Badlands Media - Badlands Daily: 9/3/26 - Beef Price Probe Widens, Tish James Whistleblower & SCOTUS Amendment Fight

Episode Date: September 3, 2026

CannCon and Alpha Warrior dig into the DOJ expanding its beef pricing investigation from the big four meat packers to eight of the largest grocery retailers in the country, unpacking how a handful of companies came to control most of what ends up on your plate and just how far prices have climbed over the past decade. From there they cover Democrats blocking a proposed constitutional amendment to lock the Supreme Court at nine justices, and debate whether the whole thing is a setup or a genuine effort. The back half includes a DOJ opinion clarifying that states taking federal welfare dollars must report known illegal aliens, federal investigators sitting down with the New York Attorney General whistleblower, and another judge blocking the birthright citizenship order. Expect the usual West Coast versus East Coast ribbing and plenty of frustration with Congress.

The Badlands, one of the Badlands, explain those Badlands. That's a hell of a name. All right. Good morning, Badlandia. Welcome to Badlands Daily Happy Thursday and everybody out there. Joined by my brother from another mother of another color, Alpha Warrior. How you doing, buddy? Doing good, brother.

Good morning. Good morning. It's a little earlier for some of us than others. But how you doing over there at the butt crack of dawn in the, on the left coast of the United States. West coast is the best coast. I'm doing good, you know. Definitely not.

Name one good state on the west coast of America. California, baby. California sucks. You're out of your damn mind. Well, I mean, your politicians have driven that place into hell. You're a captured state. I ain't seen no fat lady sing. Did you see your governor today spreading miss, dis, and mal information?

He does it every day. This is blatant, though. Let me pull this up here real quick. Yeah, he does it every day. Oh, I know, but this is bad. Governor Gavin Newsom, Shasta County's job offer to a felon convicted of tampering with voting machines to work on their election process is a disgrace. I'm directing CDCR to make every effort to block any transfer of her parole supervision into California. Tina Peters was never convicted of tampering with voting machines.

She was not. This is straight up defamation. This is absolute straight up defamation right here from Gavin Newsom. Also, if you guys watched why we vote not this Tuesday, but last Tuesday, when we had Clint Curtis on, you already knew that Tina Peters was not going to take that job. because he told us on why we vote, broke some news on why we vote last week, that she was not going to take that job. So, yeah, there's your, there's your governor for you, Alpha. You're going to bring a lawsuit?

You're going to soon? Pretty soon because the clock is ticking. Oh, I know. Well, I meant for Tina Peters, not for you. You absolutely better. You better get rolling on that, actually. All right, guys, welcome to the show. I'm studying the government position some pieces of source.

Oh yeah, you want to see who's going to be Who's going to be in there in November? Is it going to be Bichara? Is it going to be? I still think we're going to get some damning stuff on on Bichara. I mean, we already have, but I think we're going to get more. Especially with his wife. I don't.

What is it about as well? She got caught up in. It was something very similar to Gavin's. Let me pull it up real quick. Well, while you're doing that, I know he was involved with, the while he was um at uh h hs he was involved in uh the covid scam that took place with uh one of newsome's top lieutenants taking money out of his campaign coffers and using it illegally um not he wasn't but it was his it was his campaign accounts also then we had the information about the

NGOs the immigration and NGOs that he was buddy buddy with uh and that came to bat for him and all that stuff but i'm not familiar with the wife stories i am trying to find it either way you guys are kind of stuck between a rock in a hard place a rock in a not so hard place but still a hard place what's what it's with i i don't i don't have much faith in that guy i have faith in uh in trump's moves uh i i i don't doubt that but i also don't believe that a british uh you know guy is going to come in there and somehow change California around. He's totally based and everything else. I just don't know, man.

Got to trust Trump, bro. Yeah, you do, but that doesn't mean you have to trust Steve Hilton. Trump's endorsed him, right? Yeah, he endorsed Lindsey Graham too. He endorsed Mitch McConnell. And what happened to Lindsey Graham? He's endorsed a lot of, well, Lindsey Graham is dead. Uh-huh. Oh, geez, we're not going to.

going down that rabbit hole i'm not saying that the people he's endorsed is going to be dead i'm saying that he knows what he's doing when he does the endorsements yeah i mean it's your state you guys do what you got to do and there's no question that steve hilton would be better than any of the options that i mean presented look at look at what high heel boots your governor has a i'm not a fan of his at all he's on him on tuesdays why we vote but look at what he's accomplished he's done some good moves over there in florida and i i you know me i went after him aggressively i went i i went to DeSantis almost massie more but I would put DeSantis right there in a number two number three spot for people that I went after for coming out with them on president wasn't Becherra

also involved with the insurance companies in the fire I think that's what the wife might have gone mentioned in it's hard not sure about that all right guys well while Alfa's fill looking for that let's smash that thumbs up if you have not done so and uh let's jump into our sponsors for today And first up, we've got our friends over at rise attire. Howdy, Badlanders? Summertime is here. What have you got on? Does it support the parallel economy

and your favorite brands like Badlands Media and Rise Attire? If not, then you need to come see us. Soak up some vitamin D in our premium tank tops for men and women, featuring newer versions of the devolution design in black, red, white, even blue and green digital camo. Yauza. We got them for Cy War, Badlands Native, and Clown World, too. How about these bad boys? Cy War, Clown World, and Devolution beach towels

to help you spark up a conversation with your new best friend or future spouse at the pool. And by popular demand, we've got athletic women's leggings that'll have you red-pilling all the ladies in your Pilates class whether they like it or not. Too bad. This is Badlands, baby, and we're strapped. Get some and support the new media parallel economy as much as fucking possible.

at badlandsmedia.tv slash rise. All right, badlandsmedia.com. TV slash rise. Got my Cywar in the glitch, or Cywar glitch hoodie that I rock just about every single morning. Sometimes I switch it up with the Badlands one, but this one's pretty badass,

and it's got the Badlands logo right there on the side. And then let's also talk about Alpha's favorite sponsor, our friends over at Pet Club. Science proves that a healthy immune system, is the body's first offense against the smallest of ailments to the most catastrophic. Coriola's Versicolor is the most sought after all-natural supplement for both humans and pets to help boost the immune system. There are over 400 studies worldwide on its effectiveness in humans, including Sloan Kennering Cancer Center, M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, and now from the University of Pennsylvania School of Veterinary and Medicine.

Together, we can help reverse this terrible tide now plaguing your loved ones and give them the immune boosting supplements that they need. Badlandsmedia.tv slash pet club. Badlandsmedia. dot TV slash pet club. What's up? It looks like it's the wife of his aid. That's what it is. The wife of his aid. Okay. Yeah, it says, let me find it right here. And what did she do? Federal prosecutors say roughly $225,000 was diverted from Pizarra's Dormant Political Campaign around 2022 and 2024.

That money moved through various entities and disguised as compensation for a no-show job for the wife's spouse of Sean McCleskey, Fasar's longtime aide and former Chief of Staff. McCleskey pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit bank and wire fraud. Yeah. Yeah, that's the, that's the, she was the chief of staff. I think for Gavin Newsom as well. Or she was. Or she was involved.

So the chief of staff for Gavin Newsom was also wrapped up. Also the one for a percent. Yeah. Yeah. You and I talked about this because that's when you, you said that this is going to, you know, expand beyond just the, the chief of staff of Gavin Newsom and go beyond that. We read the actual DOJ press release on it. Yeah.

I think there's going to be a lot more that comes out on Bashara in the next, in the next few weeks here. specifically regarding COVID and in that pandemic, quote unquote, pandemic era, which brings us Alpha to our first story here from just the news. CIA notes, you know, FDA chief turned Pfizer board member saw race between herd immunity and the COVID vaccine. Now, this is talking about Scott Gottlieb, who was President Trump's first FDA commissioner, and left in 2019, to go and join the Pfizer board. And it says that he privately estimated a staggeringly higher rate of infections nationally, just a month after Jay Botakaria's study when he was at Stanford that said it was around 2.8%.

Gottlieb said it was much, much higher and said the CIA notes from the May 7th, 2020 meeting between Gottlieb and then CIA chief operating officer, Andy Macaritis, it summarizes the Pfizer board members views that the COVID infection rate nationally was already 20 to 25 percent and the reproduction rate was three, meaning that every infected person would transmit to three new people. Citing nasoferengal swabs from infected patients, Gottlieb said 30 to 60 percent, quote, could be shedding the virus with no apparent symptoms, end quote. suggesting that, quote, SARS-CoV-2 may not be strongly immunogenic, producing no obvious immune response and thus primed to spread without notice. Gottlieb shared a far lower infection estimate in his public appearances in the next few months, however, implying that Pfizer worried the public would believe herd immunity was around the corner and then doom the vaccine's financial

viability once approved by the FDA. That April, he estimated around 5%, which was still higher than Bauticaria study and said in August that it might be around 8%. So you have this, and I know this is kind of a weird story. You have this guy that's on the Pfizer board, former FDA commissioner under President Trump until 2019, and he is going out publicly and saying, hey, the rate of infection right now is only around 5% and then bumps it up to 8%. But then behind closed doors, he's saying 20, 25% rate of infection, possibly 30 to 60%. Now, the reason that that's significant is because, as he says, it's immunogenic, meaning people are not, you don't even know you have the symptoms. We heard this all the time, right, asymptomatic transmission. We heard that all the time. Now, if people are going around

there and getting COVID-19, through asymptomatic transmission, and the rate of infection is actually a lot higher. We have heard immunity. And if we have heard immunity, there's no need for the Pfizer vaccine and the Moderna vaccine and the Johnson and Johnson vaccine, at least not the rush that there is here. Now, Alpha, this story gets much more sinister. This was a story that was put out by Jeffrey Tucker of Brownstone Institute and Rand Paul was sharing it on X this week. It says here Tucker claimed weeks earlier that unnamed FDA and NIH officials, quote, who were on the ground, during the first year COVID, told them that the mitigation measures, such as school closures, stay at home orders, and travel restrictions were intended to, quote, delay the onset of natural

immunity, end quote, so that the vaccines could, quote, get all the credit for having solved the issue. I mean, if that's not demonic, sinister. They needed the numbers in order to make people have fear, but they couldn't allow the numbers to then dictate. that well if you're saying this much of the population has it and we're feeling it then we're solid because then it's right back to the common flu right exactly it's it's the common flu we don't need the lockdowns we don't need the six foot spacing we don't need the universal mail-in ballots we don't need the fake rigged election to usher in the basement Biden you know we don't need all that stuff we didn't need moderna and fyser making 32 billion uh 32 million dollars a day or whatever it was they made

