Timcast IRL - ITS BEGUN, FBI Launches MAJOR Fraud Operation In California Election w/ Joshua Carr

Episode Date: June 19, 2026

Tim, Phil, and Brett are joined by Joshua Carr to discuss the FBI raiding Skid Row amid a bombshell voter fraud investigation, the Iran war was just a step to hurt China, a Soros-backed group raided by the FBI in reported fraud probe, Tim Pool roasts Bernie Sanders for idiotic plan to tax AI companies, and Anthropic disables its new AI model.  SUPPORT THE SHOW BUY CAST BREW COFFEE NOW - https://castbrew.com/ GET OUR MERCH - https://merch.timcast.com/ Join - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCLwN... Hosts:  Tim @Timcast (everywhere) | https://www.shoutout.fans/timpool Phil @PhilThatRemains (X) | https://allthatremains.komi.io/ Brett  @brettdasovic   (X) |  @PopCultureCrisis  (everywhere) Producer: Carter @carterbanks (X) |  @trashhouserecords  (YT) Guest:  Joshua Carr @Joshua_the_car (X) Podcast available on all podcast platforms! ITS BEGUN, FBI Launches MAJOR Fraud Operation In California Election | Timcast IRL For advertising inquiries please email [e-mail]

Yo, the FBI has descended on Skid Row in California, going after homeless people, maybe not going after them, but investigating voter fraud following the California primary elections. Now, I know a lot of people are saying, I want results. I don't want to just see the FBI going to look at it now, but this is the best we can expect right now. I mean, how would you feel if they weren't doing anything? So it's absolutely fantastic news. The FBI is moving in on these voter fraud schemes using the homeless. It doesn't mean we're going to be guaranteed a victory, but it is very good that someone is taking this seriously. So shout out to these agents that are getting the job done because at the same time, L.A. is trying to legalize non-citizen voting. That's right. They want to bypass the whole scheme they got in place where you can send in a ballot. I'm going to say this real quick. This is not a joke, not an exaggeration. Many people have come up to me in the street and said, Tim, I'm confused about California and what you were saying, explain it to me.

Let me just say, in California, your ballot can arrive seven days after the election, hand dated, not through the post office or any kind of mail carrier, private or otherwise. And the signature could be a picture of Mickey Mouse, not a joke. And it will count in that election. That is how they vote in California. So that's a problem. But at least the FBI is going after these schemes. involving the homeless and hopefully it stops LA from just bypassing all of that and getting non-citizens to vote. So we'll talk about that. Plus, we've got a bunch of other really big news. Joe Rogan comes after the critics of the UFC event at the White House, which saw 17 million viewers tremendous. And he says, can't we just have fun, right? Hunter Biden responds saying this House does not belong to Trump. And I just cringe, guys. You know, Trump spent $14 million

to clean up the reflecting pool and they're complaining about it. There's nothing to complain about. It's the stupidest thing imaginable. They're mad about everything no matter what happens. Well, I'll tell you what I'm happy about. You know, pride's canceled. Minor League baseball team in York, Pennsylvania, refused to wear their pride uniforms. So they forfeited the match. We are seeing across the board, ain't nobody putting up there weird Pride Month profile picks or anything like that. And we've got new polling from CNN showing the American people believe movements for cultural acceptance related to gender, identity, and various other nationalities has gone too far. So, shout out.

Now we're going to get into all that news. Before we do, we get a great sponsor for you guys. It is backyard butchers. Here's what got my attention this week, my friend. Secretary of Agriculture publicly warned that America's consolidated meat supply is a threat to the country itself. Think about that. Just four companies control the majority of America's beef supply and the largest is foreign owned. It's always been bad. It's still bad. It's not a conspiracy, my friends. This is national food

security. Here's what most people don't realize. A single pound of conventional grocery store ground beef can contain DNA from hundreds of different cattle. Basically, they just throw all these cows into a meat grinder, and that's what you get. And that just, oh, come on. You know, I want to enjoy my burger, but now it's kind of grossed me out. So what's solution? My friends, return a tradition. You got to know your rancher. You got to know the land. You got to know where your meat is coming from. That's why we trust backyard butchers here, Timcast.

They are the American tradition. Backyard Butchers offers premium American beef from real Texas ranchers, born, raised, and processed right here in the good old US of A. 98% grass fed, 2% grain finish, zero hormones, zero antibiotics, zero preservatives. Go to backyardbutchers.com. Use promo code Tim for up to 30% off, two free 10 ounce ribbyes plus free shipping. And this summer, Backyard Butchers is celebrating America's 250th anniversary with a free America

250 box when you purchase a steakhouse box complete with burgers and hot dogs built for my favorite holiday, the 4th of July, which is in Maga Month, no less. Go to Backyard Butchers.com. Use promo code Tim for up to 30% off. Two free 10 ounce rib buys plus free shipping. And I just want to give a shed to Backyard Butchers and the 4th of July. Guys, it is my favorite time of the year when we're hanging out in summer. You're out in the park. You have the grill going.

Everybody's sitting in lawn chairs, explosions in the sky. That's the American way, man. And that's like my child. That's my nostalgia. So this year, we're going to have some burgers. We're going to make it fun. It's going to be great. We're going to see parades and all that good stuff.

Check out backyardbutchers.com. Shout out. Thanks for sponsoring the show. Don't forget to head over to timcast.com and join the Discord community. I also want to shout out. We're starting to do articles. So if you want to support the work that we're doing, bringing back the news, you know why? Because my friend, my friends, more than one of you, too often I run into stories and literally no one's writing it up.

So I'm like, you know, I'm going to write these stories up myself. And it's going to take a little bit extra work. And we want you guys to get involved and support the work that we're doing. So we're kicking things off. We're bringing back the news. Go to Timcast.com. Sign up, get in the Discord community, because you get to call in to this show Monday through Thursday at 10 p.m. And you can yell at us, compliment us.

You can tell Phil that his music is fantastic and he's very handsome. That was always allowed. Smash the like button, my friends. Share the show with everyone you know right now, joining us tonight to talk about this and so much more. We've got Joshua Carr. Hello. Thanks for having me.

Absolutely. Who are you? What do you do? I'm a political commentator. I'm an author and I cover mostly the conservative movement. Well, right on. Well, good to have you. It should be fun.

And the boys are hanging out. Yes, indeed. Am I one of the boys? Do I count? Yes. Okay. Guys, what's going on? It is Brett.

normally doing PCC live Monday through Friday at 3 p.m. Eastern Standard Time, but we got a bunch of stuff to get into so let's get into it. How you doing, Phil? Hello everybody. My name is Phil Labonte. I'm the lead singer of the heavy metal band, All the Armands. I'm an anti-communist and a counter-revolutionary. Still, Carter. Nice. Yes, I'm Carter Banks.

I'm here pushing the buttons and with the faders. And Brandon is also here behind me. Let's go. Here's a story from the New York Post. FBI agents descend on Skid Row in massive voter fraud probe after stunning claims of election bribery. They say about 20 agents swooped in in the notoriously blighted area after homeless people

living there claimed they'd been paid cash to sign multiple registration forms, forge signatures, and fill out voter information ahead of the mayor's race and governor's primaries. The California Post witnessed three plainclothes agents fanning out across Skid Row's run-down streets just before noon, interviewing dozens of people while taking notes. Federal Homeland Security Investigations agents also participated in the probe. The officers dressed in jeans, sweatshirts, and baseball caps spoke to locals who appeared to point them in the direction of where to look. Agents conducted up to 50 interviews asking

if individuals were paid to vote or were aware of anyone else being approached. The DOJ confirmed that federal agents were investigating a criminal matter but declined to comment further. The FBI said it is not comment on ongoing investigations, but the post-investigation to determine it was linked to voter fraud allegations. And I just want to stress, ain't no allegations here. We saw the video from James O'Keefe. These people, one guy, he's like, I'm Teresa, and it's a guy, and he's filling out the registration form. So what they do is a variety of things.

And we've heard stories of this for a while, but James O'Keefe captured this. Shout out to the work of James O'Keefe and his crew. They will either get signatures, because if you want to get on the ballot, you need signatures. So they go to the homeless and they say, just sign these names. They will go to them and say, we want you to register to vote. What does that do? they will give an address to the homeless person of a homeless shelter. Then about a month or so before the election when universal mail-in votes are

ballots, they're being sent out, a homeless shelter might receive 100, 200, 300, mail-in ballots one location with no one to accept them. The question then becomes, for what purpose do they have all of these ballots sent to these homeless shelters? Well, now we're getting a bit speculative, but speculation is that activists who are paid to collect ballots, like two or three dollars per ballot filled out, We'll go to a homeless shelter to collect these unfilled out ballots by homeless people that no one knows where they are. They will then have them signed out by homeless people.

It's actually quite simple. Here's what you do. So you find a homeless guy named John Smith. And you're like, how do I find John Smith? And the homeless shelter says, he's usually in Skid Row. You walk up to one guy and you say, hey, if you're John Smith, there's $5 with your name on it. If you fill out your ballot and the guy goes, yeah, sure, I'm John Smith. That's the conspiracy we don't know for sure.

but we do know on video they are filling these ballots out. So let's roll, baby. I also want to stress big news. June 23rd is when we're expecting the Supreme Court to hand down a plethora of rulings. The nuke is about to drop my friends just before the greatest of American holidays. If they rule in this mail-in voting case, it could put an end to universal mail-in voting, early voting, and otherwise. No more counting belts after election day. No more sending out early votes and mailing votes.

Democrats will never win on election again. That, I mean, there's a couple that are coming down next week that are going to be consequential. The mail-in voting stuff, I think, is one of them, but also the ruling on the 14th Amendment is supposed to come next week, too. Yeah, birthright, doesn't shit. Yeah, so. You're going to have a busy week. Those two, I mean, those two things alone could change the course of the country, right? If we get the kind of ruling that, you know, conservatives would be hoping for, that alone will change not only the midterms, but it'll change every, you know, subsequent election.

Oh, that's it. Culture war over. The left is marginalized. Look, with this polling that we're seeing about how Americans feel about wokeness and all that stuff, we could also see from it that woke still exists. Yeah. They're just suppressed. The plurality of Americans, I would say the majority actually, based on how the poll is structured. don't want this stuff.

So woke has to hide for now. But if we change these structures, the Supreme Court says no birthright citizenship, which would be just amazing. And if they say you cannot send ballots before election day and you can't collect them after election day, which I think they're going to rule, it is the end for Democrats as we know it.

California turns Republican. It's going to be nuts. The thing with this, too, I think a lot of people are missing this. We've theorized about a lot of these things, and we have obviously data that this is going on, but it's not until we actually have these rulings come down and then see the elections to really understand how 2020 or even 2016 could have gone differently. I think some of us who are even fairly bullish on how this might change things are going to be surprised

by just how bad it was in our elections before. And again, we just don't truly know until those rulings come down. Yeah, I mean, I would like to see, you know, see a real accounting of how the elections have panned out in the past. But that is, for me, that's a tertiary issue. It'll be interesting. But at the end of the day, you know, the people say, people always love to say, oh, you know, this is the most important election that that's ever happened. Every election is the most important. And they're right. Yeah. And they're exactly right. And the reason that they're right is because we live the way that our existence is, we live moment by

moment. So the only election that you can have an impact on is the one that is right in front of you. The one that passed, that one is no longer the most important ever. And the one that's coming up after, that can't be the most important ever because those you can't affect the one that's coming up right now is the one that you actually can have an impact on. That's a functional argument. It is. Right. There actually is a literal argument when they say this election is more important than the last election. And that is true. Right now, I will put it like this. When In 2024, when we were looking at Kamala as president or Trump as president, getting Trump in was the most important thing that we could do and the Republicans thinking majority. But that wasn't about fundamentally altering how like stopping corruption or cheating.

It was about holding the line. Right. We held the line. I said we advanced a line. We took it back. The next thing we have to do is if we do not forward that line and we fall back, we are losing. So this election is actually more important because we're, talking about fundamentally changing the understanding of our Constitution and how our elections are

actually held. And how people view the Republican Party in a lot of ways, given the fact that it's always kind of seen as like a Republican is just, you know, a Democrat is just a Republican going to speed limit or whatever, the said it backwards, right? The idea is that the Republicans are always just there to kind of be a pressure release valve for Democrat policies and you always kind of just end up never forwarding your agenda, but maybe hastening their agenda by a couple of years, but actually moving forward with your own policy ideas and making inroads helps people fundamentally see the Republican Party in a different way.

I'm sorry, I'm just going to say, this is a really important point and something that is frustrating me so much about some people on the right right now is they're acting like there's this, you know, obviously everyone talks about the Uniparty. The Unip Party is, you know, taking over and there really is no change.

This, what's going on with FBI agents right now in L.A., in addition to the rulings that are going to come out from the Supreme Court, completely dispel that. It's totally fine to talk about how the Republicans, Republican Party is more similar to the Democrat Party than it ever has been before. It's totally fine to say the certain people in power are looking at the same things and doing the same things. That's fine. But to act like Donald Trump's appointments to the Supreme Court have not changed the outcome of this country is completely ludicrous. And if Donald Trump did nothing else, and that was the only thing he did, it would still not be a unit party.

