Timcast IRL - Judge Rules Mail In Votes ILLEGAL After Election Day, TRUMP WINNING w/Mike Benz

Episode Date: October 26, 2024

Tim, Phil, Ian, & Brett are joined by Mike Benz to discuss a judge ruling that mail in ballots cannot be accepted after election day, survivor camps issue warning that the 2024 election could spark civil unrest, the Washington Post and LA Times refusing to endorse Kamala, and undecided voters deciding to vote Trump because of the constant Democrat attacks calling him "Hitler." Mike Benz is a commentator and former U.S. State Department official who focuses on issues related to free speech, censorship, and digital rights. Hosts:  Tim @Timcast (everywhere) Phil @PhilThatRemains (X) Brett @PopCultureCrisis   Ian @IanCrossland (everywhere) Serge @SergeDotCom (everywhere) Guest: Mike Benz @MikeBenzCyber (X) Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Ladies and gentlemen, we just got a ruling from the Fifth Circuit Court, which, oh boy, it says that mail-in votes that are received after Election Day are in violation of federal law. Now, the interesting thing is this was a strategic lawsuit in Mississippi that seems to have the intention of making it to the Supreme Court to shut down any mail-in votes not cast after Election Day, but received after Election Day. You know what that means? If this precedent had been set in 2020, Joe Biden would not have won. And I agree with this. The Constitution prescribes an Election Day.

Counting ballots after the fact makes no sense. So this is setting the stage for something crazy. What happens if in 11 days Donald Trump wins? However, many states announced they've got mail in votes that have yet to arrive and will come in at three in the morning. Then Kamala Harris wins, but the Republicans sue, citing Fifth Circuit court precedence in the Supreme Court, who agrees with Republicans and says Kamala Harris loses not because she didn't have enough votes, but because the votes came in after Election Day. Very interesting. How about that? We'll talk about that.

Plus, oh, man, Washington Post and L.A. Times are refusing to endorse Kamala Harris. Their staff is they're freaking out. People are resigning. They're outraged that a newspaper won't endorse a candidate. They shouldn't. So we'll talk about that. And Israel has launched its assault on Iran. So we got 11 days before Trump gets in.

And maybe it's true. The uniparty establishment is intending on starting World War III before Trump can get in to prevent it. Before we get started, my friends, head over to castbrew.com and buy Cast Brew Coffee because you're going to want to stay awake as the world is falling apart. Can't risk falling asleep in these trying times. I'm kidding. It's great coffee. Check out Appalachian Nights and Rise with Roberto Jr.

And, of course, Ian's Graphene Dream. I'm worried that if you drink it, however, you might start acting like Ian. I'm just kidding again. It's fine. It's low-acidity coffee. Ian designed it, and it's because coffee was like Ian. I'm just kidding again. It's fine. It's low acidity coffee. Ian designed it and it's because coffee was hurting his tummy. Is that what it was?

It is, yeah. I like drinking coffee a lot, but I just don't like the heavy acid that rips up your lips and stuff, so it's nice. A lot of people said it was better on their stomach, so it's actually become one of our more popular coffees. Also, head over to TimCast.com and click Join Us. Check out Josh Siter and his

big reveal. Here's a guy who for five months was saying that he was a trans woman. He was posting these videos. People were unsure if it was a troll or it was serious. Well, it was a troll. And we've got a behind the scenes expose on why he did it and the great moment, the big

moment he revealed everything. That's membersonlyatimcast.com, but also as a member, you'll get access to our discord server. If you're looking to hang out with like-minded individuals, you want to learn more. You want to make friends. The discord server is the place to be. They got pre-shows. They got after shows. Everybody's hanging out. They're sharing ideas. They're having a good time. They're posting memes. And you can be one of those meme posters too, by going to timcast.com and clicking join us. Don't forget to also leave us a good audio review if you're listening on Apple

or Spotify. You can give us five stars and say, hey, these guys are really great. I love them. That would be appreciated. Smash the like button. Share the show with everyone you know.

Joining us tonight to talk about this and so much more is Mike Benz. Hello. Who are you? What do you do? I'm Mike Benz.

I fight for freedom of speech on the internet. Well, simple enough. Do you have any accolades or anything people should know about? Have you ever, I don't know, invented something with a clock in it? I am simply a prolific chronicler of the nefarious misdeeds of government abuse. Ah, here we go. And the whole society network that is working together to try to stifle your ability to speak on social media.

Right on. We got Brett Dasavik hanging out. Oh, we're going to be good friends. I can tell right now we're going to be good friends. Guys, my name is Brett Dasavik. You can usually find me Monday through Friday right here on YouTube, talking pop culture with Mary. Tonight, I'm happy to get into all of the ways in which I've been avoiding

the election cycle, the way this country is falling apart. Can't wait to be awake for all of it. Maybe I'll get some cask. Way to pull you in. Oh yeah, yeah, that's what I said. Most of the time, I'll tell you what, so before I worked here, I followed politics religiously. It was something I cared a great deal about. Now, because of work,

I don't really do that as much, and since having to get back into it, I'm like, wow, this is why I don't follow it as closely anymore, because the world feels like it's falling apart all the time. It hurts, doesn't it? It does. It does.

Well, popculturecrisis.com, I think, links to your channel, right? Yes, it does. But go ahead and subscribe to the YouTube also, if you're listening to the audio version, like you said. Spotify, Apple Podcasts. We have a lot of fun. When you listen to this all night, I guarantee you, you will have way more fun talking about what the stupid things the celebrities are doing.

There you go. Ian's here. I am. Wearing another weird jacket. It is. This is the blue velvet. You have a bunch of velvet jackets? Yeah, I've got purple, blue, gold, and green. They have names. Not yet. Let's call this one Camel. I mean, blue velvet's good. That's not working, is it? Camel.

I'm going to call this one Ben's, named after the maniac over my left. You're Ukraine-colored, though, today. Oh, that's right. It's all subversion, my man. We're going to love you. I tell you what, I've been talking about the liberal economic order a lot lately, empire, and I actually brought up USAID the other night.

I've learned a lot from your work, Mike, and I don't know if people really truly understand the prolific nature of your work. You're one of the best in the world, I'll be honest. I think right now we need you and people like you. I feel better of the best in the world, I'll be honest. I think right now, we need you and people like you. I feel better when you're around, man. So thanks for coming. I feel better when you're around, man. My dude. And this guy jams hard. If you don't know his music,

check it out. Right on. Well, we got a guy who jams here, too. Hello, everybody. My name is Phil Labonte. I'm the lead singer of the heavy metal band All That Remains. I'm an anti-communist and a counter-revolutionary, so let's get into it. Here's a story from CNN. Trump appointed... OK, I just got to preface this. CNN's pissed. OK, let me look out. Let me tell you how they frame it. Trump appointed appeals court judges say Mississippi is violating federal law with mail ballot deadline, but don't block it.

They can't just say Fifth Circuit court rules mail in votes violate federal law if received after Election Day. They would have if it had gone the other way. Yes. If the ruling had gone the other way, it would have been Fifth Circuit ruling. Exactly. But because it goes against their weird sensibilities and their, I don't know, uniparty establishment bootlicking, then it has to be Trump appointed. To delegitimize it. There you go. Check us out. A panel of three Donald Trump appointed judges said Friday that Mississippi was violating federal law by counting mail ballots that arrive after Election Day, but stopped short of blocking the policy before the election in a ruling that could nevertheless impact voting related lawsuits this fall. The ruling from the Fifth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which is Alito's circuit, by the

way, is a victory for and he's based is a victory for the Republican National Committee and others who brought the case in Mississippi, a non battleground state with very little mail in voting, seeking a ruling by a far right circuit court friendly to their arguments. Yes, that's called jurors. What is it? Selection jurisdiction selection or whatever venue shopping venue shopping. There you go. Democrats and voting rights advocates fear that a ruling of Republicans favor will be used to boost challenges to late arriving ballots in other states, which could make the difference in if if the margins are tight in key races, quote, Congress statutorily designated a singular day of the for the election of members of Congress and the appointment of presidential electors. The Fifth Circuit Circuit Court panel said text

precedent and historical practice confirm this day for the election is the day by which ballots must be both cast by voters and received by state officials. Among the states that allow late arriving ballots are Nevada, Ohio, Virginia, as does Maryland, the site of a competitive Senate race. Also allowing for post-election ballot receipt is California and New York, both states that could make a major difference in which party controls the House of Representatives. So here's your scenario, ladies and gentlemen. In 2020, Donald Trump won on Election Day and Donald Trump said, hey, look at that. I win. They said, no, no, no. We are going to get ballots at three in the morning. And they did. And then Joe Biden won.

If this president stands late arriving ballots don't count. Now, the argument back then was so long as they are postmarked before before on or before Election Day, they are good ballots to be counted. This ruling says, no, no, you could have mailed that in three days ago. But if it arrives after Election Day, it does not count. I agree. It is the right way to do things. If you want to vote by mail, everybody says this. Whenever you're mailing anything, you've got to mail it early to make sure it arrives on time. It is not anyone else's responsibility for vote. Don't make it. We should not have vote month. Now, what happens if in 11 days Donald Trump wins? He says, hey, everybody, I win. I'm the president.

And then they say, bup, bup, bup. We've got ballots that have yet to arrive and we're going to count them at three in the morning. And then Republicans sue, citing Fifth Circuit court precedent, take it to the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court agrees. Ballots that arrived after Election Day are void. They cannot be counted. Kamala would have won, doesn't win. Democrats then assert we won the election. The only reason we're not allowed to be to have Kamala get inaugurated is because the Supreme Court, Trump's cronies blocked us. Republicans then say, no, your garbage late ballots don't count. Election Day was the fifth, not the sixth. That doesn't count. We win. Both sides then have some some version where they claim legitimate authority over who actually wins. And where does this country go from there?

I don't know, except for maybe people who bet on polymarket don't get paid out and are quite upset. Also, it feels like when they do this, it's designed to just keep the stress on the public, right? Like before you at least knew that if you went to bed fairly early on election day and you woke up the next morning, you were going to know who the hell was elected. Now you don't even have any guarantee that that's what's going to happen very strange precedent man well there's no reason for it yeah you might be able to make a convincing argument because of the novel election in 2020 because of covid you might be able to i still would say doesn't matter like i don't think that that constitutional rules should be bent just because there's a, you know, some kind of emergency because the government will just create emergencies.

And I think we've, we all kind of agree on that. And we've, we've seen that in the past. That being said, if the case is the, the ballots have to be in by midnight. And if they had stuck to that last time, Donald Trump would be the president. So the people that say, oh, this election was either there are people that say, unless, I guess, as Tim was saying, it gets escalated to the Supreme Court and if the Supreme Court ratifies the Fifth Circuit ruling here, if they then go the extra step of blocking it, but they simply keep it as is and say it's a violation of federal law, but for whatever process reason, it won't go into effect until the next election cycle, then, you know, it may avoid this Civil War scenario that Tim's laying out. If they haven't specified it, then I imagine the scenario that Tim lays out is, honestly, it's more likely than not. Because everyone, there's been multiple states

that have said, oh, it's going to take us weeks to count the ballots. It's going to take us blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. Was it Maricopa County said 14 days? It was multiple jurisdictions. I don't remember exactly which ones, but it may have been Maricopa, going to take us blah blah blah blah county said 14 days it was multiple multiple jurisdictions i don't remember exactly which ones but it was it may have been maricopa but like it was definitely like five or six or definitely three that i've heard i want to say up to five that have said

we're going to take a long time to count the bouts we won't know and the media continues to push that narrative hey it's normal we're going to keep doing this only happens in swing states but it's normal. We're going to keep doing this. It only happens in swing states, but it's completely normal. You know, you see that. And also, you know, it's only in the United States as well. You hear, we were talking yesterday, I think it was about Brazil, how many people are in Brazil and how fast they know the results of the election. Unless it's literally hair's breadth close, there's no reason they can't forecast it. And if the ballots that get in by midnight are the only ones that count, then you can probably pretty accurately predict what's going to come out. I think why anyone would want to not see this outcome is weird. Because they want to be able to cheat.

That would be the only reason. The same reason they don't want people to have IDs. They're assuming, whoever says this is not a good idea is assuming that there's going to be late ballots. Late ballots are not a good thing. Yeah. Right. Late ballots means we failed at some degree. And we're able to, after the fact, see how many we need in order to skim a line.

No matter what side they come in on, if ballots are coming in late, they already know what they need to change the outcome. So you don't want late ballots. Well, no, they do. But the reason is just like the reason they don't want to have IDs is because they don't want tight rules. Tight rules are harder to get around. So if you have even, like whatever the are, like they should be tight and strict. So I don't want proof of U.S. citizenship to vote in a U.S. election. Just this morning in Virginia, the Justice Department has forced illegal voters, non-U.S. citizens.

