Prediction number two.

Number two is there's going to be an asymmetry between how Republicans perform in areas where Democrats have long dominated versus where the Democrats haven't long dominated it or Republicans are in charge.

So in other words, I do think Republicans will be competitive in.

In states like Michigan and Wisconsin, to an extent where Democrats have have controlled state politics, have governors there, but it won't be enough to win.

And even some blue areas like deep blue, like so you're going to have a situation where Republicans might win Mississippi by a few points and lose in Oregon.

By a few points or, you know, five, six points or so, because this is largely anti incumbent.

I saw today Gallup had fewer Americans than ever think their representatives in Congress deserve to be reelected.

Again, that's realestateagentsitrust.com. All right, Dan, your third and final prediction for the midterms.

Right.

I mean, that's, that's the issue, and, um, if there's only one side marching on, I, I don't see how it ends any other way.

I mean, and, and, and look, I think we have more people than ever saying on Twitter Islam is incompatible with America, but that's because Big Tech, in my view, has changed their tactic.

They'll let selected people...

Well, they'll let everyone say what they want now, but they'll use the algorithms to elevate the most ineffective and diluted versions of that, um, and ignore the other ones.

So people get the sense that we're moving the Overton window over be- because they feel like they have this allowance to be edgy on Twitter, but I don't see us advancing the ball.

Like, I really don't.

Mm-hmm.

The thing you wanna make sure you're not doing is taking the people most likely to vote for you and, and giving them a message that says, "Don't do it," right? And that's why I thought politically there was really nothing to gain for her by putting that message out, but what are your thoughts?

I mean, in many respects it's emblematic of the GOP's entire two, two-year tenure and their campaign everywhere, which is we're losing elections.

It's like the opposite of having your cake and eating it too.

We're losing on things we don't even believe in and doing worse electorally because of it.

So again, and I know we'll talk about this, but I would argue on big tech, on the surveillance state, on, on, on many other issues as well, um, you're...

Two things about the Minnesota thing.

So, so number one, you're right that the die is cast.

Mm-hmm.

Is there, is there another way to power this technology other than what's being currently suggested and submitted?

No, for sure.

Not only is there another way, like we talked about yes, uh, la- last week with edge computing, um, but it's impossible to power it with what they're suggesting.

So if you would...

The, the main issue is if you would add up the number and size of all the proposals.

It, it's kinda like when they say if you would add up every statistic, everyone would be dead.

You know, it just doesn't compute if you put the, the components into a sum total.

Yeah.

Yeah

...

in other words, let, let me get to the core, my core thesis.

My core thesis is what they're selling you on, uh, again, and people could disagree with me, but my contention is that just the opposite.

Not only am I not opposed to it, I believe they are doing what government does in healthcare and many other sectors, that they're misallocating resources towards a bubble and to Oracle's grift of their 1970s technology of a centralized cloud in an impossible way that would perpetually have to scale in a way that either becomes obsolete or unfeasible.

So but, and, and, and the only reason you would do that is two reasons.

Number one is surveillance state.

Mm-hmm

What do you know about this bill?

So, so Dana, obviously this bill, I followed it from its inception in the se- uh, Senate banking and, uh, banking committee about a year and a half ago.

Elizabeth Warren with Tim Scott, they got together.

Just so you know, 100% of Democrats voted for it, meaning there was not a single Dem no vote in the House or Senate.

Five conservative senators and 32 conservative House members voted no. Um, it expands every single HUD program that the president and his OMB director every single annual budget promise to either trim or eliminate altogether because we understood that, A, we shouldn't even have a Federal Housing Department, uh, but that these programs were tools for social transformation.

This is what Obama was trying to do, if you remember in the second term, create a sort of national, uh, zoning standard to, let's just say, create what I like to call GhettoStone, uh, to gerrymander red America.

You're absolutely right what you're observing in your county.

Gaining too.

Mm-hmm.

That was, that was part of the problem.

And they indulged the influencers and then made a fl- fool out of them.

So you, you, you gotta feed the grift.