We'd already disprove that theory. Donald Trump is, whether you like him or not, Donald Trump is arguably one of the most consequential presidents in the past. 50 years, right? Like just the the appointments to the Supreme Court alone, the, you know, the changes to Roe versus Wade, you know, those, that alone is, is a massive victory for the right that the right has been working diligently for for what 50 years was it since. Exactly 50 years. You know, so the idea that Donald Trump isn't consequential, that's ridiculous, the idea that Donald Trump is exactly like the Democrats, like there is, there's a unip party. I hear people say that they generally tend to be libertarians that see them. It has to do with foreign policy most of the time. Yeah, usually it is. But they still like, they love to say, oh, it would have been the same thing.

I hear people say, oh, it would have been the same stuff if it was Kamala Harris. And that's the most politically ignorant comment you could possibly make. I love when they're like, who was I watching, Hassan? I don't know if it was Hassan, actually, but maybe it was Kyle Kalinsky. Someone said there's a zero percent chance that Kamala Harris would have gone to war with Iran. And I'm just like, that's the stupidest thing I've ever heard. There was a 100 percent chance she was going to go to war with Iran. The idea that there is ever a president who's anti-war is like the funniest thing imaginable to me.

But to be fair, on that same wavelength, I think Afghanistan is the perfect kind of inflection point for this. Donald Trump and Joe Biden were both getting out of Afghanistan. Just on paper, if you want to look at, oh, are they doing the same things on foreign policy? Yes. But the way they were going about it, vastly different. So if you want to say, yeah, the broad, grand strategy of America is not changing that much, okay, maybe. But to act like Kamala Harris and Iran is going to look the same as Donald Trump and Iran, is so stupid. Yeah, to Brett's point, most of the time they're talking about foreign policy.

Most of the time it's people that are at a libertarian streak in them or want to see the U.S. longer support Israel, right? And the libertarians and the far left, they kind of, they kind of, you know, come together on that. But libertarians would be like, we don't need to have all these bases. We don't need to be the police of the world and stuff. And it's like, I used to be a subscriber to that idea, but I've come to realize that without the United States kind of being the bulwark in the, of, you know, of the basically of global trade and stuff like that, you're going to end up with China or Russia in the spot. nature of boars a vacuum.

If there's going to be a most powerful country on the earth and there will be, it should be the United States because we've been exceedingly responsible, regardless of what anyone else says. Right, right. Exceedingly responsible with that. The problem is if Democrats win, then basically, y'all white people are screwed. You know what I mean? I'll explain why.

China takes over. The Chinese are super racist. They're Han Chinese supremacists. So they're going to implement global trade to the benefit of the Han Chinese at the detriment of literally everybody else. If the Democrats won, they would also have liberal economic, one of two things, either they defer to China and let them win, or they have liberal economic order global dominance at the expense of white people. Is this why there's so much pro-Chinese propaganda like on X and stuff like they're like, like, look at their buildings. They've got LEDs.

They're so far. Hassan who said that, wasn't he? Yeah, I mean, there's a lot more than Jackson King. It's a horses. Like, there's a lot of them. Well, my longstanding theory is that I believe that Republicans and. Democrats of the past 30 years, not Trump, pre-Trump, basically resigned themselves to China is going to take over.

They go way too many people. Their economies expanding rapidly. They're above average intelligence nationwide. And this is a, you know, a billion people where they got an app. I think the IQ of China is around like 107, 110. So they're outpacing us in every capacity. I think the, uh, the U.S. elites were like, let's transfer our wealth to Chinese assets. Let them become the, the dominant global power will avoid work.

World War III, we'll stay wealthy forever. Yeah, who cares? And then Trump was like, we're not going to do it. We're going to make America great. And they were like, stop. We've invested billions in this. You are screwing us over. Michael Flynn comes in and he goes,

Russia's not our biggest threat. China is. And they panicked and tried to put them in prison. That's how worried they were about their investments getting chopped up. So now, if you take a look at the Strait of Hormuz getting shut down, the only, it's funny because it's just, I'm just so tired of everything being fake, guys. It's all fake. I'm going to tell you right now definitively.

I know this. It's true. The goal of the Trump administration was to cut off China from 40 to 50% of their energy to push them back economically five to 10 years. That was the play. That was the point. They're not going to tell you that. And the other side's too stupid to argue correctly that Trump was lying because he was going

off of China because they don't want to shift the focus to China. So instead what happens is they say Trump started war and got nothing. And I'm just sick of the lies. Let me just start with the surface level on this one because it's really just it's irking me, right? Trump wiped out the entire leadership of Iran. 50 plus high profile individuals that were physically to negotiate, people who are 80, 90 years old, who have been there for generations who had not worked on the United States. They're all dead.

Now they're talking about he's giving him $300 billion, which was always the international monetary fund play. Loans to countries to put them under your boot. That's what they did. That's tales from an economic hitman. Now, I'm not suggesting that's the principal goal that they engaged in, but it is just the most annoying thing in the world to see people who have not read a single instance of foreign policy in their entire lives, watching MS now and convincing themselves, they know everything about global strategy. And I'm sitting here being like, the only thing that makes sense actually is with

the seizure of Venezuela, the isolation of Cuba, the killing of the criminal narco boats, threats to Gulf trade, securing Panama, renaming the Gulf of America. And literally now we are one of the largest oil exporters in the world, shutting down, like screwing over OPEC, shutting down the Gulf states and screwing over China. It's pretty damn obvious what Trump was doing. But I'm going to say this because I've just, I want to be very careful. I describe this. I don't think I'm right about everything. I don't think this is 100% guaranteed. It's not the only factor in this. But after conferring with sources that I know, because I know people who, you know, we have friends in the administration, seems to be, they're giving me a nudge, nudge, wink, wink. That's exactly what the

play was, and they're not going to tell the public they intentionally spiked gas prices to hurt China because that would be bad politics. Meanwhile, the left and liberals are too stupid, and they're just attacking Trump because gas prices are high. So anyway, rant over. I've seen a couple of people on the right who don't think he went far enough in Iran. Why do you think that is? I don't think you went far enough. Or can I can I say, like Ben Shapiro and Mark Levinner, like, you can't tell Israel what to do? And it's like, who cares? Can I say it like, what then you don't think you went far enough? No, not enough. So then my question be like, what would far enough have looked like? I think far enough would have been absolutely obliterate. Like, the fact that we're making a deal

with terrorists is what I don't like. Like, I don't think America should be making a deal with terrorists. I think we should be obliterating them. And by the way, I do understand to a point why the frustration is in Israel with us negotiating something where essentially proxies in Hezbollah in Lebanon are able to just continue to attack Israel and they can't do anything about it. I don't understand how that has anything to do with our deal with Iran. Like, do you guys understand how that could be troublesome for you to be making a deal with another country where a third country is involved and now cannot defend themselves from an Iran proxy on their own border? But the deal includes Iran ceasing, it includes a cessation of hostilities

from Lebanon as well. Yeah, I don't think it prevents. So, no, no, no, no, no, hold on. The problem. The deal Iran struck with Trump with the United States is that there would be a cessation cessation of hostilities between Israel and Lebanon. They didn't just say Israel can't defend themselves. They said, we will stop hostilities with Lebanon towards Israel. Israel will stop returning fire. And we believe them why. That's what I don't understand. I don't understand the point of that part of the deal at all. Same with the nuclear part. They're like, we're going to re-they literally use the word reiterate. They're like, we're going to reiterate that we're not going to have nuclear weapons. It's like they're just admitting to us already that we had it before. We don't care. We're not going

to this part of the deal. So why was it even included in the? first place. Again, I think the idea of a deal is completely immaterial to a country that you've wiped out their top leadership. You're negotiating with a bunch of homeless guys effectively who live in rubble. So they're going to say whatever they want to say. The point is Trump decided the war is over. That's all that matters. The question is, what is the material end of this war? For four months, China lost half of its oil imports and shifted to reserves and it put him in serious trouble. And it arguably, I should say, it has been argued that this pushed them back several years in terms of economic dominance internationally. What was it? The Emirates dropped from OPEC.

The Qatari natural gas fields are wiped out. The U.S. is positioned as the principal energy exporter in the world. And Trump did everything in the Gulf to make sure that's possible from taking out narco boats, isolating Cuba, taking the oil from Venezuela, removing Maduro. It sounds to me like whatever this deal with Iran is literally doesn't matter in any capacity. So that may be true. My problem with all of this. it is, as you stated earlier, if that's all the point of all of this, it has not been communicated to the American people. I understand why it can't be communicated to the American people, but if they lose the midterms and things don't pan out this way, it was all for not. And that's my biggest

concern right now. And I hear you, and Donald Trump said, I don't care about the midterms because you look at what happened in the primaries. I actually think, I don't believe that Trump is a blathering idiot. I don't believe that his brain is fried and he's whithering on the ground like Joe Biden was. I certainly think there's something going on. He's got like a weird splotch on his arm. He's an old man. Exactly. He's falling asleep, whatever.

But he's there. His brain works. But I don't even care to put everything on Trump all the time. It's all the liberals ever do is Trump this, Trump dad. I'm like, bro, Heggseth exists. He's got advisors. Trump probably goes to Hegsseh. What are you doing?

He says, here's what we're going to do in Iran. He goes, okay, yeah, you go do it. I mean, but he's held to a standard because he is who he puts into our country. Sure, sure, sure. But the point is you are never going to get from any president. here's the exact international plan where I declare that this is an assault on Eastern energy supply and China. That would accelerate war. Yeah, no sure.

I get that. I guess so here's my question because one of the stated goals from the Trump administration is to get rid of the nuclear weapons that are in Iran. So my question to you is if they continue to fight Israel and Lebanon and if they continue to enrich uranium, in your mind, is it kind of just like, oh, I don't care they're going to do that anyway. This is all about the economics of oil? Well, I mean, my position on whether Trump did, my position on the war is the war was largely detrimental. We have to see the long-term effects to see if it's beneficial. And they have to articulate those long-term effects. But what Trump is doing and what I'm stating he's doing is not a question of support or opposition to what he is doing.

Again, like, I think there's great risk in going to war with Iran because you better hope you're going to pull this off because it's a gambit. And for now, we can see the material effects. Everything I described are facts. Now, whether you like that is entirely up to you. I don't know. whether you think it's good. Now, the outcome, of course, will be Iran may or may not abide by this deal. Then the arguments afterward will be. We're in the same boat we were before the war, except we hindered the economics of the east to the benefit of America and propped up our energy infrastructure. That's certainly what conservatives will say. Or maybe Trump just says, you broke the deal, wars back on, clogs the straight of Hormuz again, cuts off China again, blows up more people.

I don't know. So the honest truth is we're in like basically the same spot. We were two months ago. No, no. No, absolutely. They're saying they're saying economically because of what's been done with the oil. Let me stress this again. On the broad scale, we're saying we don't know yet.

On the broad scale. Like we just don't know what's going to happen. No, no, no, no, no. I've already described the material effects of Trump's year and a half in office. Sure. He renamed the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America. Why would he do that? Vanity?

No, it's because now, internationally, it can be stated. the Gulf of America is the largest energy exporter in the world. He wanted America on it. It's not Mexico doing it. It's the United States. I think we're doing a lot of exporting out of like the port of Houston or something. So why killed the narco terrorists in the Caribbean? He needed to clear trade routes because you had criminal traffickers armed causing problems.

And you cannot have, it's called pacification. You cannot have tankers moving through the region at high volume if you have criminal enterprise because they're going to counter you. So Trump blows them all up, kills him. Why take out in Maduro? There's always a criminal supplying drugs. No, no, no, no. Because Venezuela in 2009 seized U.S. oil assets to a tune of $10 billion.

And Obama did nothing about it. And truth be told, Trump didn't his first term either. But now he is. He seized back our oil assets and basically got the country to line up. And they're the largest oil producer in the world. So now the Caribbean and the Gulf region is the largest, producer of energy in the world, with the U.S. being the largest exporter in the world, the largest since World War II, he isolated Cuba, which is adversarial, then sent an armada to the Strait

of Hormuz. So if we're talking about what Trump has been doing for the year and a half and what the Iran war was materially, it is completely in line with shifting global energy to the Gulf, and he did that. Now, as to the question of Iran as a nation, I honestly believe that the war, and actually, you know what, I'm going to say this. It is a fact statement. The Iran war is a subset of the greater military operations of the United States over the past year and a half. That is everything I just laid out with the Gulf, oil, all the trade. That is a massive, it's a litany of military operations for which the Iran war is large, but does not overtake all of the money spent in the other direction. To which I can say, when you look at the big picture and the shift, of energy and the cutting off of China and it is damaging to some of our allies as well, but I think Trump was like we're going to hurt them more than we get hurt. Whether or not Iran has nuclear weapons, I don't actually think is the front burner. I think it's maybe like three or four on the list. And I will stress, I honestly think

they're full of it. And it's an excuse. It's a cast of spilly because the 12 day war, they claim to have blown up all the fist on material in the first place, then came back and said, no. So I would argue this is further evidence to what I've been saying that this, the plan was to cut China off. I will also stress that upon communications with sources I know, you know, in and around the administration, that no one, I want to be very clear in how they say this because no one's leaking anything to me. But the general thing that I hear is, yeah, Tim, your assessment's actually pretty spot on.