32 billion. I did the math one time, you know, breaking it down by day. And it was, it was an astronomical number of profit that they were making off of the taxpayers. The other side of this, too, is one man can't make this happen. Just because the doctor's in there pushing the person. It takes an entire team to push that agenda. And I think that's what makes the story significant. this is the thing that gets you know puts the spotlight on it but this is something that requires an entire conspiracy to unfold yeah and and so if you have this guy Gottlieb who's on the board of Pfizer talking with the CIA what did the CIA know about this what you know what did the CIA do with this information because we're starting to see kind of the picture and and I think we all

understand that it works this way but it's being painted now the picture of Fauci and all of his you know his close circle and their collaboration with the intelligence community that we've seen exposed over the you know the last couple months maybe even years but especially over the last couple months how much of this you know was a coordination between people like gotlieb people like the cia people like fouchy and all of that to to you know promulgate these rules and regulations and policies on us to fearmonger us into you know basically being cucks of the government well i i think we're I think we all know and we're expecting that eventually we're going to find out that that amount is significant to answer your question. The next question, actually the first question I would have before we get to how significant it was is at what point did they become involved?

Right. Yeah. Because here's the thing. If you're looking at early numbers, why would early numbers raise red flags for the CIA? Even numbers like this were these many people have it, but it's not having that type of, you know, like you said asymptomatic because we just know we have it well what will cause the alarm fire for the CIA to be involved well the other the other thing is narrative too you know in addition to just protecting the Pfizer vaccine in the future for for Gottlieb potentially protecting it or allegedly i should say what would have happened in may of 2020 if they came out right

away and they're like hey one in four americans right now is infected with covid or has had COVID we'd be like that's bullshit. That's bullshit. I know I know a hundred people and none of them have had COVID. None of them have been sick from COVID. None of them certainly have died from COVID. So out of those hundred people, you're telling me that 25 of the people that I know have had COVID and all of them are alive and well. And it wouldn't have made sense. That would have led to immediate scrutiny. It didn't. It did. It didn't make sense. And there was scrutiny. It's just we got purged every time we try to expose the scrutiny. Because you remember, a guy in a motorcycle died in a car. crash. I think it was Florida, too.

Florida, you know, dies in a crash. The car, the motorcycle accident kills them. But because he had a COVID positive diagnosis, what was it? 30 days, 45 days, whatever the timeframe was. It was counted as a COVID death. And then we find out that

that was happening more and more. You know, people that were just older, natural cause of death, but they had a positive COVID test. these numbers were always inflated. Yeah. You know, and if to remind you guys, I'm pretty sure it was Pfizer that has paid the largest

civil penalty in, in the Medicare field, in the pharmaceutical industry, I'm pretty sure it was them that paid. It was like $2 billion that they had to pay. You could fact check me on that. And chat, if you guys want to fact check me on that. But they clearly have next to no morals, right? Right. And so the fines are nothing in comparison to the revenue generated. Exactly. So even if they, even if the government comes back at them and says, you guys were sinister in what you did, you guys pushed sterility and infertility and pulmonary issues and cardiovascular issues and heart attacks and all these other things. You guys, you guys knew that this could happen from this. We're going to find you five billion dollars. And Pfizer's like, that's okay. We made 70.

billion just the price of doing business right it's the cost of doing business yes factored in and so this means nothing until you start putting CEOs and until you start putting people responsible people that had knowledge and i don't care if you just had knowledge in your mid-level or whatever if you didn't start blowing the whistle on this if you didn't come out and say this well i was in fear for my life okay then dime out the people who were threatening your life dime out the people you know that you feel like you would have been a victim or something like that. You know, whistleblowers, there's a lot of good whistleblower protections in this country, anonymity, staying anonymous, all of that stuff.

Like, until people are starting to be arrested and not just their, you know, a little bit of, you scrape a little bit off of their bank account, until you start taking away the one thing that we can never get more of, and that is their time, it's not going to matter. It's not going to matter. They're just going to keep doing this. We're seeing the same thing right now with the measles outbreak. in Pennsylvania where Josh Shapiro came out and just doubled down last week about this baby that

died from measles when the coroner is out there saying publicly he didn't die from measles he died from a ruptured spleen that had no measles like was not related to the measles and then you got Shapiro out there doubling down on it being measles in order to fearmonger people and to get in their MMR vaccines it's disgusting man and it's a captured state you know by not just the pharmaceutical industry, but, but, you know, these major industrial complexes broadly. And until, until people start getting locked up for this, it's never going to subside. And to that point, you know, when you say whether they're mid-level or high-level or, you know, at the foundation of all this going on, people got to consider, too, is it's not like, you know,

the Fauci regime went and called all the board of directors from every hospital in the country to come and meet that they would get caught because there would actually be some boards from some hospitals that are decent than they reported. What happened during COVID was they exploited the structure of how the system works, knowing what they would do. Now, granted, there were probably some major hospitals that people are, you know, common everyday names that were called in to help, you know, help influence through optics of this. But most of these hospitals saw, okay, if we have a patient die of COVID, we're going to get an extra 30,000. per patient. No, no voucher regime had to come into that board of directors and tell them what to do. They did what they did in every situation is how do we capitalize on this? This is all the bean

counters putting it together. So what you're going to see is that that's what's going to come down to the states and the counties. The states and the counties are going to have to investigate that. But the states and the counties aren't going to really look into that until you see a strong push from the federal government at a much larger scale RICO that's going to show, hey, there's something here. So we'll see like that in that situation. I think we're going to see what we see here. Like this kind of stuff breaking the headlines, this kind of stuff encouraging Congress to do,

I know we hate it, but to do these investigative committees that are going to influence the investigations to start happening and then we'll start seeing the other stuff populate at the state and county level. Illinois, Danny, says, why the push for MMR? Does that contain MRNA now?

I'm not sure if it contains MRNA now, but the breaking up, of those three separate vaccines by the administration will cause hesitancy in receiving those. And this was a vaccine that every kid, well, not every kid, but almost every kid in the country was getting almost right at birth. I think MMR was within the first year of birth, I think, right? I'm pretty sure it was, that's one of the vaccines you get right away. And when you... It's early on. I don't know if it's within the first year or two, though.

early on well when you start threatening those numbers and you start creating any sort of hesitancy your your top line your profits are going to plummet they're going to plummet when you see when you see that start happening there's been a push and we've talked about this on this show and other shows that i've been on before but there's a push in this in this country to get away from medications and move towards strictly vaccines because the liability that is of that is the liability for the pharmaceutical companies, the drug companies, is a lot less with the vaccines. The federal government absorbs a lot of the liability for vaccines, whereas they get sued for certain medications and drugs all the time.

I mean, just look at the Lindsay Clancy case that's going on right now, right? Yeah, I know. Hung jury again. To answer your information on that. Your favorite CDC, the recommendation for MMR, first dose between 12 to 15 months and second dose between the ages of four and six. Okay, so within a year and a year and a half is what it's saying. Within the first year and a half of life.

It says if the infant is going to travel earlier than that from six to 11 months, but, you know, everything else aside, it's 12 to 15 on that first dose. Crazy. Well, you know, I'm going to call a little audible here. And, you know, we talked about, you know, know the pharmaceutical industry and how a $2 billion fine is nothing to them, right? It's like it's like loose pocket change for Pfizer to pay $2 billion. And by the way, it's probably, I don't know the structure of the payments,

but I bet you it's like spread out over 10 years. So they're like, oh, we got to take we got to take 20 million, 200 million, whatever it is every year and throw that back at the government, who's by the way subsidizing our company almost entirely. Yeah, that's no big deal. Check this story out. Along the same lines, also from just the news. Fourth University and three years federal claims over hidden Chinese research ties. The Ohio State University, if you had any reason to hate the Buckeyes anymore,

I'm a Miami fan as well as a Gator fan, but Miami fans, we notoriously hate Ohio State, as they hate us, but it's okay. The Ohio State University has agreed to pay the federal government $2.1 million settlement over allegations the school did not disclose employee affiliations, with China when seeking federal research funding. The public research university received an undisclosed amount of funding from NASA and the National Science Foundation from November 2012 through August of 2023 and failed to disclose on the grant application that they had any foreign government support received by the top researchers.

