Timcast IRL - FEARS GROW Russia Will USE NUKES, NYT Warns WW3 May Be NOW w/ Mat Nuclear

Episode Date: August 27, 2026

On this episode Tim & the crew are joined by Mat Nuclear to discuss Fears growing Russia will use nuclear weapons Media reporting WW3 may have already begun A liberal openly calling for donations to a terrorist organization Texas Roadhouse & Good Good Golf attacked & canceled Hosts:  Tim @Timcast (everywhere) | https://www.shoutout.fans/timpool Phil @PhilThatRemains (X) | https://allthatremains.komi.io/ Chris @ChrisKarr17 (X) Producer: Carter @carterbanks (X) |  @trashhouserecords  (YT) Guest:  Mat Nuclear @MatNuclear (X) |  @TheNuclearReaction  (everywhere)

speculation over why the CIA director met with the Russians in Moscow is still running rampant. And we have our official reporting that it was just to have a conversation, normal, you know, spy chief versus spy chief to discuss what's currently going on, and to give Russia a warning not to escalate things. We're all well and good, nothing to see here. However, Bloomberg is reported that Russian officials fear that Putin is being backed into a corner and is considering using tactical nuclear weapons on the battlefield, in which case, the question I have over why the CIA director is going to be meeting with the Russians. I mean, if it's just to have a, hey, don't escalate things, that's a phone call or a press conference. He wants to go on TV and say,

if you escalate, we retaliate. Again, we see the kind of stuff all the time. What issue could be so grave that a USC 17 flies into Moscow, the U.S. requests a three-day-day-state. ceasefire so this meeting could happen. Well, there are other rumors that this was the U.S. asking for Russia to assist in the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, which doesn't really make sense to me, but who knows? When I see the story from Bloomberg, and they say that Russian officials fear Putin is preparing to use nukes, that makes a lot of sense. You would definitely said over a high-ranking government official to go talk to a nation that was preparing to go nuclear. So we'll see. We don't for sure. But one story that was overlooked one month ago is that the U.S. is preparing to war game

out a draft. Yeah. In December, the automatic draft system goes into effect. This means that anybody between the ages of 18 and 26 automatically in the draft system, which is probably why they wanted real ID. They wanted to federalize the driver's license system so that they can also have a federalized database of every able-bodied male, aged 18 to 26. Well, now they've decided to implement a war game, a simulation of how the draft would actually go down. Maybe it's all just routine. Hey, look, you know, we have the system. Maybe we'll need it in the future.

But all of these things happening around the same time, kind of freaky. So we'll talk about that. Plus, we do have a lot more news. Before we get started, my friends, we've got a great sponsor for you. It is keet.io. Head over to k-e-e-e-e-t.com. It's a messaging app. And I got a question for you.

Why is your messaging app asking you for your private information, your phone number, your email address? It doesn't need any of this. You can create a username and then just connect with people you trust. Most people have already accepted that tech companies are stealing all of our information. What we click, where we're going, what we're buying, who we interact with. That information is valuable because your attention is valuable. Keith takes a radically different approach. It's a free messaging, file sharing, and video calling app built peer to peer.

no centralized company database holding your conversations. Again, go to k-e-e-e-t-t-i-o slash Timcast-I-R-L. That's K-E-E-T dot I-O-O-slash-T-Cast-I-R-L. To download it, tell someone you trust, use it. No phone number or email required. No trackers. No metadata collection, sorry. End-end encryption, no centralized company database.

It's peer-to-peer and free on iOS, Android, Windows, Mac, and Linux. out to keep a sponsor in the show. Don't forget to join us at timcast.com to be the change you want to see in the world. When things get bad, it is community that keeps us going. And during these lockdowns, the people who had a network were able to stay social and stay active did markedly better than those that were isolated and did poorly. So when you become a member of your support in the work that we do, but you're also making friends and being part of the work that we do.

because to our members out there, this show would not exist without you. Smash that like button. Share the show on all social media platforms if you really want to help, just share it. Joining us tonight to talk about this and everything else is Matt Nuclear. What's going on, everybody?

Who are you? What do you do? Yeah, I recently joined The Daily Wire. I'm a young 19-year-old political commentator and I've been doing debates for about a year and a half. Well, right on. Good to have you then. Yeah, speaking of the draft, I am 19 and I do have a real ID, so that could...

You are in that machine, bro. I'm in that world. They're going to edge of tomorrow you where they make you film it when you go on the battleground. We've got the boys hanging out. What's up, everybody? I'm Phil. What's going on? What's up, Phil?

What's up, Chris? Chris here. I'm the resident anarchist here at Timcast. I'm looking forward to all of your hateful comments in the chat. Keep them coming. It's like a warm bath for me. We've got to get to the bottom of this anarcho Christianity thing. A warm bath.

But, yeah, thanks for coming. Well, actually, it's really great to launch off with anarchists. considering we're facing nuclear annihilation in world war. Here's the story from Bloomberg. Putin moves to escalate war in Ukraine as talks at dead end. Russia is preparing to escalate its attacks on Ukraine after concluding that negotiations for a peace deal have reached a dead end, according to three people close to the Kremlin. For now, Russia is weighing an intensification of powerful conventional ballistic missile attacks

on Kiev, including the center of the capital and infrastructure targets in other Ukrainian cities the people have said asking not to be identified because the matter is sensitive. Now, I will stress, perhaps this is the legitimate reason CIA director Ratcliffe went to meet with the Russians because they're going to start bombing the capital. This may spark an incursion into NATO territory. We've already seen Russian missiles accidentally hit pulled. It could be very simply. He shows them and says, listen, if these missiles land in NATO territory, you're going to trigger Article 5 and it is full-scale war. But I got to be honest, I still think that's phone call. I don't, unless there's a very serious threat of retaliation. Like if the U.S.

said, imagine if Rackland went to Putin and said, if one missile lands anywhere near a NATO civilian, we will nuke you to Kingdom Come. That's something that you don't want on the phone, perhaps. But Trump said it on the phone. Trump famously bragged on the phone how he told Putin and Xi Jinping that he said, he said to she, if you invade Taiwan, I'll nuke Beijing. And he said to Putin, and if you invade Ukraine, I'll nuke Moscow. And he goes, man, maybe they didn't believe me, but maybe 5%. So that still seems like phone call territory. This is where things start getting interesting when you jump down, lower in the story.

They say, the escalating spiral of strikes is leading a growing number of Russian officials to the conclusion that Putin could eventually opt to use tactical nuclear weapons as a last resort in Ukraine, according to the people close to the Kremlin. The risk that Putin would break a global taboo on the wartime use of nuclear weapons that has stood since the U.S. dropped two bombs on Japan has long been a major concern of Western officials. The volume of chatter in Moscow from Hawks advocating such a step

has increased recently. An extreme response is viewed as possible because the only outcome worse than continuing the war for Putin would be losing it. And what people need to understand right now is that Ukraine is using powerful drones, small but powerful to strike targets in Moscow.

If you are Putin and you are not winning after all these years and now Moscow is getting bombed, Iranian chips are getting bombed, I think it is possible. We see the use of tactical nuclear weapons. Now, if people need to understand about tactical nukes, we are not talking about intercontinental ballistic missiles or multiple independently targeted re-entry vehicles, we are talking about artillery with low blast yields still utilizing nuclear warheads so they will be massive. What people need to understand, but the bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The weapons that we reportedly have had since the 80s are around 1,000 times more powerful than the bombs we used in World War II.

If we are to actually start launching ICBMs, it's hell on Earth. But tactical nukes. Not really. We have conventional bombs that are bigger than some of these tactical nukes. So we've got a few reports. I want to show you this one's from the sun. Chilling signs Putin is poised to fire nuke-powered flying Chernobyl super weapon as aircraft mass in Arctic just from today. When you search this on Google, you get a ton of sources.

We got a Turkish source. We've got many Ukrainian sources. arguing that Putin is considering using nuclear weapons or that is a possibility, the foreign policies arguing it is not correct. I throw this back to the story that we got over the past few days, the CIA director's secret visit to Moscow. Now, we don't know the exact reason. As I mentioned, they're speculation. The U.S. says to Russia, we need help opening this trade of Hormuz. I don't know that that makes sense. Russia is aligned with Iran. They're trading weapons. why would Russia flip?

That doesn't make sense. If it is true, if our CIA has information that Vladimir Putin is preparing to launch a nuke, let's say Putin actually armed some tactical nuclear weapons. And we knew. Ratcliffe flies in and says, we know you've armed these weapons and we're only going to tell you once. No. And then he dips out. I've heard rumors.

I don't know how true this is that Ratcliffe got to talk with Putin for 15 minutes and that was it. And then he was out the door. We don't know for sure. But all of this is pretty dang nuts. Now, we'll jump to this next story in a bit, but the selective service system now preparing to war game out a draft. And the new draft system going to place in December, well, needless to say, a lot of people are pretty dang concerned. And I'm not surprised young people do not like the war. I wonder, obviously, if there's any kind of attack on NATO, then you're going to see the U.S. is going to be obligated to get involved.

but I do wonder how much the United States, what kind of response the United States would do if Putin were to use a tactical nuke in Ukraine. Technically, you know, we don't have any obligation to defend Ukraine or to get involved in World War III because of Ukraine, particularly if it's going to be something where it's like, all right, well, you know, Russia attacks, so the United States has to attack Russia or like that.

That's not, that's not. that's not, you know, the United States is obligation. So I do, it does make me wonder exactly how far the U.S. is willing to go if Russia does break that taboo. And I imagine that's probably what Putin's thinking too, you know, he knows, he knows better than I do, probably what the U.S. will and will not respond to or is obligated to respond to. Yeah, I mean, it seems that Trump is currently very occupied with Iran and opening up the surfing moves. I also heard about a sort of new corridor that he's been trying to open to make it easier for, Gulf states to export oil.

So if there's any point in time in which Putin would have probably like, I don't know, the least, you know, pronounced response from Trump, it'd probably be now given the fact that he's occupied. But it depends, you know. Yeah. What do you think, Chris? Do you think that the U.S., do you think that the U.S. would actually respond or get involved in some kind of kinetic conflict with Russia?

Because, I mean, if Russia were to use nukes, I mean, we kind of all see where the winds are blowing if the U.S. actually responds, you know? Well, we live in a bloodthirsty, war-hungry state that will take any opportunity that it can to maximize bloodshed for people that live here and abroad. Maximize? Oh, yeah. Yeah. That's what the state does. So it wouldn't surprise me. I mean, we're already at war with Iran, and we're not supposed to be.

We shouldn't be. So another opportunity for more war, we're just going to chomp on it, of course. If the U.S. were actually looking to maximize bloodshed, wouldn't the U.S. then just say, well, we're going to escalate the bombing on Iran as opposed to trying to look for an off-ramp? Well, no, because the state is crazy as it is, it's not stupid at the same time. So I'm just talking about the pure data of our history overseas and the way. that we conducted ourselves in the 20th century and even beyond. So I'm just saying I wouldn't be surprised if we jump at the opportunity for more escalation

and more war. I think I think the phrase maximize is kind of what radical? Well, it's not that it's not it's not that it's radical. It's I think that history proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that the United States does not look, does not intend to maximize. right that's the the statement you made looks to maximize if the United States we're looking to cause as much bloodshed as it wanted and I've said this before on the show there has never been a military power in all of human history with as much capability as the United States right and nobody has ever and no military in history has been as reserved as the United States when it comes to

having that much, that that disproportionate amount of power. I think a good example of that would be World War II, for example. Like right after World War II, we obviously spent a lot of time and effort in rebuilding Europe and restructuring Germany and restructuring even Germany to an extent. And when it came to the Korean War, right after the Korean War, for example,

we helped establish them as a republic, as a democracy that is more aligned with America. We went from having imperial Japan invading basically almost every country in Southeast Asia, including China itself. And we made it into a democracy in which the emperor basically became obsequious to the U.S. government and Douglas MacArthur essentially restructured even their constitution from being offensive to defensive.

And that's at the point where no one really had nukes and the Soviets only really had one. I think maybe in the like 55, 1956, I've been to that point. So I don't buy the idea that America has been trying to like just maximize bloodshed. I think we've been very reserved, like you said. Yeah, I mean, so like the U.S. doesn't balk at getting involved in conflict. So, I mean, that's definitely true, right? The U.S. has been, you know, in some kind of military conflict, basically every year since the end of World War, too, definitely. And probably for, you know, pot, maybe the argument could be made since the end of the Civil War, too.

