Dave Smith Calls Out Political Wealth on Joe Rogan: “They’re All Crooks”

Dave Smith didn’t hesitate to ask the questions many Americans quietly ask themselves: How do career politicians get so rich?

During a recent appearance on The Joe Rogan Experience, Smith and Rogan launched into a blunt discussion about political corruption, insider privilege, and the massive personal fortunes accumulated by long-time public officials—especially the Clintons and the Obamas.

The conversation centered on what Smith described as an “epidemic” in American politics: officials who enter public service with modest means and leave office as multimillionaires.

“They Were Public Servants—So How Did This Happen?”

Smith pointed directly at Bill and Hillary Clinton as a prime example.

“Their entire careers were as public servants,” Smith said. “They weren’t running businesses. They weren’t practicing law for decades. And yet somehow they’re worth around a hundred million dollars. That doesn’t add up.”

According to public records, the Clintons’ net worth in 1989 was roughly $420,000. By 2015, Forbes estimated that they had earned $230 million since leaving the White House—largely through speaking fees, book deals, and foundation-related activity.

Smith argued that this pattern is not unique to the Clintons. Barack Obama, he noted, followed a similar trajectory.

Obama’s Wealth Explosion After the White House

When Barack Obama entered office, his finances were relatively modest by elite standards. Today, estimates place his net worth at around $70 million, an increase of roughly 30 times from when he became president.

Rogan and Smith highlighted the stark contrast between Obama’s public rhetoric and his post-presidency lifestyle.

“For someone who spent his presidency leaning heavily into identity politics and victimhood narratives,” Smith said, “you’d expect a much more modest lifestyle.”

Instead, Obama quickly moved into high-end real estate after leaving office.

A $8.4 million beachfront property in Hawaii

An $8.1 million home in Washington, D.C.

And the most striking: an $11.75 million estate in Martha’s Vineyard, located on a street reportedly owned largely by wealthy foreign interests, including Saudi nationals

“I don’t begrudge a former president living comfortably,” Rogan said. “But when your wealth clearly comes because you were a politician, it feels different.”

Legal Corruption and “Pay-to-Play” Politics

Smith and Rogan were careful to note that most of this behavior is technically legal. That, they argued, is precisely the problem.

Book deals, Netflix contracts, and speaking fees—sometimes reaching hundreds of thousands of dollars per appearance—are not classified as bribes. But Smith suggested they often function as delayed rewards for political decisions made while in office.

“You bail out big banks,” Smith explained, “and then magically those same institutions really want to hear you speak after you leave office.”

They also discussed charitable foundations as a particularly effective loophole.

While both the Clinton Foundation and Obama Foundation are registered 501(c)(3) nonprofits, Smith pointed out that large foreign donations often overlapped with periods of political influence.

One example stood out: Saudi donations to the Clinton Foundation reportedly stopped shortly after Hillary Clinton lost the 2016 election.

“It’s weird,” Smith said sarcastically. “They just suddenly lost interest in charity.”

Again, no crime was proven—but the optics remain troubling.

“Legal Corruption Is Still Corruption”

Smith summed it up bluntly:

“All it is is corruption on a much bigger level. Legal corruption—but corruption.”

Rogan agreed, adding that widespread access to information has made these patterns harder to ignore. Practices like insider trading by lawmakers and post-office cashing-in may have existed for decades, but the public rarely had visibility into them.

“Now people can actually see it,” Rogan said. “And once you see it, you can’t unsee it.”

The Jimmy Carter Contrast

To emphasize his point, Smith contrasted modern political behavior with former President Jimmy Carter, who famously lived modestly long after leaving office.

“Carter never chased money,” Smith said. “He didn’t do those weird banker speeches for half a million dollars. People respected him for that.”

Carter’s example, they argued, proves that another path is possible—one where public service does not automatically become a personal enrichment scheme.

Why This Matters

Smith concluded that politics increasingly attracts people who see office not as a duty, but as an investment.

“This doesn’t mean earlier politicians were saints,” he said. “But the system didn’t offer them such an easy path to massive wealth after leaving office.”

That shift, he argued, helps explain why public trust in institutions continues to collapse.