Who Funds Protests? The Business Behind Political Demonstrations

Are protests always grassroots… or is there an industry behind them?

In this episode of The MiddleGround Mic, Joseph Steagall sits down with Crowds on Demand CEO Adam Swart to explore the controversial world of organized demonstrations.

How are protests funded?
Where is the line between activism and political influence?
And why are more Americans questioning the authenticity of modern protest movements?

This conversation explores the gray area between activism, advocacy, and influence — the exact middle ground most media ignores.

Chapters

00:00 Introduction and Context of the Conversation
02:19 Protests and Law Enforcement Dynamics
07:15 The Role of Paid Protesters
12:34 Political Violence and Its Acceptability
15:52 The Impact of Social Media on Political Discourse
19:36 Building Movements and Finding Common Ground
20:39 Political Unity in Unlikely Places
21:53 The Dynamics of Portland and Minneapolis
25:09 The Consequences of Defunding the Police
26:31 Advocacy and Transparency in Politics
30:02 Actions vs. Opinions in Political Discourse
35:45 Finding Common Ground in Divisive Issues
37:34 Empowering Personal Advocacy

Transcript

SPEAKER_01 0:12

Are protests really grassroots? Or is someone funding them? Find out on the Middle Ground Mic.

SPEAKER_00 0:22

All right, everybody, welcome to the Middle Ground Mike. We got a great guest back on here today, Adam Swart from Crowds on Demand. I'm gonna say crowd control. Um, you know, he's been a guest on this show before. He's a great guy, honest up front. You know, he's very open, and that's what we kind of desire here. So that's why I reached back out to him considering everything that's been going on to see if he would come back on the show. And he's gracious enough to give us some of his time. Adam, thanks for coming back on.

SPEAKER_01 0:46

Hey, Joe, thanks so much for having me. It's great to be with you and congrats. You were just telling me how big this uh thing is growing, this platform that you've been building. So congratulations on that growth and and your uh your success in that regard.

SPEAKER_00 1:00

Yeah, no, I appreciate it. You know, the one thing uh a lot of viewers say is they really enjoy the fact that I can have a conversation with someone, someone like, you know, a crowds on demand or somebody who, depending if they went on some other networks, right? It might be like in a gotcha or an argument session. And I'm more about, let's talk about it, let's see where everybody's at.

SPEAKER_01 1:21

I agree, I agree. I think, well, I think gotcha journalism is is not a good way of journalism. I think look, it's it's reasonable to ask people tough questions, but you gotta let them respond. One challenge with cable news is you got five minutes for a segment, five, sometimes it's three minutes for a segment. So in three minutes, it's very hard. You want to get your 30-second sound bite of the three minutes or even the 20-second that then you have on YouTube or other platforms that goes viral. So the you're you're trying to create a certain type of moment, and uh and that's not always conducive to the kind of dialogue people want in a more substantive format. So I appreciate that uh the long form of what you do, and I'm excited to uh be back on your program.

SPEAKER_00 2:07

No, it and it's it's a great thing. Uh, you know, we were talking a little bit about Minneapolis, you know, and that's kind of part of the reason why I wanted to like have you on. So I had uh gosh, I'm terrible at her name, but we'll call her, I believe it's say it's Dahlia. She's running against Ilan Omar in Minneapolis. And you know, we kind of got on the ice subject a little bit. Naturally, if you're running in Minneapolis, that's gonna come up. Yes, and you know, she kind of stressed, she's like, hey, it's not as bad as they're making it out to be. Now it's mainly just a couple streets, and then I heard, and this is what really got my my wheels turning, is that part of what was going on there, George Sorrow supposedly, I can't think of the foundation's name, was behind some of it. And then CNN had a lady going on, I'm being paid to be here. And you're going, what? What's and I mean, I knew like, you know, some from our conversation how some of that went. I was just like, I'm like, man, I know Adam can't be behind, you know, these people trying to shoot it.

SPEAKER_01 3:05

Let's let's break it down for like let's break it down in detail. So, number one, you first have to separate whenever you talk about protests from peaceful, law-abiding, from non-uh peaceful or non-law abiding, right? So I guess I should say first that we're not involved in, and even though a lot of the protesters are peaceful, it's just too risky of a situation. And I'll get into it in in just a minute here about why I feel like both the protesters and the ICE agents have, I think, not conducted themselves well in what I've seen of the situation and being removed from it so I can comment objectively on it. So, first of all, let's separate peaceful from non-peaceful, right? Or like law-abiding from non-law abiding, right? So if you look at Renee Good, right, she was in the uh, this was the young woman who was in the car, right? And she was involved in an illegal form of protest, right? She was blocking ice agents with her vehicle, right? So that that I think everybody can agree on. So the question is whether the ice agents use the appropriate force in dealing with that situation, right? So I think that's a legitimate topic of discussion. Now, I am not a forensics expert, and I have seen the video from a couple angles.