But, yeah, and so maybe it's just that I have a problem with the term max. Because look, I am a pro-America-shill, absolutely. I am fully pro-America. And I do, but I do think that it's that had had another country or had another society had the same disproportionate military capability that the U.S. has compared to the rest of the world, I think that the body count would be much higher. It would be significantly higher. You look at the, like, you give the Huns that kind of. I mean, look at what the Huns did just with horses and bow and arrow. They had like, you know, they had, that was a significant capability that most of the people that they conquered and stuff didn't have.

And they conquered all of a, or most of Asia and, you know, killed millions like Attila the Hun. Like 30% of the population of Earth now has, is somehow descended from Attila the Hun. Just to speak back on the story, I mean, like, I think there must be a press. set here either by NATO and the European Union and the European conglomerate or America. But like someone has to step up. I think Europe has to step up more than America because they're actually there. They're more in danger. They're closer.

And like as much as we can talk about Russia and Ukraine, like Russia would never actually nuke America out of the whim, right? Russia could never invade America. So they're not really a threat to us. They're more of a threat to Europe and obviously Ukraine. And so Europe would certainly need to set a precedent. Because if Putin can use tactical nuclear weapons on Ukraine and no one really does anything apart from, hey, we're going to send you more weapons, hey, we're going to send you more money,

hey, we're going to give you more humanitarian aid or monetary aid, that's like, well, then Putin can go further and further. And he can start gaining his own sort of momentum under that, you know, precedent. Yeah, and it's worth mentioning the there have been incursions into, they, Russia says that they're accidental, but there were incursions into Poland, I guess a missile landed somewhere in Poland. And thankfully no one was hurt, but a Russian missile hit the ground there. So, you know, whether or not that was an accident is, you know, debatable. But let's pull this up from New York Times. Has World War III already started?

In fact, the New York Times isn't the only major publication to have written this. Now, don't get me wrong as a bunch of European outlets that have been saying this for months now, potentially years. But we've got Express. We've got the New York Times, as well as many smaller, publications now joining in asking the question, are we in World War III? And the argument made by Brett Stevens is that World War II was not simply Germany's invasion of Poland, kicking it off. There had been an accumulation of regional wars and crises beginning with Japan's invasion of

Manchuria in 1931. And for that matter, as I was explaining my earlier morning segment, World War I did not begin simply because Archduke, Franz Ferdinand was shot. They were already these tensions, the industrialization of weapons, everything was being geared up towards war, and they were just waiting for the straw on the camel's back. So, of course, we'll look back historically and say this was that key moment. However, we don't know if it may have already happened or it'll be in the future. For instance, the American War for Independence, the shot heard around the world, we had already been in a conflict fighting with the regulars for some time. this is when it kicked off when they tried to seize the weapons because you had, you know,

obviously the Boston Massacre, the was it the intolerable acts, and then you had, of course, with the Civil War, the Battle of Fort Sumter where we say the war began, but the American people at that time did not think a civil war was actually going on. Right. That's why they went to a picnic at Bull Run and Manassas. So the question now is, we've got war with Russia and Ukraine, the U.S. funding the Ukrainians, you've got war with Iran. Iran sending weapons to Russia, Ukraine now striking Iranian vessels. And Iranian proxies also sort of being activated. Absolutely.

Bombing cargo ships and civilians in the area. The U.S. surrounding Cuba, taking out the leader of Venezuela, we are lining all of these pieces up. And the question is, with all of these wars happening now around the world and escalating, is it World War III? Yeah, I like the way that you sort of phrase that. there's no actual like threshold, like how many countries need to be fighting? How hostile does the world stage have to be in order for it to actually be classified as World War III? And so what happens is historians look at history, look at sort of like turmoil and what is actually happening on the global stage. And they decide, hey, this is where when we think the revolutionary work started. This is when we think World War III started. But there's always tension like you mentioned, Tim, before that. You know, there's always sort of that tension before. So it's very possible. that we are in the beginning stages of World War III.

And by the way, it's like, I know like when I envision World War III, I think when a lot of people envision World War III, we think of like, okay, nukes are going off everywhere and everything is crazy. It doesn't always have to be like that, you know, like during World War II and World War I, for example, like, the majority of like sub-Sarren Africa and a decent part of Asia was like, okay, you know what I mean? Like, it doesn't have to be like, okay, like, it's utter insanity in order for it to actually be classified as that.

So. And whatever World War III does look. like it's going to look very different from the previous world wars. It's just I'm trying to formulate what a flashpoint would be that's so enormous that would actually kind of signal to everyone, including all these states that are already in conflict that this is official, okay, we're actually there. Well, I mean, there's what Latvia, Lithuania and one other country in Slovenia that used to be Soviet states, right? They were part of the Soviet Union, I think. I mean, if Putin decide, and they're currently NATO member nations now, if Putin decides that he's like, well, you know, the U.S. is busy and Europe is weak because they don't have the militaries that they used to have. And, you know, maybe now is the time to do it. I mean, if you're Putin making the calculation that we should bring back the Soviet Union, I mean, like Tim said earlier, you know, this might be the time that he says, okay, look, the U.S. is

preoccupied. They've spent a lot of, you know, effort and military, you know, weaponry to fight Iran or whatever. And so, and look, I don't think that the U.S. is as the U.S. military stockpile is as depleted as the news reports. But I don't know what Putin knows either. Yeah, I mean, I doubt that, like, I doubt that Putin would ever, like, invade Estonia or Lovia anytime soon, more any NATO ally. I do think that Putin wants to restore a part of the, like, U.S.S.R. Like, for example, Belarus under Lukachenko. Lukashenko, I'm not mistaken. Yeah. Yeah. Like, they are basically a Russian puppet state. Like when the war started, the most recent

war with Ukraine starting February 24th, I believe, of 2022, he used Belarus to invade from the north and the Battle of Kiev sort of started there and commenced there. So I don't, I think that he wants, uh, puppet states and, and states that are going to be more, you know, you know, subservient to the, to the U.S., uh, not to the U.S., but to Russia's government. But I'm not, I'm not, I don't buy the idea that he wants to invade Poland and then he wants to invade Latvira Stone. I don't really buy that idea. It could be the case. I just don't, I just don't think that he's dumb enough to think he'll, he'd win that war. Because he just wouldn't win. I tend, I tend to agree, particularly because, I mean, look, if he had the military, that it was required to take multiple countries and take on NATO, then he probably wouldn't have such a problem in Ukraine. Like big Russia can't beat little Russia. So how are they going to take on NATO? And when the war started, I thought like, I mean, first, I mean, I'm 19 currently,

but when the war started, I thought like, okay, like, this is crazy. Russia is going to like swallow them up in like 12 days. And I never experienced anything like that. I've always heard about wars in the Middle East happening from very far away. and, you know, Arab people were getting bombed and stuff. I've always heard about that. And I've heard about World War II and World War I. But I never saw anything like, okay, Russia is invading Ukraine and you see all of these modern

videos and modern warfare happening. But to be fair, Russia has underperformed. And that's to say the least. And, like, again, Russia getting hit with a bunch of drones from Ukraine, the fact that their refinery sites have been getting damaged, the fact that we see all of these videos in Russia where people are waiting in these super long lines to get gas. It's like people internally feel alienated, and I'm sure they don't feel great about the current conditions,

and that is going to weigh on Putin. It doesn't matter how much of an autocratic, you know, fascist he is. I don't think he's a fascist, but, you know, like dictator or whatever, you know? Who would have thought that we'd see a war that had, you know, trench warfare a la World War I and drones flying around with bombs and robots, you know literally robot robotic machine guns there were i think that the ukrainians used a uh the first ever fully robotic assault because they had like motorized machine guns and stuff uh recently so yeah it is crazy to think that you know you've got a stalemate that is trench warfare where

neither side can really move forward and take any significant amount of territory and at the same time you've got, you know, drones and robots fighting on the front. Drone warfare has been just insane. I've seen so many. To the spider webs? Yeah. Because they control them via fiber optic cables. Right.

So the forests are just littered with these wires. It's nuts. It's crazy. And the drone warfare, like, I've seen so much, like, just so much, so many crazy videos online of, like, these drone dropped grenades exploding and, like, drones chasing soldiers and the trench warfare that you see, it's like, it's so surreal. because we're typically used to seeing that sort of stuff in black and white, but now we have access to so much surveillance and so much reconnaissance and just videos

that we're just able to see how it's really like. And it's just... We watched one the other day where this guy got chased around his food truck or something like that. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Oh, yeah. It was wild.

And it's like... Yeah. Yeah. He survived, though. Yeah. Insane. Yeah, it's... It certainly gives people that, you know, like to talk about...

you know conflict here in the u.s oh you know i'm going to get my gun go into woods and you know it it does really make you rethink what what that actually entails you know you see see all the i mean you go to the internet and there's a lot of very gory uh you know gory videos that you can i mean you can just see them on x never mind going to specific telegram channels that that are you know uncensored to whatever and it is just horrible it that doesn't look like any fun at all, you know, dudes just just reminds everyone of how mortal they are. Like, it's all, you're just living in mud.

I guarantee that even today, there are dudes in Ukraine right now with trench foot. And if they're not right now, there will be in December because they're, you know, those trenches are going to fill up with water and it's going to be freezing and it's going to suck. I mean, yeah, I, I have no desire in that position. Yeah, I have no desire to see any. kind of, you know, conflict here in the U.S. No matter how many. It resembles anything like that.

And the reason why we will probably never see anything like that coming from another country, like domestically, something could arise, you know, of course. But I think that's the only thing that could internally cripple America. It's not, I don't think that any foreign power is ever going to be able to defeat America domestically by invading it. No. First, how did you get here? How would you get here?

You know, we have the Pacific Ocean, the Atlantic Ocean. We have Canada that isn't going to do. anything and we have Mexico. You know, like Canada and Mexico are our big trading partners, they're never going to do anything to us. So the only way something could domestically arise here is, I mean, or like the only way we could have military issues here in America would be something happens internally or civil workers. Well, there's an internal conflict in which China then allies with Western states and then that's how they're able to do. Something like that could pop off. Right. Exactly. And it is feasible that there's been enough military age men that have come in

from China or what have you during Biden's administration. I've heard, you know, numbers. Look, there was like, over the course of Biden's administration, people estimate something like 20 million people came in illegally. And even if that's an overestimation, it's not crazy to think that 20 or 30,000 military age men from China made it. You know, if you've got millions, people have a hard time. Like, and I'm not saying that I...

Sleeper sells as well. Yeah. I'm not saying that I don't have a hard time conceiving of these numbers. But like, look, 30, 40,000 people when you're dealing with 10, 15 million, that's a very, very small amount of 10 to 15 million people that came in. It's completely within the realm of possibility to say, oh, look, you know, they got a couple of brigades worth of people put into the U.S. and they could wreak havoc, you know, a couple competent cyber attacks and activate some sleeper cells and just everything goes to hell in the U.S. Which is one of the issues, I think, I mean, we're going to get into this also soon, which is one of the issues with illegal immigration and just immigration as a whole when you look at it is you have to have a good vetting system so that you have to, so that you avoid things like that. Yep.

I know a lot of people are talking about how like Trump, you know, banned immigration basically from Iran. and it's like we're actively at war with Iran. Allowing people from Iran to come here now would be like the worst possible thing we could do right now when it comes to that. You know, so you have to be wary of it and you need to know who's coming in, who's coming out, and whether or not you're having sleeper cells come in

during infiltrate. I've got personally a very hard line on immigration and what should be done about the people that are here illegally and stuff. Like there is no gray area for me. If you're here illegally, you've got to go. the administration, I mean, they're doing more than basically any administration in my lifetime. I would like to see them doing more because it's just, it's literally a matter of national security.