Back on the rolls. Back on the voter rolls. The Justice Department intervened. Glenn Youngkin, the governor, is absolutely livid over this, and rightly so. But the Justice Department, the crooked Merrick Garland criminal mafia squad that currently occupies that building, has forced illegal voters back on the voting rolls less than two weeks before the election. So, I mean, I wouldn't overthink this. Their job is to try to pad as much as possible in order to do a come-from-behind, red mirage, blue shift type event like they did in 2020.

That's the function of Mark Elias. That's the function of Norm Eisen. That's the function of the Brookings Governance Institution and the Aspen Institute Governance Institution. This whole policy web is designed to allow the political operatives to harvest, is any attempt to muster a Republican apparatus will get chewed up by the Justice Department. This is what they've been doing. There's the 65 project to to arrest, imprison and disbar as that's not even a big, powerful legal apparatus. It was Tea Party members were getting investigated by the IRS for ridiculous reasons. Well, look at the Georgia situation, right? 19 of Trump's allies, including Trump himself, were rolled up by the criminal justice system for an alternative electors scheme, right? That was the exact same thing that the Democrats did in 2016. They actually got 13 votes in the Democrat part in the Democrat Congress to go ahead with an alternate elector scheme. They war game doing that in 2020 with a group called the

Transition Integrity Project. But when the Republicans tried it because they control the Justice Department, they simply arrested them. They called it a civil them they called it a civil they called it a rico scam when republicans did it's just like when there are protests that turn violent on the republican side that's called domestic terrorism and uh you know 20-year felony conspiracy charge but when they do it it's good trouble so it all comes down to who controls the justice department yeah is it possible to have it so nobody controls it that it just can exist i mean you're no because you're it's it's people it's always going to be run by people and even if you and if you even if you go and say something like oh well someday it's going to be ai there's going to be someone that programs the ai you can't get you cannot get rid of the inherent bias from human beings.

It's one of the reasons why when they talk about draining the swamp, I always kind of side eye it, because the idea is like even if you get rid of top brass in every government organization, they trained the people under them who a lot of times share the same belief systems that they do. And a lot of times vote the same way or part of the same party that they do. It's not so simple as to just find some corrupt politicians, find corrupt government officials, and get them out. It's been cycled downwards through the process of vetting, hiring, and everything like that. It's impossible to really make that change in one fell swoop. The blob has increasingly made this, our foreign policy establishment has increasingly made prosecutions and control over justice departments in countries all over the world, a linchpin of our diplomacy strategy. Everyone right now can go to Google and look up a term called transitional justice, which is basically now a state department doctrine

around that that's based on as soon as one of our supported political movements wins an election throw everyone from the opposing party who is just in power in jail throw their political leaders in jail throw the journalists in jail throw you know people who are influential in the unions and civil society in jail in order to stop that political party from ever rising again everyone can go to journal of democracy.org right now. And if you go to the Wikipedia, sorry to cut you off, but if you go to the Wikipedia, it says transitional justice is a process which responds to human rights violations. So automatically they're saying that this is because they're clearly the bad people. What it's about is when the State Department or CIA-backed

political movement in a particular country or region narrowly wins an election, that's usually the result of tens or hundreds of millions of dollars of support from U.S. government-funded NGOs or U.S. government institutions, and that's expensive to manage. way is to simply knock out the other party entirely so that you can achieve democratic stability, i.e. a permanent auto win for the CIA-backed political movement there or political regime because everyone else from the opposing party is purged and in jail. And that is what transitional justice is about. We set up the same thing in Ukraine, by the way, when we controlled the prosecutors there as Joe Biden himself testified to the Council on Foreign Relations. We did the same thing in Georgia. We're doing the same thing in Poland, the same thing in Moldova. We're doing the same thing in Chile and several other Latin American countries. We've rolled this out worldwide. Norm Eisen, who's the major legal hatchet man for this whole Trump operation, Get Trump. His literal bio is called Trying Trump.

He wrote a whole book on it. He wrote 10 articles of impeachment for Trump. I think his first year in office behind the Russiagate, the Trump impeachment, the Trump trials. He started off as a U.S. ambassador to the Czech Republic. And one of his claims to fame there was basically suggesting who – and when a State Department ambassador suggests to a foreign government who they should prosecute, that message is received. You're coming with the full force of the U.S. federal government, the humanitarian aid, the civil society support, the carrots and sticks that a diplomat can offer in order to purge that country's political

opposition. And you see them do this time and time again. It works so effectively in Europe. The State Department teamed up with the George Soros anti-corruption NGOs to create this whole whirlwind news cycle so that they were stigmatized, so that it was easier for the Justice Department to roll them up. It worked so well in Europe that when Trump rose to power here in 2016, they simply applied the same playbook with the same networks. What context are you talking about in Europe? Just to clarify. These anti-corruption probes that are set up where the State Department will back channel with the criminal justice system, their version of the Justice Department, and participate in these probes to roll up the State Department's political adversaries in the region. And there's a great article, if you want to pull it up, it's on journalofdemocracy.org,

which is effectively the CIA's in-house journal. It's the in-house journal for the National Endowment for Democracy, which was set up in 1983 by the CIA director at the time, to get back the powers that the CIA had lost under the Carter administration and the church committee hearings of the 1970s. And if you just look up on journalofdemocracy.org, Poland transitional justice or Poland Donald Tusk stamp out populism, any of those keywords will get you there. And you will see the CIA's in-house journal tell the newly elected Polish government this year, December 2023, less than a year ago, a list of names for them to throw in jail from the party that was just in power.

This is the playbook for American statecraft around the world. And that is why the driving force behind all this at home comes from that same State Department DOD CIA network. It's a playbook. The very first thing that comes up is who is Javier Millet? He's a rude foul mouth and one of the he's rude foul mouth and one of the most popular politicians in the world. Like it or not, Argentina's chainsaw wielding president is the new face of populism. So clearly the CIA is against him. Populism is the State Department's new definition of terrorism. We set up this whole apparatus to control the world to win the 20th century. After World War II, we set up the rules-based international order.

We create a CIA to do the plausibly deniable dirty work. We have the State Department be the public face of it. We have the DOD for military and paramilitary support. And what we started to do was, you know, this whole regime change type operation, overthrow governments in the name of stopping communism. 9-11 happens. We carry that out for counterterrorism. Then Trump happens. We take this whole apparatus for overthrowing communist governments and for stopping, you know, terrorist insurgency groups who want to topple a government that we install in Afghanistan or Iraq. And we simply do it to duly elected, democratically elected governments in the U.S., in Brazil with Bolsonaro. This is why the CIA

director personally went down to Brazil to threaten Bolsonaro before the election, because he was casting doubt on the hypothetical future election results. We did the same thing in Italy. That's why Matteo Salvini is being indicted. We did the same thing in France. That's why Marine Le Pen is being indicted. We did the same thing with the Vox party in Spain. That's why so many of them are getting indicted. The same thing with the Vox party in Spain. That's why so many of them are getting indicted. The same thing with the AFD party, the populist party in Germany. That's why their party is on the precipice of being banned by the German parliament. Because populism is the only thing that can stand against globalism. And you have these international markets. You have these banks and these multinational corporations who effectively work with the

political arm to staff the State Department, to staff the CIA, to staff the DOD. They go out and do the dirty work, and then they get cushy seven-figure jobs. As soon as they leave office, they go from making $200,000, $300,000 at DOD or CIA to making seven figures, like Mark Milley at J.P. Morgan, or like Jared Cohen at Goldman Sachs now or like the lot of them, if they all move into this space because they have put favors in the favor bank for the bankers. And that's the function of the blob. I want to ask you guys, we have this story from The Washington Examiner we brought up the other day, but we had a conversation on the Culture

War podcast this morning, YouTube dot com slash Tim Cash, check it out, about the fear of civil war with this upcoming election. Fortitude Ranch, which is a network of off-the-grid prepper resorts, they describe it as, has issued a call to their members to come to these facilities on Election Day if they live in highly volatile areas. You know, and I'd ask Ian about it. Do you think, or I'd ask the panel, do you think that this is a, they're just hyping it up

because it's their opportunity to market when people are freaked out, or are they trying to intentionally downplay it out of fear that they don't want to spark a panic by saying, quick, everybody get to the bunkers, it's going down. Considering the story that we just saw, where the Fifth Circuit Court ruled

that votes that arrive after Election Day are in violation of the law and the potential. And I say it's a potential because I don't know what happens, that this leads to a scenario where Kamala wins, but only by ballots received the next day in the wee hours of the morning, much like Joe Biden did. And then Democrats claim victory, Republicans claim victory, and then we actually end up with some kind of no president scenario. I'm curious with you, Mike, here, what what do you think we see, especially considering everything you know about the deep state and the and the intelligence apparatus? How will they respond? And is there a potential for some kind of greater escalation? Well, if you play the Jamie Raskin clip, the very influential congressman around, you know, him gloating. It doesn't matter who Trump supporters vote for. They can vote all they like for Trump because the fact is we're going to stop it on January 6, 2025.

We are going to simply not certify the election by invoking the 14th Amendment. So it doesn't matter. He can win the election. He's not going to get inaugurated because we'll stop him on January 6, 2025. Now, this is very interesting because it's a direct match of the Transition Integrity Project blueprint for the 2020 election, where they simulated an ability to stop a clear to stop to stop a clear Trump win by invoking by provoking a breakdown of Congress on January 6th to stop the certification of the election. So I have the clip here. I'm not familiar with secular or whatever. I just, ACLJ.org.

I just Googled it. It's going to be up to us on January 6th, 2025, to tell the rampaging Trump mobs that he's disqualified. And then we need bodyguards for everybody in civil war conditions, all because the nine justices, not all of them, but simply do not want to do their job. What he has just said there is worse than what anybody, any words that were ever said by Donald Trump at that rally. So this is an event at something in Pro's bookstore. I believe it was in D.C. He said that they will not certify that on January 6th, 2025, they are going to assert that Trump is ineligible under the 14th Amendment, Section 3 and block him.

You add into the mix the potential for Supreme court disqualifying large swaths of votes that came in they were cast way before election day but arrived on november 6th how is the 14th amendment what what's on section 3 like this the text of the 14th amendment is no state shall make or enforce any law which i'm sorry did i say 14th it's it is 14th yeah okay okay it is 14th it's it's you you If you wage an insurrection against the United States, you're ineligible for office. But nobody was convicted of that. But listen to what he said, the way he teased it up. Listen to how self-aware he is about the magnitude of this. He says he's he's insinuating Trump supporters are going to be pissed. They're going to be rampaging Trump mobs because to their shock and horror, when he wins the election, we're going to stop it on January 6th. So that's why we need this big military FBI apparatus in order to arrest them all to stop

the civil war conditions that we know that we are going to provoke because we're going to rob them of the election at the 11th hour. We are going to stop the certification of a duly elected president for democracy. Right. And he's saying because because the Supreme Court did not rule that he's disqualified, it now falls on Congress to do it 14 days before inauguration. You say this guy is getting marching orders from international NGOs and things. It's a consensus building process. And Jamie Raskin is in the dead thick of it. They war game this.

They do consensus building meetings. If you follow Brookings or you follow the Atlantic Council Networks or you follow the Transition Integrity Project Networks or the nonviolent civic resistance movement networks, they've been war gaming this stuff for months. They war gamed it for almost an entire year before the 2020 election. It's the same group that's back again. You can pull up The Guardian article by Rosa Brooks just a few months ago that goes over this. So is your sense that on, say, January 20th, if Trump does win clearly in the election, is your sense that on January 20th, Trump will be will be inaugurated or no? Well, if he wins on November 5th, it's going to set up this scenario that we're now talking about with Jamie Raskin. This period between November 5th and January 6th

is going to be extremely intense. If Trump wins, you are going to see, my sense is that you will see street paramilitary left wing slash never trump right even potentially you're going to see you're going to see this sort of be it summer of love 20 summer 2020 style riot force start to break out on the streets the media is going to portray them as pro-democracy groups who are protesting the illegitimacy of the Trump Electoral College victory. You're going to see that. So that's going to shut down the country. It's going to start terrorizing people.

