Timcast IRL - Democrats Have STOLEN The Election In California, Spencer Pratt CHEATED OUT Of Win w/ Andrew Branca

Episode Date: June 9, 2026

Tim, Phil, and Brett are joined by Andrew Branca to discuss Spencer Pratt Loses after late mail-in ballot drop, Nick Shirley Uncovers 126-year-old California voter, SCOTUS could nuke ballots after election day, Karmelo Anthony is screwed, and the DOJ moves to strip citizenship from 17 criminals.  SUPPORT THE SHOW BUY CAST BREW COFFEE NOW - https://castbrew.com/ GET OUR MERCH - https://merch.timcast.com/ Join - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCLwN... Hosts:  Tim @Timcast (everywhere) | https://www.shoutout.fans/timpool Phil @PhilThatRemains (X) | https://allthatremains.komi.io/ Brett  @PopCultureCrisis  (everywhere) Producer: Carter @carterbanks (X) |  @trashhouserecords  (YT) Guest:  Andrew Branca @TheBrancaShow (X) Podcast available on all podcast platforms! Democrats Have STOLEN The Election In California, Spencer Pratt CHEATED OUT Of Win  | Timcast IRL For advertising inquiries please email [e-mail]

If you've ever wondered what combat actually feels like, not the headlines, not the movies, but what it was like to be there. This is combat story. I'm A.J. Peschuti, a retired force recon Marine and scout sniper, and this show is for anyone who wants to understand the human side of war, through the people that lived it. I sit down with veterans from across generations and specialties, special operators, pilots, infantry, law enforcement, and everyone in between. And we talk about the moments that stayed with them. The missions that went right, and the ones that didn't. And what it costs during and after.

There's no script and no agenda. Just real conversations between two people who've walked similar paths. We're not here to create content. We're here to provide context. So whether you've worn the uniform or just want to understand those who have, watch, listen, and follow us wherever you get your podcasts. Welcome to Combat Story. As to be expected, the Democrats somehow magically pulled ahead of Spencer Pratt and Steve Hilton in California.

Thanks to these late ballots that came in well after Election Day. And we all knew this is going to happen because this is what happens in California every single time. But Donald Trump is accusing the Democrats in California of cheating. And I agree. and I will definitively state, yes, it's cheating, but. You see, when you make the claim that Democrats are cheating, what you will get in these liberal debates is they'll falsely frame what you are stating to make it seem like you're out, you're stating something completely outrageous

or impossible or conspiratorial. No, I think cheating just strikes at the spirit of an election is supposed to be. We all come out, we express our thoughts on who should be our leader, who should be running this particular jurisdiction in this particular authority, authority or office, and then whoever we all vote for ends up getting that job. I would not call it democracy when activists go door to door convince people who don't want to vote to fill out a mail-in ballot, collect it, and then drop them off after the fact, and also giving them time, if we want to get into the hardcore cheating, giving them time after the election

to figure out exactly how many ballots they would need. Because the most interesting thing about the late ballots they're counting in Los Angeles is that they like to say, you know, Democrats, They vote early. And that's why after an election, you see a whole bunch of votes coming in just for the Democrat. The problem is that California instituted a jungle primary to try and lock out Republicans, meaning that all parties go for the same primary and the top two will advance to the general election. They did not expect a Republican to muster up enough votes to actually get that slot.

Based on this mail-in vote system, it's actually really easy. First, you get, if they didn't do the jungle primary, you'd get to the general election and you'd have a Republican on the ticket who's probably not going to win and a Democrat. And then you can just count the belts after the fact. So day of election day comes in, you go, oh crap, the Republicans ahead by 3%. We need X amount of votes. So let's just go through what we found from the mail-in votes until the Democrat wins. The problem with the jungle primary that Spencer Preet was actually capable of advancing to the general and they wanted to knock him out. Well, the problem now is the mail-in votes that actually came in for some reason didn't come in for Karen Bass.

Seemingly only Nithia Rahman. And I'd make the argument that when you're in a desperate rush with only days after an election to try and find as many ballots you can, with apparently the authority to backdate and signatures can literally be pictures of the NES character Kirby. Not a joke. I have proof. Well, you don't really have time to balance the ballots, do you? So you just crank out as many as you can to make sure Nithia Rahman jumps ahead of Spencer Pratt to knock him out of the election. The reason why I think we are not seeing a proportional amount of votes for Karen Bass is because they didn't need him. She was already in first place.

Now, as with the governor's race, that is yet to be seen. But Javier Becerra is now in first place, so we will see. We'll talk about that. And then big news in the Carmelo Anthony trial. You guys, this one's a big, big case that everybody's been following for some time. let me just say, I'm just going to say it. Carmelo Anthony is going to prison. This dude's getting locked up.

His defense is in shambles. All of the witnesses, even on cross, the defense's own witness were like, he did it, he shouldn't have done it, he provoked it, literally a quote, he provoked it. And new information coming out, it's actually quite shocking. A few things. Austin Metcalf was quoted as saying, I'm not going to fight you, was stabbed before even being able to put his hands on Carmelo. Anthony, and Carmelo Anthony had grabbed the knife before there was even a confrontation.

So this is where things really start to break down for the, I'd say defense, but let's just call lack thereof. So we'll talk about that and a lot more. It's going to be fun before we get started. We've got a great sponsor. It is backyard butchers. I love me a good steak, my friends. Check out backyard butchers.

Dot com. Use promo code pool. You get to 30% off and two free 10 ounce rib-eyes and free shipping. Man, can you go wrong? Here's what got my attention this week. The Secretary of Agriculture publicly warned that America's consolidated meat supplies a threat to the country itself. Think about that. Four companies, just four companies, control the majority of America's beef supply and the largest is foreign owned. Not a fan. It's not a conspiracy theory. It's national food security.

Here's what most people don't realize. A single pound of, oh, this is awful. A single pound of conventional grocery store ground beef can contain DNA from hundreds of different cattle. I just want you to think about that real quick. You're going to go buy some ground beef. and it's literally just a giant blender of random cows. Man. All right. So what's the solution? Well, as Americans, we got to return, return to tradition, where you know your rancher, you know your land,

you know where your meat is coming from. That's why you've got to go to backyard butchers.com. That's the American tradition. They are the American tradition. Backyard butchers offer premium American beef from real Texas ranchers, born raised and processed right here in the USA. 98% grass fed, 2% grain finished, zero hormones, zero antibiotics, zero preservatives.

Go to backyard butchers.com, use promo code pool. Up to 30% off, two free 10 ounce rib buys plus free shipping. And this summer, backyard butchers is celebrating America's 250th anniversary with a free America 250 box. When you purchase a steakhouse box, complete with burgers and hot dogs, built for my favorite holiday party, you know it. It's the 4th of July. It is maga month.

Go to backyardbutchers.com. Use promo code pool for up to 30% off, 2, 10 hours. ounce, rib-bys, and free shipping. Backyard butchers, American tradition, American meat. And don't let anybody tell you can't have a steak. These W-E-F jerks trying to take away my beef ain't going to happen. Also, go to Timcast.com, click Join Now. There is a community of tens of thousands of people hanging out every day, and you know what?

We need you. We need you not to sit idly by as the world passes you by and bad things come about. Community is the most important thing. We used to have it every week. everybody used to go to church. A lot of people don't do that anymore. We used to come together. We'd share ideas. Well, that's what we built here with your help as members. This community exists and you should join it if you have not. You get access to a bunch of members exclusives, pre-shows, morning shows, after shows, as well as the call-in show where you get to call into this show and talk

to us and our guest on the Rumble uncensored portion of the show. So check it out at timcast.com. smash the like button, share the show with everyone. You know, joining us tonight to talk about this and everything else is Andrew Branca. Hey, thanks for having me back. Who are you? What do you do? I am a criminal defense attorney. I specialize in use of force law,

self-defense, defense of others, defensive property have for 35 years. And I've been covering this Carmelo Anthony case pretty closely. And also, after that, of course, the Chud, the Builder case. I think you've got some keen insights on the new developments in that regard. And there's an interesting,

there's interesting functional element to each of these stories that I think inform on each other, essentially, like provocation versus self-defense and things like that. In some ways, they're almost the same case. They're very similar. Indeed, indeed. So thanks for joining. It should be great.

And the boys are hanging out with Brett. What's going on, guys? Normally I'm doing pop culture crisis Monday through Friday at 3 p.m. But I'm excited to be here. Let's get into it. How are you doing, Phil? What's up, everybody? I'm Philobonti, lead singer of the heavy metal band All That Remains.

What's up? I'm Carter. Andrew, I'm so pumped that you're here. We've been talking a lot about your case breakdowns, and I can't wait to get into it. Let's go, Tim. Here's the story from K-Q-E-D, NPR PBS. That's a mouthful.

L.A. Mayor Race, Ramon passes Pratt in quest for second-place slot. Spencer Pratt has said, listen, there's still a lot of ballots. It's not definitive just yet, but Decision Desk has already called it for Karen Bass and Nithia Ramon, who might have cried on election night because she was crushed with Pratt up by over 40,000 votes. Well, conveniently for her, she found those 40,000 votes in mail-in-bouts. And the, you know what the really interesting thing about all of it? Is just how Karen Bass didn't. This is the problem with cheating. Okay. Now, I'm going to say

first and foremost, answer the question, what is cheating? Well, I would argue it like this. An election is when people sit around and argue over who should be in charge, then everybody writes down a name, puts in a ballot box, they count it out, and whoever got the most votes wins, right? It's supposed to be a democratically elected representative of the people. Well, when you create a universal voting system, universal mail-in voting system where activists can go to nursing homes and otherwise collect ballots from people who do not want to vote and don't care, that's not an election. That's just you saying you've got more numbers than the other guy, but truth be told, if that's the system they codified, it is. Now here's where it gets real fun. You don't need signatures, not a joke, and I can prove it.

And according to Steve Hilton, actually in California, you can back date ballots. You can literally fill out a ballot after the election, handwrite a date on it, and it counts. Real convenient then when you take a look at this data. And wholeness says, mail-ins arriving before election day. 38.1 for Bass, 27.9 for Pratt and 20% for Ramon. Mail-in's arriving after Election Day. Ramon with 37, Bass with 34.9 and Pratt with 19. Now, they like to say, you know, the thing is, it's just that Democrats vote early and they vote by mail. So explain the difference between Ramon and Bass. That doesn't make sense that Karen Bass share the votes dropped.

Now, if you were calculating, the votes that came in election day and trying to figure out how you can remove a top two contender in second place. You don't need Karen Baskin any more votes because she's, well, you don't need it to gain any proportionally large amounts of votes. She's already in first place. You only need Raman to overtake Pratt. So I make the argument that when you are counting, when you are in a crunch for time to figure out how many ballots you need to knock out the only Republican, you don't have time to balance the percentages to make it look normal. And the reality is, given a long enough time, they probably could have generated enough ballots for Bass and Remount so that it looked plausible,

but this, this just doesn't look plausible. Now, the jungle primary system where Republicans and Democrats, all parties running the same ticket, was intended to lock Republicans out of the race, and it appears to have backfired. And now they're having the trouble of how do you eliminate the Republican from the general election? It looks like this is the way they do it. It's a just fascinating to see. It's obvious. And even Steve Hilton was knocked down. I got a couple more things that I want to go through. First, decision desk has already called it. So I know Spencer Pratt is hopeful. But check this out. Governor candidate Steve Hilton revealed the stunning reality of California fraud. They allow mail-in belts to be to be backdated by hand. It's not just the postmark.

You can handwrite the date. Now, I want to shock all of you and the conscience of the the average American. I want to show you a tweet that we have. Human David Hamati with this viral post, he says, many have been asking me to describe the potential signature verification loophole in L.A. It says if a voter is unable to sign,

the voter can make a mark witnessed by one person. Here the person drew a happy face and witnessed it with a scribble. That scribble isn't validated as being a real person. Indeed, this is the viral image that's been going around quite a bit. It shows what appears to be a California ballot with instead of a signature a smiley face.

Now here's the best part. If we jump over to our good friends over on Reddit, top minds of Reddit, oh, they think they're thothmart. Top critical thinkers have zero follow-up questions when someone shows them a signature line with a smiley face on it and tells them it's from an officially counted California ballot. Can you believe how stupid these maga chuds are for believing this fake ballot? Somebody made it up.

It's not like there's an official document from the government of California. showing that indeed you can use a picture of Kirby on your ballot with this page 28 on their signature verification guidelines showing pictures or symbols can be used as valid signatures. Since we have this symbol on file, it is considered valid. It's a picture of Kirby from the NES, from what the NES games, the Nintendo games, Kirby. So welcome to California where I love this. Can I just, I'm sorry, guys. This epitomizes everything that we are going through in the culture war, that in California,

a doodle of Kirby is called a valid signature. Liberals smug and dumb as possible, I'm trying to avoid swearing, mock the idea of the truth because they're so stupid and arrogant. They didn't bother Google searching whether or not you could use a smiley face on a ballot. And the answer is, yes, you can. Welcome to California. When you point out, this is cheating. That is not a signature.