There's plenty of reasons, economic reasons. I've heard estimates of housing costs are up 20 to 30 percent because of illegal immigrants. There's plenty of jobs that the American people would do or that Americans could get. if it wasn't for illegals here uh you know there's a lot of a lot of businesses that are taking advantage of people that are here illegally um never mind the h1 b visa thing it's a totally different story but like just the illegals like they should be the the government should be doing everything within its power to get them out of the united states and like i said it's a national security issue as well as the economic issues so anything they can do to to make the united states safer and I believe that getting rid of people that are getting people that are illegal to leave

makes the United States safer. Anything they can do is a good idea, particularly considering, you know, how volatile the world has become in the past, particularly five years or so. Yeah, yeah. Chris, what's your take on this? I mean, the thing is, if I could, if I had confidence that our government was not, you know, incompetent, then I would trust them to actually make, take action. Like, the best example of the government that we have in the world right now is Bukkelly.

like this is a guy that has he imposes a very singular and righteous will on his people and he has effective measures he gets stuff done and the results speak for themselves we don't have that and I don't think that we're going to have a leader like that because of our democratic system unfortunately yeah it's a good point I just want to touch on that for a second like the a lot of people talk about how well you know Trump has been doing better obviously than than Biden was doing when he came to immigration U.S. illegal immigration has been lowest has been in 55 years I arrest I believe in July was like 55,000. if I'm not mistaken, you know, and we're going to get more into that. But no matter what Trump does in his administration, the reason why he's able to do so much with immigration is because it's under the executive branch. But if someone can come in for years, because people are maybe dissatisfied with inflation or whatever, and they can revoke and undo all of that essentially, that causes a sort of problem where, yeah, you're voting, but how long are these policies that you're voting for really going to stay in effect?

before like an AOC or like a DSA candidate comes in and like messes it completely up. So your point of the democratic system having issues, I agree. Because if we did live in an America under Buckele, we would have uniformity of culture, uniformity of ideas, and we wouldn't have to deal with some lunatic coming in in four years and just undoing every policy. Well, he faces that same problem too. I mean, he can't stand power forever and he said that he doesn't intend to. Right.

And the other problem, of course, is one of scale. You know, I mean, it's one thing to rule over how many people are in El Salvador, seven, eight million, something like that, maybe 11, I don't know. But yeah, I mean, when you scale it up to the amount of people that we have, including all of these undocumented illegal aliens, that's a more significant problem than one man can probably contend with. Yeah, I mean, I would like to see... Small country.

I'm personally not... I don't know. I'm not a fan of the idea of a... you know, someone with that much power. But at the same time, I have been, you know, I've been on record saying we need another Lincoln to deal with the communists in the United States. So, you know, maybe, maybe some kind of short-term thing. It might be, you know, like a Cincinnati or whatever, you know, to rectify the problems

that we have right now as much. And I'm, you know, I'm a guy that thinks that, you know, Donald Trump is the most viable political vehicle, Donald Trump and the Republicans, most of the Republicans now, are the most viable political vehicle to achieve the results that I'm looking for. I'm under no illusions that, you know, like you said, as someone else can come in and undo the vast majority of it. And particularly considering, you know, the situation, the mess that we're in now, it's not, you can't blame just Joe Biden or blame just, you know, Barack Obama or just. You know, Barack Obama or just George Bush or what have you and be like well everything would be better if it wasn't I mean you can go all the way back to Reagan and say well you know if the amnesty hadn't happened people might have a different different opinion about it and stuff so it's it's a rat's nest that's been been been created over decades and multiple administrations so people that look at Donald Trump and they're like oh he's not getting it done it's like well you you think that one guy's going to get it done one and one president under our under the

system that we have now you think one guy's going to get it. Or orders and the lawsuits and this like I mean, to be fair, the Supreme Court has been good on a lot of stuff. Great. Yeah. Yeah. Certain things as well. I'm glad that they revoked the protection status that the Haitians had because they've been here for over like, I don't know, 10 years and the hurricane's been, I don't know, going on for so long. But yeah, you're right.

You have so many hurdles and you have judges imposing all sorts of different, you know, restrictions on stuff. And so, like, it's not, it's, again, he's not a dictator. leftists like to make him out to be this fascistic dictator with total power, he just doesn't have total power. That's just a reality of it. So let's jump to this next story. I got us from the military times. Selective service system wants to war game the draft. The readiness simulation project comes to the U.S. government is about to change its draft registration system. Since the 40s, men within 18 to 26 would have to sign up. But with the new rule, starting December 19th, In 20206, the selective service system will work off data contained in other federal databases,

notably real ID. Or at least, that's a presumption. That's why they wanted to federalize the, that's, you know, all your IDs whenever you register. Now the government's got it. Questions are made about how prepared the selective service system is to handle the change. It currently relies on manual analysis legacy modeling approaches, outdated assumptions, and historical data sets that do not fully reflect modern demographics.

I believe they are running the simulation because there's a very real possibility of a draft. And I think the issue is, you are not going to be able to drift. Could you imagine the U.S. government trying to draft grapers over what's going on in Iran right now? Yeah. The ideological split in this country, the various factions, it's not the same as it used to be. Right. You go back, you go back to World War I, two, whatever, you had a unified, you had a monoculture. Right. Yeah. So when they said we're going to a draft, everybody kind of knew why. But now you've got so many different political factions in this country. A, diversity, our strength, right? Hey, draft is never going to work. They're going to try and figure it out. But I do believe this is them saying,

oh, hey, guys, things are getting out of hand. Maybe we should check to see if the draft is still operational if it's possible. I mean, they wouldn't be updating the rules and running simulations on it unless they thought they needed it. Right. I think it's pretty clear that, you know, it would be, you know, most, the vast majority would be, you know, Hispanics and, and white guys and and a handful of black guys that are, you know, like American Americans, right? Right. The Marine Corps has basically been Hispanics and whites. Yeah.

For the past 50 years, you know. I mean, Hispanics, I mean, the Groybers would fit right into that. Yeah, exactly. physically fit at a double deal. Maybe they would be doing, they would all be, they would all have like BFS and stuff like Pellifitorial syndrome and they'd be like, no, my knees hurt. I can't. Yeah, my niece are too.

I mean, I still think generally it's, it's probably unlikely. But if it does happen, I mean, if I get drafted, it's like, let's do it, whatever. You know, it is what it is. For any conflict, you're on board. For any conflict, man. I mean, it's not like I would have a choice because it'd be like a draft. But like, you could be a conscientious objector. Possibly, possibly.

But I mean, I think I would probably, like, if I was drafted, I would just go. You know, I'm not going to fight over. I know Mohammed Ali sort of did his whole little scam. handle with it. But no. If you're, it's not a bad idea. If they're instituting a draft, it's not actually a bad idea to join and select what you want to do if you're not the kind of person that's like, all right, I want to be in the infantry. You know, join what? That's not how it works. I know too many veterans that suffer from PTSD and dealt with unspeakable horrors in Afghanistan, Iraq. They did sign up for very specific duty and they said, actually, no, you're going to do

this. Well, you know. Yeah. And that's just how it works. works. When you submit yourself to, you know, a bloodthirsty institution, they're going to do with you what they want. I mentioned the ASVAB too. Like it also depends on like where, like, where your intelligence is and what like role would actually befit your intelligence, right? So if you get like a very low score, I mean, the Army is probably all you have for you. You're going to go into the, yeah, you have to have a decent ASVAB to get into the Marine Corps at all. So yeah, you go in the Army and maybe you'd be a, maybe you'd be, you know, like an 11 Bravo, which isn't a rifleman and be like, all right, here you go. This is the point the end, you know, but don't point this end.

It's like that. It's like what Tim showed us earlier. Yeah. Exactly. Yeah. It was very apt. That clip from South Park. That was great. But I mean, I was playing the Operation Human Shield from South Park earlier.

Yeah. Look, the bright side is medevacs are very, have come, you know, a long way since the Vietnam War. You know, there's a reason why the death toll in Iraq for the United States was, you know, a few thousand. I think it was something like 3,500 or something like that overall. Yeah. It wasn't considering how many people were there and stuff like that. But yeah, look, I mean, I don't think that there's, I don't think that this particular, I think this particular, you know, war game of the draft is going to produce pretty poor results. I think there's a lot of people in the United States.

I'm going to be like, hell no. Even Putin hasn't gone into a full on draft yet. You know what I mean? Like he's been basically in, from what I know so far, maybe I can get corrected. but from what I've seen so far, like, one, they're paying the soldiers exceptionally well for Russia in terms of the rupees. Like, they're paying them exceptionally well, although a lot of them are like, Ann and Fodder, they are like human meat, basically, just being sent there to a meat grinder.

And, you know, they get some sort of like, you know, federal and local benefits from the government, but they do get paid a considerable amount for, you know, Russian standards to do it. So they haven't really gone into a full-on draft yet. from what I've seen. I know Ukraine has. I was going to say, unlike the ones. Ukraine certainly has.

I mean, we see the video of like men literally getting like dragged into vans and stuff. But so even Putin isn't willing to do it, probably shouldn't either. And I at least want people to be motivated and be for the wars that they fight. I think that's a good thing as well.

Because I want people to be able to know like, okay, this is the U.S. foreign policy. This is the countries that we're going after. and you can either decide to enlist knowing what's been going on on the geopolitical stage or not enlist. And that's like a choice that you can make. And I think that we're probably going to continue having that choice. And that's going to only be for the good. It sounds like you're essentially pro-war.

That's not me being pro-I don't. Sounds pro-war. I mean, I'm giving people- choice of government- Anti-war. So, you know. Well, I mean, I think that the- What does that mean anti-war?

Yeah, I think that- No participation in war whatsoever. I'll go to jail before I go and fight. But I mean, like, what if someone comes here? Yeah. Oh, I don't fight. I turn the other cheek. We already went over this.

I want to bang the same drum over and over, but, you know. But just to clarify, I mean, you're taking it to an absolutist extreme position. Yeah. Oh, yeah. I think you have to. Otherwise, you're not being in a election. China storms the beaches of California aided by communists, insurgent forces. Let's just say that with 30% of the Democratic Party being DSA, you get a series of government officials

that not on their own could they cause a coup, but they start effectively pulling the linchpin from the system because they have enough control. This allows China to come in. The remaining Democrats fall in line with the DSA like, oh, this is what we all want. China then starts sweeping across the West Coast taking over our cities. Your attitude is. Yes, it's the old Woody Allen joke. In the event of war, in the event of war, I'm a hostage. Why? Because I would rather do anything but participate in the cycle of violence. It has to stop with somebody. It has to stop somewhere. It's gone too far. So would you prefer like China takes over the whole world and there's no more war because everyone's just a communist life?

Nobody, there's not going to be a lot of people that have my specific perspective. I'm saying like if you're saying you want to end the cycle of violence, my question is let's say China sweeps through the country, they win. The entire planet is under the CCP, all countries, all nations, and there's no more war. Well, I mean, you've talked about the human propensity toward war is undeniable. There's always going to be war. Even if China takes over, there's still going to be like a warring faction within the Communist Party of the China that's allegedly taken over the world. So there is no stopping the cycle of violence. It's just...

But one person, one person can play their role in choosing to opt out of participating in the endless cycle of violence. And if one person does that, then I really believe that it could ripple out and impact people in a very meaningful way. Perhaps. I just think that there is no circumstance in which an ideology of peace preaches every single... possible human. Okay, so war. Indeed, indeed war. Yes. War. All right, great. I changed my mind. I like war now. I mean, I feel like that's a particularly childish way to explain. If you have a bunch of people who are docile and say, we all believe in peace, it takes only one sociopath to be like, these suckers are going to do what I tell them because they won't fight back.

Exactly. And then your king is a sociopath who rapes and murders. Right. All right. So I guess I have no choice but to participate in violence. And when it comes to, I believe that is correct, because you can also argue that you live out in the woods by yourself and you grew a watermelon for your friend and then a cougar shows up and malls you to death because the cycle of violence exists outside of humanity as well. Well, I'm confining what I'm discussing to the human propensity toward violence and how humans can actually choose to opt out of that if they want to. But do you think sociopaths exist? Of course they do. They're not going to stop. I mean, who knows? I believe that every person. That's why we have prison to put these criminals

away so they don't know. I mean, I mean, true. I also think like we can just look at the entirety of human history. I mean, what do you? Almost a silent history. I mean, at least. I mean, You can go through every human species if you believe in evolution or just like, again, talking about the homo sapiens here for a second. We have never had a time period in which one person was able to get

even the majority or half or even a third of the world to just chill out on war. It's just not a thing. Yeah, it's impossible. Like war is bad and we don't want it and there's soft power manipulations that we can do.