It's going to start preventing people from being able to communicate. You're going to see pressure put on the social media companies, extreme pressure put on by the Justice Department, put on by the by the advertiser networks. You're going to see this crisis response. It's going to feel like this country is, you know, it's going to feel like the day after January 6 for two for two months, if Trump does indeed win the Electoral College in order for them to prime the pump for the for for their extraordinary actions on January 6. So they're saying that because of the January 6 insth insurrection that that somehow under the 14th amendment means that he is not eligible to become president and that congress

will have to enact that is that why they've spent so long over the last however many years to push the idea of insurrection in the media because for the public to fall in line with this they have to believe because they've been duly told by the mainstream media that that is what happened. Even though there was no prosecution for that, they'll just fall in line and believe it. Which is part of the reason why they've been they've been why I said that the whole going back to calling Trump Hitler in the past week or so. The point of that isn't to convince people about voting. It's just to prime the landscape for people to feel like Trump is a danger. And now let's read Section 3 of the 14th Amendment.

No person shall be a senator or representative in Congress or elector of president and vice president or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States or under any state who, having previously taken an oath as a member of Congress or as an officer of the United States or as any member of any state legislature or an executive or judicial officer of any state to support the Constitution of the United States, as any member of any state legislature or an executive or judicial officer of any state to support the Constitution of the United States shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same or given aid and comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may, by a vote of two-thirds of each house, remove such disability. The important factor there is nowhere does it say a president can't be president if they wage insurrection.

Many people argue that it says hold any office, and it says or as an officer of the United States, but that, I believe the legal precedent so far was that does not include the president. And the reason for that was we have the Fourth Amendment because of the Civil War. And the idea was you're not going to represent a state if you were or be in Congress if you were a part of this insurrection. But the president was different because to get elected president would mean that the union states would have a say in whether or not you were president in the first place. The argument is, if Virginia wanted to send a senator,

the union says, nope, that person waged war against us, get somebody else. Now, what if someone from Virginia who was involved in the Civil War wanted to be president? The argument is, well, okay, if New York votes for that person, that's a union state deciding.

That's why it says a Congress made by a vote of two thirds of each house removes such disability. The reason why president was not included in this is because if union states voted for the person that is removing such a disability. So this was this was argued quite a bit. But none of it matters. Tell me I'm wrong. Say, Tim, you're wrong. I say, OK, fine. I guess you're right. No one was ever convicted of any kind of insurrection or any kind of Trump was never convicted under J6. They tried him in. They tried. They impeached him and he was acquitted. We're done. It doesn't matter, though. As Red Yard Lynch said the last time he was on the show, both sides believe they are morally justified and are simply looking for plausible liability to exact to to enact their force. Now, personally, I think right now, if Trump wins the Electoral College, he wins.

But they've been repeatedly making the argument that the Electoral College is illegitimate and the Supreme Court is illegitimate. Why? Because Trump will likely get an Electoral College victory and then the Supreme Court will back him up when they challenge it. And then they're going to claim, aha, this proves it. It's illegitimate. All right. And they're simultaneously opening pressure on potential Trump-leaning Supreme Court justices. You know, these ethics probes against Clarence Thomas. They're, you know, they're opening up the lines of attack against Kavanaugh again. They're talking about the repercussions on the court and stacking it to basically try to put a kind of conflict in the Supreme Court individual members' minds that if they go against this apparatus as this gets litigated, there will be personal consequences for them.

Yeah. And, you know, this people may think this sounds far fetched, but Schumer himself said that, you you know if you go against the intel the intelligence apparatus they have nine ways to sunday to take care of you or whatever i don't remember the exact quote six ways to sunday whatever but like the point being like this isn't something that is a secret in washington even if they don't even if people don't think that they would do it to the united states or they would do it here, everyone is pretty aware that CIA works in these ways in other countries. Like most people are aware that CIA has has had effects on a lot is Rosa Brooks, who is the undersecretary of defense for Obama and held a CIA blue badge. It's literally CIA, DOD, state every single time.

It's this same apparatus. They're just using the playbook here. And they're centered by a company called USAID or an organization. You've talked a lot about this is like the brain of the blob. Well, USAID isn't the brain of the blob. The USAID is just like, it's essentially a CIA front. Yeah, it's a capacity builder for the assets. Now, USAID, in this case, USAID, what they do a lot of the times is they will fund these so-called nonviolent civil resistance movements, which this is a technique for overthrowing a government where, you know, there's two ways you can overthrow a government.

One of them is a top down military coup. You basically bribe a sufficient quorum of the of the country's military brass and then they control the tanks. And so they can simply topple the government through military force or threats of military force. That began to be phased out. It's still done from time to time. But the main way we do this now are so-called people-powered revolutions. They have a sort of patina of democracy to them where the State Department and USAID will capacity build. They will run hundreds of millions of dollars to astroturf a political movement in a country. And part of the linchpin of this are street protests that create a kind of anarcho-tyranny force on the streets that will break up meetings,

that will block highways, that will block transportation, that will shut down industrial industries. They'll do mass walkouts for the minors, for the hospital workers. They will surround parliament buildings or occupy federal buildings. And so the idea is media then reports on that as being what the people really want because they're the ones who are out on the street demanding the government and power transition to a new government

to be responsive to the people because this is democracy. Not reporting on the fact that these people are all being funded by the U.S. government. They're being funded by USAID, funded by state, and directed through their leaders by intelligence-backed channels. But that gets held up as democracy. And then when the police respond to these people throwing Molotov cocktails in police cars, that gets called an authoritarian crackdown. And so that then allows the u.s government and its

international partners to put sanctions on that government in order to economically cripple them in order to put the people into further deprivation where they're now even angrier at the government and the government has less money to pay the police or the military to contain these cia us aid funded riots on the streets but but they call it nonviolent civil resistance in order. This is the same thing we saw in 2020. This whole framing technique around calling it a protest, not a riot. Even though everyone sees everything's on fire, but you call it mostly peaceful because that's how you salvage the diplomatic norms and standards around it being a pro-democracy movement rather than an act of frigging terrorism.

Do you think that it's being turned on the United States right now? He's literally articulating how it is, yes. To the point where it would, because that makes me think it's not an American thing, this USAID thing, because if they're willing to create a civil war in the United States with the same technique to overthrow the government. Why would our own country do that to ourselves? Or is it controlled by literally by the Bank for International Settlements? In order to stamp out populism, to achieve democratic stability, because no one can run against them. Let's jump to this next story from The Guardian. The Washington Post and L.A. Times refused to endorse a candidate. You know what that means? It means they endorse Trump.

Refusal to endorse a Democrat from these papers is tantamount to endorsing Trump. And I'll give you proof. When the Teamsters said they would not be endorsing a candidate, Trump went, wow, it's a great honor. They're great people. And what do you mean it's a great honor? They didn't endorse you, but they may as well have. Is this been something that's been a precedent for a long time? How long have newspapers been endorsing candidates? Because just to me, The Washington Post has done since 1980. Outside looking in, it feels like if any organization should avoid attempting to endorse any candidate,

it should be the people who have been screaming about their supposed lack of bias for the last two decades. Who did they endorse in 1980? No, they've been endorsing Democrats, I think, every election cycle since 1980. So in 1980, they endorsed a Democrat? Yeah, I believe so. Which Democrat was it? Someone can fact check, you know, it was Carter, right? The whole history is not I'm not 100% sure. I know that I recall seeing that they've endorsed a candidate every election cycle since 1980. I don't know if one of those happened to be a neocon Republican. But i do think there is actually a slight difference here between this and the teamsters because when the teamsters was it sean o'brien the head of when he released the twitter statement

saying that they're not endorsing this time he simultaneously released the internal polling data around how the rank and file who they would have endorsed. And I believe it was something like 6535 that they would have endorsed Trump. So it's very easy to say, well, listen, they wanted to endorse Trump, but they can't do it for political reasons because they don't want to piss off the Democrats. But in this case, it's kind of the reverse, because both the L.A. Times and The Washington Post rank and file wanted to endorse Kamala, but at the last minute, the owners of the institutions stepped in and said, no, we're overriding what the staff want. As the owner of this magazine, I am not going to allow you to put this out, making this political endorsement. So at both

times, the staff actually wanted to endorse Kamala, but were stopped by the owners. This is, by the way, very interesting. They did endorse Jimmy Carter in 1980. Wow, that was sad. So, yeah, the WAPO editor-at-large resigned after Bezos is rumored to have been behind the Dem leaning out of the refusal to endorse Kamala. The same thing happened with the LA Times. Their staff is all in outrage. They're banging on the tables like whiny losers, and they're quitting over this.

That's wild. DAF is all in outrage. They're banging on the tables like whiny losers, and they're quitting over this. That's wild. But I'll tell you, there was a post from, I think it was Dave Rubin, that he was driving in an Uber, and the guy was saying he's like a liberal area. Now I'm voting for Trump. You'd have to be crazy to vote for Kamala. I think when the Democrat institutions are worried about endorsing Kamala Harris, she's not likely to win. Do you guys know who that guy is?

That WAPO editor at large? Who's that? That's Robert Kagan. Anyone know who Robert Kagan is? Nope. That's Victoria Nuland's husband. And wait, wait, and who's Victoria Nuland? Victoria Nuland was the assistant secretary of state for Europe and Eurasian affairs.

Basically the angel of death toppling country after country all over Europe, particularly Central and Eastern Europe. She was the one who was caught on the hot mic with Jeff Pyatt, the U.S. ambassador to Ukraine when we overthrew the democratically elected government of Ukraine in 2014, saying F the EU. We're going to install this new president. Yeah, it's in your book. It doesn't matter what the Ukrainians want. Doesn't matter what the EU want. We get to pick the puppet president here. Victoria Nuland was personally handing out water bottles and cookies to the rioters that the State Department had pumped $5 billion into in

order to orchestrate those rental riots. She's basically the color revolution queen of the Europe desk. She's now on the board. Since she left the State Department, she's now moved over to be a board member at the National Endowment for Democracy, which we were just talking about, the CIA cutout, which was created effectively by the CIA director in 1983. But here's another great data point on this random WAPO editor at large, who they omit is actually Victoria Nuland's husband. If you guys want to read a great quote, because I talk a lot about the blob. I've talked, you know, I said it earlier in our conversation here.

It means the U.S. foreign policy establishment and its Department of Dirty Tricks. If you go to Google right now and you type in robert kagan in the phrase love the blob from brookings the week before the 2020 election respect the blob we'll get it we'll get there as well what respect the blob what is this yes this is what am i looking for so robert kagan k-a-g-a-n i think i have your tweet yeah that'll do it too there you go respect the blob love the blob, love the blob. Yeah. So you'll see there the first image is, you know, by the way, this is, what a love story,

right? Victoria Nuland and Robert Kagan found love talking about democracy and the role of America in the world on their first days. And you understand when they say democracy, what they actually mean is totalitarianism. Yes. It means the hour in our democracy. At the very at the very least authoritarianism if you're politically disengaged you might be able to fly under the

radar but anyway i have a question for you so who at wapo ends up making the final decision on whether they endorse or not jeff bezos okay so bezos and like amazon and blue origin gave money to kamal harris right at least if i remember correctly gave a bunch of money to kamal harris which means his proto endorsement for them. Why would he avoid that from the newspaper but give money? Giving money might be just, I mean, if you got a lot of money. I understand the point of the

What I'm saying is if you got a lot of money, you give money to everybody. So that way you have favors or at least can hopefully get favors. Remember, Amazon is a major, major, major military contractor. They have a $10 billion contract, I believe, with the NSA alone. They also, I think, provide Amazon Cloud or Amazon.

I think it's their cloud contract with the CIA. There's so many military sort of intelligent statecraft connective tissue between the Bezos empire and the blob, the Kamala, you know, the whole sort of Biden Harris term. In fact, Zuckerberg feels the same way. You've noticed Sergey Brin and Larry Page from Google have been very silent this election. A lot of the people, they're milking them. Google went all out for Biden Harris. And their reward was, you know, the Justice Department is now breaking them up. Zuckerberg went all out for Biden-Harris. Their reward is that they got coerced and shaken down on censorship. And then they were left high and dry by the Biden State Department when it came to the EU Digital Markets Act and Digital Services Act. But here on screen, what I have,

you know, just so you know, I'm not making this term up, the blob. This is literally how they refer to themselves. That term is not my term. It was coined by Ben Rhodes, the Deputy National Security Advisor for the Obama administration, because of the Obama White House's frustration that this force within Washington was more powerful than the Obama White House. So they called it the blob. Is that because it just consumes and grows and consumes and grows? Yes. It's this sort of amorphous, shape-shifting, alien, indestructible monster.