SPEAKER_00 4:19

Quick pause for a second. A lot of people ask what gear resources I use for this show. So I put everything in one place the microphones, books, anything that I use, tools behind the scenes for the middle ground, Mike. And if you want to check it out, the links are in the description. Using them helps support the show and keeps conversations like this going. All right, let's get back to it.

SPEAKER_01 4:40

It does did to me from a casual observer eye look like that did not need to happen, right? Uh I don't know. That is it's not for civilians to necessarily comment on it, other than to say what seems clear to me is that there needs to be de-escalation on both sides, right? So the the core element is you have protesters who are escalating. How are they escalating by blocking ice agents, literally by cursing at them, right? They're, I mean, cursing an ice agent is not illegal, right? But blocking their their path is illegal, right? So these are escalatory actions, right? So the and the ice agents, you have to keep in mind, are not local law enforcement. They are not trained in protest dispersal. Like if they're trained, it's very minimal, right? So generally the police, so I've dealt with a lot of police in always in respectful, convivial manner. Typically, when they have an issue where protesters are doing are, you know, blogging, let's just say they're lying in the road. Well, first of all, they try to tell them, like, look, you're not allowed to be here, right? You gotta get up, right? You really gotta get up. You give them every chance to extricate themselves from the situation, and then even then, you use the minimal force necessary to get them out. Why? Because this is the United States of America. We have First Amendment right to free expression. So you have a right to protest. So the idea of the police is not to hurt your right to protest, but rather to help your you protest, but to make sure that it's done lawfully. Now, the problem with the ICE agents is the protesters are obviously protesting them. They take it very personally, they're very aggressive, right? The the videos that I've seen um have been that the ICE agents are not de-escalating. They're like, yeah, motherfuckers, you know what I mean? You're gonna come at me, I'm gonna come at you. Well, that to me is not professional law enforcement, right? So this is this is not a bar fight, you know. I would I expect more from the ICE agents to be able to sort of say, hey, look, you need to be able to do your own, you need to be able to, if you're gonna do crowd control, you need to be trained in how to do that, right? And and kind of this is not uh Saddam Hussein's Iraq, you know what I mean? You don't just like see a bunch of protesters and fire your gun in the air, you know, to disperse. This is what happens in a third world country, right? But in the United States of America, that's not how we deal with it. So, so my kind of feeling is I really feel like it on both sides it's been very poorly handled, and you need more de-escalation training for both. Now, I come down a little harsher on the side of the law enforcement because I don't expect protesters to always conduct themselves with decorum. I expect law enforcement to do that. That's what they're paid to perform themselves with decorum. Now, now let's get to the issue of the paid protesters, right? So, yes, are there people probably being paid for this? Well, that needs to be examined. There are certainly people being paid indirectly for it, right? So, in the sense of maybe these are people through academic programs or other jobs where like your job is to protest, right? So, like maybe that's not technically your job, but it's basically your job. So, yeah, I mean, I think all these people need to high hold themselves to a higher standard. And, you know, I have even published what's called the Protesters' Bill of Rights and Responsibilities and the Law Enforcement Bill of Rights and Responsibilities. And uh, if you want, my um, my associate will send you a copy of Yeah, I love it. And uh because we are, you know, this is something that's very important to understand is what um what what people have a responsibility to do to conduct themselves appropriately in these situations.

SPEAKER_00 8:25

Yeah, and it it's not easy, you know. They especially in that r the Renee Good situation, when I was watching that, if it really kind of felt like a no-win situation with how violent it was getting. You know, it felt like nobody in their nobody in their right mind was gonna win, right? You know, and her wife was sitting there telling her to drive, you know, not knowing what's on the other side of that car that that agent's right there. You know, so it was just, and I remember seeing um, I don't know if it was the guy recording it himself, but it was a you know, kind of like a bystander. And it was after everything it shooted, the wife was going, Oh my god, it's my fault, it's my fault, it's my fault. And I'm going, like, man, why can't we just step back? Go, okay, you know what, let her get down the road, then we're gonna go get her.