That is not a person. You can't do this. They say, it's not cheating. It's legal. Indeed. It's tough to look at the results so far and not think that there's something amiss. The fact that Democrats will just assert, no, this is normal. without trying to make their elections look proper

is, I think, a major part of the problem because even if the situation is where Pratt didn't have the votes and the votes are legitimate, which, I mean, obviously people are going to question that, but even if that's the case, it looks so bad. I mean, the rest of the world looks at the United States and says, what's going on?

I have more respect to these African elections where the leader just comes out and says, I got 270% of the vote. It's like, at least on election. day they gave us a number. I mean, this kind of statistical anomaly is absolute proof that the election is stolen. It's no different than if I bet you 100 bucks that I could flip a quarter and get heads 50 times in a row. And then I flipped a quarter and I get heads 50 times in a row. You're not going to say, well, you won fair and square. You're going to say you MF or you rigged the

quarter, right? This is a fixed game. Unfortunately, most people won't. The average person just says, wow, you got lucky, I guess. Yeah, they don't believe that there's any possible. I think there's still a certain amount of people that have a certain amount of statistical faith in the system and they're not willing to make that jump into believing something as important as an election would go through something like this. I would also wonder why, if they were looking to inject a little bit of, like, a little bit less concern from the public, why not count the mail-in ballots first? I mean, I don't know that they, well, the mail-in-down. That way you don't get to choose whether you have enough votes to find after the fact. Yeah, I mean, the thievery is the point. I mean, it's

not a glitch. Well, I know it's the whole point, but I'm saying like if they were looking to at least try to fake some sense of honesty, they would do this. They were going to win. The U.S. Attorney investigating said they don't have any authority to actually do anything. That they've tried to get the voter records and

analyze this stuff, but they can't. Someone tweeted at him. I think it was, was it, Bill Is that his name? Someone said, why don't you arrest them? He goes, we don't have the authority to do that. So, okay, all right, I guess. Whatever then. You made the point statistically, this is impossible. Can you can you expand on that a little bit more? Well, you just don't see this kind of sudden

discovery of votes for one candidate that's a multiple of all the votes the other candidates are getting. Unless that was going to be a general trend throughout the election, they were just a bad candidate, but that's not what we're seeing. We're seeing people get certain percentages of the vote, and then when the preferred candidate falls short, suddenly they're literally using sheriff's helicopters to fly in ballots, and all those ballots are for the preferred candidate. That's just not the kind of statistical representation you'd expect to see. And the consequence of this, what we're really talking about, is not just a stolen election. This is the death of the republic.

Our founders fought a desperate eight-year war to free ourselves from the tyranny of the British monarchy because the British king did not get elected. He could not be held accountable to the will, the political will of the people. They were subjects. They were not citizens. Our founders established a republic where you have that political accountability because you're electing your representatives. But if that election process is broken, if it's being stolen, then you're not in a republic. You're in another tyranny by the people who steal the election.

Or either Trump's in on it or it's a civil war. Right? We're in advanced information technology eras. And I say eras plural because we had, now we're entering the AI space and the way we accumulate and dispersive information, disseminate information is getting much more dramatic. But the argument I always make, the purpose of war is to seize control of a region of people. Sometimes it's aggression. In this instance, what I see is Democrat-aligned states trying to steal power, convincing the population to bend the knee. So we can call it a cold civil war as it has been for almost eight years now. I want to highlight this because you mentioned the helicopters.

This is from NBCLA. Helicopters, I'm sorry, ballots arrived by helicopter in L.A. And I want to just expand on what you were saying about the statistical anomalies. The issue at play largely is that this is the Democrat argument, whenever there's the quote unquote red mirage. They have argued now since 2016 that Democrats tend to vote by mail and Republicans tend to vote in person. First, I would contend that's retarded and makes no sense. What is the argument by which the political leanings of a person determine whether or not they decide to mail something in or walk to a ballot location? That is a plan.

In fact, I'd argue the inverse. Conservatives, tending to be in rural locations, should be the ones mailing votes in because it's harder to drive to a polling location than an urban individual who can just walk down the block and get to one. But this is the point. Normally, they make that argument because you have a Democrat versus a Republican. In 2018, we saw this. Republicans held off the blue wave.

And within the first day, like a lot of a day, Republicans crushed. Democrats did succeed, but they had. held off a blue wave. Over the next several days, somehow Republicans started losing. The argument was, well, when the mail-in votes got counted, they skewed Democrat because Democrats tend to vote by mail more. The problem here is that Bass and Ramon are both Democrats, yet somehow the percentage changed. That is a serious statistical anomaly that cannot be accounted for because Ramon has lower name ID than Karen Bass and answer Pratt. If you want to make the argument, she was simply telling everybody when she was campaigning, vote by mail, don't vote in person, maybe that would make sense. But when you factor in that the

machine only needed remand to outpace Pratt and not for Bass to make large gains, they would not have found votes for Bass at the same level because they don't need to. This looked like an overt, desperate attempt to steal the election from Pratt. And I want to say how I think they did it is ballot harvesting. They go to nursing homes. They go door to door. They collect a bunch of ballots. In the instance of California, considering they can backdate and they don't need signatures, this is the challenge. You say Democrats cheated and they say Democrats did nothing illegal. These are all votes. They're all legal in the state of California. And the government, the federal government, has no authority to stop them. And then you realize they're saying that they

may have voted after election day with smiley faces. So we can't even confirm these are real people. That is cheating. I can tell you in Colorado, we also have universal mail-in voting. And we have two-bedroom apartments with 100 people registered to vote from that apartment. So they're getting 100 ballots at that one apartment mailbox. There's no integrity to that election. I mean, the government doesn't have any ability to step in here, right? Like Tim was saying, they have no jurisdiction.

The way our Constitution sets things up is the states run their internal voting, even for federal office. Unless Congress steps in. So that's literally what the Constitution says. We're going to leave it to the states to do this unless Congress chooses to step in. But they've not done that. And that's not that wouldn't require an amendment. That's just saying Congress can't. Just congressional statute.

I see in the chat, Lady Stargazer and Rumble says, Tim, it's more than ballot harvesting. I agree, but I want to stress this. In 2020, a lot of people said the election was stolen from Trump. And my argument was, if you are saying that spy satellites and, you know, Chinese forged ballots and all the stuff, I'm saying absolutely no. I mean, maybe to a little degree, but not significantly. If you are saying it was stolen through procedure, electoral manipulation and things like this, we agree. So let me clarify. Several states changed the structure of their elections outside the confines of the Constitution.

The judges and governors did not have the authority to make these changes. My point, when I correctly stated that Joe Biden was able to get these votes through ballot harvesting, what they did was voter in the park was a big initiative in Wisconsin. Activists were going to nursing homes. James O'Keefe uncovered a lot of this. The way they were able to get Biden to 81 million votes was because people were locked in their houses. The ballot was mailed to them, and an activist showed up, knocked in the door and said, hand that to me, I will bring it in for you.

And then you need only ask Mike Benz what happened after I correctly identified their strategy. While many people were making claims about German spy satellites and servers or whatever, I was pointing out the actual technique they used. So several prominent deep state organizations engaged in a campaign to defame and lie about me. And it is shocking and insane to hear that. But Mike Benz has all the details came on the show and broke all. all of it down, showing the various organizations. What they said was that Tim Poole is engaging in malinformation. What is that? Well, it's not disinformation where you intentionally lie or misinformation

where you may be wrong. Malinformation is information that is correct but bad. So when Tim Poole says they are using legal ballot harvesting techniques in their state in order to secure this election, and it was true. And it offered up an opportunity for Republicans to counter in the midterms or moving forward, they got real, real mad at me. And that's what they've been doing in California. But wait, there's more. We got this post from Nick Shirley. It's not just ballot harvesting. And Nick Shirley once again on the ground breaking the big news. I'd like to introduce you to a good friend of Nick Shirley's, a 126-year-old woman who votes. So how old is this person who's eligible to vote here inside the United States inside the state of California?

26 based on the Secretary of State and this is Doris. Yeah, and now we're gonna see if Doris is home. Are you Doris? She's right here. Yes? Hello Doris. Yes. How are you doing? I'm good. We're just going through the voting rolls here and we're just confirming anybody who's above the age of a hundred years old and right here it says you're a hundred and 26 years old. No, you got the wrong house. Are you Doris? Yeah, but you got the wrong house. I'm doing it's good, but you got the wrong place. That's the wrong thing. That's the wrong thing. all that stuff. No, no, uh-uh, that's wrong. Oh, here, I can show you if you'd like. No, uh-uh, it's just that it's wrong.

How come you think here in California there's messing up on all these voting rolls here? I don't know, because I don't know what you're talking about. Yeah, it says he voted in 51 elections, Doris. No, not me. Really? I'm not no hundred and something old. I know.

I said I want to make sure you're not a hundred or 26 year old. No, I'm not. Yeah, it really does say you're 126 years old here. No. Who did this be 126? That don't even make sense. I know. That's what the Secretary of State says.

Well, the Secretary of State is wrong. Okay. Well, put it like this out born in 1940. So you fit that out. All right, Doris. You have a good evening. Did you notice the most important part of this video? Guys, I'm going to throw a little debunking here.

Doris is not 126. Her date of birth is 1-1-19-1. likely indicating they did not enter her date of birth. So it defaulted to a flat 1100. That being said, this indicates first and very lightly, and I'm waiting for building suspense intentionally, that the voter rolls are incorrect and we're not properly identifying people.

But hey, Doris was right there. Clearly there is a Doris at that address. And then he said she's been in 51 elections and she said no. That was the key point of the video. The question I have here is not about the age which can be chalked up to bad record keeping, but why when he asked, when he said, it says you've been in 51 election, it goes, oh, not me. She denied that she was in those elections.

This, in and of itself, I could chalk up to error. And this one may be, except for the fact that James O'Keefe and many others tracked down in Jersey and in New York, individuals who had donated to Act Blue some thousand to 10,000 times. And they go to them and say, it says here you donate $25,000. a day like 17 times per day for for two years straight and they're like no what we're finding is i'll tell you what my theory is my hypothesis doris gets a universal mail-in vote but she does not care someone shows up opens her mailbox takes the vote out and walks away with it fills it out on her behalf knowing she does not normally vote remember in 2020 how many people said they went to go vote

and were told they already voted indeed i believe that's what nick shirley's exposed Well, just look at California. We know how many people have been fleeing the state of California, right? So everyone who leaves, theoretically, is no longer eligible to vote. But if you don't remove them from the voting rolls, every one of those people now is a ballot you control. Right? They're still on the records as eligible to vote. You know they're not going to vote because they're living in Tennessee now. So you control that ballot. And over a period of time, the number of ballots you control goes from the thousands to the tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands, millions. of people. Here's an interesting post, too. The team just sent me. Shout out to Josh. Stephen Pett says, Nithia Raman isn't even winning her own council district.

The voters know her, the voters who know her best are passing. That's the crazy thing. She's in District 4. And apparently, what is it, CD4, she's not even winning her own district. That's in, that's crazy. You'd think she would have the best written.

That's crazy. Wow. Bass is in first, followed by Pratt. He's in third in her own district. Yeah. Makes me wonder who Joe Rogan voted for in this election. It speaks to the apathy of the average everyday person where they either just don't want to know that stuff like this is going on.

But you would have imagined, you know, for as long as this stuff has happened, especially in the city of California, that they would have worked to try to make it look at least a little bit fair. Yeah. You know, for the sake of like keeping the public from revolting. But so many of the people are so apathetic. And when you get that description that Tim gave of like what it actually means ballot harvesting and all the other steps, it's so much less, you know, cut and dry than a person who's watched a bunch of movies or television shows about cheating. So they just kind of sign off and think, well, I just don't want to think of it that way because it's just too much.

Then you have to go down the rabbit hole. And if you're not a part of the political, if you're not watching stuff about politics every day, it's just too much. This is why I intentionally pulled up the Reddit post from top minds of Reddit that mocked the idea. you could vote by smiley face. Because anybody who actually reads into this knows it's true. And I've long argued, my experience with liberals and conservatives, the right, the left, what we're going to call it, the left, they don't know what they are talking about. They don't know what's going on in the world.