When you talk about the deep state, this is the deep state. Yes. This is purely the deep state. Yes. That was the Obama term for the deep state, the blob. And so this was one week before the 2020 election. Brookings, by the way, is the number one ranked think tank. And think tank is a very misleading term. It is an influence. This is this is policy thought leadership. When Raytheon or Boeing or

BlackRock or JP Morgan wants a policy in government, they sponsor the so-called think tanks to do it. And then everyone gets their their cushy sinecure there as a career path. So Brookings is the number one top dog in town for that. And one week before the 2020 election, there was a list of 20 policy experts, their advice to the next incoming president. And everyone did pages or paragraphs. Robert Kagan's was very simple. Respect the blob, learn from the blob, love the blob. Basically saying don't make the mistake that Obama did towards the end of his term, trying to go up against it. Don't make the mistake that Trump did, trying to do radical reform to it. Simply subsume yourself into it. Let them do whatever they want and you'll have nothing, but you'll be happy.

Remember when I said politics was depressing? It's good to know this stuff. Look, he just told you. All you got to do is, look, Brett, let me tell you, there's a Cinnabon. You know, you go to the mall or whatever. I don't go to a lot of malls. You get one big Cinnabon. You ask for extra icing, and you don't got to think nothing about no blob.

You just got to eat your cinnamon bun. Ian, we got ice cream downstairs. Stop talking politics. I i'm getting hungry we've been blobbed up for 70 years it sounds like and we we've all had cushy lives for the most part we've had wonderful lives and that is it is it possible that this is the least worst governance on earth like the american life in the 90s and 2000s has been spectacular for all of us for opportunity relative to relative to the rest of the planet. Pretty much. They haven't been operating in the United States like they are now for the for forever. And like there was a time when there there was a time when they had less effect on internal United States. Like you said, the rise of populism is a big part of that.

This this golden age is the good time that makes weak men that leads to a fourth turning. It's like all this money printing. We don't want periods of young Americans sitting around doing nothing and getting fat. We want a moderate degree of challenge and triumph and both. So what did we get? It is true that our generation, I don't think it's fair to say we or everyone, because there's certainly a lot of people in this country who have had hard times and been homeless and some people are drug addicted. But largely conflict free for the Gen Xer and the millennials having to deal with relatively little. I say relatively little because, of course, we did have Iraq and Afghanistan.

We had 9-11. But now after the 90s, 90s were great, things are starting to get gradually worse. And it is because we have a generation, millennials largely, who, wow, don't know how to work hard and accomplish. So did the blob keep the American populace in like a glass cage and just kind of keep them soft for the last 20 years, and now they're getting prepared to turn something in on them? Well, it goes back before this. I mean, the fact is, is conservatives never experienced this before, but liberals did. I mean, certainly the populist left was being persecuted by the blob from the 1950s through the 1970s. This is what gave rise to the church committee hearings. This is what gave rise to Jimmy Carter and his Halloween massacre, laying off 30% of the CIA

in a single day, slashing their budget. That's what resulted in Ronald Reagan resurrecting them through the National Endowment for Democracy and this new pro-democracy public program that has supplanted much of the old work the CIA did. But this was, it's happening to the populace right now. And it's never happened to the right before in terms of the blob targeting it, because the right was always the party of war and big business, because you had these when we created this in 1947 1948 big democrats always had the the media the universities uh you know academia culture movies hollywood unions the only counterweight to that on the republican side is that the republicans had the military the energy companies the military, the energy companies, the military, the oil companies, and they had the Chamber of Commerce, the corporations.

The corporations were Republican because Republicans were low part, not exclusively, but in large part, the sort of Republican side of that equation in the sense that we would overthrow communist countries. This was the 20th century, how we built our empire. Marxist or communist or communist sympathizing countries would systematically have their governments overthrown so that we could privatize their industry and multinational corporations who were republican leaning would get export markets for all their goods and services would be able to extract the natural resources of an oil company a gas company a copper aluminum agriculture you name it and so what the CIA and and DOD were doing in the scandals from the 50s to the 70s is they were trying to stop the Democrat Party, the populist left side of it. liberal basically you know hedge fund and and wall street types and the sort of new left

identitarian groups the the ones who were against uh nato overthrowing governments because it was oppressing third world people's movements and so what the cia did then is it was targeting that that populist side of the left in order to bring the Democrat Party into. Into unison so that we are back to Coke and Pepsi. And so this is how you add things like Operation Chaos. Yes, they named it that just like they named it, you know, that just like they bribing student groups on college campuses, paying the National Students Association in order to stop people from believing ideologically in populist left and bring them into a sort of limousine liberal mentality. You had them working with

the unions, you had them infiltrating the music groups. And all of this was designed to stop the populist left. And the reaction to that was the church committee hearings in 1975 and 1976, where you had all these Democrats who were in power in Congress, and they exposed a huge amount of scandals there. The heart attack gun, you know, that Frank Church held up, you know, where the CIA was assassinating people like Lumumba in Congo and Allende in Chile. That's what gave us the House Intelligence Committee and the Senate Intelligence Committee. There was no oversight of the CIA until enough Democrats got pissed

that they didn't have control of their own party because the CIA was overthrowing it. But it didn't hit Republicans until 2016. And it's unclear if, you know, there's a way to, you know, it seems to be harder now on us than it was, frankly, on much of the left. Let's jump to this story from the Postmillennial. Undecided voters lean Trump after suffering from Hitler fatigue. Yep, I get it. I think part of the reason why I'm being pushed towards Trump so strongly is I find the Democrats and the left keep going straight to Hitler all the time with everything. So in the same lifetime now, when people go to movies, they talk about superhero fatigue. So we now have superhero fatigue and Hitler fatigue at the same time.

When Kamala Harris came out and said Donald Trump said he wanted generals like Hitler, I tweeted, this is going to boost Trump in the polls. Because we're at the point now where a lot of moderates are just like, oh, you know what? Just for that, I'm voting for Trump. I am so sick of that stupid garbage. The problem is this movie is boring. This is supposed to be a Transformers sequel where it's like, OK, we've got all these crazy Trump scandals. Grab them by the, you know, you know, they were doing the hit the Trump Hitler stuff in 2015, 2015. They were saying he's got quotes of Mein Kampf on his dresser. And some ex-girlfriend 30 years ago said, not only this, the quote about wanting generals was published in 2022.

So the Atlantic publishes a story acting like it's new, but it came out years ago and it was debunked. They've got anonymous source who who claims it happened and then two on the record sources saying it didn't happen. So by any journalistic standards, it did not happen. When they rolled it out, they said, and there's an audio, it hasn't been published yet, but there's an audio, the same thing they said about Trump saying the N-word in an elevator

one day. The whole thing Well, the elevator thing is funny. You know the Huffington Post elevator story, right? I always got to pull this one up. Let's see, Huffington Post. What do they call it? A white whale. Trump elevator X dot com. This is one of the greatest tweets ever in breaking down what the corporate press is. And it is this. A tape might exist of Trump doing something in an elevator, though exactly where that somewhere is and what that something might be, no one in media can say. That's because no one in media seems to have seen the tape or is even confident that it exists. OK, this was 2018 Huffington Post saying somewhere at some point Trump may have done something and someone may have recorded it. We don't know what he may have done, where it might have been, who might have recorded it. And no one's ever seen any evidence of this

happening. Holy crap. 14th Amendment. That man can't hold office. Insane. He may have done something in an elevator. The only noun available, the only information is that Trump at some point went in an elevator. That's their story. This is what they've been doing non-stop since

2015. Holy crap, it's been nearly 10 years. That's why it works so well, right? No, what I'm saying, what it works on is that the average person who just would have been undecided but doesn't really like the guy, they're left with the negative impression because all they're hit with daily is negative stories. No, this is the point. It's fatigue. I just I can't. I think part of the reason why I'm being pushed towards Trump so strongly is that I find that the Democrats and the left just keep going straight to Hitler all the time with everything

like it. And if it's if it's not if it's not the left pushing Hitler, it's the right pushing Stalin. So it's like we're fighting World War II every single day for every single election. So it's just it's so it's so exhausting. I think it just detracts from it pushes me away from their position. And it you know, it's so hyperbolic that it makes it impossible to have good discussions. And I think it ruins the discourse. Does anybody think it's it or something you want to hear from the vice president? Anybody? They're all saying no.

Every single person is shaking their head no. What are we talking about? Anybody? Nope. They all just shook their heads no. Nobody wants to hear this. All they're doing

is pushing Hitler. And if it's not the left pushing Hitler, it's the right pushing Stalin. I mean, the right's not really pushing Stalin, but whatever. They say communism in general, and that's also different because when they talk about

the left doing it, they're talking about not just politicians, but the mainstream press, which is able to signal boost this far greater than right-wing media, which is confined to smaller networks, Fox, I guess, but also a lot of it's going on X for right-wing politics, whereas the left is more mainstream.

I identify with this so strongly. It's funny. I wonder if they've been listening to me talk and they're like, oh yeah, and Ian's got Hitler fatigue. I'm just so tired. That's what it is. Like the hate, the scare you tactic is just done, man. And I noticed this last one, this one i just didn't feel i was like

oh i'm not now i'm getting like resilient and they used jeffrey goldberg from the atlantic the guy who lied us into the iraq war uh you know on the on the on the on the on faking weapons of mass destruction this is the guy that they roll out for this ridiculous think he i mean anytime i see like whether it be like uh bill crystal or or any of the the cohorts i'm just like i can't believe these guys are actually allowed to speak in public but this is what they do this is an intelligence network and apple bomb is is the marquee staff writer over there at the atlantic she's also a board member on the National Endowment for Democracy, the CIA cutout.

She was busted. Her name appears in the UK inner cluster cell of the Integrity Initiative, which is this big British intelligence op to start censoring the internet in 2015, where they told in the instruction manuals to be helpfully uninformative about sources of funding for the organization as they were recruiting into their quote inner cluster cell high-ranking members of the of a country's military journalism class regulators captains of industry in in order to rig the information economy in every country in nato to control who gets elected and then it was busted

when all these documents leaked and so it shut down in disgrace. And lo and behold, Ann Applebaum's name is in the UK in her cluster cell that. You specify which documents you're referring to? Yes. The Integrity Initiative leaks. It was a seven-part leak. Came out in like 2018, 2019. You can literally run a search on my handle right now for Ann Applebaum or for Integrity Initiative. And I have a whole, I don't know, multi-million view thread going through all the major receipts where her network's implicated. You know, you mentioned NATO, and I do feel like this blob is, I guess, the liberal economic order. This is what it's turned into. And I've been thinking it's a bit of a zoom out from inside

the blob where we are to BRICS. And we can stay focused on this too, but I want to know, is BRICS like another blob? And if so, BRICS is Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa. It's another economic order that's been growing over the last decade. I don't know how long it's been around, but is it another blob? And if so, and if not, how do you see these two organizations interacting, the blob and the bricks? Yeah, it's a China-led. Every country has at least a mini blob, right? I mean, every country has a version of a State Department. It's usually called a Ministry of Foreign Affairs, MFA.

In the UK, it's the UK Foreign Office. But essentially, this is how you participate in the world around you. No country is an island. You can't even make a pencil in the United States without getting, you know, the erasers from gum trees in Malaysia and graphite from mines in South America. You need to interact in the world in order to have goods and services. The State Department, for example, is the first thing we set up in the U.S. government. In 1789, we formed only three government agencies, the State Department, the Department of War, which is now the Department of Defense, and the U.S. Treasury. I mean, it's your founding government agency. And so the moment you have that,

you need an apparatus to get your way in the world with other countries. And so the intelligence services are folded into it. The military coordinates other countries. And so the intelligence services are folded into it, the military coordinates with it. And so everyone seeks to influence world events. And so you need a blob to do that. You need a foreign facing operations core who is able to exert leverage, who is able to do intelligence, who is able to run operations. But China does that mostly through economic soft power, through what is sometimes called debt trap diplomacy, but oftentimes it's just simply trade. Europe, for example, now does more trade with China than with the US. They overtook them, I believe, in 2020. China has gotten huge influence over Africa through building their ports, building their roads,

building their public health, building their infrastructure. And in return, the African governments vote their way in multilateral institutions, vote their way in the UN. It's a favors-for-favors relationship. Now, the U.S. dollar has been one of the main mechanisms for U.S. economic soft power projection, a way to get influence over foreign governments because they are dependent on the U.S. dollar. Everything's transacted that way. Dollar supremacy has been one of the ways that we have led the world order. As China has risen economically and China has developed partners all around the world in BRICS nations and beyond, they are competing now against the dollar to dislodge it as the sort of economic currency primacy coin of the realm. We've seen Saudi Arabia, for example, signal it's not going to renew the petrodollar and that it's going to use a basket of currencies that may be led by the Chinese. I do think it's interesting that news just today broke that Brazil just blocked Venezuela from joining BRICS, which I find very interesting because the State Department worked assiduously to rig the Brazilian election to censor every Bolsonaro supporter on every social media platform, plus all the encrypted chat apps, ran this whole operation. The State Department back chained with Taiwan in order to get electronic voting machines into Brazil against the will of the Brazilian prime minister.

