Timcast IRL - Timcast IRL #1045 Hunter Biden GUILTY On ALL Counts, Facing 25 Years, Joe WILL Pardon Him w/Daniel Turner

Episode Date: June 12, 2024

Tim, Hannah Claire, Ian, & Serge are joined by Daniel Turner to discuss Hunter Biden being found guilty for lying on his gun form, Joe Biden vowing to ban assault weapons, Joe Biden moving to grant mass amnesty to illegal immigrants on parole, and how the 2024 election could break America. Hosts:  Tim @Timcast (everywhere)  Hannah Claire @hannahclaireb (everywhere) Ian @IanCrossland (everywhere) Serge @sergedotcom (everywhere) Guest: Daniel Turner @DanielTurnerPTF (X) Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Hunter Biden has been found guilty. The son of the president found guilty on all charges related to being a crackhead and buying a gun, but lying about it. And there's actually a mixed perspective on this. Many people on the right are actually kind of pissed off about it. This is self-incrimination requiring Hunter Biden to admit that he's the user of an illegal drug to the government, which violates the Fifth Amendment. And it's also a non-issue. Now, a lot of people did want to see Hunter Biden face accountability because many feel like Democrats aren't being held accountable. But of course, the narrative now is that, oh, they're going after Hunter Biden, the Biden family, because they can't get anything on Joe. And it's a deflection. But we will talk about this because some people are certainly happy that he is being held accountable. And then the other big news, of course, is that for the past couple of days, they've been reporting Russian Navy off the coast of Florida. Maybe it's big

news. Maybe it's not. We'll see. And then there's a bunch of other fake news that we'll get into. The funny thing following the Hunter Biden guilty verdict on gun charges is Joe Biden calling for gun control. So we'll definitely talk about that. Before we get started, my friends, head over to castbrew.com and buy coffee. We got Ian's Graphene Dream, low acidity blend now available, as well as Alex Stein's Primetime Grind. When you buy from castbrew.com, you're supporting the show. Also head over to timcast.com, click join us, become a member, because we rely on you as members to keep the show up and running and all the work that we do. So if you want to hang out in the members only call in show and actually get the opportunity to call in to talk to us and the guest and be on the show. You got to go to TimCast.com. You got to click join us. You got to join us.

You got to get on the Discord server, submit your questions. And then Monday through Thursday, 10 p.m., we are live after the main show with our call-in show featuring you guys as members. So smash that like button, subscribe to this channel, share the show with your friends. Joining us tonight to talk about this and so much more is Daniel Turner. It's great to be here. Thank you, Daniel Turner, Power of the Future. Focus on energy issues and here to talk about everything. And it is great to be here with such an austere group of intellectuals. Thanks, folks. Good to see you again, man. What's up, everybody?

Hi, Tim. Hey, Hannah Clare. Daniel Turner, my man. It's good to be here. I'm glad you're here, dude. Thank you. It's been months and months. And hello, everyone.

I have returned. Let's keep the intros going. Hannah Clare, what's happening? I'm Hannah Clare. I'm Hannah Clare Rummel. I'm a writer for SCNR.com. I'm happy to be here, too. I'm so glad you could join us in the new studio.

Hi, Serge. Yo, what's up, guys? Let's get into it. Here we go. We got the story from the Wall Street Journal. Hunter Biden's guilty verdict. The president's son faces the consequences of unlawful acts. And the question is, is this legitimate?

Will this affect Joe Biden's polling? And how much do people really care well it is big news because i believe is is this the first time the the family member of a president has been it's the first time the child of a sitting president has been gone before a criminal court and been convicted why like what what is the reason the real reason so you've got many people on the right arguing this is a distraction. Joe Biden is sacrificing his son for optics to make it look like they're not biased, because certainly as the head of the executive branch, he could tell his DOJ don't go that direction and they wouldn't. I suppose the issue then is there's concern that appears

that the system is biased. So Joe Biden says, OK, Hunter, you've been a thorn in my side for too long. You're going to prison. It's possible he does. He has another case. Hunter Biden has another case coming up in California. He's got tax evasion charges there. And that that case goes forward in September, I believe. So there is a level of like he may be being sacrificed.

On the other hand, maybe they thought by getting this out of the way, it would sort of help him in other cases. Maybe they could they could skirt some other stuff on the rug. If you guys remember his plea deal, that was that was the big part of it. Just trying to make it as as easy for a Hunter Biden, who's now facing basically 25 years in prison and like a seven hundred fifty thousand dollar fine. Contrast that with Trump, who's facing up to four years in prison. I think it was 25 years per charge, and he's got three charges. It's not per charge. It's two charges have maximum sentences of 10 years each, and one charge is a five-year maximum. So up to 25 years in prison.

I suppose the root question is, should crackheads be allowed to own guns? I say yes. I mean, if they're not on crack and they're not wielding it at the same moment, if you're on crack wielding a gun, that's presented by his attorney. Abel was basically like, well, he wasn't currently on crack at that moment. So it seems fine. No, no, no, no. But that's about lying on the ATF form. So basically what Hunter Biden was charged with is that you get this federal background check form and Democrats are all about their background checks.

Takes forever. It takes 15 minutes. The form. Yeah. Well, it took me with Daniel Turner as a name, it took me almost an hour waiting for the callback to say, all right, you're good. Oh, well, to be fair,

my first gun purchase took five days. It took three days, the maximum wait. They basically just didn't press it, and then the law releases it, and you can buy your gun. But there's a question on it saying that they ask you on the form, are you a user of an illicit or controlled substance? And Hunter Biden said no.

But he was. We all know that he was. My thing is kind of like, I agree. A lot of people have pointed out. These are like hardcore Trump supporters who have every reason to just say lock all the Bidens up. Have that right said this violates the Fifth Amendment. This is unconstitutional. That's actually what the defense argued, because it forces an individual to self-incriminate. This case with Hunter Biden, they're going to appeal

this. It's a federal case. If this ends up before the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court, thanks to Hunter Biden, could overturn federal background checks. Not the figurehead the Second Amendment movement thought they needed. I'll take it. As his father is in Atlanta talking about gun control and that awful statistic, which is a flat out lie that more children die from guns than cancer and car accidents combined. But they define children up until 21 years of age. So, yeah, it's kind of ironic that this is happening all on the exact same day. And no one at the White House pulled the plug and said, maybe we shouldn't be talking about gun control right now. I think we should see, you know, as many conservative organizations and gun rights organizations file briefs on behalf of Hunter Biden for his defense that, look, if you are on crack with a gun on your person, then I OK, that's like being behind the wheel of a car. Like, you know, if there was a guy for just hypothetically was chewing on

a speedball behind the wheel of an SUV and the cops had to drag him out of the car, kick it in screaming and then hold him on the ground. I mean, that's a guy who's committing very serious crimes, you know, and resisting arrest and all that stuff. Very serious outcomes could come from something like that. Hunter Biden, if he was actively doing crack with the gun on him, I'd understand arresting him and saying, like, you are using a controlled substance while in possession of weapon. That should be a specific crime. But I actually don't agree. If you're a gun owner and you don't have a gun on you,

but your gun's like in your house somewhere and you're out gallivanting about on crack, I don't believe you should be charged with owning a gun for that reason. It seems kind of weird. You weren't wielding the gun while on crack. You're just doing crack somewhere else. If you get charged for doing crack, which is a felony, they can then, after you're convicted, say, and now as a felon, you relinquish your right to your guns. That I agree with. But I think this

should be a major attack factor for 2A rights organizations because it puts Democrats in an awkward position. If all of the right-wing and Republican and gun advocacy groups come out in defense of Hunter Biden, they're going to have to agree or pitch Hunter Biden into the pit. Is your position because it's the Second Amendment specifically or self-incrimination writ large, meaning what's the fifth amendment? Well, what's the difference? No, no. The Second Amendment that this is because it's because of the right to own to bear arms. Well, you said self-incrimination, which is a separate thing. No, but are you are you concerned about this? Or let me rephrase. Are you concerned about this?

Because it's a second amendment issue and the right to, to bear arms is sacrosanct. And I agree with that, but is, is what's the difference between what Hunter Biden did? And when you come back into the country and they say, do you have this in your possession? Aren't you self-incriminating to a certain extent? Do you have any apples? Do you have any fruit? Do you have any wine that you say, well, why do I have to tell you? As an American citizen? How is that different

than Hunter Biden having to say on a forum, are you taking crack? Are you a crackhead? And he's like, nope. Are you bringing in more than $10,000? Nope.

What's the difference on lying on the forum? So it's a question of morality and it's not a question of straight blanket logic of you never have to tell the government anything at any point. I think border security, if you leave the country and you're operating outside of the United States, coming back in, it's reasonable to say, as you now enter our legal jurisdiction, we want to make sure that these things, you know, are controlled for for very specific reasons. But it is a good argument. When it comes to reentering the country, U.S. citizens, you're not supposed to, they're not supposed to make you take a picture or fingerprint or anything like that. You do that all the time

now. Well, I don't. I mean, I haven't flown internationally in a couple years now, several years. But the last time I did, when I came in an international line, all the non-citizens are getting their hands scanned and their pictures taken and not me. I walked up. They said passport. I just had an American passport. They looked through it and they said, what were you doing in insert country? And I was like, X, Y, and Z.

Welcome back to America. And I was like, here, here. And then that's it. So the idea is an American citizen, you have constitutional rights. They can't do these things to you. But it is an interesting question. I think it's a question of morality. And it really comes down to what is the reason why we don't want someone to come in with fruit and livestock and animals because it will spread disease and cause serious harm and damage. And so we've agreed like, hey, man, don't bring that into our house.

Question of morals. So then what's the reason that we don't want crackheads to have guns? Because it's the same as... Oh, I want crackheads to have guns. I just don't want them on crack and with a gun at the same time. Gotcha. I think the question is, like alcohol, right? That's legal.

But if you're drunk and with a gun, you're going to go to jail. You're going to get arrested and take your gun away from you. So I view crack similarly. I don't like it that people are doing crack. And I understand, you know, I'm fairly libertarian on drugs and all these substance abuse laws. I don't think they're solving any of these problems. Not that I think we should completely legalize everything. But my attitude is forcing you on a background check form to admit to committing felonies, I think, is very, very different from admitting you have an orange in your pocket, which I think at worst is a fine.

What was the actual question on the thing that he said he wasn't? It's not a question. I'm sorry. It asks you. So it is a question, but it says, are you like, do any of the following apply? And it's like, you are a user of illicit substance or something. So it might have been like three days since he'd used. And he's like, well, I haven't done that thing for three days.

I'm in the clear. And that was part of his defense's argument that he didn't think of himself as an addict, partially because, you know, some people don't accept that they're addicted to substances. But also he had been sober for the 11 days before leading up to it. So therefore he was not currently addicted to anything. And then as soon as he got it, he's texting about being a cracker or whatever. Immediately went out to find drugs. So I guess he wasn't planning on staying sober. It was definitely a really interesting argument.

I mean, the other thing that I find interesting about this case is, you know, Andy Ngo had a video of a woman protesting outside of the courthouse today. And she was saying, you know, when I got in trouble for gun and substance related charges, they threw the book at me. They were really harsh. It changed my whole life. He needs to be held accountable because this is really the question I think a lot of Americans, I think the two way things are interesting. And I think some people feel them really strongly. But the other part is, is he getting special treatment as the son of the

president? You know, a lot of Americans struggle with addiction. A lot of Americans are involved in the legal system because of that. Does he get a pass that other people don't? Well, he shouldn't. He shouldn't. But like you said, this is the first time that the son of a sitting president was ever charged with anything, a felony, I think, at the point. The thing is about the illicit, what is it? Three of them. Three at once. The illicit argument is like, are you using illicit? Some people have medical marijuana cards or just taking marijuana. What's that? Answer is yes. Marijuana is illegal federally.

That's exactly my point. It's a Schedule I narcotic, according to the federal government. But some states are like, yo, it's medicine. And so if you're in a state where it's legal, but then the federal government's like, hey, you lied on your federal background check when you said you didn't take illicit drugs. Like what kind of conundrum? So that could be this case could send more people into, like, arresting people because they have a small amount of pot in their house. Ian, perhaps, but there is no prescription crack.