Now this is where it gets crazy. Though a senior official at NASA's office of Inspector General called the settlement, quote, a major financial recovery on behalf of the American public, the sum represents a tiny fraction of what OSU received in grants over the years. In 2024, the school received more than $81 million in research grants just from the National Sciences Foundation. One school, one foundation, $81 million. How much did NASA give? How much did all these other government bureaucratic agencies donate, essentially donate to these to these universities how much are we paying these universities and then when we find out that they have you know people that are being paid by china on their staff that are

receiving funds and support from china their fine is 2.1 million dollars that's not even what 10 percent it's it's like 2 percent of what they received in 2024 from one foundation it's not a penalty that's a that's a that's a hey cost it's a business expense exactly Exactly. It is a cost of doing business. Crazy. Now, that story gets even worse, Alpha. Check this out. In 2019, the school learned that one of the principal investigators on a research grant was a participant in China's Thousand Talents Program, which recruits individuals with knowledge or access to foreign technology intellectual property. Ohio State University did not notify NASA or the NSF about this revelation until 2020. three. So they knew that they had somebody on their payroll that was a member of the thousand talents program. This isn't just like, oh yeah, they're a Chinese citizen and they were over here and China was paying them to go to school. This is a known program that is spies, you know, that come over here and are accessing our intellectual property, our research, stuff that

our government is paying for and then shipping it back to China so that they can basically get the same research for pennies on the dollar compared to what we're spending. And they took four years after they knew to disclose that to the government. So one, I agree with you. If we look, if we look at this at an isolated incident, I agree with you completely. If we zoom out and we look at everything that's happening, I think that the timing of this being released and push is the the point of the story not so much the fines we the the fines we know don't mean shit to these guys but in order to get this problem shut down on the scale it needs there needs to be an overall it it needs to be china china china china china china china china china every time you get to the news cycle

not for us not for this audience because this audience is going to be like me and you yeah that's a business expense the fine isn't there but when you look at the the biggest demographic again the normies that exists and they're seeing china did this china funded this china try to i think that's the point of these things all hitting the cycle right now because of what's again what's coming with you know elections trump has to create a public indictment against china it's not opinion it's not just you know msnbc or or cnnan saying you know trump's trying to destroy another relationship or start another war it has to be something that people see and be like this this is unacceptable yep again for us it's been there for years but this is something that needs to drive the

populace that again is the biggest group in this country well and there and there's been a tremendous amount of this look at the case you and i covered last week with natalie winters about you know a million plus veterans that had our DNA and our genetic material our genetic whatever you want to call it sent to china through a VA grant um what's his name from hHS um rfkj no um or geez i can't think of his name but anyways he came out just a few days ago and talked about, you know, we can't have any of these machines in our elections because China's been part of the process at some point and that opens our back door. Gosh, I can't think of his name. At HHS. DHS, sorry. Oh, okay.

McWan. Yes, there you go. Mullen. Thank you. Marquane Mullins. Mawlen, Mawaine. Couldn't decide on a first name. So they're like, Mark or Wayne. Let's just put it together, Mark Wayne. Because Wayne, Mark would sound kind of lame. Mark Wayne, you got the strong cue sound in the middle. Sounds like good, but not going to go there. That's what me and Chris Paul came up with. All right, let's jump back into this story. And yes, I agree that there's a lot of deployment being put out right now about China's involvement. I mean, we even had a story again from Natalie Winters as well, by the way. I think I think Natalie Winters, she is officially an SGE. Isn't she? Like, she's publicly said that, I think.

Let me check. That I don't know. She's working or is she working for the White House? Hold on. She has it in her profile. White House correspondent. Okay, she's just a White House correspondent. Never mind.

She's not an SGE. Correcting the record there. In October 2023, Stanford agreed to pay $1.9 million for foreign, although it's not known if it was China that had foreign country supporting its research. in July of 2024, University of Maryland agreed to pay $500,000 for failing to disclose current and pending foreign funding. Three of its researchers are receiving from Chinese entities. And also in September 2024, the Research Foundation of the State of New York,

SUNY, agreed to pay $313,000 to settle allegations that it failed to disclose Chinese affiliations and research support of a faculty member. In August, the Pentagon ordered 30 universities to audit. their financial and research ties to foreign entities, including China, or risk losing federal research funding, those universities included Harvard, New York University, Georgetown, MIT, the University of California, Berkeley, Oklahoma State University, Penn State, and others. And so again, these are the cost of doing business, like you said before, these are not even slap on the wrist. This would just be like a stern, not even a stern. This would just be like a, hey,

don't you do that again wink wink you know that kind of thing because the federal government is and we don't even know by the way we don't know the actual money if ohio state university was receiving 81 million dollars from one institution one foundation that the nsf how much is harvard receiving from the consortium it gets complicated and i know this will be an unpopular take and I would understand that you can this administration can still only penalize these these higher learning institutions so much because again they factored in a certain amount for a business expense because that allows them to keep functioning if they get hit with the fines that they actually deserve the

institutions would be shut down now I know a lot of people are like well then an effort, let them shut down. But then you're forgetting that there's a lot of kids in these institutions that are still everyday normal Americans that are going to be penalized as a result of that. And people say, well, they would, they would migrate into the other colleges, other colleges that don't have the support in place to do that. So you would really disrupt the higher education level. And again, outside the fact that, well, a lot of these institutions propagandize them, too, they do, but they also do learn a lot. So there's this fine balance at the institution. And I think this is something that's going to frustrate a lot of people moving over the course of the next few years.

I think people are expecting to see the collapse of certain institutions. I don't subscribe to that. I think the evidence supports that this administration is taking over institutions. So this way there's a gradual change that doesn't disrupt the normal day, you know, everyday living American because it would suck to be a kid who is at Harvard or Stanford that did bust their ass off. all of a sudden, you know, and it's going to be in debt with their loan for who knows however long. And then the institution gets shut down. And it's just a debt that didn't return any investment on them because they can get a degree because their thing was shut down. Like it's more complicated than just hitting these institutions, you know, with a 30, 40 percent of what they made type of fine to impact them.

It will shut them down. So I disagree with you on this. Now I understand what you're talking about about certain individuals and certain course curriculums and things like that. but college broadly has been a psychological operation and manipulation on the American people. We've been told you and I going back to our generation and even perhaps the generation before that we have to graduate high school and go to college and get a great job, right? Majority of Americans don't need to do that. And I'm not saying that we're all condemned to blue-collar jobs.

I don't disagree with you. I agree with you 100% on that. But that's you can't, that's not an installment you can do over one year. No, I understand that. But my point is, is that when these, when these institutions are being funded, not just through grants and everything else for research and whatever, by the way, the colleges should be funding the grants and everything else on their own and then having that ROI from their own, you know, research and development. The reason that they do the federal government and that the federal government, you know, uses these universities and the universities

just willingly accept it is because a vast majority of the funding, that comes into them are for failed projects, for projects that never go anywhere. You know, they never get proof of concept. They never get to the point where they're able to be implemented into, you know, whatever their intention was. It's failed research. Like, hey, try doing this. Oh, it didn't work. Oh, well, we just wasted $20 million on that, you know, that kind of thing. And that happens all the time. The other aspect that the federal government is funding them is through the student loans.

And so these universities had become wholly dependent on the federal government government and in doing so this is going to flow perfectly with my next story in doing so you've created an industry that is able to manipulate prices to the extent that most americans you know can't afford it they come out of college and they're in debt for hundreds of thousands of dollars then at the same time you have on the on the front end of this these kids that are being brainwashed into believing that they have to go to college if they want to amount to anything in life you have to have at minimum a four-year degree Also, we're going to lower the standards so much so that we don't even care about how stupid you were or how lazy you were in high school.

And we're just going to accept you into these universities. And the professors are pushing back against it now. The whole thing is a private public partnership that is absolutely corrupting institutions and creating just a cash cow where we're the suckers. We are the ones that get footed stuck with all the bills for this. I don't disagree with any of that. But it's it's something that it's a culture change. You know, we can't just go in and tell students that, you know, are about to graduate students that are at the beginning of it at a lot of these institutions

and to say, hey, the doors are shut down. You can't do that either. Now, I think the thing that shows people would probably be like, at least that's happening, is go through and arrest all the people from these universities that are doing that. go through and create, you know, curriculum that, you know, and we see Trump doing this anyways. He's doing it at the public school level. If you want this funding, you can't do this.

If you want, like, it's the reverse of everything that you just talked about. And that's, those are the kind of the cues that I'm looking at that this administration isn't just going to collapse the secondary institution. He is going to go and impact the way they do things, but they're going to still be allowed. to exist and then it's us the people that are going to change the culture to for or the it's it's it's it's going in reverse is what i'm saying you know we're not we're going to start looking for colleges that are doing stuff that are similar to trade schools where they're not brainwashing our kids and over i think what we will see over the course of time we'll see that there's not going to be as

many colleges because we're going to see a lot of kids are going to be like hey i can make you know six figures if I own my own plumbing company I can do this you know if I'm a wilder if I'm a nutrition people are going to see how important like these types of trades are in our community but again that's a culture thing yeah I think the hardest to be impacted by this is going to be or AI is going to impact the university level you know workers more so than the blue collar at least initially eventually the AI and robotics will will trickle down into a lot of the blue collar jobs as well. But yeah, I think there's going to be massive changes within the next 10 years in the entire system, education system in terms of how we value and what we actually teach in these systems,

whether we're teaching people how to do a job or how to teaching people how to monitor a computer doing its job for them. And we got to be prepared for this. But yeah, my point, my point is, is that if these universities can't survive without research grants and everything else from the federal government. And your point was excellent. Like I don't mind, well, I do actually mind when it's $81 million from one institution to a school in one year. Like $81 million should be able to cover. And that's in addition to any tuition, right? You're telling me that these schools would go upside down if they had all their tuition money, all the money they're making. The Ohio state university how much do they make off of football and and off of athletics you know these are these are

massive cash cows and and they need 81 million dollars from the federal government for one program it just it's ridiculous i don't disagree you know how many junior colleges you know you know what you could do to a junior college several junior colleges with 81 million dollars yes yeah and and i and and to me i find junior college way more important than a four-year university because junior college shows you the mentality of a lot of kids you know high school kids that i didn't apply myself the way i needed to get into a four-year university but education is important to me so i'm still going to go to a junior college because it shows that adjustment to maturity and you know and in goals capitalize on that these are these are young these are young adults showing that they didn't give up on themselves

so you know afford them something quality but not I agree with you. And I think, like I said, I think it will be, I think, I think this, I think Trump is going to facilitate massive culture changes. And I think I agree with you, man. AI is going to be a huge component of that. That genie's not going back in the bottle. All right. Let's, let's jump into this story here from Fox business. DoJ expands beef price investigation to Walmart, Costco, Amazon, and other major retailers. The DOJ antitrust division expanded into eight of the largest grocery retailers in the United States. This comes after the DOJ launch an antitrust probe in May into the big four meat packers,

JBS Cargill, Tyson Foods, and National Beef, which control more than 85% of the U.S. beef processing market. Letters obtained by Fox Business show that the federal antitrust officials are examining retailers of retailers beef pricing strategies, profit margins, cost, and purchasing arrangements, dating back to 2020. Did you know Alpha? I didn't know this. I did a lot of research on this this morning. Did you know that the beef, beef prices have increased 400% from 2015 to 22? Actually, very, I'm up to date on the beef stuff. Just go a couple of friends that I have that are in this field. Yeah, that's crazy. 400% in seven years. There's nothing that should increase in price 400% in seven years.

