, I want HHS and he said, "Fine." And then he

allowed me to appoint all of my sub sub you know Agency heads which no president has ever done with an HHS secretary in history. He allowed me to appoint Marty McCary choose Marty McCary at FDA Jay Bachara um Dr. Oz and CMS and everybody else below them. Um so nobody's ever been able to do that. And then he, you know, he gave me a very prominent job on the transition committee to set this all in motion. And then once I got in, he supported me on everything. And that I think was um allowed me to

do things more during I I think I mean I I don't want to say sound like you know vain or something but because of the great team that we have and because of the support of the president we've been able to uh accomplish more in one year than I think any other HHS secretary has done in history in four years. Oh, I'm pleased with what we've done, but there's still I mean it's the uh it's 20% of our economy And so it's a huge agency and there's you know it's in everything and there's a lot

to do but I think we're moving really fast. >> So better than you'd hoped. I would say, "Yeah, if you put this on the table and said you can have this at, you know, the first day I got into office, I would snatch it off and say, I'll take it." But I mean, I could only imagine staring at that mountain when you're at the foot Of it and realizing what a climb this is going to be. >> That's not how I approach it. I just did it one thing at a time. And there's something to

fix every single day. And um I have the smartest people in the country working with me. And you know, we meet every day, me and Oz and Jay and um now Chris Clom um and uh and Marty, we have a meeting every morning and we talk about what we're doing and about Where we need to help each other. And you know, it's a really uh it's a very very congenial team. we all feel like family with each other and we vacation together and you know it's uh I think because of that in in former times

the HHS secretary has always been at odds with his departments and you know under uh Biden and uh even under the previous Trump administration. >> Why do you think that was? >> I because I I think part of it is Personalities. They're all kind of, you know, alpha people. They have different ideas and um and then they I don't know. I mean, we I I think a lot of that is just personality and um struggling for for um uh for power and influence and all of that kind of stuff. you know, you want to run

your own agency and you don't want interference and u But we've been able to do it in ways that are very very collegial. >> Um I I wanted to ask you about pesticides. So what was the recent ruling on glyphosate? I was on an EO, which is an executive order, >> right, >> from the president saying that um we're going to make the ingredients for glyphosate in this country and for elemental Phosphorus. And you know, I've listen, I've spent 40 years fighting pesticides. It was I was part of the trial team on the Monsanto case,

which was the team that, you know, we won three cases in a row and then got an 11 billion um settlement with with uh Monsanto, which is now Bayer by the end of our trial, Bayer owned Monsanto. But, you know, pesticides are poison. They're designed to kill all life. It's not a good thing To have in your food. So, but I also so it's not something that I was particularly happy with. Let me put it that way mildly. But I also understand the president's point of view. The president didn't create this system. He's dealing with

a problem that was created long before over the past 60 years when um you know through federal policies and subsidies and the Management of of farming in this country the agricultural management we have addicted our farmers to these pesticides and particularly glyphosate. Glyphosate is the foundational pesticide of our food production system. So 97% of corn in this country is produced with glyphosate and can't be produced without it. 98% of you know you could do it. You could change it. There's organic corn Producers in this country. It's like 3% 98% of soy is produced with glyphosate.

If you banned glyphosate overnight or if you got rid of it or if somebody else cut off our supply, >> it would uh it would destroy the American food system. And it >> how crazy is that statement? The American foods the entire system is based on using poison, >> right? The farmers don't like it. You know, let me just explain what the EO did right now. According to the industry reports, 99% of our glyphosate comes from China. So the Pentagon and others said this is an extreme national security vulnerability that China controls the US food

system. We can't afford to let that happen. If we got in some kind of tangle with them, it could literally cut off our food supply overnight and [ __ ] the country. And and so that's what the President was responding to. But we all know we've got to transition off of glyphosate. We all know that. And the farmers hate it. Farmer one, it, you know, they're now starting to see these uh these chemical resistant uh uh weeds. So that that can't be treated with glyphosate. Now it's predictable. Two, they hate the inputs. It's cost them

a lot of money. Um three, the uh foreign countries won't allow them to export like Europe doesn't Allow most European countries don't allow the export of our crops to their countries. >> Well, how are they doing it? They use less glyphosate than we do, >> but they >> or they use some they use it, but you know, our system was is all roundup ready corn and roundup ready soy and so they don't you know they don't use it like we do over here >> ideally that we would transition away From that, right? >> Yeah. And