And I'm like, okay, that's all in a dear. I don't want anything classified. The issue is the nuclear material thing is clearly bunk because how many times we're going to blow up nuclear material, how many times it's still going to exist. So we go in the 12-day war, it's gone, but then it's back. then we do this four-month war. It's gone, but now it's back. It's ridiculous. But that was a huge part of the selling point when this all started

was he was talking about we can't let them get nuclear weapons. And he asked the citizens to march on, you know, against the government. And a lot of people feel like he's hanging those citizens out to dry. So let me ask you, let me ask you, if Donald Trump came out and said to the American people, I want your support for a

war in Iran that will shut down the strait of Hormuz, drive gas prices up to $4,0.50 cents a gallon because I want to cause economic damage to China. Do you think his approval ready would go up or down? No, I mean, I would go to zero. Right. No, I'm not arguing the point. I'm just saying this is the argument they're using against them is that like he's hanging people out to dry when, you know, we understand we have to put our needs as a nation first. I understand the idea of needing to cut off China's access to oil,

all this stuff. Makes perfect sense. I'm just saying that's where the, you know, the detriment comes from a lot of people who probably aren't reading that heavily into the politics. They're only looking based off his initial statements, but obviously espionage and whatever happens with global politics being what it is. Who you are on the front also is going to matter going into the midterms. I mean, I imagine that the administration had hoped that if they initiated strikes, that there would be an uprising and that they would be successful. Sure.

You know. I guess that was why I asked, like, what would, if we were to go based off what they initially said, if all of this economically related to oil and gas prices wasn't the point, and he talks about an uprising from the citizens, right? arch and take back your freedom. I understand that. But like what would that have even looked like? Because that's what I'm seeing from people who are saying that we didn't go far enough.

They're saying like you didn't- We got regime change. Yeah. We got regime change. And now we've got this IMF deal for $300 billion, which is what they've been trying to do forever. Yeah. So they're like, Trump surrendered and gave him billions of dollars. Yeah, guys, you know, I know it's really difficult for people who've never read tales from economic hitman

to understand how the liberal economic order works. But for those of us that have been tracking foreign policy most of our lives. And I got about about it. down to those that are older than me who have been involved in this much longer. I'm 40. So there's a certain point when I got into politics, I had no idea what was going on. And I had to start reading all this stuff. So I got a major gap in my mind going back beyond the 80s because I wasn't alive. But this is how the liberal economic order has always worked. You go to a country and say, we'll give you a billion dollars and then you work for us.

And when they say no, you then you then you get threatening. Then we're going to have protests against you. We're going to fight against you. We're going to get you replaced. So we see this of right of countries. The first thing they do is they say we'll give you a billion dollars. The country says deal. Now they're under the boot. When these countries say no deal, it's my country and we are sovereign, the next thing they do is they prop up your opponents. Look at Bolsonaro. Look what happened in Brazil. Look what USAID does with funding protests and revolution. If those don't work and you retain power, then they kill you. If they can't kill you through assassinations, they kill you through invasion. So we'll give a shout out to historical figures like Saddam Hussein, who wanted to trade oil in Euro.

He's dead. Then you've got Muammar Gaddafi. He wanted to trade oil in gold dinar. He died. What did Hillary Clinton say? We came. We saw he died. Take a look at Syria. Bashar al-Assad said, you will not run your natural gas pipeline through my country. Now, he's in exile. His country fell. It took a long time. They got him out. Take a look at Ukraine. Yanukovych had to flee. He fled to Russia. And now the country is at war. So this is the structure. So when Iran gets bombed to and their leadership is all dead. And then they come in and they say, if you abide by the rules, you get 300, million dollars. That was the play. That is how you subjugate a nation. So from the looks of things, I would say this. If you go to one of these, you guys know what Bilderberg is, I'm willing to bet you go to Bilderberg. It's all off the record, global. I bet if you go to Davos, all of the guys there are saying basically what I'm saying. And outside, and I'll tell you this too, there are going to be journalists who appear on these big cable network TV shows who are going to be at these meetings. Behind the scenes, they're going to be like everything's off the record. Yes, this is exactly what Trump is doing and why. Now, excuse me, I've got to go on a late night cable television

show and tell everyone that Trump's evil and he flubbed this and it's about gas prices. They know they are lying. And you turn on MS Now and I'm pretty sure all of these people when they get to work, they're like, do we have our lies written down yet? Because there's no way a sane normal person can believe the things that MS Now hosts are actually saying. They know. And I want to give a shout out to our friend Alicia Menendez, whose dad is Bob Menendez, who is corrupt as they come and is going to jail. She's deep state as they come. So I don't believe for a second. These people are actually being honest about anything. Let's jump to this next story, though, because there's a lot in the voter fraud camp. I could rant on the all that stuff all day. Check this out from Fox News. FBI raids

Soros-backed voter group headquarters in reported fraud pro. The Ohio organizing collaborative received over $10 million in revenue in 24 from top Democratic-aligned donors. They say if FBI agents raided the headquarters of the Ohio organizing collaborative on June 11th and deployed across the state to question members of the organization, sometimes bearing subpoenas or demanding to seize electronic devices, MS now reported. A day later, multiple sources familiar with the events, told CBS News that the operations were part of a fraud-related investigation. I would just like to point out right now that with these FBI fraud investigations, with Watson v. RNC coming up, that's a Supreme Court ruling that could end early voting.

and late counted ballots. When Donald Trump seems not to care about polling as it pertains to the midterms, combine what we're seeing with these raids on these organizations over fraud with the redistricting efforts and this upcoming Supreme Court ruling. And I think the Republican strategy

is basically like, we're going to win by procedure. So that's the strategy. Is the Supreme Court ruling about just federal elections or would that also pertain to California state elections? Let's pull it up there. Let's pull up Watson. I actually got Scotis blog.

over here. Let me grab this one. Actually, I wonder if opinions expected. Oh, they don't know. Scotus Blog doesn't have any listed opinions just yet. But I do have the, let me see here. We got it right here from Scotus blog. Let's pull this bad boy in. The most important cases yet to be decided. And let's see, Watson v. I thought it was the first one they brought up, but let's jump to it. The court is expected to issue two major decisions on elections and campaigns, Watson v. RNC. They challenge a law in Mississippi that allows mail-in ballots to be counted as long as they were postmarked by and received within five days of Election Day. At oral argument, a majority of the justice appeared ready to uphold a lower court's ruling that federal law requires all ballots to be received by Election Day. And in National Republican Senatorial Campaign Committee v. Federal Election Commission, several justices were sympathetic to the argument made by the challengers that a federal law that,

limits the amount of money that political parties can spend in coordination with a candidate for office violates the first amendment. So the issue is this on Watson v. Republican National Committee. The argument is you can't count ballots after Election Day. Scotus blog says they seem sympathetic to the idea that all ballots must be received by Election Day. We could get a, it could be ruled on the narrow, broad or very broad. If the argument is this, Congress has codified a single day for elections. It is, what is it, the second Tuesday of November or something like that? Second Tuesday of November.

Second Tuesday. If that is the case, you cannot give out, you cannot collect ballots after that day. That's narrow. The Supreme Court might just say, yes, election day is this day. You must count all ballots on this day. Anything afterwards, gone. Now, if they rule on a narrow set, just like that, but apply it broadly, nationally saying it's not just about federal elections, but this applies to election. in general, then theoretically they could argue, and I don't know that they will, that your primary

elections must adhere to the standards set by Congress as elections are held. So if elections are to be a single day or they must all be counted election day, then your primaries must function similarly. If they rule in that capacity, Spencer Pratt would have got second place and he moved with general. Now, federally, they can rule more broadly and say, no, no, no. Congress codified a single day for elections, which means you cannot give ballots out earlier than election day. If they rule on that broadly, then holy smokes, Democrats never win again.

They can go even more broadly than that, going double double and say ballots must be delivered and received on election day. You cannot send out early votes. You cannot send out mail in votes because those all de facto create multiple election days. All ballots must be counted by midnight, or I have a feeling they will say you can count all ballots received in the day of election however long it takes, but all elections, state, local, or otherwise must adhere to the same standards set by Congress on federal elections. You may hold your elections at state level as you see fit, but they must be in accordance with

how the elections are held federally. And the reason why is a long shot, but I would argue this is what they should rule. And I bet Thomas and Alito do. If you create in a state multiple standards for our elections are held, it's confusing to the public and it's disenfranchising. The people of your state, you can determine, as the state legislature, how you conduct your elections so long as they're uniform. And if Congress has codified at the federal level, federal elections are this day, your primary elections can be on whatever day you want, but they have to function the same. way so that the people who are voting know how to vote, when to vote, and what the rules are. If they do that and do this massive broad ruling, which I think is a long shot, it's a nuclear

bomb for the Democrats who will never win again. Now, with the caveat, Democrats, of course, will adapt. They'll change their politics. They'll try to moderate. So, of course, they'll win again. But I'm saying, I could get a little bit more extreme with it and say the Democratic Party is the oldest political party in the world. And technically, I'm surprised they still exist. So sooner or later, we're going to face the nuclear bomb, the earthquake and politics that, like most political parties around the world, the Democratic Party is just too old to function anymore. Well, they, I mean, they try to be, you know, they try to evolve with the times as they, because they've been pretty successful generally over the past 50 years or so. And as they've had successes, they've had to basically move the goalpost. I mean, we talk about when Obergefeld was decided about gay marriage, right?

people were like oh if you get gay marriage and stuff then you're gonna next thing you know you're gonna have uh have you know gay people having having kids and and you're gonna have all these other things there's going to be all these crazy things now we have a question as to whether men can become women or women can become men that and that's something that's fairly new to the democrat party right in the past 10 years it's been to become an actual issue um the democrat party has overall swung very far left specifically with with younger women right like gen z women they're very far left, these ideas were not at all considered by most of the mainstream Democrats 30 years ago. There was, there was all, there's always been a fringe, particularly since the 60s and stuff,

but there was a time where you could find a quote unquote conservative Democrat and that's just not. Blue dogs. Well, no, do you believe that's, do you believe that's mostly true at the national level? Because I was like looking into the Maryland Democrat candidates upcoming. And like, I saw one of them he's like, he's been a firefighter his whole life, and he's like not necessarily pro data center, but definitely not even anti-data center or redistricting and said, you know what, I'm willing to talk about it, basically saying like if you want to have a conversation about getting rid of it, we can do that. But at the national level, like a Democrat saying that there are anything other than anti-data

center would be insane, given the way that that looks on the political spreadsheet. So is it more that just at the national level? those wedge issues end up being a bigger deal? I don't know I don't know if it's just at the national level because you see so many people on local when local politics or municipal politics being elected that are very far left, right?

You've got Maldani, you've got the mayor of Seattle. Whether or not Karen Bass calls herself a socialist, her policy. I'm saying local, like not state level even, but like, you know, when you're talking about people, you're talking about local representatives and stuff like that. I'm like like I don't remember which elections is coming up for in Maryland but basically it's not like he's going for a federal level election it's like a state level representative and that's different than in this case just feels like the issues are a lot more ground level no I don't think so and again I disagree because I mean you got AOC who's probably one of the most recognized Democrats and she's a member of the DSA this is this is really more about the divide in age

than it is about whether it's local or federal, right? There are people that are younger that are seeking office now that are very openly members of the DSA, very open. Age makes more sense. Yeah, I think this is what ultimately destroys the Democratic Party is the DSA. Fox ran a report today about how they're massively expanding. They've got something like 110,000 members and growing. And I got to be honest, I don't blame these young people for seeking out something. other than the Democratic Party, because the Democratic Party is just garbage, stagnant, stale with no new

ideas. However, their ideas they've adopted are very, very bad. I think what's likely to happen is that Maga splits into two factions, which become the left and the right of the United States, and then we get this, I don't know what you'd call it, like malignant tumor of insurgency violence from these young people who think Trump is Hitler. They won't have strong institutional power because people of poor violence. They love watching it on TV, but they really don't like seeing outside their door. But these people will be going around doing psychotic things like we saw with the UFC event and the arrests. I think the future is going to be just as simple if I reiterate once again. I do believe there's a decent probability that mega breaks into two factions. We've talked about

those rumors and what we've seen already. And the Democratic Party is impotent. They've got no leadership. They have no money. They're broke. And all the funding is going to these whack-aloon lefties. And the younger generation is radicalized. So extrapolated. It is worth no. that when you talk to young people, you ask them what socialism is, they're not mostly Marxist-Leninists, right? They don't think of, they're not actually communist. What they're thinking of is they're thinking of, you know, northern European-style social democracy. But not even that. The DSA, I'll give you the really, the idea. The DSA is full of communist. No, I understand. But for the average DSA person, I'll explain to you, I want you to

imagine this in your mind, right? So 17-8. 18 year old, you know, they're going to, 18 year olds getting out of college and they're trying to find work. And they end up applying a bunch of jobs and they can't find work anywhere. Not to mention that online application portals are redundant, super annoying. It's like, how many people have been in that process where it's like, please list all of your credentials, job history and everything. And then when you do, it's like, oh, no, I'm sorry, says, please upload your resume. And then when you do this, now list it all out. And you're like, what, they do these things for obedience test to see if you're willing to do tedious things. That's the real test. So you get out

high school, what do I do? I can't find work. So you go to college. Now you're in debt. You did everything you were told to do and you're standing there when along comes a demon. A forked tongue communist who whispers in your ear, you did everything right. You played by the rules. Elon Musk didn't play by the rules.

