Timcast IRL - Dudley Brown & Ronnie Adkins Uncensored: Rural Areas Try To SECEDE From Illinois And CA, LETS TALK GUNS

Episode Date: December 1, 2024

Tim & Co join Dudley Brown & Ronnie Adkins for a spicy bonus segment usually only available on Timcast.com. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Welcome to our special weekend show, Sunday Uncensored. Every week we produce four uncensored episodes of the TimCast IRL podcast exclusively at TimCast.com and we're going to bring you the most important for our weekend show. If you want to check out more segments just like this, become a member at TimCast.com. Now enjoy the show. You know, this story was crazy. It came out from the Wall Street Journal on the 17th and I only just saw it today because Now, enjoy the show. yes illinois separation referendum i think apparently they were saying 73 of voters in predominantly rural iroquois county on election day backed the idea of forming a new state with every illinois county except cook that's crazy so i don't know what do you what do you guys think

should we have the states secede and form uh free states give the give the liberals their city state districts yeah problem with that is they're going to want U.S. senators. Then you're adding two U.S. senators per state. Yeah, we're adding two conservative ones. These states are basically ruled by their cities, and they get two far-left lunatics. I mean, it's interesting theoretical, but we all know it's not going to happen. Right. I mean, I know the state of Washington, the eastern side of Washington,

wants to be the West Idaho. Yeah. But so what's your reasoning? Why not? I just don't think it's not realistic. It's fun to talk about. In Colorado, 10 years ago, people talked about seceding and going up into Wyoming.

And great idea. Not going to happen. If they're successful, why not, though? They're just not going to be successful. But that's what I mean, is if there's a path to be successful on it. The bar is so high, it just wouldn't happen. What about secession? Yeah.

Yeah, Illinois, small Illinois counties are voting to secede from uh cook county and then what you join a different state no make their own that i don't see an argument against it i can certainly see the argument for it's just not going to happen that i get because yeah i don't disagree that it's difficult i think i think i think people are generally cowards i think cowardice is rampant. And so what ends up happening is you'll get Supreme Court justice. Alito and Thomas seem to be based AF. But overwhelmingly, people are just like, but we don't know what would happen.

And I'm scared. I think the last time we had it was West Virginia, a state split like that. And it was post-Civil War, so there's already visceral chaos there was a lot of military states a lot of military power was in the states and the federal government was still very weak it was just starting its grip on the nation so this was it and west virginia basically as a part of virginia uh virginia calls up young men to go fight. So all the young voting age men from West Virginia, which at the time was just Virginia, were like, let's go fight. They did.

As soon as they left, the scumbags who were still there were like, we vote to secede. And then they did. And then the federal government was like, we like what you're doing. We're going to accept it. Then after the war ended,

Virginia was like, you can't do that. The war's over. That's Virginia. And they said, go fuck yourself. West Virginia now exists. Okay, so if a whole new state is outside of the realm of reality, what about redefining the borders?

So that way there's no change. So like we talked about, you know, Idaho, Western or Eastern Washington wants to become part of Idaho or Oregon wants to become, I forget what, you know, Oregon wants to become. I forget what actually.

The same requirements exist, though. But it doesn't change. But there's less. I imagine there would be less resistance because it doesn't change the makeup of the Senate. It will change the makeup of the House, I think. But I'm not sure exactly how much. Well, it can be done in a way that it wouldn't so long as everything's apportioned similarly. So depending on how many people leave

Oregon in the rural areas and join Idaho, it might not change anything. I do think the greater Idaho movement would take away one vote from Oregon and give one vote to Idaho though. And then I think then it would be like Oregon National Guard get pulled up and then it would be the federal government's job to be like, stand down

or to be like, listen are we are a nation up their national guard you're not doing this we are a nation that asserts in our founding documents we have a right to self-governance and so if there is a portion of say illinois that's like we do not want to be ruled by those fucking lunatics i don't see any argument for this country to deny that right within itself. So if a large portion of a state or whatever says we want to form our own governing body, I don't see how the—it's not like they're leaving the country. It's one thing to say we're going to leave this union altogether and take with it the blood and treasure and sacrifice. No, they're saying just within it, we're not going to have those people telling us what the fuck to do.

If it happened, it would set off a chain reaction of new states popping up we'd go from 50 to 60 real fast but we're talking about well i mean we i thought we had just started talking about just changing the borders so that way this was b if they popped the new state up that was the last point that tim was making but i think that it would be much more likely for borders to change than for a new state to appear yeah and there and there should be no restricting it. The federal government should have no say. Only the states. The only federal government's really only job is to make sure chaos doesn't break out. I don't even see justification for why any state has a say over jurisdiction. Let's say you're in a specific county of Illinois. If that county votes to sever itself from Illinois, I don't see why not.

What right does Illinois have to assert itself over this county? You'd be like, listen, you've sucked off the tit of our government finance to help fund your roads for the last 120 years. You're not just taking it. Sorry, it's our state. We are in charge of that. We own it. They're going to say that, but that's not an argument. That would be the argument. To be honest. That's the argument for the

crown to not let the colonists declare independence. I don't really know all the legal side. I just know the political side as somebody who literally has been paid for 35 years to work in professional politics and give assessments.

And I don't see how you can get politicians in the state legislature to agree to it. Could they just do it? That's what I'm saying. I mean, like eastern Colorado and northeastern Colorado was talking about seceding post 2013 with all the gun control laws and craziness in Colorado and going up into Wyoming and reattaching them to Wyoming. And I don't remember the specific requirements, but it was just silly. It was not even... What kind of requirements?

