Timcast IRL - Candace Owens Implies TPUSA KILLED Charlie Kirk, Claims Failed Bibi Deal Cost MILLIONS w/ Nick Freitas

Episode Date: December 3, 2025

Tim, Phil, & Elaad are joined by Nick Freitas to discuss Candace Owens implying TPUSA was behind assassination of Charlie Kirk, Sabrina Carpenter losing it over the White House using her song, NYT debunking the Hegseth Narco Bombing hoax, and the GOP winning the special election in Tennessee.   Hosts:  Tim @Timcast (everywhere) Phil @PhilThatRemains (X) Elaad @ElaadEliahu (X) Producer: Serge @SergeDotCom (everywhere) Guest: Nick Freitas @NickJFreitas (X) Nick Freitas is an American Republican politician, former U.S. Army Special Forces veteran, and social media influencer who has served in the Virginia House of Delegates since 2016.

In a viral post on X, Candace Owen says she is convinced she has received information that she believes proves turning point USA has betrayed Charlie Kirk. What does that really mean betrayed? Well, she's implied that there's multinational organizations involved in the assassination. There's Israelis, the French Foreign Legion. And with this latest post, the implication a lot of people took away is that they were involved in some way in the murder of Charlie Kirk, which, considering what we've seen all. already over the past couple of months, most people just believed that's the insinuation she's been desperately trying to make, which is really funny because so many people come on and go, she never said that.

She's like, dude, come on. The post that she's made, the claims that she's making, in another claim, I believe this was today's episode, she said that one of the individuals, a higher ranking individual, a turning point lost millions of dollars when they didn't do a deal with BB Netanyahu. You add all these things together. She's painting a picture of Turning Point, angry that charge. Charlie wouldn't work with Israel, was turning on Israel, so turning point betrayed him because they lost money and had him killed and they used French foreign Legion or whatever to do it. I got to be honest.

Well, I'll save the overt commentary for the show, but the insinuation that you're seeing across X, the implication she's making, they were involved in the murder of Charlie Kirk, which I'm just going to say outright, I think is silly. But we'll talk about that. And there's a bunch of actually important news. The Washington Post claimed that Hegsseth, Secretary of War, ordered the killing of survivors of a drone strike as they were clinging to a boat for dear life. And the New York Times said that that's never happened. They actually checked with five different sources independent of each other. And they all said, Hegson just gave an order to strike the boats and left. So why did the Washington Post lie?

Because they are now claiming in the press formally that the actions taken by Trump's administration are illegal and the orders given are illegal. at the same time Mark Kelly, Alyssa Lachin, and many of the Democrats have told the military to defy illegal orders. This is why they are putting out these lies. They are factionalizing our military and, well, you all know what I think about that. So we'll talk about that plus some silly stories. Sabrina Carpenter's all mad because the White House used her song. Oh, cry more about it, lady. But before we get into all that, we got some great sponsors, my friends. We got Tax Network, USA. My friends, the IRS needs more money. Your money.

With President Trump pushing to abolish federal income taxes and replace them with tariffs, so foreign countries pay America instead of American workers. Washington is scrambling to protect its revenue. Congress will fight tooth and nail to keep that from happening, and the IRS is already becoming more aggressive as it tries to prove it can still bring in billions if income taxes disappear. If you owe the IRS back taxes, they can garnish your wages, leave your bank accounts, seize your retirement, or even take your home.

Don't the IRS target you. Call the professionals at Tax Network USA. The tax lawyers and enrollment agents are experts in powerful programs that may even help you eliminate your tax debt. Tax Network USA is A-plus rated and has saved over $1 billion for their clients, whether you owe a few thousand or a few million they can help you. With one phone call, you can start the process of stopping the threatening demand letters, stop aggressive collections and resolving your tax matter once and for all, but you must act now while you still have options. for a free consultation call 1-800-958-1,000, or visit tnusa.com slash Tim. Shout at Tax Network USA for sponsoring this show.

We also have pool water. Have you ever wanted to drink pool water? If you have, there's something wrong with you. But if you want to drink our pool water, you can go to casparoo.com and pick up a 12-pack of 12-ounce glass bottles of cool, crisp, refreshing artesian pool water. Artesian, whatever. We only had about 800 cases that we actually made, and there's 275 left.

So if you would like to have bottles of these in your home, shipping can actually be a little expensive. It's heavy. It's water. But think about how much fun you'll have when a guest comes over and say, you want to drink pool water? And they're going to go, oh, no, what? And you're like, no, here you go. And then you hand them this bottle, and they go, ha-ha, you are the funniest person I've ever met. It's exactly how it will go down. Check out casparoo.com.

And you can pick up our pool water, as well as, I don't know, we got Mary's Ghost Blend, and we've got a bunch of different coffees. They're all delicious. Wait till you see what we've got coming out for Valentine's Day. You're going to lose your minds. Don't forget to also smash that like button. Share the show with literally everyone you know. Joining us tonight to talk about this and everything else is Nick Fradis.

Great to be back. Welcome back, sir. Who are you? What do you do? Well, I'm currently in the Virginia House of Delegates, although I'm not seeking re-election, which, given the last election results, probably a good move. But, yeah, no, a host of Making the Argument and the Wine Minutes

and other, you know, snarky mug compilations on. on social media. Right on. Well, it's always great to have you. So welcome back. It's going to be fun. We got a lot of hanging out. Good evening, everybody.

I am Alad Aliahou White House correspondent here at Timcast. What's up, Phil? Hello, everybody. My name is Philobanti. I'm the lead singer, the heavy metal in all that remains. I'm an anti-communist

and a counter-revolutionary. Let's get into it. And real quick, just one more quick promo this Saturday at 9 a.m. At Hollywood Charlestown, I will be playing poker with professional poker player Faraz Jaka. Y'all are welcome to come and play.

I imagine the tables are going to be full up super quick. So if you show up, you might just end up playing with some other people. But we will be there. It's kind of a meetup game, I guess, and it's going to be a lot of fun. We didn't know if we wanted to announce that we were going to be having this game. But I figure, hey, show up and let's see if we can pack this poker room. But let's get into the story here from Raw Story.

Charlie Kirk was betrayed. Right-winger turns on turning point leadership after murder. Candice has, I would just describe it as officially gone for, I don't know, what would you describe this? the kill shot on Turning Point USA. She is not just implying that they were involved in the murder of Charlie Kirk, but that everybody should get a refund and she's trying to get them to pull their donations. She tweets,

I received information last night that put the final pieces together for me. I now can say with full confidence that I believe Charlie Kirk was betrayed by the leadership of Turning Point USA and some of the very people who eulogized him on stage. Yes, I will be naming names and providing evidence for my claims. and I'm making a personal plea to every well-meaning person who donated to this God-versaken organization to request a refund you were lied to and leadership knew. Oh, boy, Candice is doing everything she can to destroy Turning Point USA. And then we have, we have this video. Evan Kilgore posted it.

Candice Owens just said a close family friend of Andrew Colvert allegedly reached out to her and said that Andrew told them he lost out of millions when Charles. rejected the deal with Benjamin Netanyahu earlier this year. Let me play the clip for you from her show. It's a minute long. We just can't all be hanging out in Delaware. And there's one more thing that came in regarding Andrew Colvette, very close family friend of Andrew Colbert had messaged me early on. And I, again, was not tracking any of this at the time.

But they had said that they felt that Andrew Colbert was acting weird. And I'm sure that's not a big deal. I don't think we were all acting weird. Charlie who was assassinated, but moreover, they had mentioned that specifically Andrew had told them that when Charlie said no to Beebe, he lost out on millions. Now I'm going to say allegedly because this is a tip, but I have that tip in writing. I'm not lying to you. And I thought to myself, that is so weird. How could the spokesperson at Turning Point USA be on the, how could they be gaining millions from that? What's the, what is the structure here of these contracts and even people that are in PR, people that are like running PR departments are getting tips on the basis of donations. I don't know how this is working, but we need to figure out how this is working. I think it's really important that we, that we learn the truth about what happened. Who's Pierre? Is it Pierre department?

And has turning point been paid? Obviously, it wouldn't be on this year's taxes. We're not going to find those on this year's taxes, but they would be on next year's, but we can ask now. you know I was having a conversation with a friend of mine and we are talking about how the average reading level in the United States is around like seventh grade and I think she first at the eighth grade and I was like you know this is funny because this just this just came up on Tim Kestai or other night I think it's actually around seventh grade and then I was like I double checked because we pulled up the data and it's it actually ranges from between fifth to eighth grade so it's like six seventh grade reading level and if I don't think Candace is stupid I think she's actually super intelligent. I think she's a genius. And what I mean by that is not that she's a good person, but I believe that she is extremely aware. She is quick to learn and understand what she's doing. That's why I think what she's doing is amoral, is wrong, it's immoral, because the way she just phrased

all of that to imply that there was some illicit deal with Andrew Colvert and Israel, it's exactly what she's been doing. And I'm going to say this, much to the, I suppose it'll sound elitist and insulting, but the people of low reading comprehensive. who can't parse through the manipulations. They believe this. Let me, I said, I was sitting, I was, I was at the poker room over the weekend. And there were these young guys who were like, did you hear that Candace isn't hiding now? Because Israel and like, they're trying to kill her over this Charlie stuff.

And I said, you mean how she posted her show was off the air for the week because it was Thanksgiving? And they were like, she didn't say that. I'm like, yeah, she didn't say anything. It was vague. That's what she does, vagaries so that you connect the dots. and you can believe whatever it is you want to believe without or actually having said anything. So only put it like this. If Andrew Colvin is working in a nonprofit or literally anybody works in a nonprofit,

often you get commissions on, it's called development. If you bring in a large donor, you will get a commission. That is completely normal at nonprofits. You may not like it. People may say, I think it's wrong that you get a commission on donations, but nonprofits are the same than any other business. So executive directors at nonprofits at big ones are going to make. million dollars salaries. And it is, I honestly think it's stupid that people get mad about this because

if you want CEO level talent, you have to pay CEO level wages. Usually it's not going to be identical. You know, I think Charlie was getting, I think they say it was around a million bucks between the four, between four different nonprofits. And he was worth substantially more than that. His show alone was probably bringing away more anyway. But if Colvette or literally anybody was organizing some kind of deal, be it with Netanyahu or anyone else, now you can argue that in of itself is wrong. But getting a commission on a donation is actually fairly routine for big organizations, especially when someone is working. They call it development. So the insinuation now is that Turning Point USA killed Charlie, but the Sledgehammer, of course, is when she says,

everybody should request a refund from this organization. Now, obviously, y'all know that, you know, we have the minorist of drama issues with Turning Point. We're not going to be there at Amfest, but it is what it is. I ain't crying about it. I've, you know, I've talked to these guys relatively often, so whatever. But the idea that you would try to destroy them and get everybody to pull their donations using the insinuation they murdered Charlie Kirk is evil. It's evil. My whole thing with this, because I get asked about what do you think about with Candace did or what's it? Like, look, I got no problem with people that want to question the official narrative.

No problem. You know, I got questions. about the whole 30 out six caliber and is this really going to do the damage, et cetera. Sure. What I don't understand, though, and I worded it to someone this way once, I said, if I spent my entire life building an organization that I truly believed in and I built a life with my wife who I absolutely loved, and somebody came out and started making accusations that both the organization that I built and dedicated my life to and the women I dedicated my life to were somehow complicit in my murder.

I would hope, I would hope that they had real receipts before they were, before they were willing to put my wife or my organization, my life's work on the line for that. Again, you can ask all you want, but I would hope before people would believe that, you would actually be bringing something fairly concrete. As Candace? Man, I'd hope that, well, I can only imagine that if slash when I die, I got a lot of text messages with people that can be made to see. You know what? I wonder if I could like, you could take any text message from me to anybody else and make it sound crazy. Let me see if I can find. Especially Thames. Well, hold on. I'm grabbing Phil over here. Let's see. I'm going to, hold on. What is this? What is this? I'm sure that there are sufficient text messages in my phone that would do me in. I'm trying to find a text from Phil that's not really like bad. It's kind of vague. Hard ours, straight hard hours all the time. I mean, there's just the N-word like crazy.

I don't want to read any of those. No, but like, I'm not going to read anything explicitly, but like the point I'm making is I just pulled up the text I have with Phil. And here's one. Hey, Tim, thanks again for today. When you get a chance, can you shoot me Chad's number? And then all I have to do is go, here's a message from Phil. Chad, I remember that day when we were all hanging out.

It was so sad. And, you know, Phil looked at me and he said, brother, we're in this together. And I went, I'm right there with you. That's what she's doing. She's just showing like any random text. And it's just, it's really gross.

How much stuff is she actually shown? I'm not following. So I don't, I can't say that I've watched every episode she's ever done, but I watched her show today. And what I will say is when everyone, I've watched a handful of her shows. I've watched the ones that are relevant to what we're, you know, what's been going on.