Why should he get to be rich? Burn it down. And they go, yeah, yeah. And they get twisted. They get corrupted. And then they become violent, desperate and angry. You see what Bernie Sanders. proposed? This, I just, I can't,

guys, I can't do this anymore. I got to pull this up. I just want to, I want to, let me, let me pull up the story. Bernie Sanders AI.

I, I think we need, I think we need, here's the story, Bernie Sanders unveils AI tax plan. Bernie Sanders, who known ever accused of being intelligent,

says that he wants the government take half equity, 50% equity stakes in large AI companies. If they make at least 200, million or more, and half of that money, those profits, would go towards a 5% annual dividend directly to the Americans. Okay. Okay.

Guys, please hear me. First, let's start here. If you are taxing half of their revenue, they go out of business because revenue is not profit. The revenue is what they're taking in. Now you need to check their assets and liabilities. So let's play a game. For all of the American people, ooh, I love this so much.

Can anyone in the room, pop quiz, tell me how much money Anthropic made in profit in the latest quarter? Nope. Do do, do, do, do, do, do. The answer would be about $559 million. Well, they certainly qualify

for Bernie Sanders tax. Because not only did they make their revenue back, but the profit means cash in their pockets. Now, unfortunately for X-A-I, they're negative. Unfortunately, for G-PT, they're also negative. You ain't taxing them. Now, here's the best part.

Of that $559 million in profit, let's just call it $560. That's easier, right? So we can cut it in half. We're going to cut that in half, and we're going to say we got $2.65. Wait, I'm doing the math. They're $280 million. And if we were to take that and take 5% and divide it amongst all Americans, do you know how much money the American people would get for one year?

How much? about $43. Bernie Sanders is retarded. And I'm tired of pretending he's not. Okay? I respected the guy a decade ago when I was like, he's a guy who's been consistent in politics. I also liked Ron Paul. He was talking about we don't want open borders.

That's a Koch brothers proposal. I'm like, yeah, he's talking about the working class. I respect that. But he comes out with this fake stuff that is impossible and makes no sense, but sounds good to people with low IQs. And I'm just, I can't, I can't, I'm just, I'm at this point where. I'm like, imagine, imagine each, I want everybody to understand this. Well, actually, I will say this. First, I think you all understand Bernie, right?

But just imagine whatever your job is. Like, let's say you're a plumber. Try explaining the most complicated problem in plumbing to a bunch of five-year-olds and see how many of them are going to vote correctly. What's going to happen is you're going to run for an election among the five-year-olds and you're going to say, listen, I am telling you, this valve is busted. And that's where the leak is coming from. and the other kid's going to be like, but you smell like poo.

So I don't think anyone should listen. The kids are going to laugh and they're going to vote to another kid who's going to go around thrown glue and smashing things and breaking it. And that's Bernie Sanders and that's the DSA. If you take the net worth of every single billionaire in America and somehow you sell all their unrealized gains, which of course is completely impossible. But if you did it, it would equal one fourth of our national debt.

If you stole all their money, it would not even make a dent. All their money and property. Yes, correct. One of the concerns I have, though, is that Trump and his administration is also looking into doing stuff like this. And you talked about maga fracturing into two bases. I'm seeing a seriously big problem on the right where I think a lot of people who are, you know, they're socially conservative, but they are not fiscally conservative. And there are a lot of these people, a lot of people who follow Tucker Carlson, for example, who are quite socialist. Not exactly what you said.

They're not communist. They're not Marxist, but they're just socialist in that Finland, Denmark kind of way. And so you have people like Tucker Carlson on his podcast, or rather, I think this was in an interview with New York Times. And he's talking about a violent revolution between classes. Those are his exact words that he said. Insane. And you've got young men listening to that. And so I'm very concerned.

Obviously, the Democrat Party is going to turn into something new. I've got no doubt of that. I do think it's going towards a DSA. But I think you're having a large faction of the right doing it as well. well, especially on the young side. And that is really scary to me. It's really scary that Trump is even talking about, you know, doing this on his front. I don't know if he's serious about it, but even the fact that he's talking about it, I think David Sachs mentioned something about it on the All-In podcast recently. And while it's a bad idea overall, um, Sachs did say,

look, you know, these people, these, these, these AI companies have used everyone's data, right? They basically have scoured the internet and used that as the, the data set for all of the super intelligence that's out there. I just want to express to you additionally how dumb these communists are. You know, if you were to eat the rich, you could only feed the United States population of about three or four days.

So I did the math. First, there are between 125,000 and 144,000 calories in the average human body. There are around 24 million millionaires and billionaires in the United States. If you were to break down all of those millionaires and billionaires into edible calories like the left says they want to do, you could feed the United States population between three and four days.

I'm going to cut so somebody can take mine. There's one thing that I, before we wrap this up or at least talking about AI, people people don't see the tangible benefits or they don't think they see the tangible benefits for like every man when it comes to like AI. Mid Journey just announced that they have this new product called Mid Journey Scanner and it is essentially a replacement for CT and MRI scans. It uses, you get in a tank of water and it drops this, basically, this piece of equipment down, and it uses ultrasonic vibrations to basically map your body.

And it's going to end up being, right now they're going through their trials. It says, unlike C's scans and x-rays, which rely on ionizing radiation, that can damage DNA and carry a small, but cumulative risk of cancer with repeated exposure. The Mid-Journey system uses harmless, high-frequency sound waste transmitted through water, a technology with decades of proven safety in standard ultrasound, including routine used during pregnancy. The point is if this type of

innovation becomes the norm, which is what it looks like it will be doing as AI advances, this is going to be the tangible bettering of your life that people are seeing that. People respond positively to that? The political question

here is about Bernie Sanders being retarded and how you shift economically in the face of not advanced medical technology, which I believe is only, it is, it is absolutely material considering I think healthcare is around 20% of our economy. The bigger issue, of course, is white-collar jobs will evaporate overnight. Bernie Sanders and all of these people are trying to come up with plans that make no sense. Now, I wonder why it is that these elites who run these AI companies are running full speed ahead, full steam ahead, to build a technology.

that we know will basically eliminate the labor market. Hold on. My assumption, just on this point, is that they know we can't just do it overnight, but we want to build it while we still have an economy and then ask the AI to solve the problem after the fact. We also know that if we do implement these technologies and it does disrupt our economy, China will take over. So it's a race to build it, but not use it.

This argument is the same argument that was made during the industrial revolution with all these labor-saving devices. And in Europe, there was a change in working patterns, right? People decided that they wanted shorter working hours. They wanted more leisure time. But in the United States, people just became more productive. And you're also seeing that at a lot of AI companies. You do have AI companies that have agentic AI that there were. This is not the same argument. Well, you're saying that these AIs are going to destroy jobs. But it's also... The Industrial Revolution didn't threaten 60 to 80 percent of the labor market. But the point that I'm making is there is a

scenario in which instead of becoming, instead of getting rid of jobs, they hire more people and they use this productivity to produce more. That's not correct. That's absolutely correct. It hasn't happened yet, but it's absolutely possible. The function of AI at

this scale is to reduce economic expenditures, not to increase it. That's why Bernie Sanders plan makes no sense. To increase productivity. But we are not, it is, no, it's not. It's to reduce the economic impact of those jobs. The implementation of AI is not to increase productivity. I suppose you can make the argument. That's the optimistic approach. The end result of this is not that we're

going to make more art. Art is saturated. There's a funny amount of hours in the day for people to watch video content, for instance. If you blast the market with 100x of the content, everybody is left destitute. I'm not just talking about art. I'm talking about like, you know, the productivity that you're talking about, like, you know, the white collar jobs that you're talking about, they can actually do more with the same amount of people. More of whatever the particular industry that you're talking about is. Pardon me? Taxes.

Healthcare administration. Healthcare administration is like 15% of the U.S. economy. No, okay. So, but health care in general, you could actually see more patients. You could have a doctor instead of going through someone. No, you can't. Why not? A human being has a finite amount of hours in the day.

What we will do is replace the doctor with an AI screening bot instead. Now, a lot of people are not too happy with that. idea but yes one way you can increase the ability for someone to see a doctor is we start doing virtual or you do completely digital AI doctor screenings you can have that's the plan instead of having a doctor spending so much time looking at looking at people's charts or whatever and stuff looking at the the x-rays and stuff trying to figure out if something's wrong you can actually say okay the doctor talks to him feed it to an AI the AI gives them the feedback what do you need the doctor for what do you the doctor for because people want to interact with people so so indeed in a private

market people will, people who like physical human doctors will choose that, but most people will go to robodctor. Either way, the point that I'm making is there's absolutely an argument that you're going to have productivity be increased, whereas you won't have a total distribution. I think you're misapplying the industrial revolution, which was to increase manufacturing in goods. Well, to be honest, which coincided with the expansion of oil distribution. This isn't my argument.

This is something that I heard David Freeberg from the, from. I heard the same thing, by the way. They're all theories. We don't know. This is propaganda. No, no, no, we do know. And these statements are propaganda by lobbyists, government actors, friends of the administration who want Trump to spend hundreds of billions of dollars in advancing AI because AI is a weapon.

It is going to change things. It will be disruptive to the economy. But we want to beat China to the punch. So they come out and they say, actually, AI might increase productivity. This is not correct. Yeah, AI right now is largely for abstract work. It will eliminate white-collar jobs overnight. It will not create economic output.

It currently does increase productivity. No, it doesn't. It absolutely does. There are people that are doing considerably more work using AI agents than they were capable of doing six weeks ago. You are going to see everybody fired in short term. They are withholding AI technology intentionally because of this. We are not talking about the industrial revolution where we can reduce the cost of a vehicle

from the equivalent of a million dollars to $10,000. I only use the industrial evolution as an allegory. It's not exactly. So let's use the current state of things. Around 20% of our economy is health care, a large, portion that is administration. With the implementation of the latest LLMs at full capacity, this is 15% of the economy gone literally in three weeks. You can get rid of the administration, you can get a lot of rid of a lot of the administration work, which is the

majority of the cost of health care. And you can actually bring health care costs. Now, what do those administrators do for work to increase their productivity after their job's been eliminated? I'm, look, I don't know, but you're asking me to prove a negative or no, I'm asking you, what is the productivity increase? What is the claim? you're going to get rid of the people. What do these people produce? Oh, well, they're doing paperwork. They're doing health care claims.

When we eliminate their job with AI and we wipe out something like 17 million jobs overnight, what do those administrative individuals do when there's not going to be overnight? There's the speed of adoption that changes. Like the economy has been, we have produced new technology after new technology after new technology, and you've seen the markets adapt and you've seen society adapt. That's historically the pattern. This is dramatically different. It's historically the pattern.

And to say that the human race or the entire market is just going to collapse and say, okay, well, we can't find anything to do. I really don't think that's the case. Let me pull this story from ZDNet. Why Anthropics suddenly pulled Fable 5 and Mythos 5 for everyone. Claude Fable 5 and Mythos 5 are gone. The reason a U.S. government directive. This is big news.

They released it. And Anthropics said the U.S. government citing national security authorities issued an export directive requiring Anthropic to disable access to the two models by any foreign national, whether insider outside the United States, including foreign national anthropic employees. The net effect was that Anthropic disabled Fable 5 and Mythos 5 for everyone, both inside and outside the U.S. You can see the effect of that in, he says, in my Claude Code session when I launched the session. So this is presumably by the U.S. government concerns that foreign agents could access to advanced AI technologies.

There was a general. But I'm going to posit something else because there is another. theory. And we know that the leaders, the CEOs and executives of all of these AI companies had meetings with the U.S. government. What they talked about, we don't entirely know for sure. The presumption it was, this is an arms race, we got to beat China, things like this. However, one of the theories is that right now, for a fact, the internal LLMs that are used by these companies, if release of the public, would end white collar work. The point of-

Taxes, administration. HR, all of it eliminated overnight. Hold on. The point of it, like, look, when you make an LLM that is very good at reasoning and also very good at coding,

you're inherently making an LLM that's good at hacking. There were safeguards. There was a jailbreak that allowed Fable to get around some of the safeguards that they put onto it.

So, okay, I got to pause because I was talking about something totally different. You're talking about Fable 5 and why it was taken off the... And the point I'm making is not to address security concerns, but the theory, there is another theory that the leaders of AI companies met with the government

and U.S. administration, U.S. government officials told these AI guys the current iterations of the large language models that you have, if released in its entirety right now between all companies, would put an end to white collar work. We're talking about 40 to 50 million jobs gone in a matter of weeks. We are already seeing an attempt to make these shifts. But for some reason, the LLMs, despite as advanced as they are with image and video generation and sound generation, somehow can't carry a one. Tax jobs still require human personnel. Healthcare administration still require personnel. And again, the theory is on the on the parts that don't matter, we talked about several months ago, Suno.com or C dance, Suno.com makes music

high level, Hollywood level, top label production, rivaling some of the best music. And it's arguably too good. It's noticeably good. Now, why would AI companies have no problem perfecting a creative art, which actually requires skill and expertise, but not really as a program that can fully automate the healthcare administration industry? Well, again, the argument is they have the technology. It is rudimentary. They surpassed this a long time ago because it's just text-based. You can already program video games. There's a company called, I think it's called SEAL AI, that can make full video games of any kind. They're now marketing it out. They're telling people to buy tokens. You can, you can tell it, I want to play Final Fantasy, and it will render you a version of it. But why then

have they not released tax code AI that can just fully automate the tax industry? Again, for the same reason, H&R Block and Jackson Hew and these other tax companies still exist, despite the fact people can just do their taxes through the IRS. It is a massive portion of the economy, and we need something that lubricates the wheels of trade in this country. So again, My argument is not that they're concerned about security because there's a million of one other questions related to that. My argument is right now we know for a fact and I'll put it up. This is going to destroy productivity and economic output. And I'll give you one really great example.