I don't remember them being unattainable. Like requirements put on them by the state of Congress? Yeah, yeah, by the Constitution, because you can't, the state Constitution is what created, you know, essentially chartered the state. And it doesn't, it's very difficult. It's like, amending the U.S. Constitution is an enormous task. And who knows if we'll ever see it again right yeah i don't think so so i had a friend uh in congress uh for many years and uh she was a state legislator in colorado who uh got elected to congress her name was marilyn musgrave and her claim to fame when she was a state

legislator was she ran a bill to make a marriage between a man and a woman in the law. And which was back then was not that controversial and a little controversial. But that was this. Well, she was in the legislature from 94. And I think she got elected to Congress in 2002. And then Marilyn came to Congress and proposed a federal marriage amendment. And you have to have two-thirds of the state's legislatures agree. Really? Good luck with that.

Who's got that $40 billion? And I'm not sure that would even do it on, you know, getting them to agree to even a popular amendment to the U.S. Constitution. When you're talking about $40 billion, what's that money for? I just run a campaign. Okay, so anybody who thinks that you just, in politics, that you just propose an idea and then it magically happens. It's just not the way it works.

You've got to have money to push things or to stop things. Is it like campaign like convince them it's just running or bribe them no well the the bribery thing happens um but in all my years i've never witnessed it once so technically you could convince them through mass if you had enough mass media power well i mean politicians don't respect mass media they they respect voters they come on this show they're creaming their pants to come on this show well um so so the the they were they were a politician is afraid of one thing and that's not being re-elected period that's the only thing you've got on a politician. That's why I don't like term limits.

Because once they're limited and they can't run again, guess what? You've got no power over them. So the next two years or if they're in the U.S. Senate, six years, they can do whatever they want. They don't care what the voters think. So why I'm saying that is that you've got to put pressure on politicians to get them to vote. On guns, that's true. I don't care what they think. I'm not going to support people who don't think the Second Amendment is sacrosanct.

But we have a federal PAC and we have a super PAC as well, which we have the only gun rights super PAC that's ever existed in America. But but we ran when we run and put pressure on politicians. We're trying to make them fear for their political lives, that they might lose that reelection, which to a politician is life itself. They don't want to lose. So you'll use the money to like go out and canvas and get people to sign petitions being like i won't vote for the guy if he doesn't vote for this yeah then you deliver those then you deliver those like if you look on our our site you'll see a picture of me with congressman thomas massey of kentucky and and stacks of boxes and that's the delivering one

point i think was 1.4 million petitions against federal gun control, mostly red flag, which was interesting because it was at a time in which Trump endorsed red flag. Thankfully, he he dropped that because it's a disaster. Well, it ended up passing anyway when Republicans colluded with Dems. But but we put a halt to that largely by individual pressure. Now, that's the weird thing. As you go to D.C. and you physically deliver pieces of paper with individuals' names and saying they oppose something, and you do it in large numbers, politicians don't know what to do.

They just crap themselves because they don't see that. Whenever you sign a petition for a group, figure out if they ever delivered it because if they didn't deliver it, they're freaking liars. So we could have a website with a demand and then get 100,000, 1 million people to sign it and then get them printed and send them to Congress.

You know what works really well? Postcarding. You get pre-printed postcards that say what you want. You go outside and ask people to sign it. They sign that, and when you're done, you just dump them in the mailbox. And then what happens is

this guy in Congress gets the mail delivery, and they bring in a whole bunch of boxes and just dump bags. We could automate a website. You sound like you went through a school that we teach. No, I worked for the per groups and other leftists and liberals. When you were occupied? No, this was well before that. and other leftists and liberal. When you were occupied.

No, this is well before that. Realistically, we could have a website that is auto-programmed to deliver postcards with the name, sign the name, and then it goes out. That minute, that within 24 hours of you. It's a lot harder to do. We could do it. It's not cheap either. And it is kind of the basis of mob rule because we could really put a lot of individual pressure, focus individual pressure at Congress. I don't know. I'm always giving people a printout so they can print out themselves and decentralize it and they can print as many as they want.

And they go out and ask people in their in their, you know, boardwalk or whatever to sign the thing and say, hey, we're for gun rights. Do you want to sign this petition? Here's what it says. It's real simple. It says we want a repeal of infringements, restrictions. The NFA violates our rights. Then they sign it. They put their name on it.

That's all they got to do. And then if one person does 10, and then you get 1,000 people, 10,000 postcards show up on the desk of some member of Congress. And you don't need to send it to Thomas Massey. You need to send it to these squishy middle-of-the-road Republicans. So Tim's absolutely spot on. We actually teach the class. In fact, we actually sent Phil a video on this, teaching some of these parameters.

But the important part about that is that if you deliver postcards and we do it in traditional mail, we actually send pieces of mail in the postal service, which I know people that, wow, that's old, old world. And with preprinted postcards and sometimes they'll have, you know, six or eight preprinted postcards. One will go to your your member of Congress. One goes to, you know, two to your U.S. senators and then some to give to your friends. And yeah, they're preprinted and with a full message saying, and we always say specific, don't go generic, always go specific. If you're putting pressure on politicians, tell them to vote against either this bill or this concept, red flag laws, assault weapons bans.

And if you do that, think about it. This politician gets a large number of those from voters in his district. And what he's thinking of is going through his brain. He's thinking, if they can do this during the legislative season, organize and get all this mail out and get a bunch of people sending me postcards and put pressure on me. What could they do during election season? And this is why we were talking about Donald Trump only has 18 months. That's the legislative season. That's the amount of time that you have to actually get things done, because after the first 18 months, then it becomes the election season.