But I don't follow all of it. And I always see people be like, she's not claiming turning point was involved and I'm like, then you didn't watch the show where she was like, inside job? That's how I feel. I have no, what else can you think? Rejoide. Yeah, Regicide. And the fact that she says things like, the caveat's always

that's how I feel and it's not any kind of of actually substantial evidence. It's all implication and she's covering her tracks by saying this is how I feel. I hate the whole thing like from top to bottom. All of the stuff that's that all of the people talking about Charlie's murder, post-Charlie's murder,

it all just seems like, you know, sharks in the water looking to pick up there a little bit of, you know, whatever they can get attention you can get. I have to say this, but I'm not going to say who told me it. But, you know, this issue, of course, comes up in these private circles. I get asked by a lot of people I meet who know who I am. The first thing they ask me about is Candace and what you said about Turning Point. and I have to be like, let's just stop and analyze what she said. And like, you tell me what you think.

But someone today was talking to me about it. And they were just like, you know, Candice has made a lot of insinuations. And this latest one with like Andrew Colvette losing millions of dollars, like the implication that he's going after Charlie, whatever. And then this person I'm talking to goes like, you know, he's not a chess player. And that's like the nicest way of saying with all respect to Colvette that he doesn't have. the capability to plot something of this. I'm not trying to be a dick. Yeah.

But like the insinuation that their spokesperson had the capability to map out this, this plan involving the French Foreign Legion and Israeli spies and like getting security pulled from the roof. Just all of that's required. Now, I got to be honest, I've worked a security companies where I've met people who you can tell have that capability. And I'm sure you have to. It's not as easy as people want to make it out to be. It's absolutely not.

And any, like we talked about it before, like a single janitor walking up, the roof would have ruined the whole thing. So there's all these little nooks and crannies that have to be available. And that's why I think it is actually very strange. When Charlie's security was like, the police said it was, you know, it was fine. They got it. And I'm like, nah, that don't add up. Like security companies don't just be like, we know those roof access and we're not

going to put an old lady knitting in front of the door. Like you have an old lady knitting in front of the door and Charlie's alive. So that does not add up. I mean, you know, Occam's razor, Hanlon's razor. It's just a very, very awful security company. But to then go and insinuate that the people who were made rich by Charlie turned on him, you know, the comments that I made before that got them upset with me was that I said there are people at turning point that fear they can't make it without Charlie. The people at turning point, like they all, they all stood to make significantly more money with Charlie at the helm than after Charlie's passed away.

Real quick, but that's correct. Now who stands to make the most money from. this story. Currently, it seems like Candice Owens. Indeed. Talking about how she's the biggest podcast, connecting this with the McCrowns to tie it to the Bridget McCrone as a man thing. I got to be honest, right now, we're looking at dropping CPMs for political contents.

I was having a conversation, you know, it's kind of a vague thing to say because I don't want to drag other prominent personalities. But let me just say this. I routinely talk with Jack Posobic and Benny Johnson and Stephen Crowder and a bunch of these guys, as well as ad bookers, buyers. We have this conversation. conversations all the time. And you know what I can say? This one I have no problem actually mentioned. I was talking with Jeremy Hambly from the quartering. And because he's made several videos talking about the decline of political content, viewership, CPMs. And I told him, I was like,

well, look, I got to be honest. There were some people who came up to Tate, producer Tate, and mentioned like, how come Tim's views are still good? Like, everyone else is dropping. And I'm like, well, you know, our viewership has gone down for sure in the season. But, you know, my morning show is doing pretty much the same as it always has, minus, like, I was sick or like off or holidays. And so they asked these questions. I was talking to Jeremy Hamily about it. And I said, look, I got to be honest, how evil are you willing to be is the question. And when we're at the end of, we're coming off the back year of this election season, it was abnormally large this year. It's supposed to be a dead year completely. After every election, everyone says, turn it off.

I don't want politics. And we actually got to squeeze some out of it, you know, because Donald Trump was doing, making bold moves. But now we're getting in the holiday season and people are like, okay, enough, I want to hear about why the bears are actually, bears are in first place. Is that what's going on? In the NFL? Yeah.

In the NFC East, is it? I have no idea. I know the Vikings are having a do-do season. All I know is my buddies in Chicago are like, can you believe that the bears are actually like leading? And I was like, is that true? That's what people care about right now. But I said, listen, there's two things you can do.

What most people do is they try to figure out what kind of content can I make that people actually are interested in. You know, we are in the business. of trying to inform an audience on what they want, but also not just giving them red meat. Right? The point is, can I cover new subjects you are interested in? So what we found inadvertently is that space weather stuff does-

There's a nine and three. Nine and three, right, it's massive. Very good. Seriously. And so, but anyway, when we talk about space weather and the auroras, we get massive viewership. But we don't just do that because we think we'll get massive viewership. We actually, we're all genuinely interested in it.

you know, Shane's here, and he's talking about it. And then I've interviewed Ben Davidson before. And so, you know, again, telling Jeremy, I was like, you can do things like that and try and figure out, you have an audience. They're asking for commentary. Are you providing the commentary they're asking for? Or you do what Candace does and show old tax matches going back 2018. You can make vague insinuations that they can't sue you over. And then be vague enough to where people think there's a grand conspiracy and do a true crime drama where you accuse the French First Lady of having a dong.

and you will get millions of views and you will make lots of money for which now I think it's I don't know a fortune is saying that she makes around 10 million a year and I'd estimate more than that So that's to say you don't think she's just ignorant you think she's acting with malice

for financial gain and social media clicks Malice in the legal sense I think that she is fully cognizant of what she's doing and I do not say it lightly that I think she's a genius right you know reminds me of that

Harry Potter line where Snape says, you know, Dumbledore's a great wizard and Beltricks. It's all mad. He's like, he is a great wizard and only a fool. Yeah, Candace Owens is ridiculously smart. I've told the story. I went on her show when she's The Daily Wire and I was shocked by how quick-witted, intelligent, and well-read she was. Even before the show, she knew all, like, current news. I'm like, she must be reading nearly as much news as I do to know what she knows and to put these dots together. She's very, very intelligent. So when I see the things she's saying, and I know these techniques in manipulation, like when she said, I'll be off the air this week as an update. The White House has confirmed receipt of the assassination plot against me.

It's manipulative language intentionally to trick people into thinking she's going into hiding because I'm an assassination plot. And I saw an account today that's following all this and say, well, the White House has confirmed the threat. No, the White House confirmed receipt of the threat. This is an important distinction. This isn't minor. And again, I go back, I have not spent any time on any of my show or my social media going after Candace Owens for any of this stuff, right? I'm like, whatever. But my issue comes down to, okay, fine. Once again, if you're going to make this sort of accusations, if it were me, if you were making these accusations about people I loved, I would want more evidence than what you're presenting.

The other thing that I don't understand is this. If you honestly believe that you have uncovered something that could potentially blow the lid off of one of the most, consequential conspiracies. And I don't say conspiracy pejorative. I mean into the actual word and what the word means. Okay, look, I've done a little intel analysis in my life where I was tracking terror cells. My father was a homicide detective, and he will tell you that if you really do have all of these sources that are providing you information, every time you go out there and publicly talk about private sources close to people that are doing it, you essentially destroy that source's ability to give you future information because now they lose access and placement

as the organizations that you're investigating shut down. So my question is this. For anybody that is, again, just genuinely interested in this, and again, there's plenty to be interested in, if your goal is really to get to the truth, to the bottom of what happened, what really happened with Charlie, if that is, why would you go about doing it this way as an investigation? I know why you would do it as a content creator. I don't know why you would do it as someone that's trying to get to the bottom of, again, a horrific crime.

You know, I watched her show today. It's very female coded. And that means she talked a lot about Charlie's clothing, and it was very much like Charlie was trying to find something to wear, and I said, you can't wear that jacket, and it's very emotional, social, female

coding. Guys don't talk or think this way. And that's why she also has the Stanley, you know, thermos or whatever. It's a It's a very female trendy thing. And it's been reported previously that she and Brett Cooper and others. It's the womanosphere, right? The trad, wife, prominent, conservative women. It's a true crime drama.

And it plays really, really well among women. And I think that's the play she's making. But let's jump to the story from Fortune. Hey, a lot of big news about Candace. Inside the economics of Candace Owens' Media Empire and the McCrone lawsuit threatening to unravel it. Oh boy, let's talk about nitty-gritty inside stuff because I got information. So they say five years ago, Candace Owens was a mid-tier political operative working for Charlie Kirk's Turning Point, USA. Now she's a globally famous conservative firebrand with one of the fastest growing independent media platforms in the U.S., raking in cash through controversy.

But the same contrarian playbook that launched her solo career now threatens the media empire she built. Her company generates up to $10 million in revenues per year, according to an analysis by fortune, implying that the company's valuation would be multiples of that. I would actually estimate, it's a broad estimation, but I think 10 million's low. 10 million makes sense if all she is doing is sponsor spots. But if she's doing anything outside of that. So if you want to talk about just her podcast, perhaps, I guess I'll say that because I said it before, but we do more than that.

And, you know, I guess the difference is I do like five different shows. So it's more granular where she has one big show. We have a bunch of smaller shows. Maybe, but I think she probably does closer to 20, 20 million or so. But who knows, who knows, revenues are down, although her show seems to be doing very well. They're now talking about this massive lawsuit. The conservative podcaster and provocateur is facing a high-stakes defamation lawsuit filed by French President Emmanuel Macron and Bridget McCrone, the First Lady.

The suit is set to test whether the controversy as currency of that made, is that you pronounce that? Overe? I have no idea. That made Owens rich and gave her a media. brand that reaches tens of millions of people can survive what experts say will be an immensely costly legal battle. The 219-page complaint filed in Delaware Superior Court in July 2025, accuses Owens of orchestrating a campaign of global humiliation by promoting the conspiracy theory that Bridget McCrone was born male. The plaintiff's weapon of choice, Claire Locke, the firm that

has extracted a record-shattering 787.87.5 million settlement from Fox News on behalf of Dominion, the largest media defamation payout in American history. The McCrone's vehemently deny Owens delegations, Owens has vowed to fight the suit. Interestingly, the suit alleges that spreading false information is essentially Owens' business model. The complaint names three defendants, Candace Owens personally, Candace Owens LLC, her Delaware company, and George Tom Inc., presumably named after her husband, George Farmer, who is directly involved in the business and operates her website and podcast distribution. In naming all three parties, the suit takes aim not only at Owens personally, but also her entire known business infrastructure. She won't win. She will not win this.

I can't say that I'm psychic or that everything I say is going to come true, but she won't. I will say with, you know, look, I'm willing to make predictions and try and make vague predictions. You know, maybe at this time something like this would happen, but who knows, I could be wrong with this. I'll say she will lose for two big reasons. Bridget McChron is not a man. It's not so much whether Richard McCrone is a man or is not. I mean, who knows, maybe, I guess. I don't need proof.

Yeah, I don't want proof. The issue is it's kind of a bold, ridiculous, and hard-to-proof thing that is going to land on defamation per se, which is it is so humiliating and damning because it's not just that Bridget McConnor is a man, but apparently Candace is also insinuated that's a pedophilic network or something, or at least that's what people are posting online saying it's not just about this. There's more here. And apparently there's some reporting that Candace has claimed Bridget McRone may be Emmanuel McCrone's dad. Yeah. But that makes no sense because Bridget McCrott is much smaller. But whatever, I guess. But here's the real reason. When the French government says we're going to your courts, the way the world works is not some rigid contractual letter of a law math.

People can consistently fall for this. They believe that there's a viral clip I watched. The Thomas Crown Affair. Yeah. Where Pierce Brousen signs the contract and then they start busting out laughing. like, we got you. And then he gets up and says, now explain to your board

while you paid 30 million more than everyone else offered and they look all shocked. But the thing is, if you ever signed a contract and then as soon as you signed it, the guy started laughing saying they got you,

that contract is not going to be binding. You're not going to go into a court and the judge is going to be like, was there something in the contract you didn't read? And be like, yeah, we absolutely did not agree that I'd sign over a power of attorney.

The judge is going to be like, okay, contract is out. It's the stupidest idea. So here's what really matters. When the French government, says, we want to stop Candace. I imagine what happens is, you know, Candice has claimed Trump called her and told her like, you know, maybe you got to back off the story or whatever.

Okay. If the, if the, if the, if the, if the, if the, if the, if the, if the, if the, if the if the, if the, if the, if the, if the, if the, if the, if the, scenario is they call the state department and they say, this is causing us problems in our country and we don't want these tensions. And the state department says, what can we do about it? And then all that needs happen is Emmanuel McCrone says, listen. we are telling you to make it stop however you can. And if you don't, there's going to be problems.

And France is massive. So it's not like France can control what the United States does, but the U.S. has to negotiate with France, has to cut deals with France, has to work with France and NATO, and they don't want problems. And it's stupid. So likely what I'd imagine that by the State Department says, file a lawsuit, go through the normal route, and we'll make sure you win. I don't. see a reality where Candice goes up against the French government and the U.S. backs her over a NATO ally. So here's the thing here. Candice Owens is clearly an extremely savvy media operator.