SPEAKER_01 9:09

Well, this is my take, exactly. This person is not a serial killer, right? Right. You know who she is, you have her effing license plate. So if she did something that's illegal, you have this is the here's the United States government. You think you can have an arrest warrant? You you have your license, her license plate, you know where she lives, you know where her wife is, right? So, so if she did something illegal and you have an arrest warrant, you know, you have cause to do that, then by all means, like take that necessary action. But I think that it's sort of the same thing with the that cops have been getting in trouble with over high-speed police chases, which are kind of generally cool to watch in those movies, like that movie Bullet from the 70s with Steve Queen, like great movie, great chase. But these this is an extremely dangerous thing. Like, yes, if if you're talking about somebody who's extraordinarily dangerous, then that may be necessary. But in this woman, who it seems like was guilty of being an extremely irresponsible protester and blocking law enforcement, yes, that may be a crime, but that is some a crime that can be that doesn't need to be, you know, tackled that particular second. So I think the urgency issue is is a a a good point that you make, Joe. Um that and I think the problem is the ICE agents because they're not trained at this sort of thing, when I talk to police on site for protests or any kind of event, right? They always start talking to me by acknowledging that we have the right to First Amendment expression and that they are there to help us with that. They always say this, right? And I always tell them when I'm there, and I always instruct my associates to tell them that we are peaceful, lawful protesters committed to expressing our rights within the bounds of the law. So we are looking. The thing is, I always say there's no excuse for an illegal protest in a country that gives you the latitude to protest. Like we're not England. You're not gonna get arrested for thought crimes here, at least not now. You know what I mean? So we, you know, we're not a third world country, right? So you have the right to protest, so we should expect that people do so lawfully.

SPEAKER_00 11:29

Yeah, and I mean, and it's it's not easy for the law enforcement and even the protesters. I forgot which I don't know if it was Portland or there, where they had the lady goes, I'm a paid agitator. She was very specific, and I'm going, so you're you're putting your life on the line for like a thousand, two thousand dollars, whatever it is that you're gonna get paid.

SPEAKER_01 11:50

Not about the money for some of those people, though. The money is just sort of the excuse. They're they they just they're adrenaline junkies. They like they they wanna like a lot of these people are basically pro what I call them professional agitators. They like to agitate. It doesn't matter what the cause is, they just want an excuse to stir up chaos. I mean, it's it's a it's it's a very small number of people, of course, but they're people that can have a bad effect. Big big other picture, um, Joe's both protesters and cops uh should remember that a small number of violent protesters and a small number of bad, brutal cops can ruin the reputation of all protesters and all cops, right? And that is a problem. So one of the other things that we're, you know, I'll preface that we're that's in kind of relevant to this subject is that I'm not saying snitch, but take on bad actors in your organization. If you are a protest group, right, and there's somebody there who's not committed to your principles, let them know that you don't want them at their at your protest. You know what I mean? If you are a police officer and you have a colleague who is who is being engaged in police brutality, let them know that that's not acceptable and that you're not just going to stand by and watch while that happens, right? So I think there's a difference between that and snitching, like in an ideal view, what you can better do is guide that these people to the light, guide that those people to seeing to doing the right thing. You know what I mean? Because I get it. No one wants to snitch on someone on someone who is their friend, but what you should at minimum do is let them know that like what they're doing is not acceptable, and you're not just gonna stand by while they do those things.

SPEAKER_00 14:07

Yeah, I mean, and then it's not acceptable, and people need to hold themselves to a high standard, no matter who you are. And you and you know, they I had uh I had a gentleman on back in, I believe it was October, and he was, you know, because technically one of the big myths out there is people need to know is Antifa's not an actual organization, it's more of a movement, and people, it's kind of like the Gaznin flag, right? You know, people buy it, don't tread on me. Hanging up, there's no actual organization, it's just something people identify with. Well, he was part of Antifa Portland, we'll just say it like that. And he was, he literally goes, he goes, I'm okay with political violence. And I said, Well, yeah, I said, you know, that's kind of where we separate, you know.