They only know surface level rumors about what's really going on. So a really great example, which Hunter Avalon will never live down. It's when he came on the show several years ago. And I correctly pointed out that Joe Biden said to the president, of Ukraine, if you don't fire the state prosecutor, you will not get the billion dollar loan, which is in an illegal quid pro quo. The vice president doesn't have the authority to withhold congressional approved loan guarantees. And Hunter Avalon responded with a smug face. No, he didn't. And then I just, it's okay. On this show, I can pull it right up because the computers,

I don't need to ask Jamie to pull it up. I can do it myself. And I played the video and he was stunned. He was flabbergasted because he didn't know what he was talking about. These people all just regurgitate liberal talking points amongst each other. And they don't actually investigate what's going on. And I will throw way more shade of conservatives because conservatives tend to embrace the debate through liberal framing. So the liberals will say everything we're doing is legal and a conservative will then say, well, I mean, something must be going on. That's it. No, no, no, no, no, no. I don't care if it's legal. I accept the premise of what they're doing is legal. Cheating is cheating. Another example is I was watching this Jubilee debate. I did a video on it

earlier between, it was like Dean and Parker versus two conservatives. And whenever someone would bring up, close your eyes, and you can hear the entire world come alive. 2026 FIFA World Cup is on, and you can stream it all live on on TSN radio. From the opening kickoff to the final celebration, every match, every moment. Listen to FIFA World Cup on TSN Radio. Gives Canada to the liftoff. Available on IHeart Radio.

A point of hypocrisy. The progressives would just laugh and then reframe the debate and the conservatives would go along with it. And I'm just like, see, this is why you guys get crushed by these manipulation techniques. I want to show you this real quick from Robbie Starbuck. This chart, the vote count, shows 12,350 more votes for the L.A. mayor race than the high-profile California governors. race. If anything, you expect the opposite. As some people only vote for governor but skip local races, the reverse is absurd. California elections seem as trustworthy as North Korea's. I'm going to stress this too in 2020. Many people pointed out that a lot of these last minute ballots for Biden

did not have down ballot votes. And I said, that's simple. When ballot harvesters go and are in a rush and just need Biden votes, they're not sitting there and arguing with an individual about all the other people that got to vote for. They'd sit there and be like, okay, let me give you a list of everyone. I'd say, just vote Biden or hand it to me. Some of these people were probably paid and didn't care. That makes sense. You vote for the president and nothing else. The idea that people voted for the mayor, but not the governor, is backwards. And not to mention that Nithia Rahman losing in her own district and having no name ID is, it's ludicrous. It reeks of forged, backdated ballots. And you mentioned that people, you think they'd be.

more careful. They're not careful because they don't need to be careful. It's like when you have somebody working for a company for 10 years, they're embezzling from the company, right? They're stealing checks, writing them out to themselves. The first few times they do that, they're really careful about that fake signature. But by the hundred time, they've never been caught. They're like, they just write it off. That's how ultimately they get caught. They get lazy about it and finally someone sees it. But they're not careful because they don't perceive any need to be careful. They're winning anyway. Yeah, I mean, if the law allows for this kind of behavior, or at least makes it, you know, makes their, makes it so there's no consequences, they're not going to

stop. And that's, that's the frustrating thing for, you know, for the rest of the country. You know, this obviously is just for, for the mayor and governor, but like what happens when it comes to Congress? What happens to the Save America Act, right? People, why wouldn't you pass that? It doesn't make any sense, right? But if it's not happening, it's because it makes sense to somebody. And the reason to make sense is all these politicians who would be voting on them, all these senators, they won an election. They keep their, offices under the current rules. They have no

incentive to change the rules. There's no guarantee they're going to win election if the rules are made more honest. They do change the rules. They give themselves raises all the time. To be fair, they haven't given themselves. The minor is of alterations. The rules shall be that we all get paid more.

The Fed should stake out Doris's mailbox to see if anybody comes next year to steal a ballot. Poor Doris. It's not her fault. Well, no, but you know like when you were, when you were listening to this, the exchange, you could hear her be like, nope, that's not me. I don't know. She thought she was in trouble.

Yep. The poor woman's like, I don't know. He's like, you want to look. He's like, no. I don't want to look at it. I don't want to know. I don't want to know. Indeed. Poor doors. That's her grandson speaking in that old lady voice. He's still collecting social security checks, right? Yep. Yep. Well, we've got the, we got big news.

Ladies and gentlemen, there's a Supreme Court case. I believe it is called Watson v. RNC. It's expected to be decided upon by Scotus. The end of June. or early July. This is particularly about whether or not votes can be counted after election day. This could be a nuclear bomb. If the Supreme Court, likely they will, strikes down extended ballot counting after election day, I do not believe it will be possible for Democrats to win any of these upcoming races.

If SCOTUS comes down and says, you can no long. count votes after election day, I'm going to go ahead and say they will not be prepared for what comes in November because they really need those votes. And if the systems they have built are completely legitimate valent voting systems, they will not be able to update them in time for the November election. I think the bureaucracy would be way too thick. The New York Post says a pending case and SCOTUS could put an end to delayed ballot counts. The high court in March oral arguments in Watson v. RNC, a Mississippi case that may result in a ruling stopping the practice of counting mail-in bouts that arrive up to five days after an election date. In one of at least

14 states, along with California, New York and Texas, as well as the District of Columbia, with laws that allow for late bouts so long as envelopes are postmarked by Election Day. Around 30 states have some sort of grace period for absentee bouts as well, letting military or U.S. citizens broadcast their votes. That grace period for mail bouts, which the R&C has argued is unconstitutional is one of the reasons that LA residents still don't know nearly a week after whether candidate Spencer Pratt or Nithia Raman will advance to a runoff contest. Well, we do know now this was posted today at 547 and it was already called for Nithia Raman, I believe, yesterday. So is there. But there is still an argument Pratt is making that he could collect enough votes,

but decision deaths has already called it. Is there a fundamental difference between a mail-in ballot and a absentee ballot? I would, it was like a functionally no. But I'm saying in how they're functionally? Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, because I used to vote absentee all the time because I traveled a lot for work. But when I wanted to vote absentee, I had to go to the county clerk's office. I had to personally request for a ballot. I had to show ID. I had to fill it out. I had to sign it. That's far too inefficient to do its scale. Right, right, right, right. My point is mail-in votes and absentee votes are both lumped together as mail-in votes counted. absentee was the original system by which if you were in the military or otherwise not in your home state,

you could request an absentee ballot which required a bunch of verification. Universal mail-in votes are just mailed to you whether you want them or not. They should not do that. There should be no mail-in. Indeed. Now, the big question here is whether or not SCOTUS will rule, if they do rule against extended vote counting, whether it's going to be broad or narrow. Because if SCOTUS just says from now on, at midnight,

on election day, whatever day that is, no more votes can be count. All Democrats would have to do is say, okay, then Malin votes have to be turned in a week in advance. Yeah, you know, Alito was kind of, I heard something where Alito was talking during the arguments and he was saying, look, we have all these days, you know, whether it be birthday or what have you and he's like, and he's like, birthday, wedding day, Christmas day, they're all days, one day. And then he was like, and we have election day. I don't know why.

we have to have all this extended period. And so the question is the broad ruling. A broad ruling could be something like you may not have a mechanism by which an individual's vote could end up being disqualified because of your mail-in voting system. So let me straighten this out. If the Supreme Court just says, hey, look, I don't care how you run your elections, but once election day is over, you can't count anymore. All California has to do is just say all mail-in votes and early votes have to be turned in

one week prior to the election so that we can count them in advance, then they'll count the votes. Now, this will make it harder to find votes after the fact. They will still probably pad the votes. But the Supreme Court could theoretically say these mail-in voting systems have created a mechanism by which unknowing, innocent citizens may have their votes disqualified because of this bureaucratic and broken mail-in voting system. The Supreme Court could theoretically say votes must. be able to be like they could theoretically argue that the current structure of the democrat

states universal mail and voting system is unconstitutional because it de facto creates a voting system which requires longer than a day. The argument is this. The RNC argues that that federal law in Congress prescribes a single day for voting. Congress, the Supreme Court can say under the law with a single day for voting, you cannot have early and you can't have universal early and universal mail-in voting, the exemptions for absentee exist only in very specific cases. If that happens, Republicans sweep the midterms handily, handily. Yeah, I mean, I would love to see, I would love to see any changes that make the elections more secure. I would love to see the Fed say, look, Florida's got a good system.

Why don't you go ahead and model your stuff after Florida? because, I mean, I think that there's some voting, vote counting that happens before the election day in Florida. But election day should be the end of it, you know, like. And the Democrats are a 20% political party if there's honest elections. And they know this. They know honest elections are an existential threat to them. And they've been working for decades to develop a whole host of vulnerabilities. The universal mail-in ballots, controlling who gets a ballot.

So it's not like it's just legit. legitimate American registered voters are having their ballots harvested. It's dead people. It's people who've moved out of state. It's illegals who don't have a privilege to vote, but motor voter registers them when they get the driver's license from the state. These are all vulnerabilities that need to be closed off. And everyone that's closed off is like a rope around the neck of the Democrat Party. And they know it. And that's why they fight it so desperately. It's weird. It's like a mirage that they have to convince the average everyday person of like the cultural influence of Democrat policies or of liberal ideology, which is like for decades, whether it's through this,

but also like an over-representation and things like Hollywood and places like that where only a certain type of idea is kind of put forth to the public. It makes the public believe that perhaps that idea is more popular than it actually is. And in lieu of actually having access in a way of proving that it's not, people just kind of accept it as true. Yeah, it's an artificial amplifier. The same way we count illegals in the country, or even any kind of migrants in the country in the U.S. census, right, for apportionment of seats in Congress. Why should that be? They ought to have no role in deciding who's in power over American citizens, but they do simply by being present in the country because we count them as persons within the

nation for apportionment. Yeah, I can't imagine why that's acceptable, you know, the fact that you've got basically a skewed Congress because of illegals. I may be 40 seats. Yeah. I mean, God, that'd be crazy if it's that much. But I just don't, I don't know what the average American can do when you've got so many people that are so adamant about, look, we need to pass the Save Act, but Congress just won't move. I don't think that there's been enough enough people that have, enough people that have been primaried on the Republican side that have lost their seats or anything. And it's certainly not going to, I don't think it's going to happen before, before the election this fall.

Well, there's not much you can do about the Senate very quickly, right? Because they're in office for six years. Only a third of them are up for re-election every two years, so that takes time. I think the primaries we saw this last round, what was Trump 110 out of 110 of people he endorsed? The only answer, the only path for survival of America as a First World Republic is MAGA. Is the MAGA created by Donald Trump? It's certainly not the Democrats. They want a third world does.

It's not the Republicans, the classic traditional Republicans. They're just Democrat light. They're loser Democrats. They're happy to be in the loyal opposition as long as they get to stay fat at the government troth too. The only ones who are fighting on principle for America to remain a First World Republic is the MAGA party.

Either they win ultimately or America's over as anything our founders would recognize. Yeah, it's... Yeah, I think, I think, you know, my view of the country right now, I think I was talking about this last week, that Donald Trump represents the last of the United States and everything outside of Trump is an external force acting upon the United States.

So we've described it for years as a multicultural democracy. This is actually shout to Stephen Marsh, the author, journalist. He's actually a multicultural democracy guy. But he made the argument, and we did an interview on the Cultural War podcast about the state of civil war. He believes we're heading towards a civil war. I agree with him. He made the argument, the United States consists of two separate nations within the borders of one country. that is a multicultural democracy and a constitutional republic, completely disagreeing with what is right,

what is just, and how the world and how the country should operate. My argument is that the constitutional republic represents this country's founding, its maintenance, its expansion, and when we say the United States, we're referring to the constitutional republic. But this constitutional republic has a malignancy. It has a growth, largely from illegal immigrants and mass migration that do not respect the founding fathers, the amendments to the Constitution, the Constitution itself, and what this country is supposed to represent. They represent only the quest for power to steal the wealth from people that they think don't deserve it. They don't like this country. And that's why Zohan Mamdani, the best example, said in his campaign, he would

defy the will of the American voters by force. That's what he said. It's a remarkable thing. I'm paraphrasing, but let me explain, to be fair. The second most important issue in the 2024 election was immigration. This people were fed up with mass migration. Zohran Mamdani vowed despite Trump's victory that he would use his authority as the mayor to stop the federal government from deporting people. He is explicitly telling you the American voter, he will use the force of the seat of New York City's executive to stop you. I know it's just New York City, but it's a bold thing. thing to campaign on and win.

Not to mention taxing white people. But you were talking about people taking things from me by force, and he ran on affordability. And I do think that for all that is said, the younger generation does not see a path forward in this country in a lot of ways with wages being what they are. Inflation has, you know, improved quite a bit since... I would argue that communists intentionally burn the system down. Then go to the young people and say, isn't it a shame that they burned down? down your house, join the communists. And see, the issue is, we're spending billions, you know,

let's use the Bears, the Chicago Bears is the perfect example of this. Chicago spends an estimated $1 to $2 billion per year on illegal immigrants. The Bears were requesting a tax break and somewhere around a couple hundred million to build their stadium in Chicago. So, with all due respect to the city, I did leave a long time ago. I'm from there. But it breaks my heart to see the Chicago Bears will no longer be the Chicago Bears. They're leaving. It's iconic. The important thing is this. The Chicago Bears are a national icon. It's not just the city. The fan base stretches far and wide. Saturday Night Live famously making fun of the bears, the bears, and people in Chicago became an iconic joke in Americana. And it's gone now.