Right. But again, to the ultimate point is evil exists. Right. It's not going to... It's not going to evaporate it just won't. And so if everybody refused to fight, that just means the barbarian is king. Right. It has to be confronted. Or I should say Satan will be king. Satan will lord over this world

when Christians say we don't want to fight at all. Any attempt to wipe out Christianity for 2,000 years has failed. Christianity is stronger than ever, arguably. So, I mean, like you were talking about- Well, that's not what I'm talking about. I mean, whether someone believes something and lives in hiding with their belief. Right. You know, well, no, you can't even hiding with your belief. I mean, that's, that goes against scripture. You're supposed to, would you disagree if, if, if people stop fighting Satan wins? Well, I mean, okay, so you're talking about people that basically adhere to this deranged idea of peace, this radical piece that I'm talking about. What animates that piece? If it's not animated by the spirit of Christ, then it's, you're, you are just basically

sacrificing yourself for nothing. But it's my belief that true belief in Christ and it adherence to his teachings can actually change hearts and minds in a more radical way than war can. Would, so let's say, again, I mean, everybody agrees with you, and they all say, oh, okay, wow, this is, this is the way to do it, let's stop fighting. Will there be at least one individual who doesn't agree, or who is possessed, or who is demonically inspired, or obsessed or possessed, or would Satan himself just be like, they won't fight anymore, I've won, and he comes and takes over? Well, in all likelihood, it's not just going to be one, it's going to be the majority.

I mean, the Christians are going to be outnumbered, ultimately. But just because Jesus was outnumbered and his apostles were outnumbered didn't mean that they weren't able to transform the world. But that's not what I asked. Okay, so I asked me again. I must have misunderstood. Right, right. So my question is, sociopathy exists. We can also refer to more faith-based ideas like obsession and possession. That exists.

Sure. I certainly think so. So even if the good people believe a demon can possess a person to do evil. certainly. If people are unwilling to fight back, it takes but a single individual who is obsessed, obsessed or possessed, to then wage violence against those who will not defend themselves, and Satan wins. But that's happened historically, century after century, and Christians have not gone anywhere. They've just grown a number. So, you're talking about population expansion, though? Well, not population expansion so much as an expansion of belief. I would argue that

Christian, certainly right now there's more Christians than Muslims. Muslims are rapidly expanding. Yeah, they are with their birth. And I think of it. And I think of it. Aren't they growing faster than Christianity? Yeah, they are because of birth rate, not conversion. Well, I mean, even Christian growth was birth rate. Right. Although there was a lot of spreading that obviously happened and it's sort of permeated throughout. But I mean, a good example, I think that sort of amplifies your point is the fact that Saudi Arabia was once mostly Christian.

Egypt was once mostly Christian. Libya was once mostly Christian. Morocco was once mostly Christian. Syria and Lebanon and even modern-day Israel was once mostly Christian. What happened was there was the Muslim conquest. quest in the seventh century, and the Muslims were able to, and, you know, you can even enter the Crusades for this. They were able to essentially defeat the Christians, and now they have dominion over the Christians. And now we have a bunch of Islamic terrorist organizations

that are killing Christians in Nigeria, about like 50,000 over the last like decade. And we have the subjugation and discrimination against Christians in Egypt, the Coptic Christians. And so, I mean, our most prosperous largest city is now being led by a foreign-born Muslim man. Right. That says something. A nation founded, a land conquered, a nation founded by Christians, now has a growing leadership, and not just in New York. It's actually the other place. You can look at Dearboard Michigan of Islam coming in. And they're extremist. And they hate America. They hate the West. They hate Christianity. They think all of that is oppressive. And then the argument that, like, well, it's not happened before. So let's just let it happen now.

I think the reason hasn't happened before is because you had a crusade. And the crusades weren't even particularly effective, if you want to be honest, the jihad spanned over a thousand years, made its way across the Middle East and North Africa into Spain, and the crusade was what, like a few incursions in the loyland? Over like 700 years. And not to mention, there was almost an incursion really into more of Western Europe entering France until I believe Al-Gafiki, he was defeated by Charles Martel, who was a French politician and military officer, who really stopped the sort of Islamic invasion into Spain.

And that's why the Muslims didn't go further. So I think Christians and anyone who does not want to be Islamified definitely need to fight. And I think this is why America is the home of the brave, is that Americans are willing to fight for their freedom. Americans have been willing to fight for their freedom ever since Thomas Payne told them that we have to fight against a British monarchy and we have to obtain freedom and liberty. Give me freedom or give me death. I rather, you know, be dead than live under a communist mom-dani hellhole. You know, that's me personally. But I rather go out fighting than be subservient to those belief systems.

Well, I mean, those belief systems have such a massive death toll. If you don't fight, you'll end up dead anyways. It's a good chance of it. Or it's a good chance you win. I mean, we live in the 21st century, and there are a lot fewer communist or especially orthodox communist states than there used to be, only because people figured out this ideology sucks. Yeah.

I mean, it does lose. lose and lose and it's it's it's been shown to be so unsuccessful and so unproductive that it's had to you know basically morph into something different it used to be the vulgar Marxism where it was the proletariat versus the bourgeoisie and now it's changed into a lot of race-based stuff because of people like herbert marqueuse or adorno and frank rich school yeah the frank rich school school guys I want to jump to this this story from the post millennial extremist group AI collect builds digital infrastructure support Portland antifacell, Jane's Revenge. This is a very, very serious story, my friends.

The State Department has designated Autistici, Inventati as a specially designated global terrorist. Today, the Department of State and Partnership with the Department of the Treasury is announcing the designation of AI as a specially designated global terrorist. It's an Italy-based extremist group that builds and operate the digital infrastructure for violent antifacelles. another far left militants across the world. AIs cadre of radical hackers and tech developers provide a full spectrum of services,

included encrypted chats and emails, web posting, secure video conferencing, and streaming, anonymity shields and a suite of other technological tools to Marxist, anarchists, and other left-wing extremist groups in the United States. This is crazy. They cannot designate individual in the United States as domestic terrorists, not a thing. But foreign terrorists, yes. And if they have now designated this organization in Italy as a foreign terrorist and this organization is working with U.S. activists.

Those activists are now directly aiding and abetting terrorists. And this is a very strange thing to say. But I believe that Brian Krasenstein needs to be criminally charged immediately. Yes. I am not suggesting he spent 50 years in prison, but the United States government needs to send a message if you advocate the funding of foreign terror groups, there is a penalty.

following the announcement from Secretary Marco Rubio 10 hours ago about this group, Brian Krasenstein wrote, Please donate to the Ostiti, is that you say it? Autisici Inventati, independent volunteer run internet service collective. They stand for anti-racism, anti-fascism, anti-militarism, anti-militarism, and opposition to authoritarianism and hierarchies. This is a foreign organization that is leveling, attacks against the United States whether or not they were designated terrorists.

And he has posted their donation link with a note beneath it that they are a specially designated global terrorist by the U.S. State Department. As of the day he posted this, he posed this at 11 a.m. on August 26th. And I don't know if we have the date. Let me try to find the time when they officially announced this. Now, I do want to stress four hours. Let me get the time on this. He deleted it. No, did he delete it? I think he may have deleted it. He posted this at 11 a.m. at 5 p.m. at 4.48. He says, update. Please hold off on the donations as the authoritarian regime will use it to have you arrested.

Hold your money until the designation is officially removed, which it most certainly will be, and then donate double. He is still advocating that you donate to a terrorist organization. The problem we have in this country is that people like Brian Krasenstein don't follow the law and our government doesn't uphold it. I had this conversation, guys, I'm going to bring it up again. I debated Nick Friedas on this one. Love the guy. He's fantastic. But I argued law does not exist.

And obviously we have a law book. Obviously we say laws get enforced. obviously people arrest other people. The point I am making is that Antifa can engage in terroristic activities. Brian Krasenstein can outright say, donate, wait, hold off, donate after this. We win the ability to remove the designation. He is still advocating for material support. We don't do anything about it.

The DOJ is not doing anything about it. You've got all of these people making posts on TikTok and Instagram saying, do it. And everyone knows what do it means. and they don't do anything. If there is no confidence the government will do anything, then people will do whatever they want. To put it simply, we know about blue laws. We know there are laws in the books

in basically every jurisdiction that no one would dare uphold. The example I'd like to give in West Virginia is that cohabitation out of marriage is a crime in West Virginia and no cop would ever try to enforce it. So everyone does it. Why? socially acceptable.

If they do not charge Krasenstein, they are telling everyone we find it socially acceptable to fund terrorist organizations. I mean, look, he specifically put that up in response to the Secretary of State declaring that this particular group was being considered a terrorist organization. It was officially considered a terrorist organization.

And then he replied. clarify. What? The designation, the designation was published 10 hours ago. Yeah. So that means he posted this after the designation was already made. Ignorance of the law is no excuse for breaking it, especially when it's this severe. I mean, like, like, he thought that he was going to dunk on Marco Rubio and oh, look at blah, blah, blah. Well, you know, I mean, you specifically replied to Margo Rubio's announcing the designation and said, oh, you people should go and donate. And then he himself posted that he donated. Well, to your point earlier about it, like how, you know, Marxist thought transforms and appears under a different cloak, you know, anti-racism,

anti-fascism, anti-sexism, anti-Motism. I mean, like, he totally is captivated by that ideology in its new form. I mean, I'm not so sure that he himself believes, uh, these or he himself considers himself a Marxist he probably is more like you know the lib the you know the shitlib kind of dude who's just like you know yeah he's like well you know all these things are bad and Trump is bad so we should do whatever we can to push back against Trump and it's like really should you should you support organizations that uh you know shoot at at ICE agents you know when they when they have uh you know because Antifa were were we're like nine Antifa members. were just found guilty of basically assaulting an ice facility and shooting at police officers or, you know, law enforcement. Yeah, it was in Texas. Yeah. It was in Texas. So does that, is that something you support, Brian? Because you're donating to groups that help organize that kind of activity. It looks like the post that he deleted was where he said donated thanks. Yeah. That's the one that's gone. Most likely. But I mean, look, he thinks, he thinks that he's just doing something to, you know, I dunked on drumpth, you know, on X, look at me, look how cool I am.

Well, sometimes when UFO, sometimes UFA, you know, or FAA UFO. By bad. Like you can dunk on drumpth by saying like donate to ISIS or something. It's kind of the same thing. Yeah, I mean, well, I mean, it's the same classification. And so, yes, I am completely in agreement that he should be arrested or he should be investigated, then arrested, then he'll get a trial. and the evidence seems to point to he actually did. So if he did, look, even his post after the fact,

he's saying, just wait until we get this removed, then donate. That's double. He's doubling down. But, okay, he's still telling people to support them. Yeah. He's advocating people support a terrorist organization. He's saying that we are going to win politically, grant them the legal right to operate again, and then support them more.

he is arguing for the political normalization of this terror group. Yeah. I mean, it doesn't really get much. I mean, it can get obviously worse than this, but I think that what... Doesn't get much more clear than that. Right, right. I think what Tim said makes little sense. You have to set a precedent for stuff like this.

Like, when people are able to go on X a social media platform and post a donation link for a specially designated terrorist organization, that is when the DOJ needs to step up. I mean, Trump is in power now. he has basically control over the DOJ. He appoints the Attorney General, and they need to take action on this. And we should also probably get a list of names of people that have donated to the Yes, absolutely. And look into them, and look into who these people are and who they may be affiliated with,

because these are real important things. You can't let these things skip by. I think a lot of people sort of forget sometimes that America is a real country, and we need to treat America like it's a real functioning country with a government because when people, like, in no other country do you hear of something like this, right? Where people are, you know, insulting the Secretary of State and saying, yeah, I'm going to post this link to especially designate a terrorist organization that you just designated a terrorist organization.

And, you know, Nana, Nana, Boo, this is what we do. Like, this is a serious country. Let's start acting like it's a serious country. Absolutely. And look, if he does, if there are repercussions for this, it does deter people in the future from doing this type of stuff. Look, you can have whatever opinion you want legally. But if you're going to aid and abet terrorist organizations,

if you're going to donate money to them, you are committing a criminal act and the government. Federal crime as well. Yeah, exactly. It's a federal government to prosecute. Yeah, it's a federal criminal act. And especially, particularly because he's doing it in response to the federal government designating them a terrorist organization.

Look, if you, like if you donated yesterday and they had not been designated, then okay, you got, you slipped one by the goalie, right? And the government shouldn't do anything. Every single person that saw that tweet and was like, oh, look at I'm an Antifa too. I'm going to give those guys some money. Every single donation, the government should look at it. And by the way, I'm sure there are people that are probably still donating as we speak, because some people really just don't care.

