Timcast IRL - Texas AG Files Suit To Vacate House Seats Of Rogue Democrats Who Fled State w/ Angela Belcamino

Episode Date: August 9, 2025

Phil, Sean, Elaad, & Raymond are joined by Angela Belcamino (The Bold Lib) to discuss the Attorney General of Texas filing a lawshuit to vacate the seats of Democrats who fled the state over redistricting, The Bold Lib explaining why she's still a democrat, and Putin saying he will end the war in Ukraine if Russia gains ownership of Eastern Ukraine.   Hosts:  Phil @PhilThatRemains (X) Elaad @ElaadEliahu (X) Raymond @raymondgstanley (X) Serge @SergeDotCom (everywhere) Guest: Angela Belcamino @AngelaBelcamino (X)

Ken Paxton is filed suit to vacate the seats, the House seats that Democrats who fled Texas, Putin says he'll be satisfied with half of Ukraine, which is not really a surprise. to anybody. He's also going to be in Alaska next week, which is the first time since the United States acquired Alaska. So that's interesting news. Trump says he's authorized the military to take on the cartels. And so we'll see if that'll work this time because in the past it's had spotty results. And Virginia says that it's going to help or that it has helped kids get abortions. And so we'll talk about that. Right now, we want you guys to head on over to Cass brew coffee and buy some coffee. You've got the 1776 blend.

Josie's special grind is available. You've got two weeks till Christmas. Of course, Ian's Graphene Dream is available. We've got K-cups available. So head on over to casprue.com and get yourself some coffee. The Appalachian Nights is probably our biggest seller. It's either that one or Ian's Graphene Dream. But they're both great.

It's honestly the coffee that I drink in the morning. So head on over there. and then we also have a big culture war tomorrow head on over to DCcomedyloft.com to get tickets for the culture war live tomorrow it's going to be Myron Gaines it'll be I think

Kayla I forget what her last name is I think she's not so Kyla Turner she's not so Ariadite on Twitter or X Kat Tim will be there so they'll be arguing whether or not feminism has destroyed the West and so I think that Myron is going to take

pro-feminism side and Kat Timp and Kyla are going to argue against it. So head on over there but why don't you guys go ahead and smash the like button, share the show with everyone you know. Joining us tonight to talk about this and so much more is Angela Bella Camino, right? Did I pronounce

the last name right? Belcomino. El Camino. Okay, all right. Yeah. Well, who are you? What do you do? Yeah, thanks so much for having me guys. It's been a long time coming. Many of you know me as the Bold Lib. What a lot of you don't know about me is that I'm actually, you know, my background's in mental health. And I've been doing that full time for the

past many years. And I recently left my job to start my own podcast coming up in September, which is going to be streaming on Rumble. So I'm very excited about that. Thanks to my sponsors at Network Access Group. They're bringing this podcast. So I'm super excited about that. I'm going to be moving in a week out of New York City back home to Florida. I've been. Back home. Yeah, I'm from Florida originally. I've been in New York for 12 years, so I'm just feeling over it. Awesome.

But yeah, my main platform right now is X at Angela Bell Camino, and I'm going to be bringing some more stuff on TikTok. Awesome. Thanks for joining us. We've got Raymond G. Stanley. Hey, friends, it's your resident blue collar devil dog hair. I'm excited to be here today with the boldest lips of them all. And we have Sean's here. Mr. Sean, hey guys. Thanks for having me, back by popular demand.

The blue hoodie was a fan favorite last night, so I wore another blue hoodie, different color blue, but glad to be here. Thanks for joining this. Elad is here, barely. Good evening, everybody. White House correspondent here at Timcast. Thanks for having me, Phil. Well, thank you for coming to hang out. All right, so we're going to get right into it from the post-millennial breaking Ken Paxson files suit to vacate state house seats held by Dems, who fled over redistricting vote. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has filed a lawsuit with the state Supreme Court in order to declare the seats held by 13 Democrat House lawmakers who fled the state

amid a vote on a new congressional district map vacant. The rogue Democrat legislators who fled the state have abandoned their duties, leaving their seats vacant. These cowards deliberately sabotaged the constitutional process and violated the oaths a swallor to uphold. Their out-of-state rebellion cannot go unchecked. and the business of Texas must go on. I have asked the Texas Supreme Court to clarify what has been clear from the beginning

that the runaway members have officially vacated their offices in the Texas House, Paxton said in a statement. This is a bit of a surprise for some people. I think that it's good. I know that, you know, house members leaving the state in order to prevent quorums and stuff like that. It's not unprecedented. But it does seem like Ken Paxton,

wants to put a little oomph behind it, and I think that probably has something to do with the fact that he's after John Corny's seat. Yeah, we were talking about this yesterday as well. It's like, without 100, they can't do business, right? Yeah. So that's the issue. So it's like, you know, the government's already inefficient,

and now they can't even, like, do anything because these Democrats have left. We were talking about it last night. The issue is like, okay, if you arrest them, you just martyr them and you give them, you know, all kinds of social credit. So what do we do? What's social credit going to do for them?

When elections become the face of the Democrat Party, I mean, everyone's vying for that right now. Do you think that state legislators leaving really are going to have an impact on national Democrats? No, what I'm saying is if you arrest them. Yeah, but I mean, the point that I'm making is as state, most of the time, most Americans don't really pay attention to their own state governments. Never mind the state government in Texas. Now, there are people that are worked up because this is about redistricting and stuff, but redistricting is not, you know, redistricting halfway through the time for the census is not unprecedented. They've done it before.

It's happened. I heard someone, I forget who it was that was talking about this being an unprecedented situation, and it's not. They've had. It's rare, they say it's rare. It's rare, fine. Brist's cocaine said that, yeah, it's rare. Yeah, rare is fine, but it's still unprecedented is different. And so I don't think that most Americans really are going to care beyond Democrats are looking for something to talk about.

What do you think? I mean, I'm not well-versed on gerrymandering, but I mean, my opinion is that they should have stayed. Like, you know, I don't think it's right that they left. Like, I can say that. And, yeah, my question is same. Like, something needs to be done about it. I feel like, so it, I mean, I think. Yeah, what do you do?

you're like yeah you pick them up and like force them back into their job i mean it's it's like like what are your options and yeah what i'm saying as far as like uh becoming the face of the democratic party like they're being arrested they're getting the photo op they're going to be it's going to be national news like uh they want this you know what i mean with like mom donnie i would argue mom donnie's probably like the the biggest most popular face in the democratic party right now but if these guys are you know carded out in the jail and stuff like all of a sudden, everyone's going to know their names, know who they are, know what their positions are. So it's like, yeah.

But does this hurt Democrats? Because it's my opinion that Democrats are really floundering. Part of the reason why they're doing this is because, you know, Democrats still, just yesterday, there was a clip of Nancy Pelosi talking about how they want to nationalize gender reassignment surgery for kids. This is an 80-20 issue. The American people do not back that. but Democrats still are on the wrong side of so many issues. Is this the issue that they're trying to get behind because they think that it's an easy win? Is it an easy win?

Or is this just something to distract from the fact that they still have nothing except for Zohan Mandani, who is really unpopular in their own party? I mean, there are some people that are very pro-Mamdani, of course, but the people that are, you know, against Mamdani, Like, this is really going to split the Democrat party, even if, even though it's only the mayor of one city, not even a national level Democrat. Yeah, no, it's a big one. Like, myself included. Like, I am, you know, not as progressive. Like, I'm not on this extreme.

Like, and a lot of this stuff is really turning me off. So, you know, being a Democrat, like I, you know, I don't know that this is the issue, but I think you're on to something. Whereas they're not really changing their tune. They're sort of doubling down on the same. So that's been bothering me. It's something that's kind of pushed me more towards center, you know? Yeah, I'm curious a lot, like, what are we hearing at the White House? What do you mean?

Like, as far as like, what's the administration saying about this? I haven't really heard a lot. A lot. Our White House correspondent who talks to everyone at the White House. What's the president? Has the president or has the White House made any official statements about what's going on in Texas? Not to my knowledge. I think he's letting this one rock out.

I don't know. You could Google it. I haven't been up to date on, like... You've been at the White House, right? I have been at the House. Oh, okay, just making sure. I did ask, I don't want to get into my scoops here. I'm not sure, but I think there's this one house rep in Texas. He just went on the Joe Rogan show.

I forgot what his name is, but he's having a little come up. I don't know if he's one of these guys. But, yeah, again, this is just posturing. Like, this is a band-aid fixed for the gerrymandering issue for them in Texas. they're going to eventually have to come back. It's a special session right now. And the special session session, I believe, ends at the end of August, I think. I'm not positive.

But it's 30 days is what a special session is. And then if the governor wants to declare another or call another special session, they can. So eventually, yes, you're right, there is going to have to be something that will happen. But the Democrats that I've heard talking, the Texas Democrats that I've heard talking, They've kind of alluded to the idea that they're willing to, you know, stay on the land as long as it takes. Yeah, because you said a lot they're going to have to come back. What does that mean? You can't force somebody to come back unless you arrest them, in which case.

Are they going to stay out of their district until the next midterm election? No, right? They're going to slowly get fined. And then they're going to look very bad for staying out of their districts and not doing anything. And essentially, filibustering inevitably to prevent the state house from accomplishing anything that will be extremely unpopular. politically, they're going to have to come back. It'll be unpopular on the state level. Do you think that

it'll be popular with national Democrats? Do I think it'll be unpopular with national? No, do I think that do you think that it will be popular with national Democrats? Because it will be looked at as, oh, they're taking it to Trump and they're giving... Maybe, but I could still not name one of these. I don't know. You said these guys

are going to turn popular. Sean, can you name one of these House representatives? Not yet, but as soon as you get the handcuffs on him and he's on television. It's like Mom Donnie. Could you have named Mom Donnie three months ago? When he was running, I could have, but that's not. Right. And they did this in 2021 when they were voting laws in Texas, over 50 Democratic lawmakers

has fled. If you guys recall this, they all left in Texas. But they all came back and the Republicans still passed the law. So it's just a big theater. It's not going to have any effect. They're going to come back. The Jerry Manning is going to work and we're going to move on. And no one's going to care about these people down the road.

Well, I mean, I think that I think you're. probably right about the long-term consequences unless one of these these state legislators actually is is exceptionally politically talented because it's like you could you could take someone I mean you know no one thought that Barack Obama was going to be the president six months before he got into office as the junior senator in Illinois he nobody knew who he was but because he's very politically talented as a lot of charisma you know very quickly it became apparent that wow this guy's actually going to be a force and then you know within just you know a year so he had taken over basically taken over the whole democrat party so i do think that

as long as there are no there are none of these people are actually politically talented i think you're right but this is the kind of thing that brings out you know that that shines the light on politically talented people and and we are in unprecedented times you know like i understand what you're saying like would you say 50 years ago no no just back in 2021 okay so they all came back yeah yeah we're 50 left and they came back and they i just think on the left they hate trump so much that like even like what do the we'll call it good trouble they get in a good trouble so it's like this is what they see as their opportunity for that good trouble not coming back and plus you you can be on broadcast it every day on social media yeah i mean that's i think that that's the kind of what i'm

getting at is this is the kind of situation that really does take your nobodies and make them into somebody's. So it could be that this is an opportunity for them. Now, I mean, I could be totally wrong about the individuals. And this really does depend on the individuals in question. Like, if none of them or if they're just, you know, run-of-the-mill, you know, clowns, then they're not going to be able to capitalize on this. But this kind of attention could make a star out of them, especially if they're perceived as someone that's taking it to Donald Trump. Because that's the whole point of this, right? The whole point of this is look at us.

We're not letting Donald Trump destroy democracy for the 75th,000th time, right? Like, it's always about they're destroying democracy. They're going to destroy our democracy, et cetera. But, you know, this is not going to make a mess. There's going to be, I think I heard the governor talking that there would be, four new districts they're talking about one of them would be they would all be likely predominantly republican one would be predominantly black and one would be predominantly Hispanic though they would be republican still so it's not like the democrats really can go with their normal catchphrases

or what have you like they're oh they're this is about racism etc it's like well and not really if you've got a mostly black and a mostly Hispanic you know this isn't about racism this is about you know representation you know does does that make a difference i don't i mean i don't know like i think this story uh is really very much so like for the insiders and the people that are paying attention that kind of the smaller percentage of people out there like if you ask somebody on the street do they care about this probably not i think once you know their absence starts affecting people in texas like if there aren't social programs that people are relying on or whatever the case is, you know, if that starts falling through, then I think people would be like,

you know, start getting outraged, but I don't know. Kind of like what Raymond said, a lot of theater. And Jasmine Crockett, she's probably going to lose her seat at. Yeah, that's hilarious. Let's go to you. I think that, no, Jasmine Crockett, that's a, that's someone that I think that is politically talented. Again, there's going to be a lot of people that are going to wig out that I'm saying this. But she gets attention, and that's what people are kind of neglecting. I've had arguments with people around this table before about like AOC's political talent. And someone's like, oh, she's just dumb and never blah, blah, blah. And that is a terrible, terrible perspective to take because whether or not she is someone that you politically agree with or someone that you find charismatic, she is charismatic, and she can definitely get people's attention.

