Timcast IRL - ICE SHOOTS Illegal After Trying To RUN OVER Agents w/ James Klug & Lisa Reynolds

Episode Date: July 8, 2026

Phil, Ian, and Lisa are joined by James Klug to discuss ICE fatally shooting an Illegal Alien, the UK hates free speech, new evidence drops of accused Charlie Kirk Assassin, US resumes strikes on Iran, and rumors erupt Mitch McConnell is dead.  SUPPORT THE SHOW BUY CAST BREW COFFEE NOW - https://castbrew.com/ GET OUR MERCH - https://merch.timcast.com/ Join - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCLwN... Hosts:  Phil @PhilThatRemains (X) | https://allthatremains.komi.io/ Ian  @IanCrossland  (everywhere) Lisa @LisaElizabeth (X) Producer: Carter @carterbanks (X) |  @trashhouserecords  (YT) Guest: James Klug @JamesKlug (X) Podcast available on all podcast platforms! For advertising inquiries please email [e-mail] ICE SHOOTS Illegal After Trying To RUN OVER Agents | Timcast IRL

This morning, a little bit before 7 a.m. There was another attempt on an ice agent's life. An illegal from Mexico tried to ram an ice agent with his car, and so the ice agent shot him. We'll get into that and talk about the ramifications from that. Tyler Robinson's, what's, the preliminary hearing was this morning. So there's a bunch of evidence that's being discussed. There's a lot of people that are concerned about what is or isn't going to be allowed into the court.

So we're going to get into that. there is a big push. This is kind of funny, actually. There's a big push from activists in California to allow black English to be pushed on kids. I remember there was a time where that was called ebonics. I'm not sure if that's actually acceptable to say, but that was kind of the story from there.

So we're going to talk about that. And there is still a war going on in the Middle East in Iran. The U.S. is striking again. I guess Iran had sent a few drones to three different. merchant ships that were traveling through Strait of Hormuz, and the U.S. has now decided that they've had enough, so the strikes are back on. There's massive bombing in multiple places in Iran, so we're going to get into that. But before we get into any of that, I want you to head over to Bunker Branding and pick up some of the Timcast IRL merch. You can check out the, what's it's the Ian's Betrayal T-shirt, which is my favorite piece of merchandise that Timcast has produced.

originally it was on a skateboard which is going to be delivered in my house soon I hope but we've got everybody from the Timcast crew you got Tim you got Carter you got me in the back here I think that's that's Tate right holding the flag yeah yeah I'm offended I'm not in there

well you know you you're you know you and Ian taking some shots from everybody so head on over to bunker branding dot com and pick up some of your Timcast merch head on over to the run Bumble page become a member there join our our Timcast.com and become a member there and

Smash the like button share the show with everybody joining us tonight to talk about all the stories that we mentioned is James Kluke Well, you guys, thank you so much for having me. I appreciate it first of all this Ian's betrayal shirt. I'm definitely getting that 100% I'm James Kluge. I run the James Kluo YouTube channel. We do political street Conversations as well as interviews commentary and so much more. I'm really excited to be here. Thank you Thank you. Lisa is here. Hello, Lisa. They made me come. I'm here. Oh, stop acting like you don't love being here. Oh, it's fine. It's fine. It's Vegas. We're in Vegas. We're going to go to dinner. It's going to be a good time. Tell everyone you are. Lisa, I do the booking here and I'm a resident contrarian, I guess. And you can follow me at Lisa Elizabeth, even though I hardly tweet anymore. There you go. It's here. It's good to have you. It's good to have you. It's here. It's good to have you. Also, I'm a contrarian. I'm very disagreeable personality type. So let's get into it.

I don't buy that one bit. Carter's in the back there. Yes, yes. I'm buried by machinery and screens, but I'm also here. I excited to get into it. Phil, let's do it. I'm sorry for neglecting to say hello yesterday. I totally forgot about that. I was like, Phil just mock me. I did. I'm sorry. So anyways, we're going to get right into it from the post-Melonelianel. Ice agent shoots, kills illegal immigrant from Mexico who tried to ram him with his vehicle. You know, I thought that everyone knew that it's a bad idea to try to use your car to take out an ice agent.

But clearly this guy wasn't paying attention to the news earlier this year. The Post-Milennial says an ice agent shot and killed a Mexican illegal in Houston Tuesday morning after federal officials say he attempted to flee a vehicle stop and tried to strike the agent with a vehicle. Fox News digital identified the man as Lorenzo Salgado Arayo. Nice effort there. What was that? Nice effort with me in there. I don't know if I got it right or not, but that was authentic. I was like, you're trying.

Yeah, that's good job. Solid. The incident happened shortly before 7 a.m. during a targeted enforcement operation, according to U.S. immigration and customs enforcement. ICE said Arayo allegedly rammed an ICE vehicle, ignored multiple verbal commands, and attempted to run over an agent. The agency said the agent fired his weapon in self-defense. The Houston Fire Department said crews were sent to the scene at 6.51 a.m.

and found Arayo suffering from a gunshot wound. He was taken to Bentob Hospital while CPR was underway and later died according to ICE. The FBI's Houston office is investigating if there was an assault on federal law enforcement officer, while the Department of Homeland Security Office of Inspector General is handling the investigation into the fatal shooting. FBI spokesperson Connor Hagan said,

it is not a surprise that a law enforcement officer will shoot you if you try to hit him with your car. I think we're all, like apparently we're really, rediscovering this though as a nation. I mean, apparently that's just the thing. And by the way, this is not the first time this has happened. This has happened multiple times with illegal immigrants trying to ram ICE agents or officers with their vehicles when they're getting in trouble. There was one just off the top of my head. There was Portland. It was Trendy O'Rago gang members. They were part of a sex trafficking ring. And the media and Democrats tried to run with it being like, oh, look, now they're

shooting innocent illegals. And then you dig just one layer deeper and you see what's actually going on there and just blows up in their face. I don't know if they're They're going to try to do the same thing here, but every single time they try to grab it, they try to turn it into a sob story, and it fails miserably. I see it as a big W. They keep taking care of themselves. I kind of see it as a W. It's faster than deportation. Correct. Because in a hundred years ago, this stuff would happen like quietly and then it would build, build, build, build, build in the interviews.

But now we get to see each individual instance of some, I don't want to call them an idiot, but some desperate moron, whoever they are trying to ram a police. Anybody who tries to ram police officer in their car has some problem. Are you saying that 100 years ago that people were trying to ram police officers with their cars? They were getting one-offed people would be getting killed but there wouldn't make news With their Ford explorers? You know There's a lot of horseback and Symitter if I remember

Correctly But it wouldn't get reported so stuff would build like Bleeding Kansas went on for 14 years now we get to pick it apart day by day and like kind of right the course of the ship as we go So that does give me a lot of hope it is worth noting that I haven't like I haven't you know heard a lot of leftists coming out and and making a big stink about this one. Do you think that they've actually decided, you know what? Maybe we shouldn't take the mantle of defending the illegal, take it up because this person was likely involved in some kind of illegal activity beyond his being here. They usually not care. They try. They try. So they'll do, they'll attempt to do that with anybody. And then it'll just, it depends on how much steam it gets in

the mainstream media, like whether or not they actually want to deal with that. I mean, the Maryland man was I imagine they're still running to his defense, you know? The, uh, what's, he's just a Maryland dad. Yeah, the, the Maryland man who was actually, uh, is Maryland dad. Maryland father, Maryland man, whatever. But they, I mean, that one, nobody's learned the less on that one. If you go, if we go out on the street and we go talk to some people, just your average everyday people about ice, uh, tonight, we will run into people that bring up Maryland man.

You bring up, you know, going out on the street. Do you have a sense as to whether people generally, really look at ice is a good thing or a bad thing nowadays. I mean, you're out there all the time talking to people. So, depending on where you go. Yeah, I go to a lot of blue cities, right? So, like, I'm talking to a lot of people. But like, if I go to like Huntington Beach or, or not even Huntington Beach, if I just go somewhere where it's not Philadelphia or D.C. maybe, you'll run into a lot of people that actually do support it. But, you know, this is the kind of, this is what the left does when it comes to. If you show your support publicly, we will do everything we can to make your life a living hell. And that still exists today, by that. And they still run a lot of these institutions. They still control the media. They still control college campuses. They still control, you know, Hollywood and all that stuff.

So it is still like, whoa, maybe I don't want to celebrate it, but I'm good with it. In a general sense, though, you will get a lot of people that do, the propaganda does work. When they grab that Maryland father's story, that stuff works on people because not everyone is talking politics all day long. They're not digging into every single story. They're just hearing a very surface level thing. And usually the people that are spurging about ice are who, leftists. So they're getting that narrative majority of the time. I describe it as the normal people that are worried about their kids and their family

and spend maybe an hour to two hours per week listening to news. And they don't go much further than listening to the headlines. And that's kind of how they form their opinions. For sure. Do you want to say something? Oh, what's that guy's name? The guy that kicked to the cop, the ICE vehicle, and then they shot up. Oh, yeah.

Wrestled on the ground with a gun. Was that what? Preddy was his name, Alex Preddy. And his face, people will tell me the story of, look, they threw a guy on the ground. He was a teacher, Ian. They shot him on the ground. And I'm like, well, didn't he kick the cop car? And he's like, well, yeah, didn't he wrestle for a gun while he was on the ground wrestling with cops?

Okay, okay. Like, then the reasoning comes out of the situation. You get past that. You just got to get past the headline. You got to, when people, that's why people aren't insane about this illegal guy tried to kill a cop and they killed him. Like, they're not insane about it because they dig six centimeters deep and you see it wasn't like an innocent guy. Give it a day or two. They might pick it up and decide to go be crazy with it, though. They might. They might. I think they tend to stay away from these ones. The situation with

Alex Prattie was, it's interesting because he had, he basically was just going out there professionally. He was with, what is that ice watch? That like insurgency group that was going out there, assaulting federal officers, by the way, and behaving like absolute lunatics in the street. So if you guys have ever taken like a CCW class or a conciliary class, pretty much the entire thing, pretty much like the entire course is just like don't do what Alex Preddy did. Right? That's the first thing I think I was like, one of the questions was like, where should you not bring a gun? It's like to a protest.

Or just like when you're wrestling with federal agents, you know, like you don't need to be doing that with your gun on you. Yeah. You know, they don't even recommend that you go to a bar with your firearm. And I'm pretty sure that's illegal. In Texas, it's illegal. Yeah, it's illegal. Some places, yeah. So, you know, a lot of it is just avoiding a situation that can get you in

trouble. You're an absolute idiot if you're wrestling with with officers and federal agents with a loaded firearm on your person. Don't go stupid places with stupid people and do stupid things. That's it's real simple. And any place that you're you're gonna go and possibly have a confrontation with with a law enforcement officer, you definitely don't bring a gun. Yeah. You know, the idea that you would you would go to a protest and be an as an activist saying, oh, I'm gonna go ahead.

and I'm going to try to inhibit police officers from doing their job, law enforcement officers from doing their job, and doing it armed, that is just asking for trouble, is asking for a problem. In that situation, too, he's de-arresting people, quote-unquote, that's what they call it.

First of all, you obviously have no authority to be doing that. What on earth are you think? Could you imagine pulling over? Let's say there's like a cop that pulled somebody over on the side of the street. Would you get out of your car and go, like, interfere with this traffic stop? No, that would be insane. Totally insane.

And so with that situation, he did that, he shoved the officer. It's like, you know, at a certain point, if you do all of these things in a row, you're going to end up finding out. Yeah. Whether I agree with the outcome or not, it's like you're going to end up being in a bad situation. And that's what you're supposed to avoid when you have a firearm on your person. I think these high profile, some of those high profile cases like what you're just talking about with Prattie. And then this guy who attacked the cop, the ice, I mean, they're putting like a bitter taste in the mouths of the left-ins. activists that are on the side of ice or on the side of the protests against ice because

it's just it's not it's it's like taking away the veil of like ice bad everyone else good it's showing that there's a nuance here and that you know you evil people can still do evil to the federal police force and and then maybe the federal police force isn't the bad guy in that situation even though you disagree with their initial premise still yeah for the majority of these targeted like fugitive operations where they're actually they have 10 agents and they're going after an individual. Usually that guy is a bad dude as well. Yeah.

And they're probably stupid as well. That's why they end up in situations where they ram, you know, officers with their... Yeah. They're in the country illegally and they're doing that when they're getting caught. Yeah. I mean, to Lisa's point earlier, like, it is... Like, I mean, not that I'm hoping for, for, you know, illegals to be killed, but, like, if you're a violent criminal, if you're the kind of person that's like, I'm going to

use my car to try to, you know, try to hit a police officer, no one's going to cry. No one's gonna cry if if the police officer defends himself like I forget what the woman's name was it was very it was right before the pretty Renee good Renee good yeah She was obviously an activist and she made a really really really bad decision And it ended up with her losing her life because of it like if it so I mean To in my opinion that was a sad Situation like if this guy is you know actually trying to ram a cop and And he's here illegally.

It's like, well, maybe I'm not that sad about it. Maybe he should have just, you know, allowed himself to be taken into custody. He wasn't trying to be a protester. They were trying to apprehend him. This is a different situation entirely. You're not even making the news if you do something as stupid as that in a foreign country. And you're like, oh, yeah. Well, that guy's an idiot.

Yep. Like, that's it. There's no debate around that topic. Not at all. You go to Mexico. You're in Mexico illegally from some other country. You do something like that. Screw around with police officers, whatever.

And they're trying to remove you from the country. Like, dude, you're not. And never mind the fact that most countries, if you're found to be in their country illegally, you go to prison in that country for being there illegally. Like, the U.S. is incredibly generous because we don't actually imprison you for being here illegally. It's the most generous country on the face of the earth when it comes to that process. Yeah, we, we, we deport you. Unfortunately.

Unfortunately. To our detriment. Yeah. Yeah. Like here, here it's like they, we're going to, you know, maybe you'll be allowed to stay until a hearing or what have you. It should be, you should just be brought to the border and pushed over and be like, get out of here, you know. And then if you're, if you're not, if you're not Canadian or Mexican and we drop you off in Canada or Mexico, then you're Canada or Mexico's problem.