Some people are just that radical and just so against law and order that they don't care. They don't care what the federal government has to say. And they don't think anything will ever happen because things do happen. But people get used to nothing ever really happening or at least accountability never really being enforced. And so to be honest with you, you know, we're talking about that attack in Texas. I think that the Trump administration actually, I don't know that they're going to wrap up Brian. But I do think the Trump administration is going to go after people that donate because, look, they didn't, they didn't designate them a terrorist organization for nothing, right? Right.

And this is a group specifically doing hacker-based stuff, emails, communications, which means they're trying that this is, in the United States, it's a very, very common activist thing. It's not providing these services is rudimentary. It's free speech. A foreign organization doing it for political extremists in this country is now a terrorist organization. My point ultimately is these are not guys who are throwing bombs. This is critical infrastructure for anti-American extremists in the United States for terrorists. I think this shows they're absolutely going nuclear. Yeah, and more power to them.

It's something that, you know, like for a long time, I introduced myself on this show when we're doing intros. I introduce myself as an anti-communist and a counter-revolutionary. Anything we can do to throw sand in the gears of the left and their attempts to literally destroy the governing structure of the United States because they've clearly said they want to get rid of the Constitution. When you hear them say that I want to get rid of the Senate, you have to get rid of the Senate. Not only take them serious, but you have to get rid of the Constitution into a totality to do that. But we don't need to bring up the Senate because they literally said they want to get rid of the Constitution itself. Right. The guy, DSA guy on TV said, we want to eliminate the Constitution and the U.S.

rule of government for a parliamentary system. Right. That is, I mean, that should be considered itself a threat. Now, although, to be fair, he hasn't threatened the overthrowing of the U.S. federal government yet, which would actually make it a crime. That is, that is insane. And by the way, this is sort of the issue. I think that the right has been getting gaslighted by the left.

When we hear all of these claims about the U.S. government being fascist, fascists, white supremacists, and stuff like that. The far right, like, let's say, for example, the Gropers, they don't have any institutional power. They don't have any lobbyists. They don't have any corporate power behind them. They don't have any leaders. James Fishpack just got crushed by Byron Donald's in Florida.

Casey Push ran against Vivek Ramaswamy for the Republican primary, for example, in Ohio. He got absolutely crushing him and won a single district. There has been no far right. Tucker endorsed or, you know, Nick Flint has endorsed candidate that has won any election in this country and that has become a member of the Republican Party. But the DSA are winning, and they boast about winning. You have Mamdani, for example, who, again, Ugandan-born, Muslim, with Indian ancestry, who is against America, who, by the way, speaking of supporting foreign terrorist organizations, there was five Palestinian-American men in 2007.

they were convicted of aiding Hamas, materially speaking. And they spent like $12 million doing so. I believe they were called the Holy Land Five. And they set up like a fake charity organization and stuff like that. Mamdani said he supported the Holy Land Five. He's openly has said this before. He took a picture with a guy named Wahaj, I believe. I forget his exact name.

But he's a Muslim Imam in New York City who was an unindicted, not indicted, an unindicted co-conspirator of the 1993 rolled trade center bombing. And what makes it even more insane is the fact that that same guy that Mamdani took a picture with, and by the way, he never retracted any of this was the same guy who stood as a defense witness to the guy who was actually convicted for masterminding, for being the mastermind behind the attack. And so the DSA is, although people say, well, they're not as powerful as people are claiming they are. Well, they're winning some elections. They have some power. Mom Donnie is the mayor of New York City. And he is the mayor of the largest city in the the country and the most, one of the most important, if not the most important city in the country,

is a product of the DSA. It's not like you're dealing with groopers who just, I don't know, are overweight, they're living in their mom's basement and they're just like posting memes on X. No, these people are building institutions. The Council of American Islamic Relations was the largest institutional funder for Mamdani's mayoral race in this campaign. So they're actually doing things. So that's who we need to worry about, the far left, because they do things. They act. They're actors. The narrative has been that we have to worry about the far right and the Republicans are actually fascists and what have you. Whereas in reality, the Republicans have been kicking Nick Fuentes out of basically every single function that they had for the better part of a decade.

Any time the Republicans have kicked out Congress people that have said things that were a little bit, you know, beyond the pale or that were. you know, would lead someone to think maybe they might be a racist or something. The Republicans police their ranks very, very well. And they have done it for a long time. Democrats have had no such ability to police their ranks. And maybe it's because the arguments that communists make sound nice. Give everybody this. Give everybody.

Free this, free that, free that, Free bosses, free food. They don't sound exclusionary the way that the far right sounds exclusionary. Right. Include everybody. It's for everybody. Yeah. So because of that, they have basically cover to infiltrate.

But it doesn't change the fact that at the end of the day, they're revolutionaries, and they're not looking, they're not the Fabians. While they would take that course if they can, there are plenty of people that, that once they get enough political power, they'd be like, all right, we don't have to worry about whether or not we get the votes anymore because we got some guns, right?

Like, they are revolutionary, and the Democrats have decided to allow them a place, a seat at the table. Now, there have been a lot of people that have been speaking out specifically about Hassan Piker because of his rhetoric, and, you know, good for them.

But that doesn't change the fact that they're still supporting Saeed in Michigan. It doesn't change the, the fact that they're still like, oh, Mom Donnie's great. Doesn't change the fact that they're like, well, you know, we should, we're a big tent party. So we should allow the DSA. If you're allowing the DSA in to caucus with you, you are allowing communists in to caucus with you. But this is the point.

Squishy Democrats are letting it all happen because they're like, look, whatever wins. So now, what was it, AOC just re-upped her DSA. This was big news. She's been a member of the DSA for a long time. She just re-upped. She is national. recognition, DSA can't no longer local chapter stuff.

This is for real. The DSA has taken over. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, it's a serious issue that needs to obviously be dealt with. And you talked about the Democratic Party. The Democratic Party is very fragmented.

You know, we've always heard about the fact that, well, MAG is a cult. We've always heard this promulgated and, you know, just reported constantly. That's not obviously true. But the fact that Trump has, like, very, strong endorsement power. And the fact that the Republican Party sort of unifies

around him is a very good thing because it's not like the Democratic Party where Gavin Newsom is like polling at like 20% or something. We don't know who may even, who would be the nominee in 2028. We don't have any of this information because, again, it's so decentralized. The DSA, like they're scared to call out Hassan Piker. They have to like, you know, have these secret meetings and do whatever to try to see if they want to call them out because they have people like Bernie Sanders, Elon Omar, Domani, Rashida Talib, ALC. They have so many of these different people and they have actually some power. There's no uniformity.

There's no authority when it comes to the Democratic Party. And having a party like that is a lot worse than people saying, well, Maga is a cult because people actually have a leader that they can follow and rally upon. Although there may be dissidents in the Republican Party. We've seen them. Thomas Massey, fortunately, is a great example of that. But dissidents get thrown out. People that want to be on the more radical end of the Republican Party, they get thrown out if they show that this is who they are. With the Democratic Party, it's decentralized, and you can be a Marxist, you can be a communist, you can be a socialist or a Democratic socialist.

It's like, you know, it's like basically poop, but with like sprinkles on top of it. You know, it's democratic socialism. And that's totally fine. That's acceptable. There's no, like Gavin Newsom can't come out and do an interview or anything and say, hey, this is unacceptable. This is not our party because the party belongs to nobody. It's free for all when it comes to the Democrats. Yeah, I do think that there will be a coalescing in the future of the Democrat party and it's going to be a far more left-leaning party than it has been historically. Just because that's the way the winds are blowing. People that want to remain in power, like they're going to say, okay.

So I guess we're the pro-Palestinian movement party. We're the anti-Israel party. We're the anti-business party. And they're going to lose a lot of funding because, I mean, you've already seen a lot of people like Bill Ackman. He used to give a bunch of money to Democrats. He gave a ton of money to Barack Obama. But because he's Jewish and he's also in the tech industry and in the tech world, like they're just like up you're a billionaire you're a bad guy oh you gave money to israel up

you're a bad guy they're going to end up alienating a lot of their their funding owner base and the democrats have been struggling with money already but i also find it hypocritical how mom dany sort of ran on i mean he didn't necessarily run on this as a policy because he's a mayor he can't do anything about billionaires necessarily but when he was asked he was like yeah i don't think billionaire should exist yet his number one like single contributor individual contributor to his campaign was Elizabeth Simons, who is a multi-billionaire. Contradiction there, but, you know. Well, I mean, they will talk to talk. I mean, I don't know what would actually, you know, when the rubber meets the road, I don't know what they would actually do, whether they would be like,

all right, we got to go ahead and expropriate our billionaires as well. But the idea that, oh, you know, we can't allow people to become billionaires and we need to, you know, we need to take their property until they're not a billionaire anymore. I mean, I don't know how you do that and still expect to have a functioning society because look, how dare you be successful and wealthy and disproportionately contribute to American society? I mean, yes, I completely agree. Like, you should be able to make as much money as you want, own as much property as you can get your hands on. But these are the people that, the people that are motivated to do that, the people that are skilled enough to do that. Like, they're the people

that employ everybody, or not everybody, but they, that employ a vast amount of people, right? Like, you want to go ahead and say, well, Jeff Bezos, you can't own Amazon anymore because it's too big and too successful, and then you're going to fire all the people that work there. I mean, Mom Dani is, himself

has a policy, I think he's suing Amazon because Amazon's subcontracts for deliverers in New York City. So you're telling me that he has to hire these people directly, They're not contractors. They're going to be employees of Amazon, but you don't want him to be a billionaire.

Like, you can't have, you can't have it both ways. You can't have big companies that are. I always wonder, like, why cap it at a billion? And by the way, this is always like a trick question for like people to say that, well, billionaire shouldn't exist. Ask them, why should people that have $10 million exist? Because like I get like having a million. Yeah, yeah.

I get having a million dollars. Maybe because maybe you have like a property or two and your property and your assets, for example, appreciate over time. And you can become a millionaire that way. It doesn't mean you have a million dollars in a bank. But why should someone be able to have $10 million? Because the response to someone saying, well, billioners probably should exist is that, well, what does someone need a billion dollars for?

And I mean, typically they actually think that billionaires are like Scrooge McDuck. They have like a bunch of money hidden somewhere and they can just float in their money. That's not how it works. It's obviously in stocks and assets. But I find it, they always struggle explaining why someone needs. because they always say no one needs a billion dollars, right? Why does someone need $10 million or $5 million? No one needs that amount of money either, right?

Indeed. Yeah. And one point I'd like to bring up because I think more people should know it is, do you know what the average salary of a millionaire is in the United States? What is it? Do you have a guess? Average salary of a millionaire in the United States, it's 200K? Close, yeah.

160, 180? Okay. It's pretty wild to think because the GDP of the United States is like 95, 95K. This means that if you're at 95K and you're single, which is GDP, you know what I mean? You could save up and be a millionaire within 10 years. So what does it really mean to be a millionaire? We're getting to the point where being a millionaire is going to just mean middle class. Right.

And it's kind of freaky to think. Because, you know, I remember watching like Seinfeld or whatever. I think it was Seinfeld where there's like an episode where like Elaine's dating somebody. She's like, he makes six figures. But six figures back then would be like making 250 to 300K per. year now, which is a lot more. So it was like, wow. So being a, making six figures back then, being a millionaire meant a lot more. Now we're looking at houses, bungalows that cost half a million dollars. Right. So people getting to that level of asset control. What is happening is with

hyperinflation, and we see this with these socialist policies, they're going to say, who needs to be a billionaire? Sure, in 100 years, when a billion dollars a year is the average salary, no one will be allowed to be a billionaire. Right. Or when the average salary is 700,000 and then middle class people have a billion in assets because it's just inflation, although who knows at that point. Yeah. Yeah, I mean, look, the left is going to have a reckoning and I don't know exactly. I feel like I'm fairly confident that the far left is going to win. I don't know what happens to the, you know, the centrist Democrat. There will be some. I mean, I mean, Federman's not going to stay a Democrat for long.

He's going to leave the party. I'm fairly confident of that. But I don't know what happens to, you know, the other people that are like, man, I live in a purple district. And, you know, I can't really say you got to get really, you know, we're going to eat the rich and blah, blah, blah. I don't see, I don't see a future for them in the Democrat Party. And I don't know if they're right-leaning enough to become Republicans.