There is a finite amount of time in a day. An individual can watch or listen to content. But there is an infinite, an exponential increase in the content right now. due to AI. That means it used to be there were very few bands and getting a vinyl cut was actually difficult to get made. The bands would play it live in a studio and try and record it perfectly. They'd cut them physically from that, you know, tape and then make as many that they'd sell out. Now it's infinite digital reproduction. And that was still people making the music. And now we're at the point where kids are listening to AI music. We're older, but I talk to people

like, oh, my kid just puts on the AI music and they make whatever song they want or they change songs. We now have infinite output for creative content. For those that work in media, which has become a dominant sector in the influence economy with young people desperately trying to be influencers, you are now, we are now competing with literally near infinite content production. This is not going to increase our productivity because there's a cap on what people can absorb. It is going to, it is going to cap it at flat. You will not be able to make money when the internet is 700 million videos per day AI generated and maybe 17,000 human created content. It is going to destroy our ability to do work.

We will be left without work. Zachary Levi talks about it in the Hollywood industry. He says we know for a fact that AI is about to end Hollywood. So he's like, what's the point? We are going to have billions of hours of movies, videos, podcasts, and songs per day. What's the end result? People like me can't compete with it. Why would I sit here for four hours recording myself talking when someone else just clicks a button and in 10 seconds has a four hour audio podcast extrapolating from the news?

This is the destruction of productivity well beyond anything we have ever seen. So I hear that point, Tim. It's actually something that I've had concerns about, obviously, because it's the industry I work in. But my question to you is like, do you think that that is just ultimately a bad thing? And do you not think that we could come out on the other side of it better? Because obviously, yeah, our jobs could be screwed. this might not be an industry I'll be a part of in five or ten years. I'd be sad, but it might be true. But I think a lot of the printing press, where you had the printing press come out, and I know it doesn't

sound like a big deal to us, but the fact that people could actually read the Bible literally caused millions and millions of people around the world to be slaughtered. And that was like hundreds and hundreds of years of years. It was horrible. But today, I don't think any of us would argue that having the printing press is a bad thing. Well, that's not true. Mary Morgan would tell you It's the worst thing that ever happens. Most people would agree. Most people would agree. Well, but hold on.

We could be wrong. Yeah, we could, but kind of. I mean, do we really think that our lives could be any worse right now than it was before the printing press came out? No, and I think the issue is that it doesn't matter with technology. It doesn't matter if we have a printing press or not. Evil people do evil things. So you can take a look at the rise of the Communist Party and say, were it not for

literacy, you wouldn't get the spread of communism because people wouldn't understand largely what was going on or being said to them. so they wouldn't foment revolution. They would just believe the authorities. But the reality is, regardless of the means of conveyance or technologies behind any war or whatever, good people will try to do good things, bad people will try to do bad things. The issue with this AI is not whether it's good or bad, because technology is not good or bad. The issue is, it is advancing so rapidly that it will be so disruptive. It's going to lead us into some kind of economic downturn. And what I think history actually shows is everyone gets thrown into a bucket shaking up real hard, and whoever survives

the shake will go on and succeed in some capacity, but a lot of people are going to get crushed in the process. So what I'm trying to understand from your perspective, because I think that could happen. It's one theory is, are you just kind of saying, well, crap, we're screwed? Or do you actually have a solution to this? Like, do you think government intervention is what needs to happen in order for there? There is government intervention already. Is it a good thing? I just really don't know where you're standing on this. If the argument right now is large language models and AI companies, companies will wipe out the white-collar market overnight. With the destruction of our economy, this we will, we will, our data centers will cease to operate. Humans need to be able to trade.

The, the monetary system and the jobs we have are basically lubrication to make sure things are happening. The problem is with growing population and advancing technology, which was reducing workload, you end up with people who can't do anything to get access to that economy. The solution from people like Bernie Sanders is tax the rich and communism. The problem there is, some people still have to work. So what happens when half the population is sitting around doing nothing and getting a free paycheck? And the other half has to do those jobs. You get revolution. This needs to be curtailed and controlled. And so the government tries to do a few things. They withhold technologies intentionally. So they prevent this mass disruption. They don't want our economy disrupted, people losing work.

And then a depression allowing China to surpass us and win because they're communists and they have a command economy. They also will use propaganda to manipulate the perception of what is actually happening with AI. But you've got to ask yourself why it is they're spending something like 10 to 100 times the cost for land to build data centers. Why they are dumping hundreds of billions, why the government did, what was it? What was the operation called to build AI? Quantum something. Quantum leap. Was that what it was called? Something like that. Why are they dumping so much money into this without a clear plan for monetization. This idea that we're going to use tokens and people will buy tokens. The point that was making about Bernie Sanders and him being dumb as a box of rocks

is that you cannot tax a system intended for a lesser economic output to replace the lost economic output is the stupidest thing I've ever heard. To put it simply, if you fire the people at Taco Bell and replace them with robots and machines to build the top to make the build to make the tacos, you're not going to have people from Taco Bell with money to go to the grocery store to buy milk. Then you're not going to have grocery store workers to go to Taco Bell and buy tacos. Automation will, they're, and look, they're trying to find a solution to economics in an AI environment. Right now, I would say it's absolutely crazy that we make money complaining about things. It's unheard of 200 years ago.

They'd be like, are you nuts? So certainly, there may exist some kind of economics. But the problem that I'm seeing is creative work is eliminated too. So if the argument is humans will seek out interpersonal creativity when they no longer have to work, we hear this stupid argument from communists all the time. When communism succeeds, I'll play music and do art. No, you won't. Because when AI expands beyond this and there's no more need for your labor, there's going to be 700 billion paintings per day.

This is what's going on in Hollywood right now. what's happening is the large-scale AI companies that are doing work that involves creatives, like screenwriting or adding to that aspect of the above-the-line work. They're hiring the James Cameron's of the world. They're hiring the Martin Scorsese's of the world to work as spokesmen for these AI companies to try and get people in Hollywood to be comfortable with the idea of working with AI. But the funny thing about it in that industry is, is Martin Scorsese is talking about how he hires, like he's using this AI program

that they clearly paid him to make this advertisement for to do all the storyboards for possibly his next project. How much easier it is to work on this project now that he can work with this AI program to convey what he wants on this program. And I'm looking back at old movies and you've got your screenwriters on those movies.

But the people that are going to benefit from this aren't the studios. The studios in Hollywood can afford to hire the storyboard artists for that. Yeah, maybe they'll streamline it down down the road, but it's the independent filmmakers that end up benefiting from having access to an AI tool that can help them write storyboards. The problem is, in that industry, it is a taboo thing to be okay at working with any type of

AI program because they see it as not just stealing their work, but taking their jobs. And what's going on right now in the industry, it's a union, it's got all to do with unions as well with the industry collapsing, all of the work moving overseas, and they're talking about how they want to flip all of these non-union productions that are being made and turn them union, despite the fact that the unions are the reason why movies are in mass being made in other countries now, and AI is just another rung on that ladder, where they're trying to get the studios, the studios are trying to get people comfortable with working with it,

because like Disney said, if you go to Disney right now to work as an animation, as an animator, you sign in your contract, your work is being used to train AI. If you look at the trailer that came out today for Hex, the next Disney animated movie, it looks like Sora made it. Everything is framed directly in the middle. It looks like it was designed specifically to make into YouTube shorts. It's not exactly something people would see of as creative, but lots of jobs have been taken from them because they are starting to train these things on AI. But it's not the big studios that will benefit from it at first.

Goldman Sachs wrote in 2023 that about 40 to 60% of administrative support roles are at risk. Their tasks will largely be, tasks will be automated, and they will eliminate a majority of these jobs. Goldman Sachs is warning about this for investors, telling them, if you're going to be putting money in companies that are largely based on administration, you're about to lose everything. To Phil's point earlier about productivity, like there are aspects of that industry that they can benefit, somebody who doesn't have the budget of a big budget movie to be able to make a movie, having access to a program that can do storyboarding. Again, but this is more to the point. How is a studio supposed to make money if they're now competing with the guy in his garage? Oh, I can tell you that right now. It has to do with distribution in their control of the contracts.

Not with the latest rulings we've seen with the, what's his face, Ethan Klein stuff. So we're getting to a point. Elon Musk and Jack Dorsey have already both publicly stated abolish IP laws. These are the moves they want to make. There will be workarounds plus a lot of the longstanding intellectual property that we know is going to be moving in a public domain in the future anyway. But not only that, people may like Spider-Man, but if you can AI generate something better and faster, people will watch it.

I mean, the next generation doesn't seem to have much interest in IP anyways. I mean, look, there's a lot of people out there that aren't interested in knowing how to do this stuff. They're not even interested in being like, oh, make me this. They'll, what will happen is you'll have, you'll still have people saying, oh, you should check out this and they'll be, they'll still be a small group of people that, whether you call them creators or whether you call them people that, whether there are people that just know how to prompt AI properly to get the best result.

There will be people that are going to, that will be just, oh, you should check out this version. It's not going to be a situation where just everybody makes their own because there are people that are just not interested in doing it. I have literally zero interest in doing that. Maybe the idea that Disney sets up their AI center and somebody says, go watch this version of it. But even then, that doesn't necessarily work for me

because I like the event of it. I want to go to the theaters to see the movies. Well, what they haven't been doing too well. I mean, this summer is actually right now. We're seeing the success of small budget movies. As AI goes up, I think authenticity is only going to get bigger. We keep talking about all of the jobs that we're losing, but we never talk about any of the jobs that we're gaining because of this.

Like I'll give you an example, just in my own life. I graduated with a degree in journalism, worth absolutely nothing. At the same time, mass layoffs in the journalism industry, I think maybe one person in my cohort actually got a job in, like, mainstream journalism. I didn't, didn't get a single job. Decided instead of getting a job, I went and started my own. media company, started a show, and I make more money now than I would have in a journalism industry. It doesn't say a lot because you don't get anything in the journalism industry.

But all of what I do is only possible because of AI. I wouldn't be able to do what I'd do. I would have to hire two producers. I don't have the money to hire two producers. I'd have to bring on investors. Then I'd lose equity. Well, but how many people from your class or whatever are doing this? I'd say I'm the only one. Well, that doesn't bode well, I suppose, for the future. But I think you're absolutely wrong. I think people can adapt. I'm not trying to like tout myself, but I think I have been earlier towards this than a lot of those people. I think those people truly believe you can get a job in journalism and instead of adapt. What we're seeing with journalism right now is, and this has been true forever, with the culture war especially, people don't want journalism. They want confirmation. Yeah. Well, how do you compete with someone who can do it for half the cost of you and they can produce lies? and they make more money doing it. So, I mean, there's going to be smaller players.

We're already doing that right now. Like, there's already people who are already lying. And they make great money, but there's also people telling the truth. And it's easier and easier and easier for people to lie and make fake content and make money doing so. So it becomes harder and less lucrative. So basically my point is this. People need, it's, I forgot this. There's a term for it.

But the example that I like to cite is how Donald Trump became worse than Hitler is that, you know, when Trump runs for office, someone wrote, Donald Trump makes racist comment. It gets a million views. Then they're like, wow, that did well. Let's find more of this. And the next article is Donald Trump is a racist. Million views. The next article's Donald Trump is a terrible racist.

Million views. The next article, Donald Trump is the worst racist. Donald Trump is his best as Hitler. And then finally, Donald Trump is better as Hitler. Because they have to keep one-upping it. Because it's like an addiction. People get bored hearing the same things over and over again. How many times are we going to talk about antifar rights?

You know what I mean? It gets tiresome. Now, what happens when, I mean, I didn't go to journalism school. What happens when you have, again, finite amount of hours in the day for content consumption and an infinite amount of content being produced, you will not be able to make a living doing it. That's just it. That's standard economics. Like, no one is going to have the economic output to give you enough money, or I should say,

the critical mass will not exist that you can acquire enough money from enough individuals that you can go out and have a meal with your family. I think this is the beauty of capitalism and entrepreneurism. This is why I'm really scared about the government getting involved because it can curb capitalism. This is just one example. You brought up content creation. I 100% think that if AI continues to feed out this slop, a great company could come along and say, we are the no AI YouTube.

And YouTube's frankly already doing this. They've obviously taken off thousands, millions of channels already in videos and that's been in the news. But whenever there are problems, people can make money off the solutions. And to me, I think we're going to see a massive wave of authenticity being used as a currency in a lot of ways. And I'll tell you, historically, I think that's not correct. One example would be autotune, if we can go creative. I remember when I was a kid, people complaining about synthetic music and computers. I remember when Frutie Loops came out and we were doing beats on a computer and they were bands that we knew that were slightly older, that they were like, this is lame, man, you got to play a real instrument.