And that's what Dudley's articulating. Like, what can they if they can do And that's what Dudley's articulating. If they can do this when we're not running, right? For Congress? Well, yeah, when they're not running to be reelected. When they're not thinking about that, when the population isn't thinking about that, what are they going to do when it's actually their ads being run and everyone knows there's an election coming and then they can actually drum up people that really care about this in the time when they're thinking about it's partially true but remember politicians always care about re-elected re-elected it's the difference is if you is the election uh legislative

season is when politicians get a screw you their power is over you then. People are demanding we talk about guns now. And, Paul, okay, and then the election season is when you get to do things to them. What kind of gun do you need if you live in, like, a three-bedroom house with your family and you want practical home defense? AR. Sorry. Yep. Well, there's two theories. Now, he's not a shotgun guy. It used to be shotguns was a great idea because shotguns were cheap.

You know, 18-inch barrel is fine. They're cheap. They're easy to operate. And the trouble is if you get weapons that are not easy to operate, people who aren't going to train a lot, you want pretty simple. Now, shotguns are not area weapons. There's a lot of generic silliness about it but ars are cheaper than they've ever been in the history of the world speaking practically for like some dude breaks into your house and he's dumb as a box of rocks maybe has like a glock or

something do you need to ar and just mow the guy down or like shotgun might blast. Like you, you like practically speaking, isn't AR really just shotgun is way more lethal. Yeah. There's this guy that blow it, blow it. You get some slugs. No, no. When I'm no, even with, even with buckshot buckshot, it's, it's what the reason it's lethal is because, um, you know, if you hit their shoulder with a, with a 12-gauge with buckshot, the trauma that caused is massive. Even though it was bad shot placement with an AR. I've got a governor, and I've got 410.

They're like personal defense slugs, but it's buckshot and a slug. Yeah. A shotgun. There's this guy, Clint, from Thunder Ranch that says, a shotgun with the right load will take pieces of your body off. Like, you can literally remove. Oh, dude, a buckshot's going to blow a hole in his chest, right? I look at things across a baseline, right?

So I think I established that earlier. Baselines matter to me. So when I'm providing a response like this, I look across a populace. Across a populace, the use of, like like a 12-gauge, you know, whether it be pump action or semi-automatic, the necessary skill for that, especially with a pump, right? So you can do something called short stroking on a pump action where you don't fully cycle the gun itself. I made a funny video about, you know, the FUDs that talk about, I just rack it once and the sound will scare them away. And in the process of me

basically jerking off my shotgun to make that sound, I short stroke the gun, but I left it in on purpose because I have thousands of shells through a shotgun and I still short stroke it. So imagine if you will. What does that mean? So again, you've got a pump action shotgun and you

need to pull it all the way down and then all the way back up. When you short-stroke it, you don't complete that entire cycle. So it doesn't. You might eject the case, but it's not putting a new round in. It's not fully cycling the gun. This is a very common problem, and it's talked about quite a bit. So when you put yourself into the situation of a home defense scenario, and this is a logic-based argument, there's going to be external factors like tunnel vision. You're going to be worried.

You're going to have, you know, the fine motor skills. There are so many factors that you can't really account for. From a usability perspective, the AR is going to provide you an easier platform to operate. It's going to provide you the long sight radius, right? So that long distance between the sights where minuscule changes aren't going to impact things in the same way that they would on a handgun. So if I, handgun is hard, like hard, hard, hard. If I make a very small adjustment to my grip or just a minuscule change to how I'm holding it, the impact downrange, my point of impact could be off by feet. Those same minuscule

changes with a longer sight radius gun aren't going to have the same impact. So usability is higher. Magazine capacity is ultimately going to be higher. Recoil impulse is going to be lower. And ultimately, what you're doing is you're there to ensure the maximum capability to stop the threat, not necessarily remove parts of a shoulder, right? So all respect to the shotgun, they are absolutely devastating. Across a baseline, this is an opinion, and I own it. Across a baseline, the AR is the premier home defense gun and what dudley was just about to get out is at one point in time it was much more difficult to acquire an ar the from a from a price point entry perspective so much higher my first ar was

like 1400 bucks what are they now so this can get an AR for about $399. So I went to the first gun I went to buy. I bought a couple, and they delayed me, so I didn't get them for like five days. I was in Jersey. And I was asking the guy, what should I get? And he was like, well, you should get a rifle. You know, especially if you have limited experience.

You should get trained, go to the range, blah, blah, blah. And then they had limited choices for handguns, so he was like, the governor's good because you've got ammo options. You can do 45 long or with the moon clip, you can do ACP. And then he's like, but you can put 410 in it. And I was like, sure. Brought it to the range. And they're like, that's what you bought?

And I was like, well, I've only fired a 9mm. I did a police training where they brought us from 22 up to 45. And so we used a hand. It was like a police training in jersey where they let us fire it was pretty pretty awesome and so uh these are the ones that i got the critical defense on the left it's got two bucks shot in a slug and they were like yeah that's a heck of a thing to shoot somebody with but but realistically it's fun look i i, I believe in diversity, okay? I mean, a diverse weapon. What matters more importantly, I think, again, across that baseline, is intermediate caliber rifle, a semi-automatic intermediate caliber rifle, which is that, you know, space between a pistol caliber, 9mm,.45,.40,.10, and a full power cartridge, which is going

to be like.308, you know, 7.62x51. So, but in your house, what kind of rounds do you want? Like 9mm hollow point or something? Oh, no. 9mm is a joke. That's actually a misconception. With hollow points, what you have is, unless they have some kind of an artificial cavity plug, what will happen when they hit a drywall, for example?