It's gone because the city would rather spend four times the money needed for the stadium on illegal immigrants. That's multicultural democracy at play. But the The problem is it's not the communists that are being held responsible for the way things are in America. They're blaming capitalists. They're blaming big business. They're blaming Amazon. They're blaming these companies. That's what communists do. Communists will make problems, then rush to you and blame someone else with the problem so that they can make more problems. They also fundamentally don't have an understanding of how business works and anything like that. Well, I'd stop you there. I'd say that the communist leaders do. No, no, I'm talking about the people that are going in line with this. They don't have a function of understanding.

of the way these things work. But it's also, it's like, look, when you're hurting and when you don't see a path forward, you're looking for the easiest answer possible. Now, like, I don't know how you fix something like this. I don't think that there's an educational infrastructure that would be willing to call this type of stuff out. There's a good example in the,

I brought this up several times now over the weekend. The Dave Rubin debate on Jubilee, one of the debates who's talking to Parker get a job. And Parker asked Dave, by what metric has Trump improved the country? Like, you know, inflation, unemployment. Dave did not give an answer, or he responded with the Big Beautiful Bill just got passed, so we've not yet seen anything. Parker asks him again, by what metric? This is, you know, like Parker is a grifter.

That's why he debates people with no experience. And he's also a child. And I mean that in a literal sense. I'm not trying to be intentionally overly derisive, but a little bit. I don't know how old is in his early 20s. He has very little experience and he doesn't understand what a country is, what a nation is. A nation is its people and its borders. A country is its border.

I think that's the definition, right? Anyway, my point is this. It's culture. Well, your culture, indeed. Indeed. But that's what I mean by its people. I mean, like, you have a sense of identity. You share certain histories and traditions and moral frameworks.

The important point is this. If you were to look at my bank account and say, I judge whether you are responsible by the metric of percentage growth in your bank account, you know, one day, you say, time to review. Hey, time to review your bank account. Oh, whoa, whoa. we're down 5%. Are you kidding? News report, Tim's a bad manager, his bank accounts down 5%. And then I say, I spent that money getting my, getting an important surgery on my leg so I can keep working. I had to spend the money. Otherwise, I wouldn't work at all. These young people either intentionally are lying, the communists, or they fundamentally don't understand. The metrics don't prove whether a

country is improving or doing better. If so the tariffs are the best example. Donald Trump implements tariffs. This cost us money. It looked bad, right? If you are a surface level or service level and non-player character in politics or you're a manipulative Democrat commie, you will trick people and say, for no reason Trump hurt you. And they'll go, wow, Trump's so dumb. Why would you do that? If you're honest and assess in the situation, you would say, I understand Trump's arguments. I agree or disagree after the fact. And that's fine if you disagree. I agree with the tariffs. Why? He's trying to create a leverage point for American businesses to bring back manufacturing and be able to hire workers. It is difficult for an American manufacturer to compete with Chinese,

cheap labor, Canadian, or Mexican labor. So Trump implemented tariffs, which did strain the economy in certain ways, but it's an expense towards a better future. These people either don't understand this or don't want to understand it. Now, by all means, if your argument is, I understand that's why Trump was doing it, but I don't think it'll work or I think it's bad. I respect that. I'm just saying the people are arguing, oh, no, inflation's up. Trump screwed everything up. Well, you're not making an actual argument there. Well, a lot of the arguments they're talking about right now would have been, what, with Iran and Israel and the price of gas going up for a lot of people, because that's the first thing they notice is because it hits them in their wallet right away.

And the unfortunate reality there is that you've got, you know, look, I'm going to say it like this. I sympathize. I understand the Democrats. People, there's just too many dumb ones. That's just true. And you know what's funny as the liberals will hear me say that they'll quote and say, Tim Poole thinks all of you are stupid. No, no, no, no, no. I know most of you watching at home right now are like,

now Tim's rise, a lot of dumb people. I'm not saying everyone's stupid. I'm saying like what George Carlin said. Think about how stupid the average person is. Now realize half of them are stupider than that. The problem is complicated problems have complicated explanations that some people just can't understand. There's not a justification of what Trump is doing in Iran. My point is, it is extremely.

difficult to understand the big picture, but the presumption that Trump is making mistakes, simply because he's stupid and doesn't know what he's doing or didn't have a plan, it's ridiculous. Certainly Trump could be making a mistake because his plan was bad, but they have a plan for what they're doing. Hopefully it works out. I have my disagreements, but man, are the ignorant so arrogant? The single, just about everything that's wrong in America today has one single driver and it's not complicated. It's third. world migrants in America, legal and illegal. We have 90 million illegal migrants in America. We have 90 million legal migrants. If you count visas, green cards, naturalized citizens who are only

paperwork, naturalized, or allegiance is still to their home nation. Every one of those people, hundreds of millions of them, increase the cost of living for Americans. They compete with Americans for every scarce resource. Housing, health care, education, employment, infrastructure, everything. What do you think would happen to any nation if they brought in 20% foreign people who all need those things? They all need housing. Yeah.

You're saying 36, 37%. 180 million? 180 million. Okay, so I'm sorry, I'm sorry, 50% legal. That means our country. They're not all counted in terms of our population figures. So when you say, we say 330, 340 million total, you're saying there's actually about 400 million. Yeah, that's right.

Right. I love this. They all need housing. They all need food. So that drives up the cost of all those goods. And in terms of the illegals, there are on very high percentages of welfare, very high percentages of crime is committed by them. During Occupy Wall Street, one of the liberal activists was arguing for a set of demands. And the activist rejected the set of demands because principally the protest was about general corruption. and they were trying to organize a movement, probably because they were largely communists.

But this one liberal activist said, interlisten of demands, free public transport, should be free for all people. Okay. Here's my favorite. Larger, smaller class sizes. Class sizes are too big. Teachers can't get one-on-one with students,

and this is causing a problem. Also, amnesty, and also free schooling. And I just simply said, if we grant amnesty and then free schooling, class sizes will become massive. She was like, but we have to make them smaller, so we'll have to build more schools. And I'm like, okay. So how much will making public transport be free cost the taxpayer? Like, where does that money come from? The fascinating thing is people need to understand this.

There's a viral video. There's a handful of them. If you watch Caleb Hammer stuff, there's a lot of finance videos that are popping off. One is Kevin O'Leary talking about buy $5 million in T bills, treasury bills. You know, get 5% per year. You go to your broker or say, I want treasury bonds or treasury bills, get a 30-year bond. Andrew Tate was talking about it. It was a bit more ridiculous. Put $5 million down and you will get paid $250,000 a year for 30 years. So, you know, with inflation, it'll weaken, but, hey, after 30 years, you get your money back. Now, the thing about that is the U.S. government

is paying interest. You're basically loaning your $5 million to the government and they say, it's like a mortgage almost. It's like the government has a mortgage with you. So you loan your $5 million

of the government and they have to pay you back every six months and then you get the principal back that's actually better than a loan. Okay, at a certain point, we're going bust. The government,

what is the debt, is the third biggest spending line item. The U.S. government is borrowing too much money from the American people and from other countries, and eventually it will not be able to pay that debt back. And then American dollars will be worth nothing. It'll be apocalyptic. These communists, you know, I just feel like there's too many activists who don't know how the system works,

exploited by powerful individuals and smart individuals who want the system to burn. I'll give you an example of the way it is just based on what I do over at PCC. there's a lady who was the art director for obsession. Obsession is one of the biggest movies in America right now. It's been a cultural phenomenon. It actually increased week one to week two and then week two to week three. And it only had like a four or five percent drop off in the fourth week. And for a movie that was made on a $750,000 budget, some say a million.

It was later sold to a company at like a film festival for $15 million. Well, this lady, who's the art director on this movie, she agreed to, about $300 a day, she made about $6,700 after taxes for a month worth of work. Now she's saying, why can't I get more because this movie made all of this money?

She's asking this after the fact, even though the people she made the movie with are no longer in possession of the movie. They've already sold this movie off. So instead of leveraging her being the art director on the biggest movie of the summer, she is now complaining about it online even though she took no risk in this movie.

The writers, the directors, the people who were in the production from when the movie was written to when it came out, they took all the financial risk and now she'll never work again because nobody in the industry will ever want to hire somebody

who speaks out of turn. Maybe, but the communists will just take over the industry and strip the money and then burn it down. Should I just say, woman? There is a subclass of new writers and directors that do take that approach there,

like a Zendaya organized like a back-end deal for all the workers on a movie she made with the understanding, that if it made a big payday by selling in a film festival, they would all get points on the back end,

but they also got their daily salaries. But she is the exception, not the rule, because she funded the movie herself. She didn't have to go through investors. You know, one of the big problems with commies is they're like, you know, we should take the portion like the profits and split up among the workers.

And it's just like when you actually do the math for these companies that have like 100,000 employees, it's like, you know, I don't necessarily disagree outright, but they're like the CEO got paid $25 million and the lowest paid workers making 20 bucks an hour. That's not fair. We should take 15 million of the dollars he's making and disperse

it among the employees for a bonus and you're like that will be $10. It's like not really going to move the needle for the average working person. It's a challenge. I get it. Also, said as a guy who's worked in warehouses, worked as a diesel mechanic, I've done those jobs. I'm not investing in a company that's

distributing its profits to the guy in the warehouse. I'm not doing that. Those profits are coming back to the shareholders or they're being reinvested in the company. My point was more just that that lady's opinion is not rare anymore. Like the idea that you should get all the reward and take none of the risk is one of the defining traits of the next generation. Yeah, you hear that when people are like, oh, you know, if a company makes a lot of money,

it should go to the people that work there because they were the ones that produced the value. And it's like, well, are they going to lose out if the value of the stock goes down? Are they going to lose out if the company goes bankrupt? They're not going to pay it back. This lady have to pay it back if the movie doesn't do well. Yeah, I mean, that's the, that's not what it is. That's the clear problem. It's like, oh, I want to share in the profits, but I don't want to, I don't want to share in any of the risk.

Let's jump to the next big story of the day in the past week, the Carmelo Anthony trial. And I'm going to say right now, we've got Brianna Morella reporting Carmelo Anthony's family knows he's getting convicted. Source in the courtroom said they looked upset. Based on everything we've heard, even from the defense, Carmelo Anthony did nothing. but literally just murder. There's, I'll give you the quick gist of it, and then we'll throw it to Andrew, who's much more well-versed in this, but sounds like Carmelo went there, provoked a fight, before a threat emerged, grabbed his knife, then threatened them again, and Austin Medcaf, who was

murdered, literally says, I'm not going to fight you. And then when he approaches him to either shove or put his hand on him for some reason, before he even could, Carmelo stabs him in the heart, killing him. So the defense literally has nothing. And I saw a funny tweet, I think it might have been Brianna saying, I still don't know what the defense's claims even were. But Andrew, you're the self-defense guy. What happened? Yeah, we talked about this before the show.

It was like, on a scale of 1 to 10, how screwed is Carmelo Anthony? It's 100. I mean, he has nothing. There is not a sliver, not a scintilla of evidence in this case that supports his claim of self-defense to the point where, Today, we broke for lunch. There was a two and a half hour delay before court came back and the defense finally arrested. I suspect in that two and a half hour delay, the prosecution was arguing to the judge outside the hearing of the jury and the public that there's so little. There's so little evidence in support of self-defense.

The jury should not be given a self-defense jury instruction at all on the legal merits. Well, really? You have to qualify. Right, right, right. You don't automatically get one. Well, some have argued that that may have been them desperately trying to get a plea saying, okay, we're cooked. Just give us something. That's on a two and a half hour discussion.

The prosecutor just says no. Yeah. We have a conviction locked in on murder. The witness testimony has been shockingly one-sided as it were like, even the defenses. Like one of the defense's own witnesses on Cross said Carmela was wrong. Like who was in the right side? Well, he was in the wrong. So there's a few quotes.

it's nuts to read the stuff. One witness said that Carmelo provoked the fight. So the quick gist of the story is that they were having a track meet. Rain was stopping. Once the rain started up again, everybody went to their tents. Carmelo decided to go to the wrong tent. One of the witnesses there dabbed dominicose at fist bump as he came and sat down. When a bunch of the other team members told him he can't sit under their tent and needs to go back,

Carmelo refused and then became defined saying, touch me and see what happens. He was asked around 15 times to leave, reached into his bag, unfolding his knife and holding it before there was any threat of force or vans. He says, touch me and find out. Austin Medkef, we murdered, says, I'm not going to fight you and attract me, dude. Many of the students, this is where it gets crazy. According to some of the testimony, warned everyone to stay away from Carmelo because they thought he was grabbing a weapon intending to cause harm to people. So Austin got up, went to either, the presumption is shove, but one witness said before Austin

could even touch him, Carmelo stabbed him in the heart. That sounds like premeditation to me, like based on the testimony that we've seen. This is a kid who went there, told them, touch me, touch me, took his knife in his backpack and unfolded, prepared to use it while people were telling him, we're not going to fight you, nah, dude. And then before any threat or contact was made, he stabs the guy. Sounds like he intended to kill somebody. Yeah, so sometimes you hear people talk about Trump's complicated strategies like he's playing 5D chess.