Where did you come in? All right. If you came in from the southern border, get out of here. Now you're Mexico's problem. I don't care if you're from Guatemala. Maybe Mexico put you in jail. Maybe Mexico sends you to Guatemala, whatever. You're not in the U.S. anymore. It's so beyond, if you actually think about it, it's so beyond over the top, what we do for people that broke into our country, you get. What medical treatment you get education you get oh yeah and we're also paying people $2,500 to even leave in the first place yeah with in a country that they have no permission to be in it's actually so over the top how generous we are with these people Yeah so it's wild how how like kid gloves the US can be sometimes you know

philosophically or with people but then how brutally sadistic it can be behind closed doors with like drone bombs and stuff. So it's like with a smile on our face, we'll, you know, do some things that I'm not going to talk about on YouTube to your home country. I'm happy that they're doing them. I changed my whole position. I would, I would push back on the idea that drone, the use of drones is sadistic. Well, it's more like targeted assassinations. And it's not all sadistic. I'm not, it's not that even remotely most of it. I'm not saying it is sadistic. Most of it's for money, for political power. It's not like doing it for fun. But they're doing it. willingness to cause pain to get your point across.

But if you count ethical, we are even doing those things compared to how it was, I don't know, say 200 years ago, three hundred, think about 300 years. Think about the all of humanity. I mean, we are way less problematic as far as like, you know, people on the left or pacifists would say. An example of this is we had the atomic bomb when nobody else did and we could have ruled the world. Yeah, we have the atomic bomb and yet we still developed the Ginsu Hellfire. Right? The hellfire missile that will pop out. We're not going around with horses and like what are.

No, actually, no, listen. We actually are going around with swords. We have a hellfire missile that will shoot swords out of the side. So that way it doesn't have collateral damage. We don't use that. Yeah, we do. We've used it. We've used it a bunch of times. I'm good. Let's keep using it. Like, they draw, they literally have a hellfire missile or that can be shot at a target that has swords that shoot out. So that way it's not an explosive. So we don't have collateral damage.

So we don't kill innocent people. We get just the guy that we're targeting. Like to, and to James' point, we have the nuclear bomb. We could level entire cities, but we've spent. We should do that to all the same countries. Well, we spent effort and money trying to be able to limit how many innocent people die. And then they could rebuild, like, you know, like. Japan.

They could rebuild. Japan's a special country. They could have buckies and all that other. What is it? Is it buckies? No, we don't have to do any. Baffle house, baffle house. I mean, we could actually spread freedom across the world.

Ian, to your point, though, I think what's really interesting about that point is if we're not doing it, somebody else is going to, that's just how human nature works. So who would we prefer to do it other than us? Do it. What do you mean it? What you were talking about when it comes to using, we call it world police if you want to. And I'm not really even making an argument here for like, oh, yes, it's good that we're doing everything that we do. But if we're not doing it, somebody else is going to take our position. of being that bully, I guess, you could say. Who would you prefer it?

Yeah, either you automate it or we have to keep doing it. Either you automate it to like robotic AI and just trust that it's a flawless process that's going to oversee humans and we don't let us go to war again, but that's like why we need-cap ourselves and we're ahead. Wouldn't someone still be in control of the AI system that you're talking about? So even if it's an AI system or what have you, it would be something that the US, ostensibly, the US would still control. I mean, by automating it, you're just handing it over to robots as opposed to having human beings do it. And it's perfect.

And at that point, you're still got, you know, who's developing the weapons, who's actually writing the code? Who's the one that's in control of the AI? So it's not really taking the US out. It's just changing who's making the, who's taking the kinetic actions, making it from people to automated systems. You could, like the Americans would probably build it. You're right. But it's like if you push a boulder down a hill, you're no longer, controlling that boulder so we could set a process in motion with like an artificial

governance uh that oversees autonomous weaponry and stuff to protect the human race but once that boulder this is the matrix man i kind of like the humans in the loop part i kind of like the fact that it's like as long as they're americans yes yeah i mean that's that's clearly actually like literally i'm not even joking that's correct yes that's the problem is no we'll fight to the death to make sure that we maintain that power you know it's but it's the options that we have like whether whether it be Russia or China, the best option we have is that the United States is the one actually making the calls. Of those, yeah. Of the human-led organizations, I think the American-led economy right now is the least worst one I can find because of free speech.

Like, which shows like this, if the Chinese were running the world police, we wouldn't be able to have this show. Oh, geez, even the UK, man. Yeah, I mean, exactly. The UK throws more people in jail and Russia for Facebook posts, for posts on the internet. No kidding. By a big margin. Yeah. That's a really freakish.

That's true. You should pull that. You should pull that stat up. It's wild. 12,000 people were put in jail. If I understand correct. Last year, I think it was. Over Facebook and Twitter posts, social media posts.

And they have these other things over there where it's called prevent, right? And if say, here's an example. Tommy Robinson had a really good friend who was just a security guard, just a security guard. And so he had, the security guard had a son. And his son came over and like Tommy is always nice to them. So he gave them both like Stone Island hats or something that he happened to have in his car. And the kid went to school the next day and he's like, I got a Stone Island hat from like Tommy Robinson or whatever. They called Prevent and said, we're going to take your child away because you interact with him or you know him or whatever.

And he was like put on this like anti-radical like anti-radicalization program. They do that because and it's for far right extremists. Like that's what they do. And they will take your children away. They will put you in these programs, anything that they can do to re-educate you. And they do it often. So there was annual arrests in England and Wales, around 12,000 arrests every year under laws like Section 127 of the Communication Act 2003 or Section 1 of the Malicious Communication Act of 1980. There's a really good grip.

Then it goes on to kind of pat the numbers and say convictions versus arrest. While there are more than 12,000 people annually arrested, the number of individuals formerly convicted and sentenced is significantly like. Because that's better, right? We'll use the government. We'll arrest you, scare the crap out of you, right? Possibly you'll have to defend yourself in court. Spend all the time away from home, spend the time away from work, possibly, spend the money to defend yourself. And then you don't go to jail.

So that's better. You do. Actually, there's other short cases up where for like the R word, people get less time than people who have had put up offensive. Retard? No, no, no, no. like the like people who commit like great oh oh uh sexual sexual assault yeah yeah right um they get they have form of it they get less time there's like been cases where they get way less time than people for facebook posts yeah because they're because of there there a lot of it's because of the whole

the game like in the 2000s when there was this whole like maybe it was maybe it was around like 2015 gun debate was a big thing everyone would always be talking about i feel like we haven't really been talking about that for a long time and it was always brought up like oh Oh, well, they don't need guns over there. They don't need any of this stuff over there. They're totally fine. They have no problems at all. It's like, well, you know, now we're looking at these stats.

It's 12,000 arrests every single year. Yeah. That's unbelievable. There is a graph where it shows it in comparison to other countries and it's staggering when you see. I don't even think third world countries are doing that. No, no. Well, a lot of the part of the reason is because they don't have the infrastructure to do it. They don't have the ability to monitor their population is the same way that the UK does.

Because, I mean, there are more, there are tons of cameras everywhere in the, UK and they monitor people's social media posts and stuff. But you mentioned firearms and stuff like that. One of the things that people in Europe like to say is they're like, oh, you know, you guys have so many murders in the US. And if you look at how many people die from heat stroke every year in Europe, there are more people that die from not having AC than there are people murdered with firearms.

Right. I've seen those figures and it's like, okay, so you guys are bragging, but everybody's dying from heat stroke and you can't say words on Facebook. Yeah. So I mean, yeah. And if you if you take out a handful of major cities, the U.S. firearm murder rate goes down to, you know, similar to what European countries are. Lower, way lower. Like extremely lower. In our suburbs, it's virtually non-existent, the homicide rates. In Britain, all this censorship and arrests, is this because the emperor is trying to just maintain control of all those people? The emperor. We need more effort. We don't need less.

We have Phil been talking about, is there an American empire where, like, I think it's semantic. Like, there's no emperor. Charles technically is the king. He's got a lot of kingdoms. He's got the king of Australia, the king of Canada. These are laws passed by their parliament, Ian. Usually back in the day, when a guy had multiple kingdoms, he'd establish an empire to own all the kingdom. So if he died, all those kingdoms would stay owned by the empire.

Yeah, true, but he's neutered. I mean, parliament has all, he's just a figurehead. I mean, he doesn't have any say over anything. If they have a real king, they'd probably have air conditioning by now. a governor general that can disband parliament they should do that if the royals actually had any power how did Megan Markle cut off

Harry's you know was it was it was a scary or is it the other one Harry the reason that that really happened and that he let it happen is because he knows that Charles isn't his real father anyway it's that hot polo player guy you know and like so what's he really care

oh Harry you ever see him next to that that polo player dad no it's starting to make sense spitting image really it's uncanny It's disturbing. I don't want to joke about, I mean, whatever you think about empire. That it's like our neighboring England is like our neighbor good guy speaks English with us.

And they're the, like right there across the ocean, you know. Across the pond. Right across the pond. But they like these extreme censorship technologies being implemented in their country right there with the people that are like about as American as you can get without being American. It's like Canadians and then Englishmen like than that, you know, we speak English. Australians. Yeah. The patriots in those countries are as patriotic as it can get.

To be honest. The Patriot ones, but there aren't a ton of them. A lot of there's not. What, 30%. But I mean, they are at, yeah, thankfully. What is, what is it? Is it not Restore Britain? It is Restore.

Restore. Restore. Restore. Restores the good one. The good one. Yeah, there you go. But those people are as patriotic as it can get. And really what Americans should be doing is wishing the and hoping and praying for the very best for those people.

Unfortunately, I think a lot of them would even agree. It's looking like it's a little bit too late. So this move towards globalization. I think it's been going on since the night. I just did Brian Shapiro. I was pushing the limits today. I hosted for Brian Shapiro. Check it out.

We're talking about the New World Order, basically, the George Bush Sr. was talking about. And that, like, they're just bringing foreign nationals into all these countries to create like a global village and just disrupt American power, disrupt the dollar, disrupt get rid of our constitutional, free speech. And that the balls in. motion. It's been rolling and now the people are trying to step up and stop it when they realize what's happening like 17 years too late. But also maybe they're doing the right thing

by stopping it and like maybe nationalism is kind of good. So it is good. It is because you're going to have corporatocracy or nationalism or some interbreed of the two. And I like the nice thing about the nation is we have a say and what it does through our Democrat, at least in our nation we do. But with corporations, it's just the owners that decide everything. We really don't have a say. It's all manufactured and it's, we don't have a say. Like, your vote doesn't really mean anything. That's why there should be fewer people voting. Yeah, 100%.

Repeal 17th, the 14th, a bunch of all the runs. I think you might be right that voting's not as potent as it seems, but we have the ability to, like, whip up a video show and talk to 100 million people and change their minds and tell them to push a button and they'll go do it. Kind of. I mean, like, you can change, like, sentiment and you can affect that, I guess. But, like, you don't have the big money that Pfizer has. You don't have the big dollars that. the gun lobby has or than any any other lobby has i mean the reason that our doctors treat us the way

they do is because because like even even what doctors think is influenced by like big pharma they write the textbooks right they influence the laws i mean nothing like we we don't even have food that's healthy they the farmers and and they're you know that's a lot of choice in that like if you if you there there absolutely i work there well i mean you're talking no i'm talking about there's a lot of choice when it comes to like the food that you eat like Like, you don't have to go to the... That's not true. And I'll tell you why it's not true.

If I go home right now and go get potting soil from the store decides I'm going to grow my own all organic food, is there chemicals? That will get, seep up through my own food? Yeah, you can't even grow your own food without chemicals. You live in a city. Even if I didn't. If you don't live in a city, you can do... They tell you not to, like, eat snow anymore. Even if you're in, like, Appalachia where there's, like, nothing going on because of the chemicals and things like that that that are in the...

atmosphere and that seep in and that will they don't want you used to be able to eat snow we we used to make snow whatever you can't do that anymore it was always dirt in fact the the air is actually cleaner now than it was 30 years ago 30 or 40 years ago like the the the reason really all the airplanes flying back and forth and letting their emissions out absolutely cleaner now absolutely cleaner now and it was 100 years ago not 100 30 or 40 years ago like in the 80s 70s I'm just saying I'm just saying too we don't have control of everything it's a little illusion I think that's totally not true. I mean, like, the last 10 years with even the introduction of MAGA, that's been a complete.

You're changing public sentiment. That's been transforming the direction of the country. Yeah, because it's a groundswell of public sentiment. Fine. But you're like individually, we don't, and there's people with money that are backing a lot of that, right? And so individually, you know, to sit here around the table and say, we have a say, we don't really have a say. I mean, yes, we get to sit here and talk or whatever. We, you as an individual on a non-collective basis, do not have a say.

I'll tell you what, you have a lot more say when you're not mass importing foreigners from the federal. Yes. I mean, way more say. I look at. But why are we doing that? Most of the country doesn't even want that. And yet we're still doing it. They're still pouring in.

Well, no, no. They're not pouring in right now. I mean, they're still trying. Well, they're trying. We have people overstaying. They're actually not even really trying. There's basically nobody at the southern border right now. Yeah.

And we had net negative migration last year. We have it when people were obviously saying they didn't want it. And even the Democratic Party knew that they didn't want it. We can't start fixing it. We can't start finally fixing it. I'm just saying. And then complaining that nothing can get done. We just started.

I'm not saying nothing can get done. That's not what I'm saying. I'm not saying nothing can get done. I'm saying you as an individual to sit here and act like you have some say in your democratic process is BS. I think too many people actually probably do. Like the tweaker down the street should not be able to vote to raise my taxes. The 52% I say this all the time 52% of Philadelphians are illiterate Functionally illiterate by all metrics. Yeah it's reported and those people get to vote

You want to hear why I just shouldn't be loud about this I disagree with this data just a little bit because a lot of who's included in that and I hate to harp on this again is foreigners So you end up with like oh wow why is California so behind well there's it's not because like all the tea all the teachers are bad It's not because all the schools are bad although you see a lot of bad stuff I get it I understand them are bad. But a lot of it is because you have a lot of immigrants that have come in over the last 40 years and their parents aren't really strong on education. And you have kids that are in the classroom that don't really speak English. So you're going to end it with that data regardless. And the no child, no child left behind stuff was terrible. All they do is they push kids through that haven't actually achieved anything. So that data is a little bit misleading though, Lisa.