People rally behind her and feel very strongly. and she gets people like heated and she gets people to vote and be passionate about these things. When you were living in New York, were you in her district? I was. Okay.

And I did like her and I did vote for her, so. It's a hot take. That's a spicy cake. What did you like about her? I mean, I feel like she was really well spoken and like you said, charismatic. And like I just, I think I tend to believe everything that she was saying easily.

And so I think, you know, with my experience and kind of evolving, I'm more willing to really like, you know, do some more research and like, you know, and ask more questions. But she definitely had that quality or has that quality about her where, you know, where now I'm like, oh, okay, once I see the other side and I'm able to have conversations with people more. But I think, yeah. Did you feel the same way when the issue with the Amazon warehouse was going down? She prevented the Amazon warehouse from being built in the district. Do you know, do you remember that?

I do kind of remember Yeah And that didn't Did that color your opinion of her When that happened or was it something that really I don't remember that specifically being something that I Yeah I was super involved in at the time Okay

Yeah The reason I wonder is because that's the kind of thing That would turn a lot of people off If they if it's that type of thing That if it touches their lives If it's like you know this really I was really hoping for a job or or something like that. I was, you know, I've been looking

for work and et cetera. And the scuttlebutt going around was she's not in her district enough. She's always on the internet. She's always in D.C. And she's more concerned with being an influencer. So that's why I brought up. I was wondering if it affected you. It wasn't personal to me, but I definitely get that. I think

people would. Do you still identify as a Democrat? I do. All right. We got one boy. I do. I do. But I see myself, you know, you were saying like kind of more of like a classic, like old school. modern, liberal, a little more like left of center. Do you see this as like action, like what these Texas Democrats are doing? Do you see this as like something that the Democrats get behind or do you think?

That's, I think what I was saying is like me personally, I don't, I see it as more of like, you know, a bad look. Like I don't, it's not something I would rally behind personally. And I don't know, I just, I think with the Democratic Party in general, right now people are asking a lot of questions and I you know can you unpack that a little bit you should do your you know progressive or Democrat friends what are the what are the things that they say to you about the Democrat Party and about like your kind of evolution away from the more progressive side of the Democrats well I'm definitely getting pushback from

people on the left like the more progressive like you know I'm seeing a difference where it's just getting very extreme like more woke and so by being a more woke today still yeah okay sorry that's what I was saying yesterday they viewed as punk rock yeah they really do but go ahead please yeah so you know I'm getting a lot of pushback I'm getting canceled by a lot of people that you know I was previously like having you know we were working together in the democratic party and um over the past several years you know since this most recent election it's I'm you know getting canceled for asking questions or not just like subscribing to the sort you know the the bullet point you and the, and I just find it super, you know, being called a Nazi and a fascist, like, for being like,

you know, vandalizing Tesla's is a crime, like, you know, and not, like, just agree, so by not agreeing and asking those questions, um, I have a lot of people calling me a Nazi and fascist. Yeah, I went through, I've gone through four tires because of nails being left around my testing in the past, in the past month, so. And I don't agree with that. Like, how are, how are we doing any good by? doing, I don't think that's... I'm sorry, Phil, I thought you were someone else. Be careful. You don't want to do that stuff.

Yeah, you're on camera. But I appreciate that. When you said something that you said canceled, when you get, when you say canceled, what do you mean? Because the colloquially canceled has meant, you know, lose a job. Friends stop talking to you, possibly stop talking to you. And you find out about it because they make a big long social media post about how you're a terrible person. which has happened to me. I mean, it's been a long time since that stuff has happened to me

because I've been fairly open about my opinions for a long, long time. But it was a new thing in 2013, 14, 15. And that was fairly shocking to me, people that I thought that I'd been friends with, that I'd grown up with, that I had heard say some of the most offensive, terrible jokes. And then they come out and say, oh, he's this terrible person for saying something

that is night and day from what the things that I'd heard, heard them say. But what do you, what do you mean by? No, that's hard, right? That's hard. It's hard to wrap your head around a lot of that stuff. I think, yeah, with a lot of over the past several years, you know, with, with politics, Facebook, whatever. So some of it is real, like real life family members and friends coming at you and, you know, being nasty and name calling and things. But it's a lot, I mean, I do a lot on Twitter, a lot on X, and the comments are really ugly

and really nasty. There's a lot of blockings. There's a lot of, I followed you, and just a lot of name calling, a lot of nastiness, which I'm not behind. It's like if you disagree with me, let's have a conversation, tell me why. It's

okay to disagree, but you can't. I mean, so that's kind of what I mean, blockings and name calling nasty comments, just a lot of people who are very vocal. about it. Welcome to the internet. Yeah. It's funny that Democrats are trying to cancel you, but the conservatives think it's all a bit. They think like what you're doing is, it's fake. We're talking about that a little bit before. Yeah, yeah, yeah. I'm a conservative

sci-up, all this. But there's, but it actually, it has been really nice. So I've gotten a lot of like positive responses from conservatives. Oh, that's good. Like, they're kind of coming around and being like, oh, I thought I hated you and I thought this narrative, this thing about you. Your rage baits were absolutely. I mean, And they really were absolutely perfect. They're the way that you would post things and stuff, especially when you were really going for it, trying to upset conservatives.

I was like, this chick has, she knows exactly what to do. And when I remember when I saw you hanging out with, who was Ashley Sinclair, I think is the first time. And I was like, is this real? And then I was like, well, now has the whole thing been a bit? Because I knew that it was rage bait. Like, I knew the point of it was that you were trying,

to get a reaction out of people, but I was like, there's no way that she's that good at it has it all been a bit? So how much of it was a bit? Like, I mean, obviously you are a Democrat. I am. But you just knew how to get a rise out of people. We were talking about this earlier. Like, I am a Democrat.

I am a liberal. But I, you know, I think there's extremes on both sides. And so, you know, sort of trolling, you know, a bit there. But there is an authenticity and genuineness about it, too, but just sort of like calling out. and trolling extremes and, like, having fun with it, too. Yeah, when you're, like, walking down the streets of New York, like, strut your stuff, I'm like, I'm 40 and I'm ready for a baby, but I'm not going to have them because I'm free.

Like, you know, that's some good rage being going on. It's like I was doing 42 child free. There you go. I'm also talking about that because you were talking about kids. And I feel strongly about, like, people should be able to do whatever they want to do. Like, I don't think people should, you know, your life is meaningless if you don't have children. and I think those videos people got so angry

Oh it's the chat lighting up right now There's a chat lighting up I don't know Like as a bold lib What are the issues You care about Is it abortion? I'm guessing it's like

Top of the list? Honestly for me like Coming from a mental health background My stuff is very much like humanity Like you know Things that affect Human lives Quality of Life

Mental health related Like that kind of stuff But I do Yeah but women's rights is also important to me What about women's lefts? That too. All of, yes.

The rights and the lefts. Okay. So I'm trying to understand, like, Democrats, they deal with mental health issues very well, you think? Or, like, is there something in particular? I mean, I'm not sure what you mean. Are you saying that Democrats are mentally challenged? No, like, the Democrat issues that you care about and you were like, yeah, the mental health stuff. Well, it's not necessarily a Democrat issue.

Like, that's why I'm more about. bridging, like bringing people together. Like, right now, you know, I feel like I'm, at least now, like, in this phase of, like, we have more in common and trying to bring people together and we're all human and finding that sort of common ground is where I'm at right now. Does that mean you don't have, like, a bleeding hatred for the president or? Right. No, correct.

And that's, I would say that's different. Like, I would say that I, that's part of my evolution. I think that we all should hopefully grow and evolve. And I can definitely say, like, I have said some bad thing, you know, that I don't take it back. That's where I was then. And I feel like who I am today is different. And I feel like I'm learning. And that's why I'm here and why I want to, like, have more conversations and be, like, open.

So do you feel like you had a, looking back now, right, to when you were more in the, I guess, liberal bubble? Yeah. Do you feel like you were in a liberal bubble? like you were in a liberal bubble. And second of all, do you feel like you understand conservatives now, well, better now after kind of coming out and making light of some of the more progressive ideas and also spending time with conservatives? Did you used to think that conservatives were a different kind of person? Or is it something that you kind of like always were like, no, we're all kind of actually just having different opinions and come from different places?

Yeah, I don't, I think that it's, I think that I, I think that I, I can see the differences. Like, I feel like I might have lumped people all, which is not like me. So I'm able to see that more clearly now. But it's very normal and very thin. Yeah, for sure. We will,

I think we have a tendency to want to put people into boxes, right? Which I'm actually very, and I say this now, and it's part of my bio. I'm anti-label and anti-box. So it's more in line with who I am. But yeah, I don't think I realized,

now I have a better understanding. And I think getting to know people and their stories, So I do interviews on X where, and I'm interviewing a lot of conservative people, J-Sixers, et cetera. And so I would have thought the same thing, right, about that entire group of people. But like hearing their stories, you hear a whole other perspective and not everyone's situation and where they were at that day is the same. Right. So I think that's so important and that's something I want to do with my podcast is really the storytelling piece and getting to know people's backgrounds so that we don't lump people and just make assumptions.

But I also think, like, the 90s liberals are on a tough spot. Like, the conservative party today versus the liberal party, like, go back to the 90s. They're completely inverse. You know what I mean? Like, the conservatives in the 90s are very much pro-censorship, like, you know, like a lot of, you know, very Christian. Remember, the PMRC was Al Gore's wife. Who's that? The PMRC.

POMRC. You know, I forget what the acronym meant, but it was looking to censor music. Oh, okay. Oh, the albums, the explicit album, the labels. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Even some bad head, though, I think that was the conservatives, right? Like, that's... It went after Eminem?

Yeah, they went after. No, no, no, no, no. No, this is much further back. Al Gore's wife, this is in the 80s, this is when... Because the label on offensive's records or whatever, that wasn't in the late 90s. That wasn't in the early, late 80s, early 90s. It was when D. Snyder went before Congress and actually was talking to Congress, and it was Al Gore's wife. He was the leader of the PMRC. So I do agree, you know, Republicans and

conservatives have that stigma because of the fact that that's where the Christian conservatives were, but it wasn't just Republicans. And I, you know, point to Al Gore's wife. Sure, but the left was seen as the free speech party, the live and let live, the pro, you know, same sex marriages. Like it was down with the machine, take down the government. Yeah, in the 90s, yeah. And I think the PMRC actually was the right. Except for the gay marriage part. I think the PMRC was actually earlier because like hook and mouth by Megadeth

references the PMRC and that was on the, I think it was so far so good so what album. Anyways, either way, it was... I remember it was a big deal when they put those big labels on, you know, mid-80s, but it was a big deal. And that was again...

And Beavis and by the head got censored because they were saying fire because some dumb kid burned down his house. Yeah. They were saying fire, so they couldn't say fire anymore. And remember when the movie came out, they said fire like a thousand times. all the people that, all the people that were looking to censor video games.

Yeah, video games. It was, you know. So, it was, yeah, it was, it was largely, I feel like it was largely accredited to conservatives, but I do feel like it was actually more bipartisan than people remember. And I think that that's because of the fact that it was oftentimes led by the Christian conservatives. And that's what people remember is, you know, the, the, the people that were the Bible thumpers that were saying, this is against God. burning and yeah yeah going after maryland manson going after you know heavy metal bands there were the people that were going after judas priest because they swore up and down that there

were backwards messages in the songs yeah yeah yeah judas priest had to go to court but it's just wild like that's what i'm saying like a lot of i think a lot of 90s liberals are homeless because of that well i think a lot of 90s liberals are maga yeah now they are that's what's saying that's i'm saying yeah your hat's coming in the mail yeah it's just turned a new leaf all right so uh i I think we're going to jump to this next story now. From the Wall Street Journal, Putin tells U.S. he'll halt the war in exchange for eastern Ukraine. Let's see.