That cavity that is supposed to expand will get filled, and it just turns into an FMJ and carries forward. So you'll see a lot of, you'll see some personal defense rounds now that have like a little red plug in the cavity. What that, what that is there for is to allow expansion when met with a barrier of some kind. Right. I think I have deer slugs that have that. Sure. That's a sabot probably. Oh yeah. Yeah yeah uh yeah if it's if it's a shotgun then then you're you're probably looking at it right yeah but but you're the great part i i say put in hollow point boat tails um yeah ar 223 556 and um it was that like 230 grain kind of ranger sxt is that i i can't quite tell um but um like hang out with wizards dude this is

teach me magic long long before i long before i was even a member of funker 530 i i guns have been like my that is my strongest issue like that is what matters to me i wake up and it's not that maybe you could call me an homosexual i don't care i mean i quite honestly don't because i think that i think that the second amendment is ultimately the hub of the wheel of rights because that is that that is the teeth that if ultimately somebody is trying to but but remember we're talking guns yeah back to the question though is like what do you think is the best? If you have an AR-15 in your house, what are you saying? I'll tell you mine. All I can do is give you my personal.

I run an 11.5 pistol. It's got a pistol brace on it with 77 grain from actually just changed to running PSAs, AACs, 77s. I got a 10.5 Daniel Defense. I run 77 grains. Just remember, it's a noise weapon, too. Those little short ARs, it's just ridiculous. I got a can on it. What about the 77?

So here's a question, too. So you wake up in the middle of the night, and you hear a window break, something. Do you put on ear protection, eye protection? No. You'd have a can, or frankly, it's okay to lose some hearing when you're going to save someone's life. Make sure you have a light on your gun. Yeah.

For a home defense gun, it must have a light. Absolutely. Now, I told you earlier, I said 9mm. Look, handguns have a couple of good qualities. They're portable and concealable. But other than that, they suck. I have pretty bad aim. So we had a home range for a while, 30 yards.

I hit two of seven. We can fix that. But with all my rifles, it was 10 out of 10, 15 out of 15. Those minuscule differences in how you hold it, your trigger squeeze imperfection, your breathing, it's going to be different from handgun to rifle, right? But they're also going to be more impactful because, again, you have this smaller machine that's going to be more susceptible to small changes and a larger effect. I watch these guys on Instagram at like 100 yards with a handgun, they don't miss. And I'm just like, wow. So one of the guys, a good friend of mine who won Top Shot,

do you remember that? History Channel had a great, it's worth watching. Top Shot was awesome. His name is Dustin Ellerman. He won, I think it was season three of Top Shot. And he beat Navy SEALs and all his competitors. And he's never been trained. He was all self-taught.

And he's one of the best just natural shooters I've been around in my life. And Dustin, we were at our range shooting a bunch of different weapons, shooting a lot of long range. But then we gave him a handgun. He'd never shot it before. Somebody else's. And we were making him shoot through a barrier, through color holes and we'd yell yellow and he was shooting it you know 35 yards and 70 yards and then and that was the standard and then i'm like yellow 300 and and he goes first shot bam

hits it at 300 and then he goes how many and i go five he got him five in a row. That's crazy. What does he do? Some people are just natural shooters, and I think it goes back to a fundamental understanding, though. When I say natural shooters, it's an aptitude for understanding ultimately what a firearm is, which is really just a delivery mechanism, and you need to

find a way... For lead aspirins. Yes, actually. You need to find a way to let the firearm do what uh you need to find a way to to let the firearm do what it's supposed to do the less the less damage that you can do in the cycles of operation for a firearm uh i.e steady position proper breathing good trigger squeeze the better you're gonna shoot and once people understand that your job is ultimately to allow that tool to perform its function at its, I mean, a very fundamental level. People just start banging targets, you know, 100-yard gong shots.

I didn't think that I'd be able to do a 100-yard shot, but after with some practice and stuff, I can do a 100-yard shot. Let's grab callers, and we'll start with Nomad. What is up? You are on the show. Nomad. Uh-oh. There we go. Hello. Hi. How are you guys doing

today? Fucking so good, dude. What's up? Where are you from, Nomad? Oh, I'm from California. California? It's basically the Bay Area. Oh, we're really going hardcore here. Yikes. What's happening? Break your head low, dude. I know. What's happening? Break your head low, dude.

I know I, uh, I do every day. So, all right. So question for tonight. Um, this is for everybody. It's a,

you know, more positive question. Let's put it that way. Uh, so escalation in Ukraine seems to be continuing with the, uh, U S affirming attack. Him's missiles.

Yep. Uh, and Russia using a new mid-range hypersonic weapon the U.S. has no known countermeasure for. So will there be a nuclear weapon launched prior to Trump taking office? If so, who launches? Does it escalate further past a first nuclear strike or not?

No, there will not be nuclear weapons launched, I do not believe. It's way too soon you know the uk and france are talking about deploying troops into ukraine and actively enjoining the war oh jesus i didn't know that yeah that's look it up that's le mans they reported that earlier so i i don't think we see nuclear strikes and again we're talking it's probably like low yield nuclear artillery or i don't see we i don't think we see nuclear strikes. And again, we're talking, it's probably going to be like low-yield nuclear artillery. I don't think we see that yet. But who the fuck am I?

You know what I mean? I don't think so. But if it does happen, Putin's going to use low-yield nuclear weapons for strategic purposes. If he does, that whole country's going up in flames. I don't think he's going to. That's not true. Oh, dude. If Russia unlocked the nuke box, Russia would be gone. If they used a 20-

Every country on Earth would have Cassus Belli at that point. No. You are completely wrong. If Russia used a 20-ton bomb, that's not going to happen. I think Putin knows

that it's like Pandora's box. I think you need to understand the scale of nuclear weapons. Depleted uranium is a nuclear weapon. I understand the scale. And they've already been using that.

