0:00

It happened again. This time at the

0:02

G7 summit, where Joe Biden

0:05

is supposed to be asking

0:07

China to calm down, stop supporting Russia.

0:09

We need to stop the expansion of

0:11

war. At

0:13

a skydiving demonstration, he seems to

0:16

completely disassociate from what's going on,

0:19

turn around and then start wandering off

0:21

in a random direction. Yo, it's

0:23

the weirdest thing. And then I think

0:25

it was, Italy's prime minister runs

0:27

over and grabs him to like turn

0:29

him around and he's just like completely

0:31

confused and lost. Man,

0:34

coming off of that other video where everyone's

0:36

dancing and he's just frozen and just like

0:38

completely out of his mind. Now, some

0:40

people are saying, is this really the big news? And

0:43

I got to say, we have concerns.

0:45

Donald Trump is slamming the Biden administration

0:47

and Biden himself over Russian naval vessels

0:51

off the coast of Florida. Joe

0:53

Biden at the G7 is supposed to be

0:55

representing the United States. And one

0:57

of the big issues is talking to China to

1:00

get them to back off of Russia to stop

1:02

the escalation of conflict. So this doesn't turn into World

1:04

War III and the dude is just not there. So

1:07

I don't know. I mean, maybe we got someone

1:09

else there who has no authority and they're not going to

1:11

respect, but this is it. The other

1:13

big, big news, this is a really big story. Apparently

1:16

the Sandy Hook families have filed

1:18

to seize Alex Jones's ex account,

1:20

calling it a customer list. And

1:23

this is, I mean, this is huge.

1:26

They outright say in the news article,

1:28

the goal is to prevent Alex Jones

1:30

from being able to ever promote another

1:32

venture. This is not

1:34

about defamation. This

1:37

is about destroying InfoWars and Alex Jones

1:39

and making it so he can never

1:42

work in media again. So

1:44

we'll talk about that plus a bunch of other stories

1:46

that are pretty weird. Head over

1:48

to casperu.com before we get started and buy coffee. We

1:51

got Ian's Graphene Dream now available. It's

1:53

a low acidity coffee. It looks like

1:55

we already sold several hundred bags since

1:58

the launch about a week ago. So we really do appreciate it. Everybody's

2:00

favorite is Appalachian Nights. That wasn't our

2:02

intention. Rise with Berto Jr.

2:04

was expected to be the flagship, a light

2:07

roast breakfast blend, but everybody loves Appalachian Nights,

2:09

both in the literal sense and our coffee.

2:11

So head over to casperood.com to support the

2:13

show, Buy Our Coffee. Also head

2:16

over to timcast.com, click Join Us, become

2:18

a member to support our work directly,

2:21

and you will be making the show exist.

2:23

That's really what it comes down to. But

2:25

as a member, you get access to our

2:27

members-only call-in show, and if you didn't see

2:29

last night's with Matt Gaetz, it was

2:31

absolutely fantastic talking about

2:34

active legislation, talking about the goings-on

2:36

of Congress and his views, and it was

2:38

absolutely fantastic to have Rep Gaetz here. But

2:41

become a member, get access to our Discord

2:43

server where you can submit questions, and then

2:45

Monday through Thursday, 10 p.m., we

2:48

have the member call-in show right after the live

2:50

show on YouTube, and y'all can actually

2:52

call in to join the show, be on the show,

2:54

and talk to us and our guest. So I do

2:56

recommend it because it makes the show run. Smash

2:58

that Like button, subscribe to this

3:00

channel, share the show with all your friends. Joining us

3:03

tonight to talk about this and everything else is

3:05

Mike Benz. Thanks for

3:07

having me. Who are you, what do you

3:09

do? Mike Benz, I'm the Executive Director of

3:11

Foundation for Freedom Online. It's

3:13

a free speech, non-profit, we're sort of a

3:16

watchdog of the censorship industry. And

3:19

so I basically specialize in stopping internet censorship. Right

3:21

on, should be interesting talking about the Alex Jones

3:23

stuff then. So thanks for hanging out, we got

3:25

Chris Carr hanging out. What's up, I'm Chris Carr,

3:29

I'm the Executive Editor at scnr.com, that's Scanner

3:31

News, and I'm joined by The Outstanding. I'm

3:34

Hannah K. Rivel, I'm so excited that Chris Carr is

3:36

on, we don't get to do the show enough together.

3:38

I'm also from scnr.com, that's Scanner News. You follow all

3:40

of our work at Tim Kess News, and if you

3:43

hate my articles, send hate to Chris on Twitter. Hi,

3:45

Serge. Hey, what's up? Let's get started. Here we

3:47

go, it's the big story from the New York Post. Biden

3:50

wanders away at G7 Summit

3:52

before being pulled back by

3:54

Italian Prime Minister. This video

3:56

is wild, it's already got

3:59

10 million. views because

4:01

we're all deeply concerned

4:04

about the mental capacity of the President

4:06

of the United States. Here you go.

4:09

Here's the video. Oh, is there no audio on this? Or

4:14

is our audio just not turned on? Is

4:16

there audio on? Okay, I guess there's just

4:18

no audio. Here you go. Here's Joe Biden and

4:21

he just for no reason starts

4:24

wandering off. And you can see her

4:26

get more and more concerned, try to act like it's casual. And

4:28

then she has to grab him and pull him back in like,

4:30

look at his face, even though what's going

4:33

on. They make excuses for him

4:35

every step of the way. He has no

4:37

idea what is happening around him. He's

4:40

just gone, man. And

4:43

what does everybody say? It's elder abuse. This

4:46

went up today at 1pm. It's got

4:48

10.4 million views already. But then of

4:50

course there's this video. You

4:52

probably saw this one. This is when Joe

4:54

Biden was, I don't know how you describe this. I'll just play

4:56

it for you. My

5:09

favorite part. Okay, so for those that are just listening,

5:11

you got all these people, they're dancing, they're

5:13

smiling, they're clapping and Joe Biden is frozen.

5:16

And look at his arms. That's the weird thing is arms

5:18

are like slightly sticking out and

5:20

bent and not moving. But here's the

5:22

best part. Watch this. I don't want

5:25

to love nobody but you. I don't want to

5:27

love nobody but you. I don't want

5:29

to love nobody. This is

5:31

the weirdest part of this video. Biden

5:33

grimaces and then looks over to

5:35

the guy next to him like he's really pissed

5:37

off. Well, and what do

5:39

we call him? Second gentleman. Doug

5:42

is looking, you can see that he's looking past

5:44

Kamala at Joe Biden like, you okay? What are

5:47

you doing here? I saw the funniest

5:49

caption on this. It was, hey, these edibles aren't

5:51

working. 20 minutes later. I

5:54

have no rhythm. So there's a level where I can

5:56

understand maybe standing still when everyone else is able to

5:58

keep up with. with some kind

6:01

of tempo, but it doesn't look like

6:03

he is present. It

6:05

doesn't look like he even knows what he's... the emotional

6:07

reaction he's supposed to be having to this event. He

6:10

walks around with a death mask, like the same horrifying

6:12

death mask you imagine on a dying person. And

6:14

did you all see the video where he saluted Maloney? He

6:17

saluted her. Yeah, at the

6:19

G7 today. He's just gone. Yeah.

6:22

It's crazy because we've talked about

6:24

his cognitive failures before, but

6:26

we are well beyond whatever. I mean, we

6:29

played that video. I should probably pull it up again.

6:31

We was talking about US weapons in Ukraine, and he

6:33

can't say more than a few words about going out

6:35

of breath. I think whatever

6:37

drugs they got pumped into his veins are not

6:39

working anymore, and they know it. It's kind of

6:42

like a low power mode on a computer or

6:44

something, because I actually think if you were to

6:46

put him in a debate, he

6:48

would be able to summon the

6:50

power to be able to actually be

6:52

somewhat formidable, but that he

6:54

sort of gets that by being in effectively sleep

6:57

mode for the other 98% of the day. And

7:01

he's sort of like a device that

7:03

is old and worn

7:05

out and just has

7:07

to conserve that. But this

7:09

is one of these things where people have

7:11

said that about Biden for a long

7:13

time. I remember the Paul Ryan debate

7:16

where Mitt Romney was

7:18

looking like he was on track

7:20

to potentially beat Barack Obama. He

7:22

won the first debate. And then

7:25

Biden, who everyone associated with being

7:27

sort of slow and

7:30

prone to gaffes, absolutely spanked

7:32

Paul Ryan, basically turned around

7:34

the Obama campaign. And

7:37

I wouldn't underestimate that aspect of Biden

7:39

still having a heartbeat, but these are

7:41

definitely funny. I'm going to play this

7:43

clip. This is the interview he had

7:45

with David Muir. I don't know exactly

7:48

what this clip is, right? So we know that at

7:50

some point in the interview on ABC News, he

7:52

mentions, he gets asked by Muir

7:55

about US weapons being authorized to

7:57

be used in Russia. And

7:59

he sounds... absurdly out of breath. So what I did

8:01

was I searched for the clip just now, and

8:04

I grabbed a random segment from the interview,

8:06

which I've not, I don't know where it's

8:08

specifically at, but I'm gonna play it. Let's

8:10

hear how Biden sounds. Lost on us where

8:12

we are today, what these brave

8:14

young American sons did 80 years ago. And

8:18

we know what we're witnessing in the world right now, the wars,

8:21

the deep divisions at home. What

8:24

do you think these American heroes can teach us

8:26

right now about meeting this moment? Stand

8:29

up, tell the truth, serve

8:32

your country. I

8:36

was here 30 years ago, came in on

8:39

a landing craft. You could

8:41

see from out there what they saw here. The

8:43

idea that they got off

8:45

those boats, they got off

8:47

those landing craft. Many of them died sinking

8:50

in the land. Come across that

8:52

beach as long as it's just astounding.

8:55

It's astounding. What it

8:57

says to me is how critical

8:59

alliances are, how critical

9:01

alliances are for our security.

9:05

The president man, that one was not the

9:07

worst, but that was pretty bad. You can hear his

9:09

heavy breathing. He sounded like that when he

9:11

was throughout that stop in Normandy. He was

9:13

addressing kind of a gaggle of reports at

9:15

one point and it had this like breathy,

9:18

almost to the point where I had to like check

9:20

to see if he has a history of asthma, which

9:22

I think maybe he does. Like if you're having some

9:24

kind of weird allergic reaction, I don't know.

9:26

It was odd, but it's also not the

9:29

change that I

9:31

always see in Biden. I feel like his voice has

9:33

gotten lower. He doesn't have the same cadence that you

9:35

see from even when he was running with Obama, but

9:38

that one in particular, it was just so odd

9:40

and sort of all of a sudden it seems to have

9:42

gone away. Yes, he's concerned

9:44

me for 40 years. He's

9:47

not a decent man. He's a dictator and

9:49

he's struggling to make sure he holds this country

9:52

together while still keeping this

9:54

assault going. We're not talking about

9:56

giving them. Yo, it's crazy. You can hear him. Every.

10:00

step of the way. It's weird. The

10:02

thing that I find interesting about the debate is, so what

10:05

I was reading today was that basically Biden

10:07

doesn't, hasn't started debate prep. He's got what,

10:09

two weeks until he's supposed to debate Trump

10:12

and he's kind of back-to-back booked.

10:14

He's in Italy right now, he's supposed to go

10:16

to California for a big fundraiser and then return

10:19

and have like 10 days to do debate prep. Now

10:21

he's a career politician, he's been in debates before, maybe

10:23

he doesn't need it, but on the other hand like

10:26

it doesn't seem like he

10:29

is the same Biden that was in the

10:31

Senate that was in Obama. And so I just wonder

10:33

how do you prepare someone like this for the debate?

10:35

Is it like you're saying you just have to hope

10:37

that he has enough energy, you let him rest, or

10:39

is it like you have to make sure he has

10:42

key talking points he has to go back to every

10:44

single time to be able to stay kind of punchy?

10:46

No, I think they know that there's nothing

10:49

left. And I can't

10:52

remember who tweeted this, man I feel bad. They

10:54

said that they're

10:57

going to sink Biden but they're gonna focus

10:59

everything in terms of the shadow campaign mail-in

11:01

ballots on senators and members of

11:03

Congress so that they can impeach Trump and target

11:06

Trump, go after him that way because they're not

11:08

gonna win the presidency. Yeah

11:11

it's interesting seeing his failing memory because

11:13

there's you know there's a quote that

11:16

if you're an honest man you don't need a good memory.

11:19

And I'm almost sort of I sometimes

11:22

flirt in my head with thinking about you

11:24

know the Biden family intrigues are so vast

11:26

they go back such a long time. Biden

11:29

you know before he was president before

11:31

he was the vice president for Obama

11:33

he spent 40 years on the Senate

11:35

Foreign Relations Committee which is

11:37

really the you know the the

11:40

Senate arm of the American Empire

11:42

on every continent and it's essentially

11:44

it's got oversight over the State

11:46

Department and the State

11:48

Department essentially is oversight over the

11:50

intelligence community. His own family is

11:52

involved in it a thousand different

11:54

ways. He's a guy who is

11:56

basically an international dealmaker who half

11:59

his life is diplomacy, the other half is

12:01

sort of duplicity about that diplomacy. There's

12:04

a lot of lies you need to keep

12:06

straight, a lot of stories you need to

12:08

be able to sort of tell to different

12:10

audiences about the same fact pattern. And

12:13

I kind of feel like when you live that

12:15

life for so long, you

12:17

don't really age gracefully with a good memory

12:19

because you can't keep your own lies straight.

12:23

He doesn't know when he lied and what he lied about. And

12:26

it doesn't matter ultimately because the corporate press is going

12:28

to run cover for him. And I

12:30

mean, but the thing is, I think that at this point in his

12:32

life, he's sort of running on

12:34

the fumes of his 50 years in government. And

12:37

he's still kind of like mastered, substanceless

12:39

speech, even though he can barely speak or get

12:42

it out. Like there's no substance to what he

12:44

says. And it's just like second

12:46

nature for him. Yeah, he can kind of

12:48

convert into or like shift

12:50

into a gear where it's like, I'm addressing

12:52

a crowd. And when you heard

12:54

him at the gun rally, he's like, knows

12:56

how to build to a point and then

12:58

see something kind of colloquial. But again, I

13:00

just don't think that you

13:03

could, if you're a young

13:05

voter, right, you didn't see him, you know, when he

13:07

was involved in different hearings in the Senate, you didn't

13:09

see him before you maybe remember him as the VP.