Russian President Vladimir Putin presented the Trump administration this week with a sweeping proposal for a ceasefire in Ukraine, demanding major territorial concessions by Kiev and a push for global recognition of its claims in exchange for a halt to the fighting, according to European and Ukrainian officials. President Trump said Friday he would meet with Putin in Alaska on August 15th following Putin's proposal, he didn't provide additional information

about the meeting or the exact location. The Kremlin didn't immediately respond to a request for comment. European officials expressed serious reservations about Putin's proposals, which would require that Ukraine handover eastern Ukraine, a region known as the Donbass, without Russia committing to much other than stopping fighting. The offer which Putin conveyed Wednesday to U.S. Special envoy Steve Whitkoff in Moscow set off a diplomatic scramble to get further clarity on details of the proposal. This is something that most people that have been watching the war in Ukraine kind of figured was going to happen.

So I don't know that Putin, well, the news isn't really the actual news. It's Putin saying, you know, making the remark that's actually the news. But this is something that, you know, there's always been the assumption, or at least since Putin's advance was stopped. The assumption was he was going to take the Donbos, he was going to take the places that are predominantly Russian speaking, and he was going to say, okay, this is where I'll stop.

Because no one at all ever thought that Crimea was going back. Ever since 2000, whatever, 12 or 13, when he actually invaded Crimea into Crimea, everyone has kind of been like, well, I guess Crimea is part of Russian now. And there are people that are like, no, especially those, you know, the fellas on X, they love to say, Oh, we're going to kick Putin out of Crimea. And it's like, man, that ain't happening.

Like, you're a clown if you think that. What are you going to do? Like, how are you going to get him out? I mean, is the U.S. going to actually put troops in there? That's not going to happen. It was never going to happen. So this is, like, this is probably a best case scenario. And it's also what kind of people really thought was going to be the end game anyways.

But if I understand correctly, some of the details that Putin wants is, like, there will be no U.N. or Ukraine will not enter into the UN there will be no Western forces in Ukraine which just kind of means that Putin's gonna be like all right we'll stop fighting now until I feel like it again right so right I mean is it is it 80 billion dollars well spent I mean I guess Angela from from your standpoint as a Democrat

like I don't understand like why the whole pro Ukraine thing started I really have no idea where that came from and it was like all of a sudden it was like you're on one side or the other it didn't make a lot of sense It's like from your standpoint as a Democrat, like, why do you guys love Ukraine? I don't know. This is not, like, I'm not versed in this at all. Okay. I didn't, I haven't been heading.

But in your circles where they, did they have like the flags and their profiles and stuff? Some. Why? Yeah. It's easy to answer. Yeah. It's easy. It's because it's Russia.

It's Trump and Russia, the Russia gate. Sure. Anything against Russia, Russia does. They're going to hate their whole, no offense. The Democratic Party side is going to hate, even no matter what, to do something good, do something bad. That's why. Why they won, they instantly put their flags in their bio because it's Russia and they're told to hate Russia because of Russia gate.

Because Russia helped. Yeah, because Russia helped Donald Trump steal the election. So if you are- Actually facts. If you are against Donald Trump, he's allied with Russia because he's a Putin puppet. Right. Which is, I mean, it's not based in any kind of reality, but that's the narrative that the left loves. I think that's up.

I think that is the narrative. Yeah. Yeah. So, I mean, Alad, what do you feel is the proper course of action? Do you think that this is what was always going to be the situation? Do you think that we – I mean, I don't think we can trust Russia personally, but what do you think? So for President Putin, I think the Ukraine war is legacy-defining. He wants to take a bigger chomp out of Ukraine that he's been able to.

In the initial assault, he almost split Ukraine in half when he sent that long convoy to Kiev. I don't know if you guys recall. But they definitely want a lot more territorial gains than this. And I don't think at the negotiating table is the way that Putin will be able to achieve this. Ukraine will not give up half their country without a fight, considering how much I think they've already fought for the eastern parts of Ukraine. And from Putin's strategy, if you guys have been paying attention, President Trump has been giving this guy a ton of different deadlines

that he repeatedly just has to push back because Putin doesn't want to negotiate. He's leading Trump on. And I think President Trump actually knows that he's leading him on. And he just needs to allow him to do so because Trump needs to bite for more time because there's no serious solution to this, that it doesn't take a large amount of political capital that I don't think the president wants to expend right now in Russia. The administration right now has been trying to pivot to the Pacific. That's been like, that's actually been the government's direction pretty much since Obama's pivot to the Pacific.

And right now a lot of people... When you say pivot to the Pacific, you're talking about China and China. So there's a lot of people in the administration who, who like generally talk about that issue as a top issue. Eldridge Colby is this one of the top guys in the DOJ or in the military, I believe. And then there's also Pete Hexeth, who's been known to talk about like the Pacific a lot. And they don't want to get bogged down in Russia. And the type of investment that it would require to militarily remove Putin from Ukraine

or stop him from advancing would be a lot. and it would be a kind of sinking of our treasury, our military treasurer in Ukraine. So I think he's trying to balance all of this out. I do think it's also worth mentioning that President promised I think it was originally on day one that he would end the war in Russia and Ukraine, and he was unable to do so. He's been very successful in different parts of the world, like I believe he's been very successful in the Middle East, despite people freaking out all the time about what he was doing here. But he campaigned on, I believe, reducing or no way to Ukraine.

And that's where the base seemed. But otherwise, I don't know why people wouldn't start calling President Trump a neocon once more because he did allow a ton of arms to flow to Ukraine. Despite NATO paying for it, we're still sending a bunch of arms that Ukraine wouldn't be able to procure otherwise. I foresee us being much more involved, though, militarily once there isn't a diplomatic solution to this. Putin, again, is just leading the president on more and more. We're seeing secondary sanctions on India that aren't panning out exactly. as the way that we planned. We were trying to sanction Russian oil. There's so many different

elements to what's going on here. But, well, I mean, for sanctions to work, we need good partners and Europe has not been a good partner when it comes to say. Nor have the Indians. They've been really screwing us over on immigration fraud. They've been screwing us over on global trade. They've been screwing us over on call centers. The, the fact that, you know, Europe has been buying Russian oil for essentially the entirety of the Russian war in Ukraine. I think they've dramatically reduced. I think the main buyers right now are China, India, and a couple of other small countries. And look, I do and don't blame India because from their argument, the way they see it is that, hey, we're a bunch of poor Indians and I have over a billion Indians who need cheap access to cheap oil and cheap oil from Russia's.

Literally burning dung is the option. Exactly. So, like, you know, we're telling them to live in squalor and not buy cheap Russian oil. but they are in a sense also paying for the Russian economy to run and it's a wartime economy and they're just producing arms to attack Ukraine I think we should keep our eyes on China so it's your sense I'm a big China guy I care about Ukraine I think we should send more arms and money to Ukraine but our real eyes need to be on so it's your sense that there will be no meeting with President Putin

no there will be a meeting but I don't think anything fruitful will come out of it So even if the United States were to say, okay, we've convinced Kiev to your terms, right? No, this is, I think it's like a maximalist ask from Putin. Zelensky can't even come to the table. This is an insulting offer. Like, think of it from a Ukrainian perspective. How many lives you've just lost? But does Ukraine have a lot less?

Does Ukraine have the ability to say no? I mean, I know that it's an insulting offer. I understand what you're saying. But if the president says, look, you need to go and talk to him, you need to be here, or whatever the conditions are. I don't know what the White House thinks that the Ukrainian president is going to do. But if the White House, hypothetically, if the White House were to say, hey, you need to sit down and talk because you're losing 5,000 people a week or whatever, and we want this to stop. And you don't have the human capital to continue this. and NATO's not coming in, can he say no? Can Zelensky say no, Mr. President? I'm not going to.

I think this goes beyond Zelensky. I think this goes to the Ukrainian people. The Ukraine is still a democracy right now, and Ukrainians feel this way. And Zelensky is just representing them. Ukrainians want to fight for their country. And I think even if we stopped helping them, even with just Europeans help, they would keep fighting against the Russians. These guys don't want to let their country fall. They've been under Soviet rule in the past. And I think their fight back is right. and they've actually been doing an extremely effective job at it. Also, at this point, I think it's worth noting Russia's a much bigger country, but they're losing a lot more men because they're on the offensive. And when you're on the offensive in war, you have to give up like a three to one ratio. It's a lot harder to attack, um, conquered than it is to defend. So, you know, Russia's not, Russia doesn't have endless, you know, stockpiles of weapons.

And they, uh, they got some pretty big weapons, though. I'm like, I don't think, you know. I'm pretty big. If I'm putting on my Russian neocon hat, I'm actually not, I'm like very sad and not impressed at all with my military gains on Ukraine. We're not able to subjugate Ukraine at all, actually. If I'm a Russian military, man, I'm like embarrassed by the gains that we've made. And they should have been able to end this in the first few weeks.

That was Putin's original plan, by the way. That's what he wanted to do. You realize, I mean, Russia's not sending their best off. I mean, just so we're clear. And that's, I think you are right. I think Trump is in a position. here because this whole thing was no new wars ended their best stuff is russia trying their hardest to take over ukraine right now yesterday like i have no idea i'm just telling you you know

we know i'm telling decades what kind of weapons they have you know and that's where it gets really scary you know you go back 20 30 years a nuclear war was a big fear for a lot of people you even in our country i mean phil knows you know we used to do drills for that stuff but the point i'm making is um uh you know with with trump the position he's in like he the whole no new wars and we got to these wars like he's in a tough position here too you know because the american people don't want these wars we don't support these wars you know i don't think that the u.s i think the american people don't support sending money americans well definitely not americans i do think that if the i think that to a lot's point earlier about the where the money is is coming from to pay for the arms

i think if the if you can sell the american people on europe is paying american weapons manufacturers to manufacture weapons, and those are the weapons that are going to Ukraine. I think you could sell the American people on that because... I don't know. Trump was brought in under the banner of we got to end these wars, these forever wars.

A lot of that was because of the financial aspect, right? Because the American people aren't doing the dying. Because, well, okay, so now that's a whole different context that you're adding to it, so that's not what I'm talking about. But the American people aren't doing

the dying, right? The financing has been the problem. People are like, look, man, I can't even buy a house and we're spending all this money over in Russia, or over in Ukraine, trying to save Ukraine. I can't afford groceries, but we're spending all this money over in Ukraine. It was a financial argument that the American people were

most compelled by. So if you can convince the American people, like, look, not only are we not paying for these weapons, but where we have Russia, or we have Europe, paying for these weapons and they're being made in america that means there are american

jobs that are being you know made they're there they're the money's going into american pockets to american people that work at these these weapons manufacturers and we're also putting a hurt onto our geopolitical enemies because russia is a geopolitical enemy don't forget just a couple years back there were russians the wagner group was fighting with americans in Syria. Like there's a couple pretty famous engagements where U.S. Special Forces were fighting with Russian PMCs. And Americans

or at least Americans that pay attention remember that. And they still look at Russia as an enemy. So I think that the American people could be sold on that if just so long as it's not Americans that are paying for it. I mean, maybe. Like, I understand what you're saying. It depends on which Americans you're asking. Nancy Pelosi, people I work at Lockheed Martin Shore.

Normies. Yeah, no, no, I'm talking about people in the industry making money on it. But I think, you know, the average person on the street, should we be in wars? Do you support war? Should we be helping Israel? Should we be helping Ukraine? I think, I mean, personally, like, just based on my conversations with people and my relationships, people don't want. And that was a big thing Trump ran on no, end the forever wars, no new wars, and the forever wars.

So, I don't know. I think it's really easy to say. So, like, what does that look like if we're just ending all the new wars right now? Like, what does that mean leaving Ukraine, not sending any arms over to Ukraine, and then allowing them to take over as much of Ukraine as they'd like? I mean, that's a great question. If it were up to me, yeah. I really, it's not our war.

It's not our fight, you know? I get it. I understand the point you're making, and it sucks. Don't get me wrong, but, like, why are we fighting it? It was like Desert Storm. I don't think we are fighting. Why did we go into Iraq after 9-11? That made no sense.

Like there's a lot of stuff that we get taken advantage of. And people in the military, I've had a lot of people, friends that were in the military. They love going to war because they get paid triple time. You know what I mean? So yeah, there is like the economic standpoint of it to Phil's point. But no, I think most people just don't see the benefits of war and like why people need to die. Yeah, I think we need to be pretty clear here. We're not fighting this war.