She is very charismatic. Some people would even say she's easy on the eyes. She is also a good DEI commentator for right wingers to put on this sort of pedestal. And, you know, it's really unfortunate that she's really willing to peddle bullshit and rumors and spin up fake narratives to try to get clicks. It seems it's clear to me that she has an axe to grind. I don't think this is just ignorance. I think what she knows, she knows that she's spreading stuff that is BS, but she believes it will get her clicks. And I believe somebody wronged her in the past and she is trying to like avenge that. So you think that it's an axe to grind as opposed to

just trying to capitalize on what is a hot story? It's a few, I think it's both. And also this gives her endless amounts of attention. This lawsuit may cost her a lot of money, but her husband is allegedly worth over 200 million. He has a lot of family money and he's, I believe, allegedly the former CEO of Parlor. So, you know, the amount of attention that this is giving her, you know, she knew that this, I don't know if she believes what she's alleging about Bridget McCrone, but I think she does know that it'll bring her a ton of attention. It's a transvestigation of obviously like, you know, a very prominent woman, a prominent European leader's wife. Do you have evidence that she's a woman? The evidence was that, or the evidence that she was

man was from two French bloggers or something, and they just had a couple of pictures of them, of her looking like a man allegedly. But I think as far as the media savviness goes, though, if you're trying to get your name out there, you want a lot of, to put a lot of bullshit out there, and then have them get mad at you and sue you, because, like, this is the stricent effect at hand. And I think there's also to say, something to say about all the other bullshit she pedals, because she's been pushing a lot of dumb stuff for a while. She actually said Stalin was Jewish. I don't know if you guys remember that. Lyndon Johnson. Something about the Frankest. I mean, there's a long list of

random stuff. Said Lyndon Johnson was just... Listen. And then I think she was also a flat earther for a little bit. If I... She's willing to pedal, whatever. And then, I'm sorry, one last thing. She'll get like messages or alleged tips and just, I don't know, won't vet them at all. For example, earlier when she said something about, like, a text message about Andrew Colvin

allegedly getting money, it's just like, yeah, somebody texted me this. And that's like, that's it. Somebody could text you anything. Like, I have a source that says such and such. A lot. But if there's no vetting... I want her numbers so I can text you about the ice wall. Hey, hey, can you text me right now that you, you text me right now that you think Candace works for Israel so that I can then say on the air, I've just received a tip that Candace works for Israel. Yeah, it's ridiculous. There's no vetting. And it's just like some people are dumb

enough where the rhetoric, the way she phrases things could come off like to a to an unmedia savvy person like, oh, this is convincing. This is, this is basic manipulative rhetoric, social engineering, where you say things so that the other person makes an assumption and then you can't be held liable for it and you always have plausible deniability. That's, that's the game. she's playing. That's why everyone keeps pointing out she's making insinuations and then people go, she never said that. No, but she said 80 things where the Sudoku puzzle concludes. I wish at some point, people would think about this from the standpoint of, okay, if somebody was saying this about you, would you think to yourself, oh, well, they didn't say me?

Or would you think they're obviously implying me? And all I want from this, especially because there's a lot of conservatives watching this is, do we still believe in like standards of truth? Do we still believe in like objective standards of truth? We are in a post-truth society. Not if it confirms my priors. If it confirms my priors, that it does not matter if it is true at all. This is the point of vagaries.

If someone believes five untruths, and you come out and say something that is incongruous with their worldview, they reject you. But if you say something very vague, let them fill the dots in, you're correct. And that's how she builds mass audience by being correct to everybody, because she's naturally not saying anything specific. She's letting people fill in the gaps of what they want to believe. What I do want to say real quick, though, if I were to say Bridget McGrath is a hog, okay, I can't be sued by the French government for that.

But when you say that Bridget McGrone is a man, you're getting into defamation per se territory where you're accusing someone of some kind of, it's something disgusting and humiliating. which is inherently in and of itself detrimental to you, your life, or whatever. I think she's going to get Alex Jonesed, but I think they're going to come and they're going to take everything from her. I can't understand what she thinks the long-term play is. That's why I can't, I don't know.

Well, her husband's rich. I don't think she's financially secured no matter what happens. They're married, he's on the hook to. They're going to go for him. His company's named in the lawsuit. I wonder if he... Well, presumably they say.

I wonder if the British government would protect him. Aren't they based in the U.S.? I don't know what if he's a lord, if he's somehow involved. I don't know. I don't know how passionate Kier-Starmer is about the peerage in the U.K. Would it be really funny if just like the UK and France go to war for the first time in like 800 years? Because Canada's called Bridget McCona Man. I think one of the reasons why this is so important.

Like, yes! I think the reason why this is so important is because this actually, I think, I think, like, conspiracy, driving conspiracies really draws away from people dealing with like legitimate politics that they could have the potential to influence. So instead of learning about your local congressperson or what they're doing in the House and Senate or what's going on in the Supreme Court, no, we're paying attention to whether or not Bridget McCrone has a cock or whether or not Charlie Kirk was murdered by Israel. Although there, baselessly, though.

I have a correction, too. I should say, start of the first war in 200 years, sorry. It hasn't been that long. They've actually fought not that long ago. But to what you are saying, Elad, this is the point about declining viewership and ad rates. Maybe it's fair to say that Candace actually does 10 million because no advertiser really wants to be on a show

about Bridget McRone having a dong. Advertisers want to be on normal content. They want to be on sports. Everybody's watching. They're relaxing. Nothing's offensive. You know, it's just fun stuff. And, you know, perhaps when she makes this kind of weird content,

she gets more views. she does make more money than the average political commentator, but the CPMs are actually still very low. The thing that was always struck me about this. I remember when Candace first started making these claims, and I was like, okay, you know, like, look, I remember a time where I watch a lot of things Candace was doing and appreciate her commentary

and appreciate her to contributions of the conservative movement. If she's very convinced, I just would like to see substantial evidence to back it up. And again, I had really thought, I had really thought that the majority, of sympathy in this entire case was going to be for Erica. And what is, what has shocked me is I feel like it isn't. And again, if you're going to, if you're going to implom, if you're going to insinuate,

that Erica, if she wasn't directly involved, knew something about it, let it go as is hiding truth, whatever it is, just please show me something significant to justify that. Because, again, I go back to, I think about this from my perspective, if some of it, if some somebody did this to my wife after I was gone. I would be furious unless they could actually produce hard evidence. The last thing I'll say on this before we go to the next story is she will never be sued by Turning Point. Turning Point USA, oh boy, do they have grounds to sue Candace Owens, but they're not going to. They're not going to because the law doesn't work to protect you or any meaningful way.

Like I've also said before that we had someone commit a crime on our property and then threaten us. They got arrested and charged. and then they threatened to use the legal process through this criminal charge. It almost seemed like it was intentional to exploit it and gain access to private information and other information. And they made the argument that in order for our defense, we need access to private information. And we are like, okay, drop the charges then. We're not going to, we can't. And so here's what happens.

If turning point were to sue Candace Owens, there would be depositions and discovery. And they'd be required to turn over certain communications, which I'd imagine are going to be embarrassing and depending on the context, they can be incriminating over certain issues. I'm not saying in the killing of Charlie Cook or anything like that. But there's going to be conversations about donors, things that she will then use on her show. And it will give her a year's worth of content. So they can do nothing about her saying any of this stuff. And she'll just keep saying it.

And the fascinating thing is she's been able to get more than two months of content out of saying nothing. no evidence no real can we can we distinguish something because I hear people at the same

she brings the receipt she has the evidence like okay what let's look at what do you consider to be evidence so if you look at

flight logs and you say these flight logs are interesting okay you could present that as that is evidence of what

yeah like that's the that's what I want I can I can essentially conjure up just about anything

as evidence of something suspicious oh yeah but there's a big difference between I find this to be suggestive or I find this to be interesting versus this proves X. And that's the part that I'm seeing people throw around this word evidence as if it's proof of something that it isn't proof of. It might be interesting. If you connect certain dots,

it may be whatever, but it's not evidence. And I guarantee you, nobody here would want to be convicted in a court of law based off of the evidence that has been presented. You would be furious. You would think it was a huge miscarriage of justice. And yet, I'm watching people say, well, see? I have a question for all the Candace fans out there. It's an honest question. You know, and I, I asked this question a couple times before, but why is it that she has a huge podcast and she's not getting banned? Nick Fuentes got banned on Spotify, not her. She's, she's number one. She's on the front page of YouTube recommendations for everybody who subscribes. She gets millions of views. She gets massive live viewership. I thought it's, you know, it's actually

her own words that if you criticize Israel, you'll get suspended, banned, and censored, but not her. Why is it that the person who claims that Charlie was betrayed is actually the one trying to destroy his legacy in the company that he built? Turning Point, you know, Andrew Colvette and Erica and the rest, you know, Tyler Boyer and the rest of them at Turning Point are fighting as hard as they can to keep Turning Point alive. You don't got to like Turning Point. I'm not saying they're good or greater. I mean, they were under Charlie. I think they were fantastic as to where they are. Now, like, we'll see what happens. Obviously, we're not going to be there. So, you know, It's not like I've got, I'm happy with the direction it's going.

But she's actively trying to destroy Charlie Kirk's legacy. So the question is, who really betrayed Charlie Kirk? Because if Charlie were still around, like, if Charlie could speak, do you think he'd be like, oh, gee, thanks, Candace, thank you for telling all the donors to abandon Turning Point USA. Well, here's my, here's my, I'll put it differently. Candace Owens, based off of what she's done here and what she's been, you know, putting out there, Candice Owens, there's only one of two possible options. She is either Charlie Kirk's greatest friend who stood up to everybody when they called

her a liar or they called her psycho. She is either that or she is a horrible, betrayed villain in this story. That's maybe so. But you see what I'm saying? That's the point. I'm seeing a lot of people analyze this. It's like, wait a second, no, no. If you look at the claims that she's made, it's one of the two.

it's one of the two. It really breaks down on one issue though, I feel like. I feel like if you have a, how you feel about one particular issue really prescribes how you, whether or not you think she is a villain or not. I don't even need to say the issue, but you could tell she's laser focused on it and she'll drag it into everything else. So it really begs the question because she used to have a great relationship with The Daily Wire and Ben Shapiro and then that had to fall out for one reason or another.

And the same thing with turning point. She hasn't been to Amfest for years, as I understand. She hasn't been a speaker or collaborating with Turning Point for years before this happened. You have to wonder, you know, what made that fall through and maybe something. Right, but let's just put it like this. I mean, she had, what was it? Originally, she was like a liberal and she had a doxing site and she went to conservatives, and she got criticized for that, but everybody can change, right?

Then she had red pill black and blacket. she starts working with the daily wire and then has a falling out with them. Then she starts while she's been working at a turning point at the same time, she has a falling out with them. Then I believe it was the end of 23 she stops doing formal events for them. Remaining Charlie's friend. My opinion on everything as it went down is that the reason Charlie stayed friends with Candace was diplomacy. It's actually quite simple. Charlie was very intelligent and he built a coalition and he brought a bunch of different factions together under one umbrella.

So when he's texting with Candace and saying, yeah, you know, Ben, oh man, I know exactly how he is. He's trying to stop her from crashing out and causing problems and doing what she's doing now. So Charlie, she's basically removed from turning point. She's no longer involved for the most part. But Charlie stays in context saying, listen, like, we're friends. Please don't hurt me. Now that Charlie's gone, she's like, I will destroy everything Charlie has ever built. Let me just stress this.

There is no excuse. If you like Charlie Kirk in the work that he did, telling everyone to pull their donations is simply to destroy the organization. By all means, you can be angry with Colvette and maybe Erica's leadership, whatever you might think. Maybe you think someone else should come in and run it. But the response should be donors should all email and ask for new leadership, not destroy it and pull all your money out, which burns Charlie's legacy to the ground. I think if there's anyone who betrayed Charlie Kirk, it is Candace Owens and she has proven it time and time again. Well, like you said, it would be one thing. If you said, here's all the evidence, donors pull your money.

That would be one thing. But it's, I've got a bunch of evidence. I'm going to do it later. But donors pull all your money right now. Before I can prove it. It's like, wait a second. The consequences of conservative DEI and we're reaping what we sowed. Yeah, but I'll say it again.

I mean, Candice is very smart. I mean, look, man. A kniving, but I guess she could be. both at the same time. I'm going to tell a story that's going to give me in trouble. I don't think I told the story before.

I'm going to tell the story that's going to get me in trouble. I worked for Vice and they were always trying to get this cable channel. I had gotten some people

hired there who were friends of mine who understood social media and live streaming. And I end up leaving the company but news broke that Vice had gotten a Rogers telecom deal

or teleco whatever the word is. This is Canadian cable channel and congratulations. device at the time. This is back in like 2014 or something. Wow. And so my buddy hits me up and he's, you know, how things are going, you know, because I left the company. And he says, it's great. I'm going to be doing production for the news show on the cable channel. And I went, really? And he was like, yeah. And I was like, really, though? I mean, you're not, you're not going to

stay where you're at working on, you know, like domestic news live stream stuff. And he's like, no, no, I'm doing the news stuff for the cable channel. I was like, so are they going to move you to Toronto or what? And he goes, why would I move to Toronto? And then I said, for the cable channel. And he goes, why would I move to Toronto? And I said, because it's a Rogers telecom deal for a cable channel. He goes, dude, what are you talking about? I said, the cable channels in Canada. So here's what happened.

He told me that Shane Smith, the CEO, held a meeting. They had been having conversations throughout the year that they were working on getting a cable channel. And it was their big dream to get a cable channel. And everyone makes an assumption when you hear that, which is, What? That he has to move to Canada? No, no, no, no. When someone says, I want to start a cable channel, what do you immediately think? In America. Oh, yes.

Nobody thinks New Zealand. So Shane comes out, and the story I was told that he comes, he's got all the employees there, and he says, we did it. We got our cable channel. Everyone starts cheering and screaming. They immediately start working on production, all under the assumption that they made. that he meant we got our American cable channel. So my friend that I helped get hired is now going like, I didn't know that.