Have you walked around Philly who's talked to these people? No, no, no. I've walked. You know they can't read. I have walked around Philly a lot. And Philly might be a little bit more of a unique issue with Philly. Okay, I get that. But people say that people drop those facts and figures for California all the time. And a lot of that is weighed down by how many people are in the state that barely even speak English. We don't have that many like you do. And I'm telling you, these people are voting. Philly might be a little bit different.

Okay. I get it. But to your point, like the, like I'm, you know, I've definitely made it clear that I think that, you know, there are way too many people voting people that don't have any idea what they're actually voting for. They listen to a politician say, I'm going to give you. you these things, I'm going to give you these programs, there's going to be all this stuff that we're going to do for you, and people are voting in the hopes that they basically can get handouts from the government, whether they be handouts in some kind of like child care or free. It's exactly what Chopee felt predicted. Yeah, it is, it is. And that is something that is in the long

term has hurt the country and it's only going to continue to hurt the country. So there should be, in my opinion, there should be significantly fewer people voting. I don't think that like, you know, there's the meme of though, you know, repeal the 19th. That doesn't go nearly far enough. We're way fewer than just women not voting. Like that's... Women would be a good start, though. Including me. Well, I mean, look, I don't care if it's all women and 50% of men or whatever.

But the people that are voting, you should have some kind of basic, you should at least have a basic understanding of how our system works. Most people aren't taught. We don't even have a civics class in schools where people are taught the difference between the House and the Senate. There's so many people that make the argument on the internet. What? We should go around and ask people if they knew who their congressman is. I bet you. I bet you.

Not of them though. Ask them what the Senate does. You know, what's the purpose of the Senate? People talk about having the, the, I see people on the internet say this kind of stuff. It's so wrong that Montana and it only has 250,000 or whatever the population is, has two senators and California has two senators. It's like, you don't understand why. It's just, you're just looking at the population and you're like, oh, it should be equal.

Like, that's what the House of Representatives is for. If you look at how many representatives from California versus how many representatives from Montana, it's a significant difference. They don't understand anything about our system. They have no understanding about how anything works. And then you elect a president and they're like, well, the president should just do this and the president should do that. The president doesn't have any powers to do the things that they're asking for. They're like, oh, you know, Joe Biden, he's going to, he's going to forgive student loan.

The president doesn't have the power. There was never a point where the president could say, I'm going to go ahead and forgive you of a debt. that you yourself decided that you wanted to take on. But people still vote for politicians that make these promises. We should have far fewer people voting because people don't know how our government works. You want to vote in your state elections?

Okay. You want to vote in your local elections? That's where you really get the most bang for your vote, right? You vote for your local, you know, your mayor, your local selectmen, whatever, Alderman, whatever it's called in your area. You'll actually be able to affect policy in your area. But when it comes to the first,

federal government, it should be a significantly fewer, like a lot fewer people. How did that work for Spencer Pratt? What? How'd that work for Spencer Pratt? Oh, I think they're still counting votes. We'll see. Yeah, there's still counting votes. California is a special case, but it's still the, it's still the fact, you know California's

a special case. Okay, fine. They're also, all Democrat cities are a special case. Right. Yeah, of course. I don't, I don't know. I'm not sure. I don't know.

But look, I understand, I understand, like, your point is well taken because I know that California is, California has been run by. a single party for so long, they've been able to create a system where they can kind of push people out that they don't like. That's fair, fair enough. Us, too, 1950. What? Us too, 1950. Who's us?

Philly. Well, okay. So, fine, fair enough. Democrat-run cities. But the point that I'm making is if you're not in a Democrat-run city and you're, you're going to, even still, you're going to have way more impact on your local election than you're going to be able to have on a federal election. Yeah, true. I think before any of that stuff, though, I mean, realistically, you have had over the last 40, 50 years mass importing,

people from countries that aren't really assimilating to American culture and they're coming here and they're coming here for the benefits. And that's very clear. You see this in Europe. Well, they'll skip through entire countries and go directly to the countries with the most benefits. And so you, you already have people coming to the country that are going there for the purpose of getting those handouts. What are they going to vote for more of the more of the, they're certainly not going to vote for protecting, you know, America and the country. They're going to go for. New York City, You're voting for more of what they wanted when they originally got here. Mandami just said that they everybody wants rent control.

We know how bad that is. This is another example, though. Like native New Yorkers are not the people that were totally 100% mom, Donnie. That wasn't the case. Well, it was the, it was the wealthy white people that were really voting for the. It was a lot of that. And then it was a lot of people that were not born in New York at all. Yeah.

You know, people that move there. All right. We're going to jump to this story here. This should be great. from the post-millennial breaking Tyler Robinson's trans lovers Lance Twiggs DNA found on screwdriver and a towel at UVU after Charlie Kirk's killing. This is going to be gross, ladies and gentlemen. During testimony on day two of Tyler Robinson's preliminary hearing, it was revealed that DNA evidence recovered from a screwdriver and towel retrieved from Utah Valley University in the wake of Charlie Kirk's killing belonged to Lance Twigs Robinson's transgender lover. Jennifer Phamina, a sergeant at the Utah Department of Public Safety, who has worked in the State Bureau of Investigation at the time of the shooting read out portions of a DNA report.

Do we want to play this? No. No. No. Sergeant Falamina, do you see the lines there that say item seven, that line? Yes. And will you read that portion of the report that describes what item seven is? Item seven, towel from around Mouser or rifle, serial number 8863.

Cereal number 8863. And there's also some other identification numbers. Is that the towel that you found with the rifle that day? Yes, it is. On September 10th. Yes. Item 8, will you read what that says is a description of item 8? Item 8, screwdriver from Perch.

And is that the screwdriver that you described that was collected from the rooftop? Yes. Okay. All right. All right. Yeah. If we can go to that out that his DNA was on the murder weapons towel and the title of a seven shooting position.

Case closed. Like what are we? Did people want to know if there's more to it than just this guy? And I'm not saying someone claiming that his DNA was on the weapons towel and a screwdriver at the shooting spot is enough to damn him to guilt. But what is the? Well, it's strong. I'm about to rip the top.

Remember, it's not. It's that the lover, their DNA was on it. Was it both? More of one. It was like 75% the, like the tranny guy. And then it was, am I not allowed to say that? No, you're not allowed to say that at all. What she meant was transsexual person.

Yes, I'm sorry. I didn't know. Get it right. I always get in trouble for that. Yeah, you did know. You actually did. No, I did. It was that I didn't remember.

Okay, so anyway, the, um, whatever. Twigs is buddy. I'm always going to get in trouble. He's gay love. Yeah, twigs. We just got done talking about how much we can talk about in the U.S. on our shows. I'm sorry, I'm sorry.

But anyway, there was more 75% his and 5% the other ones now. They did live together. Right. Probably shared a towel. Probably a bathroom towel hanging on the stall. No, they didn't say what kind of DNA it was, Phil. I didn't say anything like that. I don't know why you're putting words in my mouth.

Because that's what I thought you were leading. It's DNA. Is there different types of DNA? Yeah. Yeah, you can definitely tell what type of DNA it's from and where it's from. Like, you could tell if it's saliva or if it's. Or if it was the towel under the bad. Other stuff.

Yeah, right. Like, or skin cells or whatever. Yeah, yeah, you can absolutely tell. But even still, the point is, like, if you've got Twigs DNA on it, it is who wasn't at the site, who wasn't, you know, who wasn't at UVU, it's obviously strong indication that this towel came from their home because they were living together, right? Even though it had some of Tyler's DNA, but it was the other person's DNA. that was the predominant situation. I haven't really read up on this, but his twigs, the roommate.

That's the trance. Is he in custody right now? No, he's in witness protection. Yeah, it was in his protection. Okay. They, that person has. Markill says, he's gone and not. I think he was in witness protection,

but I don't know if he's still. He's like the star witness for the prosecution. Is he prosecute? I think he has immunity, but I'd have to double check that. Hmm. Yeah, well. So I mean, well, so I mean, look, it connects, it connects. It connects. you know, Tyler to the, to the murder weapon.

Yeah. And well, I mean, yeah, why not? I don't, I mean, I wouldn't have a problem with them considering him an accessory, considering all the, the text messages and back and forth and post and stuff that you've. I was feeling we'll probably end up seeing more coming out about that. Do you think like, we'll probably be seeing a lot more coming out about those two? There was a lot of Twitter posts talking about the day, like the day before the actual shooting happened.

There were people that were saying, oh, there's going to be a big thing happening at UVU today. There was multiple. Tomorrow. Yeah, multiple Twitter posts. Now, I don't know if they got to that today or if they talked about that today. But that's something that's worth that people should know. It's like there were multiple people from that Discord that were talking about it. There were multiple people that were alluding to something happening at UVU on the day in question.

I would be shocked if he was able to successfully keep that plan to himself leading up to that moment. I don't think he tried. Yeah. I think that he was talking about it in, you know, if I understand correctly, I'm obviously I'm not in the courtroom. I don't have access to all the evidence that the FBI has. But like, yeah, I don't think that he was trying to keep it quiet. It seems like he was talking about it with people that were in that discord and people knew that there was the possibility of something going on.

Very easy for people to look at discord and see who's doing something and then encourage and help people to get their things done. Yeah, because if someone was like, yeah, do it. Does that make them an accessory to murder? Yes. Because if someone comes online and they're like, I'm thinking about doing horrible, crime and I'm like, ah, yeah, just on like World of Warcraft in general chat. Am I now and then he goes and does some horrible game? Am I like an accessory to that?

Even though there's some internet chat. Well, if you egg him on more than probably a yeah, yeah, absolutely. Yeah, if you don't tell on them stuff, absolutely. Yeah. Because like, if someone comes on, they're like, I'm gonna go fill out the blank legal. I'm like, I want to report this guy to the app, yeah, I don't want anything to do with that. I don't even know if that's a bot, I don't know if it's a real person. I don't, like, I don't have a duty to report someone's telling me they're gonna commit a crime.

If you're the kind of person, like, whoa. Oh, I don't want to know anything about this. You probably shouldn't tell them, oh, do it. Yeah, you definitely need to. You should. Don't comply. Oh, there's just so much internet garbage of people saying they're going to do stuff. Like, just don't get involved.

No, but like, if it's, so if I came to you and I said, Ian, I'm about to do X, Y, Z, and you don't say anything, you can definitely be in trouble for them. But if it's like in a chat room with, like, 10,000 people you don't know, and one of the chatters says a thing and it, like, flies by in the chat room. You're like, you're not. Yeah, but they did that. Like, so there was this case on Reddit where this guy, he wound up trying to be a serial killer, killing homeless people. And he said, hey, you know, my, on Reddit, my cop buddy, whatever, said that, you know, they're investigating the serial killer out there. But everybody's like, no, you're crazy. Nobody is talking about a serial killer. Nobody's investigating that. The police

aren't investigating it. Somebody sent that to the police. They saw it. And then he started offing people. And because somebody turned that in, they knew exactly where to go and who to arrest. So you're like, yeah, you should turn those in. And I think Ian's example was more of like a live stream chat where there's like 10,000 comments every one second. That's what these Reddit feeds are? It's a level of scale. They should probably go to read us a little more. Because if it's like, if it's someone I know

that comes up to me and tells me in confidence they're going to go commit a horrible murder, I have a kind of a moral duty to turn them in or do something to stop it. You don't have a moral duty if it's like, I get what you're saying. That doesn't scale. It's to the point where if I don't know who the person is and a guy comes up me on the street news goes, I'm going to go commit a crime, go rob a thing. And I'm like, I don't, I'm not involved in this guy's crazy world. I'm going to the shorties some milk.

When people threaten to kid, kidnap my kids online, I definitely call the FBI. Yeah. I mean, if you're just on the internet in a chat room or something like that, you're not an accessory. If someone says some put something crazy in the chat and you don't go to the FBI, you're not going to be considered an accessory. And literally, if a guy walks up to me and he's like, I'm going to go rob that bank. And I go, I'll see you later, buddy. I'm not accessorizing him by not turning him in. No, you're not.

Because he hasn't committed the crime yet. If I witnessed him commit the crime. Yeah, we're talking about something totally different. And his friends that he's with at a private discord. A little far away from that. Yeah. This is totally different. This situation, we're talking about a little more of a focused discussion.

Yeah, you're talking about a totally different situation. It's extrapolating, like, proximity to guilt. Like, just because you were with someone that was saying they were going to commit a crime and you didn't tell them not to. It doesn't mean that you're guilty. So, hey, I'm encouraging you. If you were in chat rooms with that guy, turn them in. You're not going to get busted for it.

Show the chat logs. And secondly, anything that you guys tried to delete is still going to be available for the FBI. They can undelete. They have hash codes and things for all what do you think is gone. All that data of secret conversations on Discord is all. available to the FBI so there's no hiding it so come out ahead of it and expose this dude and his cabal if there were groups of them working together you know call them out best advice to you quick fact check on some I said earlier

Lance Twigs there's no evidence that he is in witness protection program right now but he does have limited use well that's a good point Phil possibly but also he does have limited use immunity from federal and Utah County authorities I think he thought he was gonna get thrown in jail and he just was like I'll do anything well tell you anything you want to know no look man they've got they literally have his DNA on the towel that was wrapped up that's that the kind of thing where you're like all right I'm gonna make a deal you know that like your DNA is on something that is is is wrapping up the murder weapon you're they definitely

have you in a position where you're like I need to protect myself it it feels like it open and shut case and I think it should be like I feel like the longer we talk about it and make a big deal out of it maybe not maybe it's okay to talk about it once or while. You think... I didn't want to do this. I've changed my mind. I know nothing.

I said I disagree, but... Well, the actual murder case is... Or the evidence of who committed the murder and the circumstances surrounding the actual murder, like it does have all of the fingers pointing at one guy. Right? Like, I mean, it does look like Tyler was the guy. I definitely think Tyler was involved 100%. Yeah.