The Ukrainians are fighting this war. Ukrainians are dying. we are not paying our death toll we are getting paid to send over weapons right at this point our money and also like I mean I think I feel like it's such an easy basic take like yeah war is bad but war is happening and like are what are you going to do about the war that is happening how are you going to why is it our why is it our job because appeasing war only begets more war so why is it our job why is it America's job well like we also have we also have we also have a united states that can't no because we have a NATO ally ship with a bunch of European countries so like what do you think our

should with NATO should be. The president thinks we should increase our defense spending to five percent to make sure that we're the preeminent power. But you think we should what? I mean, I'm just saying like Trump ran on no, ending the wars, ending forever wars, no new wars. I mean, are you noticing this in the White House? Has the message changed? You know we have to start wars and we have to be involved in every war forever. I mean, is that the messaging now? No, I think you just read into the president what you want to hear. I think the president ran on a lot of different things like peace through strength. And he ran on Iran never being able to get a nuclear weapon. I don't know if you were paying attention and he's done

he was paying attention yeah so he's abided by a lot of those promises so i'm still like up in the air is whether or not you're going to the white house so what will say what are you talking about let's bring angela into the i don't know you must have not seen in my recent scoops because i have a lot of videos should we be in forever wars as a democrat should we be in forever

i mean i'm also not a war person so i tend to agree with you but i hear i hear both of what you're saying i think it's complicated i don't have the answers but i tend to not want to be in war and I definitely would ask you know have questions about why we're involved or you know was it was the argument that Trump was making when he was you know campaigning was that an argument based on economics or do you think that it was a bay was an argument based on not being involved in war overall I don't know I don't know what do you guys think I'm not I'm not

sure what his reasoning for me like I like I said earlier I think that it was an argument based on economics. I think the American people got behind it because of the fact that it was an argument based on economics. Most people were really hurting in the lead up to the election. People couldn't pay their bills, grocery prices. And they were just, just like coming off the shock of significant inflation for multiple years. And so they were just like, why are we giving these people money? Why are we giving these people money? Every time I heard an argument, it was a monetary argument. It was a financial argument. We shouldn't be spending money on these wars because we can't afford them. Why are we giving money to Israel? Why are we giving money to Ukraine?

Those are the two big things. We shouldn't be spending our money on this, et cetera, et cetera. So if the argument can be made, look, Europe's paying for this stuff. Our NATO allies are paying for this stuff. They're sending us money. They're sending money to our weapons manufacturers, and our weapons manufacturers are sending weapons to Ukraine so the Ukrainians can defend themselves. I feel like that's an argument that the American people will say, all right, fine, I don't care. Because I understand your perspective, Sean, that, you know, it's not our fight. It's not a fight the United States wants to be in. But the United States is not over there doing the dying.

We do not have troops on the ground. I don't even believe the people that say that there's special forces on the ground. Maybe there are CIA operatives, you know, human intel and stuff like that, gathering information. But there's not special ops guys. Like those dudes are not there. They're legitimately not. Any Americans that are over there are over there as privateers. They're volunteers.

they went and they joined up because they actually want to fight because, you know, whatever, they like war. But that doesn't mean that the American people are doing the actual dying. And that matters, right? If you're not paying for it and Americans aren't dying, most Americans are like, all right, well, I guess I'm going to go to work then. No. You know, they're going to be like, I don't care.

Whatever. My friend's kid isn't going to lose his legs. Right. And I'm not going to have to pay the taxes that are going to this. So what do I care? Yeah. But I mean, you know, and when 9-11 did happen, and we did have boots on the ground in Iraq, a lot of sentiment around the country was we don't, you know, why are we there? Like, what's the point? I feel like that didn't really start until like 2008. I'm just saying, like, and that became the biggest. Yeah. And it was, it was honestly, it was. It was a ground up movement from the people were like, we're sick of this. Why are we in the same war constantly, you know? Like, we've been fighting with Russia for how long now? Like, it's insane. It's like, it's so, wait a minute. You're just like, so wait a minute. You're just like, you're just like, you're. You're.

you're you're conflating topics we're not we have just saying war in general like we haven't been fighting with russia like we have not been i understand but they're always uses the boogeyman or whatever it's just like you know people get kind of sick of the whole russia well i mean i get i get you know what i mean like it's all we can do is war it's like the democrats it's like all they can do is war we're the most when you're the most powerful military in the world yeah that's the thing that people are going to come to you and say hey we have this problem your allies are going to come to you and say, hey, we have this problem, and we want you to help us. Like that, whether or not the American people get behind it, that is part of being

the most powerful military in the world. Now, world policing, I agree. We shouldn't be the world police, but I think that there's a difference between being the world police, right, taking the initiative to say that we're going to stop this and stop that and then selecting which conflicts we're going to involve ourselves in. that's one thing as opposed to when someone else says hey come help us we're your ally or we have good relations maybe they're not nato nations or whatever they're like we are an allied nation we we've had good relations we do a lot of economic work together we've got this issue this military issue can you come help us that's a different thing and i think that whereas most i would probably say most americans don't make the distinction but as far as like washington goes there's definitely a distinction in that it's a business of war I mean I think that that's

well I mean that's what happens when you've got the biggest military on earth you know war is is part of the business it's part of the business of being the biggest military on earth and also having the reserve currency bold lip can I ask you is war bad

I mean there's you know obviously there's reasons why you know people are are fighting it wow that's a good poll it's a good question for the chat a poll chat Warhawk or...

I mean, it's... I'm making a joke. Yeah. It's a little bit more complicated. Obviously, it's complicated. So there's not as simple... But I hate to see people dying. I mean, I don't, you know, that's the part I don't like.

But obviously people, you know, there's very strong reasons why people are doing it and putting their lives in the line. So, yeah, of course it's a... For a bold lip, I'm surprised you don't love Ukraine. Bold Libs love Ukraine. So it's off-brand for you. No, am I wrong? No, I'm still pretty certain this is like a 70, 30, 80, 20 issue.

People are always, yeah, asking those questions. All right. So we're going to jump to that. We're going to at least talk a little bit more about Trump and Putin. From Fox News, Trump Putin will hold first ever in-person meeting since Ukraine invasion next week in Alaska. President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin will meet next Friday, August 15th of the first. person in for the first in-person meeting between the leaders of the U.S. and Russia since Moscow launched its deadly 2022 invasion of Ukraine. The leaders are expected to meet in Alaska, Trump said,

in a post on truth social. The highly anticipated meeting between myself as president of the United States of America and President Vladimir Putin of Russia will take place next Friday, August 15th, 2025 in the great state of Alaska. Trump wrote in his Friday evening post. Further details to follow. Thank you for your attention to this matter. I love the thank you for the attention to this matter. It's my favorite Trumpism now. The location of the meeting was a major point of interest after the summit was first floated following a call between Trump and Putin on Wednesday after White House envoy Steve Whitkoff traveled to Moscow to meet with the Kremlin chief. Hungary, Switzerland, Italy, and the UAE were all under consideration, with Putin originally

favoring Hungary, according to sources familiar with the planning. The Kremlin chief also shot down the idea of meeting in Italy, according to reports on Friday due to Rome's perceived closeness with the Ukrainian president Vladimir Zelensky. Following the Wednesday, Trump Putin called the U.S. President also spoke with Zelensky, along with European leaders on the potential for a trilateral meeting. So I don't know how realistic a trilateral meeting would be, but I mean, again, to your point earlier a lot, do you think that if Trump says, hey, Zalinski get on a plane, do you think that he has the ability to say no? I don't think Putin wants to meet with Zelensky because it gives him more credit.

credibility than I think Putin believes he deserves. So he doesn't want to give him like the type of respect to meet with him. I think they're going to, I think Putin and Trump are going to meet in Alaska and nothing's going to get done. Like a bold libid of bar, he's being let on. But what do you think, but what do you think would happen if Donald Trump were to say, no, get on a plane, Zelensky? Do you think Zelensky would? I think Zelensky definitely would. I think it makes Zelensky look like a more potent political figure if he's meeting with Putin. Putin's never met with Zelensky. The way Putin talks about Zelenskyy is like that he's a rogue state, that Ukraine, you know, is a completely rogue actor, and he's a leader of an illegitimate state.

So if he meets with him, it's giving him, like, that credibility. And so he, Zelensky wants to meet with Putin. Putin doesn't want to meet with Zelensky. Putin wants to waste Trump's time in this meeting and lead him on more. And the war is going to go on because Putin wants a definitely a bigger bite of Ukraine because they may, they may, they may base. gains, Russian military, very unimpressive gains in Ukraine, not crushing it.

I do think it would be based if Trump got Putin to admit that they wanted Hillary to win. I think that would go viral. If Trump gets Putin to admit that they actually wanted Hillary to win and not Trump the first time around. Why would he bring that up when they're talking about

what would be... Do you think that will happen? That would be fantastic. It would just end everyone. Everyone's brains would melt. But that is what it kind of looked like is Russia did want Hillary, not Trump, the first time around, based on everything that's coming out with Tulsi and, you know, everything else. Maybe. Yes.

But, uh, Zelensky is a chump. Yes. So, um. Putin's like, you know, he's one of the world leaders. He might be a terrible person, but Zelensky has some dude of dances and got, and he's, and he's for the worst corrupt country in the world for many years. Democratically elected. Sure, they said what they say. Oh, you don't think he's kosher?

I don't think he's kosher. I think he, I believe he was Democratic. Zeletsky? Yeah. I mean, we could dislike him, but I... Oh, fine. Either way, but I don't think Putin thinks he stands up to him in any certain way. No, I mean, I think that I think I agree with you guys.

I think that Vladimir Putin doesn't have any respect for Zelenskyy. But I don't know that, I don't know that, I think that Donald Trump does have the ability to say, look, you know, he's here. like right like if he were to bring him in and and surprise Putin now Putin might be like all right well I'm leaving that might actually happen and I think that I don't think that gotcha interview like well yeah I don't like Alex Stein where he brings someone else on the show it's like I mean it's possible I think that I honestly like if you really think about it I don't think that Donald Trump would want to risk that because you know Putin would get up and like all right well I'm leaving took a lot to get him here you know and so I don't think that he would

want to risk it. I mean, it would be funny, but I don't think that, I don't think Donald Trump wants to risk that. Trump's talked a lot of issue about getting the settled and he's failed valiantly for last one way since January. In my opinion, it was a bad idea to talk

about this as something that he could just walk in and make the deal. Yeah. Because Putin has all the cards. Trump talks about who's got the cards and stuff. There is absolutely no reason for Putin to say okay well I'm going to stop then now now that now that Trump's back because I mean the U.S. could threaten military involvement but everyone knows

where that leads and whether or not you know whether or not the U.S. would actually start down that road nobody wants and then I think come to those results you lose the favor well the American people you know well Putin knows that the American people don't support that right right like we were just talking about how the American people are like okay Well, if Americans aren't doing the dying and we're not paying for it, fine. But the American people wouldn't be like, oh, you want to risk nuclear war so that way you can protect Ukraine, which I don't give an S about. The American people just, that would not fly. Now, I do think that the U.S. has, I think that this is, this particular engagement or this war has shown that Ukraine, or I'm sorry, Russia is kind of a paper tiger beyond their nuclear war.

weapons, right? Like if it were U.S. versus Russia without nuclear weapons, there is no question in my mind. The United States would stomp an absolute mud hole in them, right? Just absolutely decimate the Russians. And I think the Russians know that. And I think that the only thing that they're relying on their nuclear arsenal to prevent that from happening. But that put to a lot's earlier point, I mean, that's if like China doesn't, you know, back them up and yeah, I'm only talking about a head-to-head kind of. I know, but all of a sudden you get people teaming up and all of a sudden we're in World War III. Well, yeah, I mean, but then

World War III would mean nuclear weapons. Like I said, you're talking about military powers of the U.S. conventional military powers of the U.S. versus Russia. Russia just doesn't... Right. Russia doesn't have a chance because Russia can't even you know... But that's not how war is fought anymore. It's not fought head-to-head.

The point that I'm making is Russia can't steamroll the Ukraine. They don't have the military might that people assumed before the Ukraine war. kind of can though like they could turn it in the class okay you know what i mean okay so again not talking about nuclear weapons is the point that i'm trying to make here like john why don't people are playing fair what's that why don't you think they've used these nuclear weapons that you're talking about that's a real good question that's a real and it's scary to like think about like

you know when putin's on his his deathbed i know what's going to happen yeah well he doesn't because he'd become incredibly isolated as a result of it If you're on your deathbed Well, I don't know what to say Crazy leaders on their deathbed What could they do? Is Putin on his deathbed? Not yet.