13:12

Do you look at him and think strong,

13:14

capable leader, definitely able to convince me to

13:16

vote for him? No, I mean, it's concerning

13:18

to me that he's at the G7 summit. He's

13:20

supposed to be negotiating all kinds of stuff and making all

13:22

kinds of deals. And, you know, shout

13:25

out to the prime minister of Italy for

13:27

just sort of escorting him back to the

13:29

fold. I mean, he needs a handler always.

13:32

And that's that's not exactly what you want

13:34

in your world's leader. I mean, when

13:36

you look at the leaders of Europe, when you look at what's going

13:38

on with NATO, the United States has

13:40

become an appendage,

13:43

a vassal state of this

13:45

international organization that will do whatever it's whatever

13:47

it wants. You've got

13:49

international volunteers. I mean, geez,

13:52

in Ukraine fighting the war, flying the Ukrainian

13:54

flag. They're not Ukrainian, but

13:56

they're fighting there. Who's paying them? What are they

13:59

doing this for? free. They

14:01

are okay. Well, then I stand

14:03

corrected. Volunteers. There's something else there.

14:06

Joe Biden's brain don't work. This country

14:08

is running effectively as

14:10

I don't know, we

14:12

are being forced along by a corrupt Congress that

14:15

won't do anything, an executive branch that doesn't exist,

14:17

and a Supreme Court that can barely get its

14:19

head straight half the time. I mean, Roberts

14:21

doesn't even know what he's doing. And then you've got the

14:23

liberal justices like Katanji Brown Jackson doesn't even know what a

14:25

woman is. So we

14:29

desperately need to make this country

14:31

great again. And there's a

14:33

lot of people who are like, that's that you know, the

14:35

country was never great, blah, blah, blah. I'm like, dude, I

14:37

don't know, man, look, I

14:39

guess great could be a semantic definition

14:42

where everything the threshold is. How

14:45

about functional? Make

14:47

America function, MAFA, make America

14:49

functional again. Because wow, this

14:52

is like, Joe Biden shows up

14:54

to the G7 summit, it's like he's not even there at all.

14:56

He's just bumbling about confused. He

14:59

is incapable of actually doing the job as the

15:02

president. And I'll shout out, you

15:05

know, you get these democrats like Harry Sisson, he made

15:07

this video. And he's like, why would you

15:09

if you want a better economy, you got to vote for Biden, blah,

15:11

blah, blah. And I'm like, dude, you know, look, man, anybody

15:14

who's voting for Trump

15:16

or Biden on legislative

15:18

issues, I got I got

15:20

I got I got to let you know

15:22

something it's called Congress, they handle legislative issues.

15:24

The president, of course, signs laws and can

15:26

work with Congress. But the real reason to

15:28

vote for a president is they negotiate for

15:31

the country. For Donald Trump, it's because of

15:33

foreign policy. That's the big factor in who

15:35

you're voting for for president. Now, Trump's got

15:37

better economic policy, trade policy,

15:40

border policy, that is what the executive branch does. Biden

15:42

has none and he's not he's not there, his brain's

15:45

gone. Yeah, it's interesting

15:47

because Joe Biden's moniker in

15:49

Washington in

15:52

the 1980s until he was vice president was Mr.

15:54

Foreign Policy, you know, because he sat on the

15:57

Senate Foreign Relations Committee and he was the

15:59

chair. of it and the ranking member. So

16:02

Biden's whole strong, in fact, you

16:04

can look up some of these articles from

16:06

when Biden was running for president. The

16:09

main force behind him was the

16:11

US foreign policy establishment, the

16:14

stakeholders that we have who coast off of

16:17

the activities of our state department and our

16:19

Pentagon and intelligence services. A great example of

16:21

that is BlackRock. BlackRock, everyone

16:23

sort of knows for their $10 trillion

16:25

of assets under management, but they're a

16:28

global firm, which has portfolio companies operating

16:31

in every country on earth. And Biden actually hand

16:33

in haud a lot before he actually ran

16:35

for president. He didn't really

16:37

go forward with it, according to, I think, the

16:39

New York Times who published this, a January 2019

16:41

meeting at

16:44

BlackRock HQ with Larry Fink. BlackRock

16:46

pledged their support behind him. And

16:50

basically, one of Biden's top advisors in

16:52

the White House is one of the

16:54

Donilon brothers, the Tom Donilon, the brother

16:57

of the main advisor in the White

16:59

House. Tom Donilon is a

17:01

former military guy, former intelligence guy, former

17:03

state department guy. He did the hat

17:05

trick and now he runs the investment

17:07

arm of BlackRock. So you have Joe

17:09

Biden's top advisor being the brother of

17:12

BlackRock with $10 trillion of assets under

17:14

management, many of which are in Ukraine.

17:18

And a brain doesn't function? Well,

17:20

I think the Donilon brothers brains function.

17:23

I think that they don't want a

17:25

president. I think actually Biden

17:27

is ideal because if you were

17:30

to have a popular president, they tend to be charismatic,

17:32

they tend to have thoughts of their own. Your

17:35

personality is better that way. It is,

17:37

as long as you win the vote, then

17:41

they'll be compliant. The issue is there's this

17:43

trade-off where they need to sort of get

17:46

them up to a certain point. And

17:49

it's hard to think of another Democrat who

17:51

will be as not there, as

17:53

have no ideas of their own, no vision of

17:55

the world, no principles of their own. Biden,

17:59

in the 1990s, He had a quote where

18:01

he described himself as a prostitute. Now, he was

18:03

saying this in the context of how unfair it

18:05

is as a senator if you don't come from

18:07

means, because he said he bragged that he was

18:09

the poorest person in Congress when

18:13

he won in his, whatever,

18:16

29 years of age. He was

18:18

very young when he came to Congress. He

18:20

was complaining that you need to sell

18:23

out to donors. You need

18:25

to prostitute yourself. He himself was

18:28

effectively did that. Then he

18:31

becomes chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

18:33

Well, who is he prostituting himself out to?

18:35

To that same foreign policy establishment. To

18:38

Tim's point about Trump's Trump

18:41

running on foreign policy, it's precisely for

18:43

that that they're coming after him. The

18:46

Ukraine impeachment, the Russiagate FBI

18:48

investigation, the Soros prosecutors, and

18:51

the Soros global interests behind

18:53

the present lawsuits. I want to give a

18:55

quick shout out to Power Wheels CD in

18:57

the chat who said Trojan corpse. I

19:00

thought that was a pretty good one. Let's step to the

19:02

story of the Daily Mail. This is the

19:04

greatest poll I have ever seen done. I am

19:06

so excited for this, and I can't believe they

19:08

actually did this poll. JL

19:10

Partners polled 500 likely

19:13

voters about the upcoming

19:15

debate. Half of voters

19:17

expect Biden to forget where he is

19:19

during first debate in Atlanta and walk

19:21

off the stage on the wrong side.

19:26

That's an amazing poll. Could you imagine a pollster

19:28

calls you and is like, hi, we're here about

19:30

the presidential election. Do you think Joe

19:32

Biden will forget where he is and wander off the

19:34

stage in the wrong direction? Half of

19:36

them said yes. This is

19:38

awesome. So 79% expect Trump to interrupt

19:40

Biden. Agreed.

19:46

70% expect Biden to mess up his words. Yes.

19:49

I want to tell a rambling story. I

19:52

don't know if I get. He

19:55

loves a good aside. I feel like he has

19:57

a couple moments where he's

19:59

like. at a rally maybe. I

20:01

think rambling, rambling story

20:03

is is charged language. Yes.

20:05

Yeah. He does like to tell some stories

20:08

at a rally though, not a debate. You

20:10

know, but you can control the time. They're wrong about the

20:12

love time. Trump's mic to be cut off

20:14

54%. See, that's the issue. They're saying

20:16

there's gonna be like a hard time limit and they're gonna cut

20:18

mics when it limits up. It's it's

20:21

ridiculous. 49% expect Biden to

20:23

forget where he is. 41% think he'll walk

20:25

off the wrong side of the stage. And

20:27

40% think he will

20:30

have problems standing up. Didn't they want chairs?

20:32

I think they did at

20:34

one point, but I don't know if that was that I don't know

20:36

if that was that was there. I think they wanted chairs and then

20:39

I said, guys, we're going to hospital

20:41

beds. They're like, we'd like it to be virtual.

20:44

I'm free recorded. Well, what's

20:46

interesting about this too is they have a stipulated

20:48

agreement that Trump's mic will be cut off if

20:50

he interrupts. That was one of the stipulated

20:53

terms because they were so afraid of

20:55

Trump's sort of pithy Arnold Schwarzenegger type

20:57

comments like because you'd be in jail.

21:01

And so and Trump does have that sort of

21:03

one liner quality. So it is kind of I

21:07

think it's good as a meme, but

21:09

you know this I don't

21:11

think Trump really is prone to rambling

21:14

and again, like they

21:16

fear Trump interrupting with those because it

21:18

interrupts a Biden ramble and sort of

21:20

reveals it for the ramble that it

21:22

is. Yeah, the goal of the debate is

21:25

to be the one who speaks for the most

21:27

time, who kind of controls the pace than, you

21:29

know, being able to sort of out talk your

21:31

opponent isn't bad. You know, again,

21:33

rambling feels like it might be a sort

21:35

of biased question. But you know, in terms

21:37

of all of this, do you think that

21:40

these low expectations for Biden, like the fact that

21:42

there's even a conversation that he'll exit on the

21:44

wrong side, it sort of works to his favor

21:47

because people don't believe he can do it. So

21:49

sort of any sort of basic

21:51

performance is a win for him. I think

21:53

it totally does. You know how when they do

21:55

those Oxford debates and they

21:57

determine the winner not by who agree,

22:00

who in the audience agrees with the issue

22:02

most, but they sort of take a baseline.

22:04

Who is on this side of the issue

22:06

before the debate? And then they measure the

22:08

winner by who came over to the other

22:11

side, you know, whose expectations essentially changed in

22:13

favor of one versus the other. And this

22:15

is another one of these reasons why I

22:17

just caution not to underestimate Biden in a

22:19

debate context. And I go back to the

22:21

low power mode, because even the videos that

22:24

we watched, that was Biden when he was

22:26

at one of these, one of a million

22:28

of these perfunctory presidential things. You're

22:30

in the garden, you're watching a paraglider, okay, I

22:33

need to just, you know, smile for the camera.

22:35

But in your head, you're thinking about everything else

22:37

you have to think about as president. And there's

22:39

so many of those functions that are perfunctory. I

22:42

would not be surprised if behind closed doors, low

22:45

power mode comes off and we need to be

22:47

sharp for an hour or two. And

22:52

I do expect that in this, in the debate. You expect

22:54

him to sort of tighten up in time? Yeah. I

22:57

think it's at least that sort of a low expectation for voters that we

22:59

can get Biden to be high performing for an

23:01

hour or two of the day. I mean, there's

23:03

no doubt that being the president of the United

23:05

States is a demanding job. I remember seeing those

23:07

before and after pictures of Obama who had gotten

23:09

very gray, you know, it's I

23:12

can't imagine that the demands time, travel,

23:14

stress, everything else. But if

23:16

Biden can only perform for one debate

23:19

with multiple weeks of warning, is that

23:21

good enough in terms of a political

23:23

leader? Well, there's another aspect of this

23:25

that I find interesting that's sort of related, which

23:28

is the lack of celebrity endorsements in

23:30

the summer of an election season. You know, part

23:32

of this is because while it

23:35

doesn't necessarily cripple Biden

23:37

to be so absent and to be so

23:39

sort of easily dunkable on

23:41

for these kind of moments, the

23:43

total absence of charisma makes

23:45

it hard for people to tell

23:48

their own audiences to go out

23:50

for this person without looking either

23:52

profoundly uncool or looking like a

23:54

naked shill because what do you really

23:56

see in this person? Because there's nothing really

23:58

to go on. And Biden doesn't. press

24:00

conferences. Trump did press conferences every single

24:02

day during coronavirus, and he was probably

24:05

the most accessible press person. Biden

24:08

does not do public press conferences. In

24:11

the limited context that he does every

24:14

couple months, it's a couple

24:16

of questions, none of them adversarial,

24:18

and then tightly controlled. And

24:21

what I find really

24:23

interesting is typically, they

24:25

say that politics is Hollywood for ugly people, that

24:29

politicians aren't necessarily highly charismatic by

24:31

nature, but if they are up

24:33

to a certain point, celebrities can

24:35

kind of do the rest. And

24:37

right now, there is almost no,

24:40

I mean, you have a couple of these, the De

24:42

Niro's, but we're used to

24:44

seeing, I mean, remember in 2016, the

24:46

tapes of 100

24:50

celebrities, you could do a two hour supercut

24:53

of all the musicians, the

24:55

actors, every

24:57

field of entertainment and academia

25:00

and cultural celebrity

25:03

coming out for Hillary Clinton. They

25:05

did the same thing with Obama. They did the same

25:07

thing with Bill Clinton. But

25:10

this election season, it's

25:12

almost on mute. So there's

25:14

actually a list of endorsements

25:17

on Wikipedia. Joe Biden, I

25:20

noticed something interesting. Joe Biden

25:22

doesn't have categories for

25:24

celebrities, it just has notable individuals.