And if I remember correctly, if you go back to the recent time frame is where a large portion of that that price exponentially ran. So I'm trying to remember those conversations. That I don't know. That I don't know. It says USDA secretary, Brooke Rawlins also tied the probe to broader concerns about food security and the shrinking domestic cattle supplies, saying that the U.S. had about 86.2 million head of cattle and calves as of January 1st, the lowest since the 1950s.

Last week, President Trump said he would authorize the drafting of legal documents aimed at giving farmers and ranchers, quote, the right to process their own food, casting the move as an effort to break what he called a nasty monopoly in the meat industry. The move was intended to give ranchers another way around the powerful meat packing companies that stand between their cattle and their grocery store shelves. And I want to jump into, this is an older article from July of last year from white oak pastures. And granted, there is an interest in this because they are an actual meat packer. But it's titled the big four.

And it's, you know, it goes into the same thing that Fox business is talking about, 85% of the market shares owned by just four companies. Now, here's the part where it gets crazy. And this is all Reagan era BS, by the way. These four meatpackers are actually broken up into 70 different brand labels. So when you see Tyson, JBS, Cargill, and National Beef, as those are the four big meat packers, okay, well, I'll just avoid these four. But what you don't realize, and if you pull up this map right here, I'll bring this tab up,

these are all the subsidiaries of them. So ballpark is Tyson Foods. Did not know that. Brian Tyson Foods, Jimmy Dean, Tyson Foods, Sarah Lee, Tyson Foods. Then you go over to JBS and you got all these companies here. Now these are probably more West Coast or niche. I'm not sure because I don't recognize any of these makers, but let's see, where's another one that we use?

I mean, Tyson's the biggest one by far. Yeah. You know, and so let me get back into this story here because it breaks it down even further. Sorry right there. The illusion of choice stems from a decade of lax antitrust enforcement that led to a wave of unchecked mergers and acquisitions across nearly all sectors of the food system. In the early 1900s, a meat trust of five dominant meat packers controlled the livestock and poultry sector. Public outcry led to regulations like the Packer and State and Stockyards Act of 1921,

and antitrust legal action, which broke up that oligopoly. In the 1980s, however, weakened antitrust enforcement led to a new wave of consolidation through a series of mergers and acquisitions. By 1990, by 1990, just four firms, only two of them are the same, but IBP, Cargill, Conagra, and National Beef controlled 70%, 70% of cattle processing in the U.S. today. It's the big four that we just mentioned. Now, between 2002 and 2022, listen to this number, man. This is insane. 58,000 feedlots, 72%, 18,000 hog farms, 23%, and 56,000 dairy farms, 61% exited the market, yet livestock production has not decreased.

Instead, it's decreased a little bit, but not to those numbers. Instead, we simply have fewer operations producing the vast majority of the food supply, which leaves the food supply highly vulnerable to supply chain disruptions. So think of this. You remember during the Biden administration, we used to see, you know, egg farm destroyed livestock farm. Remember when we had the hack that shut down the cattle, the beef processing on the East Coast? Those are what leads to these increases because you have a vulnerable, you have a food supply

that's consolidated to four major companies that control an overwhelming majority of the market. If something happens to one of those processors, the other three get to pick up the slack or the third ones just relies on, you know, other manufacturing entities and other labels to pick up the slack, but the prices go up. So like here it mentions Tyson beef processing plant in Kansas was responsible for 5 to 6% of beef process in the U.S. caught fire in 2019, caused market panic and a price spike. Well, to those spikes, just to give you guys some clarification on the stats I gave you. So the largest surge was the few years post-war War II. You're looking, it went from about 13% to about 30% in literally just over a year. So individual year, it was right after World War II. But when you go down to the Biden administration window, you're looking at 2021, it went up 10%.

I'm sorry, 2020. The end of 2020, it went up almost 10%. 2021 almost went up another 10%. 2022 went up over 5%. 2023 went up almost 4%. 2024 went up 5. So if you look at that four year windowish, you're looking at what, nearly 30% increase in the price of beef. That's crazy.

And you know, you wonder, is this the cost of doing business? Like we were just talking about with the schools. Hey, you're going to lose a process. facility here whether i mean the the the hack was the ideal thing right the hack was was what's bitcoin doing somebody said check out bitcoin oh bitcoin just shot up to 80 80 000 again broke 80 000 uh so you see you see these um these plants going down and you wonder like is this i don't want to say is it deliberate but you know is there is there some sort of a plan here these four entities can control and

manipulate the market very easily that's something Sometimes you need justification for that manipulation. I'm there. Listen, I do not subscribe to the idea that all that happened. It was just a coincidence hound. Right. Now, I am open to the idea that is it, you know, a glass half empty, glass half full, where there's something being put into our products and they were destroyed before they could get out to us. Plausible.

Was it an attack on the food infrastructure of our country? Definitely possible. But I think it's one of the other. You know, I don't think that this was. a bunch of eggplants and beef plants, you know, that caught on fire or train derailments that were transporting large amounts of food products that just went off the rails. I don't, for one second, think that that was just, you know, old infrastructure the way it was being sold to us.

I don't buy that. Yeah. Well, so bringing this back to the, to the investigation DOJ is running on these retailers and the meat processing plants, you know, I'm not a fan. and President Trump, you remember a few weeks ago when President Trump was talking about Venezuela and the oil companies in Venezuela. And he said, I'm absolutely a free market guy. I am one of the biggest free market guys. But what these companies are doing is unethical and moral.

You know, he was saying they're gouging people. And he's continuing with that in the U.S. markets. But he was specifically talking about Venezuela. I don't like what they're doing, I think is what he said about, you know, some of the oil companies down in Venezuela. And he doubled down on this. I think this was yesterday. Yeah, I think this was yesterday when asked about the oil companies here. And you've previously accused them of price gouging.

Is that something you brought up with them? Yeah, I did. I want the retail prices. These were mostly retailers. And I want the retail prices to come down. Okay. So you have President Trump halls in these oil executives, you know, to obviously be like, hey, why is, you know, the price per barrel?

Oil's coming out of the street. You know, it's closed, it's open, it's closed, it's open, but it's coming out. And he's, this has been made perfectly clear. The price per barrel is not indicative of the price per gallon here in the United States. We just secured 65 billion barrels that we're going to be getting for futures from Venezuela. Why is the price of oil or excuse me gas not reflecting any of these changes? And, you know, who knows what he says behind closed doors with these individuals? So on one hand, this is the crazy part because you'll have on one hand people like President Trump shouldn't be, you know, interfering with this. That's it's capitalism. Let capitalism run its course.

And then on the other hand, you'll have those same people that are like prices are so high in the United States. President Trump's got to do something about it. You know, so he's in kind of a quagmire there. And yeah, man. All right, I'll land that there. Well, this goes back to I was trying to find that when he did it last year. But you remember when Trump did the, huge beef deal with Argentina.

Yep. And everybody was up in arms. But why did he do that? I mean, same concept here with oil. It was in order to- He just did it again. He just did it again. Yeah, I saw that it was in the headlines because that's what keeps populating and all the reason stuff. I'm like, no, damn it.

I want the one from last year with Argentina. But he did it to help the consumer prices. And so, again, this is that economic warfare that's happening in our own country. know Trump's waging economic warfare against the globalist mechanism, but they're also doing it right back to him here in our country. And people get pissed when they see Trump making these moves. He has to. He has to counter the stuff they're doing because, again, they want to destroy the grocery prices so that when it comes time to vote, you're like, screw these guys. Now, this is the direction I want to go. Or so that when it's stolen, you're like, well, it makes sense because

everybody was pissed about fuel and groceries and electricity. So it makes sense that we just got our ass kicked in midterms. Yeah. I mean, and when everything is so consolidated like that, it's impossible for you to check out of that system. So like you, it is now it is possible to be clear to check out a beef, right? You can go and buy local source beef and things like that. But it's also extremely expensive in comparison. You have a lot of states like mine that have also made it very difficult to go straight to your rancher. Exactly. To do it.

Because now the ranchers have to do, there's a workaround. Yep. They got to do these private clubs that you can become a part of to do these things. But if people think that, well, in the shit, it's a fan. I'm just going to drive out to my rancher and just buy the eggs from him or buy the beef from him. These guys, there's certain laws that have been put into place where they'll lose their ranch or their ability to sell if they do something like that.

again, because to make what you just said very difficult for people. This is what I talked about yesterday. I said I couldn't remember the name of it, Wicked versus Philburn. And it was in, I think it was 1939, I believe. And it was a Supreme Court decision that, so this guy was growing wheat, right? And the government was regulating how much wheat you were allowed to grow in order to manipulate pricing right and ensure that pricing didn't go too low if you flood the market it's it's disgusting and this for this to have happened in the 1930s I mean that's the whole FDR era so

this is you know a continuation of the progressive march towards the doom that we're facing right now the 40 trillion in debt we're facing right now and not allowing markets to regulate themselves and and whatever this guy was was like I'm gonna grow excess wheat to feed my own family to feed my own cattle to feed my own livestock. I'm not growing it and putting it on the market, but I'm just growing it from my own consumption. The government said, you're not allowed to grow it. And the Supreme Court upheld that saying that by him growing it, by them growing it, they are taking the millions of farmers across the country would manipulate the prices just by them growing their own

wheat. And so the government came in. The Supreme Court upheld a ruling forbidding farmers from growing excess wheat. They were only allowed to grow so much wheat. That's not capitalism. That is, that is sheer, sheer communism. 100%. They're literally describing market manipulation. Yes. You know, we got to allow this to happen and you're going to ruin that. You know, at nuke and I love nuke in the comments. I completely disagree though, nuke. And I would have agreed with you years ago, Newk put when the, when the shit hits the fan, ranchers won't care about those laws, though, Alpha. 10 years ago, 100% would have agreed with you, Newk.