Of course I did. I was like, oh, okay, I play a real instrument. now all the top songs are electronically produced. Some musicians literally do nothing but auto tune. And now we're in the AI music era where I'm going to tell you, AI music is, it requires right now creativity. So for me, I write songs, load them into AI and it finishes them in 30 seconds. The creativity comes from me, which makes the songs better than average.

If you ask the AI just to make a song, it usually makes something bad. So you are going to have minimal work again, production decrease. You can argue it's a production increase because now we're getting 500 million songs. But what I mean is the amount of labor and the value produced will be so minimal, no one's going to pay you for it. You are not going to be able to buy a car or have a family based on your ability to prompt an AI. No, but I mean, look, that same argument was made when streaming started, right? And obviously there is a significant decrease in the revenue for artists and for labels. but, you know, making music didn't go away, you know, by individual people.

We're not talking about the same thing. We're not talking. So when it comes to streaming, we're talking about mass distribution and replicability of a song. And so we saw first, yeah, I mean, revenue flattened because people were selling music. Selling music is no longer a component in whether or not your song does well. The streaming platforms can just put you on rotation and then claim you did well and all of a sudden you're famous. you're on top because they decided that they would put you in rotation for their top songs. With this, we're talking about going on Pandora and, you know, or Spotify is a better example,

because Pandora isn't doing nearly as well. What happens when Atlantic goes to, you know, Atlantic will go to like Spotify and they'll say, listen, we know that you really want Taylor Swift. Well, we want to make sure that you put some of our other artists in your, you know, default streaming for top hits, your playlists. So that we can sell their, you know, can sell them too. and we want to do shows and we want to get revenue from the streaming. What happens when Atlantic says, I don't want to pay Taylor Swift. You know, she made a billion dollars for herself.

Why would I want to be bothered by that? We don't need to do 360 deals anymore. We can just create a fake person and music and own it completely. Put that in rotation. One of the hardest parts about that right now is whether it's TV and movies but also with musicians is you're not just tied to your music. You're tied to your social media platform. And there are large accounts tied to like fake AI,

people that have social media accounts, but if you want to get play, whether it get a role in a big movie or sometimes working with these artists, they expect you to have a large social media platform as well because they want access to all the people that follow you. They'll sign based on the side of your social media. And that doesn't always translate into people that go into venues, right? These artists that are social media famous, they get a song into some kind of algorithm or in some kind of reel or something. They'll have millions of followers, but people don't show up to their show. And in speaking to what you were saying earlier, In the YouTube space, most of them, now some of them might make money or make the a brunt of their revenue based on the ad rates for people who click on their videos.

But a lot of them, they go off and they do other things. You have a coffee company. Other people do coffee as well. Some people do some type of merch line. Other ways to monetize beyond just their videos because what people buy into them, if you're in the space that I'm in, you're lauded for your authenticity. Yes, again, just for. The issue is infinite competition. But the point we were having earlier, it sounded like you were saying this is the doom of any chance to make a living in these spaces at all.

Right now, as right now as more competitive is an understatement. Infinite competition. Like the fact that we were able to make a coffee company the way we did, white labeling through a distributor, we got samples, we blended some things up, found the flavors we like. We didn't have to build a warehouse. We didn't have to import all of these beans. We found a company that did that and we said, we want to make signature blends, brand them, you know, for us and then and then sell them. We compete with a million and one coffee companies.

People buy from us because they like that, you know, we have good blends or they're fans of the show. I appreciate that. With moving forward, you are going to have infinite competition in this space. So I'll put it like this. Our coffee company would not exist in the wild. It exists as a function of Timcast. It doesn't have any mechanism by which people could buy the coffee on their own, and we have no means to do it.

Stores, shelf space is a commodity. So if you go to Shark Tank, I love Shark Tank, by the way, and say, I want to sell coffee. They're going to say, not a single major distributor will give you any shelf space for this. Done. Zero investment. We don't need shelf space because this show is our shelf space. So that's it. But what happens?

Isn't that kind of the same argument he's making about social media? Your authenticity is what sells your product. So what happens when we are competing with infinite content for our distribution channel? That funnels to a finite amount of people. Okay, okay, let me say it again. Let me just say it definitively. Everyone in media right now is losing money and viewership to AI content. It is one of the most frustrating things ever to argue with people who don't see the ramifications behind the scenes of how media is being destroyed

by AI content. The same amount of views is getting substantially less money across the board, and it's harder and harder to get views because there is an infinite amount of videos popping up on YouTube, some 30% AI generated. So where we used to make money, and again, I'm not, I understand, I completely understand the irony in me saying this knowing full well, the technology disrupted the existing media giants when I came in. I am telling you this chain of events has happened before and it will happen again.

So, for instance, when I entered the scene, I'm at National Association of Broadcasters in the Netherlands. Where was I? What city was? I can't remember. And at this event, they put me on a side stage, talk about new online streaming, live streaming, podcast stuff. On the main stage, the prominent journalists of the major cable network said, that's not real. Don't watch it. It's untrustworthy and it's bad.

And the audience rejected it, saying, why should I trust you over him? on the side stage, we talked about the revolution, that for a phone, for $400, I can broadcast from anywhere in the world, whereas the big networks were still using $200,000 rigs in trucks. We don't need it anymore. We figured it out. We cut the cost down. And where there used to be one network, there were now 7,000 in the same city, and the network could no longer compete, lost money, laid people off, and they're struggling.

CNN's being sold after the right. It's a prestige brand at this point. us, what's happening now to us and everybody else. You are noticing this if you take a look at any political commentator, they've become retarded. Look at all the people that have decided Israel is it. Why is Israel it? Because there's two billion Muslims in the world and you need more people to watch your content, otherwise you're not making money. It's not just that it's harder to get views. Take a look at all of the major shows. Some of them are doing really well. What are they doing that's doing really well? Well, you know, Tucker and Candace do really well complaining about Israel.

and talking about how they have a great foreign audience. Candice flies to Russia. That works for them, I guess. Our audience has been kind of, we've done all right, actually. For whatever reason, we've done well. The amount of viewers that we have right now is comparable to where we were four years ago,

which is the political off season. And we were doing well last year. The views I get per video on my show seemed to be fairly static. So I think we have a dedicated audience. You guys rock. There are some other really big channels that have lost a tremendous amount of their viewership.

people have talked about how Ben Shapiro lost his viewership, and people make the argument that it's because he's a neocon and he's pro-Israel. The people who are pro-Israel didn't disappear. Ben-chapiro's fans didn't cease to exist. They didn't have some kind of major awakening where they realized he was wrong. It's an infinite amount of competition. So without calling out too many people, I'll throw Megan Kelly into the mix. Take a look at how many views she's getting on her full podcast these days. She's certainly bragging about getting hundreds of millions of views, but her show gets like 100 to 200K.

Not bad, but down from where it was. Why? You can see this in every facet. Joe Rogan's episode from yesterday is 450. Maybe it's at 500,000 views right now on YouTube. This is Rogan. He used to get $3 million in every episode. When you go on YouTube, let me put it like this. Let's go back to 2017, 16, when I started making YouTube videos. I started making YouTube videos after I leave Fusion and I'm doing one per day. And I start at one per day, I'm getting 10 to 20,000 views per video. And all of a sudden, I'm doing 70 to 100 bucks a day and I'm going, holy crap. Like, I could live off this. I got to be careful. We've got to budget. By 2017, I'm still just doing one video per day, but my audience

has grown a little bit. Shout to Carl Benjamin, who asked me to do a guest video on his channel. I jumped to 100,000 subscribers. Now I'm getting 30 to 40,000 views on one video per day. Jump into next year. I launched my second channel, Timcast News. I start putting out five additional videos per day. Something interesting happens. A bunch of us. A bunch of us. conservative commentators start complaining their viewership collapsed. I saw him on X. I saw him make videos. They're saying YouTube is censoring me. They did one video per week. They say I do I use I do one video every Wednesday for my show and I was getting half a million views. Now I'm only getting 100,000. What happened? Why am I being censored? They weren't being censored. What happened was

I came in and I was working every day Monday to Monday with no days off producing four hours of content. Now doesn't mean I'm better than them at doing this. What happened is? is each video you produce is a lottery ticket. When someone goes to YouTube.com, YouTube can show you 15 videos. When I'm producing six per day, five on one channel, one on the other, and you're producing one per week,

something magic happens. YouTube starts recommending my videos because there's so many of them, and people clicked on them because they liked the news stories. When your one video per week finally popped up, YouTube says, whoa, hold on.

This guy's getting five million views per day. Don't show that one. And so all of a sudden their views were gone, they lost their money and they couldn't sustain it. The same thing is happening to everybody now because no one can compete with the amount of AI content. I get all of that and I've seen all of that. I've seen it on a smaller scale for me as well. What I'm saying is that you're in, and you described it.

So I feel like we're in agreement here. The money just moved somewhere else. It's not like it's just gone. No, no, no. The money flattened. That's fine. It's being redistributed to maybe more people. And the point is a single individual will not be able to make enough money for a single individual's living.

So for me, when I was doing six videos per day, and I was getting 5 million views on one channel, and I think that YouTube.com slash Timcast was doing like 800,000. I was going about 400,000 per day because it was only one video. I was doing, at that time, about 3.5 million per year. By the end of 20, by mid-2019, I did $8 million in YouTube revenue alone. As a single individual, by myself, complaining on the internet, that's insane money. So it's good. That is all flattened out now.

And so whereas one person could be very well to produce in this content and nobody's complaining about that, it flattens out decentralizes. And to a certain extent, again, no one's really complaining about it. Like one person making $8 million is kind of nuts, right? How about you get a couple hundred people all make in $40,000 a year? They can at least pay for their own food. We're going beyond that. With AI content being infinite, a single individual like myself, we produce with Timcast

and all this, I think we do. like 20 or 30 segments per day. Well, maybe not. Actually, I think we do like 12 to 13. So that's a lottery ticket. 12 or 13, every single day we're throwing into the mix in competition with everybody else. None of us humans will be able to compete with AI generated content. It's not possible, which means our companies will cease to exist.

We will not be able to pay our employees. Then when it comes down to the individual level, you will end up with single individuals, $30,000 a year maybe. And they're going to say, I'm struggling. I can't work this way. I need to find a job that pays more. It will become infinitely unsustainable for the average person. So I don't think we're disagreeing with you.

This is my last point on this because I know we've been on it for a long time. This is kind of, I think, how I feel, maybe how you fulfill, is that, yes, it may be true like every other industry throughout the history of the world that it becomes oversaturated. And me or you or any of those other people out there realize I cannot make a living doing this thing. I must switch industries. I must find another problem to solve. and I must find production and value somewhere else.

So for the content industry, could totally be true. Okay, so how do we do that for 30 million people in the span of two years? That's the problem I'm bringing up. Not that economy's change. Not that careers change. It's a speed at which. But this is the fastest we have ever seen an economic revolution. I believe the governments and these companies are intentionally holding this back because

the growth has been insane. Some people speculate, we've heard this from some of the top AI guys, that artificial general intelligence has already been produced, and it's not being released to the public for a variety of reasons, one of which may be the economic issue. Over a long enough period of time, humans can adapt. Over a long enough period of time, industries can adapt. But over the span of two years, you can't lay off 30 to 40 million people

and think they're going to find a way to survive. Yeah, I think where I'm coming from, I think a lot of people in the same camp are coming from, is that with something as disruptive as AI, I agree that it'll be fast, but we've also never had a tool that can help you adapt as fast as AI. And I think AI is very unique in that way in that it's disrupting, but also helping you potentially if you're smart enough to use. And I disagree in that capacity because of two problems.

First, the recitation problem and model collapse. So the recitation problem, for those I watch you so, and already know because I've said it a million times, is that AI tends to ignore your question and give you a generic response based on the majority. This is a problem because, oh my God, every single time I put a question into any AI. I deal with this problem. So for instance, just now when I asked it how many calories are in a single human, it ignored my question on how many calories are in a human, and it gave me the response something like how many calories a human needs, because it's not actually reading your prompt.

I hit the recitation problem specifically around the gambler's fallacy and the mathematician's fallacy, and this is a really great example that you can all do yourself. I'll give it the quick version. I won't do the test because I want to go through it quickly. but if you go to a casino and you're in a physical location and you want to play roulette, people will tell you, so if you go to play roulette, red and black, right, they throw the ball in the wheel and it comes up red or black. They will always tell you it doesn't matter if it comes up red every time each role is independent of each other. There's no such thing as black being due.

That's the gambler's fallacy. However, that statement is called the mathematician's fallacy, the presumption that math exists in a vacuum, that when you walk into a physical location with a physical device run by a human being, it's going to behave as though it's an abstract mathematical equation. Gamblers know this and they do what's called AP Advantage Play, where they intentionally wait and watch a dealer to see if he develops a signature. It's called the signature spin, which results in the ball landing in the same quadrants every time, and then you can actually get an edge against the casino.

If you ask any AI generically about this, it will give you an incorrect response. This is the recitation problem. AI does not actually analyze what your prompt is. it seeks to find with the highest probability response based on the internet, which leads us to the second problem, which is called model collapse. When we get to a point where content, music, videos, podcasts, or otherwise, documentaries are at least 51% produced by AI, the models begin ingesting AI generated content to output AI generated content.