Yeah. So not in this case. Well, it's the illicit part. It's just that there's, crack is only illicit. You might be able to defend your gun rights because you're like, well, I do have a medical marijuana card. But even in states where you don't have a medical card but it's just like decriminalized,

people have it. It's not federally illegal. This is the big trick. The moment you get a marijuana card, you can't own a gun. This is wild. That is really, really dirty. It's a fact. I remember I was in California 10 years ago walking down Venice Boardwalk and there's people standing outside these weed shops going like, weed card, weed card.

And a guy goes to me, and he's like, hey, man, you got your weed card? And I was like, nah. And he's like, but why not? And I was like, don't need it. And he's like, oh, but dude, come on. I know you got problems, right? You're hurting. You're a skateboarder, man.

And I was like, yeah, my feet hurt all the time. He's like, oh, you need a weed card. And then I laughed. I was like, oh, okay, dude. And there were five bucks. If some kid, 18, 19-year-old kid, was like, oh, okay, goes in. There's the doctor, and he says, I'm going to prescribe marijuana for your pain. The moment he gives you that card, you now have to admit on federal NICS forms, N-I-C-S, that you are a user of an illegal substance.

Well, some people will get the card but don't use it. I mean, it's an outlier case probably, but there are times when people will will have it they'll use it for a short period of time and then stop using it but their card persists for the year or whatever and you're gonna go to buy a gun and they're gonna deny you their farm's gonna come back and they're gonna be like you're a medicinal marijuana i think the law is hazy on that like whether or not they can say because you've got a medical marijuana card you can't get a firearm because sometimes i hear that it's okay sometimes i hear it it's not okay, but that's terrifying that that's the money in regards to that. If you have a medicinal marijuana card, I believe it's fair to say 99.9% chance you are smoking marijuana. When you fill out your background check form, I'm pretty sure it says in parentheses,

marijuana is illegal. It specifically states that. Actually, let me see if I can pull up the form. You're both pointing out something I think very important, even though we're talking about Hunter Biden but just an argument about gun rights in general. Only the people like us are trying to comply

with the law. The criminals don't do any of this crap, right? The criminals just buy guns and they kill each other and all of our crimes in our major cities that is absolutely through the roof regardless of FBI lying statistics. We're the ones who are like am I allowed to do this when I have marijuana? Do I have to check Form B if I, and this is what's so stupid about gun laws, only the compliant people comply and everyone else who's a criminal who is a threat does not comply. So here's what it says. We have

it pulled up here. This is Form 4473. And it says, are you an unlawful user of or addicted to marijuana or any depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug or any other controlled substance? Warning, the use or possession of marijuana remains unlawful under federal law, regardless of whether it has been legalized or decriminalized for medicinal or recreational purposes in the state where you reside. That's the federal is the federal. This is the federal background check form. Thank you, Democrats. So dirty, man. 1930, they made that stuff federally illegal.

Well, I got a legal challenge. I got a legal challenge. You know how the federal government is suing Sheetz? No. Have you guys heard this story? Yeah. So Sheetz is a chain of gas stations, and it's like, wah, wah, you go in there, you can get a burrito or whatever.

I'm just going to stop by there after work today. That's delicious. It's great. You get the pre-made milkshakes and all that good stuff um so apparently the federal government said that because they won't hire criminals they're racist which is a really interesting racist statement i know but you know federal crime stats right well i'm gonna go ahead and say based off of that argument federal background checks are racist and should be abolished for racism.

This is interesting because if they're going to target sheets and say rejecting employees or prospective employees because of their criminal background because it's racist, you could then take the argument the government has made and say, based on exactly what they're saying, if this form results in a disproportionate amount of black and brown people unable to get firearms, then the federal government must get rid of it under the 1964 Civil Rights Act. Well, you wonder if NRA groups and Second Amendment groups are smart enough to be jumping onto this argument the way you're talking about it, because this could be the unraveling of so many unconstitutional gun laws that are that are that are always being talked about and the fact that hunter biden is is is the advent of it is pretty ironic this is an area of law i was talking with a lawyer about it has to say and i wish i could pull up all the terms she was using but if your law would um implicate the race uh there's there's a way to delineate whether or not the law is actually racist or it's not.

But it just outlies a disproportionate amount of people of a specific race. There's two different ways. So it might not be, is my point. It might not be considered a racist law just because it impacts disproportionately. Ian, if you try hard enough, anything really is a racist law in this country. I mean, that's what I have learned over the last couple of years. You can breed race into anything. So hypothetically,

if you just have to have a good enough lawyer, in my opinion, and I'm not a legal expert. I see racism everywhere. Yeah. Those are the glasses I wear. And so every conversation turns into a race one sooner or later.

It's just, if you're a hammer, everything looks like a nail. We got the proof right here from our good friend ChetGPT. I asked it for a bar graph of drug addiction rates by race, and here we can see that it's 7.5% among

white people, 8.2% among black people. Hispanic people is 6.8, Asians are 3.5, Native Americans 12.3, and others 5.9. This clearly shows that all you need is one racial group to be disproportionately affected to prove the background checks are racist based on the federal government's own argument they submitted to Sheetz or against Sheetz. And I am hoping y'all can spread the word and we can get as many two-way advocacy groups,

the anti-race party's not going to do it, but any one of these other groups, they can take this argument, attach it to the argument made by the government themselves and say, background checks are guns, are racist and must be abolished. I assume the vice president herself will take this up because she's always been a champion of of race

issues and inequity and um you know she she is the right person to champion this cause i'm just cackling like she does she will answer by saying we need to have a conversation about that we have this story from the post-millennial. Biden calls for assault weapons ban, fails to mention Hunter's federal gun conviction at D.C. Gun Control Conference. It's time once again to do what I did when I was a senator, ban assault weapons, Biden told the crowd, which is met with cheers. Who in God's name needs a magazine that can hold 200 shells? Did he really say that? No, it's a holy. That's a massive drum for a shotgun. A magazine holds 200 clips and a clip

holds 5,000 shells. He's got to learn the terminology. No, he doesn't. He's just going to ban them. He doesn't have to learn anything if he makes them disappear. I want to, I want to, I couldn't imagine someone making a 200 shell. I couldn't imagine someone being able to pick it up. That's very... Are you talking about like battleship

magazine? Don't they have magazines on board the battleships that fire shells? Very, very heavy. Maybe that's what he's referring to? Wow, I'm impressed. I wonder if... Here we go. This is a clip from Mom's Demand Action. You know him, you'll love him. Here's Joe Biden. Here's creepy Uncle Joe.

By the way, if they want to think to take on government, if we get out of line, which they're talking again about, well, guess what? They need F-15s. They don't need a rifle. By the way, if they want to try that again, is to take on government if we get out of line, which they're talking again about, guess what? They need F-15s.

They don't need a rifle. I will buy an F-15 if possible. Is that what he's saying? I love when he says this because I'm just like Joe Afghanistan called. Joe Vietnam called. How many instances of U.S. failure related to a guy with gun needs to happen historically before this argument ceases to exist? The problem is he's in a room full of very stupid people. That's it. First of all, this incoherent muttering,

which we can't really understand what he's saying, but the idea that they're going to need F-15s to go after us. Yeah, okay, right, dude. F-15s cannot occupy street corners. That's always the most insane thing. It's like, we have air superiority, so we're going to win. Yeah, not if you can't occupy a street corner, okay?

So we spend several decades in Afghanistan, and these goat farmers in the mountains with AK-47s took the country back. They took it over in a couple days. Jeez. Daniel, this is you, right? Because you're a sheep farmer. Exactly, and I'm planning this, which is why, right? Because you're a sheep farmer. Yes, exactly.

And I'm planning this, which is why I'm building my F-15s right now. He must have said the line, which he loves, is that the Constitution doesn't give you the right to own a cannon. I don't know. I didn't read this.

No, but he always likes to say that in gun talks. He always says, you don't have the right. When the founders created this, they didn't want you to have the right to have a cannon. I'm pretty sure they did.

I'm sure Madison would be like, actually, I would like to argue with you about that. You know what I find to be one of the big problems is we'll have some Republican politician come on and I'll say, should people have a right to keep and bear nuclear weapons? And they'll say no. And then I'll ask them, do people currently have the right to keep and bear nuclear weapons? And they'll say no. And then I'll ask them, do people currently have the right to keep and bear nuclear weapons? And they'll say no, but they do, quite literally. Private organizations are the ones that are making nuclear weapons

and large weapons for the government. They have contracts with the government to produce these things. Sure, the government regulates it, but the constitution protects the right of independent entities to have weapons of mass destruction, as it always did. And there are politicians that are like, no. And I'm like, I don't see anywhere in the Second Amendment where it says unless the weapon can do X, Y or Z, unless it literally just says you can have guns.

I'm not interested in compromising. If you want to change it, the compromise is amend the Constitution. You get a convention of states, you get Congress and the states to agree to it, we got ourselves an amendment. Can't pull it off, you don't get to just change things. Well, it's the same argument that they say, well, the Second Amendment couldn't have imagined weapons like this, right? It only imagined, it imagined everyone having a musket. And then you say, well, when the First Amendment existed, we didn't have the internet or the cell phone. So does the freedom of speech mean it's just the printing press, right? Or the newspaper? Because technologies evolve, but the rights evolve and grow with it. And so it continues.

It's true. But even the argument has a broken premise. The first rapid fire gun was from, I think, 1300 something. And it was basically you had like this barrel with a ton of small barrels in it. And they were all lined up so that you rip it one time and they go, ba-ba-ba-ba-ba-ba-ba. Everyone argues with me. I'm like, it was effectively fully automatic. And they're like, no, it is not fully automatic. It was a bunch of different muzzle loading. You get my point in the in the year 1300 someone figured out we don't need a single musket we can make one we can make you know 50 barrels in one cylinder

load the pre-load them all aim it and then pack them everything's ready to go and then you rip one and it goes and then you just aim it, you're just firing. They had that almost a thousand years ago. And so the founding fathers could not have imagined such devices. Oh, come on, dude. Certainly they didn't have cartridges at the time, but they definitely understood the power of rapid fire weapons that had been around for a long time. And it's because of what was conventional at the time and what was in mass production. But certainly they were privateers, big warships with guns they'll be contracted by the crown and by the united states government to engage in various activities and those are private individuals who owned them and they said we're not going to interfere with you and isn't that

what a militia actually is is private individuals right as opposed to yeah and it was uh back in the day there weren't police and so militia was the local men who lived in the area would grab their guns and run out to defend whatever they had to defend so they weren't they weren't trained army necessarily they were just farmers with guns yeah not regular i'm not regular police so the militia being necessary for a free state basically what they're saying is the people who are willing to defend their homes are required to actually have a free country, so they gotta have guns.

Yeah. The good news is there are so many guns in this country, we will never be invaded, you know. But certainly Joe Biden's trying to do away with that. Then the other issue, of course, is he doesn't even know what an assault weapon is. Does he define it? No.

They can't define it, because there's no definition. I love this. Who in God's name needs a magazine that can hold 200 shells? I mean, I always assume they don't define assault weapon so they can just keep it a big umbrella term. Like any weapon that you could theoretically use to, you know, assault someone is an assault weapon. So therefore, let's also ban letter openers and also ban,

I don't know, heavy bottles or whatever you can throw at people. It makes it so they don't have to be held to a standard. They can just keep adding things to the definition. They also like the phrase weapons of war, right? When you don't want to get specific, what are we banning? We're banning assault weapons and weapons of war. And again, those are very vague, all-encompassing, because there's been war that were fought with rocks and sticks. You know, I saw a viral video of a guy who caught

something like 30 feral hogs that were roaming through his property, and it's kind of wild to watch. And then he set up this fence, and they go in there, and then it catches them, and they're all freaking out and running, and it's like,

and then you go and kill them all, because they're extremely dangerous, and they will kill you. And then you get that funny meme. This is the remarkable thing about people who are in that room with Joe Biden, how ignorant they are. Someone said, what do you need a magazine

with 30 rounds for? And a guy responded, what if I'm in, I'm working on my acreage and 30 to 50 feral hogs come running through. And then they all started laughing as if it's not a real thing that happens. Yo, in Arizona, I had a friend who was in college, I think at like Arizona University or whatever, ASU.

And they, I think it's ASU, they have javelina warnings. And she was like, this is like 20 years ago. She's like, I can't leave my apartment right now. And I was like, why not? Like the javelina warning going off. Have you ever seen a javelina? No, what is it?