SPEAKER_01 14:49

Well, yeah, I mean, and I'm not, I'm not okay with that at all. And one kind of disturbing trend has been the number of Americans on both political sides that basically say that political violence is is okay or acceptable. You know what I mean? And I think that's important. I think to to a lot of people, um, the horrific events with Charlie Kirk were a wake-up call, but I I don't think it was enough of a wake-up call. I think people need to understand that, like, I don't want to live in a country where everyone has was walking around armed with bodyguards, you know what I mean? And where like there's a beauty in the idea that a congressperson is a like the whole concept of a co, for example, a congressperson is you're the people's representative, you're among the people, but if congress people don't feel comfortable and safe exercising their responsibilities, I'm not saying you don't, you know, ask them questions in public. You should. If you see a congressman, you should ask them questions, send tough ones if you want, but the the but they should not feel unsafe physically, you know, in public. And same with all these other figures. And I think you've seen way too much of that because there are people like that who who say that they are okay with political violence, right?

SPEAKER_00 16:07

Yeah, and that I'm not gonna lie, I never thought that I would see the day where people be like, well, yeah, I'm okay with beating somebody up for their political beliefs. I mean, yeah, growing up, you know, the I grew up, you know, a little bit post-Ronald Reagan years, you know, the Bill Clinton, nobody would have you'd have had 90% of the country going, What are you doing? They would have turned against you. And now it's acceptable.

SPEAKER_01 16:28

Well, I what's interesting, Job, is that in people's personal lives, I don't think this is how people conduct themselves. I think there's this like kind of online warped world that creates a warped personality because I have a lot of friends who are Trump supporters and a lot of friends who are very much on the opposite end of that. And they, you know, I'll have I'll host events with my friends and they'll see each other. And, you know, they probably don't discuss politics a lot, but they know each other and they know where the other one stands, and and they're all fine. So, like, like on a personal level, I feel like people don't support this. I think that this is the this is the effect of the media bubble, which is kind of an off-discussed thing, but it's more important than a media bubble. We're talking about social media, and social media to me is a cancer. It is a cancer. These social media companies make money on dividing people. I'm sure you know people, I know people who've been driven completely down a right or left-wing rabbit hole through social media because it radicalizes you. They stick to a the more you spend, the more the you spend, the more valuable you are to them as a user because they met measure the user user engagement for their ads, right? That and that's how they make money. So, um, and by the way, what uh just a little real question for you, Joe. What do um Elon Musk, uh head of Twitter, Mark Zuckerberg, founder of Facebook, and Reed Hoffman, who I believe is the founder of LinkedIn, have in common? I would not know. They are all contacts of Jeffrey Epstein, they were all in his emails. Wow.

SPEAKER_00 18:10

I I heard about Musk, but I did not hear about the other two.

SPEAKER_01 18:13

So Mark Zuckerberg uh and uh and Reed Hoffman all were connected to Epstein. Now, I just to be clear, I'm not suggesting anything untoward, but they knew, I mean, they knew who he was. I mean, this is a guy who's a convicted, you know, of what he's been convicted of. And my understanding is they all associated with him well after that period. Um so it's interesting. So the the I guess the the analogies I would use is what did Jeffrey Epstein do? He he groomed people. What does social media do? Grooms people. So yeah. I think I honestly personally think all three of them should, you know, they were there's this Epstein committee that has been interviewed Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton, right? Should I believe that all three of those men should be questioned by this committee on what on earth that they had to gain from Epstein? Because by the way, what I'm like, okay, with Bill Clinton, if anything, I get it. Like it's a private jet, right? Like, but Musk, uh Hoffman and and um Zuckerberg are all extraordinarily rich, far richer than Epstein. So, what on earth did Epstein give them a value? Is what I want to know, right?

SPEAKER_00 19:26

Um I would be I would suspect because I believe it was in Epstein's email. I believe that one Democratic congressman, I don't know if it's from the Virgin Islands or wherever, you know, she was trying to get dirt on Trump in the middle of the hearing texting Epstein. So I'm wondering if they were trying to use him as kind of, you know, where do I get my information from?

SPEAKER_01 19:45

Possibly, possibly. You know what I mean? But uh I I that's that is some I'm not I don't feel like either any of them deserve the benefit of the doubt. They deserve to be answered answering questions under oath, is my opinion. Yes. You know, because but I think is it not interesting that the three, I think the largest social networks, the heads, were all connected in some way to Jeffrey Epstein.