This is called model collapse. So this problem we are seeing is going to, one, if released right now, be too quickly transformative to an economy, which will disrupt white-collar jobs and creative jobs to the tune of 20, 30 million jobs in the span of a couple years, you will get a depression. You cannot have that massive an economic downturn. Now, people could adapt, but the next problem becomes how our minds adapt to a culture of a facts of a facts of a facts of a facts. You're watching a documentary about Plato's allegory in the cave. Was it Plato in the cave, right? Or am I wrong? Plato's Cave. You're watching an AI documentary about it.

This is the problem we're facing right now. Imagine, it's five years. You see a YouTube video when you're scrolling, and it says, Plato's Cave, and you go, oh, what's this? And you click it. And you hear a charming voice that says, Plato told of an amazing story. Seven men were on a voyage to the Americas when they fell into a maelstrom

and sucked them into a cave. In it, there were goblins. And the goblins had torches that they threw at these men who fought them. But one of the goblins had a magic ring that turned him invisible. And you're sitting going, wow, I didn't know that about Plato's cave. The problem is, obviously, that was all a bunch of psychobabble nonsense. But this is what happens when the AI keeps regurgitating different versions and you combine the recitation problem. AI begins ingesting incorrect content and then outputting increasingly crazier content.

That's one of the biggest problems I see beyond just the economic factors that we cannot solve for. Cannot. I hate AI. Have I made it clear? An average human has 81,500 calories in an adult male. Total calories are 130,000, but if you take out the bones and stuff like that, it's actually 81,000. It's documented in a 2017 paper by archaeologist James Cole at the University of Brighton. He calculated the caloric value of human body parts specifically to analyze prehistoric cannibalism.

What you do is, first you've got to get the pigs to eat the bones. Because pigs will go through a pound of bone-like butter. And then you can eat the pigs. Yeah. There's also a bird that eats bones. You ever see that? It's like a vulture that literally eats bone. Yeah.

Anyway. So the video where he just has like a hoof and the lower part of the leg, it shocks it down. I asked Chat GPT and GROC how many illegal immigrants were held under the Obama administration. And it said the Obama administration gave me this long-winded paragraph that was unnecessary. And then went on to give me the numbers about its deportation. And then I had to and then I typed in

I did not ask about deportations. That's the recitation problem. The issue is for most people they will ask it. So if you go to someone and say this is what happened. A guy sent me a text and he says, did you know that Donald Trump

has held more illegal immigrants than Hitler held in the concentration camps? And I went, it's obviously not true. So I went to Grock and Chetch EBTBT and I said,

how many illegal immigrants were held under the Trump administration in the first term? And it gave me deportation. And then I said, I did not ask about deportations. The only problem is, if you were a midwit and someone sent you that and you asked the question of chaty PT, and it told you 3.5 million people and you associated held with deportations because you don't know the difference, you would believe Donald Trump put 3.5 million people

in his first term in concentration camps by their logic. That's the problem with AI right now. I agree. One of them, one of them. Yeah, I agree. It's a problem. whole assumption that we're going under is that this AI is going to disrupt the economy so bad because of the fact that it's so good, it's going to replace workers. And now you're bringing up

a big problem that AI has. If AI continues to do that, I don't think it's going to be disruptive. So I don't think you can have both. Sure, let me explain what you're missing. Tax, doing taxes, you don't got to worry about recitation problem for math, for doing taxes or for HR work. Administrative work can be done because you're asking, this is the most rudimentary of AI work, which is what I'm saying, all of the LLMs could do this right now. You are asking a large language model to simply assign a schedule, like a work hours for employees.

Yeah, I can do that. You can put 100 employees in a system and say, schedule them out and it'll do it with no problem. Why aren't they doing this right now? Why has this not been released? It would wipe out administrative jobs overnight. Now, the issue of creative content is melting our brains. Culture is a secondary problem.

Yeah, that's fine. We all become functional retards. Yeah, I agree with it. One thing we're seeing, too, on top of this is that teachers in public schools are creating their curriculum with AI, which cite the recitation problem is getting it wrong, giving it to the students who then ask JetGPT to solve the homework, give that assignment back, give their homework to the teacher who then asks JetGPT to grade it. Not a single human interact with knowledge in any way, and that's literally happening.

Can I ask you, you said that you wouldn't be able to do your job without AI? In what ways does it benefit you doing what you do? Oh, my gosh. I mean, literally everything. I think, you know, I said two producers. I think it would be about two producers worth. In terms of research, it helps me do research every day for the news, for pulling up clips, for pulling up quotes from people.

And I do appreciate, I use a lot of grok because it pulls up the actual original source. I wouldn't just take its word for it. It does all of my shorts editing. I've been pretty transparent with my audience. I don't do a single lick of shorts editing because I hate all of that. It does a ton of my editing. It does a lot of my thumbnails. I mean, all of the lighting, like anyone who's done graphic design, I mean, graphic designers

are in a big trouble spot right now because of just how good AI can generate images right now. In terms of content myself, you know, I put out way more now than I ever did before. And so I guess that's kind of what I'm measuring for how much more productive I am. I'm thinking, you know, if I'm putting twice the amount of content out, that must mean there's kind of two of me now, and I can't, I can't afford to pay another one of me right now, but I can't afford to pay 50 bucks a month to the, you know, to get Gemini or to get all the other great products out there. I think we are headed for a cultural crisis and an economic crisis because of the speed at which AI is rolling out. The economic crisis that Tim's talking about isn't, I don't think

that it'll be AI that does it. I think that it's going to take the robotics industry in in conjunction with AI because there's still so many jobs out there that people do with their hands, but robots are coming that will be able to do all of those. Once AI is capable of, once you get an AGI that can actually navigate the world like a person does, which is maybe 18 months to two years away. It's already here. Well, okay, so once it's put into an AI and available for the, for, you know, public consumption, where you can buy the product. So if you've got a, so Tesla's talking about the, the optimist being $25,000. Maybe the service life on it is five years.

That's significantly cheaper than an individual for five years worth of the payroll. Once they can do that, then you'll see, I think, the significant disruption. But again, I'm just curious what you think on this, Tim. So sure, it will put the plumbers out of business or the builders or anything like that. But also it is adding productivity to your life. Like you would have spent more than $25,000 doing all the things that that robot does for you over those five years. Yeah, kind of like how we had manufacturing in the United States and then we gave it all the China and then we ended up losing all of these All the cultural infrastructure all the all the jobs were sold off and

I Culture is another another thing I think I agree with you largely and all the cultural stuff, but just so when you so when you get so I do this example in skateboarding They said if we have the Chinese make the products. We will get more profit right now there's zero profit because there's no one to buy skateboards anymore So what happens is they send all the factories to China and and a couple other countries, but China largely. China started making all the skateboards. So all new skateboarding started emerging in China. The economics of skateboarding in the United States was extracted until nobody skateboarded anymore. And now skateboarding is completely dead. And you're lucky. We're actually one of the biggest skateboard distributors because we sold 300 skateboards the other day,

which is insane. 300. Skateboarding is an Olympic sport. How is that possible? So I would argue, here's what happens. You eliminate these trade jobs. And you, you eliminate these trade jobs. And you, you bring in robots to do it. You will then end up with all of those. You know, let me give you a better example is the story of Tom's shoes. Tom said, for every pair of shoes you buy, we will send a free pair to a needy family in Africa. And they destroyed the economy in several local villages and led to starvation and death.

Why? Because all the people who made shoes were not of work. When these robots roll out at this speed and you argue, I will have more money to spend, indeed. The problem is, who's going to buy my money? pancakes when the plumber has no money. So I go to my diner and I say, we just saved a thousand dollars. We saved us out thousand dollars this year because we use a rented optimist bot for all of our trade work. Hey, how come no one's shopping here anymore? Then the guy walks in who used to be the

plumber and he says, sorry, I just don't have any money anymore. I used to work for you. You just said they rented out the optimist bot. So you rented it from Tesla? Yeah, but yeah. So the big corporation can make billions of dollars extracting the value from the regular working class people. And then the plumber has no job anymore. He can't buy it. things. So that's why Bernie Sanders is saying we got to tech because these these ideas look, Bernie's not a smart guy. The best idea he could come up with was let's take half their money. That's not going to work because you can't displace 10 economic units for one, then tax the 1 at 50 percent and think that half economic unit is going to cover the cost of the guy who lost 10.

Yeah, you bring up Tesla. I think here's my problem. It sounds very communist, very socialist to me. You brought up a company. You're acting like that company is one person, Elon Musk, making all this money. Tesla has made, you know, hundreds, thousands of millionaires. And so I think there's a lot of... What does that have to do with the point that I made? Well, the point that I'm making is that there are, once again, congratulations to the engineers at SpaceX and Tesla. No, exactly right. So I think there will still be companies that will innovate that will continue to make great products using AI that should bring out. Sure, so what does a plumber do when he loses his job to a robot in three? Well, I don't know the answer to that because I don't know what that person's

skills are outside of plumbing. Is not automation from robots and artificial intelligence. It is the speed at which it is happening. If this guy aged out and he was retiring and the company brought in, you know, Gen Alpha is only half the size of Gen Z, probably intentionally. If I was conspiratorial, I'd argue that the Malthusian since the 70s and since DARPA began building artificial intelligence, planned for population collapse intentionally because they knew this was going to happen. So eventually, you have people saying, there are no plumbers. What do we do? Don't worry. We got Tesla bots just for you. But that can't happen overnight. That's going to be 10 years. That's going to be when, when Gen Alpha is 35 and they're trying to find trades workers for their homes.

Then we're going to be like the robots will take the place of the plumber. But once again, there's still the problem of when you automate the job, you don't automate the customer. So by eliminating an individual, a single plumber is not just a plumber. He's a customer for a carpenter as the carpenter is the customer for the plumber. You eliminate one of those from the equation. Now the other one doesn't have a customer so he can't afford to rent the bot either. These are the economic problems we're trying to face or we're trying to solve that Bernie and literally no one. Even Elon Musk said we need a high value universal basic income to solve this problem.

Even Elon doesn't know how to solve it. All right. Well, shall we go to your Rumble Rants and Super Chats? Indeed, my friends. Smash the like button, share the show with everyone you've ever met in your life. The uncensored portion of the show will be coming up at 10 p.m. of course, you don't want to miss it. But let's grab what you guys got to say. Methos says the Supreme Court ruled today.

that possessing or smoking marijuana is not disqualifying for gun ownership or arrestworthy for smoking and having a gun, not legal still, but decriminalized in that way, which is really interesting. Because I don't know. How does that make sense? Well, I think it was Alito today that said that smoking marijuana and now is equivalent to drinking alcohol, you know, 50 years ago or whatever. Actually, I'm not sure the time. But it's still illegal. Alcohol's not. I mean, I didn't President Trump change the schedule? It's still illegal. Yeah, but the... Schedule 3 is still a felony.

Oh, is it still a felony? All right. I'm pretty sure Schedule 3 is still done. I thought it was made into a misdemeanor. Maybe I'm wrong about that. But either way, the, the argument about marijuana, like, if you've got the entire, you know, federal government that doesn't prosecute people. Yeah, yeah, yeah, it's a felony. It's serious.

It had to do with, like, the tax, the whole thing you scheduling was to do with the taxing, right? I'm not sure. Yeah. But you know, it's federally up to five, maybe not even up to. Oh, yeah, up to five years between three to five years. Possession of any amount of. Possession of any schedule three is one to three years. Distributing and manufacturing is three to five.

Yeah. So, I mean, look. Trafficking is 10. Overall. Yeah, but that's saying trafficking, say this again, one to three was well. Possession is between one and three years, which is a felony. Yeah. Misdemeanors are less than a year.

Felonies are a year or greater. So, yeah, I think it's weird that they were like, it's a felony, but, you know, you can commit a felony to have a gun. I'm like, there's a lot wrong with that. I mean, I don't think you should go to jail if you smoke pot and own a gun. Personally, I think that... I'm fairly libertarian in that regard. Even if you have a felony, unless it's a violent crime, I don't think you should, I think

you should have your rights restored after you've done your time. Or I believe you should be sentenced. I believe as part of sentencing, it's a violent crime. They say you're hereby sentenced to 15 years in prison and 25 years of suspended gun rights. That way you know, like when you've served your time and you're eligible to defend yourself again. I mean, I'd suppose it be suspension of your... It should be suspension of your rights. Well, for argument's sake, it should be suspenseful of your rights because if you're a felon, you can't vote either, so you lose the right to vote.

And I think that you get restored. I think it is. No. Yes, absolutely. Never. Felonies are not life sentences de facto. Anything we can do to limit the number of voters in the United States, I'm okay. You think like forever, like you commit a felony, you're done voting forever.

I think that, I don't think that I don't agree with the universal entrapment. So I'm just making a joke about getting a rich. Right. Like a guy, a guy gives his buddy money to donate. to a political candidate, and now he can ever vote or own a gun again. Yeah. I'm like, come on, this is not a guy who's a drug dealer who's murdering kids or anything like that. You sentence him for, you know, prison or probation or whatever for the felony.