They're little pigs. Little pigs running around. And they're like, not even that big, but they will mess you up. So they're like, warning, don't go outside. And I'm like,

now I certainly can understand why you're like, we're not going to go outside into a residential area and start opening fire on a bunch of hogs that I get. But if you're on a farm, yeah, there's a real reason

for these things to exist. Yeah, I've been on Texas ranches before where you've seen, I've seen feral hogs that are 800, 900 pounds and they are in packs and the damage they do is absolutely incredible. And one of the few things that is strong enough to take them out from a safe distance that is precise enough is an AR. And I've shot them before because these things, if you leave them to roam wild, are going to destroy your crops. They'll eventually kill your livestock.

And it's a huge problem in a lot of farms, especially in Texas, Oklahoma area. And it's a growing problem because they breed like pigs, right? They reproduce really, really quickly. So the javelinas aren't pigs. I think they're also called peccaries. Yeah, peccary. Yeah. Is that another name for it?

That's the official name for the thing. They're not pigs? What are they? They're like pigs. I think they're also called peccaries. Yeah, peccary. Yeah, is that another name for it? That's the official name for the thing. They're not pigs? What are they? They're like pigs. Look at them. Goofy little things running around. Dude, javelina is like little javelin. Do they just go flying at you or something? Like a javelin?

I don't know, man. Oh, they're a baby. That's cute. Look at them. So these things run around, and they put out warnings because they're all over Arizona, and they're like, you got to be careful because they're dangerous. My middle school had to give us, I grew up in Connecticut. They had to give us a specific talk on what to do if a bear crosses your path.

Because like you'd have to walk to our sports field. And it was sort of a wooded area. It's all rural. And this would happen on occasion. You would get black bears who wander onto campus. And like, they don't care that it's a school. I don't think you're going to arm a bunch of middle schoolers, but you know, there are,

it's people who don't interact with people whose lifestyles are different. The same people who tell you you've got to be open to the way other people live and diversity is a strength and all this stuff are the ones saying like, well, that's a ridiculous case. That would never happen.

When it does. We've just kind of eclipsed the age of barbarism and of like, what do kind of eclipsed the age of barbarism and of like what do you mean eclipsed we've kind of no longer live in the age of barbarism now we're like warlords control we kind of are in the tail end of it like we're looking at the end of like monarchy monarchy is kind of part of barbarism we're like one guy like the british emperor is still kind of uh barbaric in a sense because he controls everything around him with force. And also the age of ruralism

is kind of, at least in the United States, we're kind of on the tail ends of this with all this urbanism. So people are trying to twist the constitution to fit the modern urban stay in your lane era but we still need our weapons. She can go crazy. Power can go out. We need to defend against the wild animals

and warlords. But I disagree on the barbarism thing. Compared to like a hundred years ago, I guess, we're tailing out of it. I disagree. I think it's never been worse. Barbarism? Well. Yeah.

Roving bands in like the Middle East and North Africa enslaving people? Yeah, that's where it's kind of like, they made the Marines to fight the barbar, what was it? The Barbary Pirates. Yeah, literally the Barbary Pirates. It used to be so dangerous to sail around. Now we've got a little bit more. Barbary Pilots kidnapped 1.5 million white Europeans and sold them into slavery through Africa. And I have yet to get a dime in restitution. Although I think at the time my family was already in America, but still. Mine wasn't. Where's my restitution although i think at the time my family was already in america but still mine wasn't yeah where's my restitution exactly exactly someone owes you something that's so true

so the the idea of like barbarians this is what the roman empire and it was uh like egyptians and like no it wasn't the word bar bar comes from greek and it's where they they said the foreigners sounded like they were going bar bar bar bar bar bar, bar, bar, bar, bar, so they called them barbars. Originally, the Germanics, when you talk about what the Romans thought were the barbarians, were the Germanic tribes. And so basically, these were people outside of the empire, and then as the empire began to decay,

they start coming in en masse. And then, of course, because we did this amazing culture war show on the Roman Empire, there was a period where one emperor was like, we're going to make everybody a citizen, we're going to give amnesty to everybody, hoping that it would bring in all this tax revenue. And it just precipitated the collapse of Rome.

So how's that working out for you, America? Take note, America. It's important to remember history. Yeah, well, they won't. They won't. But let me see if we have this. We have this one right here, this story from the Postmillennial. Biden moves to give mass amnesty to paroled illegal immigrants married to U.S. citizens.

The plan the White House has put forward would give work permits, deportation protections and other privileges to immigrants who are married to U.S. citizens and have been paroled in the U.S. OK, look, we get it. OK, they are flooding this country intentionally. Joe Biden's pretending like he's trying to stop it, but he's not. And it's because the average person is stupid. That's unfortunate. Or I should say the average person is average, but half the country is stupider than that. And so Joe Biden says, yeah, I'm trying to come out, secure the border. And then and then people are just like, well, Joe Biden's trying to secure the border and he's not. His executive order basically said we will allow one point5 million illegal immigrants to illegally enter the country.

That's what his order was. Right now, a single illegal immigrant walking across the border is a crime. Committed a crime. You get caught. You get arrested. You go home. Joe Biden's like, look at this 5 million. We're going to cut that number down to 1.5.

It's basically the trick right it's like he's he's he's gotten everyone convinced that going down to 1.5 million illegal immigrants is a good thing he allows the mass invasion at southern border that even Sharpton and other democrats have called an invasion then once it gets bad, he pushes it back only a little bit and says, see, look how good I've done. It's crazy. People fall for it. He's like, I can't secure this country's border.

In fact, I refuse to. But you should vote for me again because I'll only let a million and a half people come in. But that doesn't make any sense. And he is claiming that this is how he's going to fix this problem. He's saying he doesn't make any sense and he is claiming that this is how he's going to fix this problem he's saying he secured it he's going with my executive order we've cut that number down by 70 or 80 percent after we increased it by 500 yeah exactly it's it's it's still it's still an invasion and it's all because of i don't think it's voting everyone i think that's a common

talking point is this is so that they'll vote for him. I don't think it's for that. I think it's ultimately just about demographics for the next census. I mean, you look at 2000, 2010, 2020, what's losing electoral votes are all the blue states, right? California, New York has lost, I think six, Pennsylvania has lost, and those are blue strongholds. And what's gaining is Florida, Texas, Tennessee, all the red states. And so to change that, I mean, Chicago, Illinois is not going to be as powerful. New York isn't as powerful anymore. New York used to be second. Now I think New York is third behind Florida. California lost in the last election. So if you can bolster, because illegals do count in the census, if by 2030, California's got five more people and Illinois has six million more people and New York has three million more, well, now they get their electoral votes back and they have to take them from somewhere.

They'll take them from Wyoming. They'll take them from one from Colorado. They'll take one, et cetera, et cetera. And now the blue states are powerful again. It's crazy because they wouldn't let them ask about citizenship on the census. You're not allowed to. Yeah. Legals count towards the census, which is absurd.

It's crazy. So back to Ian's point from the previous segment about the age of barbarism, we're experiencing similar. I don't know how similar because, of course, I was not alive during the Roman Empire, but people from outside of the United States flooding in in massive numbers. And then we're getting a president who wants to grant them amnesty. And that only goes in one direction. What's fascinating is Social Security is going to be insolvent in about seven years. Or it's going to begin to destabilize in about seven.

And then in about 13, they say it will be done. Unless something dramatic happens. They always try and find some way to squeeze more blood from the turnip. The idea here, possibly, is that they're trying to bring as many people as possible to sustain the tax base required because people aren't having

kids. There's going to be a huge problem. There's not enough people in the younger generation to sustain the older generation. And the next generation may actually be smaller than the one before it. That means there's going to be more old people with more requirements and young people who can't pay the bill. You bring in 5, 10 million, 20, 30, because if they're doing 1.5 million per year, they're trying to maintain that tax base, hoping they can tax these people,

make enough money to sustain the system. You are going to end up with, very similarly to what happened in the Roman Empire, with the mass citizenship of all these non-citizens. And then your country just rips apart, rips apart, split in half and then fights each other. And you can already see this starting to happen in other Western countries. Canada just announced that they're going to, Harrison Faulkner on Twitter does a good job covering this. They announced, so the background is that Canada said our goal is to bring in 500,000 new immigrants every year through 2026, which is crazy.

That means in three years they want to bring in 1.5 million new people. This doesn't account for any illegal immigration in Canada. And one of the ways that they're opening permanent residency is by saying, well, we need people to work in our caregiver sector. Right. We need people to take care of people who are homebound or whatever. And so we will, if you can, you know, they lowered their language standard to say, you know, if you can reach this base level, decreasing it, making it easier, and you can say that you already have a job here, you can prove that in some way, you and everyone in your family can come here and become permanent residents. This is crazy to me. Rather than pouring resources back into Canadian people, rather encouraging them to join this sector that needs support, rather than encouraging them to have families, they're like, we're going to solve all of our problems by bringing in new people.

It's like saying that it just doesn't matter who lives there. It's like saying it doesn't have a unique culture. It's like saying you guys are all replaceable to us. I can't imagine what being a voter in Canada is like. Yeah. And you look at serious forms for Social Security. The last serious one was 2005. Bush had just won reelection and he figured this was a legacy project. And he

threw out a lot of these statistics, said social security is going to go insolvent, population demographics are changing, et cetera, et cetera. He was absolutely crucified. It crushed him in the 2006 midterms. They lost the Senate. They lost the House. And all he did was he wasn't trying to abolish it. All he said was young people starting this year should be able to opt out and say, I will put my money. And I once was talking to Dana Perino, who was Bush's press secretary. And she said, and I want to find an economist to do this. She said, I wonder if you could go back and if that had been implemented, take X amount of dollars and invest it in 2007 and compare that to what Social Security does now.

And just look at the difference if I were able to keep my money and invest it starting 2007. Imagine the price difference. Imagine if they invested in 2010 in Bitcoin. Yeah, in anything. And they'd fund social security forever. Shout out to El Salvador. They figured it out.

Imagine if you just treated your citizens with enough integrity to say, I will opt out of the social security system. And I recognize that when I turn 75, if I have made terrible investments and I am broke, that's on me. But they'll never allow you to opt out of the system because it opts out of big government. And Social Security is an enormous slush fund of money that

government likes to play with. What you got to understand is the way our politicians view this country. They do not view the United States as a body of people with shared moral values and a national border. They view this as their company with employees, and they don't care what their employees think. They need more employees because they don't have enough to milk the labor from. So the likes of the establishment uniparty, they're not thinking about cultural traditions, moral values, the 4th of July and Christmas morning.

They're thinking, we need 10,000 more employees to maintain this machine because I want to get my paycheck stripped you know i want to be able to insider trade and buy stuff that's how they view everything yeah 100 100 and we're watching late stage empire as as a result and it's and it's tragic yeah literally an empire it's the british empire the emperor i'm gonna call charles the emperor from now on uh he's the king of canada the king of australia the king of new zealand and the king of england he owns all those titles he's the King of Canada, the King of Australia, the King of New Zealand, and the King of England. He owns all those titles.

He's the Emperor. And the Empire looks like it's geared up. Yeah, but he's not the United States. Well, the U.S. and the Brits got into some business cahoots in 1941 when they set up the precursor to the Five Eyes Spy Club. The U.S. is deeply entrenched with the Empire. And they're using the U.S. as like a spearhead. Looks like they're letting people in to get a bunch of fighters ready for the next imperial war. And they're just going to draft these dudes and send them off and give them citizenship that they survive.

This is the Democrat establishment uniparty path versus the MAGA populist path. And we've talked about it. It seems like Hillary Clinton represents, and I mean like her ilk, the war machine. They have no regard for the American people. The United States is a vassal state of the international interests, and the American people just happen to have the benefit of the U.S. dollar backing their economy. And the idea is to put as many troops all over the place. I mean, it's really, really fascinating. The world really was set up in this liberal economic order very much like the Hunger Games, right?

And so the United States is basically like District 1 or 2. So for those that aren't familiar, the general idea is the lesser district where the main character is from, it's like coal mining Appalachia. And then the first district is military and police. I think actually it might have been the third. And then like first and second were like elite engineering and stuff. I could be wrong. But the higher brackets of the of the districts protected the Capitol. And then the people who lived in the Capitol were the global elites who got to do whatever they want. That's what the United States is. We are the military policing arm of the world.