So, I mean, it looks like he was the guy that actually did the... took the shot. You know, it looks like he was talking to people. in the discord about it. So, I mean, anything beyond that, like, I mean, people can pontificate, but that's not something that necessarily is going to put people into a legally actionable position. A lot of people are aware of those weird posts that were coming out the day before of them being like, oh, well, there's something big happening tomorrow.

I mean, there were at least several of those posts made. Outside of this trial, there needs to be a serious look at discord or whatever. groups were in the area that could have had anything to do with this as well. Because people aren't going to stop asking questions about that. I don't think we should. I think it's fair. The Kennedy assassination, I'm talking about John F. Kennedy, with Lee Harvey Oswald, everything was pinned on Harvey Oswald.

His gun was in the building on a different floor from him when they caught him. He was eating a sandwich, just chilling out. As they were arresting, he was like, I'm a patsy, you guys. There were apparently multiple gunshots at Kennedy from different angles. Like, still hasn't been exposed. Allegedly, not apparently. Allegedly, allegedly, multiple gunshots, but officially won. Is that what it is?

They hit him in multiple. You know what funny about that? There was multiple shots. So allegedly. Multiple angles. It was, no, not multiple angles. Allegedly, it was Lee Harvey Oswald and he took more than one shot. That's the official story.

So my daughter's like was learning about this in school this year and or last year. I can't remember this year or last year. Anyway. And she said, well, she questioned Lee Harvey Oswald to her teacher. And the teacher says he admitted it. Like that's how far along like the official. narratives are, they're saying that Lee Harvey Oswald admitted it when he

never admitted it. Like never, never, never. If anything, he claimed he was a Patsy and there's all this other evidence about all the cover-ups and things like that. Could you imagine when your teachers just going over that, like in detail with your kid though? But no, I'm saying. So today we're going to learn about Patsies. But why are they going to be like, oh, no, no, he's

definitely who killed him. He admitted it. And like, the people don't know. Like, people don't even, still to this day don't know that like there's any legitimacy or conspiracy. even surrounding that, which I think is crazy. You don't think people know? The teacher apparently didn't.

She had no idea. Well, she might not have wanted to talk about it. But I mean, you know, didn't Oliver... To lie, then, do you think you're going to lie to the kids and say he admitted it? I think a teacher would definitely lie to kids. I think a lot of people don't know. I think a lot of people don't know. I don't know.

My mom had no idea what MK Ultra loss? The JFK movie that, uh, what's his name, Oliver Stone made? Like, that was all about the conspiracy, wasn't it? It popularized it. That was a big movie, too. I mean, maybe, I'm sure that there are some. people that don't know, but I would err on to dishonesty from the

teacher than ignorance. You think so? Yeah, I'm telling it, a lot of these teachers, they can't even not in art, my school, my school's an exception, but like you see these schools and these teachers can't even spell words. Well, there was that viral video from Philly, right? Yeah, yeah, from Philly. I can't spell words.

With the student going up to the faculty, not even faculty, no, teachers and the principal, I believe. Yeah, the CEO. What, spell out some, you know, decently, like, No. Millennials on a lot of them. There you go.

Okay. So, like, what I'm saying, no, I think it's dangerous. Home school your kids, guys. I think that you're around people to talk about these things all the time and know this, but most. It's exhausting. It is exhausting, but most people don't. They have, like, my parents, for instance, didn't, they don't know. They just know that there was something fishy about the Kennedy assassination for sure.

Their whole lives, they've been like, yo, brother, the CIA, who knows what. But I think that that's residual about what's going on with Charlie's assassination as people are like, there's a cover up. There's got to be something going. on. Yeah, I mean, look, man, the COVID broke people. It really broke people. The fact that the government was lying so, you know, so much about what happened with COVID and what was going on. And with the availability of information now, like people didn't know that, you know, when people found out that Fauci had something to do with the way that HIV was, the laws that were being made or the

narrative that was being spread about HIV and then finding out that he has something to do with COVID, too. They're just like, all right, I don't believe anything. All the lies of the government. was making about about uh about about COVID really really broke people's brains you and when I say broke people's brain what I mean is it made people you know it made them incredibly skeptical of the official narrative and for good reason right like the the government has definitely lied about a ton of stuff whether it be like you know CIA operations that are not supposed to be happening in the U.S but absolutely were selling drugs in the U.S. to fund you know to fund freedom freedom fighters in the in south american stuff right the government has done really terrible things so

it's it's totally valid and completely justified to be very skeptical of the government but that doesn't just because you're skeptical of the government doesn't mean everything that the is the official narrative is always wrong it's usually not that it's 100% wrong it's usually what they call a limited hangout right so like when nixon was was being investigated for for watergate they They brought this stuff to him and they said, look, we think that you should, you should tell a little bit of the truth. And he's like, what? So Nixon replied by saying, what, we should just let it all hang out. And the advisors replied, well, what we're thinking of is a limited hangout.

You tell a little bit of the truth, but we hide this stuff. And that's kind of the MO of the government now. They'll tell you, they will tell you true things, but they don't tell you the whole story. And then when people hear that there, that there were things that they hid, then the reality, is, well, it's all a lie. And that's not how things work generally, because the more confused people are, the more bits of truth and bits of deception

that people ingest, the more confused they are about the actual reality. And they tend to stop believing anything. And they'll pick up on whatever their preferred narrative is and whatever their emotional reaction is. And this is what I believe. And so then it doesn't matter whether what they believe is true or whether they have a lot of evidence for it.

They're not going to believe the official story. because that's the government and the government always lies because the government does lie enough to make people Justified in that opinion so they just decide well this is what I think and so this is the narrative that I'm gonna I'm gonna stick to I think it's also super important to keep in mind that blue and on will grab on to every single any any potential Ciotic event or chaotic event and they will push their narrative as hard as they can as well in that area For an example every single assassination attempt that I've ever talked to people folks on the left about on the street they have brought up that, oh, it was a loving Trump supporter that tried to kill him. Oh, they'll bring up everything. I heard one person mentioned for the Butler situation, for the Butler assassination attempt,

that no, Trump actually, they squeezed like ketchup on him when he was on the ground. So, you know, they have every incentive to get the heat away from them as well. So just keep that in mind whenever we're seeing these crazy things happen. That's why I said, like, people will decide that this is the narrative that I like, and that's the one that they stick to. Like, the people that are, that are, you know, that don't like Trump, they still believe that the whole Butler situation, the attempt was a lie, it was all fake. You know, like you said, whether it be ketchup or blood packs or whatever. The left would never try to do this to Donald Trump. What do you, you know, that's the narrative, I guess.

And nobody should be buying that. Mm-hmm. At least for that one specifically, you know what I mean? Yeah, I mean, and it doesn't matter how many attempts that there have been on Donald Trump. And never mind the fact that, you know, it all. All indications are that it was a leftist that killed Charlie Kirk. Again, this is still to be found if it is actually true, but that's what it seems to be the case. And the left will do anything they can to point the, you know, point the finger at the right and be like, no, no, no, his family were Trump supporters.

They have everything to gain by pushing that away from their behavior. And their behavior over the last 10 years has been horrifying. It is constantly horrifying. And escalating. And escalating, yeah. Rhetorical violence bothers me, because I don't like it. I don't even like saying, we got to fight for our rights. Like, oh, you start using the word fight.

You unleash that beast, dude. That beast has a mind of its own. Because one word's, what I mean by that might not be what that guy with the knife means when he says, we're going to fight for our rights. You got to be real careful about inciting. That's like a generic campaign slogan now. I'm moving towards vigilante justice. You see the guy with the naked bikers?

Uh-uh. No, what happened? He was shooting them with a BB gun. Oh yeah, he got arrested, right? No problem. Did you hear about Mexican Batman? No, no. Tell us about it. Mexican Batman's cool. He's in Mexico. He's in Mexico, and there's these thieves, and he's sick of them. And so he goes around on his motorcycle and gets these motorcycle thieves, and he duct tapes them to poles,

and he draws, like, whiskers on their face and writes rat on their head. And he's been going around. And, of course, they're looking for him and not the thieves. But, yeah, like, no, I'm okay with this new vigilante wave of things. How come the superheroes get villainized? Like Spider-Man? How come the cops are? Mexican Batman. I mean, they like him. Like, we like him, but like the government doesn't. If you're talking

about comic books, it's because of the, you know, you have to have drama in the comic book because it's a story. It's not real, it's pretend. They're like, yeah, it's weird when, like, they made Spider-Man's like the bad guy, but he has to do it anyway. You know, even though he knows what he's doing is making him look worse. I'm not with you,

Lisa. I don't like vigilante justice. I'm turning a tide, you know? I used to not like it, but now I do. The Mexican Batman sounds totally epic. I know nothing about that, but that sounds excellent. Let's make a movie about them. But that aside, I think... You don't like the naked biker thing either with the BBIN?

I kind of like that. Because we're not in, like, a third world country, we should actually demand a little bit more of our communities and our police forces and all that stuff instead of saying, some idiot can go out there. And by the way, a lot of vigilantes, they're not really good at their job. They think they're better than they are.

I don't know. So we should actually demand a little bit more of our communities, of our policing, of our culture. If people are going to be scared to ride, their bikes naked in front of children because people might get them with a TV gun. That is a good thing. But in a general sense,

I think in a general sense, we see vigilance and it ends up being a little bit more disappointing than that story right there. Okay, so to your point, change, I do think that we should demand more out of law enforcement. Look, you should enforce the laws that are on the books. But at the same time... It's not just law enforcement.

Sorry, that's actually totally missed... I didn't mean them specifically. I mean more of just our leadership. Yeah, fair enough. Fair enough. But to Lisa's point, like, look, if you're the kind of... a dude that's walking around like if you've got a family and you're walking around with with your kids and some dude rolls by naked and is like swinging his junk I am fully like fully endorse you pop in that dude in the face.

But that's sure. That's typically you're going to jail. I know. No, no, no, no. Yeah, it is. But we're not. We're not calling for any of this. No, we're not.

We're not calling for it. But at the same time, it's like, look. I'm saying I don't mind. I don't hate it. Society swings his junk in your kids face. He's assaulting your child because to defend the child. That's not how I see it. But the point is...

But it's just swinging it and it's not in their face. But the point is, we as a society should not accept that kind of behavior. For sure. Right? So that's the point. The fact that we're that far to where that person isn't being absolutely locked up, thrown in jail for 10 years for swing in his junk in front of kids. I just should be gone. You should be off the streets.

You should have no place in society. I saw. Yeah, there was a video from Spain where there was a guy that was just on. the beach just masturbating in front of in front of kids and stuff. Is it England or something? What was it? Spain, I think it was Spain. And it took a minute, but the, you know, West Coast or East Coast? I don't know, but it was bad. But the point, like, he was

clearly, it wasn't like, he wasn't hiding behind a towel or anything. He was full on. And he should be removed from polite society. Yeah, like, and, you know, the people actually did something. At first they didn't. Yeah, at first they didn't. But they grabbed him and, like, they were. And then there was that liberal white woman and they're like, no, she jumped in. It was like, Don't hurt.

She's like trying to protect him. I don't watch the video. Did she really do that? Yeah. She actually came in as the savior of the. Uh-huh. Yeah, she did. Did they save them?

Did she? Yeah. Yeah. She was trying to prevent people from hurting him. Did she win? Did they stop? Well, I'm pretty sure the guy got arrested. So that was, but that's the point.

They didn't, he did not when she was stopping him. Like society, like society shouldn't allow that kind of stuff. How do you feel about? Just say, oh, well, you know, we're going to let people do that kind of stuff. Like the police should absolutely be arresting these people immediate. What if, what about robot vigilantes if like a corporation? Why do you like robots so much? No, we don't want any robots.

Why are you trying to off-knode this to machines? Because I always think about who are the police. He's like, I want the Terminator. I want robots. Somebody's in control of the robots. You know, all entertain it. Who's in control the robots that are beaten up? There's multiple ways you could have autonomous robots or you could have like a police force program robotic force.

But let's say, no, we don't want that. For the example, it would be an autonomous police force that's just overseeing things to make sure we're not breaking laws. You're literally talking. talking about constant supervision and like terminator enforcement. And you endorse this? What I bring up now is vigilante justice. Like obviously people can take it upon themselves emotionally to go wreck some havoc because crime's not getting dealt with enough.

I get it. That's the human vigilante. But if a corporation's like, I'm tired of this crime on the streets, I'm tired of 7-Eleven getting robbed. I'm unleashing my drone force overnight. There's going to be drones that have machine guns fly-rored. No. We don't need a army of robots.

We just don't. We're not asking for a person. We don't need to do, whipping out their winners in front of kids. That's all we're asking. We do not need a robot army. So nobody is saying it's okay for people to take the law in their own names like that. We're not asking too much, you guys. What we're saying is we need people to demand that law enforcement put these people in jail immediately.

And leave them there. But in some situations, law enforcement won't. So like England, for instance, when they were protecting the rape gangs, I've heard there's actually happening. Okay. In England situation, I support Elon Musk launching a. in a robot army because yes they're not gonna save themselves so you're gonna vigilante robots now this one I'm wondering is like if a person through their through their corporation there corporate ownership of their autonomous weaponry

decides to do vigilante justice like doc no you think that's that's bad it is bad I I think vigilante is bad in general until it's good like no it's bad until all order breaks down like what other choice do I have like if like the american revolution is like it's crazy to me that you talk about like corporations as if they're bad until this comes up. And they're like, you know, maybe a corporation should go ahead and make a bunch of robots to be law enforcement outside of the normal. It could be a guy that's not registered. It could just be a guy that owns 19 drones.

And he's hooked up to a neural net. And he controls them all and flies around town at night patrolling the city on his own because he feels like cops aren't doing it. So, well, okay. So like if you're talking about like high tech neighborhood watch, that's one thing. It's totally different when you're talking because you just mentioned drones with machine guns. Yeah. Right. Like, so drones that are, if you're, if you're like a dude that has a couple drones or whatever, and you, you are like, I'm the neighborhood watch.

And I have this drone that flies around my neighborhood and keeps an eye out to make sure nothing's going wrong. And then if you see something weird, you call the police perfectly fine. Right? I'm totally cool with that. You have a drone that flies around. What if the drones shoot nets? No, no, no, no, no, no. Too much.