You can't grift the grift.

And that was where the mistake was.

But, but I, I just want to interject here, 'cause I think this is important for this and everything else as well.

Mm-hmm.

So what do you think this does for the Iowa gubernatorial race?

Well, Steve, I know someone else who lives in Iowa.

(laughs) Look, you know, I, I'm glad you're talking about this today.

I really am.

Because what I'm saying is the upshot of everything going on in DC, if you take kind of the lowest common denominator of what every faction is saying, if you wanna put it in a defensible way, it's, "We just don't have the votes.

We just don't have enough power." Okay? I mean, whether you agree or disagree with that proposition, that is the sum total, that we don't have 60 votes for anything.

We're not gonna fund a debt ceiling.

Mm-hmm.

Before I get to your thoughts on the interview we did yesterday with Vice President Vance, just kind of your overall assessment of where things stand, right? Just in, just in terms of how things have changed, the conversations have changed as it involves Israel and Iran, just since you and I talked last Wednesday, right? So, just kind of give us your big picture view of what went down and what you think it means.

Sure.

So the geopolitical picture really didn't change much since last week because when we spoke at that moment, it was kind of like the Six Day War in that it was over before it started.

It was over from that first night.

The way Israel planned it, it was abundantly clear you wouldn't have World War III, no one was coming to Iran's aid.

It was clear that strategically (clears throat) they could no longer fight a war.

They didn't have an army, they didn't have an air force.

Um, so what do you think that means moving forward?

Daniel, am I wrong yet?

yet?Steve, I, I, I don't know what to say c- because, again, she doesn't believe her own views and I think this is important about her and adjacent people.

Just to hijack for a moment, and I will respond to that, you have to understand, it's kind of surreal being me this week because I have spent 10 years losing my career.

Often this camera, if I don't use it for my own show, it will never go on again from Wednesday to Wednesday on your segment, because no one will have me on anymore.

I tiptoe around, whether it's immigration, COVID, spending, endorsements, big, big betrayals.

Um, and now, I mean, you wanna talk about Trump being bought off...

I mean, the Qataris, the AI data centers, I mean, the tech bros, there is a lot of problems.

That's what you're saying.

To me, RFK Jr. set an example that th- every agency and department head ought to be following now.

You know, you could gauge this by the reaction.

Uh, so far, they haven't been that apocalyptic.

I mean, if you're from the vaccine industry and you have the greatest nemesis of the generation to your grift, you know, they, they haven't seemed like they've been on alarm from it.

But obviously, that changed with the firing of ASIP.

So, what's, what's important, as you mentioned, not only did they never get rid of, uh, or, uh, disapprove of a vaccine, but we actually had a rotavirus vaccine that caused a dissection in the stomachs of kids and had to be pulled.

There were a number of members that were on the pay, uh, and on the take, getting paid from the manufacturer and they literally approved it, and they were the people there.

So, the normie voter, where, where, where's the ratio between, this is a useful reminder of who Democrats are, to how much longer before we just put this completely down so that we don't look weak? Where do you think we're at with that?

What's your take on this?

Sure.

So Steve, as you well know, I- I might've been the person who broke that story weeks ago.

I wrote a column, Two Provisions That Need To Be Taken Out.

So, it was preempting states from regulating AI systems, and then a similar situated provision, uh, preventing states from regulating carbon capture pipelines.

So, both of those were- were in that vein of, you know, infringing upon state powers.

Uh, so it's kind of weird, because that was not put in there at the end.

Mm-hmm.

But what are your overall thoughts of the decision, how long it took to get here, the aftermath, et cetera?

So, I was gonna praise it, actually, but I wouldn't quite frame it like that, meaning, that's something you measure, let's say, a long-standing thing that you would rescind so expeditiously, such as maybe the legacy vaccines.

This is obviously a new, transparently harmful one.

It had to go.

And thankfully, this was, you know, the culmination of so many years' worth of work.

It really is good news.