But they want to annihilate the Putin regime. They want it. And China's already working with them and supplying weapons, and North Korea's involved. Now Russia's recruiting the Yemenis to fight on his side. This is not, this is never going to be a, oh no, Russia's been crushed by the great powers of the world.

They're aligning against each other. What do you mean they are aligning? China's already been supplying Russia with weapons. North Korea has deployed 10,000 and up to 100,000. And now Russia's recruiting from Yemen. They're bringing in global forces. Iran is going to line up with Russia. If Russia uses nuclear artillery on the battlefield, the U.S. is not going to retaliate with an ICBM or long-range strikes.

They may deploy troops into Ukraine. But this escalation if if the if okay let's let's entertain your scenario russia launches a a low low grade low yield nuke on the battlefield to to to wipe out the attack comes launch points it's a attack a tech m is what they're called a tech not attack but someone corrected me today that's why i brought it up they they call them attack them so let's say that Russia says... Attackums is okay. Let's say they're like, we're going to use nuclear artillery, and we're going to flatten this part of Ukraine where they're attacking Bryansk and Kursk.

If they do that, as already stated by European Parliament, no one in the West will sacrifice New York for fucking, I don't know, Kiev. I can't remember what city he said. It was a Polish city. He's like, if Putin attacked Poland, no one's going to launch nukes against Russia because they're not going to sacrifice New York City or Paris for Poland. It's not going to happen.

And I mean, when you think about it, if the Russians actually launch a nuclear weapon, they're basically losing the opportunity to negotiate with Trump. If it happens before Trump gets into office, because the consensus is Donald Trump wants to actually negotiate and end, as opposed to the current administration. If they do anything too provocative, and there's people that are arguing that the U.S. is going to try and do it, but even still, if Russia does anything too provocative, then they make it a situation where Donald Trump can't. That's why I said they're not going to do it. So when you say launch points of ATACOMs, what do you mean by that?

So the regions of Ukraine where they're attacking Russia from. Okay. So the launch platform for ATACOMs. What do you mean by that? So the regions of Ukraine where they're attacking Russia from. Okay. So the launch platform for ATACOMs is called the HIMARS. It is the high mobility artillery system. And you can't, there is no launch point for that. There are the locations that that artillery piece moves to, fires, and then displaces from. Could Russia use nuclear artillery to decimate? What is nuclear artillery? Are you talking about nuclear weapons?

Yeah. So the delivery mechanism for those would be things like the ATACMS is analog, which would be the Iskander, right? So Russia's been using the Iskander, which has the ability to deliver nuclear payload since more or less day one, right? Right. So Russia's been using the Iskander, which has the ability to deliver nuclear payload since more or less day one. Right. So they've been firing that into Ukraine for all of this time. I believe that there is an absolute escalation. I don't believe the use of ATACOMS specifically itself was the escalation, rather the timing and the purposeful public announcement of it.

From Biden? Correct. Right. That to me is the ultimate escalation. The capability of ATACOMS is par, largely because the HIMARS itself has been used to strike into Kursk for months now. So there was even this argument

that the U.S. has to be the ones to fire. That's absolutely not the case. You can load a tentative grid onto that system from that system and fire from that system. It's a self-contained firing mechanism. Even the argument that it is GPS guided, it ultimately doesn't have enough trajectory to truly be guided.

You load the grid onto it, it fires, and it lands on that grid with extreme accuracy. So just to make sure that I kind of finish this thought, my opinion doesn't matter, though. The opinion that does matter is Russia's, right? So the enemy always gets a vote. Their perception of the use of a TACMS, or at least their public perception of the use of a TACMS, is ultimately what we're conversing about here. Again, I think the escalation is actually the public announcement. It's timing, in my opinion, probably purposefully to throw a wrench. Do you think the sabotage of the undersea cables was China's involvement?

Do you think it was intentional communication sabotage? You know, I'm not really certain on that. I kind of feel like it leans towards sabotage, because how do you accidentally have a Chinese ship go in the Baltic and damage? I will tell you that my time working within the intelligence community, I've got 12 years worth of my career that was as a part of the intelligence community, as a contractor, not even as military. I'm a career reservist, right? So I will tell you that undersea cables is something that's always being talked about. From my perspective, the lenses that I look at war are going to be from like the Funker 530 side of the house, which is very, very video oriented.

It's what is truly happening from the lens that we do have, which is itself imperfect, which is video. So I could show you the video of the Iskanders being used, which is ultimately the rough equivalent of the Atacoms. I can show you the HIMARS system, which is the delivery mechanism for Atacoms firing Gimlers, GMLRS, which itself is a guided munition, just a smaller one with less range, albeit, into Kursk, right? So I see these things from a capability perspective as being less of the escalation, and I think it's an important distinction. What the escalation is, in my opinion, is the announcement, the way it was done purposefully and publicly. Because it forces Putin's hand, right? Right. The question that's been for a while is that Putin's statements of

red lines are meaningless because every time he states them, nothing happens. Well, every time he has said something, nothing, nothing has happened. Right. So there is there is a basis at least to that argument. So now that the issue is, will there actually come a point where Putin feels an existential threat like the attack on Bryansk and Kursk and then say, OK, we're going to load up some nuclear weapons? We're going to just the enemy gets a vote. You know, like i said uh you don't know what you don't know and i think that's the the million dollar question the the hope is always that there is somebody operating inside of the highest levels of government that is the best of us that truly understands the nuance and complexity of this situation as i get older this is something i

talked at dudley a lot about and i better understand you know and i'm exposed to those those people in those positions i become less and less confident that that is always going to be the case. I do firmly believe that there are some extremely smart people that are actively working towards the betterment of society. I don't think that they are always put on the pedestal necessary to enact change. Nomad, did you want to add anything or shout anything out? Because we do got to grab other colors i would say that um the idea of there'd be no red lines i think that the areshnik missile which was what was launched the other day i would say that was a response to the uh

attack is being used and also it's uh it is a new weapon and i think that there are people talking about how it's a kinetic MIRV weapon. So the MIRV deploys at hypersonic speed, and it actually bursts into kinetic rods. Wow, really? That's what some people are talking about. I know. It's like Call of Duty Ghosts years ago. It was a sci-fi concept.