No, no. It's too much assault. Well, I'm, hey, I'm not. I'm not. I think they're terrible. I like using robots an example because I want to take ethics out of it. I want to just look at it as if what is there a neutral system in place that does what we're talking about. There is no neutral system because as soon as you're deciding what is and is not legal, then you're making a value judgment. Correct.

So there is no neutral system. There's no such thing as neutrality in the world. As much as we talk about it, like anytime you make a value judgment, you're no longer neutral. True. It's a good point. You know? So there's no such thing as neutrality. You have to decide what your values are and those are the values that you want your society to have.

And if your society has values, has any particular values, that's not neutral, right? You want you want to have justice, but your justice is going to be based on your values. In, you know. What if they have like pepper spray or like lasers that can blind with guys? What your shoot, what you decide? to use any kinds of force for is making a value judgment. I'm only asking because you know that guy in Portland that was a superhero that went around at night and kicked the crap of the superheroes. He wasn't a superhero, he dressed like one. You know what I'm talking about? He was crazy. Well, hold on. You don't know that. He could have been superhero. You know what I'm talking about? No. He would like, he walked around the posse. Mexican. Sounds like a superhero. He would fight guys at night. This is a real story. Yeah, he like got out. He got the whole Vigilani superhero game. He was doing it at night. I think his name is kick.

ass. No. He was like, look, where. Yes, though. In the chat, you guys know the chat, someone's going to name him in the chat.

No, look, no, like, again, Ian, I'm gonna lay off the drones. You can't, you can't have neutrality. You have, your society makes value judgments. You could have, like,

Ian, Ian's driving, man. How do we get on vigilante stuff? But yeah, from what story that we were doing? Because we were talking about units out for around children,

and then Ian went to, we need to launch an army that'll sterilize the streakers. Yeah, what if we, what if we have vigilante robots. Insane. What if we what's the word extrapolate? I don't want to scale out our vigilanteism

into now I have an army of robots doing my vigilante will. We don't want vigilanteism. Like I said, the line is drawn out. Phoenix Jones pick you in chat. You can agree with individual moments of vigilanteism, but in a general sense Yeah, look, the line is If you want, like again, if you want to have a dude or couple dudes that have drones that are

like monitoring your neighborhood, like a high tech neighborhood watch and then you call the police, you call the action. You call the actual law enforcement, go ahead. You've got to understand. Fine. So they can just frame it. But but you cannot take matters into your own hand. Would you say can you guys are you just are you just are you just saying? Are you just by the way I love this conversation? Yes she is. You know the chat and say Lisa's going so hard against everything Phil says all my I'm really not actually. I don't think I I was attacking it. The reason I'm going so hard is because what if their police don't respond that's where they don't

sometimes that's why we said we don't investigate. That's literally why we said we need to hold police higher standards and you need more. The answer to that. The answer to that is, is more law enforcement. Local leadership, police are more than happy to get these guys off the streets. True. Maybe not an SF, but...

What's the problem with SF? I don't know. They just do a lot of this. I've been, I've been to those Pride Month protests up there. I don't go to them anymore because I literally will not do street interviews

at those things anymore, dude. But here are most cops you've even said that. James Clude. We stopped going because there's so many naked dudes around. I was like, dude, I can't do this. There's kids walking around.

It's so horrifying. See, all those people should be arrested and put in jail. Of course. They should be an essential. All go to jail. Well, fine. Medicaid.

No, I'm not sure about asylum. Maybe just regular jail. Why do they get a special jail? True. Regular jail is fine. Yeah, I guess regular jail. Regular jail is. Regular jail.

Regular jail. Well, I mean, I don't know if I'm okay with that. For the safety of like the corrections officers and stuff like this. No, I think that the, I think that we walk around naked on the corrections officers. Yeah, they're going to run their day too. Yeah. That's what I've said. You got to medicate them.

Anyway, so we're going to jump to this story here. The, from the AP, U.S. launches, new strikes against Iran after three ships were hit in Strait of Hormuz. So they were launching drones at merchant ships, and the United States has decided that, well, we're not going to watch this anymore. So from Dubai, United Arab Emirates, the U.S. military launched new strikes against Iran early Wednesday hours after three merchant ships were struck in the Strait of Hormuz. In the latest exchange of fire to threaten the interim deal to end the fighting between the two countries, the strikes were expected to hit a variety of military sites and port facilities, U.S. officer said. The renewed attacks were sure to add to the

difficulty in the negotiations aimed at fully reopening the strait. Rolling back to Iran's disputed nuclear program and reaching a permanent end to the war launched February 28th. In a statement posted to social media, U.S. Central Command and American forces launched the strikes to impose heavy costs for

targeting and attacking commercial shipping crewed by innocent civilians in an international waterway. One U.S. official said the military is targeting Iranian air defense systems, coastal surveillance systems, ground-to-air missiles, as well as launch sites for anti-ship cruise missiles and drones. Iranian porphysis are also being targeted, that official said.

The second official said the strikes would likely last for hours. I read something that said that these strikes are not going to just last for hours, that it could be days. I don't know how true that is, but look, the MOU, the memorandum of understanding, like, it looks pretty clear that we can toss that away, that there is no understanding and that whoever is in control of the IRGC, Like, they are still intent on attacking merchant ships and trying to make an actual, you know, prevent people from using the straight-or-moos.

I think the U.S. is probably in a pretty good position to continue preventing that so long as, as, you know, as long as the military is in the area. And I think these strikes are probably going to continue for a while. I was just reading about this. There were three, the three merchant ships that got hit. There was a Qatari merchant ship, a liquefied natural gas. gas tanker, a Saudi Arabian crude oil super tanker, and an unidentified tanker. You know, and to that point, like, the other Arab states, they should be stepping up and saying,

look, this is, this is Iran, you know, actually declaring war on us, right? Like, the Saudis have no love for Iran at all. Iran is the country that de-state the whole region, you know, like the Saudis in Iran had, you know, whether it be because of the Shia-Suni issue or whatever, They all really have a problem with Iran because Iran is the, you know, they're the ones that are funding the Houthis and the Houthis were fighting, they were fighting Saudi Arabia. Iran's funding Hezbollah and Hamas. Like, Iran has been doing all sorts of, taking all sorts of actions to fund terrorist organizations or militias that cause, that just wreak havoc through the whole region. I don't know why I'm thinking about Turkey. And it's not this story.

There is another story. I'm thinking about like American dominance in the region and how Trump's over there removing sanctions from the Turks, because the Russians in order to get through the Black Sea now that they have Crimea and they have Sebastopol. They need to go through Turkey. They need to go through Istanbul. That Constantinople, they need to get through the Bosphorus Strait. So Turkey's in NATO. So America wants to strengthen its ties with Turkey so that they don't strengthen ties with Russia.

And then because Netanyahu is like, that's a bad idea. Trump's talking about giving like F-35s or some jet to the Turks. And Netanyahu's like, I wouldn't do it. that that will change the power balance in the region we shouldn't do that we should we don't i don't care what netting yahoo has to say about it i generally don't but i think the reason we're in this war with iran is because of what net and yahoo said about it so i think that it has to do with it i think there's a lot more dynamic i think it's far more broad i think that it has to do with well it's it's it's all like i like i wrote a piece on my on my patreon a couple of like actually

the day yeah a little bit uh the day after well i can read too um the Yeah, the day that the strikes happened, I started right, I wrote a piece I was talking about, you know, it's really about China and about trying to, you know, change the geopolitical, geopolitical, um, situation. With the Belt and Road initiative. Yeah, regarding China. Yeah. You know, that's what Venezuela was, was largely about. That's what the, the argument over the, um, the, what's it called the Panama Canal was about because China was taking, trying to basically control both ends of the Panama Canal. And the U.S. is like, we built it.

You're not going to control it. The U.S. built it. We lost a bunch of lives, putting that there. You know, this is something that the U.S. is going to be able to control because we want to make sure that the whole world can use it. We're not going to make, we're not going to allow China to decide who we can and cannot use the Panama now. I think that's why the U.S. is putting the, the screws on Cuba, because Cuba is basically in the gateway to the Gulf of America. All of the stuff, there's even the Strait of Malacca where the U.S. is making moves are not really all that it's not really what it's funny what malacca malacca you know what i mean

yeah i do um but it's not it's not something that that makes a lot of news but the u.s is making moves around the strait in malacca as well because that's one of the choke points we have we have more influence over that than china as well yeah so that's why they call it the what what's the phrase uh the malacca trap yeah yeah exactly so if you're pushed back on that and that's your only option for you know shipping that's a big problem yeah and and that's this whole this whole thing with iran And like, I do think that obviously it benefits Israel, but I don't think that the decision to deal with Iran is because of Israel. I think that it fits into a greater picture.

Just like the stuff with Greenland, the U.S. needs to take Greenland. That's because the U.S. is trying to realign global power. If you've got the ice caps melting and Russia has a port that's, you know, open year-round because the ice is kind of receded, then you're going to have to, you want to have to US forces that can monitor what they're doing. People act like the Greenland situation is something new to Trump. Yeah. Totally not. Actually, I think the first time the United States tried to go after Greenland was in the 1800s. What was it? Secretary William Seward, I believe, is his name.

And it's when we were purchasing Alaska, they also tried to get Greenland. And at the time it was looked at as this like, wow, what a waste of money. What a stupid idea. ended up being genius, by the way, for sure. I mean, as we know. And then what? Harry S. Truman also tried to get Greenland. So these are not like new things. There's tons of benefits to controlling the entire region around our country.

Whether or be, well, now, data centers, I guess. You can make the argument for the cool temperature. But a lot of it has to do with, obviously, defense and a lot more. Yeah. And it's a zero-sum game who controls the land. It's either us or them. So that's the way military men will think about it. It's like, if you don't secure it,

someone else will. But we took, nobody's creating massive islands yet, like the size of... The Chinese are trying. They're working on it. They're building islands. Yeah, we are seeing that. Not on the same scale, but we are... Not yet.

The stuff with Greenland, I mean, the US took stewardship of Greenland when, you know, when Denmark was invaded by the Nazis. You know, like during World War II, the last thing that we want is to have, you know... For sure. Have the, had the Nazis, you know, go over to Greenland because, well, that was, you know, Danish territory, you know. So it's not that ridiculous to think the U.S. for the U.S. to say, look, this is actually important to us strategically. Denmark can sit there and say, well, that's our territory, et cetera.

But look, when this was actually in the news, we talked about how much it would cost to pay everybody in Greenland. And it wasn't a lot of money. I think it's a population of about like 60,000 people. You could make them all millionaires or, you know, give them five million bucks a piece. And you're not talking about a significant expense when you take into account. the national security benefits that it could. But anyway, back to Iran. Make a millionaires and then build a bass pro shops right in the center.

There you go. And make it a pyramid just like the one in Nashville. But yeah, this stuff with Iran, this fits into a broader picture. And so I mean, I know that there are people out there that think everything is because of Israel, if it happened in the least. But it's largely not. It's because the U.S. is looking to change the calculation when it comes to basically all of geopolitics.

Global shipping dominance and energy dominance. Those are decent incentives. Absolutely. Incentives that the United States is not unfamiliar with. Yeah, I was talking. Thomas Massey introduced an amendment to the NDAA to take away the feature that says that we're going to merge our military. Merge is a bit of a strong word with the Israeli military. Like, we're going to, there's a bunch of collusion that they're trying to legally bind American military and the Israeli military.

We're going to share secrets, share technology, share trade. shipping lanes are like part of our structural what do they call that the building process with Israel to build our processes together it's concerning who put that in I don't know yet and that's a good idea who wrote that into this

that they want us to merge with Israel isn't that because the the US is looking at the five eyes the you know Canada UK what is it New Zealand Australia was it exclusively Israel I think so and I think part of the reason is because they're looking at the five

as less reliable when it comes to sharing intelligence and stuff. So I'm not saying that that's a good idea, but I think that the point is you look at the changing, changing basically populations in the UK and stuff. And the U.S. has said, well, look, we can't really guarantee that in 25 or 50 years that we're going to have the same relationship with these countries because they're having such significant changes of their population. And so we need to make sure that,

that we have the ability to share intelligence and stuff with other countries. So I'd, and again, I'm not saying that it's a good idea to do it with this. You're just explaining. No, I get it. We should be doing that with Japan. I would probably ask very few questions, my friend. I completely agree. Japan is our greatest ally.

People say Israel is our greatest ally. It's not Israel, Japan. Particularly when you think about how close to China Japan is, obviously right there. Did you see their fireworks shows? They're huge. They love America. For the fourth. I'm telling you, we could make the Middle East our friends, just like we're

did with Japan. I'm just saying. I disagree because I think the population is you really think you think you're yearning for a friendship of us? You know really one of the things look at I was really what are we not missing from what I said nuclear bombs we don't need that we don't need to use nuclear I'm just saying it would eliminate a lot of problems

they could go back and be our allies. Yeah no we don't we don't need to use we don't need to initiate a nuclear war. I'm just saying look a part of the reason why today we have such if I understand correctly some the stuff that I was reading on X over the weekend. Part of the reason why we have such a close relationship with Japan now is because of the way that the U.S. responded in 2011 after the earthquake, right? The big one. Fukushima. Yeah, I was there. Like, I was in Tokyo when it happened. And it was, it was crazy. We also crafted their constitution. So like, yeah, but we've, we've done a good job.

We conquered. But I do know. Let me get the side. Let me get that. There's, there was the, the general consensus from the Japanese government in like 2000. 2008, 9, 10. They weren't particularly friendly to the United States. They were actually, there was, there was some tension there. And then after the, um, the earthquake, the US sent a bunch of aid and we had Americans over there because we had, you know, we had people on, we had military in the, on Okinaw and stuff. And we jumped in to help. And we were doing a lot to, to really kind of help Japan deal with what was a massive, massive problem for them. A lot of people died. I think it was 20,000 people died in Sendai alone. Never mind across the whole country. So after, that, if you took a set, they took a poll of like Japanese people and the approval of the United States was something like 85 or something like that, 85% of the people love the United States. And so since then, the relationships with the U.S. has actually gotten significantly better. So like looking at Japan as like an ally, particularly when you consider should something happen with Taiwan and we want to go ahead and make some kind of military move, we're going to need

Japan. Japan is a great way for us to keep an eye on, you know, have, have intelligence. about what's going on in China. And I mean, that's kind of what people think Israel is, right? So it's a way that the U.S. can kind of keep, have a country that will actually monitor the Middle East. Right now, you've got a problem with Iran. But in the future, China is going to be a significantly larger problem. And Japan is uniquely positioned to help the United States monitor what's going on in China. I've got some information.