What do we see during COVID? They did. And why? And it's not the good rancher's fault, because I agree with you where they stand on principal and Americana. The thing is, is the large ranchers, the ones that are controlled by the mechanism, they have the money to sustain those rules. So who's the FDA going to come after?

It's going to come after those little ranchers that say, I don't care. And the second, those little ranchers start getting that they show that they're getting clothes and their cattle's getting taken, because this is not a matter of, well, stand your ground. They've tried before. And the government's come in and just taking their shit, like literally a jack move. Now, granted, I think this administration would be in favor of those guys. And I think if there was ever a time for the small rancher to hold that fight, this is the window to do it. But if we're going off what we've seen over the last years, people didn't stand. the way we thought and it has goes goes into another conversation we've had so many times about you know

strong times breed weak men and we're we're in that cycle right now yeah i also don't think um that covid was necessarily that serious enough that it would it would implore ranchers and things like that to circumvent the law and completely circumvent the law and and the laws weren't put in place for covid so that to be clear these are pre-existing laws that they were complying with before beforehand. The narrow scope, there's a very narrow line between COVID and an actual shit hits the fan. And if you got to an actual shit hits the fan event where people are ignoring, you know, laws like that by the government, that's because the government has no enforcement mechanism remaining. They have no collapse. Right. It's collapsed. And at that point, the rancher negotiating with you is not going to be a thing.

that rancher is going to have to be concerned with either maintaining his entire herd himself or realizing that it's a lost commodity. Maintain what you need for bargaining and bartering and everything else, but the rest of it is going to be fend for yourself. That ranch is not going to be selling you beef for money. He's going to be selling you beef for security. Exactly. He's going to be feeding the people that are to protect his ranch's family and his cows.

And I think that that's what, in that's a name, because at that point we're talking apocalyptic that's where we're at and and the point that i think nukes making there is that and this goes back to gorsuch the the overruled book about regulations and and the few people that have stood up to the regulations and realizing that it's detrimental to you as an individual but has lasting consequences for your industry for your posterity etc etc there's just people that aren't willing to take that battle like a rancher saying this is bullshit that the government can tell me I can't sell you a cow is absolute bullshit but they don't have the balls to to fight it because the

government has unlimited resources the government will fight you until until you have nothing left even if it's something that you end up being victorious in right that's that's their goal is to wear you down and and force you into compliance and that's why I think we're in a weird, weird place in that cycle of, you know, strong men breed weak times. Yeah, strong men bring breed good times, good times, breed weak men, weak men, breed strong times. That cycle all, you know, continues like this.

So what this administration, I think, is trying to do is create a controlled hard time so that the institution itself doesn't collapse, but that we start to breed men that are strong again. you know and culturally i'm speaking not just men but culturally you know to help us come out of this but yeah you know and and i get what you're saying nuke you know that you know the rancher would just start throwing freedom seeds at everybody trying to come take your stuff and and you're not wrong about that but it's also people got to understand you only have so many and and what ultimately ends up happening is people begin to concede when it sees when they see the cost of other stuff and again we're talking about a very apocalyptic scenario that i don't ever see

happening but it you know there's bargaining that happens folks because again you only have so many freedom seeds and then when you get to the point what happens when you get to the point where it's not a bad man coming to attack your ranch it's a good man a man you know who is a god-fearing man but his family starving that those are the those are the conflicts that are scary when it's not good defending against bad, it's good fighting good because of the environment that's been created. Well, you also have an environment created where there's complete and total dependency on the government. I mean, if you look right now, President Trump is trying to get past a bill to subsidize more money to ranchers, to farmers. And all of that is going to end up going essentially to these

big four meatpacking firms, which are going to manipulate pricing. And, you know, these ranchers are beholden to them because they're the only place. that they can get their product processed because there's regulatory effects like you like you were saying they can't sell to the consumer directly they have to go through tyson they have to go through cargill they have to go through these companies and they can't they can't just go to their local farmers market and say here's a cow what do you want you know now they're getting around it you're seeing a lot of these a move that i heard and i don't remember the specifics of how they how they how they outlined it but this is this is from a group that does the cattle stuff out in texas and

And if Trump, there was something that was very simple, but that it would exponentially grow the cattle industry is that if Trump came out and provided financial incentives, whether it's through tax breaks or business breaks for cattle ranchers or not just even cattle ranchers, like, you know, just, you know, ranchers in general that started to put out their product locally. Like if there's a certain percentage that goes locally versus, you know, nationally or even internationally, that there would be. you know, like tax incentives or financial incentives to that, that you would encourage that more. Now, that's a way that you could kind of, you know, kind of subvert the big box stores like Tyson and stuff like that. Because, I mean, I'm not a rancher, so I don't know. But if I was going to be guaranteed to stay in a certain tax bracket, no matter how much money I made, if I was pushing out to my local state, I think I would subscribe to that. But again, it was a little bit more detailed than that, but they said that it would, it would, it would, that's something that would result in a very quick solution to what's going on.

Yep. Um, Ash says in the chat, money to farmers will go to the banks, which are in bed with the big four. Farm bailouts are massive scam. Yes, also tune into Badlands Book Club or AKA Bad mood story hour at 2 p.m. today covering the creature from Jekyll Island. It will be fantastic. Also, Rattlesnake Meat Co. Meets Co. Is it Meets Co? Or Meat Co. Rattlesnakemeetco.com promo code badlands. If you want farm to table, ranch to table, food, their products are fantastic. And that is how you fight back against these big four. That's how you fight back against it.

All right. Let's go ahead and hit a sponsor here real quick. Our next sponsor, I should say. And let me get this pulled up here. And there we go. All right, guys, this is a paid advertisement for Rumble Wallet. They're sponsoring this portion of the show. All right, chat, real talk.

If you actually want to grab our attention, there is now a clear line to it. Here is how it works. We are prioritizing grants sent through Rumble Wallet. If you send one and we see it, we'll respond. It's as simple as that. For a limited time, you can start your wallet with $20 in U.S. stable coins for tipping Rumble creators like us by entering our exclusive promo code daily 20 when you sign up now. Questions, hot takes, stuff you really want us to react to.

Don't bury it in the chat. Put it in a rant because let's be honest, regular chat flies by. But when you use Rumble Wallet, it cuts through everything. So here's the move. Scan the QR code or use the link in our description down below. Download Rumble Wallet, try it out yourself. And don't forget to use code Daily 20 and claim $20 for tipping in U.S. Stable Coins.

Sending a tip is easy. Just open the chat like you're sending a Rumble rant and hit pay with Rumble wallet. It's basically the VIP lane. You want a shout out. You want us to actually engage with what you're saying. the rumble wallet and claim that $20 in u.s. stable coins with promo code daily 20 then send the rant we'll be watching for them restrictions apply and there are a limited number of entries available terms and conditions apply see the description below or visit rumble.com slash promo official rules

for details all right then let's also talk about our friends over at well they're not really our friends it's us it's us stop disclosure these are the hands that built america Hands that hammered, hands that welded, hands that carried the weight of a nation. Soft disclosure offers here for the hands. Good Lord Randy. Working hands take a beating. Soft disclosure gives rough, dry skin, lightweight hydration that absorbs fast without leaving your hands greasy. Every purchase supports six small American businesses.

Take care of the hands that take care of everything else. Thanks, Papa. The hands that built me and you. All right, soft disclosure.com promo code Labor Day gets you 17% off. Also sign up for the newsletter there, get some special discounts. We won't flood your inbox with garbage mail. You'll get all the exclusive offers and details. I think there's even been like some other, well, I'm not going to say because I don't know for certain.

But yeah, soft disclosure, fantastic products. Looking forward to getting my beard oil back in. I just ran out this morning. So Ash got me covered. I got the new stuff coming. my favorite part of some of that beard oil you i think randy's a rancher randy looks like he's a rancher randy when he's not building when he's not building charters pink houses don't even go to there too all right let's uh let's get into some other news here um from the hill

democrats block proposed constitutional amendment to keep supreme court justices down to nine um again this is so stupid what i mean like i understand what they're trying to do here. And I do think that there should be a constitutional amendment, you know, explicitly outlining how many justices there should be on the Supreme Court, right? We have limits for Congress, obviously one president. We're supposed to have one representative for every 35,000 people. We don't. We have one representative for every 780,000 people now, two senators per state. But justices, there's no constitutional mandate for that. I get it. Also, they're going to use this as like, look, Democrats are totally going to pack the Supreme Court.

Well, that would be the Democrats have to get rid of the filibuster in order to do that. And maybe they are going to do that. And if that's the case, shame on you for being a feckless body that wouldn't get rid of the filibuster in the first place. So that you guys could then pass statute requiring only nine justices because you can do it by statute. It's nine, it's nine justices right now by statute. So they're going to have to change that statute. So if you want to get rid of the filibuster, get rid of the filibuster. And you pass the Save America Act and all the other stuff.