The American people are the cannon fodder for this machine to send overseas to enforce the petrodollar and the liberal economic order. And Donald Trump wasn't supposed to win because he represents an actual country. He actually is like, I like America and the American flag and apple pie and baseball and all these other things. And he is in many ways an old, lewd and lascivious man who represents the worst of American culture as well as the best of it, or at least the only one who's actually representing it at all. The MAGA path with Trump is we like America. We're going to secure its borders. We're going to bring jobs back. We're going to get rid of these disgusting international trade agreements.

We're going to bring our troops home. We're going to focus on our nation. We're in a nation built here in this country. And Joe Biden, Obama, Clinton, they represent you are a vassal state. Shut your mouths. Your children are our cannon fodder. And we're going to go send them to yemen saudi arabia and other countries to serve we're going to send them to germany and japan and south korea and they will work as police for the world and that's all that

you have that's what that's the only reason you matter we need to live in luxury because of it better than most people if trump comes in he changes all of that or at least begins to and then so that's the liberal economic order is American military police. And most people I know are like done with it. They're like, we don't want to be world's police. All the libertarians I know are like, no, screw this. So they want to make a new world order where the Americans aren't the military police. That kind of scares me because what's that world order going to look like?

Technically, we should have the biggest bargaining chip as the United States. We should be like, it's going to look like this. But instead we floundered for 20 years, kicked sand in our own eyes. And now they're like, we're just going to make a corporatocracy that's based on technocratic values and ideals. Don't say the wrong words, but it should be that we are establishing American constitutionalism globally right now. This new world order needs it. I, in my opinion,

this country is the best thing i've never i mean i've lived in other countries but i've this this free speech thing is like just so important for innovation and it is the establishment powers of the united states trying to get rid of that because they don't like it they want u.s military running bases in foreign countries telling everyone else to shut up and do as you're told this the constitution is in the way so that if they keep the military bases but just transform them into an imperial military instead of an american military and they don't have to get rid of the bases but they've got their order you know we talked about this because obviously civil war is on the mind of a lot of people and people have have tried to dance around the issue by saying

no no peaceful national divorce which is impossible impossible because, like, Las Vegas can't exist in a state. Like, you need national trade. So we were talking about what would happen in a civil war. And one of the ideas is if the establishment uniparty basically just breaks away and becomes an international military body. The military industrial complex already basically is like, does anyone in this country actually want to send our troops to Syria or any of these places? Certainly there are some people, but the overwhelming majority of Americans, you can see it in the populist left and right. As crazy as the populist leftists may be,

the one thing we all agree on is, why are we at war in all of these places? The one thing we really agree on is, why are we funding Israel? But not just Israel. I think the populist right is more so like, we don't want to fund any of it. Ukraine, Israel, Pakistan, I don't care. India, none of it. But the military industrial complex, which does not represent the will of the people, uses the U.S., uses its men and women, its best and brightest, to basically serve this international body. So I wonder, in the event of a national divorce, do we end up with an enclave? Do we end up with some – the functions of the U.S. military basically just becomes a U army. And then the U.S. bases that are all over the world get absorbed by an international body that says, and it could and maybe ridiculously, you know, far fetched or whatever. But imagine a scenario where the U.S. come November is in

complete disarray. No one knows who the president is. There's lawsuits going on. It's November. It's a week after the election. And everyone's like, we don't know. Several states are giving press conferences where the state legislature is saying these are not our results. We did not certify these. We have the constitutional authority over the elections. And these are not the real certified results. The governor says, well, I say they are. And so everyone's like shrugging. Well, who's given the orders then? Who's given the orders to the other bases? And then you get something light where they just say, look, we've got the U.N. Secretary General, of course, who has worked with the United States, is going to, in the interim, have someone and give us a general view of like how we can stay organized. And that's the first step in. If the U.S. does dissolve into a greater conflict, then the people who are already stationed overseas just get told, don't worry, China command isn't broken. Here's your new boss.

Yeah, some U.N. or NATO commander, et cetera, et cetera, who is in charge. Because I go back to 2020 when General Milley said that he had private conversations with China to let them know that he would let them have fair warning if Trump were actually to do anything. And you say, well, wait a second. Why would you go against the commander in chief? And you realize, oh, the military is a little different than the commander in chief. So I think the military complex is so strong and so powerful that there if there was the inkling of a civil war those on the other side would be there's no other side this is this is this is movie versions of civil wars yeah yeah in in almost over before it started no in almost every civil war in the world ever it is bubbling up factions who randomly assert control for some reason. And it's an avalanche.

There's no scenario, or I should say it's extremely unlikely in any circumstance, where you get the states breaking apart and then declaring that they're joining a union. That's just, what happens with the United States in 1861 is a group of states that were basically focused around key issues and geographically connected, but also politically aligned. And so when actually there was one one small piece of in the South, I can't remember, was it Louisiana or something that stayed union? They were like resisting. Look. Yeah, something like that.

We looked it up before. We're looking up the Abraham Abraham Lincoln's election in 1860, I think 1864. A lot of people seem to think that civil war is going to be California going, we declare civil war. What's going to happen is 30 guys from Eastern California are going to just basically take over and say, we don't abide by any of this anymore. National divorce doesn't happen when Donald Trump raises an army on the East Coast to the California West Coast. Like none of that will happen. What is what is more likely to happen is Texas files a lawsuit. The Supreme Court again in November saying we have seen now numerous instances over the past two elections where they are subverting the Constitution and violating the legislative authority over elections. The Supreme Court once again says we will not intervene.

Texas then says then we've got a problem because we will not recognize this man as president after everything that's already happened over the past four years. Then you get I mean, 48 states were involved in a lawsuit suing Pennsylvania because they violated the state legislature's process of the elections. And so this was Texas v. Pennsylvania, and the Supreme Court refused to hear it. Basically, we have been in four years of limbo where as much as people don't want to don't want to admit it in the mainstream you have high level state actors i'm talking like ags governors senators who do not believe biden actually won now i know the media talks election deniers oh please every single one of these democrats that calls republican election deniers an election denier themselves so we know exactly where this is going if this time around considering what we're seeing with the southern border, the actions of the Texas National Guard versus the feds, if there is another, whatever you want to call it, shadow

campaign that results in states filing lawsuits against each other and the Supreme Court once again refuses to intervene, it's not that Texas is going to call up Arizona and say, you with us, boys, because we're going to go. What's going to happen is Texas is going to say we're deploying our National Guard to the border and we no longer regard federal the federal agents as having as having authority here. Federal agents then say, no, we're taking command from Joe Biden. But then you've got federal agents who live in Texas being told by the Texas government that's not the president.

Trump is actually the president. You take orders from him and they live there. And so it's going to be it's going to be really interesting when federal agents who are in places like Texas are being told, look, when we cooperate with law enforcement, it's Trump's federal agents, not Biden's. And then things start getting weird. So if if if civil war does happen, a national divorce, it's going to be confusing, chaotic, and no one knows exactly what's going on. You're going to have roving bands of militia. There's going to be groups that are going to be appointed. It could even come to the point where Donald Trump shows up, gets inaugurated, and then Democrats claim that

Trump never actually won and he's stolen. He broke his way into the White House. No idea. Matt Taibbi described it as a moment where two vehicles speed to the local police station in D.C. Two men jump out of each car, run to the chief of police and say, arrest that man at each other. So we don't we don't we don't know where it goes. But ultimately, my point is the the body that controls the U.S. military is not beholden to the American people in any way and hasn't been for a long time. The Congress doesn't care about what you think. It's show legislation. We know that members of Congress don't even show up to vote. They have the camera set up in such a way. We were talking about this the other day where you can see the one guy standing there going, how is it that Joe Biden is blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. In the wide shot, you can't see it. There's no for show. So in the event of an actual national divorce, my concern is that the military industrial complex machine of the United States just becomes an international machine outside of the outside of whatever the US is, or a bricks machine, which would be even more terrifying if they just changed their alignment where they're getting their their fiat from,

from the other side. I don't know. But I agree that it is kind of its own autonomous organization. What you're describing sounds like the beginning of the War of the Roses where you had two kings from two different houses who were both claiming legitimacy of the throne and then all their families and allies and intrigues because no one knew who was the king. All I knew is that I was just trying to live on my farm and the next thing you know, one shows up and says, you must pledge who was the king. All I knew is that I was just trying to live on my farm.

And the next thing you know, one shows up and says, you must pledge allegiance to this king. And if you don't, we'll kill your kids. And so you do. But then the next day, the other one shows up and says, you must pledge allegiance. And you just want to be left the hell alone. So chaos. The risk I see is election happens. And then in one of these states, maybe a swing state, they have multiple results.

And then they're like, we don't tell you. So then no one crosses 270. Biden and Trump are both short of the threshold. So it goes to a contingent election where you end up with the House. Then House delegations would then choose the president. The Senate would then choose the president. The Senate would then choose the vice president. Once that happens, Democrat media across the country is going to say Biden won and Trump's cheating. Trump's allies in these states are cheating to try and get him the victory. He's not really the president. Then the question becomes, if Biden and Trump both show up for the

inauguration, what happens? Who's the authority? Who determines? Or if it comes down to whatever the date is, is it going to be January 6th again? For the counting of the Electoral College votes, if they're like, we don't have any. These states never submitted. They're under contest in the courts. When it comes to who's the authority,

the most basic reality is whoever authored the people's minds first, who got to the media first. It's like when they, they run to the courthouse and they're like, he arrest him. That's who, who's going to, who's going to run the media story first.

And I got an idea who I think is going to do that. It's going to be whoever owns those companies, ABC, CBS, CNN, NBC, all these companies that are kind of owned by the empire or run kind of in cahoots with the empire they're probably going to make people believe that the imperial president is

the one that got elected um that's my guess and then it's good there there is still the issue of joe biden making it that far and so what another another potential scenario of who is the president is if Joe Biden fizzles out right at the last minute, like pardons Hunter and resigns. And no, I mean, like Trump wins by default because a month out, Joe Biden is just incapacitated. No one's aware of his current state. Kamala Harris is not going to step in because Joe Biden is cognizant, but incapable. So you basically have him in this limbo state where he is in the basement, not really running. Everyone knows that he's become, you know, incapacitated. Then if it's if it's a month out, Democrats are like, what do we do? Do we remove Joe Biden now? We can't remove him from the ballot, but he cannot be president. What do you do? How does how would that work? If everyone in the country knows Joe Biden is now

completely incapacitated medically and not coming back, his name's already in the ballot. There's no time to put Kamala on the ballot. And if he wins, what does that mean? This would be a constitutional crisis because it's one thing to have a president who gets elected and then you find out his brain doesn't work and you trigger the 25th Amendment. It's another thing to intentionally vote for a man who you know is already incapable. And the moment he gets elected, invoke the 25th Amendment. Well, if you saw video footage of him last night at juneteenth event at the white house americans know that he is not there i i mean just his his body language the general look of utter confusion on his face the poor they have him standing up and trying to have him dance to whatever he's the completely still and you see his hands frozen and he's floating just standing there well look at the clip you just played this slurring of of of the language i mean he he doesn't know he doesn't know what's going on there we just see a

poll that said this is the number one number one issue imagine a scenario where it is a known fact a month out october surprise joe biden suffers stroke incapacitated and the Democrats come on TV and say, vote for him anyway. This is going to be a disaster. It would be Kamala then. But what would happen if they can't just put her name on the ballot? So they would run Joe, but it would just be Kamala. Basically, it would be Biden, Harris or Biden. And the expectation is you're actually voting for Kamala Harris. But think about what would happen in red states and swing states when they're saying, no way are we going to accept having the president be incapacitated and without the possibility of recovery and you running him

so that you could appoint whoever you want after the fact. I think a lot of Democratic states wouldn't go for that either. Yeah, they would. Pure insanity. They'd say that Joe Biden is still alive. We have a 25th Amendment for a reason. He's on the ballot. Vote for him. But the point is, voting for an incapacitated Joe Biden is just so that Kamala Harris can either step down, Gavin Newsom can step in, and then they basically appoint a president. The big thing that I think is interesting from what you're saying is that basically the Democrat Party has always tried to downplay Joe Biden's health. He's he's had two previous strokes, right? One in the 80s and one, I think, in the early 2000s.