25:27

And so it mentions Mark Hamill, will be

25:30

Goldberg, George Conway, Stephen Colbert,

25:32

George Clooney, JJ Abrams, there's a

25:34

good amount here, right? George Clooney,

25:36

Obama, and Julie Roberts are hosting

25:38

this fundraiser. Yeah, and you got

25:40

Steven Spielberg, Martin Sheen, I don't

25:43

know, Matthew Iglesias, congratulations, you're listed as

25:45

well. But when you go over to

25:48

Trump's, he actually has so many, it

25:50

breaks them down into political operatives, actors,

25:52

musicians, sports figures, religious figures, and activists,

25:54

and public figures. So certainly Trump has

25:56

substantially more than Joe Biden does,

25:58

Biden does have his celebrity endorsements. But

26:01

they actually, like, when you look at

26:03

the list of endorsements for Joe Biden, I

26:06

mean, how many of these are actually, okay, how many actors

26:08

do we have? Let's see, one, two, three. Let's

26:13

go, let's go, let's go. Four, five,

26:16

oh, Eva Longoria. Six,

26:20

seven, eight. He's got a, he's got a, nine, 10, 11,

26:22

12. Kim,

26:25

how many of these are A-list actors that were

26:27

in a movie this year? I

26:29

mean, like, all of the- Yeah, but to

26:31

be fair, I mean, like Dean Cain and like Kevin

26:33

Sorbo, they're doing like parallel economy

26:35

stuff. That's exactly what I was gonna say was what you're talking

26:37

about is that I don't think these celebrities have the same cultural

26:39

clout that they used to. Like, we're in a totally different landscape

26:42

than we were in 2016. Their endorsements

26:44

really don't matter that much. Maybe it does at an

26:46

LA fundraiser with Julia Roberts and George Clooney, but culturally

26:48

speaking, I don't think they're relevant. Yeah, but take a

26:50

look at this, right? So if we look at Joe

26:52

Biden for, let's look at like music. Okay, who does,

26:54

let's see if he has any names in here that we

26:56

can actually be like, oh, wow. Lenny

26:59

Kravitz. Where's Lenny Kravitz? Well, the AP

27:02

wrote about this yesterday. Yeah, but Lenny

27:04

Kravitz is a Gen X. He's

27:06

not a big deal right now. I

27:09

mean, shout out, whatever, he's all right.

27:12

Lizzo's popular with- Lizzo's on the

27:14

list? Yeah, she is. Oh, okay, well, there you

27:16

go. All right, what's her name?

27:19

Most of the rappers are supporting Trump. But when

27:21

you look at Trump, you've got- Email

27:24

rappers. Azealia Banks, Benny the Butcher, Kodak

27:26

Black, Orgiato Below, Waka Flocka

27:28

Flame. I do like

27:30

that they included Naked Cowboy, sure,

27:33

I guess. DaBaby, Aaron Lewis, Ted

27:35

Nugent's also a bit older, Lil Pump,

27:38

Sexy Red. Lil Wayne, Lil Wayne,

27:40

too. And Snoop Dogg even reversed his position on

27:42

Trump. Did you see that? Yeah. He

27:44

really, wow. Snoop Dogg, if you remember, held up a, did

27:47

a music video, essentially shooting Trump in the head

27:49

or holding a gun to Trump's head when

27:51

he ran the first time. He actually came out

27:54

a couple of weeks ago and said, I got

27:56

nothing but love for Trump. And,

27:58

you know, basically- effectively

28:01

all but did a formal endorsement.

28:04

So who does he got for sports? He got

28:06

Andrew Tate as sports figures. I do love that.

28:09

I feel like Trump's, it's not like the

28:11

lists are, Trump's list is obviously bigger, but

28:14

Trump's got more relevant figures than Biden does,

28:17

but I think that's kind of just obvious.

28:19

When you look at the polling, when you look at

28:21

public sentiment, it leans slightly towards Trump in a lot

28:24

of different ways. Not that it matters because all that

28:26

really matters is whether or not Republicans can figure out

28:28

how to win an election. I

28:30

mean, it is interesting because typically Democrats lean

28:32

on Hollywood and celebrities to say, we are

28:34

the cool, youthful party. I remember in 2020

28:37

at their convention, they

28:41

had Billie Eilish perform. And at the time she

28:43

was really on her come up. She'd been huge

28:45

during COVID and everything. And

28:48

maybe young celebrity starlets are

28:52

just not interested in endorsing Biden, although

28:54

we know that they tend to be

28:56

politically active. I'm thinking of Olivia Rodrigo,

28:58

the pop singer handing out the

29:00

equivalent of Plan B at her

29:02

concerts. They have political positions, but for whatever

29:04

reason, it's not translating this cycle into Biden

29:06

endorsements, even from what I can see people

29:08

who have endorsed him in the past. I'm

29:10

gonna speak specifically about Taylor Swift here. Read

29:13

my mind. Yeah, they can't get Taylor yet. Also,

29:15

I'll just shout out the rest of the list

29:17

includes Kimberly Guilfoyle, Jackson

29:20

Hinkle, Charlie Kirk, Kerry Lake,

29:22

you got Malik

29:24

Obama, that's great. You got

29:26

me, Jack Posobek, Amber Rose,

29:29

Scott Pressler's on the list. So

29:32

I don't know, man, whatever,

29:34

I guess. Well, this is really where I

29:37

see the low power mode though, coming into

29:39

it more so than in the debate, in the sense

29:41

that look at what Trump is

29:43

doing today with Logan Paul, a 90 minute

29:46

interview. Nelk boys, like 60, 90

29:48

minutes. I think what's hurting

29:50

Biden about this kind of low power mode and then

29:53

save it for an hour or two of the day,

29:55

is that you can't do these kind of media tours

29:58

and these kind of, the media. a

30:00

blitz of connecting with all these celebrities

30:02

because they can't

30:04

get together to produce a video, to

30:06

produce an interview, to do a little

30:08

song together. He can't hit the road

30:11

and do four cities to go to

30:13

LA for this, to New York for

30:15

that, and Chicago for this. Whereas Trump

30:17

is flying four or five cities a

30:19

day, that was one of the things

30:21

that Democrats were arguing was so great

30:24

about the trial is that it hemmed

30:26

Trump down physically in the trial room

30:28

so that he couldn't go out and

30:30

do the blitz that brings you the hearts

30:32

and minds. And so I actually

30:35

think part of this celebrity endorsement drought

30:37

in the Biden election cycle here is

30:39

the fact that he's not, he

30:42

has to be on low power mode so much,

30:45

he can't expend the energy to do these high

30:47

profile, have to be present, have to deliver, because

30:49

now you are in front of the cameras in

30:51

front of all their audiences, you actually have to

30:54

be on point. And so he's

30:56

cut off from that and I think part of that also has

30:58

to do with a kind of left wing

31:00

civil war on the Israel-Palestine thing where

31:02

because of that issue dividing the left,

31:04

a lot of celebrities don't necessarily want

31:07

to endorse Biden because not only do

31:09

they need to fear a Bud Light

31:11

style right wing boycott but their left

31:13

wing flank might, half

31:16

of their base may be pro-Bidenum. Yeah,

31:19

I was just thinking, you're making me think of, I'm going to back

31:21

to talking about pop culture. Chappell Rowan, this

31:23

pop star who's really popular right now, she's

31:25

really coming up, I think she was at

31:27

the Governor's Ball in New York, this music

31:29

festival, and she said the Biden administration asked

31:31

her to come to the White House and

31:33

perform during pride and she was like, no,

31:36

and seemed to say basically because of the

31:38

Israel-Palestine thing, which is fascinating, right? I mean,

31:40

one of the things the media talked about

31:42

constantly when Trump was in office was how

31:44

many of the sports teams that would win

31:46

whatever tournament, whether it's Super Bowl or whatever

31:48

it was, refused to come meet Trump

31:50

because he was bad, I guess, or whatever, and

31:53

now it seems like this is starting

31:55

to happen in the Democrats'

31:57

backyard in Hollywood, in the music industry. They're

32:00

saying well, I don't want to be associated

32:02

with Biden because either I personally don't believe

32:04

him or he's too controversial because of the

32:06

stances He's taken on this international conflict I'm

32:09

wondering if it might be like a really smart strategic move

32:11

on their behalf to just keep him out of the media

32:13

tour My trope like Trump is on you know Well,

32:17

not just that because like think about it,

32:20

I mean he he doesn't well as you pointed

32:22

out He's not a free thinker You know He

32:24

doesn't have any sort of personality to offer anybody

32:26

the people are gonna vote for him anyway or

32:28

have been Ideologically compromised for what at least eight

32:30

years now probably longer So who is he really

32:33

like advocating to support him? Like he's already got

32:35

the support that he is gonna get like nothing

32:37

He's gonna say on a media tour is gonna

32:40

necessarily bolster that right? You can't and I

32:42

think part of it is if you send him on a media tour

32:44

people are gonna be like I have questions about this policy you put

32:46

out and I don't think they want to answer to the record. They

32:48

currently have Yeah, let's jump to

32:50

the story from Reuters. This is huge news Sandy

32:53

Hook families want to seize Alex

32:55

Jones's social media accounts is wild

32:58

Families of the Sandy Hook massacre victims want to

33:00

seize Alex Jones Jones's social media accounts in his

33:02

bankruptcy Saying that the conspiracy theorists

33:04

frequent posts to fans are a key part

33:07

of the Infowars business being liquidated to pay

33:09

Jones's debts Jones filed bankruptcy protection

33:11

17 months ago has given up on trying to

33:13

reach a settlement that would reduce the 1.5 billion

33:15

dollars that he owes To the

33:17

relatives of 20 students and six staff members that

33:20

killed in the 2012 mass shooting at the Sandy

33:22

Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut Jones

33:25

and that's and if families now agree that

33:27

Jones's assets should be liquidated in bankruptcy. I don't know

33:29

that's true I I think Alex

33:31

Jones may have contested that saying they're reporting this but

33:33

that's not the case, but I don't know They're

33:36

gonna say the families on Wednesday asked

33:38

a US bankruptcy judge in Houston, Texas

33:41

To additionally take control of Jones's

33:43

ex account x.com account

33:45

and prevent Jones from using it

33:47

to promote new business ventures That

33:50

is wild. They say it's quote no

33:52

different than a customer list

33:55

of any other liquidating business First

33:58

I will stress that uh,

34:01

you don't own your social media accounts. X

34:04

owns it. And they grant access

34:06

to Alex to use that, using, that's terms

34:08

of service and agreements. They

34:10

would have to seize access, not from

34:12

Alex, but from Elon Musk. I

34:15

don't see this ever happening, but this is an

34:17

insane move. They argue that Jones

34:20

has used a social media account to

34:22

push down the value of InfoWars by

34:24

diverting sales from that site to his

34:27

father's drjonesisnaturals.com, which sells health supplements

34:29

and other products. A quick question, is Alex Jones's

34:31

dad a doctor? I'm gonna google that

34:33

right now. Dr. Jones is natural. It's

34:35

just like a doctor philosophy. That does seem right. I think

34:37

I, I think I read that somewhere. His dad's a doctor?

34:39

Yeah. I think I read that in

34:41

Shane's profile of Alex Jones, as a matter of fact. So

34:44

they say a bankruptcy judge is scheduled to hear the family's

34:46

demand at a Friday court hearing in Houston. The

34:48

judge is expected to convert Alex Jones's bankruptcy case from

34:50

a chapter 11 to

34:53

a chapter 7 liquidation Jones claimed for years.

34:55

The San Diego killings were staged. He did

34:57

later then say he didn't think

34:59

that was correct. Jones has estimated that

35:01

he has less than 12 million dollars in assets,

35:03

meaning that he will carry an enormous legal debt

35:06

even after InfoWars and his other assets are sold.

35:09

Alex Jones's dad is apparently a dentist. Oh

35:11

wow, look at that. So he is a doctor, specializing

35:14

in dentistry. So

35:16

he's a doctor. Dr. Jones is naturals.

35:19

This is not about restitution.

35:22

Shutting down InfoWars doesn't actually get them any

35:25

money. If they're going to be

35:27

filing, they should be filing to say we get X

35:29

amount garnished off of InfoWars revenue per month or something

35:31

like that. Taking his Twitter account from

35:33

his X account from him, they're literally

35:35

just saying, like, no longer

35:37

can this man speak in public. It's an impossible

35:40

thing they're doing. There's literally nothing they can do.

35:43

Alex can make a new X account tomorrow

35:45

and tweet one time with a video of

35:47

him talking and it's going to skyrocket. I

35:50

don't even know how they seize a social media

35:52

account, but this is wild. I suppose

35:54

considering we're moving closer to the election, we're going

35:56

to see more... I don't

35:59

know, man. I guess the question is,

36:01

do we see more censorship attempts like this? Well,

36:04

this is absolutely terrifying,

36:07

mortifying, stupefying. It's

36:10

brutal to watch what they're doing to Alex. On

36:12

top of that, I see this potentially

36:15

being a Supreme Court issue three years from now,

36:18

because this gets to the fundamental question of what

36:20

is a social media account. This is almost an

36:22

extension of the Section 230 debate

36:25

about platforms versus

36:27

publishers. If a social

36:29

media account is a

36:31

business asset and can

36:34

essentially be rolled up in bankruptcy,

36:37

this gives the censorship industry a

36:39

brand new tool everywhere,

36:41

anywhere to take out an

36:43

opposing voice simply by driving them

36:46

into bankruptcy and seizing the account. Which

36:48

is to say that anybody who ...

36:51

because in this case, it's gross because it's

36:53

a billion dollar debt. What happens if you're

36:55

bankrupt? Because if you have to declare Chapter

36:57

7 or Chapter 11 because you're $100,000 over

36:59

the whole

37:04

when they do the seizure. If

37:07

they can ... any lawsuit that you're

37:09

unable to compensate on,

37:11

if the precedent

37:13

is now that they can take your ex-account,

37:16

this will be gamified to

37:18

take down basically everyone, anyone.