And I'll land that there. Do you think that that might be going in that direction? I don't know. That's such a garbage story. Wait, getting rid of the filibuster? Yeah, like the pretty much like what you've outlined right here, do you think this is kind of the purpose for that to kind of create that conversation and go in that direction? I think that ship has sailed now.

because so here's the thing one of two things if you if you if as a conservative a republican if you get rid of the filibuster you have to ensure that we have free and fair election 100% if not it's a death blow to ourselves it's a it's a death blow to the whole system and and I'm not just talking about like all the democrats are going to take it over and do all this craziness so are the republicans so are the republicans they're all going to do the craziness the filibuster maintains the status quo of where we're at right now it's a it's a compromise captured system, but the filibuster is actually a good thing in the system we're in as it exists right now because it's the only thing that protects each side from going full-scale retard with their

agenda, right? And I know this audience, they're going to be like, oh, well, the Republicans will do the right thing. No, they fucking won't. No, they won't. They'll just do the right thing in what makes you feel good while also beating you down in more debt. You know, so if we had free and elections and we had accountability and we had elected representatives that actually represented the people of this country and and you could have accountability then then i think you don't need the filibuster but as it sits right now you do i agree and i think at this point it's too late to be able to do any type effectuate any type of actual change to our elections uh at the federal level that would ensure um that we get an honest

election in the midterms. And I think, I don't know, I still, my personal take, my personal belief is that this is not going to be a major shift in policy, in, in, in partisanship in either direction in the House. I think it's going to remain pretty close to the same. You know, the, the numbers are going to shift and they will go, you know, a little better in our favor of the Republicans. It's not going to be like a massive shift. shift. It's going to be a decent shift. The point is the people that are going to become the Republicans is what's significant. It needs to be the numbers that Trump needs to push the agenda because I think we are, I think we're going to see it in a reverse order. We wanted

to filibuster so that way we can get what we want. I think what we're going to see is Trump take control after these midterms. And that's what's going to facilitate the, you know, the filibuster going by by before we get to 2028. And I don't think, I don't think the filibuster exists by the time we get to the next presidential election. I don't know. We'll know more after November 3rd or however many weeks it takes from the count the votes. You know what I mean, though. I don't know, man.

I just I talk about elections nonstop and could care less about actual elections. I talk about elections all the time. I don't give a shit about elections. So I don't think anything changes. I think we're going to see some significant change come midterms. And I think it's going to have a lot to do with the way they're deployed. We'll see. We'll see.

I'm willing to bet that no matter who takes power, not much changes. So all right, let's, and case in point, here you go. John Thune, Washington Post, Senate Majority Leader John Thune warns Republicans could lose the Senate. So what? So what? You guys have done absolutely jack shit. Two years and you've been babies. You've been, I was going to use a different word that starts with a P and rhymes with wussies.

You've been wussies. You know what I'm saying there. Two years and you've done jack shit for President Trump. And now you're like, hey, Republicans, we need you to come out and help us. And that's all say. Because that's what they do every single time to drive the campaign funding. Every single time. they get their money they get their slush funds for the next you know six years until you know how

you know how he would have got a lot of money into his campaign funding if that headline would have wrote or read sorry we're getting an attack because we passed the Save America Act and there and now they're coming after us we need you to out fund us so we can do more of that then people would have been like hell yeah hell yeah but of course 80% approval you know how many you know many conservatives you would have made if you guys had the balls to do something like that you would have had you would have had independence and this country is you know it's a it's a 30 30 30 30 split 30 30 30 30 30 30 split right 30 percent republican 30 percent democrat 30 percent independent is what we're being pushed into this belief now that's the belief that's been

coming out lately and so if that's the case if that's the case this was an opportunity to sway people into your into your camp right there conservatives people pass the Save America Act. Look, they actually had the balls to go and do something like this in a bill that was 80% approval. But they didn't. They didn't. And so I think the blame is more on them than it is on the, the quote unquote Democrats that refused it, that pushed it back against it. I think it's more on the Republicans for not having the balls to do something, to look at something that has an 80% approval amongst the population, or so we're told, and pass it. And do what has to be done to pass it. So shame on them.

That's all I got to say about that. I agree, but Trump knew exactly how it was going to play out. I don't disagree with that. All right. From New York Post, federal investigators met with Tish James Whistleblower, who claimed he was pushed to dig up dirt on sources. This was a great story we covered. I think it was, it might have been earlier this week or last week.

I can't remember. But this guy came out. And he was a, he was a, deputy he was a deputy district attorney or attorney general in her administration and i don't know if you saw this story alpha he came out and sent a a office-wide email to like over 2,000 people saying hey i've got f you money so i don't care if you guys blow back on me tish james told me to go after trump and his allies he told me or or not tis james shamosa mimawasi or whatever her name is said that go after Trump, get dirt on Trump and his allies.

Well, now the DOJ is investigating this. Daniel Weisenfeld, a former Brooklyn prosecutor in James office, had a lengthy sit down with both criminal and civil attorneys from the FBI and the U.S. DOJ over his bombshell claims, sources told the post, Weisenfeld claimed in an email to colleagues that his boss, Investor Protection Bureau Chief Shamiso Masawesi, instructed him to, quote, find and pursue enemies by Trump's allies. In a statement this week, Tish James's office, called the scandal, quote, a personnel matter,

saying that, quote, the office of the attorney general is committed to upholding New York's laws and protecting the rights and freedoms of all New Yorkers, regardless of political beliefs. We strongly reject any assertion to the contrary. Of course you do. Self-preservation is going down. She literally campaigned on that. I'm going to prosecute Trump. I'm going to get Trump. We're going to we're going to haul Trump in here and make him pay for his crimes.

He literally campaigned on that. And now she's like, that's totally that's probably the evidence that would be put from a jury. Like just 10 minutes of her saying, I'm going to go after Trump. Trump's done. This is my entire agenda. This will be my focus. I'm not sleeping.

Just clip after clip after clip. that's our opening argument, Your Honor. Yeah. All right. So that's the update on that story. That's all we know is that the DOJ is sitting down with the guys. So we'll find out more as we go. From the epic time, Judge Block's Trump's latest order aimed at limiting birthright citizenship.

The ruling from U.S. District Judge Deborah Bordman in Maryland granted a preliminary injunction saying that, quote, the president has tried through executive order to upend the country's longstanding tradition of birthright citizenship and eliminate for large swaths of Americans. The right to citizenship by birth, a right enthrined in the citizenship clause of the 14th Amendment, Boardman said in her opinion. They hate our country. They really do. Because that's not at all what the executive order says. The president signed two executive orders, ending birth tourism and continuing to protect the meaning and value of American citizenship. The latter sought to expand the definition of people who are ineligible for birthright citizenship. The order aimed to ban a foreign national traveling

to the United States on a tourist visa with the purpose of giving birth to a child in the country so that the child is guaranteed automatic U.S. citizenship. Then they return back to their country. They can come back to the U.S. whenever they want at that point. They don't live here. They can, you know, apply for all sorts of benefits. UACAVA. There's literally programs in China and Mexico for this very thing. They don't even hide it in those countries. countries. They tell you this, we will help you get to America to have your child born and then you can bring them back home. Yep. It's crazy. And not only that, you know, you and I talked about this one, there's the groups that that are sending, they're buying American citizens to have

their babies and they never even step foot on American soil. Chinese businessman, millionaire, billionaire, whatever in China that has over 100 kids in the U.S. 100 kids in the U.S. Never met their daddy. China men now becoming, well, we won't go there. Anyways, yeah, that's crazy. There's a lot of immigration stuff in the courts that came out today or yesterday. London Times, Obama appointed judge Hans Sanctuary City, a win, throws out Trump DOJ lawsuit against Rochester, New York, and rules that federal law cannot stop local officials from blocking ice.

Now, this was the case. Rochester, New York, some cops participated in a, they were called by federal law enforcement for backup in a traffic stop. And when they detained the people, the three Guatemalans that were part of that traffic stop, they got a whole shitload. Like their own mayor and chief of police came down on them was like, you're not supposed to be helping them. You know, they put them through extra training.

You know what that means, right? when you have to go through extra training. A federal judge in Rochester, New York, tossed the Trump administration's lawsuit against the city of Rochester sanctuary policies, slamming the door on the case with prejudice. Judge Frank P. Dracci, Geraci, Geraci, granted Rochester's motion to dismiss,

tossed the Justice Department's amended complaint with prejudice, preventing them from revisiting it in the same court. The administration argued that Rochester sanctuary policies intentionally obstruct federal immigration enforcement, unlawfully discriminate against federal authorities, and violate the Constitution's supremacy clause. The policies prohibit city personnel from using local resources to assist federal civil immigration enforcement, except we're specifically required by law. The Rochester police also are restricted from asking

about immigration status, honoring civil immigration detainers, assisting ICE and taking certain individuals into custody or cooperating with ICE border protection and customs or Homeland Security investigations without specific authorization. Jump down here and Judge Gerasi rejected the Justice Department's argument that two federal information sharing statutes, 8 U.S.C. 1373 and 1644, override Rochester's policies. Jeresee Jarosy concluded that the statutes could not preempt local law, because they regulate state and local government entities rather than private individuals. Now, I don't know what they mean by that.

They regulate state and local entities rather than private individuals. Are they saying that law enforcement is acting as private individuals when they're enforcing law? No, I don't know. You can't do that because you completely throw off all the other legal terms that are being used in the policies and statute. So I don't know what they're meaning there. I'd need definitely more to that. That said, though, you know, we're always told, you know, careful what you wish for and pick your fights. This is, granted, I'm against the sanctuary thing.

But, you know, taking the fight that federal law enforcement can't dictate what state and local law enforcement do is something that's probably going to majorly backfire in their face in the future. go back to the Biden administration, if you remember, and this was something that the leftist judges and Democrats absolutely supported, was when the FBI said, we're going to come and pick up some of these Catholic parents and these J-Sixers, and some of these sheriffs said, you're not going to do this in our state. And the FBI said, we will arrest the sheriffs. Well, they didn't, they didn't mind that argument in position of power then. And what was the argument we had? Local law enforcement has the authority. The sheriff has the authority. And I think that this is something that is going to be good because federal law enforcement is not going to be what in sanctuary cities.

It's going to help facilitate the immigration, you know, in the invasion crisis we had. But it's going to be the elections putting the right sheriffs in position that's going to end this stuff. That's going to end the sanctuary policies are going to go away when we have the people, like you said, fair and transparent elections. That's what's going to make this go away. But they're securing the argument right now that federal law enforcement doesn't have more jurisdictional power than state. And that is a good, that's something that benefits us in the long run. Well, there's also, you know, the concept of the supremacy clause. I talked about this at Gart is that's a, I want to say relatively new concept, but that wasn't the original intent of the Constitution.

Like when our country, when our Constitution was first ratified, there were states that did not have broad Second Amendment right. That didn't come about until I think it was like 1833. There was a case that said that there's supremacy clause that the U.S. Constitution reigns supreme. But prior to that it didn't exist. Now, I'm not saying that it shouldn't exist, right? And I think that in the Constitution offers the executive branch or doesn't offer it. It gives the executive branch the authority to maintain our borders and secure our borders. And I think that this is an extension of that.