Like, it's not that he was in tip top shape when they decided this is the guy we have to run for president. But his health reports never seem to mention this. Right. He has he has a previous history of having a neurological issue or a neurological condition. I'm not a doctor. I cannot tell you what the long-term implications are there, but it's hard for me not to believe that if you've had a stroke before, there's no damage, right? And I think that speaks to the reality, which is that they don't trust the rest of the bench. They don't think there's anyone who could really satisfactorily fill the spot that Joe Biden is sort of filling right now, at least filling physically, maybe not filling in terms of leadership and personality, which strikes a sort of a doom and gloom mentality within the DNC. It doesn't seem like they believe they are able to put the next person in office, whether it's Gavin Newsom, whether it's Kamala Harris, whether it's AOC.

They don't, as a sort of of structure seem to believe in who's coming down the pipe. No, I agree with you. I think that, well, they've become such a cult of personality party and they do lionize their their their leaders and create little altars to them that Biden was the only one in 2019 who had a general favorability and who was not super polarizing. The Pete Buttigieg people are not going to vote for the Elizabeth Warren people. The Elizabeth Warren people hate the Bernie Sanders people, even

though they're the same. The Bernie Sanders people don't want to talk. Then Michael Bloomberg jumped in the race, right? So Joe Biden was like, hey, look, he was vice president. Everyone kind of likes him. We can pull the strings on him pretty easily because really he just wants to, like the queen, walk around and shake hands and wave and give a couple speeches and we'll do all the hard work. And all the guy ever wanted to do was be president. So I agree with you, but I don't think their bench is very deep. They keep pointing to Gavin. Gavin's leaving the state with a hundred billion dollar deficit and the highest unemployment rate in the nation. I mean, he was mayor of San Francisco. He

destroyed San Francisco. He's governor of California. He's destroyed California. And the guy keeps getting promoted. That's the amazing thing. He keeps getting higher office. I always wonder if Gavin Newsom, if, you know, I assume when he runs for president in 2028, you know, if he doesn't get put in before, if he could win California, because I feel like California would back him anyways. On the other hand, I don't think Californians are happy with the performance there. No, Californians are leaving. The ones who are coming in are illegals. And that's the only reason why the population of California is staying somewhat stable. But most Californians are, or not most Californians, most of the majority of people leaving California are Californians.

But wouldn't that mean the people that are leaving are the ones that don't want to be under his leadership? So the people who are still there are probably more ardent supporters of him? Probably. They're just sent there by the buses. They get on a bus and they're told, you're going to San Diego. Okay, San Diego.

Thank you for letting me know. No, it doesn't seem good. I mean, I would argue it is something that eventually the America First and MAGA contingent of Republican and conservative causes will also have to deal with eventually. They would need to say, you know, who is going to take over leadership after Trump can no longer serve in office. It's just, it seems like they are they have more options than the Democrats do. Let's jump to the story. Ladies and gentlemen, I have terrifying news. As it turns out, if Donald Trump gets elected, he's going to start rounding up liberals and putting them in camps. I had to say, but Rachel Maddow is worried Trump will send her

and other civilians to camps. Yes, I'm worried about me, but only as maddow is worried trump will send her and other civilians to camps yes i'm worried about me but only as much as i'm worried about all of us rachel say it isn't so i uh am now terrified of donald trump because he's going to round up liberals and put them in internment camps you know camping is quite lovely you know if you have a good tent and a nice location um it's they act as if this guy were not president for four years, right? I mean, he didn't go after, much to some people's dismay, he didn't go after his political enemies. He didn't shut down the networks. He didn't shut down the New York Times or the Washington Post. Rachel.

What planet do these people live on? No, Rachel Maddow knows Trump is not going to put her in an internment camp. She's just trying to scare the 70-year-olds who watch MSNBC. Her and AOC. AOC had something similar this week. She was saying,

Donald Trump's going to come after me and lock me up or whatever. Like, I think it's so ridiculous. On the other hand, they keep going back to this, this, well, now Donald Trump is seeking vengeance.

He's seeking revenge because no Democrat has ever been vindictive ever in life. But the reason they think this is because it is within their mind. Yeah. They would do it. So certainly Trump will do it. Yeah. What they're telling on themselves, they're basically saying, we want you in camps. You've already got the Democrat in New York saying MAGA, this MAGA nightmare. After it, we got to put these people in reeducation camps. Maybe we shouldn't call them camps. It's not the first time a Democrat has said Trump supporters need to go to a reeducation camps. Maxine Walters called

them domestic terrorists. What they are doing is telling on themselves and they're sending a warning to you. They believe Trump will do it because they know they would do it. And so they assume that Trump is going to be like they are they the uh aoc interview i saw and all i could think of was that meme from from breaking bad because the whole presidential election was about herself and that mean from breaking bad like it's all about me like what do you think of the what do you think of this election and aoc was like it's about me it's about what he's going to do to me it's like well maybe maybe this presidential election maybe just this one time this one little thing isn's about me. It's about what he's going to do to me. It's like, well, maybe this presidential election, maybe just this one time,

this one little thing isn't about you. Sorry, she's the main character? It's only about her? I'm thinking about the January 6th people that are in prison for nonviolent trespassing. All of this. It's all about me. Yep. It could be existential guilt.

Like the people that are in jail from January 6th that did not commit violence, that were trespassing, that are actually still in jail. That's got to be weighing on people's conscience. Well, the mainstream media, Trump had this rally in Nevada over the weekend. Nevada, I don't know how you guys say it. He had this rally and he referenced the January 6th political prisoners. He called them hostages. And the mainstream media was like, oh, he's crazy. That's so ridiculous. This is great. But there are a ton of people who were treated terribly by the justice system, who were not giving out that a Democrat or a liberal leaning person would have. You know, obviously, we know that people who rioted during the summer of 2020 were not brought up on charges the way people who were present at January 6th were.

It is kind of wild to me that this is one of these issues that some people see completely differently than people who are appearing on television or writing for mainstream media. There has yet to be an arrest for the Hamas protests outside of the White House over this weekend that defaced all the Civil War memorials. They threw bottles at cops. So yeah, it depends upon what you're protesting, whether or not you are hunted down by the FBI or let go. Those people are in camps. As far as the nonviolent offenders that were trespassing that are still being held without trial are in camps. You just called prison cells. It's a much harsher environment than camps. So like, yeah, people have been put in camps, Rachel. They're actually in the camps right now.

And apparently they weren't violent. That's why she thinks she's going there. Yeah, like wake up. That's your own guilt, man. You're doing this to these people with your complacency by not speaking up to get them out. Well, she's doing more than complacency. She's an advocate.

She's a mouthpiece in support of locking people in solitary. But look at the, what's, this campaign is all going to hinge on fear and hyperbole. I mean, the president's speech today about guns, everyone's going to die of a gun wound. Climate change, we're all going to die from climate change. He's going to put you in camps. Trump's going to, if this was a popular president with some sort of a record to show for the last three and a half years, you wouldn't have to be spinning the hyperbole or the hypothetical, extreme hypothetical of what will happen if we elect this guy. Just tell us why we should elect you, Joe. You know, Rachel, rather than tell us what will happen if Trump wins, tell us why we shouldn't elect the guy currently who holds the job.

It's easier to get reelected. Right. That was one of the reasons why everyone was one of the main reasons why everyone was surprised at the 2020 election. It is very hard to knock out an incumbent president. It's happened very few times. It's easier to get reelected. So why should you just vote for Biden? Who cares about Trump?

Why should I vote for the guy who currently has the job? And they can't. The answer is if you vote for Trump, going to go to camp, which again, camp is nice. Trump should come out and be like, I'm going to send them all to camp, space camp, to learn about NASA and spaceships. He was very pro our space program. He tried to move to Alabama. He was supportive of it. Didn't he start the space?

He did. Yes. Like that is very possible. And Alabama. He was supportive of it. Didn't he start the space? He did, yes. That is very possible. And they made fun of him for it. Anyone convicted of a crime should go to the island. I heard you talking about the island. Ian's for the island. Oh, I didn't say that. Tell me about it. No, he just doesn't want to admit it. I want to hear about this island.

We're making a fake island? It's the most humane way to deal with prisoners. That was on the island. We stopped funding all these prisons prisons and then people who engage in i'm talking about max super max prisons and maximum security people who are violent offenders instead of the death penalty instead of life in prison and you know whatever we just send you to an island we say good luck you live on the island now they they did that back in the day, and they called it Australia. That's right.

They did. And it worked out really well. Look at them. Now they've got Vegemite, you know, and good for them. And they have Christmas during the summer. It's great. I know. You see, it all worked out for everybody.

It would be a fascinating, if you could follow them and see what society they would build. Reality show. I mean, like a Truman Show meets Lost. You know, like what would happen? Truman Show meets Lost means like we create weird smoke monsters to harass them. Truman Show meets, what's

the movie with Tom Hanks? No, where he... Oh, Cast Away. Truman Show meets Cast Away. And we see what society will these convicts create. I don't like the death penalty. You know? So I say just island. You get to live.

You have the full reign of God's green earth, but just away from us. I bet you people would choose the island. Absolutely. It is much more humane. There is some researcher who is like, I will approach abc for the funding for this show because i think it is it is interesting to see what kind of structures people create when they're on there especially if the idea is like you can't be here because we have a certain moral cold and culture and you violated it so go somewhere else and either fall back in line and create this kind

of culture or make your own culture and see what happens it It's the ultimate Locke versus Hobbes debate, right, of where is man's virtue? Is it in society or does society make him, you know, an animal that's lord of the flies? It would be a really interesting thing. They've done this. And they found that extreme violent offenders who were sent to an island, all the criminal tendencies were gone because they had to survive now. They no longer had a system that gave them whatever they wanted so in modern civilization you can walk up to someone and steal the food and you're good

so these people who are criminals are just taking whatever they want but when they're in the when they're on an island with nothing there's no one to steal from save another guy who's equally as capable as he is and now a real threat there is no robbery robbery. There is no theft. Only risk. So the only thing you can do is figure out how to survive. And what do they do? Start growing food, start fishing, setting up camp, fires, get a cabin going. Build community. You got to build community in those situations. They're going to come get you at night.

And I bet you they have the swiftest justice imaginable, because there will be one bad apple. They're all bad apples. But I bet you the one person who does though mess up they is dealt with severely they've done these studies where they take uh violent offenders muggers you know carjackers and they make them watch videos of people and they'd say we're going to show you a video of a person walking down the street we want you to tell us if this is a person that you would consider robbing. The people that were chosen overwhelmingly had been victims of robberies before.

The predators, the criminals, can see the weakness in the person and know they're a good target to get whatever they want. So these people actually had been victims of violent crime, were filmed walking, and the criminals were like, yeah, I'd rob that person. And the people who are stronger and more, you know, standing upright, paying attention, that's too big of a risk. They stay away from them. You take a guy who goes to prison, like he gets charged with attempted murder for trying to like rob a store, and he like critically injures someone or kills someone in the process. So they're like, that's life in prison or the death penalty.

Instead, the island. What happens? Well, this guy life in prison or the death penalty. Instead, the island. What happens? Well, this guy is on an island with another guy who's just like him. These guys are going to be like, that's not a target. You cannot. That's chaos. So they just say, yeah, I'm not fighting that guy. I'm not going to be able to steal from that guy.

We're just not going to go about it. And then what do they do? They start fishing. There you go. The island. It's interesting. It is. Rachel Maddow, I don't know, though.

She can not go to jail because she's just a talking head on TV. I don't know why. I don't know what she thinks she did illegal. I don't know. She's just going to be persecuted. But when people on the right think they're being persecuted, that's fake. They made it up. Comey said it, too.

He was very overt. He was like, oh, if Donald Trump gets elected again, they're coming after, I don't know, I don't want to put words in his mouth, but he was like... Oh, I heard FBI agents are fleeing the country or preparing to. Wow. But they have nothing to be worried about if they've done nothing wrong, if they've committed no crimes.

Right? Well, again, what does she have to be worried about? She's committed no crime. She's a talking head on a popular, well, popular television television program i wouldn't be surprised if she has communications behind the scenes oh which could prove conspiracy well well that's a little bit different then right i wouldn't be surprised i mean uh when garland was uh uh when matt garland was testifying matt gates said can you send us the communications between you guys and these prosecutors? He's like, and he's like,

and he's like, you're implying a conspiracy. He's like, no, I'm not. I just said, can you send us communications? It's a public record. No, I, because they got them. Because they got them.