The Defense Department, Lloyd Austin, swooped down to Brazil to threaten Bolsonaro. The CIA director, Bill Burns, personallyoped down to Brazil to threaten Bolsonaro. The CIA director, Bill Burns, personally flew down to Brazil to threaten Bolsonaro. The State Department diverted semiconductor chips meant for the U.S. just to get more electronic voting machines into Brazil, even though the governor of Brazil didn't want it. And then, so Lula's installed. By the way, Lula was named Man of the year by the union arm of the national now for democracy the CI so make of that of what you will and then Lula comes in just today and is seen as backstabbing Venezuela a lot of people thought that that this would go through with Venezuela being joined with BRICS because everyone accused Lula of being a communist and Maduro is a communist

in Venezuela. But at the 11th hour, Lula backstabs Maduro and says, actually, you're not going to be allowed in BRICS. I wonder if the State Department called in favors to their little puppet in Brazil, Lula, and in exchange for basically getting him into power and helping him consolidate power, he, you know, takes out one of their one of their adversary states whose government the State Department is trying to overthrow. You conceive that Brazil will leave BRICS then? No, I think that BRICS is not it's not fully formed enough. It's not going to be a threat until it's a little bit more mature than it is currently. And there's only so much leverage that the U.S. has against China. The fact is, as a matter of gross, China probably does have a larger economy than us at this point, just as a matter of,

you know, of gross on that. But so there's only so much leverage that we can exert. We can't get our way the way we used to 30 years ago. The world is not unipolar. Again, most countries do more trade with China. So the Chinese Ministry of Affairs has a larger pull on those countries than the U.S. I ran into that at state when I was at the International Telecommunications Union at State Department Cyber. All 40 countries or so in the African Union systematically vote with China for what they want on telecom. And there's almost nothing we can do to convince them. Because how do you argue against the fact that China is their economic lifeline? All you can do at that point is either bribe them with more money.

And we're spread too thin with all of our other operations around the world, or threaten them. And there's only so much you can threaten them before they turn even more to China to offset those threats. Let's jump to the next big global news. Israel has begun its retaliatory strikes on Iran, sources say. We actually have the statement from Iran now. In response to months of continuous attacks from the regime in Iran against the state of Israel, right now the Israel Defense Forces is conducting precise strikes on military targets in Iran. The regime in Iran and its proxies in the region have been relentlessly attacking Israel since October 7th on seven fronts, including direct attacks from Iranian soil. Like every other sovereign country in the world, the State of Israel has the right and the duty to respond. Our defensive and offensive capabilities are fully mobilized.

We will do whatever necessary to defend the state of Israel and the people of Israel. Do you think that when they recorded that, they all looked at it and said, this is a good speech? And intentionally were like, yeah, I like the way he said it, because I feel like it was very uninspired and weak. And I'm not trying to be a dick. I'm genuinely asking. I wonder if Israel was like, we don't want someone who's strong, angry, smoking a cigarette saying we're going to bomb you. Maybe they wanted a guy who looks a little more less aggressive and intimidating, considering

the fact that there is widespread war in the region. Like, I don't think Mossad and the IDF are stupid when it comes to PR. I think they're very good at relations. The metaphor is they are being attacked. They are the defenders in this. He doesn't seem big and aggressive. He does seem like he's calm and mild mannered and we will respond. It's very, it's very timid. Coming across as very timid. I wonder if that's intentional. Yeah, I think it's, it's, it's, you know, trying to be diplomatic, understated, somewhat vague about the extent of it, but trying to, I mean, this is standard statecraft. I mean, if you listen to a State Department, you know, presser, it has a very similar tone, which is that it's sort of short, concise to the point.

There's, you don't give, you know, a five, 10 minute soliloquy on it because everything you say, it's almost like when you it's almost like when you are at a deposition, you try to make your answers as short and tight as possible so that there's nothing to poke at. Well, so the news we have here is that several explosions were heard in Tehran on Saturday morning, local time. And so I guess I mean, this this could lead to very serious escalation. I mean, we're looking at escalation, but I'm wondering if this will put Trump in a position where if he wins, there will be a war that's already begun, something he can't stop.

I did mention, I asked before the show, and if this is like they're doing this in Israel because there's no leadership in the United States, hyperbolically, Biden is very weak as a leader, you know, unfortunately, but, and now they're just taking the initiative and it does seem like that. And they're going to put the situation in their court if they can. I don't know, but that's sure what it seems like. I mean, everyone knew this was coming because of the attacks on Israel that happened. What is it? Two weeks ago, a week and a half ago or something like that. There were, I don't, I don't, I think it was pretty clear. Israel was pretty open about the fact that they were going to retaliate as soon as there were missiles shot from Iran. Um, that actually, I think they actually hit, they were, they were

actually landing in, in Israel. So I don't know that So I don't know that this, I don't think it's a surprise at all. I was just surprised about that it took this long. Well, literally leaked like three days ago that these highly classified documents of the Israeli intended attack plan against Iran leaked. It was a huge international incident, actually, because it's unclear who leaked it. There are allegations around some of the sort of Iranian adjacent members of the National Security Council who are in charge of the intelligence portfolio that may have leaked this in order to stop this from happening. But to Tim's question about, you know, how Trump, how a change in government here will impact the course of events there, I do think that much of

what we're seeing right now, with the extent of the Israeli military excursions into Lebanon and into Gaza and into Iran are a function of the unsettled business around the Iran deal from 2015, which is what really broke apart so much of the consistency between Israeli foreign policy and U.S. foreign policy. When NATO had this big plan to open up Iran's oil and gas, because after the US, Iran sits on, I think, the world's second largest reserves of oil and third largest reserves of gas, maybe third and fourth, but it's either second, third, and third, and fourth.

Basically one of the largest oil and gas centers in the entire world. But the whole thing has been under sanctions for decades, effectively. But under the Obama administration, NATO energy companies began to see an opportunity that if they were to remove the sanctions on Iran and partner with the Iranian government, there would be trillions of dollars in windfall profits if they could simply take that oil and gas, and they would get a cut of it. Iran would sell it on the open market to the world, and they would get rich. It would be like if an asteroid came to Earth, and it contained the

galaxy's largest concentration of gold. How many gold companies would rush that? If you remove the sanctions, it's like that all opens up. So that was what the Iran deal was in 2015. And this is what created this giant rift between Israel and the Obama administration. Trump's first act in office was getting out of that Iran deal. That placated the Israeli side of that, and it greatly angered the NATO side of this. This was a huge, huge issue. And if you remember, our current CIA director, Bill Burns, is the guy who personally negotiated the Iran deal for the Obama administration, because this is a major, effectively, over the course of a decade, a multi-trillion dollar windfall to whoever can open that up. The problem is the Israeli government

sees that as a massive security threat to Israel and time is not on their side under under continuation of a Biden-Harris foreign policy on Iran styled after Obama in in 2008 to 2016 because if Iran is allowed to operate to basically sell its oil and gas on the open market and make hundreds of billions of dollars from that, they will 100x their economy. And the idea then is that they would be able to pump up their military proxies, Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis, and militarily overwhelm Israel. And so I think a lot of what we're seeing right now is part of this proxy war between Israel and NATO around the economics of Iran. And I think that they're hoping for a change in government that will put sanctions back on

Iran. Right now, Trump stopped China, for example, from getting around those sanctions. He threatened China that they were not allowed to trade with Iran on oil and gas. Just two months, and you can look at, you can look this up, fact check me on this, type in China-Iran $400 billion and you will see the $400 billion deal that was signed, $400 billion from China to Iran in March 2021, just two months into office, something China had been waiting the four years of the Trump administration to do in order to have China pump up Iran's economy and get all the oil and gas from there. $280 billion for developing Iran's oil, gas, and petrochemical industries, $120 billion for upgrading Iran's transportation, manufacturing, and infrastructure, 25-year cooperation plan signed in 2021 as a comprehensive agreement between the two nations.

The program outlines China's investment of $ 400 billion in Iran over the next 25 years in exchange for a steady supply of oil to fuel China's growing economy. Right. That's just China. Now imagine if the sanctions are lifted and you have the U.S., Germany, the United Kingdom, France, and first of all, that also massively threatens Saudi Arabia, because Saudi Arabia's market share goes way down because they have to compete on equal par with Iran. The price of oil plummets because of the glut of supply on the market. This was the basis of the Abraham Accords, is that Israel and Saudi Arabia were drawn into this alliance, Israel on security grounds around the Iran deal, Saudi Arabia on economic grounds because of the Iran deal. And that's what laid the groundwork for effectively that new peace in the region. And it came obviously at the expense of the Iranian

economy, but you have this larger proxy war playing out around that. And I do think that this drastic military action is because Israel sees it needs to make a time sensitive military move on this because they have felt existentially threatened by the Biden foreign policy. So they think that so the Biden foreign policy has been to open up the sanctions again to continue Obama's plan to allow Iran to sell its oil. Did he do that during his four years? He did not because I think of how much they've been attempting to do this. It's one of these, and mind you, Obama did not in his first term either. He didn't do it until the second half of his term because there is political blowback from doing that.

There is a very large, influential Iran hawk faction, both in the Republican Party and also in the Democrat Party. And so it does come at a cost of political capital, but it's a huge boon to other sets of donors who would make multi-billion dollar profits from doing so. And so there is this tension where you want to time that political action to where there's nothing they can really do to you at the end. It's almost like a pardon list. This happened in 2015, for example, under Obama, but he had been working on it for seven years. And so they've been trying to sort of do a Iran deal 2.0. But I think part of the problem was, is in doing that, it would send a lot of folks more to the Trump camp who

were on the fence about Trump because now they're existentially threatened around this Iran situation. But what they've done is they've allowed China to circumvent that. And I think that they would do so in a second term or in a Harris term. Harris's short list of national security advisors and national security council folks seem like they would want to enter into an Iran deal. So it seems like the Israeli government is concerned with either the blob forcing Kamala into office. Likely that sounds what they're afraid of, that they're afraid that either she's going to win legitimately or disingenuously somehow that she's going to be put, she's going to arrive in office and then sign a new Iran deal.

So they're getting in now before. Right. But remember, they don't even need to sign it at this point for a lot of this damage to accumulate. Iran is already, you know, 20 X to its economy versus the Trump years. Because not because remember, not only did Trump get rid of the Iran deal, he also put massive, massive, massive sanctions on all this. This is the maximum pressure policy that Trump instituted. Biden took a huge amount of that

back. If you remember earlier in the news cycle from about a year and a half ago, two years ago, Biden lifted sanctions, got $8 billion directly to the Iranian government that Trump had held under freeze. So Iran has been able to economically thrive under the Biden-Harris White House, even without the Iran deal 2.0. But if that were to go through, that would 100x multifold the problem from Israel's perspective. Do you think the Israeli then government doesn't, a lot of people, this is all another conspiracy conversation, just doesn't have that much influence over the blob? I think it's a multifactional dispute that's constantly in flux. I think one of the things that the Iran deal exposed was NATO won that side of the equation

in that fight in 2015. There's a constant negotiation. There's the China lobby folks. There's the Qatar lobby folks. There's a constant negotiation. There's, you know, there's the China lobby folks, there's the Qatar lobby folks, there's the UAE lobby folks, there's the Israel lobby folks, there's the British lobby folks. Nina Jankiewicz, for example, is the head of our disinformation governance board, is now a registered foreign agent for the United Kingdom, for the British Crown. So this is a everyone is always constantly competing with each other on this. And in some industries, certain lobbies are more influential

than others in the military space. Some loom larger in certain commercial industries. Others loom larger. So, you know, it's a big multistakeholder thing. Let's jump to this next one. We got this from the Post Millennial. Chinese hackers target phones of Trump and Vance. This is getting crazy. The hacker has reportedly targeted the phones of Trump and Vance. This is getting crazy. The hacker has reportedly targeted the phones of Trump and Vance as well as, of Trump as well as Vance as they've been campaigning for election day. According to the New York Times, the hackers are believed to have gotten deep into American communications data and targeted information from the phones of Trump and Vance. We didn't hear that three times. According to the Times, people familiar with the matter told reporters about the Chinese hackers on Friday,

and investigators are working to determine what information they were able to pick up from the phones, if any. The Trump campaign was made aware of the hackers this week. Information on the phones of Trump and Vance may have data that could potentially put the national security of the United States at risk, as the hacker may be able to obtain contacts, phone calls, and text messages sent and received from Trump as well as Vance. I don't know how much I care. I mean, I care a bit about us being attacked by, say, an adversary like China. But this just sounds like, you know, I'll just say everything before the election is just muddy garbage to me. I want to as if China's not been trying to do this with all government officials forever. How how encrypted of a phone is he using is he using

standard phone or is he using oh it's probably an iphone okay so what i want to know is if they can get in there and find donald trump's twitter drafts that's what i want to know i want to see the tweets he didn't ever put out it's probably it's probably crazy like that's where kofifi comes from yeah that's what i'm talking about he's's got tweets from like 2017. Look, I don't like China, but if they could publish that, that'd be fantastic. Yeah, I just feel like all the news right now is just nothing. Yeah. It's just they're all trying to do things. Just, okay, can I go to bed until the 11th?