What- what I think people were criticizing, Steve, was, uh, two weeks ago, um, Marty Macri and Vini Pr- Prasad came out with a new guidance in The New England Journal of Medicine that was a little bit, dare I say, subversive in what it was doing.

Is that what you're saying? So you jump before you take a bath, right?

L- so with that said, where do you think things really are? What's true and what's not?

So I want to introduce something else to your audience.

You've heard me talk about it.

I've been talking about it a lot recently.

I, I don't want to focus solely on Israel because let's say Israel died tomorrow.

Here's a fact.

I don't know what, to, to your point, exactly where Trump's gonna land.

Mm-hmm.

Mm-hmm.

Where even if you do good things, Dems come in and up the ante and bring in 20 million people.

But what we can do is in the states where Republicans, alleged Republicans have permanent authority to keep illegals, at least out of those states and deter them from coming in, even during a Democrat president.

So yo- your state, Iowa, is one of them also, passed a little weaker version of it.

It's more like a secondary offense, but the courts officially enjoined each one.

Now, what does it mean to enjoin? So this is the mechanics.

The, the, the judge said, this is a, uh, Obama appointee, Kathleen Williams.

Mm-hmm.

Do you agree? Disagree? Could it be improved? What do you think?

Look, Steve.

We are at an inflection point that we've never seen since really the 1860s in terms of judicial supremacism on such a core issue.

But it's not just a matter of being a core issue.

As you well know, the politics matters because this is all political.

There was never any law involved in this.

So this is an issue, CNBC has a poll out that, um, the public largely agrees with Trump on all the deportations.

Mm-hmm.

All right? Who's right here or is it more complicated than that?

that?Chip is right by a mile.

I mean, old habits die hard and from Newt's era, they know of one thing.

We're now on round seven since Reagan, since 1980.

We're gonna come in, Steve, our most important thing, no matter what is going on, here's what we're gonna do.

We're gonna cut taxes, okay? We increase spending, increase spending.

Next time, come in.

Mm-hmm.

Mm-hmm.

So, what you're often seeing people think it's like 3D, 4D chess.

It's actually an amalgamation (laughs) of different views winning out on a- on, on any given day.

So, this was a cave, but I think it's a good cave.

Um, it's, it's a place where, where I think, you know, it's, it's important.

Um, what I would say more broadly is, there's a lot to say about trade.

It's not the fundamental reason why our country is a crap hole.

But, okay.

I'm gonna go through each of them, get your reaction, but let me just start with your meta-analysis of what I just said first.

Well, you know, history, as you say, doesn't only repeat, it rhymes.

You know, it's funny how, um...It says in Ecclesiastes, it's not just that there's nothing new under the sun, but there are times where people would say, "Hey, come and look, there is something new." Indeed it's not.

And you have all these neophytes that are taking over on the right, suddenly rocketing to great prominence of, in terms of influence or subscribers, and they literally don't know where the bathroom is.

A lot of them weren't around in 2017, much less, you know, way before that.

So they think, "Oh, this is a trend or this is happening or permanent majority," or they, they literally cannot see more than an inch in front of them, um, more than their next tweet, the next hour.

And for us, it's like the cycle repeats and repeats.

Your thoughts?

Mm-hmm.

Um, and, you know, we're talking a lot about food, um, the West Virginia governor is having an event with RFK about, you know, food with- food stamps being used for, you know, bad food and dyes in the food.

I'm actually having the West Virginia governor on my show tomorrow.

This is all good stuff, um, but there's a gaping hole there.

There's a gaping hole and, you know, Doctor J, uh, Marty Makary, they're great, but they were more into the, like, the lockdowns, um, not so much with the vaccines.

That's the one thing we're kind of skirting around.

I also agree with your assessment that what shocked a lot of us is that we expected per- per the CBS report, uh, before the pick that they- they were looking at Ladapo and they were looking at Michael Burgess who was a doctor, who was a former Texas congressman.

Mm-hmm.