What are we even talking about? I mean, there was a rumor in the media that he had cancer Was like a couple months ago Or whatever, he had cancer. Have you guys heard this? I mean, it was a story. Yeah, yeah, yeah.

I just saw something in the chat. Oh, I was like, I don't know why that's funny like Putin with cancer. I mean, maybe it is funny. Well, I mean, yeah, but even if that like we've heard rumors but you don't see him falling apart the way that you would imagine.

Yeah, right, but he has the best health care of, like, anyone. And, you know, like, on earth almost, you know, like, the thing that, or the point that I'm making is, the argument was he was, he had cancer and he was, you know, he was degrading and, et cetera, et cetera. It was like rumors we didn't know, yeah. It was two years ago, and we haven't seen the fruition of this alleged cancer, right? Well, you can live with cancer for you. No, to rewind, what we were actually talking about was Russia's military capacity in Ukraine, and

their ability to overtake it, which they haven't displayed, I haven't done a very good job of, but like they do have nukes. They can nuke Ukraine. It wouldn't do much for them. But conventionally, they are clearly unable, falling very short, probably losing hundreds of thousands of Russians for a lot less than I think they anticipated to get originally. This looks like from a Russian perspective, almost like they're Afghanistan. Well, Afghanistan part two, I guess. That's a good, that's a good, yeah. No, it's not even close to Afghanistan because like almost every, like I can't think of a significant engagement the United States lost in Afghanistan. Oh, that way.

It's a metaphor for being bogged down. Yeah, and like waste of time and a waste of money. Unable to fulfill your ultimate like military goals are completely serious of it. Like when we went into Afghanistan, we thought, oh, we're going to change these people. We're going to turn them into Americans. They're going to have blue jeans. That was Iraq. That's not what we thought in Afghanistan.

Well, Afghanistan. Well, yeah, you're right. we turned Afghanistan and glass. And then we thought we could go to Iraq and do that. But yeah, yeah, yeah. Like in Iraq, it was like, oh, we're going to set these. Afghanistan was like, we'll be, you know, welcomed as liberators in Iraq, et cetera, et cetera. Afghanistan, it was just like you're in the Stone Age and we're going to keep you there for 30 decades if you don't turn it over.

And the funny thing, and after 9-11, and you remember this, Phil, like the Americans were all on board for that strike in Afghanistan. Afghanistan? We just got hit. Oh, yeah. And everyone was out there. rah, ra, ra, and even I hate war and I was supporting it because it's like you just killed, you know, thousands of Americans. So it's like, of course. But then when it went to Iraq, that was the bridge too far for a lot of people. And that's, that's all I'm saying. Like,

the stuff escalates and you're going to lose a favor of the American people, the more we're fighting in these wars. That's my opinion. Well, I mean, yeah, I don't, I don't think that the American, I think that we've made it fairly clear that the American people don't support, you know, having an actual war in Ukraine, where the U.S. is actually on the ground and involved in the fight. But, all right, I think that we've talked enough about military force in Ukraine. Maybe we should talk about military force in Mexico. Let's go. From the post-millennial.

Trump authorizes military force against drug cartels report. President Donald Trump has reportedly ordered the Pentagon to begin using military force against drug cartels that have been deemed terrorist organizations under his administration. People familiar with the matter revealed to the New York Times. Anna Kelly, a spokeswoman for the White House, told the outlet when asked about Trump authorizing military force against cartels, President Trump's top priority is to protect the homeland, which is why he took the bold step to designate several cartels and gangs as foreign terrorist organizations.

The sources said that the U.S. military officials have begun preparing options for how to go after the designated cartel groups. Per the outlet, the directive is focused on U.S. forces directly capturing or killing people involved in the drug trade. Now, I just saw a tweet from President Scheinbaum, and she straight up said that there is no chance of U.S. military forces in Mexico.

Now, I think she was referring to boots on the ground. Actually, let me see if I can find that. while you're looking for that Phil a lot do you support this do you support boots on the ground in Mexico yeah but I'm nervous about it but but yes I feel like this has to be dealt with militarily I just I'm very nervous of an outlandish cartel response

or the killing of Americans visiting in Mexico or or even them breaching American territory and you know trying to send a message to Americans but I'm confident president and Trump is doing this lightly. Also, like, I think we have, I wonder what troops she's talking about specifically, because I do believe we already are, like, deeply ingratiated there with, like, our DEA agents

or have been on and off again for some time. So, yeah, I don't know. I can't find the actual president of Mexico, Sean. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Chbett says she's, uh, she's sharply rejected. There's going to be any, um, U.S. troops deployed to Mexico. There'll be no invasion. She's saying it's going to violate their sovereignty.

Yeah, I mean, you hear rumors that there are former U.S. military special forces guys that are actually training some of the cartel members, which is a terrible, terrible development. And I think that should they actually be, should that actually turn out to be true, the U.S. should, you know, deal with these people accordingly. I mean, I agree with a lot, like, in principle of, like, maybe having, like, boots on the ground or at least trying to get the situation under control. But it's like, you know, what happens if we take out the cartels? They're just going to get replaced by something. You know what I mean? It's like, same thing that's happening in Gaza. It's like you go after them.

It's like you can't destroy an ideology and you can't destroy like a society's like. It's a drug trade in an ideology. We have. No, I believe in the cartel. It's an ideology in Mexico that they are the hammer, right? If you mess around in Mexico, they're coming after. And then we smash their hammer. I understand what you're saying.

There is precedent for the U.S. to be involved militarily going after cartel members. I understand, but I'm just saying in Mexico, the people have accepted the cartels as this iron fist or whatever you want to call it. Us going in and disrupting it, don't you think something else is just going to pop up in their place? Allegedly, or ostensibly, what should happen is the U.S., should the U.S. go in and actually directly involve themselves with the cartels, what should happen is the local police forces that are supposed to be, you know, run by the municipalities, they should step in and say, okay, we weren't able to fight the cartels. Now that the U.S. has either decapitated or significantly degraded their ability to murder people by the dozens, they should step in and say, okay, well, we're going to provide for the, for the, for the, the, the, the, people of Mexico because that's the whole point, right? You vote

for people. There is a municipality. You pay your taxes. The taxes pay for police. They're supposed to be able to... Understood that's our system, but obviously, like, the cops in Mexico, like if you pay them, you don't get a ticket. You know what I mean? Like, their whole like thing is just shaking down

people. So it's like a currency of crime. So do you think the U.S. should not? Is the argument, or are you making the argument that the U.S. shouldn't? Or you just think, I think, I think like, you know, I think, you know, I personally think the best offense is a good defense, and I do believe in a lot of those principles, like, that come out of the American first movement where it's like we need to be focused on home and focused on...

How is a narco country on our southern border not focused at home? As a point of... I understand what you're saying. Now, if they're coming in and trying to attack us, like, a lot of saying, like, they're doing like attacks on American soil. I understand. But if they're, like, actually attacking us on our soil, like dropping bombs and stuff then yes obviously it's we're in a defensive stance so but us go i'm just saying i'm just

whatever you know what i mean like they're they're coming down there on the street they're going down they're mowing down americans of course we're going to so the death toll isn't high enough all i'm saying is when you're the bully and you go in and you're say hey we're going to fund a monthly changes just like afghanistan just like iraq you can't go in and and tell people hey the way you live is wrong we're going to kill them and put in what we want it just doesn't work the point that I'm making, though, is they're already operating in the United States. Sure. They're killing Americans.

Get them out. That's the, that's the, get them out. Get them out of the United States. Then when they start, you know, you get them out and then they're actually like attacking us, like doing like bombing buildings or cars or whatever the cases, you know what I mean, like actual, you know, war, then yes, open game, like destroy them. Because they, you know, you, you want to be in the defensive position, especially. as the bigger person, the juggernaut,

we don't want to be seen as a person going in just massacring people and then saying, oh, you guys figure it out, oh, the local police are going to take over, everything's going to be okay, you know what? So what do you say to the idea that the United States has actually been disassembling

terrorist organizations for 20 years? And whereas I understand, if you're making... Hold on, hold on, hold on. If you're making the argument that change changing a government doesn't work, I can concede that, but the idea that the United States is not successful or has not been successful dismantling terrorist organizations, that's just flat out wrong, right? So a lot of people love to say, oh, well, you know, the U.S. tries to go in

and do all these changes to these countries, et cetera, et cetera, and it never works. But what they're saying is you can't change, you can't change the government and expect to have a Western style democracy. That doesn't mean that you can't kill enough of the bad guys where they stop. And hold on. And that's what the U.S. has been doing for 20 years. There has been a sharp decline in terrorist attacks against the United States in the past 15 years.

The last time there was some kind of significant upswing in terrorist attacks was ISIS and the U.S. completely wiped ISIS out. Understood. So you think Obama's drone campaigns were good. I don't know I don't think that I'm not talking about drone campaigns because I'm not talking about drone campaigns

let me finish the sentence and stop talking before I'm done I'm not talking about just drone campaigns I'm talking about dismantling terrorist organizations the drone campaigns were one aspect of an overall system right so it was Intel it was actual boots on the ground like Delta Force

going in and killing bad guys that's why there was that's why bagram air force base in iraq is still still has u.s. soldiers there is because they use that as a forward operating base or they did use that as an afford operating base when Syria was being overrun by ISIS and then subsequently when they had the uh the the civil war that was going on right so like the u.s is extremely good at dismantling terrorist organizations and we've got 20 years of doing it and I understand like people love to say oh well you know Afghanistan blah blah the US didn't lose engagements in Afghanistan the US lost the politics and the US did had did there were serious serious fights in Iraq but even that like the US lost the politics of it the US didn't lose a lot of engagements the US military and US political goals are totally different things and the US military is second to none at finding and killing and

terrorists. And if the U.S. has actually decided, or if the U.S. were to actually decide, hey, we think that the terrorist organizations or the cartels in Mexico are terrorist organizations, and we're going to apply the same pressure to them that we did to ISIS, I don't think that it's the situation where, oh, you know, we can't do anything about it anymore. I understand. I'm just saying we have to understand the position we're in as the biggest military in the world and I personally think like what Obama did put us way behind in a lot

of those. What about Trump when he came in? What about Trump was always anti-war? Trump came in and took ISIS out. I know. I know. I know. And it was a good policy. I know. Listen, I'm not saying it's always the bad, the worst decision. Angela, maybe you want to chime in. Should we be bombing Iraqi kids?

Wait. Yes. Should we be bombing Iraqi kids? Could you possibly phrase this? in any more disingenuous way? Should our most popular president be sending drones over to destroy Iraqi kids? What? It's a good question.

We're talking about the cartels, bro. Angela. No, no, we're talking about something. Okay. I wanted to think I'm one of the big lib issues during this administration, that's kind of been an 80-20 issue for them. And that's kind of President Trump's like reinvigoration of ICE and like the Democrat opposition to that.

I think it was governor from Minnesota, Tim Walton. said of the ICE that they're like the Gestapo and it's part and parcel for how many Democrats described ice. What do you think of the president's, I guess, immigration strategy? I mean, being in New York City, like, I'm giving Trump props on this one, like from what I see. So this is, again, I know, but it's a bold lib thing to say this. I feel like it's a bold statement because a lot of Democrats wouldn't say that, right? Like, I want to give, like, I'm not rooting against Trump and I'm not rooting against the country. Like, I'll definitely give him.

I think that's an area that he's been really successful and done well at. So, I mean, I'm happy with that. I have seen, I think he has been successful in doing that. And, yeah, I definitely don't agree with, you know, violence against ICE agents and against ICE. So, and I do believe that people, you know, should be here legally. go through the right process and steps. So again, with the sense of humanity, like, I care about people and their families and their situations, but I also, you know, if they're here illegally, like, I feel, you know, that that's a concern that needs to be dealt with. And they should, like,

I, you know, I have, I wouldn't go to another country. Like, I feel for their situations and why they're fleeing. But I wouldn't expect to go to another country and just be able to be there you just got canceled by the rest of your Democrat friends I mean it's one by one right no but like I don't think that that's like unreasonable to say that I think that that sounds reasonable to me I'm I'm so unreasonable when it comes to immigration policy I'm the most I'm probably the most hardline person that that you're going to meet so

you're you're you're not even close to unreasonable in my opinion 10 years right 10 years no but moratorium is going to like 30 we need 30 years 30 years I want a 10 year moratorium on all immigration except for 01 visas I want to see actual punishment for people that hire or rent apartments to

illegal immigrants because the best case scenario is a scenario where people deport themselves I don't like the idea of ICE having to run people down and going through neighborhoods to pick up illegals and stuff So the best possible situation is making it incredibly hard for them to stay. So if you are renting to someone that's an illegal, that person should possibly lose their property.