And they've been doing it and they know they're doing it. But the problem is the average American doesn't pay attention to anything. And so they only hear passive news from people who don't know what's going on. Yeah. And that's why you see all these statements laced with buzzwords, right? The term camps.

They know she knows that that's going to trigger a certain emotion for people. Or when when Trump was convicted, the Biden-Harris campaign released this statement, you know, saying, you know, he is a convicted felon, this, that, and the other. But the thing is, we need to vote because the other side is threatening political violence. I've never heard that from any Trump supporter. I don't hear anything about that. It's always coming from, I would argue, the Biden-Harris campaign that is using this term political violence, political violence over and over again to try to trigger sort of a primal fear because people don't want to go into a time of violence. Of course, that makes sense, right? But I'm not actually hearing that from, I'm only hearing it from one side and it's definitely the Democrats.

Yeah. Yeah. The political violence is always funny because the week after Trump held that huge rally in Wildwood, New Jersey with a hundred and something thousand and there were no arrests, the week after there were numerous arrests on the boardwalk of just youth incidents and and so it always does seem that whenever the right heck they found hunter biden guilty i didn't see any violence when trump was found guilty there was acts of self-immolation which is a form of a form of violence exactly you know i saw hunter a former violence. Which side is more stable here? Exactly. You know, I saw Hunter Biden was guilty, and I was like, oh, look at that, guilty. You have to tend to your sheep. Go to cellar, yeah.

So it's a little different which side tends to be the violent. The FBI ones, though, I saw that report of supposedly fleeing the country, hopefully the countries that have extradition. There are FBI agents who have done some criminal things, and I do hope they are prosecuted. More than anything are the ones who targeted families

that were going to Latin Mass. I mean, that's just, that is under my skin for three years now because it's not a crime and it's evil to say, well, I'm gonna, I'll just follow him. Follow him, see what he does, right? I mean, so yeah,

there are some FBI agents who should be worried. Let's jump to the story from The Washington Post. Oh, boy. In Trump's orbit, some amuse about mandatory military service. Only one percent of the U.S. population serves in the armed forces. Some of the former president's camp say it's time more young adults put some skin in the game. Now, I got to tell you, this is very obviously a ploy. This is politicking, and they're trying to scare young people into voting Democrat. That's the point. The funny thing about it is a vote for the Democrats is a vote for conscription to go fight in Ukraine, or perhaps to defend the Suez Canal. But they're going to, of course, smear Trump. Kira Rousseau remembers feeling trapped in her high school media center last fall when a phalanx of military personnel and faculty members shut the doors behind her and 100 classmates before gathering around everyone's phone, gathering everyone's phone. She was a senior.

You know what? I'm going to I'm going to go ahead. I want to inspect this and just delete everything because this is what the I can't. This is what I hate more than anything in the corporate press. Headline. Donald Trump signs executive order. And you're like, oh, wow, what's that? You click it?

It was a dark and stormy night. Yeah, the creative writer. Yeah, get out of here. I don't care. Tell me. Okay, here we go. The ASVAB, Armed Services Vocational Attitude Battery Standardized Test. Don't know, don't care. Trump has been complimentary of Miller's performance. Don't know, don't care. Trump has been complimentary of Miller's performance.

Don't know, don't care. In an interview, Miller said national service requirements should be strongly considered. He described the concept as a common rite of passage. It reinforces the bonds of civility, Miller said. Why wouldn't we give that a try? Under his plan, he says the ASVAB would be used to identify potential military weaknesses and help plug knowledge gaps as U.S. defense leaders size up competitors like China. If we want to prepare for a great power competition, it's helpful to have a baseline understanding of the pool of potential military service members and their specific aptitudes prior. So after wasting all of our time with this, it's not a story about Trump's orbit. It's a story about the opinions of a guy who says,

maybe we assess the American population to see who has the potential to fill any possible roles. That just sounds like recruiting. Right. And Trump came out and said, the fake news Washington Post came up with a ridiculous idea that Donald J. Trump will call for mandatory military service. This is only a continuation of the eight-year failed attempt

to damage me with the voters. The story is completely untrue. In fact, I've never even thought of that idea. Only a degenerate former newspaper, which has lost 50% of its readers, would fabricate such a tale. Just another fake story, one of many, made up by the dead Washington compost.

There's something funny about when he refers to himself as a third person. Donald J. Trump, when we were at the Libertarian Convention, at one point he just went into referring to himself as a third person. Yeah, halfway through his speech he started going third person.

I was going to say, and you know I'm thinking of those Washington Post reporters who all gathered and complained that they were being headed by another white cis man, you know, and you wonder this is the stuff that you guys are putting out that no one is reading and then you wonder why you're dying. I'll tell you this, I think

what we need in this country is in order to vote, you got to sign up for selective service. That's it. Men and women. If you don't sign up, you don't have to. You don't have to, but you don't vote. No voting unless you've signed up for selective service. After you do, you get a voter ID card that allows you to vote. It's so funny because this Washington Post article, I mean, I could be wrong.

I don't want to put words in this person's mouth, But, you know, South Korea has mandatory military service. Right. And I don't think they would be critical of it because it's a different culture and they're allowed to do things. But in America, and I'm not saying we should have mandatory military service. The idea that it would be good to have young people who want to serve the country, who spend time, you know, contributing to communities is bad. This is their thing all the time. There's no reason to support America ever, and there's no reason to potentially sacrifice your country. I find that very weird. What are they driving at? What's their end goal? This military service in South Korea is probably like you learn how to defend the homeland, but here it's get shipped off to some foreign country to get your legs blown off.

It's a horrible misuse of military in the United States in the last 20, 30, 50 years. Yeah, I think we should have compulsory service for young people and they should have to go defend the southern border because obviously no one's doing that. Maybe domestic service, compulsory domestic service. I'm kind of kidding. But the thing is, I don't think Trump did this. Obviously, The Washington Post is being ridiculous. The other part is that we do actually want young people to feel tied to their communities. We want them to want to be civically engaged. You know, it's something that is good now, whether it should be mandatory military service or

something else. I think we should foster and cultivate young people who believe the country is good and want to give back and participate in it. I have an idea. How about we get an island and then anyone who's a communist has the option to opt into the communist utopia. I say that we allocate. Well, how much do we just give Ukraine? Sixty one billion or something. Let's take that and build some basic infrastructure, some communist block style housing.

And then anyone who's a communist in this country who wants communism, we will offer them communism. And we'll say, you can go and live in your communist utopia. Well, we've got to keep that island separate from the convict island, because if you said the convicts can easily tell who's weak and they prey upon them, they will crush all of those communists.

So we have to have those islands very, very separate. Well, I would agree, but I actually think what would happen is the communists so we have to have those islands very very separate well i i i would agree but i actually think what would happen is the communists would weaponize the criminals against their political enemies to destabilize the system and seize power so but uh it's a choice you know if you want to be a communist we got an island with everything you could ever want and more and just go live there and then we remove all the communists. But we didn't get rid of them. They chose to go live in their communist utopia. I'm a fan of that. And we helped them build it.

You raise a great point that I think needs emphasis of, I don't know South Korea's military requirements, but you can assume it's the DMZ because the North is constantly threatening. I've been to Israel. That's also required military service. And it's all about Israel and terrorism, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. If we had that in America, you are 100% right. You would say the best way you can serve your country is we're going to ship you off to somewhere else. You wouldn't be doing American military. You wouldn't be protecting American border, American interests. You wouldn't be doing Coast Guard. They would say, thanks for joining. That's what they do now. Thanks for joining the military, buddy. And off you go to Mali. And you say, well, what the hell am I doing in Mali? Well, this is you are protecting America. And that's the argument that both left and right, but especially more and more on the right, the neocons can't articulate. Why is this good for

America? Because we are protecting our national, how are we protecting our national security having 5,000 people in Mali? Because when America's interests are overseen, oh, shut the hell up. They can't argue it. It's that five eyes. It's such a great point.

It's such a great point. I would love to see them in the United States making American babies, protecting American borders. That would be the ideal American soldier. Vote Trump! Well, that's one way to aim towards that direction. Trump is an avatar of that energy. He is not the savior.

He's not the perfect guy or anything. He's just the best avatar there is. After him, the question is, and we were talking about earlier, is who takes his place? But you need that energy, and that energy is, we like America. Sec you need that energy, and that energy is, we like America. Secure our borders.

Bring jobs back. Make stuff here. I believe in the country. I get the Five Eyes Spy Club. And for the record, Five Eyes Spy Club is New Zealand, Australia, Canada, United States, and England.

It's basically British Empire. And the UK. Yeah, and the UK, the British Empire. But it's particularly those five countries. There's this base called Pine Gap. It's the largest American military base outside the United States. In Australia, in the middle of the outback, it's called Pine Gap. It's this huge, it looks like a spy base.

It's probably America's largest external spy base they use to spy on their own people. So I get this kind of stuff, this Five Eyes stuff was spun up in 1941 because of the Nazis and the Japanese. We were like, oh crap, we've got to spy on the world because otherwise they're going to build up their military in secret. So I get this American military predominance, this imperial predominance, but yeah, Pine Gap's nuts, man. I just watched this long documentary about it a week ago. I'd never heard of it before, shockingly. I think a lot of it's underground. So, I mean, I guess I see the argument for American military presence over Earth, but at the same time, defend the borders and enhance the homeland by making babies. I don't want to send our guys off to the Philippines.

That is probably a miserable assignment. The Australian outback is 114 degrees and dry, and every spider and snake is trying to kill you, that is probably not a great place to be. I watched a documentary of these guys trying to get into Pine Gap. They drove their car there and it's like, dude, just doing training. You hear gunshots because perimeter guys are out there just firing weapons. Don't go near, don't go near because you might get hit. For all I know, they're shooting outward away from the base. Near Pine Gap, there's another...

Well, I think my mic peaked there. There's another base that has this giant metal rod sticking up into the sky, and any plane that gets near it just falls out of the sky. It's like an EMP denial device. It's this giant tower in Northwest Australia or somewhere near Pine Gap. It's like an extension of the American military base crazy that we're that sounds like science fiction i know it's wild dude i want to pull up this this tower i don't even think it has a name i'll see if i can find it but don't wait for me because i'm going to be looking for a minute is there any american

imperial it's not even american imperialism i'm trying to figure out who's in charge is it the emperor himself emperor Emperor Charles? Or is he just a bitch to the CIA, probably like the Praetorian Guard of the Romans? They got to the point where the Roman emperor was so dispensable that the Praetorian Guard took over. They just killed the emperor, put a new one in charge, kill him, put a new one in charge.

This is why I'm saying the military-industrial complex doesn't just cease to exist. If a civil war happens, it just buds off and becomes an independent entity. The operations that are happening in Australia won't cease to exist because the U.S. chain of command is disrupted. They're there in operation getting supplies locally. So what about all the military bases all over the world? Do they just simply cease to function? There's going to be U.S. military personnel. And if there is chaos back at home,

they're going to be like, we don't know what our orders are I asked Alex Jones this I was like what's the difference between the deep state and the shadow government because I'd heard about both terms and this was a couple years ago he was like well the deep state's the administrative state the shadow government's in case there's a break in military chain of command so like

nuclear war power goes out there is apparently a government underneath the government that's ready to rock and roll and probably would take control of all these military bases maybe govern from underground and it sets up shop not far from here potentially yeah right i mean i i see mount weather from my my farm um and and well it is far from here it's close to where i live um but that's the location of if everything hits the fan that's where the government's supposed

to reorganize it. That's Congress. If that's where they tell you then it's probably not the real place that they're going to go. No it is because it's for Congress. That Thomas Massey was like yeah good luck. There's also Raven Rock. We all joke that like if something happens,

we just have to get to Mount Weather and we'll be safe, but I don't think they'll let us in. Maybe. They'll let you in with your beautiful face. You just have to act like you're a congressman or a staffer. They're not going to be doing headcount, so you just got to walk with purpose. Nah, they're going to give you RFID cards,

and they're just going to be standing outside being like, door opens when you can open it. There, you're going to walk up and be like, oh, I lost my key card. They'll be like, sorry, good luck. But yeah, there's Mount Weather and there's Raven Rock. And isn't there another one? Close by?