it's also they know it's destroying their soil and they're all suffering from runoff. You know, it destroys the microbiome in the soil and because of that the soil um can't you you you don't get water infiltration in the soil and so the soil then runs off and you know that it it's destroying their farms. It's not sustainable. Everybody knows that. We had Will Harris from White Oak Pastures on here and he showed us the literal line in the river between his organic farm and the next door neighbor's farm where you could see this clear line

where all the runoff is going into the river. >> Yeah. But Will Harris will also tell you the same thing that I said is that what he did is is you know is very hard and it it's not >> took him 20 years. >> What >> took him 20 years. It took him 20 years and it's not applicable to every farmer and >> he you know he understands the problem too. We all understand that this is a huge problem. So the president was dealing with national security and they did something that I I really don't

like which is to support there's a lawsuit about that's now before the Supreme Court but in the lower court they supported That is asked for federal preeemption. So that would mean that if the uh if the federal label uh um uh says that this is safe that these state lawsuits now cannot be brought. So it would throw out a lot of the state lawsuits and me effectively gives them immunity from liability which um which is you know to me it's not good to give any company immunity from liability. It gives it takes away all Incentive

for them to make the product safer. Again, the president is dealing with bigger issues, which is the company that's making this has paid 11 billion to, you know, in my lawsuit, they just uh they're just about to sign another $7.6 billion settlement. 65,000 cases out there and they've said we're getting out of this business, you know, if this we if we don't get relief. So the president is hearing that, the farmers are hearing that, and they're Saying that, you know, this is a temporary fix. We're putting huge amounts of money into studying the impacts of

of glyphosate right now in my agency. I'm doing that and we're doing um and the president has made a big commit a billion dollar commitment not only the regenerate farming but also to uh developing new ways of of chemical of of dramatically reducing the amount of of chemicals in our Agriculture. I met this week with three farmers from um who are using this new system of lasers and which is now the cheapest way to control weeds in the vegetable fields. So, you know, vegetables, lettuce, celery, um all of these vegetables now they're using a lot

of them. You know, you're going to see a very quick transition. It's a it's a a an attachment that is dragged by a a tractor. It kills the weeds at every stage of Their life. It identifies their species and kills them instantly all the way down through their root system by exploding them with this laser. And yeah, here here is one of the >> This is what it looks like. >> Yeah, that's what >> and this guy. [laughter] >> So I >> can I ask you this? Does this have any negative effect whatsoever on the

food? >> No. In fact, >> you get a 30% increase in productivity of the farm and the growing season is shorter shortens by 3 weeks for onions. So, and that is a huge economic boom. >> Exactly. >> It pays itself back in for some of these farmers, it pays itself back in um in uh nine uh nine months. It's a million dollar is a million dollar machine, but it pays back. They're paying vegetable field. This onion producer in South Texas, the biggest onion producer in Texas, she has 8,000 acres. She was paying $1,500 per acre

for pesticides [clears throat] for mainly glyphosate and for manual labor. And now with this machine, it's $300. She's saving over $1,000 an acre. >> Is this showing how it does? >> She's got 8,000 acres. So, it's a million-dollar machine, which sounds like a lot, but you got 8,000 acres and you're paying 1,500 bucks an acre per Growing season. >> They missed one. >> Maybe. [laughter] >> And you know, now they're making them on drones. >> Maybe a crop. >> Yeah. Yeah. Interesting. >> There's all these kind of new exciting technologies that give us a a

light at the end of the tunnel to transition and it could be very very fast. What the president wants to do is accelerate That. He says, "Yeah, we've got we can't allow the company to go bankrupt. We can't allow foreign interference, but we got to get off of this stuff. We got to give these farmers an offramp so that they can get off it because they don't want to be on it and nobody wants >> without crashing the food system." So, so this is a bridge. This is a bridge to path you think would be

technologies like this for weeds. What about for bugs? >> The, you know, it's harder. These systems are are more difficult are not yet economic in the in the the corn field, the row crops. They're they're economic for organic corn. And I talked to an organic corn farmer who is in love with his machine. But yeah, they can do it for bugs, too. >> So they just zap the bug. >> They zap the bug. They identify him and zap him. Um, but in the row crops, the, you know, these guys, the vegetable Crops are paying 1,500

bucks an acre, the row crops are 50 bucks an acre. And so to get economically to their level, they have to scale enormously. So that is, you know, how do we help them do that? How do we bring Silicon Valley entrepreneurs and billionaires in to start investing really heavily in these kind of technologies? And let's get off of this stuff. What are the primary health concerns about people that consume too much glyphosate or is there A threshold like I I know there's like a safe level that's supposed to be detectable in your blood like what

does that mean in terms of >> I don't know if there is any safe level I don't know you know I don't >> I shouldn't even say there is a >> that is what we are trying to figure out right now and it's it's associated with >> um non-alcoholic fatty liver disease it's you know but There's a scientific association, but it's not strong enough For people to litigate on the the litigation was all about non-hodkins lymphoma. >> Only that. >> Yeah, because that's the one thing that they had a critical mass of scientific studies supporting.