I mean, for 11 days? See, I can't even think straight. Go to bed until the 5th. By the way, I don't believe this for a second. I mean. Wait, you don't believe China's trying to hack the 11th? I mean, for 11 days? See, I can't even think straight. Go to bed until the 5th. By the way, I don't believe this for a second. I mean, Well, you don't believe China's trying to hack the United States? No, I don't think that. I think it's the inverse. I think China's likely hacked everybody. They probably got access to your phone information.

Well, okay. Well, we know that, for example, the NSA reads Tucker Carlson's signal messages. Yeah. You don't think they're reading Donald Trump's? The fact is, And then if China hacks the NSA think they're reading Donald Trump's? The fact is- Yeah, of course they are. And then if China hacks the NSA, they're going to have all of that too. The problem is, is after Vault 7,

how can you look at any of this without a critical eye? Oh, what do you mean critical eye? What I mean is false attribution for hacking attacks is 101. You think China's not hacking us? I don't know in this case, but it's very possible that it could be a U.S.-based network that simply leaves a false attribution trail. No, no, no. Let's just start from the beginning. Do you think China is using hackers to target Americans? Sure.

100%. That's why I'm like, this story is nothing. It's like, thing happened. It's, it's, that thing that happens every day for the past 15 years is still happening. Right, but I don't accept the premise of this article. I agree that in a hypothetical case, it's certainly possible. But simply seeing this when I see this being reported without the receipts, show me how you came to that determination. I need more detail than that. What you know, without revealing sources and methods for, you know, whatever the classified process would be for making those digital forensic determinations. I need more color than just someone from China did it. Because the problem is, is we know from Julian Assange that pocket Putin is a core capacity of the U.S. intelligence hacking syndicate.

That is false attribution. When the U.S. hacks someone's phone, hacks their TV, hacks their microwave or toaster, we can leave fingerprints for false attribution. That's what you always do, by the way. And so just because at the top level you have some VPN piping in from Shanghai, that does not a Shanghai hacker make. You said it's called Vault 7? Yeah. Is that the name of the leak from Assange? Yeah.

I think the same thing with rockets being fired from a foreign country. For all I know, they could have been put there by the country that wants to be fired on. So the question then becomes, why bother trusting or distrusting any country if they all do it and we don't know which is which? I think more is I think that the public needs to demand much more robust reporting when it comes to cyber activity than what they're being fed. Because hacking is a totally classified realm. You are either a hacker for the CIA, the NSA, or the FBI, or you are a felon. That's the only two jobs in town for hacking. It's either massively illegal, and you're going to prison for 20 years,

or you're working for U.S. intelligence. And so lay civilians... Well, there's pen testing. What's that? There's pen testing. Yeah, sure. I mean, there's, you know, you can be, I guess, and also a private consultant doing vulnerability.

Yeah, penetration testing. You're talking about like black hat hacking? No, penetration testing. You're talking about like black hat hacking? No, penetration testing. You're talking about white hat hacking. I wouldn't, I mean, yes, technically. So I would say that when you're working for the intelligence agencies and you're working for these contractors,

my friends never called that white, white or black hat. We called that green. Money. The white hat stuff is like you work for a private company and you get hired as a cybersecurity company and they'll say, we're going to show up your security.

We're going to try and keep it as not we're trying to get as minimal weight as possible. So your employees have easy access to everything without being too cumbersome. And then we're going to do a few penetration tests and see if we can break your security and explain where you guys were weak. That's run of the mill everyday stuff that you might find a small business doing of like two or three guys. And that's probably the majority of quote unquote hacking. There's a lot of social engineering manipulation and con artistry stuff, but they call that hacking and it's basically just a con artist. Someone tricked you into paying them out because, you know, a guy said, oh, look, my car broke down and I need 50 bucks for gas. It's a con, right? Social engineering is the same thing, but over the phone, over the internet.

Then you have the government stuff, which is, you know, my French is called that green hat. You work for the company that's going to pay you the most to do things that are kind of, you know. And then, of course, there's gray hat, but these terms are just getting silly now.

Gray hat is like activists that are doing hacking and infiltration for, you know, the people who leak to WikiLeaks, for instance. Many of them may be gray hat hackers. Exfiltrating data, not legal, but they're doing it for a you know, the people who leak to WikiLeaks, for instance, many of them may be gray hat hackers, exfiltrating data, not legal, but they're doing it for a political cause, which is, eh, and then they leak it to somebody or something.

So are you insinuating that the black hat, or the green hat hacking is either highly illegal, or it's a government? No, no, no. Illegal stuff is black hat. Breaking into a database to steal credit cards is black hat hacking. Unless the government's doing it. We make fun of the contractors working for governments as green hats because they're just going for the big fat military checks. Okay. What I'm getting at

here specifically is this is not good enough for me anymore. It wasn't good enough for me years ago. Now I assign zero credibility to this. When you see a news report that comes out and says the sky was blue yesterday, you as a civilian can easily decide whether or not you were being lied to because you went outside yesterday and it didn't look green. It looked blue. It's the same thing, for example, if the media reports that a projectile missile fell on Greensboro know, Greensboro, North Carolina, there's going to be a picture of the indent in the earth. There's going to be eyewitness testimony. There's going to be lots of ways where you say, okay, that probably happened. I don't think they AI deepfaked,

you know, all this stuff. But then are you just saying that because we got leaks about the U.S. and not about China, you're more inclined to believe the U.S. is doing bad but disregard things that China may be doing? cell like Peter Strzok and co at FBI counterintelligence and you want to delegate it to a foreign contractor to with no look, we're not going to look. And and they do that. It would be the easiest thing in the world for that to just be a compartmentalized classified operation. And they just have the contract at the end, put a little false. You're not you're not making an argument.

Now they get to read Trump's phones. Yes, I am. The argument is that they want to read Donald Trump's phone. And they can simply say that China did it. Does China want to read Trump's phone? Sure. So right now we're at a moot point. No, we're literally at a point where you're just like, we know the U.S. government does bad. Therefore, I don't trust this story. And I'm like, give me some evidence, bro. I know the U.S. government does bad. Give me some evidence China hacked the phone. Our evidence right now is the post-millennial side.

That's a singular story. So why? Well, it's actually they're citing New York Times. Well, let's pull up the New York Times article. Let's see what proof. Show me the math. You're conflating two different things. There's a question about the subject at hand, this particular story.

There is no reason for anyone to make any assertion of who did it outside of the the statement made is that China did a thing. OK, that's it to say then it is the U.S. government could do it. Therefore, I don't believe this for a second. It's like, oh, OK, well, anyone could have done it. But right now, the statement is China did it. Do we have evidence limited to none? So in that case, we have nothing. There's no point in bringing up that you don't like the U.S. government hacking and doing bad things. We don't have evidence China did it. Your evidence is that the New York Times said it. As I said, limited to none. Right. But what I'm saying is it was true yesterday that China hacks American devices and has an obvious interest in

hacking Donald Trump's. It was true a year ago. It was true 10 years ago. But this news cycle just broke. And I need more proof in that, given how CISA was turned into a cyber censorship unit, because they said tweets on the Internet containing misinformation are a cyber threat, are cyber threat actors and are attacks on the critical infrastructure of our elections. If you tweet that mailin ballots are not reliable. This is one of the most corrupt wings of the U.S. government, and it operates in the most cloak cover of darkness. And so when I see a news story from the New York Times, who simultaneously publishes that we need to torch the U.S. Constitution and who lied us into the Iraq war, I do not immediately accept the premise unless they show me the math.

And what I think the American public needs to demand on all things digital and all things digital forensics and hacking is we need a higher standard of reporting for this to pass the smell test. Right, I agree. The issue I brought up was with you then diverting to saying Vault 7,

the US government, their apparatus, they could do this, they have a better reason to, and they want to know what's on Trump's phone as if to imply the real story is that the U.S. government hacked Trump's phone. No, I didn't imply that that was the case. I implied I don't believe this because that's equally likely. Right. So then we don't need to talk about what the U.S. government can or can't do in this context. We have a story about Chinese hacking. We don't believe it. We

can move on. It's nice to think about false flag, digital false flags. It is because I've literally I mentioned it earlier. I'm concerned with like foreign like putting missiles in another country nice to think about false flag digital false flags it is because i've literally i mentioned it earlier i'm concerned with like foreign like putting missiles in another country and having them fired on you so you can be like they fired on me like how deep does it go this this does the cia do that kind of thing has there been evidence that they've literally gone into a foreign country set up rockets and fired on themselves to be like they're firing on us? I don't know. I mean, certainly we, you know, the Stuxnet capacities and I mean, we literally hacked North Korea's missile launch tests in order to, you know, make them be ineffective. That's been publicly reported. But I'm not saying that, I mean,

that would be a step that I've never heard of before. Is the argument this is to drum up anti-China sentiment among the American population? No, not necessarily. I just, you know, a lot of times stories like that, I mean, I don't think we have a real point of disagreement here. I was just providing color on my reaction to seeing the article. Like, I agree with what you said about, you know, China obviously having a robust hacking capacity and hacking American devices and that they would have an interest in doing so. You know, the larger point that I was making here is that when I see this article in the New York Times and I don't see math attached to it, here's how they made this determination without revealing

sources and methods. I need more than, you know, someone said that. But they never do that. Yeah. But that's what, that's, that's what I'm getting at is that they can get away with these news cycles without the American people ever questioning. Hey. Oh, yeah. I'm demanding. Right. Right. But you do watch in some fields as credibility drops out. There is a higher standard for meeting the public skepticism about things. And I'm simply demanding that in these cyber hacking cases agreed yeah so this is the story that we have so far is new york times says sources claim trump and vance as well as many democrats but they use trump and vance in the lead uh this is the weirdest thing too they say that democrats including uh kamala harris's campaign and prominent figures in capitol hill chuck schumer were also targeted. But the headline is Trump and Vance. And they don't name a single official.

No one is accountable to this story. An official who cited it. Well, they say officials. Well, who are the officials? Oh, yeah, they never have any more basic evidence. So no one is actually responsible. But then the question is, what is the intention of the New York Times to get clicks to make money? There's not much substance to the story. Is it... It would then be, I suppose, if it's a fake story, to drum up sentiment against China. Maybe because we're

going to engage in a war with Taiwan at some point, and they want the American people to be mad at China? That's one of several possibilities, I think. But... Yeah, it's like a... That could be a double win. Like, they... I mean, there's lots of possibilities, but if like a local American company hacked and then blamed it on a foreigner, not only do you get the data, but you get the enemy to get hated. Did they list Kamala Harris in that as well? I thought I saw that farther down her campaign. Maybe the idea is that by listing Trump and Vance, it makes them look more unstable as if they're targeting them specifically, even if they don't name them. Insecure. But here's the thing is like they're obviously reading Trump's communications.

They they want to know if he's back channeling with we just live through Russiagate 1.0, 2.0, 3.0. They want to know, you know, hey, was there any text message to somebody who's a Russian oligarch or a back channel or an interlocutor of one? If it is, then we we bailed them, boys. And we're going to I mean, they just what two days ago, they say Elon Musk was texting with with Vladimir Putin. Yeah. Again, another one of these. Well, how do they get that?

Keith Olbermann said to arrest him. Yeah. Was was Elon. First of all, I don't even know if that's true. But if you assume it's true, Olbermann thing. No, no, no, no. I mean, I don't even know if that's true. But if you assume it's true. The Olbermann thing? No, no, no. No, I mean. I'm kidding.