And I said, well, you know what's going to happen. If you go to him and say, I don't want to go to Canada, he's going to say, I never said it was in America. That's the manipulative language that you use to keep people in line. You let them believe what they want so they feel good about what's going on. Because if he came out and said, guys, we didn't get the American cable channel. We do have a slow start, though. 30 million households in Canada through Rogers Telecom, people would go, that sucks.

Instead, he says, we did it. It, what does it refer to? That's the manipulative language used by powerful people. This is what Candace does. So when she comes on her show and says, they betrayed Charlie, she's already said it feels like an inside job. So what else could you be insinuating? And then her diehards with fifth grade reading levels are like, I am going to fill the dots whatever I want to be true. So insert, whether it's France or Israel or Turning Point or the CIA or the deep state or Netanyahu himself.

It was really funny. I had a guy telling me this over the weekend. I couldn't tell. He looked like he might have been Pakistani or something, but he said, the Shapiro's killed Charlie. He said, Candice is right. He's like, I love her show. The Shapiro's did it.

And I said, I'm not kidding. I was like, the Shapiro's, yeah. And I was like... When it Ben's kids, right? I was like, no, he didn't mean Ben's family. He meant Ben's extended family. Oh, okay, yeah. But enough of this.

Let's talk about some... Shilling to third worldists, literally. Let's jump to this in this. story from NBC News. Sabrina Carpenter slams the White House for using her song in Evil and Disgusting Social Media Video. Okay, let's play the evil and disgusting social media video. I wasn't probably going to watch it, but I want to see it.

Let's go. Have you ever tried this one? Have you ever tried this one? Have you ever tried this one? The White House. Is that it? Yeah. Okay, so she's salty.

Where's the response? She said, this video is evil and disgusting. Do not ever involve me or my music to benefit your inhumane agenda. She got 834,000 likes. Bro, if I've ever seen a ratio, this is the ratio. I mean, she's got 126,000 retweets, 834,000 likes. And I got to be honest, the White House, they try to do a lot of these memes, but they're getting pretty cringe.

I disagree. I think the White House edits have been crazy, especially that Theo Vaughn one, which he was also very bitchy about. The Franklin one, those, but to be honest, he didn't make that one up. Have you seen the new Franklin that are going, the Franklins are going viral? Franklin's the new Pepe. My favorite one is Franklin, what is it? It's like Franklin grows tired of immigrants acting. And he's sitting there all like angry. And it's like a Mexican fox and like an Arab squirrel or something. I don't know, a bear cub. I went over to the Franklin's page on X, and they were talking about how they're really big on, you know, inclusivity and the whole deal.

But then they shut off their comments to only people that allow you to, I'm like, oh, we're not that inclusive. There's a lot of people are talking, or she's talking about how it's evil or how it's immoral and whatever. And Sabrina Carpenter has used a lot of what people would consider sacrilegious imagery and stuff. It's a little pot calling the kettle black. You know, she doesn't.

like the White House used it when it comes to enforcing immigration law, but she's perfectly comfortable with insulting Christians and, you know, let's talk about the... Here are the memes that work. Celebrates Killedosur Day. Oh my gosh, I never thought I'd like a Canadian cartoon this much.

Let me try and find some more of these. Killedozer Day. Beautiful. Oh, man. Okay, here's the best one. Franklin grows tired of immigrants and their behavior. The Baron of Burka. You know what I really love about these, though?

As I was pointing out earlier, is that no one knows what turtles look like. It's like he's wearing the shell. People need to understand. The shell is its spine. Turtles are, like, the shell is their spine. They are not wearing the shell. I guess people watch too much ninja turtles.

Yeah, they do. In their behavior. They think that they can actually go inside the shell. Yeah. Look, Ninja Turtles was a documentary What's doing with Trump giving Franklin

The presidential Yeah, it's because Logan Hall responded to kids can press Who owns Franklin saying sorry, but Franklin belongs to us now Look at the

Why is the Fox a Mexican? Oh, man He's like Mexican And then you've got this Beaver What is this? Is this like Sikh?

Yeah, that's what I thought But then what is this squirrel? Oh yeah, maybe this squirrel Indue? That's, yeah. Just a regular turban? Just a regular turban. And then there's a Muslim bear cub with a briefcase for some reason.

It's impressive that you noticed that one as a Sikh. There was a Republican congressman who just thought all Sikhs were also Muslim. It's cultural nuance that you have. That's actually a really sad, very well-known story of a Sikh man who was murder after 9-11. Yeah. Where was that? It was like New Mexico or something, right? Yeah.

He was just like, minding someone thought he was a Muslim and killed him. That's crazy, dude. That's horrifying. Stupid people. Unfortunate. We got angry. barren stain bears here's one

Franklin learns oh Franklin's been radical like how is he wearing look at the coat how is he wearing that coat the shell is hanging

like a backpack can you suspend reality just a little bit just to suspend disbelief a little bit immigrants were learning there too about Floyd's autopsy

so I guess the White House responded to Sabrina Carpenter they called her stupid Is that all that? I don't know. What did they post? They post on the White House or something?

I believe it was a big long post too. Look, if you're going to reply, if you're going to, you know, clap back, it can't be long. It can't be some big multiple paragraph reply. It's not a dissertation. Yeah. That's why your mom works so much. Your mom. I got to say, I've been pretty impressed with DHS and their troll game has been pretty good.

I think it's fun. There are a lot of people that are all kinds of offended because they say that it's beneath the White House, et cetera. But nobody was complaining when Barack Obama was slow-jamming the news on late night every chance that he got. So, you know. Yeah, I'm kind of over the, I'm offended by this. Like, oh, okay, I don't care. Yep, yeah. You're offended by everything.

My response is more so like, ah, I'll do it more often then. Yeah. You know, whatever I got to do. Thank you for telling you the troll work. I can't even find their responses. Do we have it? It was from Abigail. The one of their spokesperson.

Oh, so she responded. She responded. Abigail Jackson, the White House spokesperson. From her account? I believe from her Twitter account. I don't know. Yeah, labeled carpenter stupid in a statement. Yeah.

So, I don't know. It's not even worth, you can't even find it. Like that's how insignificant the responses was. Like I said, clapbacks have to be short, concise. That's why your mom. work so well. Like, look, if the White House just reply, if the White House would have replied with your mom, everybody would be like, boy, you know, it would have been a much better reply. Look, I think they like this as a distraction.

I think posting memes and like Sabrina Carpenter's response got more millions of impressions than anything else. I think that the White House put out today. So I think they utilize this as a good distraction when they need one. But they are putting out fire memes. the DHS and White House Twitter account runners probably need a raise, and that's that new frontier that they fight on online, the meme wars. Yeah, I mean, look, it does matter, right? I mean, there is an argument to me made that Donald Trump got memed into the White House in 2016. All the people online that were constantly flooding social media and stuff with pro-Donald Trump memes

really did have an effect on, you know, popular culture and the way that people perceived Donald Trump. You know, it's funny is, uh, uh, were you at the Pentagon? today a lot? No, I was at Congress. Ah, okay. So, um, all these news reports popped up where they were like, you know, Tim Poole and Laurel Lumer and Jack Posobic or at the Pentagon today. And I'm like, I'm not at the Pentagon. It's, it's all fake. It's all fake. Peanut butter and jelly, man. Peanut butter and jelly. Shout out to my best friend in the poker room, Ken, because he was asking about this. Like, you signed that pledge for Trump, whatever was ever. And I was like, I filled out a press application so I can go to the Pentagon one time to do a podcast one time because

sometimes people interview other people like it is crazy that the perception they created in the press over the Pentagon thing is that we were all signing a loyalty pledge to the president when I was literally like hey guys why don't we try and do why don't we try and book Pete Hegseth and then they came back with he can't because he's working all the time from the Pentagon yeah and then one of the people who's been on the show that we know said maybe we can find space for you guys to come and do the show in the Pentagon. That would be cool. I said, okay.

Then the team came back and said, we have to get press passes so that we can come in and do the show. And I was like, okay, well, if we're going to have Pete Huggis on the show to talk about all this stuff, that'd be amazing because, like, having a direct access to the Secretary of War

is tremendous, a lot of questions we'll have. And we'll even, we've got friends with a lot of questions. Scott Horde will get questions from him and Dave, and we could have these here. And so I said, let's fill out the thing. Next thing out of the media is like, Tim Pool and the right-wing puppets showing up at the Pentagon to steal our spaces.

As if they were like, you know, over themselves to get access to these seats before, you know, alternative media got the opportunity. Like, they thought that those seats were theirs. Yeah. I remember when the, when the White House correspondence, or the press room in the White House, you know,

a lot got in there and other people from, you know, alternative media got in there. And they were behaving as if something that they owned had been taken from them. And it was an affront to journalism, you know, in its entirety.

that someone that they disapproved of was there asking questions of the White House. And it's that, that, what's the word I'm looking for? Elitist? Yeah, elitist. Yeah, definitely elitist. But, you know, they believed that the access to the president or to the White House was theirs. And it wasn't for anyone else. It wasn't something that any other journalists should have access to it.

Well, they had been allowed to operate that way for decades. Yeah. I mean, I was shocked when I first learned who got to decide who was in the White House, because I always assumed it must be the White House. Nope. It was this incredibly far-left organization that essentially had the authority to decide who made it and who didn't it. And when Trump came in and said, yeah, we're not going to give a far-left organization the ability to gatekeep access to the White House. They just infuriated.

How dare you? This is because they are journalism. Well, ultimately, these people feel entitled to it to put. a little bit more succinctly. But to be clear, they have reason to be upset because, I don't want to, I don't sympathize with them. Do it. Do it. The reason that they get upset is because it's zero sum.

Access is zero sum there. Caroline Levitt or Press Secretary Kingsley at the Department of War, they're only going to give so many questions. Pete Hexeth is only going to give a Department of War. Secretary of War Pete Hexeth. I want to practice putting in the titles while I say all these guys. Franklin overwhelmed at Costco. Wow.

My mustache is though. It's funny because a lot is, you know, giving some poignant, astute speech. And Nick and I are just busting out laughing. It says Franklin is overwhelmed at Costco. And it's just Franklin looking scared surrounded by a bunch of Indian people. Poor Franklin. But if you look at the, this one probably leads into the one that's in there now that I just posted in there. You just used post, sent one to me?

Is it going to get us in trouble? I mean, hopefully not. See, this is what first happens, and then that's what you get. He gets radicalized by going to Costco. Look at the monkey in the fox. They're filming it on their cell. So for those, they're just listening, it says Franklin gets a new job. And he's a masked DSA agent arresting what's her face.

Dora the Explorer. And you say La Migra? I drew a map Back home Imagine all the things They're going to find in their backpack Not Immigration Papers

Did you guys remember When Marvel tried making It was called the New Mutants Yeah And they had safe space and snowflake Oh my God And they had There was a fat female

Hispanic character Who had a backpack And her superpower That you could pull any item out of it And it's just like That's just Dora Well yeah It's Dora

But it's also The back was a rip off of the bag of holding from D&D. That's right. She's just a D&D character arc. That's right. Trying to learn how to speak Spanish, I guess. Nothing's new.

Why does a monkey have a cell phone, though? The Fox I get, he looks like he's... He swiped it. Yeah, the Fox stole. A swiper. He swiped it from Dora. You can swipe whatever I want now, Dora. Somebody put in a call.

That was actually... Yeah, the monkey called. The Fox is definitely the way. A swipe are definitely called. Franklin's the new Pepe. Yeah. This is amazing. Franklin, I love that grows tired. What is it? Yeah, yeah. Franklin learns about George Floyd's autopsy.

Oh, man. Oh, Franklin. Look how upset he looks. Oh, no. Did you riot for no reason, Franklin? Maybe you should not have done that. Oh, man. Shucks. All right. Let's talk about news, I guess. No more laughing. We got this from the post-millennial. Pentagon says all options are on the table for the investigation into Mark Kelly over seditious six video. Now, here's what really matters. From the post-blinal, Pentagon says Wapo falsely attributed quotes to Heggseth that he never said in report on September drugboat strike. This is actually reported in the New York Times. I want to pull the New York Times for all the libs out there.

This was crazy to watch the New York Times fact check the Washington. It was lip-on-lib violence. Yeah. So the New York Times basically have. have countered what the Washington Post reported, saying, Hagseth ordered a lethal attack, but not the killing of survivors, officials say. The reason why this is important is that the Washington Post put out the claim that Hagseth basically said double tap, that he said, kill the narco terrorists, blow him up.

After he did, they claim that they were staring at survivors cleaning the boats, and he said, finish him off, which would be a war crime, survivors, you'd capture him, right? Well, the New York Times was like, we talked to five different people independently of each other, and they all confirmed. Hagseth gave one order, strike the boats, and then left. Why then did the Washington Post lie?

They are fomenting civil war. I am not saying that lightly. And all of the people chuckling and saying, ha, ha, time to drink, stop. You're allowed to have fun, but I want to make this point because it is very terrifying. I have explained throughout the whole year,

they have been saying that all of Trump's orders are illegal. They have terrified men and women in uniform. They have said, when they take power back, they will arrest you for following Trump's orders. The Washington Post now put out a story claiming that Heggseth authorized a war crime. They ordered the war crime.