>> Um, now what about when they use it at the end of >> it? Definitely it definitely disrupts sorry your gut biome. Yes, >> it it it is um it's the the advantage of glyphosate is unlike the other poisons, it doesn't harm organic tissue, but it goes after plants, not animal tissue, but your stomach microbiome is plants. And uh and so you know um there's uh you know it may contribute to this the celiac disease and to all these gluten allergies. It was co-terminus with that. You know the introduction of glyphosate of of [clears throat]

Roundup ready corn. You know what Roundup Ready corn is right? means that you can spray the field and everything [clears throat] green dies except for the corn which is immune to glyphosate. That's why it's so advantageous to them. It saves huge labor costs and it it allows them to you know to sell the corn at a price that people can afford. Um the you know one of the most controversial uses is a desicant and that means that there is no roundup ready wheat. So, normally they weren't Using this in the wheat field, but around 2003

they started using it to dry out the wheat just before harvest. And that way they can harvest it without getting fungus on it and without getting mold on it. And for the first time, they were spraying it right on food. And so that is real, you know, the major factor for getting into human beings. And you know around 2003 is when you started seeing these explosions in celiac disease and gluten allergies. There's no clear scientific evidence that it's related. But you know there is a uh you know there's some signals out there that now we're

looking at it HHS for the first time. They should have been looking at it this 30 years ago and [clears throat] um but you know they're not but we're doing it now. Well, there's a lot of anecdotal stories about people going to Italy or Spain and France, eating bread over there, not having any problem with it at all, and Being so confused. And then also people coming from Europe and eating in America and getting sick. >> And I don't know whether that there's no telling whether that's glyphosate or other pesticides or whatever, but >> but

it's something. I have a I have a son who had chronic eczema from when he was a kid. The disease I I never heard of as a kid and everybody's got it now. And he would get it any time that he ate Spaghetti or or bread or you know um and he went and he went to the University of Bolognia. He went to Brown and then he took a year at the University of Bolognia and he ate spaghetti three meals a day and had no problem. And so, and you hear there's, you know, there's hundreds

of stories like that that we've all heard. >> I feel different when I go to Italy. When I go to Italy and I eat over there, I feel different. I feel different if I Use there's a a restaurant that uh um called Gaitanos in Las Vegas and Henderson and they use all Italian flour. They import it all from Italy. You could it tastes different. It feels different. You don't feel terrible after you eat it. There's a something's wrong with our food and everybody knows it. And the fact that it's become a leftwing or a right-wing

issue is one of the dumbest decisions we've ever made as a country. And I know that a lot of it is Again a lot a lot of a lot of propaganda. A lot of a lot of these narratives trying to push people into thinking that things aren't dangerous because right-wing people believe in them and that it's nonsense. And it's just I don't know what that pathway is when you're dealing with monocrop agriculture and you have these enormous farms and you say 98% is based on glyphosate use or whatever it is like how do we get

those people to ultimately Transition and if they do could they even produce enough of their product to stay viable? I can tell I mean I've met with over a hundred farmers and developing the food guidelines our team and you know I've been doing agricultural issues for 30 years and I can tell you farmers are the most hardworking people that I've ever met. They are good people. They want to produce the healthiest foods and they don't like the inputs are Killing them. there. You know, seven out of out of 10 years farmers lose money and you

there's no young people moving to the farm country anymore. So, you know, we we really need to do what we can to make sure we don't lose any more farms in this country. And that's what the president's worried about. That has to be his priority. But he also wants to make sure we accelerate the uh the offramps, the development of offramps that they can transition off of this. And we're putting huge amounts of money into regenerative agriculture. People like, you know, Mr. Harris and uh and you know, and meeting with him and Brook Rollins and

meeting with these guys all the time trying to figure out how do we help you? How do we help other farmers to do what you're doing? And you know, that is a priority for the administration. Um, do you envision a possibility, a real Possibility of a country that is all regenerative agriculture with no pesticides? Is that even possible that we could get to a point whether it's a decade from now or two decades from now where we've completely eradicated the uses of these harmful chemicals? >> I mean, I think that's going to happen. You know,