Maybe second offense they lose their property. Definitely they go to jail in their first offense. If you are hiring illegals, you should run the risk of losing your business, tax remittances at 90 percent. So that way they can't get the money that they make out of the United States. And of course, anyone that's caught that's illegal, they do. just go out and they can never come back so and and uh and h1 b's because that's corporate slavery and h1 b's i like h1 i not h1 um the o1 visas but there should be a lot of a lot of a lot of what's the word i'm looking for pretext you know to the situation right like you can't just be like oh well

i have a an oh one visa so blah blah blah like you have to have the right ideology no communists no leftists. We have to deal with our own leftists here. So those kind of things. You have to love America. You can't hate America to come to America. I guess to wrap it on this like what does the panel think as far as like should we go and

kill the cartels? Yes. Okay. I mean it's essentially it's effectively a war. Right. You're very hyperbole like no we should stop them from doing what they're doing we can go in then like we do with ISIS like a lot of other things. America has capabilities of stopping them. We don't need to just bomb them and bomb whatever you're saying about bombing the

civilian i wouldn't say well look the ginsu missile's really good right there we go you're not even you're really really targeting an individual you're not targeting you're not targeting you're not targeting and stuff drones are nowadays yeah nowadays they've got the hellfire that's literally loaded with swords we have stuff from space that we could drop down laser yeah jewish slays no we do there's spikes up there that that drop down no rods from god are not real yet okay i could have sworn i saw that i mean that would be that would be that would be something That's what they're talking about, Sean. They're talking about the Gintu missile.

Like, but is that really? You mean the blades? No, he's talking about rods from God. Like a tungsten spike in, tungsten spike in orbit at like 200 miles. And it drops. And then it's all kinetic energy. I understand what that is. I think that does.

Well, yeah, we have to stop them, brother. I mean, but you have to like also consider, again, like, again, we're the most powerful military. It's Mexico. Cool. You know, we've seen the maiden Mexico signs on them. theoretical kinetic energy. Quality, those are. I'm just saying, like, we have to consider, like,

what it looks like to the rest of the world and what, you know, like, the favor of the people. We've never cared about the, what the world cared about. I understand, but we've also never went into Mexico and started a war with cartels. Yes, we have. We did. We absolutely have.

Oh, okay. We've had military, what's his name? Chavez. The war on drugs. Yeah, I mean, the war. There have been, there have been multiple times where, like, actual Delta guys, actual Delta, force has been used to pick up cartel members.

Sure, but I'm saying we have not gone in and disseminated them, destroyed them. We're not talking about, we're not talking about, like, actual, like, invasion. Oh, okay. I thought that's what we were talking. No, no, no, no, no, no. There's not a discussion. I mean, she's saying that there's nothing, but the panel was saying that they were supporting an invasion.

No, we said about going against cartels, not invading Mexico. I think there's a difference. Slow down. There's a spectrum here, right? Yes. Like, we're not going to do regime. change in Mexico, despite their government being a narco state, say, hey, maybe... They got Pablo... Not kosher, are they, oh, son of the guys. So Delta's, Delta's, Delta was, Delta force was involved in picking up Pablo Escobar and

Colombia and El Chapo in Mexico. Yeah, we do targeted raids against powerful narco cartel gangs in, like, northern Mexico farther from the centralized government where they're most potent on our northern border. Those that distribute lethal drugs to American citizens and get rid of. rich off of that. We are coming after you. The president is coming after you and expect to get raided soon enough if you are on American soil or Mexican soil. And we need to go after the Chinese too because the Chinese are involved in the precursor chemicals that arrive in Mexico. That mushroom story is wild to China that they just like got away with that.

You know, I don't want to get too far off, but that was insane. I'm not sure about it. Orabella mushrooms? The mushroom that they brought in that was like going to cause like a big like disease or pandemic oh yeah that was insane that we're just oh that's normal all right we're going to jump to this story to close it out tonight uh from the post millennial again virginia high school staff accused of secretly helping students get abortions including pressuring a girl who was five months along all righty an investigation is underway in virginia's largest public school district after allegations came out claiming a staff at a local high school arranged and funded abortions

for students without notifying their parents. The claims involved Centerville High School in Fairfax County where employees allegedly helped at least one 17-year-old to obtain an abortion in 2021. The story was first reported by the WC Dispatch, which said there were two instances of female minor students saying school officials arranged and bankrolled abortions at Fairfax Health Center without so much as a phone call to their parents. Under Virginia law, physicians must attest that at least one parent or guardian was contacted before performing the abortion on a minor.

The 17-year-old student was allegedly assisted by a school social worker who scheduled and paid for the appointment and kept the information from the student's parents. A second female student, who was five months pregnant, was allegedly told by the same social worker that the student had no other choice, but the student fled from the clinic and did not go through with the procedure. Per the outlet, school principal Chad Liam allegedly greenlit the procedures which were paid for with school funds. Well, this is disgusting.

Any... I don't know the earmarked school funds for that. You know, apparently they do. Any time the conservatives or the right says things like, oh, the Democrats think their kids are yours. Democrats sit there and protest, no, no, no, no, no. And then you hear about stuff like this, like, you know, students. Five months along, right?

Like, my girlfriend is seven months along, But I just imagine, like, five months along you're going to abort a baby. We were, you know, feel the kick in and stuff. Like, that was a baby. I don't care what anyone says. Five months, it's a baby. I don't care what you say. If I understand correctly, at five months, it's possible that the baby could be born and survive under, you know, it has to be in care and stuff.

But, like, it can survive at five months. So, like, the idea that, that, thankfully, the girl ran away from them, which kind of makes it more horrible, right? Like the girls like being ushered in like it just just gives you like this this concept of like them trying to be like no you got to get rid of that thing and they're just like no no no so yeah I mean I can't imagine thinking that this is acceptable and I imagine that you don't either but no I don't like it's very icky like right so hearing it is very icky I am pro choice. But also coming from like a health background, mental health, like this is all shady because there should be, you know, they there is, you know, they do need to have parents permission to do anything as a minor. So this does not seem like it was gone about obviously the right way. Well, that's kind of the shocking thing. And like this, a lot of this came out during the critical race theory and the COVID, you know, during COVID when, you know, parents could. see what their kids were doing in school. But, like, it's weird. The Democrats, like, are so creepy

and weird on this every time. Like, I understand where you're saying the parents' permission. No, that's actually not the case. In a lot of states, the schools trump parents' rights. So the school can say, you know, schools, you know, treat a kid as trans. If a kid says they're trans, a school, treat them as trans and won't, we'll never tell the parents, you know, abortion like this, never tell the parents. It's a strange thing. And to Phil's point, like, they do. say, you know, like, these are our kids. We love these kids like they are our kids. And then you see, like, this weird, weirdness of them, uh, including the parents. And I talked to a lot of educators, uh, especially that we're on the left. And their argument is always their defenses.

Well, a lot of these kids have troubled homes. And we know if we tell their parents, they're trans or they're this, like they're going to be treated like, like crap at home and yada, yeah, yeah. But it's at the end of the day, it's not their kid. Yeah. I agree with you. I mean, if you say that, like, you're, like, you're, like, you're. You're a Republican if you say, oh, it's parents' rights. Like, parents' rights don't exist on the law. Well, everywhere that I've lived and worked, I've always needed permission when working with minors from parents to whatever.

So this is surprising to me to see. That hasn't been my experience. Yeah. Depends on what state you're in you. This is a decision that, yeah, I don't think should have been done without the parents being involved, for sure. Have you heard stories of minors going for? transition surgery and stuff.

I mean, this to me seems this seems like the mild situation, which is ridiculous. I mean, the fact that I'm even articulating this idea is, is mind-blowing to me, but an abortion paid for

and handled by the school is actually significantly less and I'm not, I'm not sure about that, but it strikes me as significantly less offensive. than a teenager or maybe young teen getting some kind of transition surgery without the parents' involvement. I hear you. I think, like, those things can, like, coexist, right?

They can both be, I don't know that one, everyone's situation is different. But I also agree with you in terms of I don't think those surgeries should be done on children either. I definitely think that children can feel a certain way. Maybe they feel more like a man or a woman in there. right yeah what like when kids are like I'm a truck oh you know you're not gonna go and like drain out their blood and stuff in full of motor oil are you right like long lasting surgeries etc things like that like very definitive um I disagree with those being done on on minors as well yeah Tim brings us up a lot it's like you it's like you're watching the same movie but it's two different

screens it's like the Democrats see this is actually protecting the kid you know know, they see this as like healthcare, they see this as like keeping the kids safe, you know, from the parents. So it's like, it's hard to like explain to people that literally think they're doing a good thing for kids. Like, hey, this is horrible child abuse and the parents should be involved. It's, it's a tough one. I'm not so sure that there are people that really believe that they're helping so much as they really believe that there should be more people that think like them right like i think that there's there's there's i think that when it comes to like the LGBT stuff especially when you're talking about trans people i think that they are looking to

make more of them and oh for sure i think it's polls but they but they truly think what they're doing is you know good for the kids and so yes of course they want them to follow in their so they're pushing their ideology as to them for their future game i mean i don't i don't i'm not so convinced that it's about the child, right? Like, I don't think that it's, I, I think at the end of the day, like, really down deep, it's not like, oh, we have to help these kids. It's, I want more, it's a, it's a narcissistic thing for the trans people that are trying to get the trans, get kids. Oh, sure. It's not like, oh, I want to help these kids. They really need help. No, it's, I want these kids to be like me. It doesn't matter that the kid, because if it was really

about the kid, they could be like, well, we can wait because there are even even if you're making arguments that are pro transitioning right doing it to children is bad if only because there's not enough material to fabricate the genitals of the opposite sex when their children because the gen you know their genitals haven't grown so now this is not in any way like some kind of endorsement i think that it's an abomination but if you really care about the kids, then you would want to have as much material to work with so you have the best possible outcome. But they don't want that. Or they don't care about that. They want the transition to happen as early as possible because it validates their own mental

I agree. Okay, they're definitely are the activists and they're definitely are the useful idiots. But at the end of the day, most of them still think they're saving the kid's life from committing suicide because that is the end goal if they don't transition the kid they are convinced that the kid will self-harm i disagree i think i disagree i don't think that it's actually the the like fundamental motivation is not about the kid it's not about saving the kid it's not about having a kid that transitions and has a better happier life it's about get this kid to transition because that validates me i think it's narcissistic and i think that it's not about the child because, like I said, there are arguments for people that agree.

Like, I can make, I don't agree with this, but I can make the argument that if you think that it's good to transition, you should wait until their genitals have fully matured so that way you have the most material. But they don't think they're going to make it that long. They truly, if you talk to, I mean, Angela, back me up here. I think they're lying. Right, it's hard whenever you generalize. Like, I don't think every, like, you can.

can't generalize across the board. I think everything is situational, but I would say in my experience, I more believe that they think that they're helping. Like, I think it might be an overreach or a stretch or based on being older and thinking you know. You've been had. No, but I do, like, I have relative,

like I have a trans cousin, my aunt has like, I've seen her go through that process. Like, I genuinely don't think that she is pushing anything on her. Like, I think that she feels like she's trying like he was bullied in school and I think she and you know they're unhappy and potentially suicidal and I so I do think my experience has been more that people genuinely are trying to help and think that they're doing the best thing but I I agree with you that I that's a it's a young age to be doing like a surgery like that they're activists at the top totally that

know exactly what they're doing and are trying to further the ideology like you're saying but I think a lot of the educators especially like truly believe they're helping the kid like they just been you know they've been brainwashed into thinking this is the way so your your argument is not that the educators as in like people that you would teachers regular normal people yeah like they bought into the line that the trans people that are who run the schools who are at the top of the schools yeah yeah okay i i i can understand that i think that i think that that does make sense I think the people that are the activists that are the most likely to do things like kidnap a kid, take them to a place where they can get a transition. I think those people are the ones that I'm referring to.

I don't think that they're actually motivated to help people. I think they're motivated by the fact that they're narcissists and that they want to see more people like them. And it validates their own, what's the word I'm looking for? Their own self-image. Yeah, their own, yeah, their own motivations. And it's like, and it's sad too because like the hardest thing on the left these days, which is really sad, it's like, you know, everything you're saying is right, Phil about like why they shouldn't be doing it. But as soon as you have that discussion with an educator on that level, like they shut down. They stop listening.