So our friends over at Jase Medical, they came on board in response to what they saw happen during the scandemic, in particular seeing award-winning medications now suddenly described as dangerous, not for public consumption. Meanwhile, here's a drug with a black box warning, uh, that, uh, when it's not working against COVID does work to kill your kidneys and we're gonna give everybody that. Oh, and here's a toxic genetic serum that we haven't really tested and never injected en masse to everybody, except now you can't work at a company of any critical, uh, mass unless you take it too. And so they came on board very concerned that something like this would be tried again in the future. And so they created the original Jase case that's, uh, a collection of some of the most venerable antibiotics in human history, just because they might be the next ones that suddenly are now too dangerous to take right when we need them the most. Since then, and they've been on board with us now I think for what, about three years. And, and since then, uh, they've expanded it now. You can, um, have customizable option to their ever-increasing menu of medications, including the aforementioned, you know, subconsciously referenced ivermectin. You can get that too. Um, and that way you've got a backup of the meds you need just in case they try to kill you yet again, like they did before. All right, so if you want to get this at a discount, go to jase.com. Use the code DACE for the discount. Code DACE at jase.com. J-A-S-E. By the way, they're still doing that free giveaway for the free Jase case too. You can register for that over there at jase.com as well. Get the discount on your Jase case at... and the, and the peace of mind that comes with it as well, with the promo code DACE at jase.com. Let's bring in the weekly prophet of woe and lamentation himself. Good to see you, Daniel Horowitz, and let's get right to it. Uh, it is very clear, uh, that some form of war versus the judiciary is on. Uh, I mean, Stephen Miller basically is taking the Daniel Horowitz, Steve Dace greatest hits, uh, out there onto X as we speak, and national television hits. Um, you had John Roberts sensing the ground is being tilled for something, maybe an attempt to impeach one of these judges, uh, with his statement yesterday, basically saying, "No, we have unlimited power." Yeah. All right. So just kind of curious to get your observations of, of what we're seeing happen here, which is nothing less than a judicial coup, in my mind.

So Steve, I mean, this is a once in 150-year opportunity. This is the biggest opportunity since the Lincoln era to finally deep six this Dred Scott stain on the country that we don't have separation of powers, that we don't have three branches. We have one branch, an unelected branch, that in their mind could do what even in the original design of Congress, where, where it was very powerful under Madison's first plan, never could have done as an elected branch with, you know, 100 people potentially in it, as opposed to one guy unilaterally or a panel of three or s- or nine on the Supreme Court. Um, I think... A, a couple of observations here. So number one, at a base level, this is a rerun of the first term, right? They were doing all this. In fact, I just dug up my article from when another female DC district judge, uh, struck down the ban on trannies in the military in 2018. The difference now is that because Trump is more prepared...... he's truncated the period of time where he's done all this, so he's doing all this in, like, a month rather than over the course of maybe two years. So what it's done is w- back then, I was very frustrated, as you remember. It seemed like only a few of us were talking about this and it undermined the entire presidency. Now, it's like, boom, boom, boom. It was five of them yesterday. It's like, okay, we're gonna appropriate funding for foreigners. We're going to, uh, uh, you know, allow invading gangs to come in. We're going to direct foreign affairs. We're going to have mental illness in the military-

Yep.

And this is, by the way, literally, I'm taking from a Congressional Research Service, CRS, report from a few years ago that says it's only recently that the courts have done this. The other branches kind of seeded it. Early history is replete with every branch being co-equal. And what I would do is shadow box, and I would put out, in non-legalese, easy to understand... shadow box every opinion you disagree with and say, "This is the way we see it. This is the way we see it. So for our purposes, we can only use our power in concert with the power we believe we have." And, you know, Marbury ma- uh, Marshall said, "We swore an oath to uphold the Constitution, gotta uphold it." Exactly. We have to uphold it as well. And finally, Steve, one thing I gotta say. Almost anything Trump does, including what you and I want him to do, it's not immutable. Right? Democrats are gonna come in. Even if you get things through Congress, you know, you wanna cut spending, they'll double the spending for whatever you cut when they come in. They'll, they'll, they'll do everything. But the one thing he can do that will endure forever is break the virginity against judicial supremacism.