I think technology is going to allow us that to happen. Um, but you know, you're going to have a lot of robotic farming happening and That's another question. But but >> well that's robotic with these lasers. That's essentially what you're doing. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> So that would be >> you're going to have drones doing this. >> You know, you'll have have drone swarms over farms uh killing the insects. >> What about industrial fertilizer? What would be the solution to that? uh and that's a little more difficult Particularly in some parts of the country you

know you need um you need nutrients in the soil but there's ways of of growing and you know Harris has shown this where you can dramatically reduce the amount of um of uh petroleum based fertilizers that you're using dramatically almost eliminate them. >> Sure. But uh the scale of his farm and the scale of the production in comparison to these monocrop agriculture places that produce corn. I mean these People are dealing with enormous amounts of crops. It's the question is could that be scaled regeneratively? Could you could you get it to a point where you

have organic farms only? >> I you know I think with technology you're going to eliminate a lot of the pesticides and the herbicides. I think the um that the uh it's going to be much slower when you talk about fertilizers. >> But is there a pathway for that? >> I hope so. >> But you haven't. >> No. >> No. Because it's so far off. >> Yeah. I mean that's going to be after my three years before that happens. [laughter] >> Do you uh I mean if uh someone else wins and they want you to stay,

are you going to stay? Do you do you have a thought of that or do you want to do as much as you can in four years? >> Well, I whatever happens because you can't tell what's going to happen in the election >> that I will I'm going to I'm going to act as if I got three years to do everything >> and if I, you know, get more time then I would probably take it. >> Um, how many days a week are you working? >> Well, I work uh I mean I'm work when I'm

home. I'm working. It doesn't it doesn't Stop. >> It's just your life. >> And then [clears throat] we have a president who has, you know, never stops working and he's up till 11 12 at night, you know, which you can get a call at that point. He says, "Were you sleeping 2:00 in the morning?" Yeah. No, no, of course not. I was working. >> Oh, [laughter] he's an interesting guy to work for. >> Yeah. He's got a lot of energy for an Old >> He's got an incredible amount of I've never seen anything like it.

And particularly with the food he eats. >> Yeah. >> You don't know how he does. >> He's still he's still eating mostly I mean >> he I've never seen Well, no. Let me put it this way. When he's on the road, he eats like fast food because he trusts it. He doesn't want to he doesn't want To eat in some local place where, you know, he gets food poisoning or something. Um, but when he's at home at the White House or Mara Lago, it is the, you know, it's all like locally sourced incredible food. >>

Oh, that's good. >> So, he eats well. I mean, but he still drinks. Dana White told me that he's known him for 20 years and he's never seen him drink water. Just drinks Coca-Cola. What Does he drink? Diet Coke, right? Doesn't he? You know, I just had Michael Malison in here. He was talking about how he got off aspartame and how his brain fog just completely cleared up. >> He was drinking Diet Coke every day. >> That is a really sleazy saga about how that got into her. >> We talked about the other day. >>

Yeah. >> Yeah. [clears throat] We brought it up. >> That was uh >> Donald Rumsfeld. >> Donald Rumsfeld. >> Yeah. >> And there was a really good FDA commissioner back then um named David Kennedy. no relation, but he was uh he was a a guy from Stanford. I think he was the president of Stanford for a while. And he was really good, had total integrity. He was like David Castler, another really great FDA head. And he uh he banned aspartane and Rumsfeld came in there and just overruled them. Rumsfeld had owned SURL, you know, which

was making it um [clears throat] That's how it worked. >> Well, that's why that's why this uh time with you in office has been encouraging. I mean, you doing the things that you wanted to do was to me the most interesting thing about this administration going in because I I I knew your conviction. I I'd read your Your Fouchy book and I'm like, if anybody could do something about this, it's you. And I'm I'm kind of amazed at how much you have been able to do. and also, you know, re watching the struggle, the difficulties

of getting things pushed through that should have been pushed through easily with rational thinking. Um, it's it's a fascinating time because we are in a time of change. Some of it's good, some of it's bad, but we're we're Definitely in a time of change. And that's not something you can say about every administration. It's definitely not something you could say about everybody that's been the head of the HHS. You're the first guy that gave me hope when you got in there. I'm like, "Okay, maybe we'll see some meaningful change with some things that are really