But at the same time, I say that. But, I mean, remember, Donald Trump, Tulsi-Gabird, RFK, you know, there are so many people that came, that used to be Democrats that have come to the, you know, whatever the, the, what is considered today to be the right, even though they're not particularly far right. They're classified as far right by the left, but that's only because of the left's perspective. You know, maybe there are going to be a lot more people that are going to be like, well, I guess if I want to be a centrist, I have to be a Republican or at least not a Democrat. Yeah. Let's jump to this story from the International Business Times. Completely unfounded, Texas Roadhouse responds to viral allegations over racist Facebook group and food tampering story. So here's a story. Somebody posted a screenshot of a woman saying that 400,000 white people are spitting on your food if you're black at Texas Red House and Logan's Roadhouse. Completely fake. No evidence. Of course, it's just ludicrous. And now you've got liberal activists. No joke with millions of followers posting. They have to apologize. for this. They did nothing. They are attempting to exercise communist force again. We lived through this already. The good good commercial, a bad commercial. Dude just issued a cancel culture, pathetic loser apology. Talk about spineless losers. The problem we had with woke was these

pathetic losers like the guy from good good apologizing despite doing nothing wrong. So good on Texas Roadhouse saying screw off. It's a hoax. No good on good good because this dude put on an eight-minute video being like, yeah, we're sorry. They made a commercial that was meant to be like obsession. That was it. People got mad because he pushed a woman in it. Pro Obsession did a lot worse to a woman.

That movie is the biggest movie ever. This dude should have come out and he should have called out all the comforts. that were coming after him and said, you are pathetic. This was nowhere near as a creature. It's the movie itself. I will not take this. Instead, Mayacopa. Yeah. Cancel culture is back with a vengeance. They just dropped two nuclear bombs on the culture, and I don't think that the right is unified enough at this point to stop it. With the likes of Tucker and Candace and everybody else, the right is fragmented, the left is taking advantage, and they are absolutely going to cancel.

It's back. I think it's, well, I'll just start with using my black privilege to sort of comment on this issue. I remember just scrolling through TikTok because I do that. I'm pretty young. And a lot of us young people are on TikTok, at least to just scroll and see different things. And I kept seeing, you know, people talking about Texas Roadhouse and how, like, if you're a black person, don't eat at Texas Roadhouse. And I was kind of confused because I was like, well, I was just like in a Texas Roadhouse not too long ago. a few times with my producer, I think once with my producer, we got a different spot before,

and with my friends and family. Like, I've been to Texas Roadhouse. It's always been a great experience. I love the food. And I never experience any, like, weird racism there. But the fact that people are willing to believe a random screenshot without any evidentiary substantiation for the claim is ridiculous. And it just speaks to how people consume information or just confirm. consume the news.

Like people actually view TikTok videos that make, like, claims by any evidence as evidence itself and as valid or having credibility. Like, we need to have more discernment. We need to be able to, like, look at screenshots, look at people saying things and say, okay, what's your evidence for this claim? Because if you have an egregious claim that can smear a smear a company or smear a restaurant business that can defame, that can lose the money and revenue and personal. profit, they can really attack them and hurt them, at the very least, have evidence for what would

yield such an attack. You know, have evidence for this. So, and, and I have to give, you know, praise to all of the black people that started going to Texas Roadhouse and filming themselves just having a great time. Oh, were they? Yeah, yeah, there were a bunch of people. I kept seeing videos of black men and woman going to Texas Roadhouse and just eating normally. And the comments sections would be filled with a bunch of people just so mad. They'd be like, you're a coon, you're a coon, you know, how dare you go there and eat there when they don't want us there and stuff like that? And it's like, come on. You know, I'm actually going to go to Texas Roadhouse as soon as possible, maybe on Friday or something, just because this whole scandal is going on now.

It's ridiculous. Like, have like a random Facebook screenshot really got a bunch of people going on Texas Roadhouse? What, is it because it's Texas or something? Like, I don't like, no, it's fake. Of course it's fake. It's because the socialists are like, we are going to burn. anyone who opposes us to the ground. Clearly it's fake.

And guys, it's obviously that they are trying as hard as they can with the good good stuff too. Like the fact that the costume, Good Good and Rodos all happen at the exact same time. Activists were like, we're going to nuke their culture. And I actually, I want to say this right now, no one should buy anything or nobody should support Good Good.

Good Good deserves to be completely blown off the cultural map. Gone. Cowards are not welcome. Texas Roadhouse, I'm going to go spend double, and I'm going to tip $1,000. They should sue whoever this person is that has defamed them. You can't. You can't. For damages? Damages? What damages? All the people that made videos for them to quantify it. I mean, I'd have to go through all that. It's impossible. Yeah. Well, this is why there's no defamation loss. It's ever in American culture. The way our laws work, you have to prove tangible, individual quantifiable damages. Texas road cows can say, because someone posted this, everyone else posted.

They're going to say, who was the first person posted? Then they're going to say, I have free speech. I saw a post. I posted it. What do you know what you do about it? They're going to say, where'd the post come from? I don't know. Prove it.

Good luck. Do you remember that time that someone said they found a finger in like a Wendy's chili bowl or something like that? Yeah. I think they ended up suing that person and winning. Yeah, that's, that's defamation per se. Okay. You could argue that whoever posted this screenshot is responsible, congratulations, you're going to try and squeeze blood from a turnip.

Yeah. Texas Roadhouse can sue the guy who has no money or for all we know lives in Russia or Iran. The guy probably has no money. That's one, right? So even if you do sue him, one, you're not going to really make any money from it. And two, the damage has already sort of been done. Yeah. This disinformation has permeated and has disseminated all across social media.

And you obviously have the white saviors coming out and, you know, they're going to make their videos. They're going to be, you know, they're going to be a soy boy about it. And they're going to say, oh, my God, I can't believe Texas Roadhouse has been used as a weapon of white supremacy or whatever buzzer they're going to come up with now. It's a very unfortunate thing to see because the truth is, is that I'm not going to say the average person, a lot of people, I don't know how to quantify this, but a lot of people, people are really just not that smart. I mean, I could never ever, um, just hear a random rumor that was posted by a random Facebook account with a screenshot, uh, that someone starts like just permeating online and just use that as my basis to judge a restaurant, especially when there's no evidence. I can't talk to anybody. I can't see what else they have to say. I can't see where this

first came from. I can't see what the evidence like 400,000 might people spitting on black people like how do you even like how do you even come up with that stuff? That's the thing that got me like I've been thinking about it ever since we started talking about it. 400,000 people. Does, does Texas Roadhouse actually have 400,000? No, no, no, no, that's not what the post said. The Post said we're at restaurants all across the country, especially Texas Roadhouse and.

Okay, all right. Okay. And because we're at, so we're in multiple restaurants and particularly at tech, well, the people that are the people that are doing the spitting apparently. But yeah, like it's just, we were talking before the show a little bit and really what happens on social media like people obviously don't check and again I'm guilty of this there's been times where I had to take stuff down off that I post or whatever on X and it's really just about people that hear a story

that presents the narrative that they already believe right and they're like that's got to be true that hit me right in the in the in the dopamine center and I believe it and all the things this This, you know, backs up what I already think. And so I'm just going to go ahead and push this. And then on top of it, the whole cancel clutch or stuff like that, that is another, you know, another self-satisfying thing. Another dopamine hit. Look at what I did. They were racist.

They were doing racist thing. There were racist there. And we got them in trouble. We hopefully I'll get, we can get some of those people or get some of those businesses shut down. We can get those people fired. We can, we can harm people for the harm that. they've caused. We're self-righteous. We're the good guys. But again, I don't think when you look at a coordinated campaign that happens like this,

they posted a fake screenshot. It's not about being the good guys. It's someone sitting there saying, who can we target? Let's target a seemingly innocuous business. It's large. They're not going to be able to defend themselves in the public sphere. They're not, they're not a national icon like McDonald's, Texas Roadhouse. It seems like a trial balloon for communists to being like, can we bring this control back? Can we beat the ever-living F out of the American people once again? And look at Good Good.

They took the commercial they made, snipped out the first 15 seconds, so it's just him knocking him into the ground. And then there's videos, and I think they're fake of Dick's sporting goods taking their products down. They showed the funny part. You saw what?

They showed the funny part. The funny part of the commercial. Right. So when I see an image, and I tweeted this and it says this is insane because they're like Dick's sporting goods is now taking down good good merchandise for all I know some random person walked in took those hats off took a picture said it's happening it went viral he saw it dropped to his knees like a pansy little piece of crap and said I'm so sorry I'm so sorry everybody so this is the world

you get when you are in a world of cowards right so Texas Roadhouse gets my money and good good gets my disdain and just to add to your point I listen when And you're neutral towards somebody, like even if you don't really know anybody and someone makes a crazy claim about them, you typically ask like, okay, what's your evidence? Like, what's the proof that this person did this thing or whatever? If you know somebody and you're connected to them and you're a friend of them, then typically what you get is like you're you trust them more. You're typically on their side more and you really have to see the evidence before you go on with it. the fact that so many people before seeing any credible evidence or really looking at any sources or anything have already taken to defame, to attack, to smear, to boycott Texas Roadhouse,

that tells you that it is what you say. It is confirmation biased. And they have just been waiting to have this moment. This is what they want. It's not about the fact that this is real, them. They want, they want information like this or disinformation like this to be out there just so they can have that opportunity to smear and attack white people and Texas Roadhouse and just to be a victim because there's like, in leftist politics, there's always this sort of, this sort of affinity, this sort of strive towards victim mentality. I am a perpetual victim. It's the billionaires. It's the white people. And even to an extent, it's the Jews. There's someone responsible for my failures, for me being inadequate, insufficient, whatever it may be, there's people always

want to cry and complain. When it comes to people of color that are leftists, well, they typically blame white people for all of their problems. It's the white system. It's the white businesses. It's capitalism. It's, you know, it's every, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, slavery that happened 200 something years ago. This is why I make the amount of money that I make today. So, this is typical leftist politics. Just I'm a victim and information, disinformation spread. I'm going to use this disinformation to spread my victimhood mentality. And it's so pathetic, by the way. Can I just say that?

It's like, it's so pathetic. Like the reason why I am not on the left and the reason why I'm a conservative above everything else, above being a Republican or above, you know, Trump, above everything, is because I want to be principled and disciplined. And I also want to have sovereignty and autonomy. I don't want leftists telling me I can't get an ID because I'm black. I don't want leftist telling me that cops are out to get me. I don't want to live in a perpetual victimhood mentality

where it seems like white people are always oppressing me. I don't want to live in that type of, I don't want to have that mindset, you know? Yeah, I mean, again, this is something that we talk about a lot on the show, to your point, the victim mentality. Like, that's something that has actually been taught in schools now. There's this guy named Palo Friari that wrote a book called The Pedagogy of the Oppressed, and I think he wrote it in the 70s,

and it made it into the hands of one particular educator in the early 80s, and it spread like wildfire. And you teach, basically, it got to the schools of education, so the schools that teach teachers in the early 90, or the late 80s, early 90s, and then it started to become, you know, the standard way of looking at the world for basically all the teachers, most teachers in America.

You teach kids to see the world from, an oppressor and oppressed narrative everywhere by everywhere whether it be whether it be racially or whether it be economically or you know what have you there's always some way that you can characterize a dynamic as there is someone that has more power and someone that has less power nailed it and that's how left to see it like it's like the far left this is why the horseshoe theory works so well the far right and the far left sort of believe in the same thing in that in that sense where in which the far left view everything from the oppressor-oppressed sort of standpoint in which Palestine over Israel because Palestine is brown and they're supposedly the indigenous

people. Israel is a white. Don't forget how they say it. Israel is a white settler colonial state. And the reason why America is illegitimate is because America is a white Anglo-Saxon, settler colonial manifest destiny state. And the way the far right sees everything, they also see themselves as victims. Well, the Jews, the Jews, the Jews, you know, world jury, Jews are responsible for all of our problems. And this is why Nick Fuentes talks about how he, how he's oppressed, how, you know, they're oppressed by the Jews. And the Jews are the reason for all of the issues, you know? So, so the left sees it as white supremacy and just white people. And the far right sees it as like, well, just the Jews.