A really interesting point about the assist. Yeah, it was a big deal. You know, helping with aid after the, the honorable Japanese. It was a tsunami, right? It was an earthquake. It was a 9.0 earthquake one of the largest earthquakes and it led to a tsunami. And there was a tsunami that basically went out That followed the way out basically all of Sendai. Yeah, interesting Yeah, it was all that cadmium went into the ocean. I think it's cadmium. It's the heavy metal and the nuclear

Corium reactors that just got flushed into it. You can see it like flowing through the Atlantic Well, I remember I just I just was unaware of like the the polling after following Yeah, it was a big deal just like not just mending or fixing any relationship, but just making it explode. Yeah, like the the the approval of the the United States by the Japanese citizen afterwards, it was a big deal because we really did, you know, especially from the, at least the way I understand it, the way that I was reading it on a lot of ex post is there was, there were people that they kind of thought, you know, because of the tension between the Japanese government and the United States, they were like, well, you know, the Japanese government had just insulted the U.S. a bunch and kind of, you know,

they were talking about, there used to be people talking about like Okinawa as being like, it's a bad thing that the military is there, the, the Marines. Corps has a has the third marine division over there and it's it's bad and and we shouldn't have that and Japan shouldn't be a client state of the United States, et cetera, et cetera. But once that happened, the U.S. was uniquely positioned to send aid and to send help and to send people there to literally help dig up bodies and stuff. And, you know, the U.S. did when the Japanese were kind of like, look, we kind of just treated these guys really bad for a lot of years and they didn't ask for anything. They just kind of jumped up and started helping and helping our people. And so

that really changed the opinion of the general consensus of the Japanese people about Americans. And it's been kind of something that we've seen grow. I mean, it was in 2016, 17, 18. That's when we saw Shinsou Abbey and Donald Trump kind of hanging out and being friendly towards each other. And that was a great relationship right now. That relationship's only grown. And it's another thing that I wrote about on my Patreon. The U.S. and Japanese relationship and why the Japanese and the U.S. actually have a lot in

And even though our cultures are very different, the way that we approach our cultures and the value that we have in our culture, the way the value that we place on our cultures, like it's very similar. And the U.S. doesn't want to see Japan change, right? Like, the U.S. wants Japan to be Japan. And it seems that the Japanese appreciate that. But anyways. I want to talk about Israel, unfortunately, but I want to also say something about Japan because the Ronan, the wandering samurai is like kind of like the lone gunslinger. Like there's very similar, like, heroic archetypes in the American and the Japanese mythos. But I, I. To answer your question from earlier, James, about who drafted that bill. They're calling it the Israel merge in its colloquial known around Congress like that. It's section 224, renumbered section 219. Of what? In the FY27 NDAA, titled the United States Israel Defense Technology Cooperation Initiative, advanced by the House Armed Service Committee, chaired by Representative Mike Rogers from, is that Alabama, and bipartisan support, Prime Minister Benjamin Netany.

Yahoo has publicly claimed credit for proposing the idea. And the initiative is strongly backed by APEC. This is from AI sponsored. You have to remember a lot of these Southern evangelicals. They really, really believe that, like, Israel's our greatest ally, and we need to be doing everything we can for them. I've seen it up close. I mean, they really believe that with all their hearts. The boomers are going away, though.

The difference between Japan and Israel, because I agree Japan's an excellent alliance. is that we conquered Japan and then dominated them and rebuilt them with our own constitution. Israel's like its own thing, nuclear armed, allegedly. I don't even know if they're obviously. So it's a different animal. Like that's not, you can't really control that thing. They got their own. So I don't know.

It's tough to. So every time I think about Iran, I think about the whole moving puzzle. Like everything's moving at once. There's Israel moving. It's all a problem. It's all a problem. Israel's a problem. Turkey's a problem.

Iran's a problem. And Pakistan's a problem. The whole place is a problem. Turkey's an immense issue because they hold the keys. Or in NATO. They hold Russia's keys. Yeah. Turkey is, they have to ally with Russia because they're going to be their main shipping port. They can't ally too closely because they are in NATO.

I know. It puts them in an immensely powerful position, Turkey, to negotiate to the right or to the left, to the east or to the west, to the Russians or to the Americans. They could leave NATO. They could leave NATO, which would... I wouldn't mind. Israel would flip their...

The Israelis would flip their... Netanyahu would probably flip his freaking later. Israel's not NATO? Because America's just about to give jet fighters to Turks. So if they leave NATO, right after that, you'd be like, what in the... We just gave them weapons. Yeah, but I did... Yeah, I was just going to say...

Turn it into a boat anger. The F-35 is a very advanced plane, and I think the U.S. could probably just turn them off if they wanted to. 100%. Oh, I like that idea. You've got a plane, but you don't get... They'll be able to fly them, but they wouldn't get any of the advanced aeronautics. They wouldn't get any of the radar systems. That's usually what the U.S. does.

When they sell planes to other countries, they'll sell the plane, they'll sell the airframe, but they don't get the state-of-the-art electronic suite. They don't get the state-of-the-art radar. They don't get the state-of-the-art networking capacity. And one of the things about NAP-35 is it's not just a capable airplane that you can use as an attack plane. But it's kind of like they turned it into like a node to communicate with all. with the other planes and people on the ground. Like it's more like a, I mean, it's almost like a networking system that they have.

Like a flying mesh network? Yeah, kind of like that. So they, the US likely, and I don't, not that I have any kind of, you know, inside information. I don't know, you know, I don't have any kind of specific info about it. That's exactly what you would say if you did, though. But, but yeah, like the U.S. I mean, the U.S. is, even when it came to like selling F-16s back in the day, like, they would sell the F-16s to a bunch of different countries.

There are a bunch of countries that have F-16s, but they don't, they didn't. They didn't sell them with the advanced targeting packaging. They wouldn't sell it with the advanced radar. They would sell the airframe and they would sell some of the stuff. They wouldn't give them the state of the art stuff because the U.S. This is awful. Nobody cares. Honestly, I don't like the Israeli, Iranian.

Nobody cares. There's nothing to complete with it. Everybody's so sick of it. It's been three years since like October 7th of this region, Israel. We're not even talking about. No, but we are. We're talking about the whole thing. They want you to get bored with it.

It's annoying. What are you talking about, Lisa? Find another, find something else to talk about. If you get bored with it, then they win. Then they can pull out their plans in secret. We've got the complaining woman over here. We're going to jump to this story. We were talking about it was kind of boring.

Senate Republican leaders say that they've spoken to Mitch McConnell as he remains hospitalized. The rumor going around is that Mitch McConnell is actually brain dead. And then so a bunch of people have said, no, I spoke to Mitch McConnell. I reached out of people on the hill the other day when it was going around that he was dead. and again, and they said they were hearing the same thing, and they have heard the people at least that I still talk to on the hill, which is a lot of them, say that, yeah, he has been non-responsive for a while. Now, I don't know how true that is,

and now people are saying that they have spoken to him, but I think it's really weird that his wife went away while he's in this condition and she's in China. I think that's a little bizarre. From ABC News, Senate Republican leaders say they've spoken to Mitch McConnell as he remains hospitalized. Kentucky Senator Mitch McConnell, has had phone conversations with several Republican leaders as he remains hospitalized,

spokespeople for the lawmakers told ABC News on Tuesday. A spokesperson for McConnell first confirmed the senator had been hospitalized on June 14th for an unknown condition. His office has not provided many updates, though they say McConnell is continuing his recovery in the hospital. Senator McConnell appreciates the outpouring of support he's receiving. I'm actually kind of dubious about that. He's receiving while he continues his recovery in the hospital.

He should have resigned. A McConnell spokesperson says, in the statement first issued last week at ABC News has told continues to stand Tuesday. The senator continues to improve and he is working closely with his staff on Kentucky and Senate matters while the Senate is out of session. He probably should have retired years ago. As soon as he started doing the whole like where he just like stopped, like someone hit the pause button on him like in front of cameras, you know.

It's pretty blackpilling for a lot of Americans that see that stuff too. Yeah. They're just like, what are we doing? Like no Republicans are defending that either. No, no. I mean, look. No, they are. They're lying for him.

There's a couple. There are people that are, the people that are saying that they've spoke it to his office and him. Sorry. I'm more of. I'm more of mean like, like people that vote Republican. Like nobody's saying that and they're thrilled about it, you know. I have no idea why he. I don't know why anybody isn't saying you need to step down right now.

I don't know either. Well, I mean, actually, you know D.C. better than most. You know exactly why. I don't. Really? I would imagine because people, because people in a certain. are still getting rich they still getting paid he was very good fundraiser yeah i mean and look i'm gonna everyone's gonna be like everyone's gonna be like you know he's he's the turtle and he's terrible and blah blah

and i can't i know that i'm gonna take heat for this but remember the reason we have the supreme court that we have is because mitch mcconnell knew how to prevent merrick garland from getting appointed right like you have these people i thought amy was gonna be good what yeah like two weeks ago that argument would have been salient but now no well i mean but the point that i'm making is like if you're gonna talk about if you're going to talk about, you know, why, why do these people stay in office and, and, you know, what's the benefit of having people that have been there years and years and years? They know how the Senate rules work. They know how the government works. They have the insight to be like,

you know, we have this option because no one cares about how the, uh, the sausage made, but the Senate has a bunch of rules that they have to have, you know, that you have to abide by. And it's not just as easy as, oh, well, the senator says that he wants to vote for this or doesn't want to vote for that. It's chess and he's a chess mask. Yeah. And so it's, I, I agree. We should be. But I'm saying that's what I don't get anymore. He was a chess master. But he hasn't been coherent for a very long time.

Exactly. So I don't understand. Garland stuff was over 10 years ago. He should have been out. So the point that I'm making is I do think that it's a good idea. I forget who it was that was talking about. But like 80 should be the line, right? Like if you're a senator and you're 75, you can't run again. Correct.

You know, because you'll be 81 when you get out. I think if you're 74, you can run. You get out at 80 because Senator do six-year terms. Right. What? Senators are six year terms. Yeah. So you can, you can, you can, you can keep running until you hit 74.

74 is the last time you can run. If you're 75, you can't run anymore. So that way, by the time you hit 80, you're gone. At least term limits, if that, not that. But the problem with that is, I brought this up as a counterpoint to Rollo last night. I don't love term limits. No, I don't like term limits. No, because.

No, because you'll never have any, like, you'll get a bunch of people that are just, are just learning the game. Yeah. We were just talking about it being chess. Everyone's just an idiot and doesn't know how to work this. But I think what a Trump's, appeals was that he didn't know the game. He just came in and did what he wanted. And look at what happens. It's way more complicated than that. And what happens is because the house is on a two-year cycle, right? The first year, they are trying to do policy and learning things. And okay. And then the second year, they're campaigning. And that is all of them. It's like, if anything, I would increase. If I were going to do anything, I would increase. I'm sorry. I'm jumping ahead in my own head. I would increase the, like, from two years to four years so that they're not in that constant, like, almost campaign dialing for dollars. That's one part. However, then you get somebody good. Say you get somebody really good that you like and they're doing everything right.

And then APEC puts 30 million against them and he gets sorted out or something like that. That'd be crazy. Right. And so. I meant term limits. Well, I'm just saying turmoil. And so say you, you know, your time's up, you just go and then and then A pack a point somebody. Right. Like you don't, you don't want it to be a constant turnover. Especially if you have good stuff going on. I love. There's a learning curve. There's a staff curve. You don't want a lot of that turnover. The worst thing about Thomas Massey not having his seat is he'd been there for. for seven terms and he really knows how DC works. Well, even more, it was that he was just, he was good. Because a lot of those people know how it works, but they're not good at it. You have to make relationships.

He wasn't really good. I mean, as much as I like Massey, Massey did good things, but nobody wanted to work with Massey. That's another problem that people don't really understand there. Like, I remember when some bill was going around. It was a good bill. And I was working there and we're trying to suggest bills to my boss and stuff.

And I think it, I think it was Marjorie Taylor Green. Another one was Madison Calthorn. And at that time, Like they were, you know, person on grottas. And they were like, no, we like the bill, but we don't want our name associated with them and wouldn't sign on to the bill. What co-sponsor? It wouldn't do anything with it. And so if you're down there and you're making enemies or you're brand new and you don't know the people and know the ropes and know who to talk to.

You're not going to get anything down. So it sounds like it's a popularity click. Oh. So, well, I mean, every would smash that up. Everything is, everything is networking. Like the, you have to have people that you know and are friendly with to get anything done. And that's not just in politics. That's in anywhere.

Like, a big part of the reason why all that remains managed to get signed is because I knew people from when I was in Shadows Fall, right? Like, we were getting good shows. We were getting good tours. We were getting on shows and stuff. And I made friends in the local industry. And so, like, when all that remains started, Scott Lee was a promoter and a manager that had managed Shadow's Fall. And he took all the remains on because I knew him. And if it wasn't for Scott Lee, all that remains wouldn't have been able to really get off the ground in Western Mass.

and he really helped us a lot. So it is like who you know really does matter. So you don't want to actually go out of your way to make enemies, whether it be D.C. or in the business world. Like you do want to, you, the best situation is being able to tell everybody yes all the time. And you can't do that. It's also how it works too. And I'm not just talking about like the networking and the things like that,

but like how to pass legislation, how to call ledge counsel to actually get the proper formatting of the wording of the bill. Like there's lots of regular infrastructure that you, it takes you to, years to get acclimated to, you need to even learn the building. You're not going to learn the buildings and how to even get around in the first six months. So there is a lot of, you don't want constant turnover because nothing will be getting done. It will be total chaos. I definitely think that, I mean, there's so many things that you need to know structurally, even have the committees work. Here's the thing that people don't understand to. Our government is so gigantic.