important for people's health." I think uh >> Oh, we're doing it. >> I think you are. I think you're doing that. Um, is there anything else you want to talk about? Any other subjects you want to cover? >> Why don't you ask me about immigration because I know that that's something that's disturbed you. Well, what are your thoughts on immigration on what's going on? >> Well, you know, here here's the background of my kind of assumptions during the last 10 years of his life. I Worked very closely with Cesar Chavez and I worked with he

had two issues. He had pesticides which were a huge issue with him and that's what I worked with him on on the dangers that you know his workers were experiencing from from pesticides. And the other issue he had was immigration. He wanted to shut down the border because he saw the way that it was impairing this huge influx of of illegal immigr migration across the Border was impairing his ability to get uh to bargain to leverage good wages and conditions for his workers. When I grew up, the Democratic party was against im immigration. And it

was the Republican party who wanted it because the big corporations wanted cheap labor. The Chamber of Commerce was firmly embedded in the Republican party and they were all about open borders. Today, the Chamber of Commerce is with the Democratic Party. And so, it's one of these switches that is kind of inexplicable to me, but I think again it be it happened because President Trump said, "I'm going to fix it with a wall." And that became, you know, it suddenly became open borders. suddenly became a a calling card for the Democratic Party. But there's a reason,

you know, and I see it in my agency, the cost that it's it's imposing on our country and and you know, on healthcare, diminishing health Care for Americans and housing and and jobs and all of these place where it uh it hurts. We need workers in here and we need legal immigrants in here. But they should come in legally and every country has to do that. President Trump ran on this issue. He's now and he ran that he's going to enforce it and deport particularly the bad people. This is what you don't hear. 70% of

the people that they've arrested are have criminal records. What the Democrats are always Saying is only 14% of them have been convicted of a a violent crime. Well, they've been convicted and a lot of them, the other ones [clears throat] have been arrested and they just haven't been convicted yet because they jumped, you know, bail or they uh uh or they, you know, they jumped their their uh their warrants. The other 30%, a lot of them are gang members. When they go looking for an immigrant, they're not just randomly searching, you know, Restaurants. They're going

after particular people who they've gotten their names from local law enforcement and from others. During the Biden admin or during the Obama administration, President Obama uh deported more people than President Trump did, the most in history. Nobody cares. And there were 76 people shot during that process during the Biden administration. None of it made headlines. About half of those people Were killed. None of it made the news now because it's Trump doing it. You have the entire Democratic party and the media establishment saying, "Oh, look at the horrible things. He's a dictator, but he's doing

what he promised to do to the American people." It it's it's very disturbing watching what you see on TV. And the thing that makes it most disturbing, is because there's so much interaction with protesters, Which is weird that the Democrats are telling protesters to go out there and stop law enforcement from doing its job. If you That's not how protests [laughter] usually work. If you don't like US drug policy, which you don't, you know, and a lot of people don't. A lot of people don't like the war on drugs at all. They think it's counterproductive.

You wouldn't send people to try to interfere with people who are who are uh Who are arresting a drug dealer. And when [laughter] you have thousands and thousands of people doing that, there's going to be thousands of interactions and some of those are going to end badly because you have armed people doing dangerous things. And when you have crowds doing that, it's going to blow up. And so, you know, I I I see this, you know, I nobody is happy with the way that things have looked, particularly in Minnesota, But a lot of it is

because of this capacity of the press to take to take Trump derangement syndrome and amplify it into public outrage and and set up a situation. I mean, if you were you're a dad, I wouldn't send my kids out to interfere with law enforcement operation. There's other ways to protest. Uh, but um, so I think that, you know, I I think now they're pulling out of Minnesota. They're going to do this, you Know, in other states where they're not going to get that kind of crowd interaction. But a lot of the the people that they're arresting

are not, you know, they're they're [clears throat] people who are actually, you know, have, like I said, 70% have had criminal records. Uh yeah, we've we've actually covered that here. And then there's also the issue that this is the first time in history that the border has been wide open for four Years. It's a different thing. It's a different thing when you have at least 10 million people. They don't even know how many. For real. >> Yeah. It could be 20 million. >> They don't know. And that's a lot. And to have that happen all

at once is pretty crazy. Um what I think what what disturbs people is uh again obviously these violent interactions. What should disturb them is that these are not organic protests that these protests are Organized and paid for and that's crazy right >> when you find that out and you find out that people can actually be paid to protest and that they provide them with signs. They tell them what they do. It's organized. They have signal chats. There's been a lot of people online talking about being paid to protest in certain places and that's kind of