How did they get the text with Vladimir Putin? Except by hacking the phone. Unless Elon personally showed the phone. Again, that's accepting the truth of it. Elon's not weighed in on it. And I'm reserving judgment. But the fact is, is they want to know both for national security reasons, for counterintelligence, but also for political operations purposes that can be used to generate a treason trial

and insert a counterintelligence probe, a special prosecutor. And it would be very easy for them to put a little boop, a little button on it at the end, a little false attribution that says, oh, you know what? Your phone's been tampered with. Darn, the Chinese did it. the iranians did darn the russians the venezuelans and so i need more than totally anonymous zero accountability from the government for me to think that that this is clean do they ever go so far as to be like hey we found a text of you texting with a foreign official and you're like no no, that's not mine. They're like, look, we have the records and they just forged the records. I don't know of any cases like that, but

Is that within the capability of technology? There was the, I believe it was Kevin Clinesmith, right? Oh, well, wasn't that the FISA? The FISA. Oh, yeah. There was an email where he doctored evidence to get the FISA warrant. How did they find out that

they'd been doctored? There get the FISA warrant. How did they find out that they had been doctored? There was an investigation in the Russia investigation. Oh, no, no. It was the Durham. Yeah, the Durham report. Yeah. They investigated what led to the warrants. And they found that this lawyer, he was an FBI lawyer, right?

Yeah, I think so. He removed information from an email that showed, I believe it was, it's been a long time, Carter Page was an informant for, was it the CIA or was it for the FBI? I forget. He was a federal informant. He's working for the government. He's also providing information on other people. And Clinesmith wanted to get a FISA warrant, so he lied and said, this is just some guy doing bad things, when in reality he was doing things for the government. They got the FISA warrant.

They went after him. This was how they were trying to get Trump. It's probably part of that, what you called transitional, what did you call it? Transitional justice. Yeah. They were like, we're going to arrest this guy. We need means to do it. I believe Clinesmith ended up getting prosecuted.

But what do you get? Like a slap on the wrist? Yeah, they watered it down to basically nothing from what I recall. This is what always happens. When malfeasance is discovered, some random guy you've never heard of takes the fall for it and gets some slap on the wrist. Peter Strzok, didn't Peter Strzok

get a multi-million dollar settlement suing the Justice Department for being mean to him? He probably did. If you look it up, Peter Strzok settlement millions. What's her face? Who's the woman?

How do you spell Strzok? Lisa Page? Yeah. Peter Strzok, how do you spell that?'s a page yeah yeah peter strachan yeah spell that s-t-r-z-o-k it's like is that how you pronounce it that was the guy who um you know will trump won't win will he to the fbi lawyer he's the head of he's the head of counterintelligence for the fed settles insurance plan fed settles privacy claim by fbi agent and lawyer with early roles in Trump Russia probe. How much money did,

did they end up paying Peter Strzok? I'm looking here. So what they, they threw Strzok under the bus and then paid him back? No.

It's in the millions. I don't think it says. We'll figure it out later. I suppose. We're going to go to super chat. So if you haven't already, would you kindly smash that like button,

subscribe to this channel, share the show with everyone you know, leave us a good review if you're listening on Apple Podcasts or wherever it is you get your podcasts and become a member at TimCast.com because the Josh Siter 1.2 million fake trans social experiment video behind the scenes is live now on the website. And I also want to give a shout out to our good friend Don Lemon, who called me extreme. That was the funniest thing. I was actually kind of surprised he did. He was interviewing a guy who said that he was voting for Trump and that he gets his news from Rogan, Tim Pool and Crowder. And then he says, but I don't really follow the extreme people like Andrew Tate. And then Lemon goes, Tim Pool's a little extreme, isn't he? And he's like, oh, I don't know. Maybe I don't really listen to that much because he's doing more clickbait, I guess. So, you know, and I was like, well, buddy, if you listen to this show more often, you might have had a coherent answer for our friend Don Lemon, because everyone's ragging on the dude because he got asked about why he's voting for Trump.

And he said the economy and immigration and so you got to watch more Timcast, dude. Maybe you'd be better versed, better versed. But I appreciate the shout out. And Don Lemon, we should have him on the show. But it's funny that Don Lemon said, it's funny because the replies to Don Lemon, like, are you kidding? Tim Pool, the milk toast guy is extreme?

You're nuts. Yeah, yeah, well, you know. All right, here we go. Scooby Dragon says, howdy, people. Howdy, indeed. Scooby. Yep. You know, the problem is Don Lemon gets his news from CNN.

He gives the news to CNN. You can tell he's questioning it, though. I actually feel sorry for CNN. They fired the guy. All right, what do we got? What do we got? Joan says, hey, Tim and crew, member for about a year now.

Just want to say thanks for all you do. Really do appreciate it. Join the fun over on the Discord server. If you want to hang out with people who think largely like you, you go to TimCast.com, click join us, become a member, 10 bucks a month, get in that Discord server.

We're actually going to be in there tonight. We're going to be doing a little after show tonight. This is the weekend lock-off show with Raymond G. Stanley. He's going to help put me in touch, so I'll be on later. Maybe you want to yell at Ian because you don't like him and think he's wrong. Well, here's your chance. And maybe you love me. You want to tell me that.

Maybe you're his biggest fan and you want to say that you love him. You just feel different about him on different days. Some days you love him, some days you want to yell at him. I feel about myself, man. That's what it is. There it is. All right. Award-winning taint.

Is that what it says? Whoa. Tim, like me, you have been given the greatest award ever. A child. I wish her great health and strong moral character like yourself. Thank you very much, sir. I appreciate it. I think I've seen, I've heard that username in the PCC chat before.

What's up? Who is it? Who is it? Who was it? He's going to make you say it again. Okay. Pardon me. I do think it's kind of funny to consider that, you know, I meet people and they say, I feel like I know you because I listen to you for hours every day, but you don't know

who I am. And I'm like, that is correct. So it's kind of weird that every day monday through friday and the weekends we have clips up when when my kid grows up it's like would you like to see a uh eight year account of my life actually how about this you can literally listen to what i was thinking about every day from the moment you were born until today. And that's kind of wild. Well, then you got to start like a separate podcast.

You don't even have to actually post it talking about other interests because this is narrower in focus, right? It's also boonies. Yeah. But it's just like, so that's what you were thinking about on that day. It's really crazy is that we actually have robotic perfect recall now. I mean, I do. I can't speak for you guys, but me doing this show Monday through Friday,

I can be like, I wonder what I was talking about on February 3rd, 2021. And I can pull up the episode and go, oh yeah. Yeah. That's crazy. That's the day that Ian put that paper towel in the toilet and got it clogged. They went down there with face first. Remember that day?

Yeah, Phil, you remember that day. All right, here we go. What do we got here? Biden body double says Ian was gone for a while. I was like, where's Ian? Now that he's back, I'm like, I don't care about the crown and the constant diversion of conversation. Hey, you brought it up. We started talking about empire. I'm glad you're conversation. Hey, you brought it up. We're talking about empire.

I'm glad you're here. He sounded really happy at first, and then at the end, he's like, yeah, stop talking about the crown. He was just nagging you, bro. He's into it. So do you think MI6 and the CIA are controlling the crown at this point? That's not in the super chat, right? That's a serious question for me in the query.

All right, Twisty says, was listening to the culture war. And I'll just say this, that most of the road truck drivers can't afford a home on the wages we get as truck drivers. I personally would not be able to afford a home car and basic bills on the pay I get now. So there's a simple equation. It's kind of a useless equation. But if the cost of acquiring water ever exceeds the amount a person gets paid for a job, you'll get a revolution in two seconds. This usually doesn't happen, but there are water wars. So if there's a city or a country that has a river as its main source of water and another

country starts doing things to the water, war. Because it's like, hey, downstream, we're dying. You're putting poison in our water. We have no choice. So we usually don't see water conflict in terms of, I can't afford to get water to my home. People just leave and go find water somewhere else. But that's why I say it's largely useless, but the general idea is there. If a required resource becomes too difficult to obtain through work, people will begin to act

violent to obtain such a resource. Well, that's why what I've always said, whenever people talk about civil war, I, you know, from the Luddite perspective was like, wouldn't it be more common to believe that that will happen once food shortages happen? That's what happens. Yeah. When-

People are too comfortable now. So the Arab Spring, they attribute the cost of food largely to what sparks off the Arab Spring. That's why U.S. sanctions policy is designed to create famine. Literally, I think that the Biden, I think there's an assistant secretary in the Biden administration. I know that Max Blumenthal and the Grayzone folks reported on this,

basically stipulating that the State Department and USAID, they see the goal of sanctions policy to create that exact equation that Tim just teed up. There's a regime that we want to throw out of power. They did this, for example, in Syria with Assad. They strafed the wheat fields. They bombed the wheat fields so that there was less grain production in order to increase hunger, in order to get more Syrians on the streets to overthrow the Assad government because of the inaccessibility of food.

Cameron Giotto says, I was thinking about this today. The past eight years, we have been living in a new Red Scare McCarthyism, but against those seen as conservative rather than communist. Yes. I mean, sort of, yeah. C. Watt says, I'm flying back home from Ukraine just to make sure I can vote in person. This election is too important. Congrats, Tim. God bless you and yours. Phil, you the best. Cheers, man.

What are you doing in Ukraine? Welcome home, man. Only in the West, huh? Welcome back, CWOD. CWOTS. Oh. CWOTS. Is it QUOTS? CWOTS. Thanks, man. Samuel Rice says, I legit emailed Timcast last week to have Ben's on.

And we listened. That's exactly how it went down. I swear it was just for you. He pulled up the email himself and said, book him now. It's actually me. I super chatted that. It worked. Tom Wolfe says spread the word.

Any illegals or non-citizens that vote in this election could be immediately arrested on site and deported. It's technically true. No, it's literally true. Trump said it. Trump said that they're going to arrest people who are violating the law when it comes to the elections. He said, you better watch out. You better not cry because Trump is coming to arrest you.

That's right. All right, here we go. Sean H. says, a Virginia judge just said, it's illegal to remove illegals from the ballot. The governor is trying to get an injunction, but let's face it, the Democrats run the system.

That's crazy. Well, I kind of think it's fascinating that we live in a society where when Democrats break the rules, Republicans go, oh, what?

The governor can issue an executive order right now saying no and then require them to go get an injunction and then when they do he can do it cuomo did he just go okay let me draft another one no again here you go go get another injunction the election's in 11 days he can just do it but they love to write sternly worded letters it all boils down to the i think it was andrew jackson or maybe maybe it was andrew jackson but he said uh you know the chief justice has made his ruling now let him enforce it you know the the supreme court made a ruling and i think it was andrew jackson that said you know i'm going to ignore your ruling and and do what i want to do like that some level that is like a possibility as long as there are, are forces or whether it be

the justice department or, or, you know, direct action forces that are going to listen to whoever's given the order. It doesn't matter what the courts say. Yeah. It's, it's just crazy because we've totally lost rule of law in this country with what Merrick Garland's gangster justice department does. Like the same institution that is telling you you need to have illegal voters on your voting rolls is the same institution who can effectively legally assassinate you by destroying your life if you are in the political crosshairs of the administration.

Who wants to be on the bad side of Merrick Garland? Oh, is it live? I'm just going to hold up my phone. Hey! Which is right now just showing Joe Rogan talking to someone on his show. Ooh, I wonder who he's talking to. I wonder who he's talking to right now.

That looks like an interesting show. And I'm just going to wait for a second. We're just going to wait, because all you can see is a little tiny Joe Rogan waving his hand around. I wonder what's on about. He's talking somebody's ear off. Maybe he's talking to Ian.

Maybe he's actually with a show. What are you doing? Five minutes ago, and it's 46K views already. Oh, there it is. Oh. That was Donald Trump. Whoa, he looks good. People listening.

You said Trump scare? Trump scare. Indeed, ladies and gentlemen. Oh, there it is again. Look at that. Oh, they're live right now. It's not live yet. The episode's up.

Episode's up? The full episode is now live, and I'm going to sit here and watch the concurrent viewers start dropping as we wind up. Yeah, you guys. I was going to go on Discord. I still feel committed. It's three hours long. Yep. Wow.

Three hours. 10 p.m. on a Friday. Wow. I'm getting goosebumps. That's kind of insane. Why do that? It's great for credibility, though, because it shows they can't have edited it. They put it out right away.

It's as close to live as you can basically get. And they're not trying to maximize views by waiting to do the money. But it's not about that. It risks burying the story. I guess the idea is because it's three hours. I don't know. But the idea is that come Monday, there's going to be newsrooms slating stories and they're gonna they're gonna pre-write and they're gonna schedule and then come monday

it's gonna go up i feel like for for donald trump and joe rogan joe rogan gets great view viewership anyways and for donald trump it's like there's no burying the story and there's no it doesn't matter when you put it up the people that want to listen are going to listen people are going to cover it it'll be all over the news mond Monday. Probably have people doing my thoughts on it and what Trump said. There's probably going to be many, an article written about it. And so tomorrow morning, again, subscribe, youtube.com slash TimCastNews for your post-Rogan Trump interview commentary from Tim Pool. Are you going to watch it tonight? Power watch it? As soon as the show's over, I'm putting it up on the TV.