They stop talking. Like you can bring up all these facts. Hey, you should wait till you're 18, all these things. Hey, this, you know, thing about like self-harm in a video game is not necessarily true, whatever. They don't, they just shut down. And so it's really hard to get through to them. and they're the ones that are overseeing the education system, you know, so. And, like, bringing it back to the story that we were on, like, I think the social work,

I do think that they probably want to help these children, but there are those measures in place for a reason, right? Like, with going through the parents and you, I mean, that's, it's just like, yeah, it's crossing a boundary and a line for sure. I agree. I think it's most, when it comes to teachers that would help a kid get an abortion, I think that that is them thinking that they're doing. doing the right thing because if you listen to people make arguments for abortion, I think the vast majority of arguments for abortion are bad, but then because they're always like the extreme cases that are like, you know, 0.01% oh, you know, they'll be poor. Oh, so it's better to kill a kid as opposed to have a poor kid. That's insane. That is absolutely insane. So they'll

make the argument of what about rape and incest. And then the, you know, conservatives are constantly like, okay, we'll make a carve up for rape and incest. How about we do that? And then all other abortions are out. No, no, no. Because they know that 99% of abortions are actually just about birth control. They're not about any of the preconceived or any of the arguments that you hear made, the exceptions and stuff. It's never that.

Well, you've got to be careful on the conservative side because birth control is not necessarily the most popular on the conservative side too. because that's where that whole discussion gets really weird. You know, like, I think, like, when you get to the abortion discussion, it's too late. Like, there needs to be a whole discussion of what's happening before the abortion discussion. And, you know, the conservatives will say, okay, abstinence, more responsibility, yada, yada, the left will say. They used to say, use, like, protection and condoms and so. Oh, the left, yeah. They used to say that.

That's what the right says now. Well, kind of, right? But it's not all the way there, like, it used to be. So it's like... I mean, well, again, the distinction that you're making is actually the distinction between the Christian conservatives and the broader MAGA coalition. So the broad MAGA coalition would be like the Democrats from the 90s

that we were talking about earlier. But I would still say broad MAGA does not support, like the Plan B, it does not support, like, things like that. Like, uh, I mean, Alad, maybe he can chime in, he's in the White House a lot of time. I think, I think MAGA... What's a White House say about it? What's your deal, bro? I think MAGA writ large is pro-choice.

I think Trump's made this pivot in the Republican Party to now be relatively pro-choice. And when I say that, I mean that he's moving more in the pro-choice direction. In effect, what he's actually doing is allowing the states to make their own decisions and leaving it up to the states. But I don't think that's a fundamentally pro-life position. And compared to Republicans of the past, it's going in the pro-choice direction. And I think that's effective politically because it's decisive politically because it's dispelling, I think Democrats' most potent attack against Republicans. I think for many women,

the Republican Party was a little bit unappealing because of the abortion issue. That could get a little bit iffy for them. I don't know if I'm breaking any news here, but abortion's a little bit more personal for women than it is for men, so it's a little bit of a touchy subject for them. So I think politically it's very potent, but it's also going at one of the traditional three stools, one of the stools of the Republican Party, which is religious conservatives that are completely unaligned with the MAGA, the larger MAGA movement on this issue, because they go as far as to not even believe in IVF. There are many Christian MAGA people who don't believe in IVF, let alone who are pro-life. So I think that's something important to consider.

And that could be a core constituency in the future that could turn against the Republican Party. if they keep heading in the pro-choice direction. That's like, you know, what's the terminology? They're hitting himself in their own foot. Like people like Little Rose or something like that, they're telling people not to vote for Trump because he's not super, you know, pro-life. Like, what are they going to do, vote for a Democrat

so they can kill a baby in nine months? They have no choice in the matter. Unless you have a third party, if you don't go with someone who's, you know, moderately release, leave it up to the states and move to the state that you want to live in where you can save your baby, matter what, and they can't, you know, whatever they got going on. I'm not a big old pro-life

person. I'm okay with it. I love it. Go babies. But, but you know what I mean? Like, what are they going to do? They have no other choice in this matter. They can't alienate themselves against Trump and or the Maddica Republicans. I think it's also important to understand that I believe most abortions now happen via the abortion pill, which is Mepha Pristone. And there's this one other drug. And this is a drug that during COVID, it required like a meeting, before COVID, it required a meeting with the doctor to be able to be prescribed it post-COVID because COVID disallowed people from meeting with one another. They changed the law such that women were able to be prescribed this and didn't have to be with the doctors. We're still under

those COVID laws or post-COVID laws where women don't have to meet with a doctor to get this drug. This drug is becoming a lot more accessible. So when we think about how abortion will look in the future, it will become more medicalized. Women will have a lot easier access to it through Mepha Pristone, if it ever becomes illegal, women can easily, you know, get access to these drugs despite that because it's abortion and a pill. You don't need to do a crazy coat hangar or something, which was the stereotype. Is that's going to kill population worse and worse down the road? The abortion, abortion has been one of the worst things for... No, I agree, but like, make it so easy, like, in the future. Of course, it's... I think that

it is, I think it's already one of the reasons why, you know, it's been such a... hit to the population, you know. Oh, 60 million? Remember the teen mom show? When I was younger, there was like a lot of teen moms, they wouldn't abort the kids on TV. And I don't know, the birth control was. What?

Oh, really? Yeah, it's like they're, it's still on. I don't watch it, but I do have a little Jersey Shore guilty pleasure. Jersey Shore was hilarious. Sometimes I see, I love Jersey Shore so much. They like Snooker. But teen mom, like they're, I don't know. they're bringing back the tea moms from like before i used to use that as an i'm going to stop using

that as an example i always used to say like oh they're really abhor all the young women are encouraged to abort but i guess not because the show is still going on also on mephopristone real quick the trump administration actually defended its use in texas they're trying to not have different people and different courts go after women's access to mephapristone i think it really speaks to the pro-choice direction of the, at least the administration right now. And they don't want to touch this issue with a 10-foot pole. They like that. Trump loves touching on all the issues, but I think he's noticeably leaving this one alone.

All right, we're going to go to Super Chats now. So smash the like button, share the show with all your friends, with everyone you know. Head on over to DCcomedyloft.com. I think there are still tickets available for tomorrow's show. It is going to be Myron Gaines, Not So Areiodite, and Cat Tymph, and they're going to be debating whether or not feminism has destroyed the West,

and I think that you guys can probably figure out who's going to be on what talking point. And Angela is going to join as well. Are you going to be there? You're going to stick around? I saw the conversation on X, but I wasn't sure if there was a resolution of that. So Angela will be there, and she's definitely going to be on the side of the misogynists.

So we're going to go to your superchance right now. Lee Whitaker says, hey, based friends, Discord VIP here. I've written an anime-inspired fantasy novel available on multiple platforms, all links at Celestiumsaga.com. So there you go. If you are a member of the Discord, which you should be a member of the Discord, actually, before we get to any further, head on over to Tim Kassie. com become a member at timcast.com so that way you can join the discord and then head on over to rumble

dot com and become a member there so that way you can watch the after show now tonight being friday we're not going to have the after show but it's monday through thursday you watch the after show we can say things on rumble and the after show that we're not allowed to say on youtube and if you're a discord member you can call in and you can ask us questions ask questions of our guests you can also possibly find your spouse because we've had like three people get married in the discord You can start a podcast There's like three or four different podcasts That were started in the district board

So join Timcast.com So that way you can find like-minded people And do things together as friends And you get free tickets to the culture events Oh you get free tickets too There you go members get free ticket And afterwards we have a little get together For the Discord members after the live events

So you have an extension after live event And you get to meet people in the Discord at the live event So I think there's still time to do that too Right if they were to sign tonight You get a free ticket. Get a free ticket for tomorrow in D.C. And then you'll get free access to the after show in Washington, D.C. I think we have like 20 tickets, maybe like 18 left down.

Sick deal. You can also buy me unlimited drinks at the after show. I would love to see you get a lot hammer. Nothing to buy me a drink. Now I think that I just want to buy you enough drinks to get you absolutely. Imagine that. As long as you tip your bartender well, You have a ride home or are you driving?

You could drive me. No, I am not driving you anywhere. Absolutely not. I mean. I'm a way. Bold lib? I have a driver. I was saying on the other show, young liberal women don't get enough credit.

I was saying libs are kind of hot. Nobody agreed with me. And then I said young Hillary Clinton was, you know, a beautiful woman. What? No. Okay, you agree, right? I don't know if I've seen a young Hillary Clinton. I don't know.

Surge, you're ready to pull her up? Oh, no. You guys aren't ready for young Hillary Quentin. A lot has been thinking about her a lot, apparently. He's been talking to Broadway. I like it. I'm happy for you. She's happy for you.

I'm happy for you and Hildog. I am. Well, hey, her and Bill got pretty far. I mean, hey, they had a good run at it. She was almost president. She has amazing pantsuits. Great. I'm kidding, by the way.

I love a pants. Wyatt Caldenberg says, if they arrest one of these Dems, I think he's talking about the Texas legislators, he or she will become a superstar if they arrest 30 or more they become a faceless mob everyone remembers the first man to step on the moon

who remembers the fourth that's actually a fair point a fair point I do think that the talent of the individual still matters will actually matter though if you get someone that can't speak can't relate to people

that just manage to squeak in as a state rep you know that that'll be a problem they need to have that kind of charisma and that political star power. Alan Bean was his name by the way, the fourth person to step on the moon.

Ellen Bean. Was it really? Hey, facts. There you go. Well, if you believe, we went to a lot. Oh, God. We'll talk about it tomorrow with Alex. I don't even want to talk. Plastic Cup politics says, I will be severely disappointed if not, but a single Timcast member tosses a lime cream

Oh, geez. Yildo? Yeah, there is. There you go. On stage during the feminist debate tomorrow. Peep's going to be showing up with a little bag of dicks. Now that you've read that, someone's coming with one. You know, I know. It was already coming out of my mouth before I realized what it was.

Just aim it at Alex. He'll love it. Dane Peterson says, hook and mouth. So far, so good. So what? Greatest anti-government song ever. Great job, Phil bringing it up. F. Tipper Gore. Absolutely. I'm a fan of Megadeth. We just got the privilege we had the privilege of touring with them just last summer great guys Dave was awesome and one of the cool things about Megadeth is they changed the set every night so it's

actually worth going to see multiple shows if you can swing it they don't play the same show the same set every night they were constantly surprising people um so yeah go check out megadeth they're awesome ligma johnson says trump's promise to end the war on day one came before biden greenlit american missiles to be fired on civilian targets inside russia Biden did everything he could to fan those flames. Yeah, I agree, but at the same time, like... What a cope. Yeah, I mean, I mean, his point is well taken, but at the same time, I don't think that Trump could have just stepped in and said, hey, stop and, you know, Putin was going to listen because Putin, again, Putin has all the cards.

Putin is in the position of power there. Well, that's why it's like, we are always in the impossible position of, like, trying to bury... beefs like end beefs and it's like I get we're powerful but how do you stop people that have hated each other for as long as they hate each other like that's the toughest thing it's like outside of you know

doing terrible things and even that doesn't necessarily end it it just makes it worse again Obama's campaigns like that didn't help us so Shane H. Wilder says a Tarrant County judge granted Paxton's request for a temporary restraining order injunction against Beto Orocks powered by the people

dot org that was receiving funds to pay fines of the Dems big W hey look any time Beto O'Rourke gets his fanny slapped I'm happy well hand slapped smack in the face I don't don't get the wrong idea what's in here you don't get the wrong idea weirdos Phil told on himself in a lot's talking about hot hiller Shane H. Wiler with the uh another rumble rant Raymond is right about the long term but in the short term they're delaying more than the redistricting. They are delaying votes on protecting groundwater and a flood disaster bill. So, Shane H. Wilder is from Texas, so he actually has a good inside track on it. So thank you, Shane, for those. I want to mention one of these guys. His name is James Tala Rico.

He's a Texas state representative. He's one of the guys who fled. But he's also one of the guys who went on Joe Rogan's podcast, like a week or so ago, and he's getting a lot of buzz. So if there's somebody who's trying to finesse this whole, you know, political stunt, into something. It's this guy and I mean, this is what he wants for us to keep our eyes on him, but I guess he's somebody to keep his eyes on. Your eyes on. I mean, if he made it to JR, that's kind of

a thing. But I agree with Shane like once critical things start happening as a result, that's the only way people start being like, hey, go get this guy, rest him. Yeah, water's a big deal. Yeah, exactly. Shane H. Wilder again said, remember, Warren's Cherry Pie album, 1990, had a 55 second track called Ode to Tipper Gore

that consisted of clips of every foul word they said in concert as a big middle finger to the warning label look the warning label when the warning label came out that was a badge of honor right like but it hurt your sales bigly did it really hurt the sales oh yeah artists were like because

Walmart wouldn't carry them like family friendly stores wouldn't carry them once they had that label on it and you lost a ton of money 1990s was there I guess there was wasn't oh yeah yeah absolutely they weren't as they weren't the big gigantic oh they were still huge for like artists because people used to buy CDs back Remember, you used to go buy the singles. Yeah, I did.