They're the reasons for all the problems in the world. And they agree. Well, the left now, too, so. Huh? The left now, too. Yeah, yeah. Well, the left is basically on the same realm with the Jews now. It's like, well, it's the Jews and the whites. And to be fair, they don't make a distinction between the Jews and the White. So they're on the same sort of point there, which is why when Lindsay Graham died, and I know people may have disagreeing opinions on Lindsey Graham, but again, you had Shank Weger, Anna Casparian, Nick Fuentes,

all tweet basically, Hannah Sondon's all tweet basically the same thing. It's not even just about, hey, you don't have to issue, you know, you don't have to tell everyone that you're mourning him or that you're upset that he died, but it's the fact that, you know, you're going around saying good riddance. Anna Kasparian posted the day that he died, and Nick Fuentes also posted at the day that he died. They both said good riddance. Like, they're both happy that a Republican died. And so it's because they're so close to each other.

They're certainly closer to each other than I am to a regular liberal, you know, a regular, actual classical liberal. Yeah. And to be honest, with the policies that they endorse, like, they're very, similar about the only difference between like the groipers and the far left is like the groipers are like well it's just for white people or just for for americans that are from america whereas the the left is like no we can let everybody in and give them all the same stuff right and actually we need to actually defeat whiteness like whiteness is something that needs to be battled that's kind of what the left believes you know yeah um and it it is nice to see uh you know

people pushing back against that i mean it's been pushed back people on the right have have again like I said earlier, the people on the right have been very, very diligent about saying these ideas are not allowed in the big tent, right? So the MAGA, you know, mega people are generally pretty big tent, right? You know, they were reaching out to a lot of different people with different political perspectives and stuff. But the far right, they've been like, no, we don't accept this kind of, you know, race-based, you know, political, identity politics stuff. were not about that. And the left, they just haven't, they don't have that in them.

And I think it's because the left has been so inundated with that oppressor versus oppressed, looking at white people as the oppressor. Inherent oppressors, by the way. It's like they don't think black people can be racist. They don't have the ability to be racist. And the white people inherently because they're white, they're oppressive and they're racist and they're colonizers. It's such a pathetic, demonic. weight of view life.

It's just, I don't, I honestly don't understand how leftists, like, live with themselves in that sort of, if they actually genuinely believe, I don't know how they live with them. I don't know how any of them do. Well, NPCs don't believe anything, and the people who are running the show know they're manipulating the NPCs. Right. For that, you know, I read this Christian thing that said that there's this group that believes there's only, actually, no, this might be, it might be somewhat related to,

I forgot the name of the group, but they think there's only 750,000 and sold people in the whole world. That may be true. I mean, I'm just saying, like, given what we've been seeing, that may be true, okay, because... Maybe it's a little low.

That would explain me, you know, seeing all of this, like, low IQ slop, you know, that I see all the time. You know, see one screenshot and believe it, run off. Yeah, it's like, one screenshot, let's boycott this company, racist, no evidence. I mean, I mean, come on. I mean, it's not ins sold.

Yeah. I never thought about that. I mean, even like, even if you were to give the, you know, give the devil as do like Jordan Peterson likes to say and take the arguments that the left makes at face value, like they break down so quickly, right? Like the idea that, you know, there's only one group of people can be racist, only white people. It's just a slight of hand. They change the meaning of the word or they use a different definition.

And then throughout a conversation, they'll slide the other one in. And, you know, it's like the, like the, you know, where's the red ball underneath the cups? It's like, which one at which racist are you using? Are you talking about power and privilege? Or are you talking about bigotry or whatever? And, and that kind of, you know, has had for a long time kept people that were arguing against them, kept them on the back foot because they didn't understand the sleight of hand or weren't prepared for the slide of hand. because people that have a a and when I say this I mean like liberal in the classical liberal sense if you're if you're not you know terribly offended because like a lot of people that are like really communist identifies liberal a lot of leftist or like liberal like liberal progressives is now a thing else yeah I I call them you know either shit lives or progressives you know and and whereas I don't consider you know I don't consider conservatives to be actually liberals that.

in the, you know, the American sense. The idea of like, hey, we can actually agree on terminology and have a discussion. That's something that you're only going to get in the center and to the right nowadays. You're not going to get that from the left. You're going to get, again, the sleight of hand, the kind of, you know, dancing around meanings and changing meanings. So that way they can essentially, you know, basically just to win the art. argument and and the right is caught on to that you know people in the center they they most people that would engage in political conversations nowadays are aware that the terms the meaning of the terms

change depending on what is functional for that particular interaction um we share a dictionary we share we have the same lexicon um but we don't have the same dictionary you know we'll use the same words, but the meanings aren't the same from the left, particularly the far left and the center and right nowadays. Sure. I mean, they love mischaracterizing people. Like, I've been called a fascist before. You know what I mean?

So it's like, and what they don't realize because the left is not really made up of intelligent people, like their composition is not made up of the brightest because they always seem to like have a five-year-old understanding of everything. It's like billionaire shouldn't exist. It's like, or like Medicare for all, billionaires shouldn't exist. Everyone should have a home. it's like that's the answer that you get from a five-year-old when you ask them what they would do when they would be if they were president. Should everyone get ice cream?

They don't understand logistics. They don't understand how economic works. They can't. They can't. Yeah. I'll finish your point. I don't want to have to interrupt. Yeah, yeah, no, for sure. And so that's what you sort of get from their ideology.

And I was trying to get to something else when it comes to just leftists in general in their sort of thinking. They have a childish way of viewing basically. everything. People need to understand something. Do you guys know what tetracromacy is? That's when you only see certain colors, right? No, that's when you can see more colors and only what you can do it. So here's it happens. There's a mutation on the X chromosome that moves one of the rods over. I'm oversimplifying it. If you are a dude, you have one X chromosome. That means your eyes are going to have cones moved over. What does that mean? You're colorblind.

The cones for, I think, red and green begin to overlap. So in your eye, those colors basically are molded together. There are these glasses you can buy. They're really cool. And they cut out a piece of the spectrum. So instead of overlapping, now it splits out the middle, and it actually creates a distinction so colorblind people can see. For women, they have two X chromosomes. If they have a mutation on only one of those chromosomes, they have a fourth rod and cone.

Or it might be a cone, I'm not sure. which allows them to see hundreds of times more colors than anyone else. That's insane. They could not tell you the color they are seeing. It's impossible. Wow. It's impossible. Can you imagine a color you've never seen before?

No. Can you define red? Only with things that are not colors. Yeah. I think of the movie mask where the guy that had the disfigured face took a girl into the room And he put a rock in her hand or a boiling potato, took a potato out of the boiling water and put it in her hand. And he's like, that's red.

And then when it cools down, it's pink. And that was the best description he could come up with to tell a blind person. Oh, I said the mask. I was going right. I have no idea. Oh, mask. Yeah, not the mask. Yes, now I know.

Like when you said mask, I, for some reason, just thought, the mask. Yeah, Jim Carrey. Not the one with the ugly guy in the blind chick. No. So you can't define red. When you look up the definition, it's like the color of an apple. You know? Yeah.

Color of blood. Because I was going to respond with red, but that would be circular reasoning. So here's the issue. This is why people don't know their colorblind. Because when they're, so a buddy of mine walked one day when we were teenagers, he walks downstairs and he's wearing pink sweatpants. And everyone started giggling. And they were like, yo, what are you doing?

And he's like, what? And they're like, why are you wearing pink sweatpants? It's like, what do you mean? They're white. And they were like, no, bro. You're wearing. you're wearing, you know, or I don't know what, he said, but he was like, what? And they're like, bro, you colorblind?

Like, I don't know. And he was colorblind. So, people who can't understand economics, their brain does not have the capability to perceive these colors you can perceive. Right. Maybe it's a issue with cognitive limitation also. But since we know this is true, there's also synesthesia. Are you familiar with this?

I've heard of it. This is where you can hear colors. Really? Yep. And there are a lot of famous musicians who can hear colors. And so they say when they, when they hear, they can, like with a sound, they can know what color is. Their brain, they can see it. How do we know that's true? We did two tests. First, we played a sound and asked random people to describe the color of the sound. Then we asked the people with synesthesia to do it. Then several months later, these same people were brought back in. They played the same sound and said, tell me what color it is. People without synesthesia gave random answers. People with it correctly identified every sound as the color.

So they said, this might be real. Let's do the same thing during an MRI scan and found the visual cortex was lighting up when they heard noise. And they said, their brains are actually trans. Now, how can someone who can perceive something you can't explain to you something you cannot perceive? So now understand all of these really dumb people out there.

When you go and say, do you understand scarcity? You might as well be saying there is a color. It is globo blobe. You can't see it? And they're like, I don't know what you're talking about. Like, you're a fascist. Their brains literally cannot process it. And this is what a lot of people don't understand.

They project their intelligence. I had a friend recently. I was talking to my friend like a week ago. And he was like, he's not a political guy. And he's like, why are they, like, what did you do to piss these people off? And I was like, oh, nothing. I voted for Trump, I guess. No, no, no, that's not what I mean.

I mean, like, you pissed them off somehow, right? And I was like, no, I voted for Trump or something. And they're like, dude, I understand. But I'm saying like, you said or did something. And I was like, bro, stop projecting your intelligence on people who don't have it. You think in your mind. because I only get reasonably upset with people. They must be reasonably upset.

Right. But they do not have the cognitive function to understand why they're mad. Right. People need to understand this. Real quick. I believe the same is true for God. Because I've asked myself this. I had, group Catholic, had a couple years where I was like, the TV told me, you know, be atheist.

And I said, oh, that makes sense. I was watching Bill Maher and stuff. And then I was around 18 or 19. I had some good conversations with my Catholic school was miserable. My priest, they didn't teach me anything. And then I actually had some people explain some things to me. Then I read some books. And then I was like, I actually feel the presence of God.

Like it is apparent to me. Plain as I see the sky blue, God exists. How could there be people who don't understand that? So I had a conversation with the guy. I love this story. And I've told a million times, but it's worth repeating. I'm sure everyone will appreciate it. he was a drug addict punk rock guy who was living a life of debauchery and he said one day he was he was in

the woods like a forest preserve and they're partying and they're like just sleeping outside and he walks away from the group to take a leak and while he's pissing in the woods a powerful voice booms from within him saying why are you doing this and he had an anxiety panic attack and he said and he started freaking out the voice said again why are you doing this to yourself and he said i i don't know he then sought answers. He asked people, what was this? What was his experience? And he found the Christian church. And they explained to him, you are, it's a legitimate question. Someone is trying to help you. Someone loves you. He turned his life around. He became a Christian, opened a small business, got off drugs. And he was like, he said to me, I know you'll probably not believe me, but trust me, it happened. I was like,

I believe you. I was like, I don't think a drug addict partier turns his life 180 degrees in a few unless something truly profound happened. And, you know, I'm thinking about that experience, and I've heard that experience from so many different people. And then I meet atheists, and they're like, there's no, God. You don't know that. And I'm like, no, I do. Because I've, I've, I've, I've, I've, I've sensed this thing. I don't know what it was. I read about it. I, and then one day I was like, wow, I can almost see something in my mind when I learn and I understand this. And it's, I mean, no, no, you're wrong. And I told, uh, I was talking to Brian Shapiro. And I said, Brian, just because you can't see something doesn't mean it's not real.

And just because you can't comprehend it doesn't mean it's not real either. Because there's a lot of things that cats can't comprehend. And dogs can't comprehend and any sort of like mammal, anything that would fall under like a mammalian species or anything that would even be like a reptile. They can't comprehend certain things. You can't teach them algebra. You can't teach them even maybe addition to an extent. You can't teach them how computers work or how to read and write.

These are just things that they can't cognitively comprehend. And so God very well could be one of those things in which... I think so. Yeah, God could be one of those things in which you can know that it exists. You can know a degree of it. But we're also cognitively limited. Like we are not like, you know, I obviously believe in evolution. I believe that there are like there has been a progression of intelligence when it comes to human species.

accomplished more. But we are, I think, biologically limited to how smart we're capable. We're not omniscient. We're not omnibenevolent. We don't have all the knowledge. We're not the most intelligent thing that could possibly probably exist. And so we're also limited in comprehension. But the point that I was going to make was that, well, leftists love mischaracterizing things, and they don't understand how it actually harms them. Like, if you call everyone a fascist, if Matt Nuclear is a fascist and Trump is a fascist and Tim Poole is a fascist and Canada, so everyone's a fascist, well, then that term loses that sort of scary meaning, which is what you're using it for.