And any law contrary to that, you know, and, And not just allowing the immigrants to live in the sanctuary city, but going beyond that and forbidding federal law enforcement from doing the constitutional job that was given to the president of the United States and securing the border. It's unconstitutional. I don't know why we're like the Supreme Court has to see this. You can't have a sanctuary policy. Like you can't just all of a sudden decide that you're going to. go against what what what what what is outlined in article two of the constitution as the president's authority i got to i got to answer new crook oh gosh nook says so alpha what about sheriff

standing up against the feds when the feds come to still a rancher's land and cattle in a shit it's the fan scenario didn't you just make the argument that the feds would rightly uh that would be rightly no i didn't make that argument i said that's what's going to happen i'm not i'm not saying that guy i don't agree with that but that's what's going to happen and it has happened we already we've already had the federal government come in and take over people's you know their land what was the big thing that pete santilly was a part of a few years ago that was all over the headlines with the ranchers oh the bundies yeah there you go the you know it there's a precedence for that i'm not saying that it's right i'm just saying that's

what will happen and we've already seen that in the end people concede um all right let's jump into this well it's not really a story press release from the DOJ justice department clarifies duty of states to report known illegal aliens under welfare reform law the office of legal counsel this is fascinating I didn't realize this this goes back to the Clinton era and their interpretation of of law the office of legal counsel has issued a legal opinion clarifying that when a state chooses to participate in the temporary assistance for needy families TANF and the supplemental security income programs all agencies within that state, not only those that administer TANF or SSI benefits, must report individuals known to be not lawfully president in the United States. This is going to be interesting how this competes with what we just covered.

Quote, Congress wrote this requirement plainly, said Assistant Attorney General T. Eliot Gaser. When a state chooses to participate in TANF, it accepts the obligation to report illegal aliens in the United States. tax dollars intended to help vulnerable Americans should not perversely encourage illegal entry into the U.S., but rather should reinforce our laws and our borders. This could kill sanctuary cities and sanctuary policies if they're going to accept government subsidies, period. It doesn't matter if it's for illegals. It doesn't matter if illegals aren't getting it. If they're not using state entities to report these people to the federal government,

they may be disqualified from receiving this is this is definitely going to be you know they're going to sue over this uh congress wrote this requirement plainly said assistant attorney general oh i read the one our clarification does not impose new obligations on states says deputy assistant attorney general joshua cratic it simply restores the original meaning of the statute congress enacted and ensures that dhs receives the information it is legally entitled to now the office withdrew a Clinton era opinion from 1998 that construed the reporting requirement much more narrowly. It only only the specific state agencies administering TANF or SSI were required to provide information to federal immigration authorities.

Federal TANF funding grants exceed $16.4 billion annually. That's actually the one we talked about like two weeks ago, Alpha, the James O'Keefe where he was in New York going to the rest, to the, to the. bodegas and and we said you know 16.4 has been steady across 30 years it hasn't gone up so it's started at 16.4 billion and it's remained the same but these these are being paid out to uh you know families and and like depending on what state you live in the the amount that they pay out can be much greater they supplement it with uh with state funding as well like texas you only get like 600 bucks but you go to like minnesota and i think it was up to like 1,100 so they're they're they're

essentially hurting people into these blue states that are offering more of these social welfare benefits but this is absolutely going to get sued they're going to get sued for hell yeah it's going to i don't know why people got so upset with me uh ravel mader says in the end people concede spoken like a true authoritarian. Listen, I'm just saying what happened. I'm not a fan of that, but if you go back to Biden's administration, generally speaking, the vast majority of people conceded at all levels of government, local, county, state, federally, and guess what? The people conceded right now more than 75% of the people don't believe or trust the government now if that statistic is true then why is the government still in power because people conceded now the the it was designed

that way the mechanism was designed and first of all you can count on your hand not on both hands You can count on one hand how many people didn't concede to the government during Biden administration that were attacked by the FBI. I was one of them. And I won. So I walked the walk. I'll say that much. That said is I think Trump has an understanding of this. Because the way, in my opinion, the way this mechanism was created was create the illusion of freedom.

So that way we maintain power. But create this illusion of freedom in the sense. that if they go to ever challenge this illusion of freedom, we have a system in place that if they go and they generate mass chaos, air quotes to a civil war or a revolution, that we have it infiltrated, so we'll still main power after that as well. They had the contingency set up.

And I think Trump under, I know Trump understands that. And that's why what we're seeing is a very finesse of create enough acknowledgement that the government is. is not in your favor, which is why we probably have that over 75% where people don't believe the government is why we have that. But it's being done in a way where Trump can still facilitate order to get us in the way where we come to the brink of, okay, do we got to go there? But we never do. And then we do this in a way that's not so chaotic. Just my opinion. All right. Well, you know, getting back to

the case here and I don't know specifically what the law says here, but it seems like the Office of Legal Counsel's opinion explains that Congress defined quote unquote state broadly in the personal responsibility and work opportunity reconciliation act of 1996. So this is going to be much like, you know, what we've called for with the schools and everything else where if the states don't want to comply with this, then they're just going to lose federal funding. And the same thing is what should be happening with, and I was trying to bring this all together here with the judge in Rochester, New York that said that the sanctuary law enforcement doesn't, or the sanctuary city law enforcement doesn't have to comply with those specific information sharing laws. Okay, then all your

federal funding for law enforcement is cut. If you're not going to cooperate with your federal partners, then you don't get funding. And I don't think it should be funded in the first place, you don't get funding. And then watch how quickly they come back on that. But then if they, if they do that, then they sue and that gets tied up and they end up, you know, getting the same liberal-minded judge.

Well, not even liberal-minded, but, you know, lunatic. I don't know how else to describe it. Anybody that would think law enforcement should be, you should be able to pass a law that allows illegals to live in your, in your place and in your city or state. Anyways, all of it comes back full circle.

right all of it comes back full circle and when when you use the power of the purse and you try and stop funding for for for excuse me entities that don't comply with with federal law it's absurd that you can't do that like there is no there is no enforcement mechanism at that point so listen i'd take it a step further and remove all their access to federal data data programs and everything make them fill the pinch you want to operate independently be independent then but again you are you know remove them from any federal task force and all that which again it's probably not a bad idea in the long term because me and you definitely agree in that as well but but in the interim you know yeah um you guys are such black pillars in the in the chat

AI data centers are going to be tyranny bro nuke i love you they do they do did that under Biden. Shut down my bank accounts. You got you got 21 days to remove your money. You think you think them tracking your license plate matters. They showed us during Biden's administration that in the amount of a few days, they can take away your ability to use the existing economic system that's in this country. I can't tell you how hard it is to do when you can't have access to everyday banking and

you got to find these like you know hole in the wall ones or some that are specific that I won't name just in case we ever need them again travel you're just using what aboutism though that's not what Biden did it it's not right not right being done now that's not what I'm saying what I'm saying what I'm saying is people are selling the idea like this is what's coming it's been here is the argument I'm making right now they shut down my and I'm using myself an example so people can't say oh it's hearsay or it's an opinion because they did this to thousands of Americans, shut down my ability to bank, prevented me from getting a job because they flagged my account. Every job I applied for, they saw that and they, we ain't giving you a job, took my ability to travel. Some of you witnessed that

yourself. So that's what I'm saying is everybody's sounding like these data centers are going to bring the surveillance state. It's been in place. And what I've been hearing since last year is that these AI laws and or these AI concepts and laws to facilitate that that Trump's going to pass are going to be weaponized the American people. And what I've have seen is these things be used by our federal resources and local resources to take down actual terrorist groups to actually go and find these people that are coming across the border. Exactly what we said Trump's intentions were are there. Now granted, I don't have any, I can empathize with everybody that has our position because we're taking that position or I believe people like rebel and others

have that position because of what historically we've been through. The Patriot Act is a great argument to make that. And I would concede all those arguments. At the end of the day, it comes down to a fundamental question that I've said over and over over the last few years. Do you trust Trump? Because if you do, AI is a genie that you're not putting back in the bottle. We are in an AI energy race with China. Whichever country, people say, well, this stuff, This is a constant. This is why I say unrestricted warfare, remove emotional and ethical arguments. I understand people are like, we've got to protect the Constitution. If China, which I understand people try to make it seem like they're not a real threat.

The deep state part of China is, because it's part of the global mechanism. If China reaches peak AI before us, some people want to call it, AGI, sentient AI, whatever you want to call it. If China reaches that before us, your constitution doesn't matter. We have the strongest military in the world. It doesn't matter. Whoever reaches that point, though, what's that? We still have sovereignty. Not if China wins.

Let me explain to you why we don't. What do we need in order to have sovereignty? You're explaining it to me like, like, is the same thing as explaining why we need more nukes than the Russians. It's the same, it's the same Cold War strategy. It's just now instead of nukes, we're turning in the strategy. The strategies are not any different. The fact is, is before the bad guys owned both sides of the strategy, it wasn't a lie. It's just that they controlled both sides because they were the threat.

So the Cold War nuke argument is not a fake argument. It's just we didn't have control of either side. So they wanted us to become tribal because they controlled both sides of it. In this AI thing, what I'm saying is it doesn't matter if we have the strongest military. If China gets to that point of AI, none of our AI, none of our military will be able to, able to prevent the encryption. Like we have no encryption that will be able to defend against. So what happens when we don't control our own tomahawks?

What happens when we don't control our ballistic bunkers? What happens when we don't control our ships? What happens when we all our high tech shit is, it would be hacked. And that's the people, the AI is a loaded gun that is right there sitting on the coffee table. And so, so what do you, what do you, what do you think China is going to do with that? like nuke America and just make us all here. The number one consumer of their products. It would never be doing that they're economically viable is because of U.S.

consumerism. It would never do that. That makes no sense. It would do to us what is doing to its own people. That's the person. Prisoner's dilemma. At worst. It's just a race to,

you know, well, look, the surveillance thing, I'm 100% on board with the surveillance thing should not be. But that's not the, that is the direction that they're taking it with things like flock cameras and all of that stuff and they do it in the name of security and all that.