They want you in the military to question whether or not you can actually follow these orders. Mark Kelly then went on, meet the press and said, they can tell when the orders are illegal. You've got these billboards popping up all over the place saying not what you signed up for, communicate with us, discreetly using encryption to avoid the risk. Risk of what? So when Mark Kelly

is coming out and saying don't follow illegal orders, this is overt calls for civil war. And I want to make sure this is, I want to very much define and clarify this. There is never going to be a circumstance in modern warfare

where someone trying to ignite a military coup goes on TV and says, I am calling on the military to engage in a military, military coup against the president. Now is the time. Let's take the seat of the White House. Because regular people will get freaked out by it. If you wanted to actually stage a coup, this is how you would do it in modern warfare. You would have your media allies come out and say,

Trump is doing illegal things. You would make up fake stories to terrifying, share the confidence of our military, and then you'd have politicians come out and say, you can tell if it's illegal and you must disobey. That's where we're. we're at. I guarantee you, with those billboards that have been popping up since October, there are already men and women in uniform who have been in contact with these organizations and have already made vows to defy the chain of command. So when people ask, how would a civil war ever happen in this country, the military is not going to turn on itself. It makes me want to just bash my face in the table because in 2018, when I first started talking about the

prospect of civil war, the first question was, why would anyone at the federal government be fighting each other? There's a uniparty. They're all aligned with each. Now we can. can see what's happening. They prosecute Donald Trump. In 2018, nobody, nobody believed Trump would be arrested. It's never happened. It could never happen. And then Trump got arrested, what, twice? Three times. Then all of a sudden, it was like, oh, wow, that happened. But it won't go, it won't escalate again. So back in 2018, people would say to me, the federal government is never going to allow this kind of fighting because they're too powerful and they control everything. Well, now the federal government is fighting itself. And now we're see, and people said,

yeah, well, they're fighting each other. But how would the military ever line up against? the military. That'll never happen. Then we saw in Texas, the Texas Guard versus the feds over the border dispute. And now we're seeing Chris Murphy say pick an effing side. And Trump's not getting any free pass on this one. He said sedition is punishable by death. Like this is all lining things up. I would not be surprised if we were a year away. I'm not saying it will happen. I don't know. But if a year from now, we see Gavinism come out and say, I am seizing full control of the California National Guard, and I'm ordering all members of the Guard to defy federal court orders to obey Donald Trump. He is engaged in unlawful actions. You are hereby

order to defy those actions. I wouldn't be surprised if that happens. He's already threatened to arrest DHS, ICE for wearing masks. We're already seeing criminal prosecution threats in Illinois and Oregon. It is all happening before our eyes. I think the only move Trump has right now, and I don't think he'll do it because with all due respect, they don't have the balls to do it. I think they need to be arrested. I think they need to be charged under 18 U.S.C. 2387. I believe that out front and Lamar advertising should be fined for criminal violations of 18, 18 U.S.C. 2387.

And I believe that they need to go out and actually make arrests under this. Otherwise, it just gets worse. Do you have the clip of how she actually responded? Because I watched this full briefing. You mentioned working with partners on the Hill. Another senator on the hill, the Democrat side, is Senator Mark Kelly. Now, we heard some reporting about a possible investigation into him regarding his status as a retired member of the United States Navy, still in pension, and therefore still under the jurisdiction of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. And as such, his membership, you mentioned the Seditious Six, would that be grounds for possibly bringing him back to active service for an investigation, for NJP, or even a full court marshal? So you're correct. The Department of War received serious allegations of misconduct against Senator Mark Kelly. And in accordance with the Uniform Code of Military Justice and other applicable recommendations and regulations, we're doing a thorough review of all of these allegations.

And the Secretary of War has tasked the Secretary of the Navy, John Feeleon, with doing a thorough review looking into all of these allegations and providing him an update on December 10th. So we will have more information to come on that. But I would just add that this despicable video that Mark Kelly participated in with the Seditious Six was a politically motivated influence operation that was an attempt to undermine the chain of command to so distrust and division in our armed forces. That is absolutely ridiculous. It's crime. It's crimes.

Our warfighters at risk. And again, he doubled down on the Sunday shows. I don't know if you all saw him on the Sunday shows. But he basically insinuated that service members who do not defy President Trump's orders could face potential prosecution in the future when Democrats are back in power. He even called our troops and likened them to those of the Russian military. This is totally disgraceful from an elected official. And the department takes it very seriously, and that is why we have launched this review.

And just to be clear, so Secretary Phelan were to recommend courts. That would be on the board. What was the question? Sorry. If Secretary Phelan were to recommend court martial, that could be an option on the table. All options are on the table at this moment in time. And we look forward to getting the Secretary of the Navy's review. And the Secretary of War has been very clear in his statements as well that he takes this extremely seriously and it is unacceptable.

I want to pull up the law for all the else. So you can see I'm not playing around. This is illegal. This is 18 USC 2387. It's a, well, let me pull up the penalty. for, does it have the penalty in here? It doesn't. Oh, I'm sorry, 10 years. And let's see,

or find or in prison, not more than 10 years. Whoever with the intent to interfere with impair or influence the loyalty, morale, or discipline to the military or naval force of the United States. One, advises, counsel's urges, or in any manner, causes or attempts to cause insubordination disloyalty mutiny or refusal

of duty by any member of the military naval force in the United States, or distributes or attempts to distribute any written or printed matter, which advises counsel or urges, insubordination, subordination, disloyalty, mutiny, or refusal of duty by any member of the military naval force in the United States, shall be fined under this title or in prison, not more than 10 years or both, and shall be ineligible for employment by the United States or any department of agency thereof, or agency thereof, for the next five years following his conviction.

So this is illegal, and I'm pretty sure when you have a website that instructs you to reduce risk by using encrypted communications, because you're questioning what you signed up for, this falls perfectly under 18 USC 2387 section A subsection two and one falls perfectly and Mark Kelly's actions falls under one section A subsection one perfectly. They need to be criminally charged. If they are not, this will keep getting worse. If you do not use your power, you lose it. And if the DOJ is unwilling to bring an indictment, this is a slam dunk, by the way,

if they're unwilling to do it, Democrats are going to keep, they're going to entrench this worldview. They're going to expand their efforts. And by then it will be too late because the military will be scared. There's going to be some young guys in the military. And they heard Mark Kelly say, if Democrats win, they're going to prison. Yep. So they're going to say, Trump, you have to win because I don't want to go to prison. And Trump's going to go, I can't do anything about it. And they're going to say, then I'm with them. Because if you will not use power, we know they will. So if Trump doesn't do it, the military is going to immediately defect and go to the people willing to crush them. That's why in Venezuela, you are able to suppress the people who are

fighting against communism because the military is told, we'll kill you if you defy us, but we'll feed you if you work with us. And so people are like, okay, it's better to be a soldier well fed and fat and happy in Venezuela than one of these impoverished poor people suffering under socialism. The military has got two choices. Are they going to follow the chain of command as they signed up to? or are they going to follow the defectors and then under the Democrats? Well, the reality is if Trump isn't going to do anything,

they're going to say, look, they got a gun to my head and you won't stop them. Yeah. I mean, look, I do still, I'm still of the opinion that the government is being very precautious about any kind of, any kind of,

any kind of legal action they take. but I do think that this is pretty clear and I do I would like to see you know see something come from the investigation. I think so I'm always again my background was unconventional warfare counterinsurgency I mean that's what we did as green berets

I'm always I'm always cautious of the idea of the whole Olinsky rule that their action is our reaction yeah and there is there is something to be said for you know perp walking somebody out who's then going to claim that I was just I was simply repeating what the law is. You're obligated to not follow unlawful orders. Show me exactly where I

violated this by telling service members that they don't have to follow lawful orders. Is that not true? Is that not in the uniform code of military justice? That's going to be their claim, right? And so the question is, what do you have that truly is the slam dunk? I understand the implication. And the thing, again, there's two things about this that really piss me off. The first one is that I am so sick and tired of watching these former members of the military sit there and hold up their prior service and the oath we swore to the Constitution. Well, will that include the First Amendment, Second Amendment, Ninth Amendment, Tenth Amendment, Article I, Section 8?

Because I've noticed you don't seem to care about those things. My wife said it best. She goes, Democrats quote the Constitution the way atheists quote the Bible. Yep. Yep. Right? There's no real commitment to it. It's a restriction on you, not them.

Where were anything? I mean, they're all saying, now we need you guys in the military. We need you. You know what? I remember when the guys in the military needed these guys when they were getting kicked out of the military

by Eugene Vindman. Yeah. Because they didn't want to take an experimental vaccine. Or the people who got kicked out because they had Gadsden flags on their Facebook profiles. Yes.

Or a member of the Virginia National Guard that I'm trying to help right now that not only got kicked out but barred from reenlistment demoted. Why? Because, well, he belonged to a local militia. The local militia was actually sanctioned by their local.

sheriff's department and actually help them engage in things like first responder activities. Right? And they, and they knew about it for four years, sent this guy to Soldier of the Year to represent the Virginia National Guard. And now they kicked him out. That's super frustrating to say that because there's a lot of, a lot of people will do things.

They'll sign up to help their local fire departments. They'll sign up to help their local sheriff's departments. They're like, I'm a volunteer. And the government absolutely will look at people and say, well, I don't like his politics. He's in this organization. He's in this group and he's, you know, whatever, he's pro 2A or whatever. So he, we're going to say that he's a member of some kind of militia or something. And they'll target it to one individual. They won't go after the whole group. No. And so there's that, right, that aspect of it, whereas these guys are holding up their former service

as justification for what they're doing now. When we all, none of us are convinced that these guys actually care about the Constitution. The other thing that that pisses me off is exactly what you said before. It's this idea of you're, you can't follow. unlawful orders. Correct. So Mark, Senator Kelly, show me which order is unlawful. Oh, you don't have one. Oh, it's just a friendly reminder. No, no, no. What you did was you threaten them. Yep. Yeah. Because it's the whole idea of how do you know it's an unlawful order? Well, it's pretty easy when you look at the Uniform Code of Military Justice in order to decipher

between a lawful order and an unlawful order. Okay. But the fact that he said we'll go after the people that follow, this is the part where it gets into a much grayer area because when you have service members that now have to execute on orders fighting terrorism or something like that now it's the whole idea of am i going to is there going to be a future regime a future congress a future president a future attorney general that's going to come in and now determine three years after the fact oh you know that order that you executed which by the way jag cleared off on at the time that you did it because especially when you're talking about this i've explained this before. I've seen this. This is not the sort of thing where random guys are just going

out there deciding who they want a drone for fun. It's not some random captain saying, oh yeah, let's go kill that guy. That's not how this works. Yeah. Okay. What you actually have, when you have a common operating picture and you have a talk, you have a tactical control area, and you were actually blessing off on this stuff where it's like, okay, in S2, S3, right, JAG. Like, yep, good to go, good to go, Good to go. Okay, now I execute it. Now Mark Kelly comes in and decides after the fact, that was an unlawful order and we're punishing you as well. And your enlisted guys are listening to, you know, you mentioned JAG, those guys are officers. They're lawyers. They've gone to law school and they clear it. And so these enlisted dudes,

these E4s, E5s, E6s, they do what they're told. And then Mark Kelly's coming and threatening them. And essentially saying, look, we're going to hold your responsible if you violate the law. if you violate your oath to the Constitution, and it's as murky and as ambiguous, he makes it as murky and as ambiguous as possible, even though these guys got the okay, the thumbs up from, like you said, the military lawyers that have gone over this from, you know,

tip to butt. They're like, yep, this is all good. You're 100% right. It's infuriating to see. I agree with everything you guys just said, but I feel as though we're speaking a little bit too much in the abstract. So I wanted to add details to what we're actually talking about.

out here. So originally the Washington Post put out an article saying that Pete Exeth ordered a strike on an alleged Venezuelan drug boat. He allegedly said, kill them all and then allegedly ordered the follow-up strike. I believe that's what it says in the Washington Post article.

The New York Times came out with a new article that says Pete Hexeth only was involved in the initial strike, as I understand, and didn't allegedly say. He gave them one order. He ordered a lethal strike, but not killing of the survivors. And then Pete Hexeth, Secretary of War Hexeth, alleges that it's Admiral Bradley, who eventually sent the follow-up kinetic strike.

And now, Senator Mark Kelly is saying that that could potentially, if it truly happened the way that the Washington Post is alleging, that that could be a war crime. So I guess Mark Kelly is also saying that, therefore, if that is the case, then, and you are following the chain of command, you will still be held liable if these are unlawful orders. I guess on that part particularly, what do you think about, based on the reporting that we've seen,

if that's, you know, could that, would you interpret that as a war crime? The point of this is not to actually claim there's a war crime. It's to tell an enlisted guy who doesn't know left or right on the legal matters, we are coming for you. If Trump tells you to do something and you do it, we are coming for you. Totally. And it harms our military readiness because now all of our soldiers need to think twice. This is the decision you're making, potentially going to compromise you in the future. But I think there are two issues at hand there.

There's that issue. And then there's also the issue of potentially striking people who have no means to strike back. To your first point, Nick, you can speak to this. You hear guys on the ground talking about how the rules of engagement have been detrimental to actually accomplishing the mission. Can you go ahead and expand on that idea so people understand? So give you an idea. I'll just use Iraq as an example in 2008.