We talked about that. But that's what they're talking about. And because it's coming at hypersonic speeds, no Patriot system, no air defense can stop it right now. I know where he's going with that. Yes, it can. So you don't have to be faster than you don't have to be faster than what you're intercepting, you intercept by trajectory. So there's a there's a, I have a lot of good friends that work in air defense, right? And I, I'm no expert. I'm a generalist when it comes to this stuff, right? So I understand a lot, a little about a lot across a broad scale of military topics as a function of what we do.

And you don't have to be faster than what you're trying to intercept. You need to be you need to be better from a trajectory perspective. And the Ereshnik, as far as is based off of the RS-26. So from a true hypersonic vehicle perspective, wherein it would have true in-flight guidance, really being able to avoid, you know you know trajectory based intercept that's not a capability that's known to have that's not to say it's not an advanced weapon again it's a multiple re-entry vehicle we don't yet know if it's a multiple independently targetable re-entry vehicle a MIRV M-I-R-V because the way the video is so again it goes all the way back to video the way the video looks is they're all landing in a general same area, a multiple independently targetable.

Well, you could send that stuff, you know, wherever you want. But you would intercept that, you know, hopefully before it reaches that point of releasing the MIRV and all of those rods, right? So we definitely got to jump to other callers. Do you want to shout anything out?

Nope, you guys have a great night. Thanks for having me on. Thanks for calling in. All right, let's grab Snowfire. Welcome to the show. We can't hear you if you're talking. We hear nothing. Unmute your phone.

Can you guys hear me now? Yes. There you go okay so um hey guys uh it's been a long time thanks for having me yes so uh my question for you guys is like what do you guys think about uh trump's pick compared to his first term which is almost similar to it and like his controversial picks of some of his members like Pam Bondi, Pete Hegseth, John Ratcliffe, and Michael Waltz, like all of these people have constantly been attacking the constitution or like blatantly showing that they are against a lot of what the constitution actually stands for. Pam Bondi, I'll just speak to that right away because we came out pretty loudly in opposition

to her. And largely as the Florida AG, she was very instrumental in pushing Donald Trump into embracing red flag laws after the Parkland shooting. She was in the U.S. Capitol. In theland shooting um she was in the u.s capital there's a or in the white house she was lobbying the president along with a number of other people including senior white house officials to to support red flag and and he did and uh followed that down the road pretty far until until he either lost interest or felt a little bit of heat uh but um and so we think she's a horrible pick even though uh i think many people think she's

gonna win the nomination win the secure it probably i by the way i was somebody who called i think phil remembers it um because i i called Matt Gaetz was not an actual pick. That was I said that was a lure for heat. Distraction tactic. Yeah. And everybody was everybody was paying attention to that. That was not a serious one. But that means that he planned to win an election and then ditch Congress. He's got other problems i think so but i i do think it's that there was a plan

there in that uh there's no way they did not know this was coming and so him coming out and saying well i couldn't get the vote it's like but you knew you wouldn't get the votes yeah that's why everyone said reese's appointments if it's going to happen 70 chess oh yeah i'm so tired of that crap um i i think this was just a way to plan i think this was just he he was going to leave anyway he was this was a way to draw attention um but what's in the mind of matt gates i don't really know matt so uh know a lot of members of congress he's not one of them uh and so um i mean from a actual perspective of public policy um he would have been entertaining and i think he would have been kind of good um not angry but our favorite but uh yeah he's not gonna be it um you know i

think there's some certainly some controversial choices like secretary treasury uh is uh that's an interesting one a a former Soros employee. Like 20-something years, 30 years ago. Yeah, and I read reports said he hasn't talked to these people for some time. I don't know. You know, my prediction was Trump would give us a marginally good presidency, but anybody thinking that it was going to be super insane and above, like, that he's going to give you everything you want is not going to be super insane and above like that he's going to give you everything you want it's not going to be the case yeah well uh from just a second amendment perspective um he was the

worst republican president in american history on guns he is not a rep he's not a conservative exactly even given really even given oh yes he was worse than barack obama in effect on guns just saying guns you guys this is all i pay attention to i mean yeah i know i follow other stuff but this is what i have to pay very close attention every time they speak um every time they say something it's a signal and um he wasn't he looked at uh at banning suppressors completely that's not a great look uh just because of one particular incident but um he gave us supreme court that's going to give us our rights back he gave he didn't give us supreme court he gave us that he gave us nominees and i agree he gets the credit but he didn't

decide who that he got three nominees right right one of them was you got to give one guy credit you got to have the turtle credit for the first one oh yeah i mean it was the chad move of u.s senate history now i have two people who work for me um who who literally are some of the world's experts on u.s senate procedure and they and when they saw it they were like that was absolutely art was the way he delayed that out for trump uh but yes that's a um he gets the credit for for those three snowfire did you want to add anything uh yeah just uh one quick thing um let's see your work what's it like um do you think like he's gonna learn from his mistake from like last time, considering the current picks he's doing right now is basically the same thing.