Yeah, because I think there's more than one out here. And they recently were doing major renovations on Mount Weather, I think, upgrades and stuff like that. Yeah, and there's the original one at that famous West Virginia Greenbrier that famous west virginia um greenbrier greenbrier i love this one greenbrier and see the tour hotel which is you know a huge you know it's got casinos got all kinds of stuff you can like do falconry i think they're uh but they declassified the secret bunker they had there now you can take tours of it everybody who's played fallout 76

knows exactly what this is because in the game the game. It's called the White Spring Resort. So the Greenbrier is in West Virginia and... Owned by Jim Justice's family. Yeah, it's like a country club or something, right? It's got a big hotel. I know it has a casino and outdoor activities. It has a casino? I think it also has a golf course. I'm pretty sure they had... I don't know about a casino. I know they had a poker room, but the poker room shut down.

Someone told me when they were there that there was a casino, but I'm not sure if I would... I've been to the casino. You have? Oh yeah. You can testify to the fact that there was a casino, but I'm not sure if I would... I've been to the casino. You have? Really? Oh, yeah. You can testify to the fact that there is. I don't know how they got it because I don't think gambling is allowed. Oh, you're right. Casino.

Yeah. No, in West Virginia, gambling is allowed in historic hotels. There you go. And the Greenbrier is 17-something. Oh, yeah. Look at this. They do have a casino. I didn't realize.

I knew that they had a poker room because it was kind of a big deal because there's very few, and they said it was shut down. Oh, wow. Maybe I'll check out the Greenbrier. Oh, it's beautiful. You just go there? Is it invite only? Oh, no.

You can make a reservation. If you want to have a lovely weekend away with the lady, it's beautiful. There are certain places, though, you have to wear a jacket and tie. You may not appreciate that. I did that in Mar-a-Lago. It's pretty fancy, but it's beautiful. Underneath it, you're saying that this is where government...

Underneath this building, there's a big bunker that they used, they prepared so that the government could go there in case of emergency. Take a look. Bunker tours. So in... Everybody who's seen the Fallout show, you understand the general premise, there's nuclear bunkers. In Fallout 76,

there's a vault under Greenbrier. And so it's funny. In the game, it's where the enclave is. So the enclave in Fallout is the government that have government shelters. So it's a government vault. But it's real. Yeah. There you go.

Yeah, I think it was World War II, right? It was built during world war ii and it was the place in case dc is bombed or if the germans invade um get yourself to west virginia and uh it's in the middle of nowhere west virginia you look at it on a map and it should take you about an hour and a half to drive from where i live and in reality it takes about four and a half hours. West Virginia roads are, they're beautiful and wide thanks to the Senate's favorite Klansman, Robert Byrd, who had tons of money for West Virginia roads when he was the Senator. But they, boy, are they windy. And he held the seat until he died. And that's how Joe Manchin got in, which I think is funny. Like people don't realize how long Robert Byrd was in office.

Joe Biden eulogized him at his funeral. And you have to say if Trump had eulogized the known high grand knight of the Ku Klux Klan, it would be a campaign issue. But when Joe Biden does it, it's all Joe. It's Joe. It's just Joe. On the Greenbrier thing,

then do they have tunnels that go out there to bypass all those winding roads? Oh, I don't know, but you can see the tunnel right there. I wonder what the tunneling system's like. Yeah, I think the order in World War II was you just got to get yourself there. I'm sure they probably flew some people, but I think it was if you were a member of Congress or important, you had to get yourself to West Virginia. Get yourself to Mars. People don't realize how important West Virginia is. That's what I'm taking away from this.

It's beautiful. It's a beautiful area. It's a beautiful resort. Oh, we should be getting a sponsorship from Greenbrier for all this lovely attention we're giving it. I don't lie from the bunker at Greenbrier. And they expect you to show up wearing a suit jacket and nice clothes and how much does it cost to

I bet it's probably not super expensive, right? I probably not because it's I don't know. You have a cigar lounge? What are the prices on these rooms? Fancy golf course. Book today. One bedroom. What does it say? Oh, $359?

Okay, it's not crazy. I mean, it's a resort. Pretty cool. Yeah. I mean, that resort closer to D.C. would be $1,500, right? But since it's a bit of a drive. Oh, a resort. Like, they got pools and stuff.

Yeah, golfing. I think there's like a spa there. I know you can do like ATVing and stuff that like, you know, it's a historic hotel. And I'm like, but West Virginia, you know, you can do these outdoor activities. So I just think we should do, you know, IRL live from the bunker one day. We can have Jim Justice on. It'll be great. Yep.

There is no communication devices allowed in the bunker. That's what it said. And no backpacks, nothing to conceal anything. It's going to make it hard, but I'm sure they would work. I'm just kidding. I'm not trying to give our tech to you. We got to do IRL from Nome, Alaska. Oh, yeah? Yeah. Have you been there? Nope.

It's where the Iditarod ends. And all of the racers show up covered in icicles all over their faces and their dogs are frozen stiff. I would love to do an IRL with the Huskies from the Iditarod. That would be fantastic. And they are dirty.

Is that the Northwest Alaska? Because that could be in solidarity with the Russians and the Americans, bringing it all back together. It is remote, that's for sure. It'll be a little tricky to get there, but we can make it happen. Just regarding that. You fly there. And regarding that.

Well, it's a lot of flights. DC to Seattle to Anchorage to Nome, probably. Actually, you can probably it happen. You fly there. It's a lot of flights. DC to Seattle, to Anchorage, to Nome probably. Actually, you could probably go from Seattle to Nome, I'd imagine. No. It's not Nome, like G-N-O-M-E? Almost guaranteed. They're probably just like two flights, one flight a day from

Anchorage. Maybe one from Juneau. Does your work take you to Alaska very often? A lot, yeah. Have you been to Nome? I have. What was it like? I have. It's cold and remote. But it's beautiful. All Alaska is beautiful.

If you are from there and your livelihood is there, which is what my organization tries to protect of their jobs, it's wonderful. I couldn't see myself living in Nome. It's very, very, very remote. It's wonderful. I couldn't see myself living in Nome. It's very, very, very remote. That's with Power of the Future? Power of the Future, well, we fight for energy jobs, right?

Under the understanding that these are geographical jobs, they're historic jobs, they're legacy jobs, they're vital to our national security and all that. But outside of that and outside of even our national economy, these are coal jobs in West Virginia or oil and gas jobs outside of Nome. And for the men and women who live there, this is their livelihood. And they get to live in their own community and live with their family and live with grandma down the block. But when we take away their jobs under climate change, we send them all to Anchorage. And that's what we're doing.

We're sending everyone to cities. We're killing rural jobs. We're killing ag jobs. We're killing oil, gas, coal jobs. We're saying learn to code. And we're pushing everyone. We're concentrating them in the cities. And therefore ruining rural culture.

Ruining rural culture. Cities can't handle it. The electric grid can't handle it. There aren't enough jobs unless you get an OnlyFans page or drive for Uber, which is what we tell our young people. We call it the gig economy. But I just want to stay in West Virginia and be a coal miner. Nope.

We're going to have nine-year-old girls in Indonesia. They'll mine coal. But you learn to code. And that's what we're doing. And it's crushing our economy. It's hurting our national security. But more than anything else, it's crushing rural America. And that's why I started the organization.

We can keep turning the coal and oil into graphene. So we can keep pumping that stuff out of the ground. These guys have got to recognize it's not just about fuel, that you can turn it into graphene and make computer processors with it. It's more valuable than it was before. And then we can start fueling with hydrogen, like take the load off the carbon industry. But man, we've got to start. We've got to go.

I understand how dirty it is for a coal miner to be down there breathing and how dangerous it is for a coal miner to be breathing it and underground and taking the risk. But like, you know. It's definitely risky. Every job has a certain amount of risk, but this is what they want to do. It's risky to be a farmer, right? A lot of jobs have inherent risk. Risky to what they want to do. It's risky to be a farmer, right? A lot of jobs have inherent risk, risky to be a copper fireman, but a lot of times they do it because this is what my

parents did before me, or this is what I've always wanted to do. But they are essential. You know, I argue all the time that you got Secretary Deb Haaland, who's Secretary of Interior, who's pushing all these anti-coal resolutions and legislation and regulations, excuse me, EPA administrator as well. No coal, no coal. And you got Pete Buttigieg, who's saying we're going to build roads and bridges,

but you can't make cement or steel without coal. And I said, do you guys ever talk? Right? Like one of you is pushing an economy that needs a boatload of coal and the other one is trying to make coal illegal. How are we going to function as a society if we don't have cement and steel? Now, I know it's a different type of coal than what you use to burn to make electricity,

but we're just killing coal writ large. So we're going to start importing it. What's the difference of coal? There are four main types of coal and they burn at different levels of heat. So there's meteorological coal, it's hard to say, which is what you use to make a lot of steel, right? There's coal that you use when you make cement. And then there's, I think it's bituminous coal, which is the most common, which is what you burn to make electricity, right? There's lots of different types of coal that are used at different heat points for making different products. But I don't think the administration is differentiating. I think they're just saying writ large, get rid of coal. And we can't. We can't function as a society.

Almost everything in this room has been touched by coal at some stage of its product development. My impression is that the environmentalist movement made coal a bad word yes so there's no differentiating there's no nuance it's everything coal is bad even when it actually does good things for our economy and for people 100 it's because they don't actually care about climate change they're communists yes because if they'd actually cared they'd be promoting nuclear energy yeah yeah which is actually thorium reactors yeah thorium salts yeah they make breeder reactors where it can make more of itself and then they don't melt down they just shut off because they're liquid it's it's the same

i don't know enough about it's the same as so many issues of legislators who are just disconnected with the policies that they make they don't know what they're talking about they don't understand we've talked about this with guns. We've talked about this on a lot of different issues just in this conversation alone. And yet they have the power to make these decisions and they have the haughtiness to think that because they are in Congress,

they should make these decisions, but they don't have the slightest damn clue what they're doing. And they also don't care that they don't know what they're talking about because I'm the elected official and therefore I have some preternatural gift towards authority. And you just have to listen to me because I'm in charge.

This system began to unravel, I think, the only silver lining from COVID was during COVID. I think up until then, government said do this and just shut up and do it. And you were like, well, you know what? Like they did say, and people went along with it. But COVID, I think, was the first time as a country writ large, maybe the Vietnam War, but COVID was the first time as a country writ large that the evidence said, this is stupid, but why do I still have to do it? Yes, you have to do it.

And if you don't, you're going to get arrested, right? Whether it was wearing your mask, whether it was getting a vaccine mandates, whether it was standing in a little white circle, right? Whether it was the trumpeter who had the mask on, but he's still playing the trumpet with the, that was the first time people said, wow, our government isn't just stupid, but they could also be evil. Yeah, that was Vietnam for sure. People were burning their draft cards. I was fortunate to be raised by a veteran of was Vietnam for sure. People were burning their draft cards. I was fortunate to be raised by a veteran of the Vietnam War. He was served in the Navy and didn't see action,

but he was like, God, he just knew the evil vileness that a government could become. He still never saw a reason. Like, why are we there? I don't know. We're going to go to Super Chat. So if you haven't already, would you kindly smash that like button and subscribe to this channel, share the show with your friends head over to timcast.com click join us because the show is only possible thanks to viewers like you who become members hang out in the discord

server and you can join in calling into the show and talking to us and our guests being a part of the show if you are a member in the discord server and so uh every monday through thursday at 10 p.m we have the uncensored members Members Call-In Show. And we would like you all to call in and talk to us. And you get the added benefit of being a member and supporting our work.

One like equals one Let's Go Brandon. Smash that like button. Let's read your super chats. We got Kyle who says, I hope the X phone comes out. Down with Apple and Google. So there's a meme going around

of a Tesla phone or an X phone. I would buy it instantly. If Elon Musk announced that he was creating an X phone that was integrated with your X account and it had X pay, he's got to do it. He's got to do it. Because that would be epic. And I have Starlink. So in terms of technology, Starlink is brilliant. And it's flawless.

I've yet to have a problem with it. It likely would not have strong data via Starlink, but could probably do satellite calls. So that means anywhere, basically everywhere on the planet, you've got a working cell phone for phone calls. I love it. Amazing. He could get it preloaded with neural net. So if you're tied in, you'll be able to control your phone with your thoughts. None of that.

But Elon, make the regular phone and then shut up and take my money. Yeah. Well, his comments today about how he would ban Apple products at his companies if they go forward with their AI integration makes me wonder if he is thinking about it. Particularly chat GPT.