37:21

Any time you've got a bad

37:23

investigative journalist writing about

37:25

your company or your

37:27

financial institution or your political candidate that

37:30

... now, boom, operation mode, how can

37:32

we get rid of this? Well, we

37:34

tried going to the platforms. We got

37:37

them banned on Instagram. We got them

37:39

deboasted on YouTube. They still

37:41

have their ex-account. Okay, well, what if we

37:43

do lawfare, force them

37:45

to file a Chapter 7, then

37:48

we know, because we've got legal precedent, that we can

37:50

just seize it from them. I

37:53

think the issue is, is what

37:56

is a social media ... if it is

37:58

a platform versus a business asset

38:00

then I would

38:02

think that this would not be touchable but

38:04

this is now basically a brand new novel

38:07

legal theory and you know

38:09

this is something that I think we should all

38:11

support the side of freedom on. You're never going

38:13

to be able to stop Alex Jones. There's

38:15

nothing they can do about it. They'll file all

38:17

of these things every day night and let's say they

38:20

get his ex-account, let's say they get all of his accounts

38:23

then he makes a new account. But then they

38:25

seize the new account. They say they sure do

38:27

and then he makes a new account and then

38:30

it gets better. Then some random guy on the

38:32

street named Joe Shmo

38:35

makes an account and says wow Alex Jones is

38:37

standing right here I'm gonna film him and

38:39

now Joe Shmo's account is getting tons and tons

38:41

of viewership and then they go what? They

38:44

go to Joe Shmo and say we're seizing your

38:46

account because you keep playing videos of Alex Jones?

38:49

You can't do anything about it. The

38:52

issue is is it does damage for

38:54

it keeps what

38:57

would be a burning fire of speech to

38:59

a to a low to a low

39:01

burn to a low ember constantly. It's

39:04

almost like it the insurgency strategy the

39:06

counterinsurgency strategy that our military uses to

39:08

contain insurgency movements where the goal is

39:11

not to eradicate it completely but simply

39:13

to render it functionally ineffective by keeping

39:15

it at a sort of

39:17

low burning ember where it never has a

39:19

chance to actually have real influence. So if

39:22

it takes time to build up a

39:24

large platform and any time

39:26

you start to get close to influence for it to

39:29

be able to be ripped from you and start back

39:31

at zero all over again it is

39:33

very effective. I mean it was a game changer

39:36

when Elon let people were trying to do bad

39:38

evasions all the time but but

39:40

it rendered you and you could still sort

39:42

of get a Twitter platform for a couple

39:44

days before someone flagged you or for a

39:46

couple thousand followers or ten thousand until somebody

39:48

said oh they're they're evading a band this

39:51

is their alt. We did

39:53

not have freedom again until Elon came

39:55

back in and I do fear that this

39:57

strategy could seriously seriously work. And

40:00

this is why this is such a threat in tandem

40:02

with the fact that the censorship industry right now is

40:05

plotting seven ways from Sunday how to use legal

40:07

strategies to get their power back. They're

40:10

plotting this by using with the EU

40:12

Digital Services Act in order to have

40:14

this disinformation compliance to spiral back on

40:16

US companies. I have clipped

40:18

countless hundreds of videos of high level

40:20

censorship industry insiders. In fact, in April

40:23

this year, they had a whole conference

40:25

on legal solutions to stopping

40:28

disinformation. And this

40:31

new toolkit on the legal side

40:33

to coerce this, I mean, this

40:35

is just like when Alex got kicked off the social

40:37

media in 2018 and a lot

40:40

of people thought, well, that's so

40:42

extraordinary because he's such a big account and

40:44

people were hoping and praying that would just stop there.

40:48

And then that turned out to be a canary in

40:50

the coal mine. And I think legally this would be

40:52

the case if they succeed. And my fear is because

40:55

it's Sandy Hook, they will win

40:57

at the trial court level with some favorable judge.

40:59

And now it's going to be in the hands

41:01

of an appellate court and

41:03

then a Supreme Court. And if Biden is

41:06

able to change the majority of the

41:08

Supreme Court, we would be looking at a whole

41:10

new world. Apparently

41:12

Alex is saying they're also going after his cruise

41:14

social media as well. Now, don't get me

41:16

wrong, I get it. This is a

41:18

bad and psychotic thing. My point is there

41:22

is no point at which you can remove

41:24

Alex Jones from the sphere. And

41:27

what happens if they seize his act? Well, first of all,

41:29

they can't seize his act. That's the Elon Musk is going to

41:31

say no, just outright no,

41:33

you can't. And then what are they

41:35

going to do? Try to get some kind of injunction? Alex, you're not

41:37

allowed to log into X then. That

41:40

makes no sense. I

41:42

don't even sure a favorable judge

41:45

and crackpot courts that

41:47

I believe. Alex Jones uses

41:49

X. The court says you are hereby banned

41:51

from using X and he says I'll do it anyway. Well,

41:54

we're going to hold you in contempt or something for violating

41:56

the order or I don't know how

41:58

they legally pull this off. And

42:00

thank God, by the way, that Elon understands

42:02

the importance of the legal here. I mean,

42:04

he has fought Australia on

42:07

their legal prohibitions in

42:09

one. He has entered the legal

42:11

battle against the Center for Countering Digital Hate

42:13

and against Media Matters and others. He has

42:15

a legal defense fund for people who get

42:17

fired from X. And so thank

42:20

God, I mean, in addition to the

42:22

free speech policies, the

42:24

actual economic resources behind

42:26

legal defense, we

42:29

are in as good a position as you could possibly pray

42:31

for to be able to take on something like

42:33

this. The issue is, is

42:35

at the end of the day, the justice system is

42:38

kind of the straight of Gibraltar.

42:40

It's this very narrow straight. And if you are

42:42

ordered by the court, at

42:45

that point, I could see hands

42:47

getting tied and it

42:50

comes down to judges in a world where

42:52

we just saw what the judges, what

42:55

our judges are doing to people like Donald Trump

42:57

in New York and what

43:00

they just did to so many other folks.

43:02

So the issue is when justice is politicized this

43:05

way and you have a

43:07

political figure like Alex Jones, law

43:09

almost doesn't exist in this country anymore. It

43:11

does seem like it's never ending. I don't think law

43:14

exists in this country. I

43:16

wonder too, you're pointing out that if Alex Jones is

43:18

what he's saying is true, they're going after his crew.

43:21

I mean, part of the issue is, you know, Alex

43:23

Jones might be able to make something else work, but

43:26

part of it is the Sandy Hook lawsuit

43:28

is sort of now being used to shut

43:31

down anyone else who's in his sphere, even though

43:33

they may or may not have been involved with

43:35

Infor at the time of the incident that kind

43:38

of set all of the conversations or whatever. And

43:40

that seems to me to be sort of creeping

43:44

judicial reach because ultimately

43:46

it's not about Sandy Hook anymore. It's

43:48

not about, you know, what was said

43:50

or not said or anything like that.

43:53

It's really about how can we strangle

43:55

and muzzle what's going on here, whether

43:57

or not we think that the people

43:59

who are. tangentially affected have any have

44:02

any actual influence over the situation

44:05

Think about this Donald Trump had corporate

44:08

bankruptcies. They could argue that

44:10

Donald Trump I mean he had multiple

44:12

corporate bankruptcies They could argue

44:14

that if Donald Trump used his personal

44:16

account to promote a Trump business Then

44:19

they can seize Donald Trump's accounts There's

44:21

the Bankruptcies whether

44:23

personal or corporate and again, this is the

44:26

an info wars bankruptcy. This is a corporate

44:28

bankruptcy proceeding a

44:30

Corporate bankruptcies happen all

44:32

the time every day if every

44:35

single time that happens the social

44:37

media account of the of the

44:39

individual officers or directors or

44:41

or you know Senior leadership

44:43

or even staffers are now in

44:45

play What this

44:47

opens up is a strategic field of

44:49

play for censorship operatives and for political

44:52

folks is just a brand new world

44:54

What's to stop John Doe from

44:56

starting a company called the war for information and

44:58

hiring Alex Jones as his host What

45:00

could they do about that? Someone

45:04

else starting at the company

45:06

and him him being a contractor not

45:08

even an employee He's a contractor

45:10

produces content when he feels like producing he gets paid 48,000 a year

45:14

It's a good question. I don't

45:16

know legally how that would work I

45:18

would presume that the that the lawyers

45:20

would make the argument that this is

45:22

a sort of deliberate evasion attempt They

45:24

would you know, they would probably probe

45:26

all communications in discovery or get some

45:29

sort of court-ordered subpoena To

45:31

see if there what you know to get the text

45:33

messages and emails to see if they were trying to

45:35

do a it's basically like Banavasion right in a so

45:37

I get it but think about what that means and

45:39

I'm not saying it's not gonna happen But that means

45:41

that a private business That

45:43

has done nothing wrong that seeks to enter

45:46

into a private contract with an individual

45:48

Completely outside of the scope of this

45:50

lawsuit will be targeted with federal harassment

45:55

I do not believe right now that there is

45:57

functioning law in the United States. We

45:59

have roving bans smashing up department stores and

46:01

stealing everything. You have people defecating all over

46:04

the streets in California. The Westfield Mall has

46:06

abandoned, the company abandoned their lease and some

46:08

of the two of the biggest hotels abandoned

46:10

their, I'm sorry, not their lease, their debts.

46:14

They, what is it, I forgot what

46:16

it's specifically called, but they surrendered.

46:20

They basically told the lender, you know what, it's

46:22

yours, we're out. Collateral is all yours,

46:24

we'll lose the money we have on this. We

46:26

are seeing just

46:29

insane levels of crime, corruption.

46:32

You've got the trials in New York, you've got the

46:34

Georgia trial, Fannie Wills. I mean, this is insane what's

46:36

happening in Georgia. Can we just break this down? They

46:39

go after Trump and his lawyers and

46:42

now the whole case is at risk of

46:44

being thrown out because the prosecutors, bang another

46:46

prosecutor she hired and it's thrown the whole

46:48

thing into a conflict of interest because they

46:51

are literally corrupt. And now you've got to

46:53

think, it's Wisconsin, right, that filed,

46:55

their AG filed charges against Trump's lawyers

46:57

again. The level of corruption

47:00

and extrajudicial attacks that are

47:02

happening. And I don't

47:04

understand why people tolerate it.

47:07

Like I don't understand why Alex

47:11

Jones or Donald Trump are just going like, well, I

47:13

guess I'm like, I don't

47:15

know what you do and I

47:17

don't have answers, but if like

47:19

a clown shut up to my doorstep demanding I

47:22

hand over all of my bananas, I'm going to

47:24

say, get off my property. It's

47:26

psychotic to assume that we

47:29

know what Georgia is doing is not within the

47:31

confines of the law. We know

47:33

what New York did was not within the confines of

47:35

the law. Fact. We

47:37

just have rogue police

47:39

officers pointing guns at people

47:42

and threatening them. Like

47:44

those cops in New York that are facilitating that

47:46

trial against Trump that facilitated those, they should all

47:48

be in prison. And heaven

47:50

forbid I ever get any kind

47:52

of political power because the first

47:54

thing I'm doing as president or

47:56

governor or whatever it might be

47:59

is All those

48:01

cops are the first to go to prison for the rest of their

48:03

lives. You are not acting

48:05

within the law. You have no authority under the

48:07

law. Just because a guy claims he's ordered you

48:09

to do it does not give you the authority

48:12

to do it and you have broken the law.

48:14

But unfortunately, Donald Trump goes

48:16

along with it. Real quick,

48:19

my argument for Trump was that he

48:21

should have told Georgia, he should have

48:23

told New York, you get a legitimate

48:25

claim to Florida, hand it

48:27

to Ron DeSantis, put it

48:29

on his desk, and I will talk to him

48:31

about whether this is an actual legal proceeding or

48:33

not. I'm really glad you brought that up

48:35

because I've been banging on, and

48:38

folks who follow me have seen me

48:40

tweet this every week, every month for

48:42

the past year, year and a half

48:44

now, which is that we effectively need

48:46

a kind of sanctuary state for

48:49

politically heterodox folks. And in particular,

48:51

something that I published about last

48:54

week, which I think if there are any state

48:56

assembly members listening right now,

48:58

I'm speaking directly to you, what

49:01

you can do right now in your state

49:03

assembly, if you are a state legislator in

49:05

Florida, in Texas, in Tennessee, in Arkansas, pick

49:07

your state. Amend

49:10

your malicious prosecution law. Every

49:12

state has a malicious prosecution law

49:15

that allows a civil action against

49:17

a prosecutor who brought the suit,

49:20

not in the interest of justice, but for a

49:22

political reason or a malicious reason, and

49:25

simply broaden that law to

49:27

apply it to out-of-state prosecutors who would

49:29

target an in-state citizen. So for example,

49:31

if you are a citizen of the

49:33

state of Florida, you simply say that

49:35

there is an in-state nexus to the

49:37

state of Florida when a Georgia prosecutor

49:39

or a New York prosecutor, now you

49:41

probably barred legally from doing this with

49:44

federal because it's a state, but

49:46

allow you to bring an

49:48

in-state action against Alvin Bragg,

49:50

against Fannie Willis for the

49:52

malicious prosecution of an in-state

49:54

person. This is effectively what

49:57

Florida and Texas have done with their social media laws.

50:00

that allow now a civil course

50:02

of action for certain censorship activities

50:05

under, now those laws are sort of being

50:07

chewed up in the appeals process currently, but

50:09

you can do the same thing for malicious

50:11

prosecution and allow Donald Trump to then sue

50:13

Alvin Bragg and Fannie Willis in front of

50:15

a Florida jury. And then we'll see if

50:17

the same outcome happens. I agree, I guess

50:19

the way you'd see it is, they

50:21

file the paperwork they say to Donald Trump. He says,

50:24

don't I don't care? You talk to

50:26

law enforcement in Florida, the moment they

50:29

say, this is legit, we say okay. Then

50:32

with the malicious prosecution laws, under

50:35

the law in Florida, Trump files and says, this

50:38

is an illegitimate case, Ron DeSantis and

50:40

the state police then say, we cannot go anywhere near

50:42

Trump. And this is a dispute between states that has

50:44

to go to the federal courts. What this would allow

50:46

is a parallel trial every time this happens. As

50:49

New York is doing this trial to New York, well,

50:51

guess what? Now New York's on trial in Florida under

50:54

a concurrent malicious prosecution case. And that first

50:56

of all makes these things very expensive for

50:59

the state to litigate. It

51:01

has liability for these New York offices.