SPEAKER_00 20:09

Yeah, yeah, no, and the social network part radicalizing people. There's a protest group here in Michigan, not like group, but it's like a group on Facebook, I should say. And you know, I'm sitting there, you know, I just bought a center and they're turning it into attention center, not too far. And I'm like, you know, I'm gonna go there and maybe try to talk to people, see if we can be reasonable. And I posted, I said it was the group, I said, Hey, would anybody want to meet up while you're there and just have an open and honest conversation? Just be, oh, well, if you're not 100% against it, you're a Nazi, you're a communist, you're this, you're that.

SPEAKER_01 20:42

And I'm like, it's probably not a smart tactic. First of all, I thought it's more tactic because you have to build a movement, and sometimes what you have to do is you have to build a disparate movement. I mean, for example, what's what's kind of interesting here is like they call it a horseshoe theory, right? So you've got right now you got Trump who's you know prosecuting this war against Iran, and there are people on the left who oppose it, but what's interesting is there's also people on the right who strongly oppose it. You know, the Tucker, Carlson, Thomas Massey, Marjorie Taylor Green. I mean, you know, if you want to put Nick Fuentes in there, right? Like, so, you know, if you have sometimes what you have to do is you have to make common cause with people who may disagree on a lot with you, but you but you can say, hey, this is an issue where we are kind of in agreement, right? I mean, the Epstein Falls is a great example. You had Democrats and Republicans come together on on that issue.

SPEAKER_00 21:40

Yeah, one of the few times in our lifetime, I well, probably I would say since the 2000s that we've seen them all come together in such unity since 9-11. I mean, everybody was pretty much, hey, we're all on board. And I thought that was a good moment. And I was kind of hoping maybe it will spark something there, but yeah, that was about five seconds short-lived, and they were right back to the usual rhetoric. So when it comes down to the protesting, you know, how do if let's say you're one of those people that live in Minneapolis, Portland, which seem to be the actually before I go into that, I'll ask you this. Why is it with those two cities specifically these days that seem to things seem to go from normal to crazy? And the reason why I'm asking that is they've done ice rates here in Detroit. Nothing, people aren't getting shot, nothing like this is going on.

SPEAKER_01 22:27

Well, the uh Well, let's talk about Portland first. Portland, one thing with that Portland has. Is you have a group in the city who are extremely radical left, and then, but you also have kind of this area like kind of rural Oregon, and the people kind of in the outlying areas, some of them are quite radical right. So Portland, I think, has been the showdown for some kind of confrontations between Antifa and some of the kind of far right groups. So that has kind of been a part of it. Minneapolis has been a lot more surprising because Minnesota, so Portland's always kind of been known for this, for having this. I mean, I mean, ever since I've been politically aware, there's been this kind of dynamic, right?

SPEAKER_00 23:11

Okay.

SPEAKER_01 23:12

Minneapolis is interesting because I, you know, I'd spent so some time in Minneapolis like prior to 2020, and it's always just kind of a peaceful, sort of sedate, a little bit boring city. And then ever since the the George Floyd matter, um, it's it's really just gone kind of crazy. I mean, first of all, one commonality they both have is they've both engaged in the the defund the police movement, which is one of the worst possible movements. It is it is it is the most one of the most dangerous ideas that I've ever seen in my lifetime. Why is it dangerous? Well, it's not only dangerous because you're gonna have an upswing in crime because you will, but you're also going to have increased vigilanteism, right? So I'm sure you know, but maybe your audience needs a primer on the Kyle Rittenhouse matter. So Kyle Rittenhouse was a young man, I think he was 17. Was he 17 at the time of the incident or 16?

SPEAKER_00 24:13

Yeah, I believe I believe he was 17 at the incident and 18 when he was on trial.

SPEAKER_01 24:17

Right. Okay, so so you basically have in Kenosha, Wisconsin, you have the police who basically completely disengaged from the city, right? So the city is burning, right? And the the radical agitators are just looting, burning, whatever the city. This kid comes in and he sees himself as a hero, you know, and he's like, okay, I'm gonna do it, right? And he's he's 16, 17, he's he's trigger happy, right? So he wants to kind of get in the mix and help, right? And then he's he is showing down, you know, has a showdown against these kind of total nut jobs, right? But my point is, this is a symptom, whether like whether you agree with Rittenhouse or not, he should never have been in this situation or in the first place, because it shouldn't fall to a 17-year-old kid to defend property, should be the police that defend property, right? Because this 17-year-old kid is not trained, so the kid is gonna do what he did potentially, right? And whether you agree with it or not, and I'm not even gonna wade into that because it's too controversial, but I'm gonna say I think we can all agree he shouldn't have been in this situation in the first place because the if had the police been doing their jobs, right? But the problem with the defund movement is that ultimately you need police in order to protect the community. And without police, there's gonna be high crime and higher vigilanteism. And the result of higher vigilanteism is going to be more unnecessary deaths, right? Because if the police come in numbers, people might back off. If it's some random guy with a shotgun trying to defend property, it could lead to an altercation and potentially even someone, you know, an intruder getting shot, or even someone who's not a party to it being shot. And it's just like that is so unfortunate. Again, I keep mentioning it, but we're not third world country, we're not Somalia, and that's not a diss against the Somali community, but we're not Somalia in this country. And why should we you shouldn't have to defend your property personally in this country? You see what I'm saying? You should have the 1000% to defend our property, and it's much safer if they do it and if we don't.