insane that that's even legal that you can organize a mob and pay them to go and Make a bunch of noise. >> Um >> it's like the color revolution, >> right? Exactly. And that it [clears throat] happened here just happened to take place in the place where hundreds of millions of dollars of fraud was being exposed. So then the narrative completely shifts away from the fraud and onto this unnecessary violence with ICE. And then there's the natural thing that people have, this Distrust of people wearing masks. They don't like that. They don't like officers wearing

masks. But on the other side, they have to wear masks because they're being docked and their families are being threatened and you're filming everything they do. And you're these organized instigators. So if it wasn't for organized protest, I wonder if those particular interactions would have even happened, would have even taken place. And I know you're saying that they don't That they're targeting specific people. They're going after bad people, but also they're showing up at Home Depot and just grabbing people, too, and trying to find out if someone is a bad guy or a good guy.

So, there's probably a lot of people that are just people that got duped into coming to this country thinking they're going to be welcomed and then they come over here and they're trying to get jobs and now they're getting arrested and deported. you know, It wasn't their fault that they were encouraged and brought into this country, but they did break the law. And I understand I understand that perspective. But it's kind of insane that no one is pointing the blame at the fact that they let at least 10 billion people or 10 million, excuse me,

people into this country over the last four years at least being charitable. >> It's kind of nuts. And I was down at the border and [clears throat] you know I Was st when I during my presidential campaign I went down there and went down a bunch of times but first night I went down there to Tucson >> and I couldn't believe what I was seeing. It was like the Boston Marathon the beginning of it just the sheer number and they were you know they all had it planned. The cartels were all you know running the

whole thing. They were advertising all over the world and and bringing people in and everybody was the Border patrol was completely demoralized. They were told, "Don't arrest anybody. Just uh fingerprint them if they're a criminal. Turn them back." But, you know, most of these people, they couldn't figure that out. And uh and otherwise put them on a bus or a plane to anywhere they wanted to go in the country. So it was just uh >> and at the same time you have legitimate people that are doing it the right way That have to go through

a long and difficult lengthy process to get attain citizenship and to come here or get a green card and come here. Right. The whole thing was crazy. And that, you know, one of the complicated issues that you have now a bunch of sanctuary cities and sanctuary states. And it used to be that if somebody who was an illegal immigrant was arrested for a crime and put in the local jail, they ICE was notified. So ICE would then come and They local law enforcement would transfer to ICE. In the sanctuary cities, they don't do that. They

just let him go. And you know, it's not >> How is that legal? >> That seems insane. That seems like a violation. >> Never a law. It was just a policy. You know, that law enforcement always cooperated with each other. Now, because Trump's in there, they're saying, "Okay, we would rather take the you know, the Side of of um you know, a criminal than uh take the side of the president." So, they're all they're choosing sides. as part of it's like the other day during the um during the State of the Union speech when President

Trump said he was talking about immigration and he said please stand up if you think that law enforcement should protect the American people over illegal immigrants and not a single Democrat stood. >> Yeah. >> How can you how can you do that? >> Well, that's what we were talking about earlier, what you were saying. It's just they're they're ideologically captured. Yeah. I mean, that should be something if you want to be taken seriously. You're a reasonable person. You would stand up for that. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Um it just it really disturbs people when you

see masked people, Grabbing people, arresting people, and a lot of them turn out to be American citizens. [clears throat] >> You know, that's part of the problem, too. Um but I did look at a chart recently because I thought it was fascinating the number of American citizens that were arrested. uh what percentage during what Obama did versus during Trump, it's actually I think higher. More American citizens were arrested during this Obama thing. Um you Just never heard about it. Also, if you hear Obama talk about immigration, if you hear Hillary talk about immigration, or if

you hear Bill talk about immigration, you would swear they were running for president as a Republican. Like [laughter] if you listen to the things they were saying back then, it was very much the Republican perspective. >> Well, that was the Democratic party always was was, you know, against an Open border. >> Yeah. Bernie even said it's like open borders are that's a Republican idea. They want cheap labor. >> Yeah. So, all right. Um, anything else before we wrap this up? Listen, thank you very much for all your hard work and uh it's really it's very

exciting for me to have someone like you doing what you're doing cuz I I do know that you really want to push for meaningful change that's gen Genuinely going to help and uh I think you know so far you're on a good path. So I hope we can get all the other stuff done too. >> Well, thank you John. Thanks for the conversation and thanks for all of your conversations. >> My [music] pleasure. Thanks for All right. My pleasure. >> [music]