Carmelo Anthony is playing 5D ways to lose self-defense, okay? First, on a very basic level, one of the requirements of self-defense is proportionality. You cannot use deadly defensive force unless you're facing a deadly force threat. There's zero evidence he was facing a deadly force threat. The people he was talking with had no weapons. There's no disparity of numbers evidence. there's nothing that a reasonable person in his position could say, oh my gosh, I'm at imminent risk of death or serious bodily injury, yet he used deadly defensive force. Right there, he loses self-defense completely. But even if he had a claim a self-defense, when he does that provocation with intent, the instant, and the worst we have in evidence is that Austin Metcalf gave him a soft shove. Literally, that's what the witnesses said on his shoulder. The instant that contact was made, the knife was out and in Austin Metcalf's chest. which means the blade was open, it was already in his hand,

and he's goading him. Go ahead, touch me, touch me. Again, what? That is provocation. That's provoking the other guy to be the first to make contact, so you have a pretext to kill him and try to claim it itself. An attempted pretext. But one witness said that before Austin could even shove him,

he had been stabbed. They described it as they didn't know what had happened. People don't know what stabs look like. They, if you ever watch any videos of these things. Or feel like. Exactly. It looks like they're shoving almost. It feels like a punch when someone gets stabbed.

They, uh, the witness said they thought that Carmelo shoved Austin. Right. Austin then fell down, started screaming. He effing stabbed me. The crazy thing is the witnesses who said they were, they were yelling, watch out, because they thought Carmelo was drawing a weapon from his bag. This is a dude who brought a weapon to attract meet, went to the opposing team's tent, reached in his bag and grabbed the knife and unfolded it, prepared to use it, started an altercation,

then told him to touch me, Austin literally said, I'm not going to fight you and attract me. And then when he got up to push him out, stabbed him in the chest, killing him. Does that not qualify as premeditated murder? Absolutely. It does. A lot of people think premeditation means you have to have like a list of things, right? Like I got the rope, I got the duct tape. Hey, does it smell like chloroform?

You don't need any of that. The premeditation happens in an instance. instant. It just has to be an intentional act. And by the way, the Texas murder statute, you won't find the word premeditation in there. You just have to intentionally committed the killing. And we're all presumed to intend the foreseeable consequences of our actions. If you stab someone in the heart with a knife, you're intending for them to die. That's the foreseeable outcome of that action. But I think unfolding the knife and keeping it concealed while goading them on indicates. Certainly there's no accident, right? There's no mistake. This was clearly, that just adds to the intentionality.

It's all baked into the cake. And all these people arguing about things like, well, was he, he wasn't technically trespassing under the tent or it wasn't against Texas law to have the knife on school property. You don't need any of that. That's all a red herring. All you need to know is that he put a knife into someone's heart with no legal justification. He wasn't facing a deadly force threat. That's enough right there. I want to play this clip that's gone viral from Savannah Hernandez pertaining to the case. And I think no commentary needed. Listen to this. If evidence does come out that Carmelo was not in fact fighting for his life when he stabbed and killed Austin Metcalf. Do you think that the black community will accept that?

If evidence shows that he did not, no, we're going to stand by ours regardless. They stand by theirs. We're going to stand by ours regardless. I'm a mother first. I'm a black mother. Let me put that on there. I'm an African American mother. So I have to put away my color. first and step into the motherhood. Nobody wants to see their child slained. So I do want to send prayers to Austin MacKal, their family. But at the end of the day, I got to think, like, okay, what did you do to them or whatever to cause this to happen to reaction?

We got to start taking accountability for our kids. Because then again, if my kid, that's why I said, catch-twenty, if my kid was Carmelo and I feel like his back was up against the while, I'm going to say straight up, better mine than yours. Better mind than yours. So either way it go, everybody loses. A black boy allegedly erred, and I say allegedly, heavy on the allegedly, allegedly erred somebody. You see what I'm saying?

So, yeah, this is about race. Because if the shoe was on the other foot, they wouldn't give a damn. Who wouldn't give a damn? Let me say this. Let's say, the community. So if Carmelo Anthony was the one stabbed and killed, by Austin Metcalf. They wouldn't give a damn.

I cook. What do you think would happen? Wouldn't you like her on your jury? If you had to defend yourself against her a black son, right? And now you're being tried. You'd want her into the jury, right? Andrew, what would happen if the races were reversed, then Austin Metcalfe stabbed Carmelo Anthony?

Just look what they do with people like Kyle Rittenhouse and George Zimmerman, who had very clean self-defense narratives. They tried to destroy those people. They persecuted them with the process. The notion that some white guy who did it would get a break is laughable. I still think Kyle Rittenhouse killed black people. If Austin Metcalf approached Carmelo Anthony and stabbed him in the chest killing him, we would have had a year of riots. We would have had national prayers.

You'd have celebrities going on TV crying saying, this is what is happening in America. Oh, Trump's America. Correct. In Trump's America. But when it's a football player, a white kid who gets stabbed, these people come out and say, we are going to stand by ours because they stand by theirs. This is the important thing that you brought up earlier, though. How are we supposed to react when we're trying to have a jury of our peers? Can't happen.

The argument right now, as you can see in this next portion of the clip from Sav, she mentions that there's no black people on the jury. Some have called it all white. I don't think it's all white. No, no. In a sense, we don't know to tell you the truth because there's 12 jurors and six alternates. And the six are going to be thrown off, but they're randomly selected. So, you know, we don't know what we're going to end up with in terms of the 12.

But right now it's a mix of white jurors and at least half a dozen different ethnicities. If you're going to go on trial for a murder and the black people are like, if he's black, he's not guilty, well, then we're not really having a jury trial, are we? We have to keep in mind. Our jury system comes from the British, right, when we were still British citizens' subjects, I should say. And it was incorporated into the American legal system. when we were a very homogenous culture, right? We had very similar cultural beliefs and religious backgrounds and ethnicities.

The jury system does not work in a multicultural environment because every ethnic representative on the jury will vote for their ethnic peer and against their ethnic non-peer. The only people who don't do this, because there's been many studies done on this, the only ethnic group that doesn't do this is white people. But every other ethnic group,

they will, black jurors will, vote guilty for a white defendant. At three times the rate, they will vote guilty for a black defendant. And the presumption is, even if the white person is innocent, and even if the black person is guilty. So black jurors, if there's a black man on trial, the studies show they will say not guilty regardless of the evidence. And if it's a white person on trial, there is a tendency towards bias to say guilty, even if there is reasonable doubt. Didn't this happen with the OJ trial? Some of the jurors came out later? They told us explicitly that they voted not guilty on OJ in the criminal trial essentially for social justice.

Because of Rodney King? Right. Yeah. The other thing that kind of throws water on our argument, which is not, I don't know if it's necessarily a one-to-one comparison because I don't know the makeup of the officers. But I mentioned earlier, I said the killing of Tony Timpa. There was none of the outrage that was felt after he died, despite the fact that it was just as brutal in a lot of ways, if you saw the video from that.

And there was no outrage from what she referred to as the community. Well, there's no money to be made in that setting. That's the difference. There's no political capital to be gained. Yeah, I mean, I mentioned this how the, on Twitter today, how, you know, ethnically people will go ahead and basically exonerate people that share their ethnic makeup. And it's a large portion of each ethnic group that'll do it. And, you know, a lot of people were outraged. There was a lot of people calling me names saying racist and blah, blah, blah.

It's like, look, there's studies on this. Someone's being racist. There's studies done on this. It's not something that I just came up with off the cuff. You see this kind of stuff happen. You can go see man on the street, you know, interviews like Sav did there. And people will come out and say it. I said it in response to a guy that was essentially saying that.

I quote tweeted him. And it's like, it's still even to just like address the obvious truth, then people are going to go ahead and say that you're, you're some kind of bigot because you're saying something that is true. And that's something that has cowed a lot of people, you know, and made them afraid to, you know, to say the emperor has to close. It's going to be a big problem, too. Like this Minnesota fraud stuff, probably trillions of dollars in fraud in Minnesota,

mostly committed by the Somalian migrants in Minnesota. You think any of them are going to get convicted at trial? I mean, all it will take is one Somalian juror and you'll never have a unanimous guilty. Yep. I think we were talking about. the multicultural democracy and the constitutional republic and they can't coexist. No. And the problem is the constitutional republicanists are demure.

They go on the trial and they say, we're all going to operate in good faith, right? And the foreigners say, no, I hate you and I want your stuff and you are not part of my tribe. They're increasingly open about it too. Yeah, yeah, absolutely. With Ilhan Omar explicitly stating that we're going to send this money back to Somalia. They are here to extract from the United States. And you see it in a lot of politicians. They talk about, for example, illegal migrants in their district.

And they literally use the term constituents. You can always tell who a politician's true constituents are by who they actually serve, who they actually protect. There was a period where they tried pushing the phrase undocumented citizens. Hassan Piker had been saying it. The semantic operation or semantic game they're playing was fairly obvious. You start by saying that illegal immigrants are undocumented. Then you change migrant to citizens. Now you have undocumented citizens. Then you make the constitutional argument. Second-class citizenry is unconstitutional. And so these undocumented citizens should be just held to the same standard. They have passed laws in places like Sacramento. They tried in New York to make it so that non-citizens can vote in local elections or even state elections. And these ultimately got struck down. They are trying to steal as much as they can from America before it burns down. while they're burning it.

They're literally trying to steal the country. If they can take over the politicians that they can take the seats of power, then they can do whatever they want. Yeah, but I disagree with the assertion they're trying to steal the country because they're extracting. Like Ilhan Omar is not doing anything

to the benefit of the United States for herself. If these people were trying to take the seats of power to control America as a singular entity and say, now we control America, I would agree. But they're not. They're gaining power in these local jurisdictions and then they're stealing from Minnesota

and extracting it. They're pirated. Exactly. They're Somali pirates. So the actions they take will be the end of America. You know, if I stole your car and then just drove into the ocean, it wasn't me trying to take over the ownership of your car. It was me just driving into the ocean. Or if I sold it, I guess.

And it's not just Minnesota, it's California, it's Washington, it's Ohio, it's everywhere. They're not trying to steal your house necessarily. They're just stealing everything in the house. Yep. And the Minnesotans are like those people when their bike gets stolen. They're like, I hope that guy really needs to. it more than I. Yep, they're the one standing there watching the bike

and stolen, be like, well, you know, I'm, I'm, what is it, he's happier with the bike than I am, so the overall happiness in the country went up. I had a bike stolen once and I had to actually get really annoyed because it was my own fault because I went into a store and I locked the bike, but I didn't turn the dial on it because it wasn't a key lock, it was like a, you know, spin lock. And I didn't turn the numbers and I was walking in the store.

I'm like, I should go back and fix it. And you didn't. Went back out. It was gone. like really four minutes later. And we're not even talking about in a city. We're talking about West St. Paul, which is like on the edge of a suburb. Yeah.

I had a motor, I had an electric 150cc scooter got stolen. Man, the one night it was raining. So I parked it and locked it. And I had a lock to lock it up to, you know, rails or whatever. But it was raining really bad on my way back. And I was just like,

it'll be fine. It's just, it's like, it was like one of the, morning, I'll be up at six or seven, gone. Because they knew they were probably waiting for it to be unlocked or something. What's the benefits of an increasingly low-trust society?

Increasing third world level society. Because in a high-trust society, you live in a high... I've lived in both kinds of neighborhoods, right? We all have this experience. You live in a high-trust society, your kid leaves his bicycle in the front yard. You could leave it there all day. You could leave it there overnight on the weekend. The bike is still there. Low-trust society, you turn your back for one second.

It's gone. The city I live in now, like, I can go run at night after work and it's perfectly fine. There is literally several bikes that I've seen that have been sitting in these like yards for days that have never moved and nobody's touched them. It's a beautiful thing. To your point earlier, I have related a story a couple times. I saw a Somali immigrant talking to a representative in Maine and there was a, an issue

was a question of fraud and stuff. And he was at a, you know, town hall or whatever. And he came out and said, look, we've elected you. So it's your job to protect. us, you know, implying or directly saying, we're going to commit crimes and it's your job because we elected you to protect us from the ramifications of those crimes. And that's the kind of thing that you hear, you know, happens again in third world, third world countries. I was listening to a podcast that had a Sullenberger was talking and he was like, look, if you're in South America,

it's normal to force someone to give you a job and you have to give that guy, 10% of your pay in perpetuity because he got to the job. And he mentioned India. He said, you know, if you are in a, you live in an apartment in India, you don't call the electric company.

You pay the owner of the building and he goes down and he bribes the electric one of the guys at the electric company to turn on the electricity to either the apartment or to the building and stuff. And that kind of stuff is so foreign to Americans that for the most part, they don't believe that it's real. Well, they can't understand it.