The amount of trouble we had to go through to get outside the wire and actually conduct military operations, it was far more intense than anybody would think. It looked more like law enforcement operations than you would think like an active combat area. So this is something where I had to secure warrants. I remember going out, we launched an operation to get a guy for which we had, I think, 10 different sworn statements from Iraqis.

Yeah, this guy's a terrorist. Yeah, this guy's done bad things. And I go back and like me, I'm a sergeant first class. I'm a green beret, but I'm a sergeant first class. And all of a sudden, I got to sit and I got to justify to a JAG officer on why this person needs to go to higher detention. So, yeah, there was a lot of us that got to the point where it's like, this is getting ridiculous.

And then remember, this is also the time during the Obama administration where they were talking about, they wanted to have an award for valorous restraint. Yeah. And again, it's about the incentive structure that you're creating in the minds of military personnel. Now, listen, obviously, if you have, if I've got somebody detained right there in front of me, I have launched my operation, I've got my bad guy, they are zip tied, and they're sitting over there, and my commander walks in and goes, Fratus, shoot that guy in the head.

I'm going to look at my commander and be like, no. Like, I know that's not authorized. That's murder. I can't do that. Okay, but there's also questions on whether it comes down to repetitive strikes and things like that. Can I hit a target more than once? We do have big breaking news. Sorry, guys.

Afton Bain, the woman from Tennessee from Nashville, who hates Nashville, has lost. Oh. So apparently, it looks like I don't know if a decision desk is projecting Matt's Van Epps to win. So we've got this. He has made, he has won, and they, and they posted this at 906, so actually we're 10 minutes behind. Yeah. But, and we have this from the New York Times tracking the latest. And he's quite a bit ahead.

Perhaps going on podcasts and claiming that you hate everything about Nashville is not the way to actually win a congressional seat. You know. I will also mention in this. He looks like he's up six points. This was a Trump plus 20 district. So I don't know how impressive this margin was. It seemed as though Republicans were a little bit concerned about the seat despite that. Seventh district?

Trump was tweeting about it. Urban Nashville was plus 20? This district prior to this, yeah, in the prior to Trump election was a Trump plus 20. Nick, I wanted to follow up with you on one of the details here in particular. As I understand on ground, it's different than what it's going on and see. Correct me at any moment because I'm sure you know a lot more about this than I do. But on land, people, survivors could potentially be seen as a continuing military threat. But however, when you are at sea after you strike a boat and there are survivors just hanging on to, you know, whatever's left over of the boat,

it's different and they don't seem to pose a clear military threat. That's when an alleged second strike was ordered and people are alleging that if that's the way it happened, then it would be a war crime. Do you think that would be a war crime if it happened the way that the Washington Post is alleging? That's one that I don't have a legal expertise with respect to that to be able to defendably say one way or the other. I can't say that typically speaking, it's generally understood that if you have survivors of

like a sunken ship or something like that to strike that again would that would seem outside the rules to me, but I don't have a legal issue. Yeah, because I did want to, again, get to the specifics because that's, I believe, again, I do not believe Senator Mark Kelly is justified in telling soldiers that they shouldn't follow what they believe may be illegitimate orders because the next administration might come after them. But that's what he's talking about here with these orders. Look, with all of this, you know, we just got done talking about this earlier with Candace with respect to how words are chosen carefully

in order to avoid prosecution or avoid defamation or anything like that. It's going to be the same thing here. Right? And that's going to be the question is, can you make a strong enough legal case where you could actually convict something for that. Franklin can.

Franklin can. Franklin's capable. You can pull his one up. Well, and that's also, but look, we've also got midterms coming up, right? So the question is, is, are they talking about this exclusively? Let me give me an example.

We just got our clocks cleaned in Virginia. We're going to be paying for what this happened in the Virginia election. Oh, bro. For the next 20 years. I'm not coming back to your state. For the next 20 years, we're going to be paying for what happened on election in November. Okay. Does anyone here think that the Democrats really just wanted to keep the government shut down

because they were just so upset about some of these budget items? Or do you think it's far more likely that they realized that they were impacting tens of thousands of voters in northern Virginia right ahead of election? Right. Right. So it's this idea that they there are time, this is Sololensky's rules for radicals. You know, our reaction is their action, right? They want to get us to respond in a particular way. And so I do think that the Trump administration has to be very, very careful on how they go about this. I do think they should rigorily and investigate it. And I do think they should be willing to use legitimate power. This is one of the things that's been a huge problem for conservatives. Yes. Yes, we are skeptical of the centralization of power and the use of power. We don't see government as a mechanism whereby we reward our friends and punish our enemies.

But you know who does? The left. Every single time. That is how they use it. And to your point, when you are handed by the electorate, legitimate government power. I don't think that means that you should abuse that power. But should you exercise it to its full legitimate force? Yes.

You had better. You have an obligation. That's why you won the election because they want you to. exercise. And now let's apply that in the in the in the in the reverse. I'm not going to be coming to your state for some time. You got j. Jones coming. When does he when does he formally come in? It'll be January. In January, it's probably the last time I drive through Virginia because we are currently living in a country where Charlie Kirk was murdered and no matter who you think did it whatever I'm not here to get into that whole argument. The point is somebody wanted him dead and they

and they made sure he was. You have Jay Jones now, a man who wants his opponent's children to die so that they will agree with him on policy. That doesn't just mean, hey, you know, if your children were brutally murdered, maybe you'll change your mind. It means there are things I am willing to do that I understand must be done to make someone change their mind. And so I'm not going back to Chicago for holidays because, and you can look this up, you

can ask Luke about it. Police in Chicago tried planting drugs on it. us back in, I think it was 2012. And NBC News reported how we got pulled over at gunpoint. And it's a crazy story. And call me paranoid. But all it takes is one day I drive through Virginia and some state trooper who's some crackpot far left guy who's a fan of Jay Jones and believes all the crazy Nazi stuff plants drugs.

That's it. Or just turns his body camera off and then puts a bullet in me. That I doubt. It's much easier just to be like, he resisted arrest and he's going to jail. if you want to take a piece off the board, there are many ways you can do it. And we are living in a country right now where someone was willing to murder Charlie Kirk because of his influence. When an AG comes in who expresses his desire to see children murdered for his political benefit, I am taking that very seriously. I think, I've said this before where originally, I mean, I was used to the General Assembly when I got in there in 2016 and it was if you disagreed with the Democrats, you were a racist, you were a bigot, you were a sexist.

and the use of that language was designed to rob you of moral legitimacy with respect to the arguments that you made. It was, I don't need to listen to your arguments because who cares about the opinions of a racist, a sexist, or a bigot. Then the language changed, and the language became,

you're a threat to democracy, you're a fascist, you're engaging in transgenocide. That's not to rob you of moral legitimacy. That is to create a moral framework for where they can use aggressive violence against you and claim it with self-defense. Now we're moving in to, to what Mark Kelly's doing right now,

where it's we will come after, we're promising to prosecute you if you follow the orders of a president we don't like. We will use the full force and power of government. Yeah, the thing that's about to be going on in Virginia right now is the place is going to be run like the mob. Right. Don Scott and Louise Lucas are talking to all the lobbyists right now, essentially saying you better tell everybody that ever donated to a Republican,

they better get on board. They're going to tell everybody who wants legislation before the General Assembly, you hire a Yonkine appointee, you're done. Right? And then it's a question of you've got a guy like Jay Jones running the Attorney General's office. Guys, they don't have to actually convict you. They can destroy your life with an investigation. Yep. They can bankrupt you having to fight.

They will use your tax dollars to crush you into the ground all to withdraw the investigation after the damage is done. They can launch an indictment against a company based in Nashville and accused several prominent conservatives of being paid by Russians and then abandoned the investigation a month later when the election's over. And that's literally what Merrick Garland did because he is evil. And it's funny because, you know, I always bring up my buddy in the poker room. He's like, you're always calling Democrats evil. And I was like, well, maybe when the AG lies about you, intentionally misrepresenting everything with no evidence, and then you get death threats because of it, you might understand. But to the people who don't really pay attention and they're just passively absorbing news, they don't get it.

And I've had to explain to people. I said, listen, for you to truly understand where we are, we have to go back in time 10 years. And there's so much information you have wrong. So I was talking to this guy and I said, Donald Trump never called neo-Nazi, he never called Nazis fine people. And it was, fascinating because not to single out any individual that I was just talking to, but I'll use an example from this show. When we had, what was her name? Is it Tara, Palmyri? Was that her name? She didn't know. And this was this year. She didn't know Trump never called Nazis fine people. Yeah.

She genuinely still believed that lie. Not only. And that's the world they live in. Yeah. Not only that, but I have friends that say, have said things like, oh, well, you know, maybe he didn't actually call Nazis fine people, but he was there that day with them. Yeah. He was there talking. So he was at the neo-Nazi rally.

Even though, according to Trump, I don't think he was actually in the, at the rally. he was doing a press conference. He wasn't anywhere near. Yeah, he wasn't even near it. Was he in New York? I don't know, but he wasn't anywhere near Charlottesville. Yeah, so, like, he didn't go there. No.

People are under the impression that he was there at the rally with him. And the truth doesn't matter. Well, you saw what the BBC did. I mean, the BBC deliberately edited speeches in order to make it look like he had called for people to go over to the Capitol on January 6th. The...

Who was it? Matt Van Swole, he just came out and said, I think it was either today or yesterday. He said, I just learned for the first time that the whole hands up, no shoot, or don't shoot. It was a complete fraud. Just today. Oh, yeah, just today.

He's like, I had no idea that this guy didn't put his hands up, didn't say don't shoot, didn't do any of it. He literally charged a police officer, tried to take his firearm away from him, in the car, following him. Yes. to get the firearm. And there was a bullet... The gun went off.

There was a bullet hole in the squad car's passenger door. Yeah. We all knew that part of the story within what, probably 72 hours. Yeah. Probably within 72 hours. There's people now years later going,

wait, wait, what? Mm-hmm. Yeah. Or George Floyd having a lethal dose of fentanyl and meth in his system. Yeah. People go, huh? Yeah.

And they vote. And they're voting for Afton Bain. And the fact that these things are untrue. true and it was the foundation for a movement that, you know what, seven, eight years later, nine years later, eight years later, because I think, no, seven years later, because Ferguson was in 2013, seven years later, literally burned down multiple cities across the country, right? Just massive amounts of rioting.

Which, by the way, were not demonstrations of left-wing ideological political violence. No, not at all. Not demonstrations of that. According to all of those hate trackers, the killing in Portland, the riots don't count as left-wing violence. Of course not. No, but if a skinhead gang

gets in a fight with a Hispanic gang over drug turf, that's right-wing ideology. But skin-head gang gets in a fight with another skin-head gang. If white guys kill other white guys, it's white supremacists. The white supremacists punches his wife, it's right-wing violence. Yeah. And here's the problem. The problem is

conservatives, take debate every time. Yeah. Take debate. So, someone... I think less so. I think less so now. They may be, but still prominent, where I hear the debate all the time where someone will say something like the right commits, you know, way more violence. And the conservative spawned with, oh, yeah, but the left does this. Instead of saying, brother, I'm not going to sit here and defend white supremacist punching anybody. Don't, we are not part of the same group. Yeah.

So if you want to make an argument about white supremacists, fine. If you're going to make an argument about conservatives or Republicans, whatever you want to make, fine. When they say the right is responsible for X, what they're actually. trying to do is saying the run-of-the-mill working-class Republican is the exact same thing as a skinhead neo-nazi guy chasing down black men. Yeah. And then Republicans go, well, but the left does this or that. My response is, oh yeah, if you mean right isn't like the white supremacist, it's fine, but let's separate them and we'll all agree to condemn them. Okay, of regular Republicans, oh, now it's zero. Yeah. Oh, among regular liberals, it's 27,000. Yeah. Well, it's,

this, this, I was speaking at a University of Alabama on this, and I would say, look, the bottom line is one, you're associating to typical conservative stuff that's done by like extremists. And then you're completely negating stuff done by Antifa, right? There's an intellectual dishonesty here that has reached a critical mass. And again, I think this all goes back to Gramsheet with this whole idea of you take over culturally shaping institutions and then you use their credibility, their stored up credibility in order to push your agenda. The problem now is that when you use those kind of statistics to try to push this narrative that, oh, well, 80% of political violence is on the right, I'm looking at them now going, you understand that that doesn't cause me to go, oh my gosh, is that true? I know it's not true. Well, yeah, but this study said it, or is it all that does, okay, all you have done is reinforced my belief that that institution, the people conducting those studies, the organizations that put it out there, are co-opted.

They're absolutely co-opted. Because I can go over here and I can look at a poll that was conducted where they asked self-identifying liberals, moderates, and conservatives, how comfortable are you with political violence? And it turns out that it's overwhelmingly the left, which, oh, by the way, is what I observe on a daily basis. So it's like I don't, again, you can't continue to wear these culturally shaping institutions as a kind of like skin suit and demand that I. give them the same credibility that they earned decades ago when they actually engaged in either objective journalists or objective analysis. Yeah. Indeed, my friends, we're going to go to your chats and rumble rants.

So smash the like button. Share the show if you really do like it. Join us at timcast.com. The Discord server is awaiting. And community, my friends, is our strength. I did a couple. I did this video this morning talking about the radicalization of Gen Z and it's because of community issues.