You attach a suspension of gun rights and voting rights for a set amount of time. They know when they are now re-eligible to join society again. I think it's crazy that we're like, if you commit any felony, you're permanently banned from defending yourself and voting. But just for the meme, fewer voters is a good thing. All right. What do we got here? Shortwave says news, stunning from the... the White House as the corrupt Trump government harasses brave, unhoused voters, some of whom bravely voted

35 times last election. They did. Well, they were doing their civic duty. See, we got to limit how many people can vote. Reaffirming my point. HS disturbs as me over here rediscovering old Little House on the Prairie episodes on Roku. What a dang good show. Masculine men, feminine women, God, family, and country.

Love it so much. That's why you got to watch the fast and the Avod channels. That's where you get the old stuff. I finally started watching the original 19. 1984 Miami Vice, it's incredible. Nice. It's incredible. I thought you were going to say you got to start watching the Fast and the Furious.

That too. That doesn't watch that too. Douguelo says, asking the chat for a way to support Christians in Ireland, I found one give, send go. A Christian stronghold in the heart of Ireland, but I'm curious if there's anything better out there. The chat's probably just going to call you names. Wisterial says we want the nuclear dust to test to see if it's from uranium one. Whole story, much more. Indeed.

From Iran, they're saying? Yeah. Yeah, but even if you tested it, I know they're probably joking, but even if they tested it, no one would believe it. Right. Israel snuck that in there. Philip Mitchell says, acting like slavery wasn't the normal for all of time until the 1700s and ended by white men around the world, then acting like they owe you something is the most ridiculous isish. It's still the same places. Still exists.

Yeah. You know? Mm-hmm. Thinker for a life says Trump should remove gas tax for America's 250 and everyone's pain and suffering for all of July. let's ice this cake. Come on, Mr. Let's go. 150 a gallon and eased mines for peace, of course. Didn't they already vote to water down the gas supply in America? Yeah, E85.

Water. Was it E15? Trump, I wouldn't be surprised if in August or September, Trump announces a tax holiday. He's going to say, celebrating the massive energy output from the Gulf of America. We're going to do a one-month tax holiday. We're going to drop your prices down. Actually, I wouldn't be surprised if it was the end of October, he announced that they're planning a national gas tax holiday for January into February that Congress will surely approve after January 3rd when they've come in. Vote for us or else.

Well, don't you think, I know this is a crazy hypothetical like this is probably impossible, but if somehow Trump was able to get national gas prices down to 99 cents, don't you think like 100% chance Republicans? sweep the house and send him and he could he would need to do a tax holiday that simple that's how simple politics really is tax holiday and dump the uh spr yeah i mean if it i think that that that's dependent on how people feel i think i'm still of the opinion i've said this a bunch of times if the united states if the average person in america feels like they're doing well economically the republicans have a chance if they don't feel like they're doing well economically the Republicans don't have a chance. I don't think that Gen Z really factors into this because largely they don't vote specifically in off-year elections. I think that your point about the gas prices,

if you knock the gas prices down to, you know, whatever, a buck 50, 99 cents, I think that that would do major things from them. I do think that you need to do more than just a month. I think it would have to be a few months leading up to it and a little bit afterwards for people to actually feel like they're doing well because I think that the gas relief would take a little while to make people feel like they're actually making making economic gains. We got a great post from NNY 403 and he says, Tim, regarding AI, I remind you that in Star Trek, the next generation, Picard still had a vineyard. Brett is right. Unique, unreplicatable stuff will still have value. Now he has to watch Star Trek. And I thank you for proving my point perfectly.

Brett is wrong. In Star Trek, they went through social collapse, world war. It was, after a human, human civilization collapsed and everyone was killing each other. A police force emerged from a totalitarian government where the cops were all drugged so that they would enforce brutal laws against people. Finally, after they clawed through the mess with the help of the Vulcans, literal aliens, they did have a peaceful advanced society with Vigniards. My point is, not that these things won't retain value, I got a bunch of collectibles behind me, but that the speed by which AI will be implemented, will wipe out so many jobs, you won't have anyone capable of buying Picard's wine. But if you are looking for a way to separate yourself from the competition, before that

happens, before the AI destroys everything and we're all out of a job, the best thing you can do is unless you are like a master at using AI to create content, is to create things that have a strong feel of authenticity and find a way to build an audience that still apparently has a job until, of course, it's all going to end. I think what he's really looking for is you to watch Star Trek. I know, I know. Did you hear they're doing a new series,

and it's going to be based on the Enterprise? Are they learning their lessons, perhaps? They're bringing back, who is it, Jerry Ryan? I'm going to task AI to watch it for me. That way I don't have to watch it. So I'm really worried they're doing a new Enterprise show with Captain Will Be 7 of 9. I thought they brought back Jerry Ryan

for one of the other iterative. She was a guest star, I think in Picard, probably, because they were like, remember, you know, remember all the things from the things from the 90s? But if they do a new show that's based on an enterprise going on a trip, and they do an episodic with, you know,

so apparently the show is going to be they go to an uncharted part outside of the galaxy or something, I don't know. It's risky, but if they bring in real people who know Star Trek, they could actually save that franchise. I've got a better example of like nostalgia, the nostalgia bait final boss.

They're making a show called Dugout Dad starring all the kids from the Sandlot where they play adult with kids that play Little League. All right. We got this from Blave Kaiser. He says after watching the Unreal Showcase, Phil and Tim seem to be right.

AI can help small companies do a lot more for gaming. So bye-bye to hundreds of people working on AAA games. As I predicted, what we're going to get, like I got an advertisement for this company. I think it's called C-L-S-E-E-L-I-I, I'm not sure. And they say you can AI generate any video game you want. And they're showing examples of like, you know,

what is it, isometric, you know, dungeon games. and first-person shooters. What I said was my boy Andy, for instance, nobody knows more about turn-based RPGs than he does. He's played every Final Fantasy game 57 times. He can point out any character, any song. When this AI drops, he's going to sit down

and he's going to prompt the AI to make a Final Fantasy-like video game and it's going to take him half an hour to do it. And then he's going to upload that game to his profile on, you know, gamer dot games or whatever. he's going to get a million followers and they're going to be like, dude, Andy makes the best RPGs. Did you play his latest RPG?

No, which one is that? And he's going to have 700 of them lined up. And they're like, my favorite one is, you know, Fantasy Quest 436. That was the best one so far because he can make him so fast. However, I jokingly say that because I'm combining today's culture

with future technology, which every single creative makes this mistake. They always apply like, you know, back to the future two. I'm sorry, back to the feature one. He has clothes that he presses a button and it gets shorter or whatever because they were applying the standard of that day with what they think the future might hold. So a good example is there's a picture from like 1890 or something of firefighters with mechanical wings and they're flying as they put out fires because they couldn't comprehend the advanced technologies we'd have like drones. So that's the mistake. I think ultimately right now the goal of AI art, movies, video games is to create universes.

it's all pointing to a singularity in which we plug our brains in and we go to fake realities. We want to watch fake realities. We want to play fake realities. That's what everybody is doing. And so with Neurilink, that's the singularity. You're going to be sitting in your house with nothing to do. You don't need the food because we mass produce the food with robots and AI. And you're going to go, I think I'm going to be a medieval night. And then you're a medieval night. Congratulations. All right. Let's see. Jay Dirtbikers says, Tim, play your DJT tweet AI song that is slaps. Also, don't have that Spotify push song issue if you only listen to Class of Country. Also, communists aren't people. The civil rights accesso. Now, I want to stress this. The song I made

from a from a Donald Trump truth post is from like, what, 20, 23. It was years ago, yeah. And it's miserably, the song actually is really good. It was a, it was a gangster rap, rock opera. and it only generated like a minute and then just stopped. Today's AI is insane. In fact, you know what I should do? You know, I'll do this for the uncensored portion. I'm going to have it finish that song. Because we're on Suno 5.5.5, the music that AI can make right now,

you're going to be like, holy grap, I'm going to tell you guys exactly this right now. We've had before the show every night, I'll play some AI music, not every single time. But we have people to sit down and they'll pull up their phones and hit Shazam. And then nothing comes up. And then they'll say, what band is this? And I'll be like, it's me. It's my song. But it's like a woman singing.

And they'll be like, that's not you. And I'll be like, oh, no, no, I wrote the song. But it's AI that like I wrote the song, played it into my phone, upload it to Suna and then hit Render to turn it into like indie rock, electronica or like synth rock. And then they go, how do I get it? And I'm like, oh, you can't. I mean, it's on Suno.com. I think Suno.com slash Timcast News or something.

You can listen to a bunch of the songs. If you like that kind of stuff, I don't know. But I got to tell you, like, I see no reason for someone to spend as much money as they did in song production these days when you can literally just play on an acoustic guitar the song you want and you can tell it what to make. You can then go into Suno Studio and tweak octaves, change drum patterns, rerender drum patterns. You can tell it what kind of drum pattern you want. It is nuts. And you can do the full song in 30 seconds. Crazy.

All right. Let's grab some more over here. What do we got? We got a lot of people arguing about a lot of things. All right. Tothar Weirdo says, Longtime listener, my wife gave birth to our 10th child today.

Congratulations. Beautiful little girl, Bridgett. Mom and baby are doing well. God is good. Christ is king. Dio gratius. Wow. Ten babies.

I believe that once you get to 10 babies, the government should give you a grant and a trophy. There should be a congressional medal of babies that your wife gets. So they bring her in in their life. No, it's the 11th one is free. It gets everything free for the rest of their life. When they have their 11th child, they don't have to pay for it. If you have 11 kids, the government will give you a check for, you know, they'll give you $50,000 a year to pay with, because I mean, I ain't going to cover 11 kids.

I was saying, no, the 11th kid is free. So everything related to the 11th child from the day they're born through college. Yeah, it's all free. You go to the hospital. But you can't regulate. Like, how do they buy food? You know, I love it when they're like, you get a lifetime supply of pizza. Snap.

Yeah. What does that mean? It means one pizza a month. What is that going to do for me? Yeah, but to be fair, after like a year, you're like, yeah, one a month's enough. I don't know, man, if I, if, oh, I got to tell you my favorite thing ever. Charlestown Casino, they do these promos where they're like, you could win one million dollars. And then the very fine print is over 40 years.

Yeah. On my, I'll take 25, you enter these contests thinking a million bucks, you get 25,000 a year for 40 years. In my dark days, I go on X and I watch CPA. And I read CPAs arguing about lottery winners who choose to either take the lump sum or the... Well, there was that chick who won like a million bucks. It was like, I'll take $1,000. And they're like, you are dumb. You should not do that.

They're like, put that in the market and you'll make way more money in your first year. But, you know, what do you think? Always take the lump sum. And then... All right. Let's see. The real hydro... We love you.

He says, Tim, do you think rambling makes you the smartest person or that makes you correct? You have a fragile ego. It does, though. I learned it from Destiny. I watched a bunch of his videos and I found that if you speak very quickly and angrily and make things up, you just sound right

and people will listen. You know, that's how I learned how to debate. It's magic. Shout out to Destiny. All right, what do you got? Someone's going to send him that clip and he's going to be like, I'm going to debate you, Tim Poole,

and then we're going to end up debating. All right, what he got here? Quantum Strange Quartz says, Tim, did you see the Colorado school teacher that was getting, what does that say? Same bex student. I mean same sex students

to kiss each other during class and grading them. What? Whoa. No, but we can pull that up for the uncensored portion. We gotta talk about that. All right, everybody.

Smash the like button. Share the show with everyone you've ever met in your life. You can follow me on X and Instagram at Timcast, sir. Do you want to shout anything out? No, just come check me out at YouTube. Come enjoy some time together.

I do a daily show at 4 p.m. Eastern. What's the name in the channel? Josh Carr. Just search Josh Carr. It'll pop up. Perfect. Guys, if you want to follow me, I am on Instagram and on X at Brett Dasevik on both of those platforms.

You should check out PCC. We are live five days a week, Monday through Friday, 3 p.m. Eastern Standard Time. That is noon Pacific. We're on all the audio platforms as well. Also, if you were a member of the Timcast Discord, you should join me twice a month on Saturdays at 7 p.m. I do an additional bonus episode. I cover some of the news in pop culture, but also take calls and talk to you guys. You've got questions.

We can debate a little bit. It's a lot of fun. See you there. I am Phil that remains on Twix. Ian Crossland cannot change the weather with his mind. The band is all that remains. If you want to check out the band's music, you can check it out on Apple Music, Amazon Music, Pandora, YouTube, Spotify, and Deezer.

Don't forget the left lane is for crime. Carter. What's up, everyone? Carter Banks here. And shout out to Brandon for pressing the buttons a lot today because I got a new song that I'm still finishing up the video for. It's going to be out tonight at midnight. And follow me on X to find out where at Carter Banks.

Tim. It did not rain last night after the show. I told Ian he had 45, he had an hour. It was like 9.45. And then he was like, okay. And then it didn't rain. And then like midnight, he was like, I swear, I felt the rain. That proves it.

And I'm like, bro, he didn't make it rain. Phil told you there's already a forecast for rain. The point was, can you make it rain now? I said on Twitter that, on X, that I said, Ian Crossland, cannot change the weather with his mind. He quote tweeted this morning with a, uh, uh, weather forecast. Google thing about what the weather was last night. And he says, uh, that's an anecdote.

I'm like, this is. All right, everybody. We'll see you at rumble.com slash Timcast. IRL right now. Thanks for hanging out.