I mean, that it's, that kind of completely different worldview of being high trust and low trust, right? So in a high trust society, we can have lots of social safety net programs, and we put very low guardrails on them, because it would never occur to me to cheat on welfare. It just wouldn't occur to me. And if you had high guardrails, they're tremendously inefficient, right? So if every day you had to go to a welfare recipient's home and make sure they're not cheating, you couldn't afford the program. You'd be spending all your money doing that. So what we do is we trust people to do the right thing. We are very low guardrails. Well, when you bring in someone from the

third world, they look at this situation, vast rivers of billions of dollars with low guardrails, what they see is bags are free money, just sitting there. And they're like, well, I'd be crazy not to take it. They don't even think of it. It's stealing. Are they wrong? It's like, if you were walking down the street, there's a bag full of cash, and you're like, well, crap, I may as well take it, if I don't take it, the next person. So here's the thing. Have you ever seen, I think his name is Darren Brown. Is that his name? Let me make sure I get his name right. He was a mentalist, I guess. Yeah, yeah, yeah, English mentalist and illusionist. He had a big show and he did a bunch of amazing tricks. And one of the, one of my favorite is he went into, I think it might have been New York,

it might have been central London. And he places a full wallet, very clearly a full wallet on the ground. And then he takes a yellow sidewalk chalk marker and he circles it. Then they have cameras secretly set up and he walks away and they time lapse. No one touches it. With the circle around it and the wall in the middle, no one would touch it. Just that perception in the minds of all of these people is like, must be there for a reason. Yeah. Better stay away from it. So yeah, the idea is like clearly there's something going on here more than just a wallet sitting in the ground. It's just a very smart way of weirdly trying to protect it. This is the thing. There's a lot of these, there's a lot of people who do these prank videos. There's one guy. He's,

He goes into a casino and he has fake hundreds and he'll drop it next to a person. And then he'll go down and be like, oh, did you, did you? And then he'll just say like, did you, did you? And then he'll grab it. And she'll go, that's mine. And there's like a viral video. He's like, nah, nah, it's mine. And she's like, there's a video where this, he doesn't, this guy does it a bunch.

It's a bunch of people who do it. She gets into a fight, call security. Some guy tries calling the police to try fighting him. And then he throws, eventually after he milks it for a few minutes, he throws it to him. And it's like, it's fake and you lied. Like this is where we're at right now. And they're still with that. shame. Yeah, yeah, yeah, I don't care. Give me the money. This is where we're at. Man,

I still find, well, maybe it's because we're in West Virginia. But for the most part out here, someone finds like MoneyLang on the ground, like at a busy area. Someone be like, anybody drop this? What's the demographic here? Oh, I think you know. in the town that I live in I found an entire wallets full of stuff like wallets full of credit cards debit cards ID social security card just the other day and just picked up and brought it to the cops here

like not in a wallet literally just sitting across the street from a restaurant it's pretty crazy I mean I didn't I didn't grow up with any kind of money we were we were broke I used to just eat like we'd have flour water and butter if I was lucky and so I would make biscuits We did not have money growing up. And if I found a wall or anything, I'd turn it in.

I wouldn't take the cash out or anything like that. I don't know. I'm not going to do it. My rule of thumb for that is, like, in my lifetime, before I was in my mid-20s, I lost my wallet seven times. It got returned to me every single time. And if there was, like, at one time, I lost a skate contest in Detroit.

And it came back to me with IOUs for what they spent the money. One of the, I still remember one of the worst days I ever had. And that's, I'm half joking. but I was riding my bike and my wallet fell out of my pocket. And 10 minutes later, I'm at home and I'm like, oh, crap, I jump on my bike. I run right back out, only a couple blocks. Can't find it. Next day, gas station fillups on my debit card, on my credit card, I got to call the bank

and say cancel all of that, shut down everything. Totally brutal. People are just scummy. We are no longer in a, we no longer have community, you know. Well, we're not a culturally homogenous society. You have to be culturally homogenous to be high trust. There's no multi-ethics, because you have different ethnic groups. They each look out for their own interests.

Every other group is the other. You simply don't respect. We live in a world of scarce resources. If you were a culture where you looked at all the other cultures and said, I'll just share all the resources equally with you, you get wiped out because they're not doing that. So it's morally required. It's required by evolutionary biology that you have greater interest for those closest to you, culturally, genetically, or you see it's existing. What happens internally to a culture when resources become too scarce for the population?

I'm not sure what... Generally, they'll go out and take resources from somebody else. Let's say you have a singular nation without the means to go to war, and that nation undergoes a famine or economic collapse. this is a precursor to revolution and civil war. Cultures will actually tear each other apart because you know, the way it's been described is if a zombie apocalypse, what show was it with the zombie apocalypse and the guy goes to the pharmacy,

he try and steal, get medicine and then like a cop points a gun at him or something like when... World War Z? Was that what it was? It might have been. When all hell breaks loose, I'll put it like this. Like, you have kids? You have kids, right? If the economy collapsed, it was like a zombie outbreak, and your daughter was sick, or you have a daughter? Sure, three.

There you go. One of your favorite daughter, that's what I get, was sick. And your next door neighbor had the medicine you needed that would save her life. What would you do to get it? Yeah, I tell people this all the time, especially the preparers. I'm like, yeah, you should buy all that stuff. You should buy it all now. because if things go to hell,

someone else is probably going to have that stuff unless you're really equipped to protect it. When you had me on in Florida, you had a hypothetical. It's like there's been a post-apocalyptic thing and your family's in a cave and shelter and you're out with a rifle looking for food or whatever and you see another guy with a rifle, right?

What do you do? And I immediately said, I shoot him. I was like right to the point. Because I can't take the risk that he's of goodwill and won't shoot me. If he shoots me first, my family is done with. So the only moral, the only thing consistent with the survival of my people is to shoot him first. Let me give you this one.

There is a catastrophe. Roads are shut down, lockdown, stores are not getting resupplied. You can't find medicine. Your daughter needs medicine right now. Maybe it's a simple antibiotic. But she is succumbing to a bacterial infection of some sort. your next door neighbor, you know for a fact, has this. So you go and knock on his door and you say, my daughter will die with this medicine.

And he responds with, I'm sorry, but I have a family too. They're not sick right now. But in the future, if they do, I need this medicine. I cannot give it to you. What do you do? I don't think I would ask first. Just kick the door and take it. If I ask and he says no, now he knows I'm interested in it.

Now he's going to protect them. It's a challenge, isn't it? I mean, nobody wants to say that they would cause harm to innocent people to say to because of the rest of their family. But this is the reality of what life is and always has been. Oh, yeah, I'll say that without hesitation. Men of consequence, reluctant but steadfast, will shoot you in the face and take your water for their son or daughter. Absolutely. No question. In an apocalypse, that's that's the challenge that I think, or at least that's the genetic line that survives. Indeed. And this is the this is the this is the, this is the, this is the, this is the, this is the, the problem of feminism. Men have created a world in the United States. I say world, but created a reality where we've eliminated predators. No wolves, no bears. They barely come around our cities. I remember I was in New York and I saw a hawk once and everyone was freaking out. Like, how is in New York City? There's a hawk. It flew the wrong way. And it was just looking at everybody. We've eliminated all these dangers. And these. Have we though? We have. Yes. And feminists then said,

there is no danger. Why are we putting these poor men in prison? Release them. And now the danger is coming back. I think Austin Medcaf had a predator. I think our predators are other people now. But that always has been. My point is the degree of violence that we faced 10, 15 years ago was so dramatically low relative to the natural state of the world. So the story goes that a man and a woman find a nice field in which they decide to build a home. And the man builds a large, fence around his home so that his wife can tend to the garden without, you know, facing threats from the predators. One day while she's out tending to her garden, she hears a whisper, why are you locked in this cage? And she says, I'm not locked in a cage. My husband built this to protect me. And the voice

says, no, no, you're trapped inside there. The whole world out here is freedom and you don't have any. Why would you let him lock you in a cage? And she goes, you know, you're right. I am locked in a cage and he goes, take the hammer and knock the fence down. So she does. And it was the wolf the whole time who just instantly eats her. Now, the truth is wolves would never do that because they don't talk and they don't hunt in, you know, but this is a story that has been going viral. The point being that great men of action have created a very safe society. We no longer fear wolves or bears. For the most part, we don't really, women go solo traveling around the world now, which is like there was a funny viral post. Sometimes they even live. Sometimes. Sometimes.

there was a viral post from Business Insider and it said it was like why Pakistan is a must destination for the solo female traveler. Who wrote this? The head of human trafficking? And then someone commented saying, was this article written by human trafficking? But there are women who do this because even like the world itself has become substantially more safe than it ever has been. But this creates a false sense of security, which then in turn creates these communist feminist ideas of release the prisoners. They're just oppressed. and then we start seeing all the crime and violence coming back.

Well, it's a very mommy worldview, right? A very kindergarten teacher worldview. Hey, kids, let's all get along. Oh, Tommy brought an extra candy. Hope you have enough for everyone. We're just going to share all the resources and everyone will be happy. But of course, reality doesn't work that way.

Yeah. Maybe one day when we have replicators that can just pull matter, you know, can convert the matter of a rock into a cheeseburger or something. Maybe then you can have whatever you want. To your point earlier, though I'm not a fan of the Zubkater.

zombie genre in general. That's why it always ends up the same trope. The zombies aren't the real threat. Other human beings are always the real threat. Yeah. The good ones are the ones where the zombies are the threat. The challenge that we have is I feel like modern feminists are becoming the Ratt Utopia experiment, and we are not in a utopia. So I think that's where you get the conservative liberal divide from urban to rural. The people who live in rural areas still have to You know, this is crazy. I saw a black bear outside of Charlestown the other day. And I've never encountered a black.

This is a full-grown black bear, probably like eight feet tall standing up. And it was standing right next to the road, maybe like, I don't know, not even a quarter mile, maybe 0.2 of a mile outside of the city. So literally like a five-minute walk outside of the city, if that. Standing on the side of the road, so I pull over and I start filming it like, wow, is the middle of the day. I mean, it wasn't middle of the day, but it was, it was, it was, it was. It was not yet sundown.

It was still, it was 7 o'clock, so sundown's like 8.30 or so. And I watched the bear then run full speed just towards Charlestown, West Virginia. It's not the biggest time. I think of what is it, like 30,000 people or something, Charlestown Ranson. And I'm thinking, do I call the police for this? This is a bear in the middle of the day running towards the city. And so I was like, you know what? I'm just going to call the department non-emergency to ask them if this is a big deal.

And the pod, you tell me it's fine. I don't know. It's West Virginia. Yeah, you know, it's bears. They were closed. They're closed. So I Googled, should I report a black bear siting outside of Charleston, West Virginia? And Google said, no.

No one cares. There's black bears everywhere. It's normal. Stay inside. Don't confront it. And then I was like, really? And then when I got into town, I was asking people, and they were like, you saw a black bear? And I was like, yeah, and they were like, whoa.

Those are vicious ones. Well, no, they're shy. They're scared. They're timid. Okay. Brown bears are. Yeah. And, but they were just like, whoa.

Did you call anybody? And I'm like, should I have? Like, I looked it up because I didn't know if it was a big deal or not. The point is, you don't really get black bears in New York City. So the people who live there live in the Rett Utopia. Don't get me wrong, there's still hardship. Rent has gotten worse. But for a time, clean running water, water in general, hot showers and cheap food available

to the average person, even if you're homeless in New York City, you can say, cheeseburger, and I guarantee you sooner or later, someone will hand you one. I guarantee this. Do the social experiment. Go sit down on a street corner and look at someone and just a cheeseburger. Say nothing else. I guarantee you, sooner or later some guy who walked past you will walk back with a McDonald's burger and be like, here you go, buddy, I got this for you.

Because people try to be nice. But in the rural areas where there are still wild animals and feral hogs, for instance, people still understand the threats, the fear, the wild animals. Like where we are right now, we got coyotes, maybe. sometimes. We hear rustling we're like, uh-oh, what could that be? Where's my gun? You know, we don't actually say, where's my gun? Because we just go for our gun because we have our guns. But you don't need to do that in the city. Then the problem becomes these liberals in the cities are like, why do you need guns? And then some guy says, for the 13 to 50 feral hogs that are running through my

field. And then liberals all make fun of them like feral hogs, which is a completely real and normal thing that happens all the time. Then they tell you to get rid of the cops too. Right. And it's usually white affluent liberals who said to do this. One of my favorite breakdowns was, I don't know if it was like John Stoss or whatever, but he was like, when you look at the demographics, poor minorities keep requesting more police and affluent white people keep requesting defunding the police. There you go. Because they don't have any, just like you were saying, they don't have any, you know, real contact with reality. These things generally don't affect them. They live in in good neighborhoods, upscale neighborhoods,

where crime doesn't usually go to. I think you may have just solved all of our political issues. We should release a couple hundred black bears into New York so that these people have a political awakening and realize sometimes you need guns. I mean... But it could have been a brown bear, and that's the real concern. You don't know. In Colorado, Colorado is almost completely red, red counties,

except for Denver and Boulder, are hard blue. And so they had a statewide referendum to reintroduce wolves into Colorado. Okay? And I used to go camping in Colorado. I go motorcycle camping, stay in a tent up in the mountains, and they brought these wolves back. And it was the entire state voted against it, except for Denver and Boulder. Because these people have never seen a wolf outside of a Disney animated movie. Just if you've never seen a real wolf, just imagine the biggest German Shepherd you've ever seen,

the most aggressive-looking German and triple it. I mean, they are huge. And they run in packs. And if you're a family, mom and dad and two little kids and a cloth tent and these things are hungry, you were done. I don't care if you have a gun or not. I stopped camping in the mountain. Didn't they like have to rescind it because it was a disaster or something? It is a disaster.