51:03

It basically makes you a porcupine. So

51:05

if you wanna reach out of state

51:07

for it, well, there goes the money for the

51:09

New York prosecutors who don't make very much by the

51:11

way. This now makes the city

51:13

of New York or the state of New

51:15

York have to think about its own budget

51:17

before it goes after an out of state

51:19

person in a prosecutorial way. And

51:23

then it allows this concurrent ongoing trial for

51:25

all this evidence to come out in the

51:27

Florida trial about how rigged the ongoing New

51:29

York one is. So Level Design Operator in

51:31

chat said, Plee asked, that's

51:34

not the chat I'm looking for, but it was

51:36

Level Design Operator asking, what laws specifically were broken?

51:39

So the first thing we have is, and I

51:42

don't know the degree to which it's criminal. So

51:44

this is, Level Design Operator says, what

51:46

laws have they specifically broken in that

51:48

so-called lawfare endeavor? So this

51:50

is clearly malicious prosecution in a variety of

51:52

ways. We have multiple cases that are malicious

51:55

prosecution and I think any reasonable human being,

51:57

were it not for the culture won this

51:59

country in. in a hyper-polarized state could conclude

52:01

this. In New York, they

52:04

changed the law to allow people

52:06

to sue another person for sexual

52:08

assault claims after the statute of

52:10

limitations, but only for one year, only

52:12

this one small window. Trump instantly sued

52:15

on a 30-year-old claim that can't be

52:17

corroborated in any way, yet somehow a

52:19

jury still says yes to. Anybody

52:22

who followed that case and went through it knows

52:24

the story makes no sense. It's even been challenged

52:26

by people on CNN and

52:28

MSNBC as being weird and making

52:30

little sense. Then you have the

52:32

criminal fraud trial against Trump's organization,

52:34

which never committed fraud. They

52:37

claimed that because Trump's filings for

52:39

loans were incorrect, that's fraud, despite

52:41

the fact that each and every

52:43

one of those filings to the

52:45

banks had a disclaimer that the

52:47

information may be incorrect and requires

52:49

the due diligence of the lender.

52:51

The lenders, like Deutsche Bank said, we

52:54

recognize that, we did our due diligence.

52:56

We then told Trump his numbers were

52:58

wrong. We agreed to give him

53:00

a lesser amount towards the loan. Trump agreed,

53:02

we all made money from doing this. If

53:05

we could, we'd do business with him again. Still,

53:07

Trump found guilty of fraud. Kevin

53:10

O'Leary, a major real estate mogul,

53:12

said this is absolutely insane. No

53:15

one in New York is safe if this is

53:17

what they're doing. Then you get the latest hush

53:19

money trial. There's literally no direct evidence that Donald

53:21

Trump did anything with Stormy Daniels other

53:23

than he paid Cohen, who has lied

53:26

about everything. Cohen admitted to committing grand

53:28

larceny in stealing, they

53:30

say, at bare minimum, 60,000, but

53:33

under the defense's premise that Donald Trump had no

53:35

idea that Cohen took out a loan on his

53:38

own home to pay off Stormy Daniels of his

53:40

own volition. He didn't know that

53:42

was happening. That means Cohen stole $250,000, yet

53:47

they still criminally charge Trump for doing

53:49

this. Now, anyone who's run a business

53:51

knows it makes no

53:53

sense criminally to go after the CEO

53:56

for what underlings have done that he's

53:58

not even signing off on. You're

54:00

the CEO of a company. A mid-level manager says,

54:02

we're gonna pay this lawyer off. Then another manager

54:04

says, or your CFO says, pay them off. And

54:07

Trump's just like, sure, I'll sign the check. I

54:09

don't know, whatever, it's a legal fee. Then they

54:11

come back and say, you're criminally responsible for what

54:13

those guys did. None of

54:15

it makes any sense. But more importantly,

54:17

let's go to the malicious prosecution. Alvin

54:19

Bragg campaigns, I'm going to get Trump.

54:22

I believe, Latisha James as

54:24

well. You have, in the

54:26

Hush Money case, it is

54:28

a misdemeanor charge whose statute of

54:31

limitations expired years ago. Falsifying

54:33

business records, you're not bringing back up eight

54:35

years later, seven years later. They claim he

54:37

was trying to influence an election, but the

54:40

crime happened after he already won it. So

54:42

what did they do? They said, okay, but

54:44

if he falsified business records in furtherance of

54:46

a secondary crime, manipulating the election, then

54:49

we can upgrade it to a felony. 34,

54:51

in fact, for each time he signed a check. What

54:53

was that underlying crime? None of us know! Because

54:56

the judge said the jury doesn't have to unanimously

54:58

agree on any underlying crimes just that they think

55:00

something did occur and then Trump is guilty. Now

55:03

here's where it gets great. Here's the best part. I

55:06

could be wrong about this, but I would

55:08

assume that the very least, to be a reasonable person, there

55:12

are very rare circumstances in

55:14

the United States where a

55:16

prosecutor goes to a felony

55:18

suspect and says, if

55:20

you flip on this misdemeanor, we're

55:22

gonna let you off. You got

55:25

a guy who admitted on the stand

55:27

to committing grand larceny, stealing

55:29

tens of thousands of dollars, openly

55:31

admitted it, and they're like, no

55:33

charges. But if you help us

55:35

get this guy who falsified a business record, none

55:38

of it makes sense, and it is all

55:40

patently obvious, malicious prosecution. Now as to the

55:42

police officers who facilitate all of this, I

55:45

make no distinction and no excuses

55:47

for anyone just doing their job.

55:50

If you are the officer who

55:53

is kidnapping someone at gunpoint under

55:55

a perceived authority that does not

55:57

exist, heaven help you if

55:59

I'm... ever in charge of law enforcement in this

56:01

country. If I was the president, the FBI would bet each

56:03

and every one of their doors and they'd be like, you're

56:06

all going to prison. People

56:09

say, oh, that's so dictatorial. What? That

56:11

you don't allow cops to, I don't know, how

56:13

about CBP trafficking children on the border, which they're doing

56:15

and we know they're doing. It

56:18

is dictatorial to stop human trafficking,

56:20

to stop corrupt cops just doing

56:22

their jobs. That's the bare minimum

56:24

of what legal accountability is supposed

56:26

to be in this country. Well,

56:29

that's where we're currently at. So how are you guys doing? That's

56:32

an amazing rant. And again, to get

56:34

back to this state legislators watching,

56:36

anybody who knows a state legislator

56:38

watching, the beauty of this strategy

56:40

is simply expanding your malicious prosecutor

56:42

law, the malicious prosecution law in

56:45

your state is Tim's

56:47

rant right there is

56:49

presented to a jury and the jury simply

56:52

decides on the basis of a preponderance of

56:54

evidence standard, because this is a civil tort.

56:56

So all you need is a 51% likelihood

56:58

in the minds of the jury that

57:01

everything Tim just laid out there renders

57:03

it malicious. I wonder what it is. You

57:06

know, we're in this, we're at this point where if

57:09

New York accuses someone of a crime, Florida

57:12

just says, well, okay, complies,

57:15

no question, nothing. It

57:18

seems kind of strange to me. Yeah. I'm a resident

57:20

of West Virginia. Am I

57:22

supposed to assume that if Nebraska

57:24

accuses me of a crime, that my

57:26

own police will come and arrest me

57:28

without evidence because of another state claims

57:30

to have an indictment? I think

57:32

that's bunk. I think we need to move forward

57:35

with state protection for its residents or

57:37

perhaps it does exist. And I just don't

57:39

know. I'm not a lawyer. The issue is,

57:41

is I would be concerned and I don't

57:43

know the specific answer on this, on this

57:45

either. I would be concerned with that, that

57:47

because it's a, it's a dispute between states,

57:50

it would then make it a federal issue

57:52

and then federal marshals could come in and

57:54

supersede the state, which is why the sort

57:56

of malicious prosecution law strategy sort

57:58

of, uh, get gets around

58:00

that through all the costs imposed

58:02

on the prosecutors and on the

58:04

DA's office and on the state

58:06

budget. Because even if they

58:09

sort of seize the guy, so

58:11

to speak, they could be paying,

58:13

and again, uncapped

58:15

damages, punitive damages if

58:18

you want to throw it in, treble damages. So

58:20

that you're effectively bankrupting the

58:23

DA's office for going after it. And

58:25

again, especially a civil

58:27

trial tends to take less time. I

58:31

could see it having a huge deterrent effect,

58:33

even if you could not get around the

58:35

fact that the police, the federal marshals would

58:37

technically be able to take the person into

58:40

custody to Rikers. You're at least doing

58:43

that economic devastation in kind, which

58:45

is currently their strategy to try

58:47

to take out Trump. Because in

58:49

everything you just laid out, $500

58:51

million for Trump on, as you

58:54

mentioned, on the Mar-a-Lago

58:56

valuation case, $100 million

58:59

on the defamation case. They

59:01

claimed Mar-a-Lago was worth $18 million. The

59:04

toilet seat's worth $18 million. Anybody who

59:06

has driven past Mar-a-Lago knows it's worth

59:08

more than $18 million. Not

59:11

a question. They

59:13

are clearly lying. And

59:16

again, Trump should

59:18

put it on Aranda Santas's desk. The

59:20

great thing, though, about that, too,

59:22

is that selective prosecution, because everything

59:24

you just said during your

59:28

Academy Award speech on all the ways

59:30

they dicked over Trump there, is

59:33

they had the exact same fact pattern

59:35

with the Hillary Clinton FEC violation, but

59:38

they didn't do it. This selective prosecution

59:40

is malicious. But

59:43

having a legal hook to that in-state allows

59:46

you to highlight that selective prosecution. Instead

59:48

of just whining in the press, oh,

59:50

these people are hypocrites, now

59:52

you get to hit them back in the piggy bank,

59:54

which is where it really hurts. In

59:56

this issue, I will say Donald Trump volunteered himself

59:59

to New York. went along

1:00:01

with this. I don't believe he was

1:00:03

ever grabbed by police and forced to

1:00:05

do anything. He's not even been held

1:00:07

in jail or anything yet. Should

1:00:09

that be the case that he is given house

1:00:12

arrest or anything,

1:00:14

then we're talking some very serious

1:00:16

crimes in my opinion. Illigitimate

1:00:18

authority. I do not respect

1:00:21

the idea that cops just get to

1:00:23

dictate something for no reason, not reality.

1:00:25

And I reject it outright. So

1:00:28

there's too many conservatives who are like back the

1:00:30

blue no matter who. And I'm like, not if

1:00:32

they're communists. Communists join the

1:00:34

police forces. You got them in the West Coast.

1:00:37

You got them in Washington and Oregon. I'm not

1:00:39

going to back the blue. People are people. You

1:00:41

need legitimate legal authority if you're going to take

1:00:43

actions. Now, when it comes to

1:00:45

Georgia, I said Trump should stay

1:00:48

in Florida and say this is not legitimate.

1:00:50

I believe it should be challenged to the federal

1:00:52

courts. There's an election going on. They're interfering. And

1:00:54

let the federal courts decide. I

1:00:57

just don't know if the state of New York could

1:00:59

then call in the federal marshals. And

1:01:01

I think the justice to put it on DeSantis's desk. Ron

1:01:04

DeSantis then gets the choice to be the

1:01:06

man who ordered the arrest of Donald Trump,

1:01:10

or he can be the man who said this must be settled in the

1:01:12

courts and you will not enter my state. Yeah,

1:01:14

it's interesting. It's sort of a sequel to

1:01:16

the standoff that Texas had around

1:01:19

the border situation. And that

1:01:23

would test the limits of

1:01:25

federalism. But what

1:01:28

we're seeing is Democrat

1:01:30

corrupt forces screaming

1:01:32

at the top of their lungs and chasing

1:01:35

Republicans and the Republicans are running full speed

1:01:37

away. And I have to wonder if at

1:01:39

any point the Republicans were to turn around

1:01:41

and scream back, the Democrats might stop where

1:01:43

they're standing. If they try

1:01:45

to send in, if they accuse Trump of

1:01:47

a crime, which is beyond a statute of

1:01:50

limitations, has no underlying crime toward its upgrade,

1:01:53

and then say Trump's wanted in New

1:01:55

York and then Trump says it's clearly

1:01:57

illegitimate, even CNN called it an illegitimate

1:01:59

case. I don't recognize it. Trump could

1:02:01

come out and say, I'll tell you this. Fareed

1:02:04

Zakaria went on CNN and said this is

1:02:06

not, this would not be brought against anybody

1:02:08

else, this case. So I

1:02:10

think that's the barometer for the American public to recognize

1:02:12

is an illegitimate use of authority. So here's what I'll

1:02:14

do. New York can send their

1:02:17

paperwork to the governor's office of Florida who

1:02:19

can discuss it. And if they make the determination this

1:02:22

is a legitimate case, I'll abide by it. And

1:02:24

if they say it's illegitimate, then I expect it

1:02:26

to be recognized the same as everyone else recognizes

1:02:28

CNN. Well, actually, well, that's

1:02:30

sort of the sanctuary state idea that I

1:02:33

was outlining before the malicious prosecution one. Cause

1:02:35

I think both of these can work in

1:02:37

tandem and legislatures should adopt both. But that

1:02:39

essentially creates an in-state political

1:02:42

test. Essentially you can bring in

1:02:45

action in state for a

1:02:47

determination about, you know, whether you qualify

1:02:49

to essentially be a sanctuary in the

1:02:51

same way that, you know, California and

1:02:53

all these different blue states have sort

1:02:55

of become these sanctuary states that have

1:02:58

a unique set of laws that protect

1:03:00

illegal immigrants. Then

1:03:02

that would be interesting because that might provide

1:03:05

a countervailing force to the

1:03:07

threat of bringing in the federal marshals because

1:03:09

now you have a state

1:03:11

law that protects that person

1:03:15

because of, you know, but that would start

1:03:17

to get into interesting issues there. But I see

1:03:19

that essentially being a sanctuary state for political dissidents.

1:03:22

So I suppose that the question is this,

1:03:24

right? So the other night I said to Matt Gaetz,

1:03:27

at what point do red state AG

1:03:29

secretary of state, governors or whatever, start

1:03:32

demanding criminal accountability from

1:03:35

the Democrats that are engaging these things? And he

1:03:37

said, is that really what we want? Extrajudicial, you

1:03:40

know, retribution or whatever. And I never said that.