That's awesome. I can't imagine anyone's going to want to miss this one. Yeah, I know. I'm right. Look, I could have waited and just not said anything, because now I'm watching the viewers go down, but yep. I guess we could watch it on Discord together. I was going to go on Discord.

That might be a fun thing to do. How about this, guys? We'll watch along. Yeah, we'll do a watch along party for those on the Discord. So go to TimCast.com, click Join Us, become a member, and we'll watch the show, which basically means we're going to say, hey, everybody, we're starting the show now. We're not going to broadcast

it. You guys played at home, and we can all hang out in the chat while we're talking about the show and what's going on. That's a good idea. I wonder how we can get it in the... I want to sit on a couch. I'm going to fall asleep. What time is it? It's almost 10 o'clock. How can you stop spoilers? It's like a three-hour movie. Yeah, right. If you start an hour behind the other people in the Discord, in the i want to sit on a couch i'm gonna fall asleep you know it's like what time is it's almost 10 o'clock how can you stop spoilers it's like a three-hour movie yeah like if you start like an hour behind the other people in the discord you don't be like oh that part trump

believes in aliens dude what i don't even want to like anything to get spoken over i just don't i just the only part i want to see is when trump smokes the the weed oh my god no i forgot sorry spoilers guys spoilers oh you already saw it yeah. Apparently Trump does ayahuasca. Badass. He just halfway through the show, he's like, we're going to do DMT. Joe, let's go. And Joe's like, let's roll. The veil is lifted.

Alex Jones cameo. What? So the reporting right now is that Kamala was in discussions and there's two rumors circulating that one said it was a scheduled conflict. Can't do it. The other. The other rumor is that she asked for certain restrictions and Joe refused. Yep.

That's right. Trump said, you can talk about whatever you want. I don't care. And Kamala was like, we don't want to talk about these things. And Joe was like, nope. Yep. I believe the second one. I believe the second one.

100%. 100%. You have to ask these 35 questions and only the, no other, you can't go on script. I'm willing to bet that Kamala's team said, we don't want to talk about one, two, three, four, or five. And then Joe was like, no. like it's a three hour conversation. We're going to talk about whatever comes up. How weird would it be if you say we can't talk about the border crisis?

And then and then a story comes up where I talk and we're like, oh, yeah, that woman who died, Lakin Riley. Better change the subject. How do you feel about the rabbits? I I'm a fan of chickens. Women. It would have been... It would be nonsense. I wonder if Trump, or if Joel mentioned that tonight, like if he,

or in the thing, if he talks to Trump about it, he was like, well, we're going to do it with Kamala, which he didn't want to because blah, blah, blah. He has no reason to defend her. He has no reason to protect her.

I don't know. I don't think it's reasonable to say that Serge would want to stay here for three hours after the show, but I'm not going to ask him. I mean, that's what I'm doing anyways. I don't know who's reasonable to say that Surge would want to stay here for three hours after the show. But I'm not going to ask. I mean, that's what I'm doing anyways. I don't know who's not going to watch this.

It would be stupid to not watch this. Can we set up the TV out there to connect to the Discord? I'm sure we can do it. It would probably be like, you have to be on the Discord. That's the issue. I know. Nobody will be able to be silent and listen. Unless we took a phone, logged into the Discord.

Yeah, you could do it. Yeah, you could do it. Yeah, we could do that. Yeah, that's a good point. Anything with a set-up line. Yeah, we could plug a phone in and then turn voice on and all of us are just sitting there. Yeah, I'll connect to the Discord with my phone when I put my earbuds in, so I'll be able to talk. I don't know if I could sit in this chair for another three hours. Actually, no.

I mean, I could turn and put my feet up and then we could play it on the big screen. You have a beautiful one. Oh, we got the movie screen. We got the projector, yeah. Yo. Everyone knows how sick that is. I don't know. So we just got it installed.

We've got a, I think it's a 25-foot projector screen on the back wall of the Boonies building, and it's exactly for this. This is going to be, should we order pizza? Yeah, let's do it. I'm not doing anything else. I'm hanging out. I'm ready. I'm going to go fire up a pot of coffee up there.

Maybe what we can do is we can like, can we point a camera? Oh, man, how can we do this? We have the one over there we could do. We could do it. Like point the camera out? Yeah, something like that. Set it up, point it at the couch where we're all hanging out. Yeah, that's what I was thinking. Towards the couch we're all hanging out yeah that's what i was thinking towards the count towards the couch and get the the feet of everyone

that's in there towards it'll be like mystery science theater you know where it's like the shadow silhouettes watching the movie i think this will be the biggest podcast ever done yeah it's what everyone's been begging for for what like 10 years almost not maybe like no i think reasonably seven years 2016 when. When people were like, yeah, we want to debate with Joe Rogan, and Joe Rogan's time in 2016 was big, but Because there was this tension, this flirtation. Will they? Won't they? Will they? Won't they?

Should I order pizza now? You look good, too. Do you guys want pizza? Who's sticking around for this? I can't. I gotta catch a flight tomorrow. I literally gotta go back to work. Is there anyone to watch? I have a flight tomorrow, too, but I can watch at least an tomorrow. I literally got to go back to work. Oh, damn. Is there anyone to watch? I have a flight tomorrow, too, but I can watch at least an hour. I'm in.

Well, we've already got some pizzas in the fridge. Yeah, I pizzaed them up. Some leftover. I don't need more pizza. I'll eat two slices. Here's the thing. If I knew it was going to drop Friday night, I would have organized something. Yeah, for sure.

I thought it was going to be like noon. I thought it was going to wrap the culture war and we were going to sit down and watch it. Do you think they were going to put it today, like earlier today or Monday? That's what I thought it was going to be like noon. I thought it was going to wrap the culture war and we were going to sit down and watch it. Do you think they were going to put it today? Like earlier today or Monday? That's what I thought. They said Trump's sitting down with Rogan on Friday. And so I asked this, is it he's doing the interview Friday and then it'll come out some other time? I just assumed it was going to come out Monday.

Yeah, I'm surprised. Nah, there's no time. There's no time. We're 11 days out. A week and a half out, Rogan just interviewed Trump. Oh, man. People are ignorant. All right, so I'm going to stress this again.

We're going to figure it out. Go to TimCast.com. Click join us. Become a member. Discord party. So we will be live in the Discord watching along with you probably what is going to be

the most epic podcast in history. Could you imagine if it's really boring? I can't imagine. Everyone's like, the Theo Vaughn one was better. Trump's hilarious, though. I can't imagine not being made for this. Could you imagine Joe being like, do you think early monkeys were fighting with humans?

He's going to ask about JFK. I can totally imagine that's what i want jfk oh yeah and trump's gonna roswell trump's not gonna my trump trump appreciates the stakes of this i think and he's going to want to be interesting and say something he hasn't said before just to like you know give that something extra to the audience trump knows show business one of my my favorite moments from being on joe's show show was I think he asked me about aliens. We're talking about aliens. And I just said, the reason why we need a one world government is because the Galactic Federation will not induct Earth into the Federation until we are unified under one governing authority.

And Joe just goes, I don't think there's a Galactic Federation. I was like, Joe, I'm joking. I was like, I was just, OK, you know, I guess I'm not a funny guy. I'm sorry, guys. That interaction was funny. It was. I love it. It was like the one time he was just deadpan serious.

I think he probably did that on purpose because he knew it was going to be funny. It's always good to hang out. Let's see. We got a super chat from Napalm. He says, Rogan, Trump just dropped. Sorry, gotta go. Beast out. Pat the Plumber says, where is the YouTube play button for Pop Culture Crisis?

Asking since my hero Brett Desec is on tonight. We reached out to Google and I asked them. I was like, hey, Pop Culture Crisis is over 100,000. We want to get the silver play button for Brett and Mary. And they said, you have to submit to Google Help. I did. It's so funny the fact that you're so not talking to a person.

Oh, I know. It's a woman. I believe her name was Alicia. She was definitely not Alicia. Well, I'll tell you how I did it last time. So I searched my email for the link they sent me for my first play button, and then I just put in the name of my new channel and then it worked. I think they said that if it had gone through

that likely it would have gone to the junk folder and then been deleted from the email folder after like 30 days. So just never get one. You can order like replicas on Amazon. I'm about to do that. Well, we'll just have to get you to a million subscribers.

Well, then you're going to have to use the weight and throw the weight. I'm pretty sure if I go into my email and just search for it and get the link from 2019 or whatever, I can just type in Pop Culture Crisis and it'll go. Because there's one link that links you to where you get the awards. But now they're just little silver buttons. They're not even... No, no. The thing is, I got to fill out the form, and they put us on to, like, it's like a request form where, like, you have to get an interview, like, an email back and forth with the lady. And they're like, yeah, we'll get back to you in, like, three months. It's because

when YouTube first started doing the play buttons, it was difficult to get to 100,000. Now, it's like... Inflation. Yeah. Look at these kids on TikTok. It's like, after a month, they have 100,000. So now they're just like, do we really have to give out these things? That's why they're making them crappier and crappier.

Yeah. Yeah. It's unfortunate. All right. What do we got? Aaron Coakley says, Illinois ballot question. Should we allow civil suits for candidates assaulting poll workers? What?

All I can read is, should we allow civil suits for politicians objecting to election interference? That's weird uh crazy yeah michael barnes says ask mike about newland mentioning bio labs and rubio acting like that didn't happen oh that was so funny i mean i mean this is just an incredible moment of you know congressional hearings where i think rubio asked Victoria Newland about the presence of U.S. bio labs in in Ukraine and I think he was because this was a internet conspiracy theory that had been going viral throughout the week and it seemed was it Rubio asked Victoria Newland live at a at a hearing And I think he expected the answer to be no.

And he was asking her to sort of put the rumor to bed once and for all. And Victoria Newland, I forget exactly how she put it, but she said like, yes, and indicated that it was like quite extensive and kind of exactly what the Internet was saying it was. And the response was like to immediately shift the subject. But there was a great like shot, reverse shot reaction when that happened, because you could see that it was almost like the defense, you know, the defense lawyer, you know, asking on examination of his client in front of the judge a leading question that they rehearsed earlier, and the client just said the exact opposite thing of what they talked about. And so you quickly moved to the next line of questioning. I hope the judge didn't hear it. All right. I think we're getting close to the time. So why don't you guys smash that

like button, subscribe to the channel and share the show. And it's important. We're going to watch the J.R. We are going to do the Joe Rogan Trump companion show, which means you guys can watch it on YouTube at the same time as we are. And we will be providing commentary on the side. It's great because then you can mute us whenever you want and then unmute us when you want to hear us smack talk or whatever it is. So go to TimCast.com, click join us, become a member, and that will be up literally right after we wrap this. It's going to be a lot of fun.

You can follow me on X and Instagram at TimCast. Mike, do you want to shout anything out? At Mike Ben Cyber on X and hopefully I can join along for at least part of the TimCast experience of the Joe Rogan experience. Let's go. Guys, X and Instagram at Brett Dasavik, and please go check out Pop Culture Crisis.

Me and Mary are live Monday through Friday at 3 p.m. Politics can be very depressing, very dour. We have a lot of fun over there. I think it's a great break from all of the stuff that's going on in the world. We're going to have a lot of fun. And when you super it's a great break from all of the stuff that's going on in the world. We have a lot of fun. And when you super chat, once you reach it's $100, money guns fire and sirens go off. Well, the money guns go off every time you super chat.

Oh, okay. The crisis party, you know, is triggered every $100. And every time you do that, it's very, very good. We have a lot of fun. And the money hits the guest in the face. Sometimes falls in the coffee. It happens to Phil all the time. And we make Phil dance. So there's a Trump song that plays every time there's a crisis parter.

Eat the cat. Make Phil do it. We make all the guests do it. And if they don't, I side-eye them. If you would like to fire a money gun into Phil Labonte's face, go to PopCultureCrisis culture crisis.com subscribe and watch so monday through friday 3 p.m right there you go ian crossland that's where you find me uh youtube twitch and x follow me at ian crossway a lot of fun hey check my x account out man

did some ai pictures dude it is photorealistic artificial intelligence looks like me on set and i promise you this was not a picture of me from my last movie, but it may as well have been. It's shocking how powerful this AI is getting. Check it out. Ian Crossland. See you later. I am Phil that Remains on Twix. I'm Phil that Remains Official on Instagram.

The band is All That Remains. You can check out our three new videos, one for a song called No Tomorrow, one for a song called Divine, and one for a song called Let You Go. You can check us out on YouTube. You can find the band on Spotify, Apple Music, Pandora, Deezer. Yeah, I think that's all of them. And don't forget the left lane is for crime. Alright everybody, let's go watch some Rogan and Trump.