Lots of cattle are getting killed. It's still in effect. I mean, they're out there now. It's like if you want to get rid of them, you have to send hunters out to actually, you know. What was the argument of the deer population? because I can take care of the deer, you know what I mean? I don't know what the arguments are. They do it in this kind of animated Disney style pitch,

and I was, oh, nature, it'll be wonderful, we'll bring everybody back. I'm like, there's actually like a wolf park you can go to in Colorado where they're like captured and you can go look at them. I was like, you should not be allowed to vote yes in this referendum until you go there. You sign a certificate. I've looked at what the wolf actually looks like. No, no, I think what we should do is we should time the average person's run speed. And then if you want to vote on this, you are placed at a distance from the wolf where if you run at least the average human run speed, you will escape through the exit door just through the turnstile only one way and the wolf will not.

And then we'll put you in there, open the wolf door. And if you make it out, we're willing to take your vote. And the wolves won't be hungry anymore. Well, that's if you run slow. Yeah. So, you know, yeah, I've seen many a wolf at zoos and things like this. and they're massive. It's kind of weird how, like,

I don't know, their legs are kind of like the thin almost. I don't know how to explain it. Because I guess it's because we've made dogs so weird that when you see a wolf and they're like tall and built to run that I'm just seeing like people, people think Golden Retriever and they're foofy and doofy, you know what I mean?

They don't really look that much like dogs. No. Well, they clearly are related, but, you know. And I went to a party once, I was in Miami and, someone brought a wolf dog. And this person was insane.

And I was like, I'm leaving. It was the, let me put it like this. The way they describe it is that dogs are permanent wolf children. So the way we've bred dogs, they effectively act like wolf puppies for their entire lives. Now imagine you are playing a game with a small child. Hey, you know, what's the word's going to add, a small child? Now imagine you are playing a game with an adult who can.

can be aggressive and doesn't like being talked down to. Imagine treating an adult man the way you treat a dog trying to roll him over on his belly and tickle him and then go-go-g him. He's going to tell you to stop and he's going to get serious to stop. That's what a wolf is. So they bring a wolf dog in and it just immediately starts trashing everything. It walks up and just knocks, like, his taste his paw and just starts hitting things and they can't control it because this is effectively an adult man being like, shut your mouth

and don't talk to me like that. And they had no authority over it. I'm like, you're not. I'm like, no, it's fine. And someone said put it outside and close the door. And like, no, we can't. They put it outside on the balcony and started just smashing the pots and just like knocking them over. And I think those Russians who own Panthers.

Some, I imagine some do. Yeah. I mean, yeah, Russians own Panthers. You know a lot of, I know a lot of Russians that own bears and stuff like that. The oligarchs that think it's cool to own wild animals. And then there's that guy that was living with the bears. Remember that? Got eaten.

And then the bears ate them. Yep. I mean, look, wild animals are wild animals. You, they're, it's, it's not a good idea to be spending a lot of time around wild animals that, that could, that could kill you or that look at you like a meal. Well, speaking of this, we have a big story from the DOJ. They are seeking to strip 17 U.S. citizens of their citizenship. Let's go. For sex offenses, fraud and drug dealing.

This is massive. one of the people that's being charged, now first let me just say this. A bunch of them are predators, sex offenders, didlers. These people are lucky they are being denaturalized and deported. I'd like to see the Democrats defend that because these people will probably agree with the denaturalization. Some of them pleaded guilty to abusing children sexually, in which case there are many conservative American people who have a certain penalty they would like to implement against you. You getting denaturalized and deported is a free ticket out. How common is denaturalization?

Very rare. Not very, very uncommon. So this is a big deal. One of the individuals defrauded a tribal casino. That's what I'm talking about. I understand that if there's a didler and Trump says your citizenship is gone, we all agree. Some people might actually call for the death penalty on that one. These people are lucky to get away with whatever, like to leave the country.

But fraud against a tribal casino is a serious crime, but it's substantially less than child abuse. The fact that the DOJ is willing to denaturalize this level of crime is promising to me. Because they are saying outright, if you come here and you become a citizen and commit a crime, you're out. I like the precedent that it sets. I like the fact that it's the denaturalizing of criminals. I think that it should be used more. I think that they should denaturalize anchor babies that are here. I think every single naturalized citizen in America from a low trust third world country should have all their paperwork looked at.

Every visa application, every green card application. Like carrying it at all times? Well, at least a review. Because I'm can, so to give you an example, when like a stripe, the payment company, right? They investigate fraud. They do studies on fraud internationally. And this country, you know, America, first world, very low fraud relative to central and South America. They had to come up literally.

with an infinity fraud category for India. They could not find the ceiling. So when you look at their map of the world, the colors keep changing until you get to India and then it's black. And it's just 30 to infinity. But I need you just to imagine, everybody listening, like living in India and your parents are like,

you need to go and get a job. You will not sit around my house. You must get a job. And then it's like, okay, okay, I'll go to the local scam center and see if they're hiring. But that's how they do everything. There's a, there's literal buildings where you walk in and you're like, I want to apply for job.

And they're like, are you good at scamming? And it's like, well, I've not tried it, but we do training sessions. Oh, they just say yes, even if they're bad. Yeah, right, because they're all scamming. But my point is, the way you go and apply at like UPS for a truck job or something, or the way you apply at Walmart is the way they apply to do scams. There's literal call center set up where they're literally just scamming people. That's India all over the place. The infinity fraud. And I don't think they're capable of applying for a visa or applying for a green card or applying for naturalization and have there be zero fraud in that process. I think if we look, we'll find at least 90% of them committed fraud at some point in that process and should be denaturalized. Did you see the video where the Indian fraudster accidentally called an emergency elevator phone line?

No. There's a guy in an elevator and apparently it like connects and the person's like, hello, speaking with the guy's like, what? This is an elevator. And they're like, we need you to go on your computer. And he's like, what? You call an elevator? And they don't understand. They're just like, no, no. Like, can you pull up this website? He's like, man, I don't what you're talking about. It's weird. These videos are absolutely hilarious. But there is a whole genre of YouTubers who scam scammers. And that's fun. There was one really great one where the guy actually got the IP address, found the address, the name of the company. And then said to the guy, like,

Here's where he like freaked him out basically saying we're private security. We work with the U.S. government. Here's your address. We're coming. And he's like, no, no, no. And he hangs up. Yeah. I mean, the internet has made for some interesting problems when it comes to foreign countries.

And obviously some are worse than others. And it's, I've heard stories of the Indian government actually working with the U.S. government to try and shut down some of the fraud going on. but I mean if there's infinity fraud coming out of one country, it's going to be pretty hard to actually remedy the problem. Hey, did you want to hit the Daltren Etherly thing before the time? Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. I actually thought we would get into that with the Carmelo story

because of the similarities, but I guess we kind of just passed over it. Yeah, it's okay. You have me here, so you wanted me to. Tell me about it. So the thing with the Chud, the Builder stuff, and Carmelo Anthony is that the... there are similar claims of provocation. In Carmelo's case, it's clear now from witness testimony that he provoked the whole thing and prepared to use lethal force. However, the new information

coming out on Chud the Builder is that he tried to disengage, as I understand it. No, no, there was no provocation. He did not provoke Joshua Fox. That was my big concern. When I first heard about, and by concern, I want to make clear to everyone, I don't get emotionally engaged with these cases, so adult and ethically doesn't mean anything to me personally. I just do, legal analysis. But from a lawyer's perspective, when I heard about his shooting Joshua Fox, and I became aware of his social media content, the nature of it, he calls black people the inward to their face. My concern for his claim of self-defense was, well, if he did that here, if he provoked that confrontation, he does not have a claim to self-defense for that shooting.

It just goes completely out the window. What's developed is there's literally zero evidence that he did that here. Now, of course, he's done it many times in the past, but not in this confrontation with Joshua Fox. And what I mean to say is that he actually, in this case, it was the other direction. He was attempting to disengage from the interaction. So he didn't instigate, attempted, this is my understanding, correct me if I'm wrong. He, he, someone called it to him. He approached, they said something again. He turned to walk away. The guy then yelled something at him. He then turned back and said, why are you going to chimp out? And then the guy attacked him. Right. So the proper way to think about provocation is first, it only matters if you qualify for self-defense anyway. If you

don't qualify for self-defense anyway, it doesn't matter. But provocation works. If you would have qualified for self-defense, you hit all the elements. You lose it if you provoke the confrontation. So before we even get to the provocation question, set that aside. He's walking away from Joshua Fox, whatever happened before. Joshua Fox chases him down, hits him in the back of the head, puts him in a headlock, his arm around his neck, and it's a sustained beating. That's very different than one punch. You're in a very vulnerable position when you're in a health. And I believe Dalton aimed behind him like this or something.

He had to because when you're in a headlock, you're bent over, right? So Joshua Fox is over here. You have to kind of shoot around your own body to get to him, and that's how he burned his arm. He burned it? I thought he shot his arm. No, I think he just skimmed the surface. Oh, okay. So when it was holding the gun to his arm and he fired, it burned.

It could have just even been a muzzle burn. I mean, they're very unclear about it. I don't think the bullet actually pierced the arm, however. But it's not hard to imagine how I could have it. murder. Attempted murder, sorry. Joshua Fox. That's insane. Survive the experience. That's all a classic example of

lawful self-defense against a deadly force threat. A deadly force threat doesn't have to kill you. It just has to threaten you with serious bodily injury. Someone has you in a headlocked or arm around your neck and they're beating you. You can easily be inflicted with serious bodily injury under that circumstance. Arguably. Maybe not. You'd have to convince a jury.

But so he has a robust claim of self-defense. The risk there is, well, all that could be true, but if he provoked the attack in the first place, he called that guy the N-word, then it all goes out the window. You simply lose the self-defense because of the provocation. But there's been several hearings in court now, and the prosecutor has been talking about the facts of the case, and never once has said, we have evidence of provocation. What they're trying to do is take all his videos, where he said the N-word in other cases and say, we're going to ask the jury to infer from those instances that it must have happened here. Well, we don't have any actual

evidence that had happened here. Do you think that the, I mean, obviously, this is just, this is, you know, you're guessing, but do you assume that the judge would allow that evidence into the court? I mean, there's a path to let it in. And the path to let it in is not as character evidence. He did a bad thing before, so he's doing a bad thing now, but it's, there's other legal rationale. So you can bring in such evidence, for example, to demonstrate that there was not a mistake

happening here. This is a repeated pattern behavior. We're not saying he's bad character. It's just, it's a modus operandi. It's something he had his, he had his camera in his hand on his stick, his selfie stick. We think he was, that's the pattern he engages for his social media creation. We want a jury to infer he's done it lots of other times when he's walking around with this camera. He was creating social media content here and did it again.

And the judge may well allow it for that purpose. If the judge does, then all that other video content now is fair game to come in before the jury. And then you have the problem where he could be very meritorious on his self-defense claim, but it all becomes tainted because normal people are conditioned to recoil. I think he's getting locked up. Oh, could well be. I don't think we're asking questions of merit. I think we're asking questions of politics.

Yeah. So that's the big challenge for his attorney. It's not the legal merits. It's the politics. So the thing with Carmelo Anthony is it so egregious. Good lie. I mean, this kid's getting locked. I mean, this kid's getting locked.

You can't really do much about it. And he's not dead. with the Dalton shooting, I guarantee you, and I think you agree with me, they already had the meeting probably with activists, probably like a prominent lawyer, and they all said, well, we don't want riots, so we're going to lock Dalton up and make sure he doesn't get out so that way no one burns the city down. They don't even need a meeting. I mean, 25% of the county, for example, is African American. The judge runs for election. The prosecutor runs for election. They're not going to obliterate 25% of the electorate to defend. Fend Dalton ethely so he could be a First Amendment radical. I see this video posted by Tommy Robinson at 640. Did you guys see this? This is absolutely insane.