1:03:43

I'm saying people are committing crimes. We

1:03:45

need people to be held accountable for it.

1:03:48

Hillary Clinton's campaign was accused of a lot

1:03:50

of impropriety. She was accused of destruction of

1:03:52

records. I have to wonder, her campaign operated

1:03:54

in a bunch of different states, right? Couldn't

1:03:57

any one of those states go after Hillary Clinton

1:04:00

who worked with her, they could. I joked about this the

1:04:02

other day. There was the

1:04:04

whole Whitewater scandal with the Clintons and Arkansas. That's

1:04:06

a red state. Arkansas State Assembly

1:04:08

could turn around tomorrow, change the statute of

1:04:10

limitations the same way that New York changed

1:04:13

the statute and bring up all their Hillary

1:04:15

Clinton crimes from the 1990s. Or

1:04:18

any one of those circumstances with Joe Biden.

1:04:21

Any one of these states could

1:04:23

do exactly what New York is doing and say, national

1:04:26

records are state-level jurisdiction

1:04:28

now. We hereby declare

1:04:31

it. Underdeed business and taxes. Yeah.

1:04:34

Taxes could do it. They won't. They

1:04:36

won't. So what's gonna happen? Corrupt federal

1:04:38

forces and Democrat forces are going to

1:04:41

keep mercilessly, politically, beating

1:04:43

people like Donald Trump and

1:04:46

it won't stop. I'm not even

1:04:48

convinced, you know, one of the

1:04:51

theories I suppose people are bringing up is that Joe Biden's gonna lose. They

1:04:54

know he's gonna lose. The focus right now

1:04:56

is winning in Congress and in the

1:04:58

Senate. And when you

1:05:00

look at the polling, this is interesting. I pulled

1:05:02

up the polling and I asked our good friend,

1:05:05

chat GPT, based on current polling trends, what

1:05:07

its projection was for the presidency. Trump

1:05:10

wins, interesting. What about the Senate and the

1:05:12

House? Chat GPT in

1:05:14

numerous different simulations predicted

1:05:17

the Democrats will take the Senate and the House. Should

1:05:20

that be the case, expect everyone to

1:05:22

be in prison. Donald Trump will

1:05:24

be president, powerless, concrete strapped

1:05:26

to his ankles, thrown in the water, and

1:05:28

he'll be impeached in two seconds. Then they're gonna

1:05:31

start locking up everybody else. Bannon will go to

1:05:33

prison again, you name it. They're just

1:05:35

gonna start locking everybody up because Republicans do nothing

1:05:37

and don't care. Well,

1:05:40

it'll be interesting actually, we might know

1:05:42

next week as early about how far Republicans

1:05:44

are going to go because I

1:05:47

feel on most things, the same

1:05:49

way you just identified, there

1:05:51

have been some heartening

1:05:53

things, especially recently. So finally, and this

1:05:55

should have been done two years ago,

1:05:58

frankly, but there was

1:06:00

a... contempt motion that passed the house

1:06:02

against Merrick Garland. They found

1:06:04

him guilty of contempt and for the same

1:06:06

crime that that for the

1:06:08

air for the same actions that no less

1:06:10

than Merrick Garland himself locked up Steve Bannon

1:06:12

and and and Navarro for Peter

1:06:15

Navarro for which was defying a congressional

1:06:19

subpoena, a congressional committee subpoena for

1:06:21

the same reason Merrick

1:06:24

Garland is citing the defense that he

1:06:26

invalidated for Bannon and Navarro and

1:06:28

there's my understanding is that

1:06:30

representative Anna Polina Luna has actually

1:06:35

committed that I

1:06:37

think there's going to be a sort of final final

1:06:40

floor vote on the, on the, on the resolution, I

1:06:42

believe on June 25th and that there

1:06:46

are recourse. There's, there's two forms of

1:06:48

recourse. One is the justice department honors

1:06:52

the, the contempt act and

1:06:55

effectively, you know, take

1:06:57

takes action against him through the justice department

1:06:59

path. The other one, if the justice department

1:07:02

defies Congress, and of course it's

1:07:04

Merrick Garland's justice department. So, you know, that's

1:07:06

going to be rigged. But the other option

1:07:08

is there's technically a rule that he can

1:07:10

be immediately arrested by the house acting sergeant

1:07:13

at arms. And so Republicans

1:07:15

technically have the chance to

1:07:17

do that exact thing, effectively

1:07:20

have Merrick Garland be

1:07:22

placed in prison the same way

1:07:24

Merrick Garland, for the same crime

1:07:26

as Merrick Garland placed Steve Bannon

1:07:28

last week, you know, in, in,

1:07:30

or in prison or sense, you know, sentence, ordered

1:07:33

him to order to, yep. And so that is,

1:07:35

we will know on June 25th or 23rd whether

1:07:37

or not there's still fight left in, uh,

1:07:43

in Republicans in Congress. But the overall problem

1:07:45

is that Republicans fail to wield power when

1:07:47

they have the opportunity. And I can't really

1:07:50

quite understand why that is. Why, why does

1:07:52

that happen? Well, there is a kind of

1:07:54

Achilles heel to the inherent philosophy of the

1:07:56

limited government types, which

1:07:59

is that, you know, You know, the idea

1:08:01

that government should be small, that

1:08:03

the private sector should be the

1:08:07

lion's share of what American activity involves,

1:08:10

effectively makes state

1:08:13

action an inherent evil unto

1:08:15

itself almost doctrinally.

1:08:19

And so the act of wielding government

1:08:21

power sort of, and

1:08:23

this is something that I think is beginning

1:08:25

to change. There was this kind of strain,

1:08:30

I think, around free

1:08:33

enterprise, limited government republicanism

1:08:36

that was more true when the Chamber

1:08:38

of Commerce was completely republican. The

1:08:41

Chamber of Commerce, our major blue

1:08:43

chip companies, basically from Truman until

1:08:45

Trump, were all republican. It was

1:08:47

basically the main support

1:08:49

system that republicans had against the

1:08:52

democrats who controlled the unions, the

1:08:54

universities, the entertainment industry, the media.

1:08:57

The counter pressure from that was that republicans controlled

1:08:59

big corporations, or at least they were backed by

1:09:01

it. They had that donor support

1:09:03

and that political support, but that changed in

1:09:06

the Trump era. A lot of that has

1:09:08

to do with Trump's nationalist policies and

1:09:10

his perceived war on globalism. These

1:09:13

are all globalist companies where the

1:09:15

lion's share of their business is

1:09:17

done in foreign countries, foreign markets

1:09:20

for exports, foreign labor for their

1:09:22

manufacturing. And so they

1:09:24

preferred a sort of Bush-Biden globalist

1:09:27

president type. They shifted, that actually,

1:09:29

I think, ushered in this kind

1:09:31

of coinciding reformation of a

1:09:33

lot of current republican, sort of

1:09:35

reforming right now around this idea

1:09:38

that actually we shouldn't

1:09:42

fear state action as much as we

1:09:44

used to. This free enterprise thing has

1:09:46

basically created this tyranny that we're talking

1:09:49

about. The balance has to be restored.

1:09:52

What do you think the odds are that the republicans

1:09:54

can retake the Senate during

1:09:56

the election? Tim was chat GBT

1:09:58

say on that. At who could what

1:10:01

we take the Senate like what are the odds Republicans

1:10:03

get control when I when I asked jet GPT

1:10:06

based on current polling trends Polling

1:10:08

and trends. It's a Democrats will take both. It's

1:10:11

interesting because that's like why I mean I don't know if

1:10:13

you want to pull up this story, but 270

1:10:15

to win has Republicans favored to Right

1:10:18

now it's it's Republicans to lose there's

1:10:21

two seats that are toss-ups and Republicans

1:10:23

are expected to take 50 seats and

1:10:27

They're there two toss-ups. So it may go 52 to 48 so

1:10:31

this is why I think Larry Trump's endorsement

1:10:33

of layer Hogan is so interesting because there's

1:10:36

the argument that Theoretically Larry Hogan was I

1:10:38

don't know if I'm jumping ahead but There

1:10:41

Hogan was such a popular governor that

1:10:43

he could potentially deliver Maryland. Yeah, we'll

1:10:45

pull the story up So we had

1:10:47

this from a Politico Trump supports Hogan Senate

1:10:50

bid after conviction comment Trump support

1:10:52

for Hogan could end up hurting the former

1:10:54

two-term governor hurting him, huh? Maybe

1:10:56

that was the real play so

1:10:59

Hogan's awful anybody lived in Maryland.

1:11:02

Well, not anybody he clearly won elections, but

1:11:04

we don't like him. He's trash He

1:11:07

says all Americans he said he

1:11:09

would urge all Americans to respect Trump's guilty verdict in

1:11:11

New York Hush money case I'd

1:11:13

like to see him win. I think it's

1:11:15

a good chance to win I know other people made some strong statements, but

1:11:17

I can just say from my standpoint I'm all about the party and

1:11:20

I'm about the country and I'd like to see

1:11:22

him win Trump told Fox News Aisha

1:11:24

Hasney in an interview that has yet to air

1:11:27

Hogan drew the wrath of former presidents team after he

1:11:29

refused to defend Trump following his conviction on May 30th

1:11:32

You just ended your campaign. I

1:11:34

hope so Hogan's terrible. I Mean,

1:11:36

I can't I don't even understand how he wins in Maryland I

1:11:39

mean, he just has long-standing support in Maryland He

1:11:41

just you know, he was previously the governor people

1:11:44

for whatever reason really like him I don't think

1:11:46

he's you know, the Republican that Trump's

1:11:49

Republicans like but again it to me It's

1:11:51

interesting that Trump is signaling that he would

1:11:53

back Hogan for the Senate bid because if

1:11:55

you can get you know If you can

1:11:57

oust the Democrat in Ohio and you can

1:12:00

the Democrat Montana and you can pick

1:12:02

up Maryland, then you can theoretically tip

1:12:04

the Senate in your favor. And I

1:12:06

think that signals a level

1:12:08

of strategic thinking from the Trump campaign in

1:12:10

terms of they want to have a really

1:12:12

effective win and they want to go in

1:12:14

as strong as they can be. Because I

1:12:16

think you're right there, there are institutions that

1:12:18

Republicans control historically that they have lost. And

1:12:20

it's sort of the argument

1:12:22

of what can really regain the fastest

1:12:24

to be able to shift the boat

1:12:26

in a favorable direction without having to

1:12:28

hit these constant blockades. The fact

1:12:31

that we have to look to the,

1:12:33

you know, when we held Mayorkas in

1:12:35

contempt or we wanted to impeach Mayorkas, it just

1:12:37

died because we know the Senate is never going

1:12:40

to do anything about it. It's all of these

1:12:42

institutions that I think we're trying to find a

1:12:44

real, I think, I think conservatives are trying to

1:12:46

find a realignment for it and able to become

1:12:49

productive should Trump win in November. I'm

1:12:51

curious, are we able to look

1:12:53

up who Larry Hogan's biggest financial

1:12:56

campaign contributors are? Like is, you

1:12:59

know, who, which industries and yes,

1:13:03

perhaps individuals contribute the most

1:13:05

to Larry Hogan campaign. Let's

1:13:07

see if Che G.P. can find it.

1:13:10

Who is the largest campaign

1:13:12

contributor to Larry Hogan? Yeah, like

1:13:14

top five or something like that.

1:13:16

Top five, top 10. Normally

1:13:19

you'd have to search like Open

1:13:22

Secrets or something. And the

1:13:24

largest campaign contributor to Larry Hogan comes from

1:13:26

individual contributions. Okay. Hogan's campaign

1:13:29

over all race 3.1. Let's do this. Outside

1:13:32

of individuals. $3 million.

1:13:35

Who gave the most from

1:13:39

FVC.gov. Okay. Outside

1:13:41

of individual contributions. Other

1:13:45

committees. It doesn't actually

1:13:47

say. Okay. Well, one of

1:13:49

the things I find interesting about this

1:13:51

is that the tango dance that Trump

1:13:53

has to do to keep his, you

1:13:56

know, his friends close and his enemy, his

1:13:58

enemies closer. I think back

1:14:01

a lot to something

1:14:03

that I think Tucker Carlson revealed

1:14:06

that when Trump was considering that Trump

1:14:09

had called him, I don't know if

1:14:11

I'm recalling this story 100% accurately, but

1:14:14

I remember it being reported somewhere that Tucker

1:14:17

said that before Trump bombed Syria

1:14:20

in, I think it was early 2018, that

1:14:24

Trump had called Tucker and asked for

1:14:26

his opinion on it. And Tucker said,

1:14:28

don't do it. It's insane. It's warmongering.

1:14:31

And then Tucker

1:14:33

asked Trump, well, what do you think you're going to

1:14:35

do? And Trump said, I think I'm going to do

1:14:37

it. And I remember

1:14:39

that there was some suggestion that Trump didn't

1:14:41

necessarily want to do it, but he was

1:14:44

under a lot of pressure from the Russiagate

1:14:46

Mueller investigation, which at that

1:14:49

point, people thought Trump might be arrested by Bob

1:14:51

Mueller in the Russiagate thing. And that

1:14:54

Trump felt a need to

1:14:56

make sure that Republicans in his

1:14:59

own party in Congress who were

1:15:02

prone to war, who

1:15:04

were prone to maximum pressure on Russia, would

1:15:08

be on his side on Russiagate

1:15:10

because he was doing what they

1:15:12

wanted on Syria. And I look

1:15:14

at this Larry Hogan situation, and

1:15:17

I can't help but suspect a

1:15:19

kind of similar political

1:15:21

calculus. So I was

1:15:23

finally able to figure it out after asking several questions.

1:15:26

So Better Path Forward PAC

1:15:30

is one of the leading PACs. And then it

1:15:32

mentions other committees. I said, who is the biggest

1:15:34

PAC donors? Robert Smith, a private

1:15:36

equity firm executive, and Jeffrey Lurie, an

1:15:38

NFL team owner, among

1:15:41

other contributors. So whatever.

1:15:43

I don't know. Private equity. I'd

1:15:45

be curious what industries that

1:15:47

private equity firm specializes

1:15:50

in, for example, because what

1:15:52

that would reveal to me is, is

1:15:54

it military? Is it the Carlyle group?