But the AI data centers, I think it goes beyond just surveillance on us. I think it's, well, I don't know. It doesn't. You're talking technology. You're talking. There's a lot. There's a lot. The same people there are like, I don't want my AI data.

I don't want AI data centers are also the same people that have chat GPT on their phone. And they're like sitting there asking chat GPT questions and Googling everything. And it's like if you don't want AI data centers, throw away your iPhone, throw away your galaxy, throw away all the technology that you have. And to be fair, there are people that do that. And I commend you guys for it because you at least back up what you stand for. But I'm not going to see. Let me present this question to you and to the chat. Do you think China would love for the American population to get its government to say, we're going to stop AI data centers? Or do you think

China would be like, no, that you can't do that. I mean, of course they would like that to happen. Sure. Exactly. Yeah, but that's like saying, do you think the Russians would like for us to say stop building nuclear weapons in the 80s? Yes, of course. Yeah, exactly. But they got to do the same thing. And it's the prisoner's dilemma. If we don't stop doing it, they're going to keep doing it.

And you can't, that's the thing. You can't stop doing AI. It's the genie that's out of the bottle. So the question is, is if you can't put it back in the bottle, then what's the next, what's the next step? control. We're all going to be controlled by machines in 20 years, so it doesn't matter. We're already controlled by machines. We're just going to be overtly controlled by machines. If China beats us, absolutely. If we continue to have good men like Trump, I'm not saying the government, Trump and certain figures, and we can continue to facilitate that even at a little bit bigger scale,

then I think we're good. We are, we are generation, our generation, people your age, right? in their in their late 30s early 40s early 50s we're the last generation that's going to push back against this kids in their 20s kids in their teens they're going to be welcoming to all of this they're they're going to they grew up with this we did not we did not grow up with the internet what we did for maybe like our late teens and on we didn't grow up with this not not in the scale that we have now they're growing up with it progressively you know uh growing more and more and more They're going to be so used to this that it's not going to, they're not going to see any other way to get out of it. It's the same argument that our grandparents made about our parents and our parents made about us.

And here we are. And here we are. Our parents, my grandparents railed on the internet back in the day. And now I have the internet on everything. Everything. That's what I'm saying. You're not putting the genie back in the bottle. So it comes down to control. Who's going to control it? Yeah. I agree with that. I also agree with the chat that's saying, you know, surveillance and all that stuff. and i totally get that this is one of the reasons why we absolutely need an internet a digital bill of rights i stand by that i know it's unpopular but it is what it is as said alpha does community

consent to data centers matter or not because china it doesn't matter no i will i will take any violation of the constitution to make sure that we don't lose over china because if we lose to china your defense oh god oh jeez what i'm just going to say the part that people need to hear If your defense of the Constitution, that the moral, let's put ourselves on the moral high ground, right? The ethical high ground. If your defense of the Constitution means you lose the war to China, do you think China's going to come back to America and say, hey, you guys still wanted to defend your Constitution? So even though we're going to enslave you, you still get to maintain your constitution. No, we become China owns us.

That's what happened. What you see in China happens here. Now, with me just saying the part that people need to recognize. You just said that it's worth it to ignore the Constitution if it means... And it's not a first time I've said it. What do you think unrestricted warfare is? Now, what I'll say, what I will say is that this military operation that's in play is doing it in a very covert way that we think, that we think that our constitution

is still being upheld because that's why you have covert operations and that's why you have unrestricted warfare. This is not a new position. You cannot be, if your enemy is, if your enemy is fighting in unrestricted warfare and you think you're going to beat on following the rules, then you've already lost the battle. There are good men out there that are doing things that they will take to the grave so that all of us can sit here and be we we had the moral high ground not realizing what was done for us that you'd be able to say that we might have to we might have to hash this one out tonight we got to get to our last two stories

before we get out of here uh from the ap judge lacked power to overturn ex-soldier beau birddall's military conviction conviction appeals court rules interesting decision here and backfires on bird dawes he was trying to sue the government a three judge panel from the u.s appeals court in D.C. ordered the dismissal of Bergdahl's claims in district court. The panel said that district judge Reggie Walton in Washington lacked the jurisdiction to vacate Bergdahl's court martial conviction and sentenced back in 2023. Bergdahl had sued in 2021, arguing that the punishment violated his Fifth Amendment due process rights and that military judge Jeffrey Nance created a potential conflict of interest by failing to disclose his application for a position as an immigration judge in

the Justice Department. But the appeals court says, guess what? You ain't got the right to overturn a military tribunal. The appeals court concluded that only military tribunals have the authority to vacate a court martial judgment. Therefore, Bergdahl's claim thus conflicts with that longstanding limitation, said circuit judge Robert Wilkins. So unfortunately, Bergdall did not get any prison time for being a deserter, got a green beret killed, got several others killed and injured, trying to rescue him when he just walked off his post to join the Taliban. What a weird story that was, by the way. Remember when we interviewed Jeremy Brown about that story?

And he was on that mission. And I got to reach back out to him. He's got a new number now. I got to reach back out to him, get more on that stuff. now that he's out and pardoned and everything else. But Bergdahl did not get any time. He got a dishonorable discharge. He got like $10,000 fine.

No time served for being a deserterter. So now he just goes back to being dishonorably discharged. And I couldn't care less about Bergdahl. But interesting ruling there. He should be in a prison. Yeah. He should absolutely be in prison. That guy, I mean, if it wasn't such a.

you know a public case at the time and the the obama implications that went on with it yeah he would be in prison um have you seen this video the ukraine sb u.s versus the the h u.s you are no i'm not oh so the this is this is in ukraine check this out allegedly So there was apparently blue on blue, a little kerfuffle here. RT, a couple are reporting on it, but we'll go to RT for this one. Warfare between Ukraine's special services, why have gunfights broken out in Kiev? Two of Ukraine's most powerful security services agencies engaged in an open gunfight in central Kyiv that left three servicemen injured, one's dead,

between the secret security services of Ukraine, the SPU, and the military intelligence agency, the H-U-R, it has said Ukrainian media has said that the SPU's claims to recent detention of a senior figure in a neo-Nazi-linked Kiev unit called the Russian Volunteer Corps, or RDK, a paramilitary unit led by neo-Nazi Dennis White Rex Kapustin, and was designated a terrorist organization by Moscow, and under the control of the H-U-R, one of Kapustin's deputies, Stephen Kaplanov, a Russian national, had been abducted near his home in Kiev by SBU agents, and apparently H-UR wanted them back.

The SBU initially claimed it had thwarted an attempted assassination by a gunman linked to Russian security services, targeting, quote, one of the leaders of the Russian National Opposition Movement and even H-U-R assistance. Both agencies were overhauled with assistance from our very own CIA. Following the Western back coup in 2014, according to Western media reports, the two services have reportedly previously clashed with each other

throughout Ukraine's gradual disintegration and radicalization. Now, keep in mind, this is RT. In 2020, the SBU reportedly summarily executed a Ukrainian negotiator, whom the agency suspected of spying from Russia. this was banker Denise Kareve and it was later revealed that he had been working for the H-U-R. So you've got now caught on camera, SBU-H-U-R going at each other. H-U-R apparently has, you know, a Russian asset. SBU wanted him.

They went to take them. And H-U-R is like, the fuck you are. And they started shooting at each other right in the middle of the street. It's like, that's, that's actually our guys. we're getting them back because we know what you guys are going to find uh all you need is that that funny circus music on that one man i actually kind of respect them for that man like if if if you have an asset that's being taken like let's go listen you ain't taking them i respect everyone in that scenario because what you saw there which is different than what you

see all these other viral videos did you see all these dudes take off running yeah no they all stuck around yeah now you all this is going to be a fight gun firing and this is going to be a fight who all right um different different environment for for men in that field all right let's jump into uh the rants here and uh cam coxie what up can and alpha weird seeing alpha on time i thought he was one of us can what's your email asking for a friend named little jean have a great thursday chatlandia appreciate it cam appreciate you brother lee wald and a hoi brian and alpha heads up november 7 through 8th nassau max power air show at kennedy space center tech review of our future of space and technology hope you get a chance to review it great work guys November 7 through 8 NASA max power air show

at canady space center that's uh that's in florida right Kennedy space centers up in up in the Space Coast. I thought it was Florida. Or is that the one in Texas? Where is the Kennedy Base Center? Yeah, Merritt Island, Florida. I might have to go to that, seventh and eighth. Yeah, the one in Texas is Isn't Gart that weekend? And that's on the west coast of Florida. I think Gart, not Sarasota, what is it?

St. Pete. St. Petersburg. We call it St. Pete. now we don't call it st petersburg anymore because send me st pete not it's not saint pete that's isn't that where we were by when we were in uh yeah we yeah when we did when we did cocoa beach we're right there by merit island yeah yeah all right lee walden do you recall the legal battle that a omish farmer named amos raw milk and natural farming barns was his lawyer bar bar Lee Walden with the talk to talk to text. Yeah, we do remember that. Yep.

Bobuifu, tech needs to be hardened against AI. You can't harden tech against AI. When AI gets that point, you're not going to be able to stop it. 88 SATs rated the stream. Captain 173 by Bitcoin. Lee Walden, I for one still believe in the promise of America, still within our reach, better yet worth the fight. my oath has no expiration date where we go and we go all semper phi and simper piratus to you

lee walden appreciate you guys all right guys smash that thumbs up if you have not done so already we've got uh ash and i will be on badlands book club aka bad mood bad mood hour uh bad mood hour here in about two hours and then alpha and i will be back on uh sit rep tonight at 9 p.m. Eastern, so tune into that. Anything you got coming up, brother? Uh, no, just hail King Trump. Also throughout the Constitution, if China is, is threatening. Not what I said. Yeah, it's pretty much what you said. No, pretty much what you said. We'll unpack it tonight. We'll see you guys later. Unrestricted warfare.