It's so big, right? And these members of Congress are voting on thousands of bills. a year, right? Thousands. There shouldn't even be that many, but there's thousands. And they can't be a policy expert on every single one that's coming through. You know what I mean? If there's one that's, you know, he came from an agriculture background or another one that came from a medical background or a lawyer background, he's not going to be, you know, up to date on the next robot technology and what those limitations are or what rules and regulation shouldn't be there. So, you know, you have a ton of staff and you have to go in there and learn all of that, learn the right people to pick to hire to work with you underneath you to explain those bills and trust them and research and do all

the research there's way more into it than just going like yeah i'm going to go in here and vote a certain way that i think my constituents like you really have to understand these things and get the right people around you to make that happen so so doing that every couple of year term limits even i could say you could do term limits maybe after 15 years and stagger them or something but it has to be really like it can't be it can't be congress right now every two years and you can only you can only have six. Like what percent? That would be a horrible way.

Well, nobody would ever even know who their congressman would be. Yeah. That's supposed to be a direct voice in government. Everybody likes to talk about term limits like they would solve these a lot of problems. And I just don't think that. Well, they thought getting rid of earmarks would solve problems. And it did nothing but deadlocked the government. And then there was no bartering.

And it isolated people, polarized people. Because you couldn't say like, okay, I need this vote on this bill. But all right, we'll make sure that your constituents get the money for that bridge. You really need built there for that infrastructure. And so there was no. horse trading anymore and there was no bargaining. So at first that's all that politics is is being able to say say yes to things that don't really have a bad effect on you so that way you can get someone else to say yes to something you really want. Right. Exactly. And so the same thing with earmarks. So people push these

things like earmarks and term limits and all that whatever because it sounds good. And I go, yeah, I don't want to eat. And this is why everyone shouldn't be allowed to vote. Another thing that sounds good is getting rid of omnibus bills, which is something Matt Gates and I would talk about Yeah, getting rid of omnibus bills are actually... That's where earmarks find a place is an omnibus spending, and that's where a lot of, like, if you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours as an omnibus spending. So without that, but then they'd actually literally have to read 1,000 bills a week or whatever. Or, I mean, technically, they're supposed to read the omnibus as well, which is like 1,000 pages they get,

and it's supposed to read it in a night. Yeah, I'm not a big fan of omnibuses. There's a way to break those up into separate pieces. What, ethically, what amount of time spent in Congress should be spent campaigning for your next seat? See, the problem with the campaigning, the problem with the campaigning is that, you know, it's actually probably might even get a little better, though, because TV spots and radio spots cost a lot of money, right? More TV than TV that prices are whatever, but they're extraordinary. However, you're not really, we're not, that's not the medium anymore. You can go on podcasts for free, right?

You can go on Twitter for free. You can do Twitter spaces. So there is some shift there happening. They still do traditional mail, which is. when you're campaigning, which costs a lot of money, mail pieces, we would send out one. Apparently, that's extremely effective, though. It's super annoying for people. I've never looked at a piece of mail from a politician.

Apparently, yeah, apparently it's throw them away. Yeah, I'm telling you can get a whole staffer to read more bills for the price of one mail distribution that you do. Really? Yes. I think I've spent on one of our mailers. We spent $70,000. Another one. And I think it only targeted that one, like maybe, I think it was like 75 to 100,000 people.

And we're spending $70,000 on it. It's really a lot. But there's different ways. People are signing up for newsletters. And there's different things. The blackout period. The text is the worst thing in the world. The text.

Well, that was big for a while, too. But they're the most effective right now. You're seeing a lot of... Text messages are effective. The text messages had a better open rate and a better rate for your return. But they got expensive. They started out at like 15 cents of text and think about how costly that could get quickly. And now they're down about eight, I think.

Maybe a little less. You can get them a little less. like eight cents a tax but um there has i think that's that's got a shift but my point is they're spending so they have to spend so much money to because money's coming in from packs and different organizations like you know like what we saw happened to thomas massey and to raise that much money what could he focus on when he has to be constantly calling people and asking them hey are you going to donate or you know doing that fundraising so if we were to limit like okay no tvs we forget better. They could have less time campaigning. But even doing a town hall, like if you do, we have

telephone town halls that we do a lot. And that's about 25 to 30 grand, a telephone town hall. There's just a lot of that comes out of the MRI, though. But, you know, that's why it's hard to be in incumbent incumbent because they'll have things like telephone town halls like in the MRI budget. But if you don't, if you're not, if you're not already in office, you can't use that to reach out to your constituents and then how do you get name ID? Like, how do you get requisite? Like, how do you get recognize if you're trying to beat an incumbent. So there's tricky things that happen when it comes to money in politics and all of that stuff. What's MRA budget? Like so each office gets a certain amount of budget that they're allowed to spend on basically operating. You get to pay your staff

out of the MRI, you get to pay your mailers out of the MRI, telephone town hall, supplies, and anything you need. And everybody gets like, you know, like a $5 million budget for the office or something. Some of it's higher if you're in leadership or whatever. But, um, when you have that, you've got to be careful with that budget. The thing is, is that incumbents have way more resources to reach their constituents. They can do town halls. They can, and they can use the MR. money to do that up until 90 days before the election.

That's called the blackout period. They're not allowed to do it then. But think about it. The people that are already in Congress are constantly making touches and getting their name recognized and showing what they did for constituent services and getting people's medals or passports fixed or whatever, all those things. So they have more opportunities to reach constituents, get that name ID. There's like congressmen that are in their 80s that have been there for 50 years. Who's that? There's one really old guy.

There's a lot of really old. Like for 50 years that have been in Congress for 50. How long is Pelosi? There's a picture of her with John F. Kennedy. Yeah. She's a young girl, a young woman, man. There's a lot of people that nobody's ever even seen or heard of that have been in the game for a long time. Yeah.

They used to, we used to call them like there's work horses and show horses. And so the workhorses are the congressman you don't know about but they're helping their constituents and trying to pass bells in the show horses or the show horses and they're doing their show thing. It's a thing. I would like to disincentivize these people to be cogs in a machine of just keep your mouth shut,

sign the bill that the party wants you to sign that you probably didn't read and your staff are signed off on and just move on and raise money and get rich and maybe make a book deal. Like, God, we got to get away from that style. Well, you could do... I don't think there's a perfect way of...

No, like to 100% of... what like a king? Yeah. Just all the government and have a monarchy, right? Well, our government wasn't ever supposed to be this big, just kind of like the EU doesn't work, right? Too many different interests. We are twice the size.

I mean, maybe it's more than I don't know the exact numbers. But like we have so many competing interests across every state in this country. It's too big. It is too cumbersome. We aren't represented. It should really go back to repeal the 17th repeal the 17th uh amend the commerce clause and the necessary and proper

clause uh the 17th would help a lot yeah yeah absolutely re reinforce the 10th the 9th and 10th amendments uh so that way the states have the ability to pass the the states have the incentive to pass the laws that they need to to pass and get rid of them you know bring back doge like but like time 10. Well, Congress people used to have like regular jobs that were like everybody else that they're representing. They kind of did it as like a side gig just to like volunteer almost. Like there was farmers and like everything. But now every single person is like a lawyer or someone who's never actually had a job, it seems like. Well, the point. Some people are just political. Look at Bernie Sanders. Political is whole life. Like that's all he's do.

Like that's all he's done. The point that Lisa, I think the point that I think Lisa's making is like the federal government is supposed to be significantly smaller and it's not supposed to be able to do all the things that it does. That's why I brought up the necessary and proper in the Commerce Clause. The Commerce Clause has been bastardized. I forget the name of the Supreme Court case, but there is a case that was brought before the Supreme Court. And the Supreme Court found that the federal government had the authority to regulate growing wheat on your own property to give to your own cows. Because the logic was, or the argument that they accepted was, if you decide that you're going to grow wheat on your own property, that is something that. affects interstate commerce because you're not buying wheat that might have come from another state. So because of that, the government has the authority to regulate that.

And that's not at all what the Commerce Clause is supposed to be. The Commerce Clause says that the federal government has the authority to make regular the commerce between states, not that it has the ability to decide whether or not you're allowed to grow wheat on your own property. that is a complete abortion, like that is a total abomination of what the Commerce Clause is. Same thing with the necessary and proper clause. It's not necessary and proper clause says that Congress has the authority to pass laws that are necessary and proper.

That doesn't mean that the Congress has the authority to pass whatever law it wants, to do whatever it wants. It has the authority to pass laws that are actually necessary. But the government has taken the Constitution and the limits that are put on the federal government and they have flipped it entirely on its. head and they have said, okay, this actually empowers the government to do all these things. It doesn't limit the federal government. It empowers the federal government. And now you get this gigantic abomination that is D.C. I have a suggestion of how to solve some of this bureaucratic.

Thank God. Nightmare. Let's hear it. I call it a direct republic. So it's not a direct democracy. I don't like mob rule. But like what happens? So we've got, what, 435? Representatives right now, 480 or something. They each represent. 437. 437. They represent roughly 750,000 people each. each. So they go to Congress and it's their turn to vote, they're going to vote yes or no. Instead of that guy going to Congress, what if his 750,000 constituents vote yes or no? No, no. It's just a direct democracy. No, no, it's still only going to your one district.

You wouldn't be voting for the other guys. No, it's a direct republic because you're still getting your republic, your representative vote tallied yes or no. It would aggregate the seven or 50,000 of you in your locale go to some series of blockchains. This is the problem. This is what I was talking about before, do you really trust the general public to vote yes or no on, I don't know, say, you know, how to regulate Trey's appetite? I don't know. You know what I mean? When they don't know the ins and outs of the mechanics or how to regulate something that is completely above their pay grade. No, what you really want is people that are local and specialized. That's what you should have. But the outside of that is when they get bribed. If you have individual,

the weight of that responsibility of the shoulders of one. I'd rather have people bribed the morons voting every five seconds. I think the aggregate would show much more intelligent because it's not a mob. It's an organized... Is it like the average IQ here only 100? Like, is it that what it is?

It's reducing. Yes, and it's reducing. No, that's a bad idea. I just think we should be representing ourselves. Having these other people go there and failing is not working anymore. I mean, you're just, you're talking about direct democracy

with extra steps. No, no, it's definitely not direct democracy. I don't like mob rule. I don't, and your district is your district. Only you guys in that district get to vote for what happens out of your district. That's your representative force. And then my district will vote.

It's 750,000 yeses and knows, aggregate to a tally of majority to 58% yes. Therefore, our representative votes yes. And then he doesn't even have to go to Washington. He can, we still vote for a rep. We still have the House of Representatives. They just stay at home and vote like the rest of us. But to Lisa's point, they don't. And then if the power goes out, we send them to D.C.

But to Lisa's point, like, you can't expect the average person to understand what these, you know, what every bill that's being presented. I don't expect everybody to vote either. I mean, it would probably be so not like, you know, 750,000 people. I don't know how many of them actually vote on every bill. Just because. 80,000 people on every bill. The problem there is the people that are going to be voting are the people that are motivated,

not necessarily the people that are informed. You're asking for more moving parts as well, which is like perfect for fraud and all of that. I mean, instead of you are you saying just to clarify, you're saying instead of having that representative make that vote, you're talking about everyone votes in that district. Is that correct? The newsletter home every week on the bills that are up. You vote in a poll like we do on Twitter yes or no, and then that's how the front representative is.

Yeah, I would say we're going to a blockchain or a series of blockchains. Worrying about one guy being bribed. What about a bunch of people being bribed? What about people gathering ballots and going around town? What about activist groups? Like, you know, using intimidation to prevent voting. I mean, you're asking for a far more complex system than what we have now. Also, it's never, it's not that.

Which is going to have way more problems. It's never going to change. Like we're not going to repeal the 19th. We're not going to repeal the 17th. We're not going to have a voting system like that. We are going to be stuck in this endless cycle until there's some upheaval and then things will change.

Well, that could be possible if we wait to the last minute. But I'm telling you, these people... Mass deportations, mass denaturalizations. You'll probably get pretty close to getting... That's what I'm talking about. To fixing a lot of these problems that we're talking about here.

I think it's a lot easier for a corporation to bribe 435 individuals than 9 million, 9 million, 90 million people. If they really need the masses of the United States to vote for Exxon, Exxon's going to have to bring a lot of us. There's no congressional district with $9 million, but I guess I understand your point. Not just saying $750,000 times, you know, 10 or whatever. I mean, you're talking about worrying about the corruption of one individual versus worrying about a million different issues with a bunch of idiots.

And those people voting their own self-interest. Yeah. That's what's happening with the representatives in Congress. That's what everybody's doing. That's why this system doesn't work. That's why you need somebody like a dictator and not one that can pass it down to their sons. But that's why you need somebody and then you can blame that person. And we can fix it there.

If they're a dictator, then they're going to make the decision as to whether or not they're going to be able to pass it down their sons. I understand that. But that's not like, you know. You're about to start talking about. She's a monarchist. Baron Trump. That's it. But that's not a real.

You're not really arguing because if you're concerned with people having. I want to go back to like Roman, where like, you know, Roman times where, you know, see like it was always the people. Like, if you look at like kings and emperors over the years, it was always the people who worked really hard and had a work to get there that were. that were really great and benevolent dictators, really good. They were really great for the country. And it was always when they passed it down to their own kids that it got messy. Then the ninth leader, fifth leader down the road sucks. We don't have any responsible people.

You need one responsible person. Just like in a company, you need a CEO of the tutorial. Washington was offered this and he was like, absolutely not. We're not doing this. Because he understood. I mean, after like five leaders, somebody crappy comes in. There's a reason that it was the way it was for, are like for almost all of human history.

And that is because people need hierarchies. And when we're splitting it this way and we're giving, you know, opportunities and opinions to the masses, it doesn't work. Well, our system didn't even start that way, though. We didn't have like universal suffrage in the United States. That wasn't how,

that's not even how it was designed. So we're dealing with something right now that's like totally. Correct. Ambassadors of what was intended. I totally get that. But it morphed into that, right? So either you figure out a way to get it back to what it was, which seems almost impossible with how large

it has become now. The only way to get out of that is upheaval and implementing something. Well, or education, because I think you got to be uneducated masses need to be led by a dictator or they'll just devolve into killing each other, but the educated can function on their own. The educated are the ones that are the educated, the college people are the ones that are actually voting for the dumb stuff. Well, really educated, like you know how to grow plants. You know how to grow corn. You know what the colors in the sky indicate the weather is going to be like important things that Like, you know, in addition to knowing nine times seven, you know, but like the people that really know how to survive are the backbone of this country, the farmers, the cattle ranchers and things like.