SPEAKER_00 26:36

Yeah, I mean, because it's I would uh George Bush call it when things are going crazy. The banana we're not a banana republic here. Yeah. That's the word I was searching for. You know, they so outside of you, right? Because we know what you do, who are some of the in terms of not necessarily inside knowledge, but in terms of some of these things, who are some of the other players per se that people maybe need to go, huh? You know, the ones that maybe you speak out against, right? Where you're like, hey, we need to be transparent. Who are some of those players?

SPEAKER_01 27:04

Well, part of why I speak out is because I I I want to make it very clear that like to disassociate us with any of that, because I'm in the business of persuasive advocacy. Now, I just want to make one point as sometimes people say, Oh, well, he he he's in favor of weak need advocacy. It's like, no, absolutely not. You can be, as I said, you have the right to be very forceful and enthusiastic in your beliefs. Like, we've, I mean, we did the delete Facebook protest. We've done, we've taken on big pharma, we've taken on big tech, we've secured, you know, massive wins through peaceful, legal, respectful protests. So I just want to first say that peaceful legal protest doesn't mean I'm gonna protest in some field somewhere. You know what I mean? Right. Like when I uh when I deal with law enforcement, like sometimes we'll have a we'll be doing a big event for a company outside a convention center, and the police will say, Oh, can you move a block away? And I'll say, Well, respectfully, no, we can't do that, and we have the right to be here. So, with all due respect, we're gonna stay here, right? And then, and I said, like, if you need to run it by your commanding officer, your commanding officer will tell you the same thing, right? So, just to be very clear, being peaceful and respectful does not mean that you aren't seen. This it it just means you're doing things within the bell realms of the law. So I just that's kind of a misnomer. But the other thing is that in regards to your point about bad actors, well, I have even made an offer, and and I'm shocked that the that the Congress hasn't taken me up on it, but I've said, look, I'm willing to lead a task force to crack down with subpoena power on people who may be using money to either as like a way to use foreign interference in our process or to do illegal activity. So, like I've I've made that offer. The challenge is that I need the subpoena power in order to be able to make some of these claims because there are people who I can speculate are behind this, but for legal reasons, I can't tell you because I I can't prove it because I haven't seen the records because I don't have subpoena power. But the problem is that the people who are leading this don't fully understand how this industry works. So they are going about it the completely the wrong way.

SPEAKER_00 29:30

Yeah, and that's never good when they do something of that nature. You'll go about the wrong and they should, yeah. I mean, because they both sides, you know, and this is what I said when people were like, oh, look what Trump does, whether you believe he lost the election or not in 2020. What I thought was interesting is they played a clip of the Senate back in, I think it was 2016, where so many people like house represent, oh, we should not certify this election. And it was on the opposite side. So then I learned I started looking. There's always been this section of Congress, every election, where they're like, oh, this wasn't right, there was interference. And it was just kind of one of those things that got hyped up and everybody just went on the freight train with it.

SPEAKER_01 30:07

Well, well, let me just say one thing about that is that there is people have the right to their opinions. It's really what they the actions they do with those opinions that are the problem, right? So you have the absolute right to believe that any election was rigged, even an election where someone won by 80%, you can say that was rigged, right? Um the the challenge is the actions. So one of the big things that I have a big problem with is people treating people based on their views rather than actions, right? So when it whether it comes to January 6th or BLM, right, if you vandalize, you should be punished. If you hurt someone, you should be punished. But you should not be punished more or less based on the ideology, right? So if you vandalize a building in the name of BLM, the punishment should be the same as if you vandalize a building in the name of MAGA, right? Because at the end of the day, your crime is not believing that the election was stolen. Your crime is the vandalism. So uh that so I guess that's my opinion on that is that it's important that that in a country that has the free expression, that we separate our opinion on what they're saying with what uh what they are the facts of their actions.