I think that's, I don't think. Yeah. I mean, Tulsi Gabbard is DNI. His VP compared to Mike Pence. Yeah. He's got Tulsi, Robert Kennedy, the ability for him to reach across the aisle for RFK is really is stark. And Vivek, I mean, Vivek Sapau is like a steamroller i've worked in politics too long to have faith in politicians um and i i agree with that i'll be very pleasantly pleased if if we can

even call him a successful moderate republican when he's done because i just don't think as a person he has uh he's connected with um the principles that he espouses at all but um but i hope to be wrong i'd love to be wrong about this well but i i'm not a trump supporter never have been never will be i think we're going to get like two points out of you know what you'd hope for is 100 and kamala would have been minus 57 points and so so it's like, well, you know, what are you going to do? Although remember this, Republicans would fight like mad in the U.S. Senate and in Congress if Kamala Harris was president and she was proposing leftist moves. Nah, they'd pretend to fight. No, no, they would fight like their life depended on them.

Most of them would. And because that's a different party on the, the exact same policies proposed by Donald Trump, they will not fight one iota. Snowfire. Did you want to shout anything out? No, that was it.

Thanks for answering my question, guys. Thanks for calling in. Next up we've got, we'll go with cleric welcome to the program bless us please hello hello sir what is up hi first time caller long time listener uh tim my first encounter with you was in 2013 when you were still on vice covering the year of my damn protest yeah i was there a long time ago and i was there i was there um that was crazy so

so my question i have two questions uh first question is uh who would the panel like to see appointed to atf director and why is it brandon herrera is it true that he can do a 90-day machine gun amnesty i don't know yeah actually an amnesty can be done by an ATF director, I believe. Yeah, he was saying that 90 days go by machine guns amnesty. That sounds fine. Push it through. I would buy so many.

Push it through. Brandon's a pretty close personal friend. Brandon, when Kyle Rittenhouse got acquitted, and we were the only gun group that gave Kyle Rittenhouse's defense any money. No other gun group gave him a red cent. And then Kyle flew out after he was acquitted, flew out to Colorado, and we brought him to the range. But before he came out, I said, just come out and shoot some machine guns, have some fun, blow off some steam. And I said, who's your favorite, uh, gun tuber?

And he's like, Brandon Herrera. And I go, cool. And I call up Brandon. I said, Hey, you want to show up? And so Brandon surprised him at the range. Literally he's at the range and Brandon walks around the corner and Kyle just about drops his drawers. Uh, we put them both in a helicopter and let them shoot machine guns out of the side of

a helicopter. That's awesome. Um, so, uh, put me in a helicopter and let them shoot machine guns out of the side of a helicopter. That's awesome. They haven't put me in a helicopter. Yeah, we don't have that. Well, our friend doesn't have that helicopter anymore, but you can watch it on YouTube. It was kind of a fun. You've probably seen clips of Brandon shooting the saw out of the side of it. But, yeah, we talked to him about it.

He has an actual, we think there's a shot at it, maybe a long shot at it, but why not try? Is that another position that requires nomination and then Senate confirmation? That's the tough part. Oh, they have to, I didn't know that. I think there's a whole host of people, though, that'll respond by saying things like, no, we should abolish the ATF. And it's like, well, you have to have somebody oversee the work to actually tear that down. I mean, I wanted Thomas because Thomas actually knows machine guns, too. I don't know if you guys knew this.

Massey paid his way through MIT by buying and selling transferable Uzis. I'm not kidding. Would he fix them? He's a... He's big. No, he just bought the parts and bought them cheap and resold them. When Thomas first got elected, and it was the first time we went to lunch right after he got sworn in, and we were with a whole staff, about 12 people and all his brand new staff these young folks and and thomas and i'd

done a lot of work in politics together at that point but we didn't really know we talked guns per se and thomas and i sat down and started talking guns one night while we're drinking beer and about an hour and a half later we notice that all the all his staffers eyes were just glazed over and they didn't know absolutely in another state of mind and thomas looks over at me and is in his kentucky accent and says hell dudley i thought i was going to be the only gun queer in washington what do you think about gun owners? I'm like, how do I take that? What do you think about gun owners of America? Good guys.

I'm a life member. I give them $100 a month. And I have for like four years. We should be a member of ours. We're bigger than that. I should. But we have some GOA staff members who work for us. First they work for GOA, then they work for us. We're a great guy.

What's a life member? $1,000. Easy. I'm good friends with them. There's very little difference between our groups. We're better marketers, and I think we're better at state legislatures for sure. And we're pretty good at bringing heat, but they're just good people.

You know, I think Massey belongs in the White House. Is it tax deductible? Are you guys tax deductible? RC3 is National Foundation for Gun rights well i became a life member of uh let's see oh wait well i am becoming a member my credit card's like whoa what is this yeah who are those guys no the website said it worked but my credit card said it didn't how do you sign up what i don't know how to deal with that. Gunrights.org is the website. I kind of feel like Massey belongs

in the White House for sure. He's not partisan, is what I like about him. He's just a scientist. He's like a logical, independent thinker. People on the left would feel significantly different. No, no, Thomas, he's pretty partisan. I don't know. He doesn't side with party. He sides with what

makes sense. He sides with principle. Look, if you're a constitutionalist, then the left is going to He doesn't side with party. He sides with what makes sense. He sides with principle. Yeah, exactly. Look, if you're a constitutionalist, then the left is going to say that you're partisan. They might call him partisan. This is what the Constitution says, and they're going to say that you're partisan. Yeah, he gets labeled, but the guy is just like...