They use fascists not because they understand it, but because of the scary or, you know, the scary fear-mongering connotation associated with it. Same thing with genocide. Just my final point on perception. I think there are religious folk who can sense the presence of God and you just have this feeling, you know, it's just like in my mind, I can almost see something. And then I think there are people who can't but are faithful and they just trust and they and they read and they learn and they say there must be. And then there are atheists who don't have attachment to the knowledge that humanity has passed down for thousands of years.

And so they just say, if I can't see it, you can't either. And that's what I was saying to Brian. I was like, if you're colorblind and you can't see colors, no one could describe it to you. And if you know that there are people who can't perceive reality the same way you can, you have to recognize some people probably can perceive God and you can't. And you need to recognize then. As a colorblind man says, I know red exists because everybody seems to be able to identify the picture that is red all at the same time. So imagine this.

There are three paintings on a wall and you are colorblind. And there's 37 people all around you. and a man then says, please point to the red painting. And you look up and you see three blueish yellow paintings. And they're all the same. There's no red. And then everyone in the room all collectively points at the red one,

or I should say at the exact same one. And you're going around, you're going, you're pulling a fast one on me. Right. You all agreed beforehand to point the one on the left because they're all the same color. No one actually knows what red is. How do all of these people know, something that you don't. Perhaps you can't perceive it. Right. And so I think we recognize that about many of these atheists. And I'm not trying to disrespect atheists. I'm just saying, I must see

something you don't. And you must be convinced I'm not able to see what I actually see. Well, I can tell you this. I see it. Right. Clear as the sky is blue. There is a God. That just, and that's when we go to these liberals and you can't explain economics and you can't explain anything about Trump it gets so rudimentary that you could say something like Trump's not a fascist but they don't know what the word means and they don't care that's another part of it is they're not capable they don't care they're not capable and that's not their goal because their goal is to use the term that everyone knows to have a negative or a fear-mongering connotation to it or something that's associated with it in order to defame and smear and attack people.

And it's actually not really been going too well for them because now that everyone is a fascist, the term has lost its scary meaning. You know, if there's this very scary term that no one wants to use because it's really insulting towards a person, it really defames their character, really attacks their reputation, and it gets used occasionally and very selectively,

then everyone is like, whoa, you call that person a fascist or whatever word I could make up. But if you take that person, that word and everyone has it, well, then that word has lost its value. It's the same way that everyone wants what they can't get. And if everyone has, like, I don't know, like let's say an iPhone 35 comes out, okay? If everyone has an iPhone 35, well, then you're not the cool kid for having it. That's not a special thing anymore. So given the fact that they've called everyone essentially a fascist now, even liberals, they've called fascists, well then it doesn't have that scary meaning.

It just means bad guy. Yeah, just means. We're going to go to your Rumble rants and superchats. So smash the like button and share the show. The uncensored portion of the show is, of course, coming up at 10 o'clock. You don't want to miss it. Our Timcast, Discord members, get to call in and talk to us and our guest. General T.45K says,

if Russia were to launch a single nuke, America should, I would. Use that event as our excuse to finally do what needs to be done. I'm Russia? What is it that needs to be done? They're super cool. I'm everyone else.

John Waters says, Jesus fastened a whip to use against money changes in his temple. He didn't buy one. He didn't trade for one. He made one for violence. Well, I mean, the scripture doesn't specify that he whipped everybody up personally. But I will point out, making one of those things does not, it doesn't come easy. He had a long, steady, sustained amount of anger that would sustain him over hours in order to make that and bust up the house of God. Force name change says damages. I was going to spend a million dollars with Good Good for a merch giveaway, but after this, we are not.

Would that tactic qualify as damages? Only if you actually were in the process of having a conversation. So you can't just make up something. If like Timcast, for instance, actually had emails where we were like, let's do a deal. We're talking a million bucks here. And then once this happened, I said, listen, I don't know what it is you're involved in, but we don't want to be involved in this. So we're pulling out.

I'm sorry, the deal's no good. Then they have damages. But good luck getting blood from a turnip. All right. What's to say, them's? I mean this in the, with the utmost respect, nuclear mat reminds me of Larry Elder. Absolutely fantastic discussions, wishing you a continued bright future. Wow.

Thank you. I appreciate it. That is a massive compliment. My elder's fantastic. Mitch Stu says, and let the one who has no sword sell his cloak and buy one. Yep, I've heard that. It's a fulfillment of prophecy. It's an Isaiah.

Same old man says, send Crasinstein to Guantanamo Bay for the rest of his life. Yes, we do want to be sentenced to prison for 50 years. I don't. I want them to get a ticket. I want them to say we're issuing a misdemeanor fine and six months of court supervision. Court supervision just means that after six months, it's dropped off your record like it didn't happen. They just need to say we will enforce against this. And then the next time someone does it, they say, okay, now you're being elevated to probation. And they do it again. Now it's jail. The point is we just need to say we are going to do it. I got to be honest.

If they came to his house and arrested him, arraigned him, and then he had a court date a month later, and they said you've got to pay $250 and you're going to get six months of supervision. If you don't commit any crimes for six months, it'll drop off your record. A lot of it would stop. Just dead and stretch.

People would be like, whoa, because nobody wants to go to court. Nope. But the dude literally committed a crime, so. Indeed. Let's see what's cooking with some more superchitz. Tricky, he says, Augustus Dorico Rainmaker just experimented,

on Alaskan citizens and sprayed the clouds to make it rain. Everyone is furious that a company can do that without any government control. We are not a science experiment. Did he really? We had him on the show once. I don't know. Yeah, I remember his green room episode. Was it what? Oh, yeah, look at this.

A long time ago. Oh, wow. Using drones. Uh-oh. That's not good. Rout row. You know what, guys, I want to say something. I want to talk about AI and uncensored portions. is I had an epiphany, I'm pro-A-I.

I'm pro-I. If you want to what that means, whether or not I'm serious, you've got to go to the uncensored portion of the show. But we'll grab some more of your posts here. Raymond G. Stanley Jr., Tim reading a Christian thing is a level up. What was that a reference to?

I'm not sure. I'm not really sure either. I'm not sure. You mentioned something about a Christian thing and referring to how only 750,000. Oh, yes, yes, yes, yes. Yeah. Yeah, there's some, I don't know what it was. There's an article I saw. I read too much every day. And this is not one that I stopped to actually go through, but I saw a paragraph and it was like, it said Christian Group believes there's only 750,000 and sold people. And then I was like, oh, that's interesting. And, you know, do you know many famous people there are in the world? How many? There's about 500,000. Between 300 and 500,000. There's about 300 to 500,000 people that Wikipedia deems notable enough to have an entry. as to who they are and what they do.

Hmm. Yeah. Maybe those are the people told. Maybe. Yeah. Maybe. That'll upset people. John Lithes is Americans wouldn't care about World War III. Prove me wrong.

Well, if World War III started, I wouldn't be surprised if the West Coast states say, Trump did this, and then you get DSA at a third of the Democratic Party. Guys, I think people didn't understand what it means that the DSA is 30%. Right. This is where you have a room. And on the left side of the room is a small group, there's 100 legislators in, let's just say, let's just hypothetical number in Oregon. State assembly comes. 30 of the people on the left side of the room are all DSA. Then you've got people on the right side of the room who are moderate

to conservative and very few conservative. Then in the middle, you have squishy liberals. They all start fighting. Trump started this war. It's World War III where our lives are in danger. The left side of the room says, we have to break away and we have to break away now. Tell the world, we do not support this war, we will not be involved in it. The people on the right, they're few and far between. They say, that's ridiculous. The people in the middle say, well, we don't, we don't, we don't know. Well, guess what? The people in the middle abstain. The 30% of the right votes, the 12% of the left vote and the 12% of the right vote, the left wins. And then the left starts putting the right and the people in the middle into

guillotines, chopping their heads off. And then eventually the DSA will start chopping their own heads off. That's literally the French Revolution. There was not that many far left wackos, but, you know, and I'll say this too, it's of all things. In the United States, there was a letter written, it might have been Adams, I'm not sure, said 30% wants revolution, 30% does not, and 30% does not care. But that's not correct. The actual estimates are unknown, but it's believed that around 40% wanted independence, about 20 some odd percent, uh, I believe, I believe, actually, I could be wrong. No, I think it was, I think I'm getting wrong.

I think it was 40% that didn't, 30 some odd percent that did, and then 20 some odd percent that were loyal. The middle of the road, people were just like, leave us alone. The revolutionary people won the argument, and thus, the elections. And there were even loyalists who argued the Continental Congress had no authority to declare independence for everyone else. But they did because they were the active political branch. And then when they won, it was the best thing ever.

And boy, were they right. Sometimes it's right, sometimes wrong. The point is a small faction is all that is required for a revolution. So now that you've got 30%, if this war kicks off and they do a draft, I would not be surprised to see the West Coast states secede. And it's only a minority. Like revolutions are not done by even 5% or 3% of the population. And on top of that, you can look at the Bolsheviks for it.

You know what I mean? The DSA, and it's always done by the intellectuals that sort of gear on all the like the slave class that ends up doing the revolution sort of for them. And the DSA is, what, 85% white, and they are college-educated, basically white people. That's who runs the DSA. College-educated white people that are quite young. I believe, like, two-thirds of them hold like a bachelor's or over or something like that. So it's like, those are the type of people that would do a revolution, if anybody. So indeed, non-sequitur says, bring on Colonel Doug McGregor and have this discussion. He is nearby. That'd be great.

Add in Chavez is currently sitting at Texas Roadhouse enjoying a steak. We'll tune into the show when I get home. Let's go. You know it'd be funny if like the whole thing was actually Texas Roadhouse did it. Right. To be like, they've falsely accused us. And then I'm like, hey, we should go support Texas Roadhouse. And they're like, it's working.

You go to Texas Roadhouse periodically. And it's honestly one of my favorite spots. They got big delicious potatoes. Their steaks are pretty dang good. I'm going to be honest. I'm not going to play stupid games. Texas Roadhouse is not of the best steak I've ever had. But it's in my top 10.

I give a guy six. Because I've been to some good steakhouses, but I know this. If I want a rabbi and I just want good quality for a good price, we go to Texas. I'm not sponsored by them. It's just they got veteran parking. They've always been very nice to us. They treat us well. We like going there.

I like the potato skins with the cheese on top. You walk in, you pick your steak. You walk in and they have a fridge and I'm like, which steak would you like? And I'm like, I want the fattiest ribeye. And they're like, done. And you get that steak. So when I see them lying about an American business to bring their woke cancel culture garbage back, it pisses me off.

Yeah, I grew up going to Texas Roadhouse. It's great. It's great. Amazing. When they still had peanuts. Great place. They still have peanuts. Well, you could still throw them on the floor and stuff. Oh, yeah, that was.

Now they give you a bucket. Yeah. The good old days. It's a great place to take the kids, too. Kids have a great time at Texas Roadhouse. So, you know, screw these people. Geez. All right, my friends, we're going to go to the uncensored portion of the show, and I had a vision.

Well, I had a conversation, actually, with an AI researcher. which was freaky. You may have seen it. I was watching it today. But I've been thinking a lot about it, and I really do think everyone needs to watch it. Let me say this. Check out the Tim Poole show.

The interview that we did, if anyone builds it, we all die. And I have a lot to talk about in this regard as to what I think is going to happen. It was like almost, it's about a two-hour conversation where we talk about the potentials of AI, and this guy's very much an expert,

and he breaks down what they're doing. And I've had a vision. We'll talk about that. rumble.com slash Timcast, IRL. Follow me on X and Instagram at Timcast. Matt, do you want to shout anything out? Yeah, so I'm with the Daily Wire, obviously, and my show is The Nuclear Reaction slash Matt Nuclear over on YouTube.

Matt Nuclear on X, Matt Nuclear on TikTok, Matt Nuclear on Instagram, even Boomer Facebook. But yeah, we recently opened a new YouTube channel, the Nuclear Reaction over on YouTube. Oh, I am Phil the Remains on Twix. You can check out my Patreon. That's patreon.com slash fill the remains. The band is all the remains.

You can check us out on Apple, Music, Amazon, Amazon, Music, Pandora, YouTube, Spotify, and Deezer. Don't forget the left lane is for crime. Chris. Yeah, Chris Carr 17 on X. Come check me out. Carter Banks, at Carter Banks, everywhere, at Carter Banks official, everywhere else.

I actually had a good anecdote to tell about God, and I think maybe I'll save that for the after show as well. so go join us in the Discord and on Rumble. Tim. We'll see you all over at Rumble.com slash Timcast, IRL right now. Thanks for hanging out.