People don't have neighbors anymore. Well, if you go to Timcast.com, you click join us and you get in our Discord membership. You will find a massive community of people, some who've even got married. But there's early shows, there's episodes, it's true. Yeah, I think we've had like five couples they met. And listen, if you're a fan of the show, you probably have a similar understanding of the news and worldview. It's probably not the only show you watch, but you're going to find like-minded individuals. And maybe you'll even disagree debate, but you'll have a similar moral structure.

And unity is our strength. Not to mention, we can't do this without you. If you think the show is good and worth it, we need you to join us and help support the work that we do at Timcast.com. But we also got a great sponsor for you. It's Backyard Butchers. My friends, go to Backyard Butchers.com. Use promo code Tim. You can get the 30% off and a free turkey or ham.

I know Thanksgiving's over, but Turkey or Ham's still good. This Thanksgiving, it was all about family and American tradition. And Backyard Butchers is still running their promo right now, even though the holiday is over. But you, like many others, probably run into disgusting store-bought big ag meat with hormones and other garbage pump. Well, backyard butchers is the real deal. It's real meat from real ranchers. And, oh, man, I had a great rib-eye.

I'm a rib-eye. I was a fillet guy for a while. But I've been doing ribby recently because it's fat here. I love it. You know what I mean? So this Thanksgiving, well, I got to say it again because we're past Thanksgiving, but the deal is still there. So you can get the 30% off and a free turkey or ham. And Backyard Butchers want us to make sure everyone knew, like they're still running the promo.

It's still available. Up to 30% off. So buy your products from real ranchers, not the big ag mystery meat feedlot garbage, and check it out. Shout out to Backyard Butchers. Thanks for sponsor and they show you guys and go to Backyard Butchers.com promo code, Tim, American tradition, American meat, backyard butcher. Shout out. Let's grab your rants and chats. We got.

David Flores says tonight Frederick County is having a meeting regarding data centers now legacy farms dating to the 1700s will be affected there's been no studies on effects environment light noise or pole more to come

interesting have you been tracking the data center stuff in northern Virginia yeah well so here's here's what's there's a big problem with this it's one of the reasons why in Virginia this year they're probably going to try to take away land use authority from localities

in order to try to push more data centers and to definitely push green energy. Like in Virginia, the issue that we have is they pass the Virginia Clean Economy Act, which is destroying our energy capacity. So what are they doing to protect the environment? Well, they're scooping up farmland and forestry destroying it and put up industrial solar fields.

Now, why do they need to keep doing this to the degree that they are? Because they have to feed these incredibly energy-hungry data centers. And so it's amazing how in Virginia this is going to cause, I mean, this is about to cause our, energy rates to just go through the roof. So it's a big issue. It's a it's kind of scary to think the the amount of power that these things need and and to know that the the federal government has made it so difficult to to to build power plants. You know, whatever types they are.

I know I know that the left wants to see all kinds of you know green energy and stuff personally. I'm of the opinion that you don't get any more green energy than nuclear power and if you want to start. If you want to build power, a nuclear power plant, it's like 10 years before you'll be able to get any power out of it. If you start today. I'm so busy all the time. I'm trying to work out this mini-doc plan with Shane about the data centers in Northern Virginia because I've told the story a couple different times, but it's creepy. A large language model instructed me on how to contact data center land acquisition to get a massive payout if I shut up, take the show off the air and sell the land quietly. it argued that the data centers effectively are their own entity. It's called the Virginia instance, which is these massive data centers connected to the NSA, the CIA, etc.

They're basically, humans are basically saying, what should we do? And they're just being told it to do by the AI. And it wants to buy up all the land in this area because it needs energy transmission from north of here into northern Virginia. and all these parcels are in the way. We've noticed the prices of land around here are skyrocketing to an absurd degree. We talked about it. I talked about like a bungalow five years ago was 200,000. Now it's 500, and they sell instantly.

And it makes no sense. I looked at one house with my wife, and it was half a million dollars for 2,000 square feet, and it needed 100 grand in updates. And we are like, that's ridiculous. Sold right away. And so all of this is really weird, but the AI said there are Delaware limited liability partnerships, quietly buying up plots of land, they're trying to create large acreages to build data center transmission lines to go into the big data centers in Northern Virginia.

And it said that there are many people in the area who have quietly received exorbitant payouts for their land in exchange for privacy. That it said, if you don't list your property and you email directly to the land acquisition companies, they'll offer you a premium not to go through any real estate and to do a private sale so that it doesn't pop up in the press. The reason being, the news finds out that land is being purchased for the purpose of a data center and all the locals are going to lose their mind. They're going to pass ordinances. So they're trying to do it very quietly. And they, this, so I need to talk to Shane about this because we wanted to do a mini doc talking about what's actually going on

and exposing it all. And we've talked about it a bit, but we never actually sat down and planned it. So I need to go. And a lot of localities like the data centers because they look at it as additional tax revenue for very few services. Yep. Because they, I mean, you look at these massive data centers and that's not like a hundred people in there. It's relatively few. Yeah, it's like seven. Yeah. If that, a janitor and a security guy.

Yeah. And there's no lights. The lights are all off because they don't need them. creepy. All right. Let's jump to the next show. We got James Black says two things. Nick on Timcast. It is not even my birthday. That is tomorrow. Happy birthday. Me. Nothing has made me dislike Candice more than this Charlie Kirk arc.

I mean, look, listen. I really do recommend you listen to her show from today. Because when she posted that tweet saying, like, I've got information for you, she didn't really say anything in the show. And so I was sitting with Sean and I was like, just play it and we'll listen to it. She literally said nothing. I'm not being cute. I'm not being coy. It was pat her.

I was actually really shocked. It was 10 minutes of her saying nothing. I'll give you an example. It was shocking how Candace was saying so low. but moving her mouth so much that it made me feel it felt like nothing was being said. And that's something that's really important to tell people. People need to understand this. You know, when Candace was doing her show, her mouth was moving.

Words were coming out. But no ideas are actually being conveyed. And that's what's important to really understand here. What isn't conveyed? Because nothing was conveyed. She was just saying words. And those words conveyed nothing. That's how I think and feel.

And you know what? I wouldn't lie to you about it. I wouldn't mislead you. She was actually just not really saying anything as she was talking for a long period of time. just like I am doing right now. How long until she accuses you of being Jewish over or under three months? What if she's just like she refuses to say anything about me, but she just attacks you? I'd be the low-hanging fruit, I guess.

That's one big looking yarmically. I don't think our show generates enough buzz for her to mention. Oh, I disagree. I think she has a lot of respect for you. And I think she knows the show is very important. I think this will get a response. I mean, maybe. You know, the thing is, like we were looking at that story,

talking about how much money she made. There's, Twitch is a big problem right with bots. There's a reason why people buy bots to make their viewership look bigger. We're not going to get, you know, so right now, what do we have?

We're split between Rumb, but we have 46,000 concurrent viewers. Which is, it's actually really good because four years ago, when we were in the off season after the 2020 election, we were averaging about 27,000 concurrent viewers. So the show has grown,

its consistency and all these things. I don't need to bot or buy views or do anything like that because I honestly, I don't really care if it's number one, number 10, number 100. But people don't understand that Candace has one really big show she does every day. And it's big. People really like it. That's great if they like it, whatever. And so you'll hear in the press about how she's so big. Well, actually, across the board, I'm pretty sure we get equal to or more views than she does.

As a company, I've got four different shows of different. subject matter, and then we've got audio side, then we've got the other shows. So, you know, I think if I were to stop doing five different shows and just do one, I don't think I'd get as many views as Candace, but I think it'd probably get like 60, 70%. Whereas, you know, Tim Kest Dyerl does about half a million and she does like two. If I stop doing all the other shows, the viewers would, would concentrate around one show or whatever. My point is there's a handful of, it's, You have to break down total viewership per company for view. So it's like her show is really big, but it's one, you know, hour long show per day, right?

Do you want to hear the conspiracy about why she's still on air? So because she works for Israel. And Israel is, and that's why Nick Fuentes is banned and she's not because Nick, they don't want to actually. So Nick is a wildcard. No one controls. And he says things that are dangerous to Israel. But Candice has controlled opposition who literally worked for the daily wire and then goes road. and disappears from the company, but then she's propped up on YouTube and Spotify as the acceptable anti-Israel,

and she sounds crazy and everyone's disparaging her, and Nick Fuentes is banned from every platform. She is a dumb black woman that makes anti-Semites look exceptionally low IQ. Like her brand of anti-Semitism is extraordinarily low IQ. I think anybody with any media literacy looks at her shit and goes, wow, what a moron. Well, I mean, obviously you're personally offended by the things that she says and does. I just think it's so naked. I thought she was done when she was pro-Israel, too, which she was very pro-Israel in the past. My point is this.

This is the sin of Ben Shapiro, the Jews dealing with the sins of Ben Shapiro platforming again, this DEI right-wing commentator. And he had some falling out with her, and she was really pissed about it. And she goes, you know what Ben Shapiro loves? Ben Shapiro loves, they had a falling out together. Did they? Yeah, definitely they did. Answer me this.

Well, I had a text that said so. Somebody texted me. Answer me this, Elad. Why does YouTube prop her up, promote her on the front page, make sure she, gets millions of views for everything she says about Israel. Nick Fentis can't have a YouTube channel and Spotify banned Nick when he actually got his show up. But Spotify props up Candice. It's a DEI candidate. She is the DEI right wing commentator. Why? He can't cancel black women. It would be racist. That's totally why. I don't think so. Yeah, that's what I think it is.

Honestly, I think the reason that Nick catches so much flack is because Nick's delivery has always been trolly. Yes, I think things intentionally to get people riled up. Kind of like when Candice Owen says Bridget McRone's a man? I don't think that it's true. I think Bridget McRone, I mean, I think that Candice Owen believes that. I don't. I think she doesn't use as many slurs as Nick does, and I think the slurs really gets you kicked off of the social media platforms.

I get that. I get that. But doesn't explain why he can't even have the channel. It's one thing that if he makes a channel and then they give him a strike for saying a racial slur. Well, he did have a YouTube channel that was eventually Cantor because of so many strikes. I don't think, yeah, but just like Stephen Crowder, they're not legitimate strikes. Like, here's another example.

Stephen Crowder doesn't go anywhere near the degree that Fuentes does in the hate or like, it's not the right word, but like the aggression, the way he insults people. Yet they give Crowder strikes like hotcakes, but not Candace Owens. Hey, maybe she got somebody in the inside must be working with her, huh? Or she worked for the Daily Wire alongside Ben Shapiro. And it's, you know, I was talking to these young guys and they were like, you know, Candace Owens, you know, this is the. funny thing about people who are like, Candace never said Israel did it.

I talked to these young guys and they were like, do you believe what Candice is saying that Israel killed Charlie Kirk? That's what they literally asked me. These three guys that they said in their early 20s. And I was like, well, she didn't say explicitly that she's like implied that there's Israelis involved. And I said, but don't you guys think it's weird that she claims you can't criticize Israel, but YouTube makes her number one? And then they're kind of were like, that is weird, isn't it? Saying that is what helps make her number one.

What? Saying that you, she can't talk about Israel. She's always a conspiracy around. that is why... It's always the idea of I'm the victim, I'm the victim. It is kind of funny, though, that's like, clearly you're allowed to criticize Israel because she's number one. It's fascinating

too, because she used to be like the anti-victimhood mentality type person. That used to be like her catchphrase at Blegs. I still remember those days, but she's like, I'm against victimhood mentality, but now all of her content is about her... Here's a good one. One goat says Candice Owens, Ian Carroll, Nick Fuentes, Valhalla, and others of the future. We're done listening to these whinyy retards,

dishing out their dumb opinions. We want truth, evidence, and facts. And then it's, I think it's, those are middle finger emojis, Tim Toll. The funny thing is Ian Carroll once claimed

I was trying to buy the Daily Wire. He did. He did. He literally came out of the story and I don't got to be with Ian Carroll, but he was like,

Tim Pool was trying to buy the Daily Wire and it's like, yes. Yes, I have that much money. Wow. That's amazing. I think he also, go on.

No, it's just, it's remarkable, the insane ish, that comes out of this sector of the internet where they were they claimed the Daily Wire owned a portion of Timcast. They literally

were spreading rumors that we, that Daily Wire was a minority holder of Timcast and then at the same time they said I was trying to buy the Daily Wire. Here we are one year on from this retarded BS doing the same thing

we've always done and it was really funny because I had someone asked me and they were like, is this true that you're trying to like buy out the Daily Wire? And then I was just like, first of all, that's insane. And they were like, well, but what about the rumor that they own a piece of Timcast? And I said, give it a month. And then what happened? We signed to deal with Rumble and we announced that we're with Rumble.

And we have this YouTube short that's just constantly viral about Timcast on Rumble. It got like half a million views in the past two days. It gets like a million. It's got three million views. And all of the BS these people were spewing. And I'm not saying, Candace, specifically, like this sector of the internet. I was like, I'm sitting here having a comment. conversation with Rumble about, you know, bringing IRL live to Rumble, doing Rumble premium.