It might not be big enough, but we can always send more. He's focused on principle. I mean, I love Thomas Massey. Do we still have our caller on the line? Yeah. We're kind of like, you know, just. Hell no, Joe. We got to get rid of those, right?

So much time you have. What did you think about that, homie? That was pretty good. My second question was, seeing as you announced the 50 state concealed carry reciprocity, do you believe that there will be a national constitutional legislation? Yeah, you kind of cut out there. He's talking about concealed carry reciprocity.

Okay, so here's a problem. There's reciprocity, which is the half measure the NRA has been trying to foist on us forever. Okay, and all that means is you still have to get a permit. Bullshit. And you still have to get a permit and bullshit and you still have to get a permit and big brother may i and then you can carry all around the country which i'm not opposed to but that's a half measure thomas has hr 95 34 which is national constitutional carry it says basically if you can own the gun, carry it. No state can stop you. Agreed. And Californians, then you don't have to get the permit, and you carry. Cleric, we do have one more caller.

Did you want to shout anything out? Yeah. Phil, my son really enjoys All That Remains. Could you give Andrew a let's go? Andrew, let's go! Cheers, man. I appreciate it., let's go! Cheers, man. I appreciate it. Awesome.

Appreciate it. Cheers, guys. Thanks for calling in. All right. Next up, we've got Coe777. You are last but not least. Okay. So my question is,

this was a while ago, so I don't know if you'd even really remember it, but Trump talked about how they happened to open the assassins' phones today, which are supposed to be Apple phones. By opening J6's phones, but not Trump's assassins, is Apple choosing a side, or is it implying that they've been infiltrated by Intel agencies similar to Twitter before X? I think there's just another piece of evidence and a long line of evidence that the feds are playing a dirty game with the J6ers. And if you're the little guy, you're going to get fucked over. And yeah, I don't know.

It's just, again again more evidence in a long line of evidence i am i'm happy um that i thought we did one video where one um where one cold j6 was um was free from jail i think there's there's multiple J6ers that have been let... I mean, tons. I mean, like Adam Johnson, right? Oh, yeah. That's just the video I saw with one guy. So I know there's been more.

Yeah. But it's an interesting point. I have another question, too. I think, yeah, $25 or $27 in Super Chats, I can get you those receipts if you need them, but I wondered if there was any way to get that money back because they were

missed Super Chats? Because they were what? They were missed Super Chats. I'm not sure what you mean. They were missed? No, the Super Chats are... Oh, yeah, they were missed. They're basically... No, they're just... You pay once and then it's done. There's no

guarantee that they ever get read. There's a lot that get missed. Oh but but that's the thing super chats like most people don't read them at all and so we try to read as many as we can but we can't read all of them and so i try to i try to find ones that are meaningful to conversation i try the best ones that i can but yeah i actually tried keeping up with them a little bit it's it's there's too many you too many. Even on our much smaller show, it's difficult to keep up with them. When we first started, we would try and read as many as we could because there was like 15.

And now we get, you know, like, what do we get? Like 300, 400 per show or something. Really? Yeah. Jeez. And I get it. I was just wondering. Well, have a great night guys

and happy Thanksgiving to all you guys appreciate calling in but hey we got you on the call in show so you're here appreciate it man I really do thank you so much alright man have a good one have a good Thanksgiving and a Merry Christmas absolutely and I would just say no one you know there should be a law

Trump needs to sign an executive order making it illegal to celebrate Christmas before Thanksgiving is over. Oh, what a Christmas light. Black Friday, you turn the lights on. November 1 in my house. Every other decoration went down and I'm like, babe. You got kids, though. I get it.

No, Thanksgiving. And there's a really good tweet. It said, y'all are complaining about Christmas songs happening before Thanksgiving is over. You need to write some Thanksgiving bangers. Yep. And we talked about this last year. That's true. What was the song we were working on?

Thanksgiving Jack or something? Yeah. That was a good one. It was a guy who rides a moose, and he travels around giving turkeys to new families. Holler, holler, Thanksgiving Jack is back. There you go. No, holler's too silly. Holler's like gobble. You'll be able to change it into the go No, that's, the holler's too steady. Because it's got, holler's like gobble.

You'll be able to change it into the gobble, gobble, gobble. It's got to be very, it's got to be similar to that family holiday Christmas music, but for Thanksgiving, you know? So.

You got something going there, guys. It's like that, it's got like a rocking sound so it kind of intonates the boats coming in from the Atlantic. Doing it, do it to like a melody

or something, just so I can get my brain ready. Hobble, hobble, hobble. Gobble, gobble, gobble. Jack, Jack is back. Hobble, hobble, hobble. Gobble, gobble, gobble. Jack Jack is back. Yeah, why are we not having Phil like... Let the rock start. Think about like dashing through the snow

in a one horse open sleigh. Hobble, hobble, hobble. It's gotta be like driving through the leaves. Gobble, gobble, gobble. Jack Jack. Through the suburban America. Smashing mashed potatoes along the way or something. Yeah, carrying casserole that I made for grandma along the way. Wow. Gentlemen, it casserole that I made for Grandma along the way. Wow.

Gentlemen, it's been a blast. Thank you so much for hanging out. Thanks for having us. We have a good Thanksgiving. Everybody else, we've got one more show this week, just tomorrow. Tomorrow we'll be back in the morning, and then we're off Wednesday, Thursday, Friday, because we are going to, and you should all,

be celebrating with friends and family. So thanks so much for hanging out, and we will see you all tomorrow.