SPEAKER_00 31:30

Yeah, and I mean it well, I mean, when it when it comes down to it, you know, that I think who is it? You know, I can already see the comments you're gonna say on there, hey, both people should be punished. You know, and I'll go on there, I'll say something like that on some of these comment sections, right? I'll see something like, hey man, you know, listening right to oh well, you know what? You're a communist, you know, a Nazi. I did a show with a guy who was an Obama White House fellow, and he's from Shanghai. I've been living here since he was 10. I got called a um, I was a member of the Chinese Communist Party. You know, I was a communist advocate. Yeah, these are Yeah, he's American.

SPEAKER_01 32:07

So that's ridiculous. I'm like, I'm like sitting there, I'm like, what? Yeah, that's that's ridiculous. Obviously, that's ridiculous. He's an American citizen. So I think that name-calling is your resort when you don't have an argument. So like when people resort to name-calling, or you know, that that is just a sign that they don't have a better argument to rebut the claims that are made. I mean, it's even the same thing when people accuse each side of kind of compensating demonstrators. It's like, first of all, there's money on both sides in the political spectrum. So let's just be clear that both conservative and liberal are paying people, you know, and have a ton of money. There are billionaires on the right and on the left. So let's dispel with this idea that this is that one side is genuine and the other side isn't.

SPEAKER_00 32:59

Yeah, I I wish, you know, they should send me and you on a campaign, the government should uh to put that out there.

SPEAKER_01 33:04

We might not make it back, but well, I guess my take is that well, hopefully I mean, my my take is when I talk to people, people agree with me. It's when it's when people don't know you. So I do feel that the more dialogue you have, the more I think you can figure it out. I mean, I think we we all know this to be true, but we all know this to be true, but somehow it doesn't it doesn't always see the light.

SPEAKER_00 33:34

No, and I wish it would. It would make life a whole lot easier for everybody, really. You know, it and I and I, you know, I want to throw out there, I've never seen anything remotely once linked to your company where anybody's pointed the finger at it, at least from my end, nobody's come up and been like, hey, but the the one name, you know, I always hear about the certain names, and I'm like, okay, you know, it's like you you always want to try to go with it somet with an open mind of perspective, but you know, then you see the things like the Minneapolis, and that's why, you know, that's why we had to get you on here because I'm like, we've got to hear some perspective on this, because all you hear is, you know, and and as much as I'll be fair, is CNN has kind of seen them move a little bit back more towards the center these days. Yes. You know, they still all it's the hype rage, right? Everybody goes after the hype rage, and if they don't have the hype rage, it's like they just automatically put their fingers in their ears and tune you out.

SPEAKER_01 34:22

Yes, that's very true. And that's really unfortunate to me. Like, I think that that media is so the media has become so cowardly these days. And in they never want to confront their own viewers with hard truths. That's the that's the fact. Like, and I I I don't like that that that is occurring, that they they are just trying to like circle jerk their viewers, you know. That honestly feels like that's what each media outlet is is basically. I mean, there are a few who I think will I like like Bill Maher has a lot of left-wing viewers, but I think he'll tell them a hard truth. And I I think Tucker has a lot of right-wing viewers and he'll tell them some hard truths. So there are some who will. I mean, I'm not saying I even agree with either of those people, but I'm saying most people tend to just tell their viewers what they want to know.

SPEAKER_00 35:20

Yeah, and that's always the sad part. I wish though uh the one thing I'll say is Bill Maher does come out on his show and he goes, Hey, I'll let y'all know the Republicans are willing to come on my show. The Democrats blocked me. And that was ironic because for a long time my show was the opposite, is I got people that were left-leaning, if you want to call it, that were like, Yeah, we'll come on and talk to you. But people on the right were kind of like, I don't know about that. And I'm like, you know, it's not a I got you session, it's literally let's just talk about it.