We're going to cover this in the uncensored portion because I can't show it. I'm not on YouTube. He says an invader was trying to decapitate a man in Ireland in Belfast. And a bunch of dudes run up with shovels and they start bashing him. I'm just sitting here watching this video being like, you know, when do the indigenous say no? the native born Irish say enough of this murder and rape and we've seen some riots and some stuff but take a look at the Henry Novak story in London he was murdered by a Sikh and the police came and they're like oh no but he was racist and the cops go okay so they go and cuff the guy who was

being murdered and dying until people are willing to stand up and say enough of this like I guess I guess my point is this they're not able to vote themselves out of of this problem, right? Or that would happen. Let's let's entertain the calculus. To the politicians, if you put the white racist in jail, that's it. It's over, right? If you don't, you will get riots and violence. So which way are you going to go? It's obvious. So I remember, this is an interesting analogy in a sense, because I don't know if you guys saw the Ethan Klein news. Did you see this stuff? He sued over copyright infringement. Actually, I mean, we probably should talk about this. It's just not such big news, but it's not big to people, but it's one of the biggest stories, I think,

of the past, like, long story short, he made a documentary about Hassan Piker. It got watched in its entirety by several streamers. He sued and lost. The judge argued that you can watch someone's entire production on a live show and it's fair use. So this is, this is massive for copyright law. And now I will just be completely honest. And after shifting into I forgot my original point as to why I was bringing it up. Happens all the time. Yeah, because I'm like, as soon as I started thinking about how big this copyright news is, and I'm like, yeah, we didn't even talk about this.

This means that you could theoretically, if you made a YouTube channel called I Hate Marvel, you could watch Avengers in its entirety, live streaming it, staring at it, as long as you make some comments periodically. My guess is that the Marvel lawyers will fight a lot harder than precedent set. So we're getting to that point. But we were just talking about... Be careful. Just because a trial court made a decision, that's not.

precedent. No, no, for sure. But it's, it's, it's, it's, so there's already precedent in the Achilla Hughes v. Benjamin when he had an, an official ruling stating like, you can take someone's video and just change the title and it's fair use. So there's interesting, there's already these elements. But my point ultimately to the, uh, the politics question is that politicians are going to, I forgot the point why I brought the Ethan Klein thing, but politicians, they, they feel no threat from the white population at all. They're not going to ride on behalf of, um, of Dalton and everyone knows it. So the equation is actually quite simple politically.

Who cares about white people? Yeah, they're very primitive organisms, politicians, right? They respond to pain and they respond to reward. And if they're getting more reward, more political capital from a particular path than from an alternative path, they go with the rewarding path. Until you make them feel pain for doing that. And traditionally, in civilized societies, the pain was de-election. But as we talked about earlier, the election process.

If the election process is broken, if we cannot legitimately hold accountable the people to whom we provide political power, then there is no way for us to inflict pain. And we're living under a tyranny of the people who count the votes and keep them in power. Yep. And Democrats have been building a one-party control system. They own it in Chicago. They own it in California. Most of the blue states operate this way. Trump needs to send in the feds.

I fear that Trump is not strong enough. Crushing USAID was good and I think it was tremendous. But, you know, I see in the chat people saying every day Trump has not put one person in jail. So the question is, will, you know, my hope is that after the midterms, Supreme Court comes out and says mail and votes are dead. Because the system of mail and voting creates a voting week. The law says election day is the voting day. So you can't have any votes collected before or after. That would mean Republicans win forever.

If that happens, I am hoping that Donald Trump, after the midterms, just goes nuclear. But I don't know that it will. That's a win on Trump's part in general because of his appointments to the Supreme Court, you know, Amy Coney-Barrant notwithstanding. But in general, having a more conservative-leaning Supreme Court, getting them wins on things like that for president is a big deal, even if there's a lot left to be desired with a lot of the other things going on. And I don't know if I buy that there's going to be a lot of, you know, arrests after the fact

Though you could make the argument you said earlier that like de-election was like the thing that you had to play on them to try and to try and win them over. But a lot of times that's what ended up having politicians make bad decisions. You make deals with Iran for a certain amount of money because you understand that giving them money is better than the oil prices hurting and then the Americans not being able to get it. You know, the gas prices going up. So they take the least, you know, the path of least resistance because they want to get reelect or they want to stay in office and stuff like that. Well, you have to build the political capital to take those hits. Right now, Trump has that political capital. But it's not inexhaustible.

And the closer we get to the midterms and things not looking more positive. It's looking positive to me. The Republicans have the advantage right now. And based on the polling... Based on redistricting. Well, yes, but the polling after the fact still shows a Republican advantage. And Democrats are just betting the polls are all wrong. But the polls usually favored Democrats.

So this is looking good for Republicans. There was like a post for. from like index red. It was like all Democrats have to do to win is not be weird and then pulls up a post. It's just like trans period day. Yeah. Lost.

We're going to go to your rumble rants and super chat. So smash the like button. Share the show with everyone. You know, join us at timcast.com. This uncensored portion of the show is not for the faint of heart. This video from Tommy is absolutely shocking. But we're going to talk about where things are headed and have been heading for some time,

especially with the Carmelo Anthony's story, Dalton Earthly and what we've been seeing in Europe. In the meantime, we've got some minutes, minutes. We'll grab your chats. Hey, can I plug something before? Well, we do that we wrap up. Joey Giggle says, not politics related, but if you played Destiny, remember to sign the petition to hop on tomorrow for the final patch after Bungee and Sony killed it for

Marathon. Marathon is whack. It's awful. It looks disgusting. And Destiny was great. Despite all of Destiny's failures, I am a legacy destiny player. I play Destiny 1, the whole way through. I played Destiny 2 until the, just before the final shape.

and I think that was the last one that I actually no I think I might have played the final shape but I didn't really do much I think it was on it for only a few minutes and um yeah I just you know I worked too much to play video games anymore but I played destiny too quite a bit I know Phil played destiny quite a bit yeah the final shape was fine but I think that the um the release that had the the the where they first went to the dreaming city and I don't forget what it was called there was a lot It was, anyways, but it was,

I played for a while. I'm impressed with how they salvaged the mistakes they made from Destiny 1. You know what I mean? Mm-hmm. So it was, it was a very, very,

very fun game with, I would say adequate story. Adequate. They could have done better. Yeah, I mean, the final shape was supposed to wrap the whole thing up and then the stuff

that they did after that, it was just kind of like, yeah, you know. And so they could do Destiny 3 and they should because Marathon is whack. And if they start with Destiny 3, they have an opportunity for something tremendous.

and that is starting a new story of humans expansion and your missions are based on new cities, new settlements, new threats and new areas of the solar system or the galaxy even. There's a lot of opportunity they can go with. But anyway, marathons, like, they have a really, really, really low player base. It sucks. It looks disgusting. It's not. It's like you're playing a mannequin.

I'm not interested in whatever that stupid game is. They're trying to be race and gender neutral. Yeah. They're like, how about you play a robot instead? I'm like just like, the robots were fine and destiny if you want. to play the robots. Yeah. Anyway, the Fallen 501 says,

Hey, Tim, have you thought about making a video covering the recent Lego scandal involving Utah Police Department? I did. It's on the Tim Poole show channel. And subscribe. It's on YouTube and Rumble.

YouTube.com slash at Tim Poole. And I believe it on Rumble. Is it Tim Poole show? Whatever. You can search for it. You'll find it. It's a new channel where I talk about more of that stuff.

All right. K-Toth Swiss says, California fraudulent, Vote printer go burr. Mm-hmm. Yep. Even if it isn't actually like the kind of fraud that people are assuming, it's definitely a system designed to benefit one party clearly, you know? And that's not what a vote is supposed to be.

John Rambo Z says, have you seen the video of Roy Beck explaining immigration with gumballs? That's a classic. It breaks it down beautifully. One of my favorite ways to explain immigration is the game Life Genesis. Have you ever played it? No. The original game of life, the old coding game, the, the hacker, universal hacker symbol is the, I believe what is it called the glider from Life Genesis or from Life. Windows made a version where the game of life was a grid with a yes or no squares. So they turn on, they light up or they turn off. And based on certain rules, they would reproduce or die. And this created a bunch of interesting interactions where you could program. They then made a version with red and blue. So these things, could destroy each other. You could do interesting things where you freeze it. You can draw big blue

square and press go and see how the life of blue will grow, reproduce and spread out and then create permanent structures. If you introduce red into it, the blue would engulf and destroy the red. If you create equal parts red and blue, they would go to war with each other and then create permanent structures. And if you take a big blue square or a big blue structure and then keep introducing red into it in real time, if you introduce too much red, the blue stops destroying it, and the red starts destroying the blue. So we'll go over this in the uncensored portion. I'll pull up a video of it.

All right. We got some, we got superchats. Oh, this is interesting. How do you do that? Got a lot. Oh, you want to. No, how did, uh, did you do that? Do what?

The, the chat now on, uh, YouTube just switched completely. Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah, I did that. Oh, look at that. I mean, it's harder to read that way, so. I saw some good ones come through. I want to make sure you got to them. Which one in particular? Oh, just this red one I've seen before down here.

Dina H. Kassel says, I went to vote and I didn't get an option to vote for mayor. It didn't appear on my ballot. I also didn't receive my mail-in ballot. It was set to my old address, even though I updated the information with them. This is in California. Who is surprised? Eric Errati says, I know it's possible. A friend tested it out.

Tested it out. Roommate was away from L.A. years ago. Filled out their ballot and went through multiple times since 2020. Man. What do we got here? Eric Shaver says you don't have free speech if you can't use it to defend your life in court. A nation where lawyers are the most prosperous

is a conflict of interest with a free speech country. Okay. Yeah, I mean, I don't know how you wouldn't be able to use your own free speech to defend yourself in court. I mean... They just tell you not to do it. Yeah, they tell you to let your lawyer. Exactly.

Exactly. SSG says, believe it or not, zombies are not real, but it's an allegory for, in distrust for society. Take Michael Jackson's thriller. It depicts an invading army, a home invasion, and the person you trust closest to you ready to attack. See, we finally found a way conservatives can make good art, right? They just have to learn how to do the allegorical response, so they can make zombie movies.

I know, because the liberals do it all the time. You make a zombie movie where you're literally facing an invasion, and the zombies start, they first destroy the local convention. store. You don't make it that zombies are stealing the food. It's just allegory. It's like, we can't go to the grocery store to pick up any supplies. The zombies have overrun it. And then you use these things, like the water supply is damaged and then your car is destroyed. In He-Man, when Prince Adam is sent to Earth, he works HR. And when he gets back to Eternia and Skeletor is taken over, he literally tries to use HR language to talk to Skeletor and the villains.

And they're like, we're bad guys. We're here to kill you. Is that really, like, verbatim? Like, what happened? It was a portion of the story in other parts, yeah. I mean, it's played as a joke. It's not played for series. In a conservative zombie movie, the humans would just win. And so you don't have a series, right?

Well, no, it's the story in between before the victory. Yeah. So sure. Clint Torres says, when I was eight years old, my dad found a wallet full of cash at the store and was bound to find the owner. Turns out it belonged to an old man who was on his way to pay for his wife's funeral. That's the U.S. I grew up in. indeed my friends but not anymore they'll find your wallet they'll rip the cash out and throw it in the

garbage smash the like button share the show with everyone you know this uncensored portion is going to be particularly brutal so you are warned i'm not kidding it is very very brutal we want to talk about mass migration and the policing and the racist structures that are now impacting white people you can follow me on x and instagram at timcast and did you want to shout anything out i do i got a couple things uh once or twice a year we teach a free webinar on how to be hard to convict if you ever have to defend yourself. Hard to convict.com. Because I'm here on Tim's show, we scheduled

an extra one this Thursday or this Saturday. We're doing those. And for Father's Day, we have these beautiful Trump 250 note mugs. Just go to my profile on X at the Branca Show and the link is there for those. If your dad likes Trump, he'll love these mugs. If your dad hates Trump,

buy him two and he can smash him together. There you go. Guys, if you want to follow me, I'm on Instagram and on X. at Brett Dasevik on both of those platforms. You should check out Pop Culture Crisis. We are live five days a week, Monday through Friday, at 3 p.m. Eastern Standard Time,

YouTube and Rumble. Also, I have been doing twice a month. I'm doing a show on Discord, on the Timcast Discord at 7 p.m. on Saturday. We did our first one, not this past weekend, but the weekend before that. So we'll be doing it again this coming weekend. If you are a member over there,

you should tune into that as well. I am Phil the Remains on Twix. The band is all that remains. You can check our music out at Apple Music, Amazon, Music, Pandora, YouTube, Spotify, and D.ZER. We are playing WarpTur this coming Sunday in D.C. So you can go to Warptur.com to get your tickets. Don't forget, the left lane is for crime.

I'm Carter Banks. You can follow me at Carter Banks everywhere and at Carter Banks, official everywhere else. I've got a song coming out at 619. Didn't realize it was Juneteenth until after I put it out there. But, yeah, it's coming out. You can go see the trailer at Trash House Records on YouTube. We will see you all at rumble.com.

Timcast, IRL right now. Thanks for hanging out.