I'm making a joke, I remember. Okay, okay, okay. I myself was buying, buying CDs. Remember, I'm probably the oldest person at the table. Right, right, right. By a lot. And a lot of musicians. By a lot.

Yeah, and I really hurt your industry when they put those labels on it. Not as much as streaming, homie. Oh, for sure. So, uh, let's see. Lime wire. You look good for your age, though. Napier. Yeah, very good.

Limer's worse because napser is bad. You're shredded real nicely, even though you're closer to my dad's age than mine. I probably am close to you. No, I did the math. What? No, not in a bet. He's great for his age. Are you kidding me?

We understand you're not effective. And he's still tours? Yeah, all freaking Phil Rocks, Divine. Have you heard? This guy's a rock star. Still going to the gym and still, I mean, most of the guys my age are not in the shape that I know. Probably bench a lot more than me, so. Yeah, my chest has never been great.

Well, have you seen this? I've maxed out at 185. Okay, I can bench more than you. But my deadlift and my squats are actually much better than my bench. At the White House. Eb Jones says, it's our job because we are the world's most powerful military by a massive margin. It's not even close. And we have every interest in staying that way.

The West, communism, or Islam, take your pick. There is an argument for that, right? So, like, everybody that says, hey, the United States shouldn't be the world police. Like, I like that concept, but I also like the idea of the United States making sure that, you know, the oceans are safe for everybody. like so there there are there are trade the military makes sure that every nation is allowed to use the seas in a way that does that is not particularly preferential to other you know to other countries or to one country and i think that that has been an actual benefit to the whole world for the entire time that the united states has been doing that so the post post world war two order

the with the United States being the at least making sure that everyone can trade on you know the open sea I think that that's been a a benefit for the whole world and I would like to keep it that way because I don't know that I think that it would be a significantly worse situation if Russia were in charge of part of the oceans and China were in part of the in charge of the South China Sea and and we didn't have at least the ability to fend off a significant increase in piracy out from Somalia and stuff. Like, the United States really does do a lot to keep that kind of stuff under control. So I think that that's a net good, net positive for the whole world. Phil, a real quick question for you, sir.

Would that be like all of the oceans, but also like the seas, like the Black Sea, the Red Sea? The U.S. can't go into the Black Sea. Like the U.S. is just talking about the oceans. Like so. Just ocean straight up. Yeah. Because the, like, the U.S. isn't going to. to, if you've, like, the Black Sea, you know,

it's surrounded territorially by the Gulf. Do you think the Gulf, too? Well, the Gulf, no, because the thing is it's, it's multiple countries that are actually, you know, when it comes to like the Gulf of Oman or whatever, there are multiple countries that are

the border of the Gulf. So, if it's an international seaway, then the U.S. is going to make sure that it stays open, and I think that's a generally positive thing for the rest of it. Yeah, don't get cut up on the black sea. I was just throwing examples off the top of my head.

No hate. Let's see. Ian Kenny says, I know I'm late on this topic, but I was busy. In regards to the Texas gerrymandering convoy, here's a Wisconsin PBS headline. Democrats flip 14 seats in the Wisconsin legislature in 2024 after redistricting. It's true, man.

Look, there are something like 40% of the population of Massachusetts are Republicans, maybe 35%. And there are zero Republican seats. from Massachusetts. New York City is definitely something along the lines of like 30-70 or in the greater New York metro area, all Democrats, if I understand correctly. So Illinois is largely controlled by Democrats. There are like at least 75% of the seats out of California are Democrats. The representation for conservatives in blue states is almost not.

non-existent or actually non-existent in many of the blue states. So the idea that Democrats are, you know, the idea that Democrats are being somehow shut down and they don't have political power because of gerrymandering, like, that's, that's just a BS line intended to get Democrats worked up. It's not the case at all. And they'll tell you that it's, that it's unprecedented. they'll tell you that it's something that the Republicans are doing in order to suppress democracy. It's all BS. It's not unprecedented. It's happened before. And considering the massive shift of population after COVID from states like California, two states like Texas and the influx of people from illegal, the four years of essentially open borders because of the Biden administration, there's a really strong argument to do redistricting now. So this idea or the argument that the left makes, it doesn't hold water. It's just absolutely garbage.

The issue with redistricting is that Democrats can do it too. I'm reading some new news out of California about how Governor Newsom plans to, or is hosting some of these Texas legislators. And they have some juice to squeeze out in California, too. So I think we're going to see a tip-for-tap battle here. We'll see how it plays out. Friend of the show, James Klug says, the first time I met a lot, we were debating a board. We were debating abortion in a crowded bar And he started yelling at me

Never seen a grown man lose a debate so bad Human life is worth protecting L-O-L James Clug is throwing you under the bus And James Clugelling at the bar Yell about abortion James Clue got very emotional About, you know, his love for

Baby's life Yeah, yeah Oh, okay, I thought you took the inverse You took the opposite? Maybe he should get one of his own, James Hey, you took the opposite a lot You're a pro-choice? I don't believe in the government's

I don't believe the government should be restricting women's access to abortion beyond 14 weeks. Okay. Okay. Before 14 weeks. I do love your advice for James. Yeah, right? I think dude's almost 30. No kids.

Damn. Oof. Almost as bad as bold lib. I'm almost 50. I am 50 and I don't have any kids yet. Well, she's pregnant. She's on the way. You're right down the road, brother.

Yeah, right? I mean, it's like, you know, they say it's already alive in the womb. You know, in Korea, they start from when you get pregnant. They start counting. You don't have to put a super. chat in, even if you're on the show. Well, I mean, I'll send the super chat as the Tesla's

driving us to the... Yeah, there you go. Or maybe I'll just wait until I get there. It happens, like, surprising you're on the show. Put the super chat in before you're under the house. I mean, rumor has it the first one takes a while. Yeah. So, I assume that maybe... And then the second one just slides right out. Look, man, I was, I'm

the second, and I was born in the hallway. So they didn't even get my mom into the room. And my, my sister, it took some time. So let's see. I like it. I mean, for my girlfriend's, for her sake, I hope that it doesn't take too, too long. Sure, sure, sure. Are we doing a good job explaining, like, a woman's body and biology right now?

Yeah, that's exactly all right. I mean, you know, the logistics, yeah. Just slide right out the second one. I also hope for her that it's not long and it slides right up. How's the baby fever? You still got it? You still got that? You still sweating?

Hey. I mean, you tweet about it a lot is what I'm saying. I'm wondering if that's, like, if that's really. if that's you just putting on... See, I don't know. Like I said, evolving, growing, open. All right. Our sergeant says, our sergeant 31 says,

let's reverse some thinking. What if America allowed its people to cross into Mexico unchecked? How long do you think it would be before American gangs were running the Mexico? What American gangs? Before American gangs. We do go into America.

We do go to Mexico on checks. Like the Crips, they can't make any money down there. It's actually, we get to go in unchecked. They don't get to come here unchecked, right? We can go just go to Mexico. Yeah, and they hate us. He's talking about, like, gangs. Oh.

And also, yeah, like, if you are an expat or not even an expat, there are people that are just, that just went to Mexico City to work, right? Because it's cheaper. They work remotely, and it's cheaper to live down there. And there are Mexicans down there telling me get out. They are hating on them because they're like, there's something like 10,000 Americans that live in Mexico City. And the city has something like 5, 10 million.

It's like a big, big, big city. So the amount of people, the amount of Americans that are there, are not affecting housing prices, but they're still blaming the Americans. They're like, get out of here, Gringo. They want out the $10,000. We have like, you know, $400 million or whatever it is. I see the signs posted like, you don't come here, $5 million. Oh, yeah. Yeah, they don't want Americans.

They don't like it at all. They don't like it at all. We're the nice ones in the world. We're the best people. And again, like they're, the Americans are bringing, you know, they're bringing American dollars in. They're spending dollars that they made. Right. You know, when they're working remotely.

To be fair, they're probably are driving up, like, the property value and the prices in that area. To be fair to them. If it's a secluded area, I guess, sure. The problem is there are Mexicans that can't find apartments and stuff like that. Which is, I guarantee, just like in the United States, the cost is because of things like zoning and because of the governments of the municipalities and then the state and country more broadly. But they're still blaming the Americans. like, hey, get out of here, gringo. I blame the witty somehow.

So ironic. It's funny. All right, let's see. Webhead Mike says, first day done in the hospital with our first baby, so super chatting in the tradition. Congratulations.

Thank you very much. Hey, go, buddy. Congrats. I just don't understand how we're having an issue with population when literally every night there's two are kids in the super chats that are born. You really don't understand? Mathematically, it seems like we're doing pretty good.

We're definitely. At least in our audience. Our audience, yes, but we're doing great. As a country, I think that I'm going to trust the people that say that we are having a problem, getting people to have kids. Not in our audience. Whatever that discord is doing. Ligma Johnson says Trump bloviates. Take him seriously, not literally.

He might not have ended the war on day one, but if Biden didn't fan the flame, it might have been over by now. I mean, look, man, I don't know, but I really don't think that Trump had the ability to, and the reason is, because Vladimir Putin has all of the cards. Like the United States, the American people, we're not going to support actual military action against the Russians in Ukraine. And that's the stick that the United States has, right? The U.S. can do things like try and sanction.

The U.S. can do things like send weapons to Ukraine. But the real, you know, when the rubber hits the road, it's the United States military, actually taking decisive action and the U.S. isn't going to do it against Russia because of all the possibility of all those nuclear weapons. So, you know, it may sound nice and Trump can talk a good game,

but it was never really in the cards of Trump coming in and saying, hey, get out of here, Putin, and Putin say, oh, I'm sorry, Donald. You know, that wasn't going to happen. Yeah, on that, Phil, just as much as I'd like to think America is how bad ass we are and we can tell people what to do and how to live their lives in other countries.

Russia's, when you think about Russia's stronger than I would think than I want them to be because they're just, they're another world power. They're a China. They're as strong. We just can't say,

hey, dude, just stop what you're doing. They're not as strong as they used to be, but to your point, they are still deadly. There's only, how many world powers are in there? There's not. I love you. No, the United States.

It's true. I know, I understand. But, like, these guys are still pretty strong themselves. But then, they could take, like, took what two small regions of ukraine frankly very unimpressive well because of us we gave them all the other weapons yeah corey stalling says look at trump's legacy it's amazing to me how much people claim trump isn't a peace president he just ended a 35 year war with armenia versus

Azerbaijan look man that's a big one trump's ended that one and there was one in africa that he ended i mean he does try to end wars it's true but uh listen smash the like button share the show with everyone you know don't forget to go to what is it, D.C. Comedy Loft to buy your tickets for the Culture War Live tomorrow. There are still tickets left. And if you show up and you're a member of the Discord, you can come to the after party. It's going to be a great time. Angela, thank you for coming. Would you tell people where they can find you? Yes. Thank you guys so much. Please follow me on at Angela Bell Camino, also on TikTok at Angela Bell Camino. And look for the podcast coming

in September. Thanks to NAG, network access group, love you guys. It'll be on Rumble. So thank you guys so much for having me. Appreciate you. Nice. Thank you. My name is Raymond G. Saly Jr. I am here. Follow me on X at Ray Midgey Salli, and

I appreciate you being here and had good conversation with everyone here today. We love Rumble. Angela, good luck with the podcast. We'll check it out. Support Rumble. We'll see you guys at D.C. Comedy Lof tomorrow. Follow me at Timcast News, producer, Sean. Thanks for tuning in, everybody.

I am Alad Eliyahu, the White House correspondent here at Timcast. I actually got a pretty sick scoop yesterday at the White House. I was able to ask the Secretary of Defense Pete Hexeth if he believes the Muslim Brotherhood should be designated as a terrorist organization. He gave me a thumbs up. So hopefully we get some more progress on that in the upcoming weeks. Check us out at the Comedy Loft tomorrow. And thanks for tuning in.

We will see you all this weekend at the D.C. Comedy Lof, there will be clips on YouTube and Rumble this weekend, and we will see you all back here on Monday. Thank you.