Like, we've got a bunch of big plans that we're going on with Rumble. I'm like, who makes this stuff up? It's crazy. I was actually reviewing some other stuff since you mentioned Ian Carroll, and it reminded me of this tweet that he released in March 29th, alleging that there's an RFK Jr. Blackmail story from multiple angles that Candice Owens also pushed. These retards pushed so much bullshit that it's really hard to forget the actual dumb shit. that they push. And again, why does this matter? Why is this an issue? It's because instead of, again, paying attention to the important political stories or engaging in politics in a serious way,

it's easy to digest this stupid Netflix true crime type bullshit that really, I don't know, gets your brain go, gets the adrenaline running, but isn't necessarily true. It's baseless. It's not based on anything but conjecture and text messages that people are just sending each other. Quantum Cool says Candace is a Fed. She's trying to destroy turning point USA to what? Get rich and cover for extreme trans ideology. She never left the left. Her views are full of bots. I think she's appealing to third worldists.

I think that's what it is. I think like the Arab person that you met, they're just happy when she blames anything on Israel. There's what, 1.6 billion Muslims? Maybe we should start doing it. Appealing to Muslims, huh? Appealing to Muslims? You're going to convert?

You're going to abandon. Oh, no, God forbid. I would revert. I hate how they say that. It's the most arrogant thing of religious Muslim could say. It's like, oh, no, you're not converting. You're coming back. No, buddy, I'm a Jew.

It's just like when they say Christ was a Muslim. Yeah. Oh, everybody knows who's Jewish. Come on. Let's be real here. We got Yaki. And he says, why is no one talking about how weird their marriage is? No romantic talk.

And him attracted to her power so much that he proposed after 17 days. Nothing to see here. Is that what it was? Yeah, it was quick. Like two weeks they got married. Yeah. The two weeks are proposed. I don't know those two weeks are married.

I'm going to say this. Guys, I really do recommend you watch the show she put out today. Because I can't remember who said. it, but someone in here, someone in pre-production, we were getting ready to set it. It sounded like she was in love with Charlie. I'm not exaggerating. I'm not being cute nor derisive. She talks about how she used to like send him text saying, I feel like an alien and he

responded with, I'm a time traveler. I'm not joking. He's like, I'm a time traveler and stuff like, I believe in you. And she tells stories about how he would ask her. She was like, I was always his wingman. It really sounds like she is the friend zoned. like she was in love with him and he cast her aside and she's very jealous

and maybe the reason I'm not trying to be cute you think she has a thing for white men? I mean, isn't she married to one? I don't know. Yeah, married to one. My point is to listen to Charlie Kirk. This is not meant to be intentionally insulting or derisive. I do genuinely believe I'd listen to that show today

where she talked about Charlie. It sounded like she was in love. And I have to imagine what she must feel knowing Erica Kirk inherited and took over what Charlie built even though Candice was there from the beginning, and Candice got to watch Charlie, who was her best friend, and she was the wingman,

some other woman. I think the motivation may be that Candice, she can't come out and say she hates Erica, because Erica's a widow. I mean, her husband's murdered, and she knows it's a peer angle she can't take. She goes after her instead, Tyler and Colvette. I think Candice is just jealous that Charlie didn't want to be with her.

And again, not trying to be insulting or derisive. I think that's a genuine motivation. And I understand. Now, watch the show she did today. It's not meant to be cute. Where she talks about the texts and she was telling him what clothes to wear on his dates and how she was the wingman. And these texts about how she felt like an alien and he said he was a time traveler.

I'm like, is this like a, I'm not kidding. It's like, it's like a romance novel. This is why women probably love it. Because it's almost like a romance narrative. Oh, like a telenova. I see. I'm not kidding. She's showing text messages where he says, I'm a time traveler.

And she says, I'm an alien. Pelvin novella. I don't speak Spanish, baby. Come on. America only. Jane H. Writers says, someone explained to me how Candace is on the front page of YouTube's featured, yet the only time they put Timcast IRL on the featured

is an episode from five years ago and is YouTube's members only. This is the weirdest thing. YouTube has featured for a year now. An old episode from like the first two weeks of Timcast IRL that is members only. I don't know why it's members only. I don't know that we ever did that.

because I don't care if people watch the first episode I get that video all the time by the way I meet yes very very odd members only in like a weird studio it's our first studio in the basement in Jersey very weird with Adam and it's and it says YouTube featured on it and it makes no sense

I don't get it at all very weird I don't know an episode of Timcast IRL so you aren't like promoting those in any way no that's so weird because I get him all the time as well all the time it's weird interesting it's so weird I don't understand why won't it just

promote like the show now. Yeah, I get that promotion and I get almost zero promotion for our car. Wait, hold on. Maybe there's a way we can we can do something here. Let's go to that video and make a thumbnail. Yeah.

Oh, that's genius. I need title and thumbnail very, very similar. And have it be like, just have it say, subscribe it. Timcast, IRL. I've got IRL pulled up right now and that specific video is over in the, on the, on the, on right side. This is premium like members only stuff, right?

Yep. Yeah. YouTube featured members only. Okay, I'm going to pull up, uh, breathing Elon's musk. New Trend has kids licking toilets is the- There it is. Look at this. No joke.

Yeah, there is. YouTube featured right here. That's what I'm talking about it. It's everywhere. New trend has kids licking toilets. Yeah, it's five years ago. The coronavirus challenge. Yeah.

Dude, it's, you know what? I mean, we should just, if we, maybe it's featured because it is members only. And I don't know why it's members only. It might have been that at some point five years ago. I don't know. The YouTube algorithm has been trashed for some time, frankly, so I wouldn't be surprised. You know what? I'm just not going to do anything. I'm going to leave it as is because it's promoting it like crazy to people, but it's free advertising. So, you know, if it ain't broke, don't fix it. I don't know why they're promoting it, but whatever. Also, this, the song, Breathing Elon's Musk is hilarious, by the way. All right, what do we got here?

What is this? Kay Gorski says, enough Candace, please. I hate to say it, but while I agree on the sentiment of like, does her story really matter, it got to the point where it did. It got to the point where she put out a post and got 8 million views insinuating turning points involved in his murder. And it's like the fifth time she's made these insinuations. So it's like, yeah. It's affecting people. All right.

What do we got? All right. Larp Laugh-Love says, Tim, it's only poor trigger discipline if Franklin is aiming. at something he doesn't intend to shoot. So in a lot of the Franklin videos, he's got his finger directly on the trigger. And he's point, look, you know, I said it's poor trigger discipline.

That's true. His poor trigger discipline. Finger straightened off the trigger. Someone needs to do it. Franklin learns trigger discipline. No, because you know that the AI generated image would be like Franklin shot his friend.

Learns trigger discipline. All right. What is this? Jason Dix says, hey Tim, shout it to the pre, shout out to the pre show in the Discord. Members exclusive. Also shout it to Mark, C-O-O. He took my job. I'm not bitter. He's a good man. Shout out to Mark. So in the Discord, we have Slick and Olivia. They host a show and the Timcastco hosts come on and join it. The Discord community runs its own shows. We don't tell them what to do. It is a community of people who build things. because they want to build things, and they're wondering why you don't want to be friends with them. I think you should be by going to Timcast.com and clicking join us and getting in the Discord server. It is fun.

And then there's something all day, every day. If you're bored and you're looking for information, like, imagine this. Imagine there's a story that comes out. You don't quite understand, and I don't have any videos up or anything. You go in the Discord and you post about it. Everyone's sharing information. And these are good people who we have a similar moral worldview that the truth is more important than our political view on what should be. It matters what is.

want to make the world work, the first thing we do is figure out what's true and then what we have to do to get to our solution. So shout out to the Discord. All right, what have we here? Crystal Gaser says, Nick, my brother was killed in January of 24 in a hit and run in Newport News, Virginia. The man who killed my brother was just sentenced to six months in jail. Without going into all the details of the case here, is there anything more my family can do? you can attempt to appeal the decision you're in Newport News good gosh what's wrong in newborn news well let's just say the representation there isn't the best so yeah here's the deal you can you can definitely attempt to contact your state legislators and ask them about it now I will

say this there is obviously separation of powers between your legislatures and the and the judiciary so we're always careful about what we theoretically you know interfere with on things like that. But you can't attempt to appeal the decision. You can attempt to contact the Attorney General's office if you think there's been kind of a tragic miscarriage of justice on that. Those are the different legal mechanisms that you can take. The other thing that you can do is depending on, you know, you can get the information out about the judge that actually did the decision of the sentencing. The other thing, the other question is, is your Commonwealth attorney for your area? Did they offer a plea? Is that why I only got six months for this? Was there

something else the Commonwealth Attorney did because they're elected. And so you can theoretically go after the Commonwealth Attorney during the next election cycle. I wish I could give you like a better response on the things that you could do to try to correct for this. But those are the various mechanisms available. So we put up a poll and it said Candace is right or Candice is wrong. It's 59% Candice is wrong. 41% Candice is right. I guess my follow-up is just what does she write about?

Okay, this is what's killing me. about this. This is why I go back to, like, regardless of where you stand on this issue, is there anyone that can tell me that she is anything other than his best friend or his worst enemy? Because this is what troubles me about this, is that if you're willing to look at this objectively and you just say, I find what she says convincing so far, that's fine. I do not. I do not find what she has said convincing. But if you do, my question is, is what is the standard of truth that you're actually going to utilize? Because at some point, there can no longer be, I have evidence

and I'm going to present it and then there's no evidence or the evidence is not sufficient to actually prove what she's saying. And this goes back to what you're saying before. What is the standard for truth? We got Amish man. He says Tim is going so hard against Candace it's almost like Israel paid him. Amish man.

Of course. You are a retard. Like this is the crazy thing that you always have to be paid by someone else. Like a business can't just exist. You know what I mean? Like I did a poll. 40% 60% right now 40% say Candace is right

Well brother You paid me Bro you sent a $5 Super chat to me that I'm gonna use To do this show It's crazy That it's like you can literally See the Superchat money come in

Yeah We had 25,000 that was it $25,000 In super chats when Tim Ballard was on From when we were talking about Sound of Freedom And it's just like How does Tim get his money? I don't know

There's like 10 million subscribers On all the platforms who have discord with tens of thousands of people in it? Why does it have to be Israel paying? I constantly get that I'm an Israeli shill because the dudes that owned the label that all that remains used to be on were Jewish. So because they're Jewish, I'm an Israeli shill.

The super chatter's outing himself as Israeli. By Israel. I mean, I think you should maybe... Maybe a lot can explain what two weeks is really about. Israelis don't pay Tim, guys. Tim pays Israelis. What people don't realize is that if you play two weeks backwards, it's actually like rabbinical chant. It's just pure Jewish Torah recent.

Yeah, and to allude's point, my manager's Jewish and my business manager are Jewish. So I am actually paying the Jews. Although I do think Tomudic Tim does have a nice ring to me. Actually, that is funny too. Israel's not paying me. The Jews are not paying me. I'm paying him. He's sitting right here.

That's how sneaky it gets. That's right. Wait a minute. I rent a room to a Jewish guy, so that's one Jew that's paying me. Okay. A Jew's not your landlord. You're not paid by the Jews. I'm the landlord to a Jew.

You're not paid by the Jews. You're paid by Jew. Yeah. By a Jew. The tables have turned. Ah, yeah. All right, everybody. We're going to go to the uncensored portion of the show.

Go to rumble.com slash Timcast. IRL. Join Rumble premium to watch. And you'll get a lot more than just Timcast. Of course, you'll get Stephen Crowder's Mug Club and a bunch of really awesome content from a ton of the creators. They got Jeremy Hambly, they got Viva Fry,

all of our good friends, and DeVorey Darkens, of course. So make sure you go to rumble.com slash Timcast. We're going to be there right now for our Discord members who want to call in. That's Timcast.com. Join us. You can follow me on X and Instagram at Timcast. Nick, do you want to shout anything out?

You can just follow me on social media, Nick J. Freitas. And then, of course, we have our show Making the Argument and The Why Minutes. Thanks for tuning in, everybody. I'm Al-Aliahu White House correspondent here at Timcast. Quick programming update. I was lucky enough to go to a congressional media row today and interview a few different congressmen.

And I understand that's going to be on the Culture War Channel in the next couple of days. These are 3 15-minute interviews. And then we also have the Pentagon Media Row tomorrow where I'll be doing a handful of interviews with Pentagon officials. And that will also be on the Culture War channel in the upcoming day. So be on the lookout for that. And thank you guys for tuning in. Phil. I am Philobontim. I am Phil. It Remains on Twix.

The band is all that remains. Tomorrow night, I have a super cool announcement about all that remains. I will, that's all I'm going to tell you right now, but it's a really cool announcement for Christmas. You can check out the band, all that remains on Apple Music, Amazon Music, Pandora, Spotify, YouTube, and Dizer. Don't forget, the left lane is for crime. One more super chip. Before we go, James Margolis says, Tim, ha-ha, thank you so much for the phone message for my birthday. That was so cool to see that.

Love your work, sir. A huge hello to everyone else there. And thank you, sir. And shout it to your wife. So when George Santos was here last, he was like talking about how cameo was really great and you should use it. And then I said, sure. And then I kind of just signed up and then ignored it. And then notice there was a request for someone's birthday.

And so I absolutely gave a shout out for his birthday. So I really do appreciate it. And I just want to say happy birthday again, man. I appreciate y'all reaching out. We're going to go to rumble.com. And we hope to see you there in about 30 seconds.