1:15:57

Is it energy? Is it oil and

1:15:59

gas? You know, is it

1:16:01

software data and technology enabled businesses?

1:16:04

OK, interesting. According to

1:16:06

the FEC dot gov. Yeah. Yeah,

1:16:11

he's also the lead singer of the Cure. What?

1:16:14

Oh, I. That's

1:16:17

a different one. All right, let's

1:16:19

see. I asked I asked Chet

1:16:22

GPT. OK, so right now the I

1:16:24

asked it based on the current trends. So

1:16:26

this is not a simulation or a prediction.

1:16:29

This is Chet GPT's analysis of

1:16:31

pundits. Republicans are expected to secure

1:16:34

222 seats. Democrats

1:16:36

are expected to win 213 right now. They'll

1:16:40

have a narrow majority. So what I had

1:16:42

done before is I actually asked Chet GPT

1:16:45

Chet GPT not just to look at polls,

1:16:49

but to look at individual districts and

1:16:52

changes in population, changes

1:16:54

in youth vote, youth vote expected turnout.

1:16:57

When you added all of these things together, it

1:16:59

said Democrats will end up winning. When

1:17:01

you ask it based on the latest polling

1:17:04

who's going to win, it says Republicans win. But I

1:17:06

don't know that that's a sufficient analysis. I

1:17:08

think you need to look at immigration, which has been massive. And

1:17:11

we need we need to factor in. And I

1:17:13

said based on immigration numbers, based

1:17:15

on youth vote turnout and in

1:17:18

in country interest,

1:17:20

interest, intra intra

1:17:23

state migration or interstate migration. It

1:17:26

said Democrats win. Interesting.

1:17:28

Yep. And then it's going to be

1:17:30

a wild ride. I mean, right now,

1:17:33

having the House, I mean, as

1:17:35

much. As

1:17:37

much criticism, I

1:17:39

think that is completely owed

1:17:43

and due to Republicans in Congress, there

1:17:46

actually has been a fair amount

1:17:48

of really incredible things

1:17:51

that folks in the House

1:17:53

have done that I did not think were

1:17:55

politically possible a couple of years ago. I mean, even

1:17:57

think about the fact that we have a Senate subcommittee.

1:18:00

to investigate the origins of COVID-19. To

1:18:03

even ask that question was

1:18:05

to not be

1:18:07

allowed to have a social media account a

1:18:10

couple of years ago. We have this

1:18:12

weaponization subcommittee, which has subpoenaed everybody under

1:18:14

the sun, done a lot of damage

1:18:16

to a lot of malign actors, as

1:18:20

they like to say. And

1:18:24

the January 6th committee was because

1:18:27

Democrats, because again, the

1:18:29

role of that majority is not just in

1:18:31

getting bills done, it's that

1:18:33

all the committees flip. And so

1:18:36

the entire subject of investigation

1:18:40

turns on essentially a one

1:18:42

vote majority. And this is what we're

1:18:44

actually seeing, is one of the scandals

1:18:46

of the George Santos situation and

1:18:49

others, but a lot of the momentum

1:18:51

that we have right now on a lot of fronts, because

1:18:53

even when Brazil came after Elon

1:18:55

and the House Foreign Affairs Committee sort

1:18:58

of leapt to his defense. And even

1:19:00

right now, even as we speak

1:19:03

today, there was a whole hearing on

1:19:06

Merrick Garland's abuse of the Justice

1:19:09

Department, where all of the facts

1:19:11

about Steve Bannon and Peter Navarro

1:19:13

were publicly aired, and that provides

1:19:15

media cycles, that

1:19:18

provides an important signal to folks in

1:19:20

the private sector, folks like Elon Musk,

1:19:22

folks like David Sachs and Chamath and

1:19:24

other Silicon Valley types, that Congress

1:19:26

will have your back if you

1:19:28

are honest and act with integrity.

1:19:31

There will be investigations, it will be

1:19:33

legitimized by the People's Assembly. And

1:19:36

the idea that like literally

1:19:38

just a couple of seats in

1:19:41

a random state could

1:19:44

flip, could end all of the

1:19:46

ongoing committees and immediately

1:19:48

flip them to the same

1:19:50

Justice Department that is imprisoning

1:19:53

everyone, yeah,

1:19:55

I would agree with Tim's assessment, that is like a, that's

1:19:57

a pretty terrifying thought. Just

1:20:00

because Trump is ahead doesn't mean that everything's

1:20:02

going to swing Republican

1:20:04

or that the Republicans who win will even do anything.

1:20:08

Yeah. I mean, the main issue is

1:20:10

the Republican Civil War though, because Trump

1:20:13

inherited a Republican House

1:20:16

and a Republican Senate when he came into office

1:20:18

after the 2016 election, but he was

1:20:22

screwed over by Paul Ryan. He was

1:20:25

screwed over by his own party because

1:20:27

of the GOP Civil War between the

1:20:29

globalist half of Congress,

1:20:32

which is funded by the

1:20:35

large multinational corporations and financial

1:20:37

firms, which is

1:20:39

basically invested in the military industrial complex

1:20:41

and the oil and gas industry and

1:20:43

the chamber of commerce types. And then

1:20:46

you have this sort of nationalist populist

1:20:48

faction. And until that

1:20:50

Civil War is resolved one

1:20:52

way or the other, the Republican Party

1:20:54

is going to sort of constantly, it's

1:20:57

going to constantly lose to the Democrat Party

1:20:59

on political issues because whatever

1:21:02

your issue, one wedge of the

1:21:04

GOP can be turned against the

1:21:06

other to create a Democrat majority

1:21:08

with the holdouts from the warring

1:21:11

factions. Let's jump to this story. Ladies

1:21:13

and gentlemen, it may be the apocalypse. Saudi

1:21:16

Arabia's petrodollar deal with the US

1:21:19

expires with no new agreement in

1:21:21

place. A petrodollar agreement

1:21:23

with the United States and Saudi Arabia has expired. As

1:21:26

per reports, the Gulf nation has decided not to renew the

1:21:28

deal that expired on June 9th. The

1:21:30

move can be seen as a global finance

1:21:32

paradigm shift from the USD as a reserve

1:21:35

currency. The termination of the deal

1:21:37

may also have implications and consequences for America. The

1:21:40

50 year old agreement has had significant

1:21:42

geopolitical and economic implications. It acted as

1:21:44

a catalyst in shaping the global energy

1:21:46

market and influencing international relations. The

1:21:49

petrodollar system was signed in 1974 as

1:21:52

a result of a bilateral agreement between the US and Saudi

1:21:54

Arabia. Both nations decided to price

1:21:56

and trade oil in US dollars. With

1:21:59

oil standardization. in terms of dollars, every

1:22:01

country purchasing oil from Saudi Arabia would be required

1:22:03

to pay in dollars. Several

1:22:05

other oil producing countries also began to

1:22:08

standardize their oil pricing in US dollars,

1:22:10

which gave push to the petrodollar system.

1:22:14

Well, ladies and gentlemen, what does this mean for you? The

1:22:17

United States produces very little. The

1:22:19

only reason the US economy is as

1:22:22

good as it is relative to other nations is

1:22:24

that we have global empire. We point

1:22:26

guns at other people, we take them over and remove

1:22:28

their leaders. Saudi Arabia getting off

1:22:30

the petrodollar deal likely means they're going to

1:22:32

start trading in other currencies as well, which

1:22:34

means no one has any reason to buy

1:22:36

US dollars. The way it worked is rather simple.

1:22:39

If a country will just call it country

1:22:43

A. How about free Damastan?

1:22:46

We'll call it free Damastan. They want oil. What do

1:22:48

they have to do? They have to

1:22:51

trade free Damastani currency for US

1:22:53

dollars first, then buy

1:22:55

oil in US dollars. There's

1:22:57

faster ways of transacting and doing the

1:23:00

flip, but basically this means the for

1:23:02

Damastani currency must be strong. The nation

1:23:04

typically has to maintain higher exports than

1:23:06

imports, selling more than they're buying so

1:23:08

that their buying power

1:23:10

stays strong and they can buy oil for their

1:23:12

country. The United States doesn't do that.

1:23:15

The United States just creates currency upon the

1:23:17

issuance of debt and then buys oil with

1:23:19

it. Now, if the Biden administration

1:23:22

or anyone else just buys a ton of oil

1:23:24

by printing money and producing debt, then you'll get

1:23:26

inflation. This means something

1:23:28

magical is about to happen. It

1:23:30

means if the petrodollar

1:23:32

system breaks, the economy will

1:23:34

likely implode and you will all

1:23:37

find your standard of living miserable.

1:23:40

The US does not produce enough to maintain

1:23:42

a strong currency. It's the petrodollar that allows

1:23:45

the currency to be strong. That

1:23:47

is, what does the US produce? Dollars.

1:23:49

What are dollars good for? Buying oil.

1:23:51

Not anymore. So now why is anyone

1:23:53

going to buy dollars? They're not. So the value of

1:23:55

the dollar is going to start sinking. Your buying power

1:23:57

is going to collapse. Good luck. I have no answer.

1:24:00

I'm not an economist. I

1:24:02

find this to be one of the most

1:24:04

fascinating things to happen. The

1:24:08

decision tree spiral from this

1:24:10

is, first of all, let it be said

1:24:12

that this would never have happened under Donald

1:24:14

Trump. Saudi Arabia

1:24:17

loved, loved, loved Donald Trump,

1:24:19

and they hated, hated, hated the

1:24:22

second half of the Obama administration

1:24:24

and Joe Biden. A

1:24:27

lot of this comes down to the fact that

1:24:30

Saudi Arabia has been essentially

1:24:32

our vassal in

1:24:34

the Middle East for oil and

1:24:38

the economics of that for a

1:24:41

century, effectively. I

1:24:44

heard something really interesting by Snowden on a Joe

1:24:46

Rogan interview a few years ago, and I've been

1:24:48

meaning to go back and track down the clip

1:24:51

because I can't get it out of my head when

1:24:53

I see this, which is that Snowden

1:24:56

let slip, and I don't know

1:24:59

where he got this information or

1:25:01

how strongly he was suggesting that

1:25:04

this was true, but in

1:25:08

one of his, I think, two Joe Rogan appearances,

1:25:11

he appeared to insinuate

1:25:13

that Saudi intelligence had

1:25:15

awareness that

1:25:18

Khashoggi was involved in a

1:25:21

US sort of color,

1:25:23

in organizing a kind of

1:25:25

US-backed coup of the Saudi

1:25:27

government, and that that was

1:25:29

part of the calculus of

1:25:31

their assassination in

1:25:34

the embassy of Khashoggi. I

1:25:37

find that to be really interesting because

1:25:39

Obama really alienated Saudi Arabia with the

1:25:41

Iran deal. By

1:25:43

opening up Iran's oil and gas

1:25:45

exports, it effectively makes

1:25:48

Iran a regional

1:25:50

rival to Saudi Arabia whose entire

1:25:52

economy revolves on their regional energy

1:25:54

dominance, and Iran actually has, I

1:25:57

believe, more gross, expensive,

1:26:00

Exploitable oil and gas then

1:26:02

Saudi Arabia if they were allowed to export to

1:26:04

full capacity and the Obama administration Opening

1:26:07

them up and partnering with them through the

1:26:09

through the Iran deal brought Saudi

1:26:11

Arabia and Israel Into

1:26:13

a joint. This is actually sort of the the

1:26:16

roots of the Abraham Accords, which is that The

1:26:19

the Biden administration the Obama administration with

1:26:22

the Iran deal in in 2015 by

1:26:25

building up Iran and Qatar by proxy

1:26:28

they were Effectively creating a

1:26:30

security threat to Israel because that money

1:26:32

would go to pay for Hamas and

1:26:34

Hezbollah and an economic threat to Saudi

1:26:36

Arabia Because now they

1:26:38

are they would only they'd lose a huge amount

1:26:40

of their market share because now there'd be all this

1:26:42

Iranian oil and then it would drive down the price

1:26:45

of the oil that they do sell because you

1:26:47

have all this new supply on The market and

1:26:49

so this basically put Israel and

1:26:51

Saudi Arabia into a partnership for

1:26:53

the first time in decades Which

1:26:56

was brokered by the Trump administration the first act

1:26:58

if you remember that Trump did when he took

1:27:00

office was to kill that I This that

1:27:02

Iran energy deal and so MBS

1:27:04

and Saudi Arabia Loved

1:27:06

Trump and then immediately went hostile on

1:27:09

Biden and I can't help You

1:27:11

know if if part of that has to

1:27:13

do with the current policies that

1:27:15

the Biden administration have on Iran the

1:27:17

back the back door Iran

1:27:20

deal they effectively have allowing China to have this

1:27:22

400 billion dollar Oil

1:27:25

and gas deal with Iran evading the sanctions

1:27:27

while hunter was actually partnered with the

1:27:30

Chinese energy company doing that And

1:27:32

then you have well, I mean years Same

1:27:35

company, but this is you know, but this hunter five

1:27:37

five six years ago, and then you

1:27:39

have you know I

1:27:41

can't help but think that Saudi Arabia sees

1:27:44

the trajectory of the United States under

1:27:47

a sort of permanent Biden government

1:27:49

as being something that's going to coup Saudi Arabia from

1:27:52

the inside and bankrupt them from

1:27:54

the outside and so they are now

1:27:56

breaking this this 50 year, you know

1:27:58

this 50 year penalty and saying, listen,

1:28:00

you're gonna sink and we're

1:28:02

gonna partner with China and they're gonna be our new

1:28:04

US big daddy. Joe

1:28:08

Biden is not inspiring confidence in everybody, in

1:28:11

anybody, and so I can't imagine

1:28:13

anybody's going to think, imagine

1:28:17

you wanna go start a business with someone, you

1:28:20

wanna enter into a contract with someone, let's say you wanna make a

1:28:22

comic book, and you need a guy who can, I don't know,

1:28:25

come up with ideas, you're a great artist, and

1:28:27

then you meet Joe Biden. You gonna do

1:28:29

a deal with him? It's

1:28:32

actually great you bring that up, because

1:28:34

just today, it was announced at the

1:28:37

G7 summit, that

1:28:40

the US Treasury is going forward

1:28:42

with this plan to fund Ukraine

1:28:45

with frozen Russian assets. That's right,

1:28:47

yeah. So

1:28:50

we've always, just

1:28:52

sort of putting on the State Department hat

1:28:54

here, we've always made the argument that you

1:28:56

should invest in the United States instead of

1:28:58

China, because hey, China's an autocratic government, you

1:29:00

never know if your investment's gonna be safe,

1:29:02

because any day the CCP could just nationalize

1:29:04

your company, take all your assets, haven't

1:29:07

really done it before, but the looming

1:29:09

threat of it, because of the way

1:29:11

their system works, is always the sort

1:29:13

of Damocles hanging above you. So Brazil,

1:29:16

you should be using R phones instead

1:29:18

of Huawei, you should be using Amazon

1:29:20

instead of Alibaba, you should be investing

1:29:22

your assets on US territory,

1:29:24

instead of in Chinese territory, and

1:29:26

now the State Department and the

1:29:28

Treasury have just done the big,

1:29:31

bad, you know, apocalypse

1:29:34

claim, we've always been

1:29:36

saying for like 30 years now that

1:29:39

China might do someday, and that's the reason

1:29:41

they're bad. It's the same thing with the

1:29:43

prosecutions, where they're saying, you know, oh,

1:29:45

Trump is threatening to prosecute people while

1:29:48

they're actually doing it, but they made

1:29:50

a deal under our legal system as

1:29:52

it existed at the time. Like

1:29:54

the Russians, hate the Russians, they think they're the worst

1:29:56

thing, you know, think Putin is

1:29:58

Hitler. They invested the

1:30:00

assets in this country. They did

1:30:03

not attack the United States. Whatever you want

1:30:05

to say they did, it happened 8,000 miles

1:30:08

away to another foreign country. If

1:30:11

the new terms of dealing with the

1:30:13

United States is any time we squint

1:30:15

and say, hey, you know what? We

1:30:17

think you attacked democracy, some ethereal concept.