And they can be bribed. I mean, that's the thing. Of course, but it's harder to bribe 10,000 cattle ranchers than one guy that represents the people getting bribed, not us. It's really about the bribery and corruption. That's what we got to get. Anyway, I digress, direct republic. It's better than what we got. I mean, I don't know that.

It could be better than what we got. I mean, you're making an argument for it, but I don't know that you make it's very socialist argument. It's like, oh, this utopia could be so much better than they do it. They just get like 50 million people killed. The question is, do you have faith in the masses? No. No. In any way.

What gives you any idea, any inkling that you have any faith in the masses? Like, really? What have you seen in your life? That's like these, I see these people all in a room 100 people, wherever you are at any given time. You're like, yep, these people should be making the decisions about what's in my food. Well, I mean, maybe they should have a say in what we all eat. But I'm not saying that, you know, all of us together. And then, of course, you have the Senate, the group of better men that can override any of it.

That's what it was supposed to be. But it's not now that they're not elected by the state legislatures and they're elected directly by the people. And that's what the 17th Amendment is that we should repeal. I'm not advocating getting rid of the senators. I do like the Senate because I like the ability to override the masses. But they, but that's not. They are the men. They're also voted by the masses, right?

Like they get a pop. They're now voted by. Are we talking about this last night? the reason like how bad it is that people don't understand that a senator that every state gets two senators and there are people that are upset that Wyoming has two senators and California has two senators because they think well there's so many more people in California. What was the thought process? They wanted people that were involved in politics to choose who was going to be in the Senate because it was the state legislatures that were decided.

The state legislatures picked it because there. But what was the reason for the disconnect? I'm not remembering. Why did they want to separate Senators are supposed to look out for the interest of the state as an independent body, not look out for the interests of the people. That's what the house is for. The house is the people's house. It represents the population. The Senate is supposed to represent the interest of the individual state, not specifically the people of the state.

What's best for the state itself. For sure. The elites. No, not the elites. Well, they're the elite. They were supposed to represent the elites. The head of states. All right, we're going to go to Super Chats now.

Go to your Rumble Rants and your super chats. So smash the like button, share the show with everyone you know. Going over to Timcast.com, become a member there so you can join us for the after show. So you can join our Discord. And then head on over to Rumble.com so you can join us for the after show. Right now, we're going to read some of your Rumble rants. All right. Marsuka Dark 316 says we already have the Communist Control Act.

As it's time to enact the Socialism Control Act and the Islamist Control Act. Seems like it solved many issues. Look, the Communist Control Act is on the book. And I personally am one of the people that thinks that it should be enforced. You should do some kind of interview with people that are coming to the United States. And if they hold those types of views, views that are incompatible with the United States, they should be denied entry. Go to the Goulogs. There's no good argument for mass importing people that hate your country.

Yeah. There's none at all. And so, yes, the government should be selective about who we allow into the country if we're going to have immigration at all. Personally, I think we should shut immigration down for a couple years and kind of, let you know figure out what the hell's going on um but yeah the communist control act is still in effect uh the supreme court has heard some arguments around the freedom of speech of whether or not you're allowed to to talk about this kind of stuff and they found against the the act but the act in and in and of itself has not been found unconstitutional uh i think that it's ridiculous to allow

people from from foreign countries that are hostile to your nation to become you know even get green cards Nevermind become citizens. So. I like that tweet though. I mean, that's super chat. Yeah, great super chat. It's good. Let's see here.

Are they called what? What are they called? What? Rumble rants. Right now we're doing super chats, but the Rumble rants are next. Yeah, well, these are super chats? Yeah, my bad, my bad. I moved you over there.

You're going straight from YouTube. Yeah, so let's see. Max Reddick says, James, please come to Ann Arbor, Michigan, and speak with the radical leftists. We have seen enough of California brother. Yeah. Yeah, well, he's bringing it down. He's going to put that on his list. But, yeah, I'm jotting it down right now, right?

There you go. I'll come. Ann Arbor. Oh, my. Yeah. I mean, look, man, California's got plenty of leftists and the weather's nice, so it's hard to make an argument that going to Ann Arbor is better than going to California. It's nice there. We just went to Boston for the first time.

Oh, really? How did that go? Scottish soccer fans? Oh, really? It was so much fun. It was more of like a feel good video, and it was great. I mean, it was such a good time. Is that live now?

Yeah, it is. It is. Yeah. YouTube.com slash James Kluke. They were so appreciative. They're traveling in the U.S. They were so appreciative of the United States and us hosting. I mean, they had nothing but good things to say about everybody.

Police officers, the food, everything. They were great. All right. Let's see. In Nomi says, hi, Tim and Crew. I hope everyone is doing well. I'm not someone who typically does this, but my girlfriend has set up a go fund me. I was hoping you would give it a shout out.

Thanks. And God bless. Her name is Kenzie Schmidt. So that's K-E-N-Z-I-E-S-C-H-M-I-D-T. You have to, like, give us the reason why. It could be something crazy. I don't know. Hopefully it's not like, so that way she can.

And then donate if it's not something crazy. Yeah. Go, go make an educated judgment by looking at the actual GoFundMe. Generally, we like gives and go, right? Go-Fundee. I think so. Yeah. It's got better terms of service.

A lot of people don't know about gifts and go. So I try not to pay on. As long as you have to like the link, but yeah, generally. Sir Missile Monkey says it's not just Ellie making arrests. Arrests need to stick. The judges need to be held accountable. Arrests mean nothing if judges just release them. Look, man, I agree.

A lot of the problem is bad DAs, bad judges. But if you have like having police on like a visible police force does disincentivize crime to a degree. So like if you have, if you have like, you know, broken windows policing where people will get arrested for small things, it actually does. have an effect on overall crime rates. So your point is well taken. Bad DAs and bad judges, you know, don't help at all. And they tend to exacerbate the problems. But having a present law enforcement or a law enforcement presence really does help to kind of deter crime.

So let's see. Bashir. Clank says Bashir will appoint a Democrat if McConnell passes away. Look, man, if the people that are talking on the. the hill are to be believed. He's still alive. But, you know, if you, if you, if you don't believe anything the government says, then there's no reason to believe that he is. Uh, I think there's there's going to, there, there has to be a special election in Kentucky too. They, the, the, the, the governor appointed for a certain amount of time. Then they have to have an election. Yeah. And, well, but in,

in Kentucky, they do a special election. They don't, they, they, like the governor doesn't actually. It's not Illinois. Like in Illinois, they appoint it. It's only a temporary appointment until they finish out the term. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. So let's see. Marky, Mark outdoors says, Ian, a person is smart. People are dumb, panicky, and dangerous animals. That's why that direct republic system wouldn't work. Well, crowds. Crowds are panicky, yeah. But people in aggregate aren't necessarily dumb or panicky. They can do great things.

Buildoser says, Phil, the sword missile is cool and all. But why don't we have sharks with freaking laser beams on their freaking heads yet? Because sharks are water animals. They have to stay in the water. I mean, if you drop a shark in Jersey on the shore, big one, nine foot white. Beached? Very close to the beach, yes. Jaws in real life. I think we have weaponized dolphins. It was a white shark?

It was a white shark, yeah. Gray whites. They said that we have the best CIA attack dolphins. Wasn't that Trump's season? We have the best, I'm not saying we don't have the best CIA attack dolphins in the world, but we have the best attack dolphins. I don't know. Dolphins are very smart.

Yeah, they are. And rapy, if I understand. I think they said that Iran doesn't happen. Why are they so handsy? Yeah. They don't even have hands. They just love it. The reason.

Methos says, I agree with conservative Lisa Kudrow about the nude bikers. Maybe degenerate nervous, make the generates nervous again. Yes. I mean, look. That's a good tweet. Yeah. Well, it's not a tweet. It's a, you know.

No, I walk around when people say something good, I'm like, that's a good tweet. They should tweet that. That's a good tweet. Yeah. That's a t-shirt. That's a, that's a lot. Bumper sticker or whatever. be, make it.

I got that from Isabella Riley. She used to walk around. Like we would hang out on time and I would say random things. She'd be like, that's a tweet. I've heard her say that. I've heard her say that. Totally got that straight from her. I heard her say that.

AK Storm says, Jocko thinks that 20% of a cop's time should be training one day a week or one week a month of hand-to-hand firearms, de-escalation, etc. Do you think the short-handed would, short-handed would be made up with better cops? Look, I think that like, look, if you're a cop, you should probably at least be a bluebell in, like, jiu-jitsu.

So that way you've, You can restrain people and know how to do takedowns, probably a little judo, so you can do takedowns and stuff. I do think that they should get a lot more training than they do. I think Jocko's idea is probably pretty good. Most police, you know, they end up using their firearm twice a year so they can qualify. And that means that most people that are, you know, that go to the range regularly are better shots than cops are. And you see that in the way that, you know, police body cams, the, the, the, you know, the shootouts don't often look all that.

You know, they're not very impressive. So personally, I think they should spend more time on training. That would mean you'd have to increase the number of law enforcement so that the cops that are actually in training are not, you know, are, they're taken off the beat or taken off their assignment. Whatever it costs. Yeah, and it costs more money. So let's see. The pro let's see. Force name change says the problem with waiting for police to administer consequences is it puts the consequences low on probability scale.

Hence, ineffective deterrence, immediate consequences from society is the opposite. Well, you know, there's only certain things that we can say on YouTube, so we're going to leave it at that. There's a $300 one right there. Oh, boy. Oh, right. $300 from screws card. Maybe I was talking about this. He's like, super chast.

Like, how much is, I was like, I don't know. I've seen them up to $100. This is the biggest one I've seen. I've never seen that $300. I get that a lot. Iran need to be put in their place. Do you all think we will drop the hard end on them before this is over? I don't want boots involved, but I don't see any.

other choice soft end soft end i love this whoever this person is i love you i mean we're all safe page bro the n word the hard end i mean look i'm i don't think that i don't think that there's going to be that should be a t-shirt i don't think yeah i don't think there's going to be a use of nuclear weapons but i don't think nuclear weapons are necessary to you know to to to a nigh basically do significant damage to iran right like the u.s has a bunch of munitions they've got a lot of bombs and using a nuclear weapon just opens up Pandora's box for other countries to justify using it. No one's used a nuclear weapon since World War II, and I think that we all want to keep it that way.

There's plenty of ordinance that the U.S. military has. I don't think that it's necessary. And I don't want boots on the ground in Iran either. Look, Iran's not Iraq, right? Iraq's got a lot of wide open desert. Iran's got a lot of mountains. It's basically a mountain stronghold. So to have troops invade.

That's a lot of the problem we have with Afghanistan, too. Yeah. So, I mean, we're not going to see the U.S. putting troops into Iran the way that we did with Iraq. So I don't think that that's... Especially not in the wintertime. I don't think that's even a, you know, I don't think it's a realistic discussion. Even though there were people that were, you know, right after the strike started, they're like, oh, there's going to be boots on the ground. There's going to be boots on the ground. They're wrong. There's not going to be boots on the ground in Iran just because of the topography of Iran.

No, Karg Island? I don't think they're going to take... I mean, that's possible. It always sounds weird when every say it, isn't it? K-H-A-R-G-G-R-G-G-E-A-K-G-E. Yeah, that's how I've heard it pronounce. That's possible. But even still, like, if you put troops on Karg Island, they're sitting ducks because Iran's right there and they're going to be shooting missiles and drones at them and stuff.

So I don't think that's going to happen. It's possible. It's definitely more likely than an actual invasion of Iran, but there will not be a U.S. invasion of Iran. That is not happening. I agree. So, let's see. Phil, hey, Phil, China has launched their first sub-based missile and is increasing their research into nuclear subsystem. China is the problem.

I agree. Look, man, I'm consistently saying, you know, China is an adversary and we need to treat them as such. And that's literally one of the major reasons why I think the United States should do everything they can to keep our relationship with Japan as close as possible. Japan is their society is very similar to ours in that they cherish their history and their people. and I think that the United States should do the same and I think that we should be as as as closely aligned with Japan as we possibly can so um but yeah

number one again smash the like button share the show with all your friends head on over to rumble become a member there join timcast.com's discord uh James do you have anything you want to shout out? uh I guess just you guys go subscribe over on my YouTube channel YouTube.com slash James Klug if you enjoy political street videos, commentary, all that.

You'll definitely enjoy the channel. You guys, thank you so much for having me. Really appreciate it. Lisa? Chat hates me today. No! Chat hates everybody. No, no, I love it.

Do you should read with her saying about me? No, no, I'm just kidding. Yeah, I don't know. Send me your suggestions on who you want on the show. I would tell you to follow me on Twitter, but I don't really tweet even anymore. It's at Lisa Elizabeth. If you want to, to see what I say occasionally.

Other than that, you know, follow Timcast. and do the thing. Have a, do whatever. Do the thing. Speaking of the thing, I did it earlier, it was Brian Shapiro's show, Pushing the Limits.

I sat in for Brian Shapiro and hosted in his stead while he was dominating at the World Series of Poker. I gotta find out what he did today. Also, shout out to Tim Poole playing at the World Series, bringing it home. It's doing well. Yeah, as of last I heard, he was doing extremely well, so.

That's awesome. My dudes getting it. Check out the Pushing the Limits episode. It's on YouTube. It was very fun. I did two hours with Shapiro's took calls and got to know some of the crowd. It was great.

So shout out everybody. Catch you later. Oh, Carter Banks. Carter, what are you doing? Yeah. I'm back here behind this crazy TV setup peeking through the cracks for the show. I'll chime in every once in a while. You can follow me at Carter Banks everywhere, mainly on accident at Carter Banks official on Instagram.

Shout to Tim and Brian. I heard they're doing well. And I can't wait to watch the episode that you hosted Ian. But yeah, let's get into the after show. There's probably a bunch of stuff we can talk about that we did not talk about yet. on this show. I am Phil. It remains on Twix.

The left lane is for crime, and we will see you all tomorrow. Bye.