SPEAKER_01 35:49

Yeah, I I agree. I think it's important that I I think I think these sort of cross-dialogues are important. And I think, I think for a few years we saw none, and now you're seeing a lot more kind of dialogue where you are where you do have people of kind of opposing uh views uh talking. But I I think that what you're seeing is where I think we have to figure out as Americans, uh, is where do we where do 80% of us agree and where is there disagreement? Because it does feel like there are a lot of areas where 80% of us kind of agree. Like, even like take an issue like abortion, right? You think of like, oh, are you pro-life or pro-choice? Well, the reality is most people understand that there should be some abortion allowed in certain situations, but it shouldn't be until birth, right? Like there's there's some place where you should allow abortion and some place where you shouldn't, right? And you figure it out, and and what is it the Bill Clinton that's safe, legal, and rare, right? That well, that's what Bill Clinton said about abortion, right? So I think 80% of America probably agrees to some extent, right? You know, so there's a lot of things like that. I mean, even with like the war, right? Uh, I would say my understanding is 70% of Americans don't want the war in Iran, right? Like that's my understanding, right? And so I think that there are consensuses that you see of people, but those consensuses aren't necessarily always reflected in the wider political system.

SPEAKER_00 37:28

Yeah, and that's just that's it's very unfortunate. I wish it was a little bit more in line. You know, I know you your time's valuable. Is there anything you want to tell the public that they should know before we exit this?

SPEAKER_01 37:38

Yeah, I do. I I actually want to give your uh audience a free tip. So some free tips. So, okay, so we talked a lot about advocacy, but most of you guys who are audience are not necessarily gonna be advocating on a political matter, but you do need to advocate for yourself. So we're an advocacy company. So one of the things I'm like working on doing um is telling people to be their own best advocates, right? So I'm kind of one of the things you have to do. So, like here's an example like your flight got canceled, you need a new flight, you know, you're you're late on your rent and you don't want to be evicted, right? You're dealing with uh a problem, a medical problem, and your insurance company says they're you know is they're delayed in reimbursing you, right? So these are things that like ordinary people, any of us, could be going through, right? So, first of all, what I recommend is identify who is empowered to help you, right? So uh there's no point, for example, in screaming at a flight attendant about a flight delay, right? Because the flight attendant is unlikely to be able to assist you with a flight delay. They don't control that, right? Maybe in the case I mentioned about the uh about you being late on your rent, maybe the property manager won't be authorized to grant you an extension of time to pay the rent. So you have to maybe it's the regional manager who is has that authority. So, first of all, focus your efforts on the person who actually has the power because you're spending the more time, you're spending the time better that way. Uh, number two, figure out what matters to that person and how to convince that person, right? Um, so that's important because uh let's just say you're dealing with this regional property manager. Well, saying, oh my God, I don't know what I'm gonna do if I'm evicted. Well, that's not really their problem, right? That you you need to explain to them why they should, they should do it, why it's in their interest. So maybe it's in their interest because they don't want to have to hire a lawyer and go through three months of court proceedings just to get you out, only to have the place trashed. You know what I mean? I'm not right, I'm not saying you threaten to trash the place, to be clear, but but that's a risk that they might have, right? So so maybe they would rather say, hey, look, give me a month time and work me on a payment plan, and that's much better than having to do the the alternative, right? So you you they might be a very practical-minded person and see it your way. And if you show them that you're credible, then they might be willing to do that for you, right? But so you have to understand that you have to reach them the way that they that they respond to. So don't make it about you and why you need something, make it about them and why they should help you. So, like just a great example in my personal life, so or in my professional life, I'm always traveling. So, you know, maybe one in eight flights that I'll take is canceled, probably. So, what I typically do in that case is I tell them what flight that I look myself and I see, okay, well, what's the alternative flight that has a seat open? And I'll tell the eight the customer service agent, book me on that flight. And even if it's on another airline, but I made their job a lot easier because I've made it very easy to solve my problem, much easier than not solving my problem.

SPEAKER_00 41:10

Right. No, and that's that's critical. And I appreciate that. And Adam, I I I really appreciate you coming on to us, giving some of your time, and you know, hopefully have you back back down the road. I'm sure there's gonna be some more crazy people coming up. That there never seems to be a shortage of them.

SPEAKER_01 41:24

Yeah, anytime. And I I hope those tips help, and because we all kind of have to be our own best advocates, and that's that's really sometimes the more important than being able to advocate on politics.

SPEAKER_00 41:35

Yeah, I mean, it it's it's never easy. All right, everybody, I appreciate you tuning in, but don't forget to check this episode out. Everything will be in the links, you guys already know. And I hope everybody has a good day. All right, there we go. It should stop right there. Awesome. I appreciate it, man.