1:30:20

Then billions,

1:30:22

basically, I think it's like $200 to $300 billion

1:30:24

of total frozen Russian assets.

1:30:26

I know that there was $3 billion that

1:30:28

they pledged, that

1:30:30

they're immediately taking to fund Ukraine with.

1:30:33

Why would you do a deal with this

1:30:35

country in this way?

1:30:38

I mean, if this is not reversed immediately,

1:30:40

this is going to be catastrophic diplomatically. But

1:30:42

it won't be reversed immediately, right? Like we're

1:30:44

kind of in gridlock in freefall in terms

1:30:46

of reform policy in my eyes until we

1:30:48

figure out who's gonna handle the next four

1:30:51

years. You could see a world where Trump

1:30:53

wins the presidency and some

1:30:55

of what has happened, some

1:30:57

of the worst excesses, not all of it, some of the

1:30:59

worst excesses just sort of feel like a bad dream. They

1:31:02

threatened to do this, they did a little bit of

1:31:04

damage, but it was stopped before it's too late. America

1:31:06

gets to preserve the century of

1:31:10

diplomatic statecraft that we'd had for that time. You

1:31:13

say, okay, there was a period where we went

1:31:15

off the rails, but we rained it in quickly,

1:31:17

and this actually shows how robust our system is,

1:31:19

that even when we do overstretch, even when we

1:31:21

look like we're going to renege on this deal,

1:31:24

even when it actually is safe because

1:31:26

we will always be able to catch ourselves, and

1:31:29

that's just one more reason why the fate

1:31:31

of the universe kind of hangs in

1:31:33

the balance this November. What really cracked me up

1:31:36

about the people that were at the G7 that

1:31:38

were making this catastrophic deal is that six

1:31:41

out of the seven leaders are all unpopular. Like

1:31:43

they have insane internal struggles in their own

1:31:45

country, like Politico had a great report about this where they

1:31:47

said this is the meeting of lame ducks. So

1:31:50

I mean, you have unpopular leaders that are

1:31:52

making deals that are catastrophic. Like that's pretty

1:31:55

much where we're at. Well, that's why I

1:31:57

find it so funny that populism is the

1:31:59

big dirty word. word in all of this, that

1:32:03

populism is inherently a threat to democracy, the

1:32:05

will of the people. They

1:32:08

basically redefine democracy from meaning a

1:32:10

consensus of individuals, i.e. voters, to

1:32:13

a consensus of institutions, i.e.

1:32:15

that same blob,

1:32:18

cloistered, elite

1:32:21

institutional set. You

1:32:24

even see this. If you run a Google

1:32:27

search for phrases like elections are a threat

1:32:29

to democracy, there's a lot of

1:32:31

literature from the foreign policy establishment about

1:32:33

how we need to transition away from

1:32:35

looking at elections and votes as being

1:32:37

our definition of democracy because populism

1:32:40

is on the rise, the will of the

1:32:42

people is threatening. The

1:32:45

redefining what democracy is to

1:32:47

mean democratic institutions, basically pillars

1:32:49

of society like our Justice

1:32:51

Department or the mainstream media

1:32:54

or NGOs. That's

1:32:57

really having a healthy and

1:32:59

robust ecosystem of essentially CIA

1:33:02

assets or state department funded

1:33:05

institutions or military contractors. Their

1:33:09

will is what democracy is now. It is

1:33:11

funny that they're unpopular and they're in power.

1:33:14

What they're at war with is the concept of

1:33:16

populism, which is basically popular

1:33:18

opinion against elite institutions. Just to make my

1:33:21

comprehension easier, when I'm reading the headlines, I

1:33:23

just instantly when these freak shows are talking

1:33:25

about democracy, I just instantly translated my head

1:33:27

as hegemony. Then I'm just like,

1:33:29

okay, now it makes sense. Tyranny fascism. Yes. Do

1:33:32

you think this continues to drive

1:33:35

people to populism though? I think as it

1:33:37

becomes more clear that we're speaking different languages,

1:33:39

people feel more, not everybody, but there are

1:33:41

a lot of people who feel more

1:33:43

insistent that they have to act now. They have to

1:33:46

become part of populist movements to, again,

1:33:48

have some sort of impact on where we're going as a

1:33:50

nation. I think presently we're on a razor's

1:33:52

edge about that. The fact is,

1:33:54

is like North Korea does exist. You

1:33:56

can beat people down to a

1:33:58

point and you can use. the

1:34:01

levers of police power, the levers

1:34:03

of censorship, the levers of

1:34:05

the government and its asset institutions to

1:34:07

be able to truly subjugate a people

1:34:11

for a millennium. But the

1:34:13

issue is right now is they

1:34:15

were on track for that, I think,

1:34:17

before a handful of fortuitous turns of

1:34:19

events in about 2022,

1:34:22

which included the House turning over, which

1:34:24

allowed basically taking some of the

1:34:26

foot off of the gas of some of the

1:34:28

worst excesses of what the government was doing. The

1:34:31

House has blocked a lot of things.

1:34:34

They have forced negotiations on everything from

1:34:36

the budget to investigations,

1:34:38

hearing subpoenas, hauling everyone in

1:34:40

for transcribed interviews. You've

1:34:44

got Elon Musk, who, I mean, think

1:34:46

about, for example, even the commerce of

1:34:48

media in this country and how

1:34:51

brutal it was to be a

1:34:53

content creator or an alternative media

1:34:55

institution and have nobody, not

1:34:58

a single platform. And not

1:35:01

just to have that

1:35:03

platform, but to have the ecosystem of

1:35:05

sort of muskism around you, that he

1:35:07

also owns Tesla and SpaceX and has

1:35:09

the institutional sort of

1:35:11

connections. And the fact that that sort

1:35:13

of opened up Silicon Valley, the fact that they just

1:35:15

had a sold out Silicon Valley fundraise.

1:35:18

Right now, there is this,

1:35:20

I think, tenuous moment to

1:35:23

fight back. I don't know that that

1:35:25

will always exist. There could be a

1:35:27

century of darkness if the next five

1:35:30

years play out the wrong way. We're

1:35:33

going to go to Super Chat. So if you

1:35:35

haven't already, would you kindly smash that like button?

1:35:37

One like equals one FGB. Also head

1:35:39

over to timcast.com, click join us to become a

1:35:41

member and support our work directly. As a member,

1:35:43

you'll get access to the uncensored call in show

1:35:46

coming up in about a half an hour over

1:35:48

at timcast.com where you as members get to call

1:35:50

in and join the show. But

1:35:52

for now, we'll read your Super Chats. Clint

1:35:54

Torres says, howdy people. Howdy

1:35:56

Clint, always with the first Super Chat whenever he

1:35:58

so desires. Alpha Turkey

1:36:00

says put a chick in it and make her gay

1:36:03

rip Star Wars Isn't it funny that

1:36:05

South Park made fun of Star Wars for that

1:36:07

and then they literally did that It's

1:36:09

like I wonder if the Disney went

1:36:11

uh-oh There they're calling us out

1:36:14

and we didn't even release the episode yet. That's that

1:36:16

that's the new Star Wars story that

1:36:18

lesbian space Which is created the

1:36:20

force is that what it is? Oh my god,

1:36:22

I didn't see this They they birthed immaculate babies

1:36:24

through witchcraft or something. They don't need men, you

1:36:26

know how it is You know, that's just a

1:36:28

green amplify. That's just that's just game right there.

1:36:31

It's like, all right a green amplify Yeah, we

1:36:33

are gonna put a chicken we are gonna make

1:36:35

her gay All right, blue TMC

1:36:37

says being under the influence of a substance no

1:36:39

matter the substance doesn't make your rights to self-defense

1:36:41

vanish We already have laws

1:36:44

for brandishing negligent discharge assault murder.

1:36:47

That's a good point. That is a good point

1:36:49

So then I guess we could the clarification

1:36:51

should be if you are actively wielding a

1:36:53

weapon while under the influence You have committed

1:36:55

the crime perhaps influence can be I

1:36:58

don't know extenuating factor of some sort

1:37:02

Tim Jake says I'd love to see Ian take

1:37:04

a class on how the British government actually operates

1:37:06

So he'll stop making so many ignorant and asinine

1:37:08

comments about the Empire and Emperor. He

1:37:11

doesn't seem to understand this Ian

1:37:13

lives in this like fictional world where

1:37:15

the King of England the King of

1:37:18

I suppose of England can can just

1:37:20

take control of Australia or Canada or

1:37:22

New Zealand, which is not

1:37:24

correct Just it's not reality. What

1:37:27

does he say when he when he says that? It's

1:37:30

like on paper a long time ago, but

1:37:32

it doesn't recognize the formal relationships

1:37:35

of government and how these governments

1:37:37

function Yeah, there's there's no

1:37:39

reality where the king is gonna be like, all right, Canada You

1:37:41

have to do this now and they're gonna bet Kay It's

1:37:44

just not gonna work that way written in invisible ink on the back

1:37:46

of the Magna Carta. Yeah, that's where it is

1:37:49

I mean initially, yeah, the king was the

1:37:51

king of the Commonwealth But I

1:37:53

think modern politics is just it is not

1:37:55

reality to see something like that happen Don't

1:37:59

work that way All

1:38:01

right, let's grab some more super chats. Blue

1:38:04

TMC says, it's the acts you conduct with that firearm

1:38:07

that determines whether or not you're breaking the law. All

1:38:11

right, that'd be an interesting debate. The

1:38:14

Highlander says, Ian has Hulkamania energy. Okay.

1:38:20

Anthony Shaw says, let's go. What are the adjectives

1:38:22

for Hulkamania? Is there a synonym to this? I'm

1:38:24

not sure I understand what that energy is. The

1:38:26

fan of Hulk Hogan. The

1:38:29

Impassible says, use this to buy more BuzzFeed. Yeah,

1:38:32

I bought a bunch of BuzzFeed stock. You

1:38:34

have a Vague taken over? Not me. I

1:38:36

can't buy nearly as much as he's bought. But I was just like,

1:38:39

you know, I'm going to buy some stock. And then I saw BuzzFeed

1:38:41

and I saw what Vague was saying. And I was kind of just

1:38:43

thinking like, he's the

1:38:45

best reason to believe that's going to become more valuable,

1:38:48

I guess. So I don't

1:38:50

usually like talking about the stocks that I buy because

1:38:52

I don't want to have any influence on them. But

1:38:55

we talk about BuzzFeed and the Vague story enough to where I

1:38:57

figured I'd mention that I bought some. I

1:38:59

didn't buy nearly that much. It's

1:39:01

not. You have been secretly buying it up

1:39:03

quietly for a month and then you make a big announcement. You're

1:39:05

not going to send an open letter to their CEOs saying, you're

1:39:07

going to change the business. I would love to

1:39:09

own BuzzFeed. And their market cap is down to like $95 million.

1:39:12

Let me check their current market cap. What

1:39:15

company would you secretly take over if you could, Chris

1:39:17

Carr? Wow. AMC.

1:39:20

AMC? Yeah, I would take over AMC. Yeah,

1:39:23

probably. Didn't AMC just invest

1:39:26

in Alamo Draft House or something? If they did,

1:39:28

that's a really smart investment because Alamo Draft House

1:39:30

is the movie theater of the future. Sony bought

1:39:32

it, I think. 94 million is BuzzFeed's market cap.

1:39:36

So you need 94 million, probably more actually,

1:39:39

to buy the company. But

1:39:41

if you buy too much, the price goes up. So it gets

1:39:43

harder and harder. It's probably why the Vague is

1:39:45

doing it slowly. Otherwise you just,

1:39:48

you know, if you say right now you wanted to buy

1:39:50

10 million, you'd crank the price way

1:39:52

up and price yourself out. So I

1:39:54

don't know exactly what he's doing. All I know is

1:39:56

I am part owner of BuzzFeed

1:39:58

now. It's interesting. Buzzfeed

1:40:01

played such an interesting role in

1:40:03

the Steele dossier. They

1:40:06

really pioneered, I think I

1:40:08

read, I think there's a book called

1:40:10

Attention Merchants, which goes through the history

1:40:12

of mainstream media and into the social