The Apple said they were going to, or they're considering putting chat GPT on board all their... Yep. I wonder if you would see a mass exodus from Apple if people do that. Has Elon ever built a product before though? Does he have a history of building anything? I'm joking.

I'm joking. I think Elon's the kindiest guy, right? That's all he is. Yeah. Like Steve Jobs. He's a flamethrower salesman. That's true. Actually, I don't know if he ever sold any. Like Steve Jobs. He's a flamethrower salesman. That's true. Actually, I don't know if he ever sold any. And we have burnt hair cologne.

We got to go grab that. His boring company thrills me. Blaze Kaiser says, FYI, Tim and crew, DEI killed the Chips Act. Companies would rather open factories in Poland and Israel. Crowder did a segment on it. What? This is the first I've heard of the Chips Act getting destroyed. What happened?

Crowder did a segment on it. What? Thank you the first I've heard of the Chips Act getting destroyed. What happened? Crowded in a segment. What? Thank you. All right. Big 7588 says, if tax dollars are putting political message on city streets, can we get free Tibet in Los Angeles? Sure. I don't know. It is interesting that there's no intersection that says free Tibet and that you can't drive over um there could be a number of things that we could we could paint on on public streets and and make political issues funded by the government alas alack max reddick says tim i know you don't do the booking but you got to get

destiny back on he clearly doesn't agree with you the kind of conversations I'm not really interested in having that being said um i think we're david packman is interested in coming on the culture war show but just the two of us and dude lives in wally world i mean i don't know i don't know what's going on over there because i've known the guy for a long time and i don't know how you can come to any other conclusions when you read the news. Like, it is a fact nuclear energy does not produce carbon emissions. It is a fact that has a high energy return on invested. It's a fact that very few, if any, people have actually died from nuclear disasters. So what is the purpose for banning nuclear energy? You may get someone who says, no, I agree with him.

I think destiny would would probably be more modern. A lot of those things. But you get so many of these pundits who will just run the line whatever whatever the narrative of the machine is they'll just say it with or without facts well think about three mile island yeah that's the response that's the response always well think about three and then people say yeah three mile island and then you ask them what what happened with your mile Island? Exactly. Nothing. Yeah. Completely contained, and there was no leak, no spillage, no nothing, no incident. No fallout.

No fallout, no injury. No death, nothing. Nothing. Yeah, nothing. It was the technical meltdown, but no injury, no fallout. Yeah, it was Three Mile Island. It was Fukushima that terrifies people. Yeah.

Having a water-based nuclear island, or nuclear island, nuclear factory that melts down uranium and corium into the oceans, bad news. We don't want to do that again. Yes. But also if you have a 9.8 Richter scale tsunami, you got bigger fish to fry. And that's what I should have told Angela Merkel

when she banned nuclear energy as a response to Fukushima. You want to say, lady, if Germany's going to get hit by a tsunami, trust me, your nuclear reactors are not going to be your biggest problem. Maybe like ban coastal nuclear power plants to start or like you got to be 80 miles inland or something before you can or a certain level above sea level. But Japan's always going to have some sort of seismic activity. Always. What if they move it? They could just pick it up and move it, right? I'm joking, obviously.

Move it up into the sky. We got to get these floating islands built. You just vacuum, like a boat floats on the ocean because you vacuum out the hull, it's lighter than the water. You do the same thing in the sky with a vacuum like a balloon and it just floats, but you make a very structurally sound, big boat-looking

thing. It just floats and people live on it. No. There's lots of ways to build that. I'm going to say floats, but you make a very structurally sound, big boat-looking thing that just floats, and people live on it. No. There's lots of ways to build that. I'm going to say here. That's where we put our nuclear reactors. In the sky above us? Okay, so first, let's do some very rudimentary brain math. To have

people live on top of a structurally sound vacuum, which does not have the density to displace air around it the platform would have to be massive compared to the structures on top of it we're talking like you're i can't even i can't even begin to fathom how massive a a vacuum would have to be to have a single house on it. It's like a boat. Most of the boat's under the water just to carry that basic stuff on top of the deck. So we could build those

massive, like the city of Vane and the lunar that's still there. So much coal. A lot of coal to make all that steel. I mean... I'm sure anyone who's watching could actually do the displacement formula for the material required

to act. Okay, so first, you need a structurally sound material that can hold a massive vacuum and carry things on top of it unless they hung from it. That might be easier to do than being on top of it. That's interesting. Yeah, hanging from the floating vacuum would be easier than sitting on top of it. And then someone's gonna have to calculate what kind of material. I think aerogel. And then it would be like a graphene aerogel or a hydrogel. It would be ripped apart in two seconds, dude. Well, the graphene hydrogel is machinable. Like, you can hit it with a hammer and make it flat. And it's super lightweight, hydrogel, this stuff. So there are metamaterials that potentially could do it. And then you'd have lots of little vacuums inside crumple the vacuum would if you had one big one but if you have lots of little spheres inside they were each vacuumed out if like 70 of them got damaged

the other 30 would remain functional so you could take like hall breaches and stuff and the rest of the boat will stay let's do the math who wants to do the math and create the displacement formula for for uh Earth's atmosphere? Especially at the higher altitudes, too. You're going to need massive, massive. Yeah, low altitude flying cities. I mean, they did do, you guys ever hear of Project Loon? Google was launching balloons in the air that carried internet so that they would effectively be.

Oh, yeah. They're not in orbit. They're in the atmosphere, but at the very top, just floating in these big balloons. And then they wanted to deliver internet and cell phone to remote areas. I don't know what ever happened with this. They scrapped it for some reason, didn't they? Yeah. Sorry. Sorry, I have a stupid question about the boat thing.

If it's above the Earth, the sky boat, doesn't it cast a massive shadow? Wouldn't that disrupt the environment? Unless you make it out of glass or graphene glass, you could make it translucent. This thing would be so insanely massive. What type of government structure does it have? Is that a president of the boat?

Is there a captain of the boat? So it's prisoners and nuclear fuel on the boat floating above us. And what you do is you have a chamber that when you go in, you can put someone in it, and then when you open the other side, they're in the vacuum and just go in, and then they die. Technically, I think you could.

That would be a terrible, terrible thing to build. That'd be brutal. But if it's long instead of wide, maybe you could get the buoyancy without having to make it. I don't know. But we're going to build them. Flying cities. Didn't the Mythbusters make a lead balloon? I don't know. Yeah, I think they did. Did they? Yeah, they're going to build them flying cities. Didn't the Mythbusters make a lead balloon? I don't know.

Yeah, I think they did. Did they? Yeah, they're trying to figure out the calculation for lead foil and then how big the, like, the question is, with the amount of lead foil you need to contain enough gas to lift it, is there actually a happy medium where you can actually get buoyancy with lead? Or is it always that the lead is going to be too dense for however much gas is in it, it will always fall? No matter how big

you make it to get enough gas, it's never... Right, that's why I think, you know, Ian's sky vacuum would only work with a future metamaterial that is ultra-light but super sturdy. Yeah, yeah, aerogel. Graphene of some sort. Graphene aerogel is ultra light but super sturdy. Yeah, yeah. Aero gel. Graphene of some sort. Graphene aero gel is pretty fascinating.

Super lightweight. Did they make the lead balloon? Did it work? I know that they made the episodes, but no one's given me any spoilers on this. I find this deeply unsatisfying. There was also a great band, but that was a different-

Lead Balloon. Lead Zeppelin. Oh, that was, yeah. Big fan. All right, let's go. Jacob Hawley says, i'm at the point where i just don't care the constitution is violated on the daily his fifth was violated oh that's too bad his dad and hunter don't support my rights so i don't support theirs good jail time

also love you ian missed you buddy i love you man uh i i agree i believe constitutional rights are for those who defend and believe in the Constitution. And if you aren't actively adversarial to it, then why would we grant you those protections? If Hunter Biden came out and argued the Fifth Amendment, Second Amendment, I say we defend him. That's it. He's Hunter. I don't know.

He's not Joe. I also want to win. And I think it puts Democrats in a real weird position if we all jump behind Hunter Biden to get the Supreme Court to overturn his conviction and do away with Form 4473. Imagine if Hunter Biden's the guy who ended federal background checks. I have this. I watched the TV show Gilmore Girls all the time growing up. And one of the characters has this enemy who suddenly is supporting him and he goes, get off my side. I feel like that's what the Democrats would say to us.

They would be like, no, don't make this a two way thing. He's he's part of our group. You guys can't have him. It would be very weird to see what the narrative around this would be. KW says it's not self-incrimination because Hunter could not be charged with drug possession based on the form. The crime he's guilty of is lying and the resulting illegal ownership, not drug possession. No, I reject that.

The idea that the government can say you lied to me. So now you don't get Second Amendment rights. I don't don't like that. Don't like that one bit. So, you know, maybe you are right, but there's something something wrong with that. Government should be able to be like, you can't lie to me if you want to buy a gun. It's like, my buying a gun has nothing to do with you. If I want to buy orange juice, I don't need permission from the government. And I don't even have a right to

orange juice. There's no constitutional amendment saying the right to drink orange juice shall not be infringed. Second Amendment says, shut up, none of your business, I do what I want. Take that, government. All right, what have we here? Dose Woods had had a client who got a medical Mary Jane card and was rejected when he went to purchase a handgun. Came back instantly as not permitted to buy it. I've heard these stories. That's what I was saying.

The moment you get one of those cards, they put you in the database. You got a card, and they're going to say, nope, no guns, never have a gun. I saw that the head of the DEA was working with, I think, Matt Gates to take marijuana off of schedule one. Yeah, they want to reclassify to schedule three. And, you know, for all kinds of reasons, it just hasn't happened yet. I don't know. The thing is, sometimes they make these changes and then they don't apply retroactively. So I don't know that that would be grounds for someone in that position to argue, well, I was denied before or anyone who's been convicted of having something under Schedule

1. Like, it's not totally clear what legal avenues are opened up by this, but it's definitely worth pursuing. Noor Alai says, I am very angry about what they're doing to President Trump. But at the end of the day, the 4473 is unconstitutional and shame on Hunter's lawyers if they don't appeal his conviction to the Supreme Court. Should Creepy Joe win, re-election shall not be infringed.

Here's a question for you guys. Should Joe Biden pardon Hunter? No. Why not? Well, actually, because I think it would look really, really bad for him if he did that. I didn't ask if it would look good. I asked, should he do it? Should he do it?

That's why I'm saying he's got to take that into account before he makes the decision. Should a father pardon their son? If the son did nothing wrong and the father has the legal authority to do it, then yeah. Let's say a 17-year-old kid was driving his car, and he's going to the mall, and as he's pulling out, he rear-ends another vehicle, panics, and drives off. Goes home.

Of course, everybody saw the vehicle. And the cops show up at the house. The kid's panicking, tells the dad, I hit a car, I don't know what to do, I came home. Hit and run, serious crime. Should the dad take the blame for the kid cops show up and say sir is that your vehicle outside we got a report of a hit and run this vehicle struck a vehicle in a parking lot should they had to go it was my son take him lock him up uh yeah you should what do you guys think um that's a great question um no you shouldn't take the blame you think you should be like i mean if we're talking about a

17 year old i think it's a challenge right because you're yeah if you're about to be an adult if we want to raise people who have good values part of that is you know facing the consequences of your actions and it's hard to say because obviously, like, do we trust the police? Do we trust the government? All the stuff. But hypothetically, especially you're about to be a legal adult child should be responsible for the things that they do. What I find interesting about Hunter's case is the story the Democrats are always leaning towards all the talking points are, you know, addiction is really serious. Addiction is something that's very difficult for the family and the person involved to see the person through. And, you know, Hunter is changed and reformed. He's not like that anymore.

And so I don't know. You know, part of it is also that Biden said he wouldn't pardon him, but he didn't say he wouldn't commute his sentence, which would leave the criminal record intact. So I think that there is a it is likely that Biden intervenes. But I do think that this this case and the way that Hunter has been treated by the government and the media is different than just a teenager who gets a car. I think most parents would probably take the blame for their kids, depending on the severity of it. And so that's why the hypothetical hypothetical I chose is he accidentally rear ended a car that was parked and then panicked and drove home. It's not like he's a malicious dude who's murdering people or anything.

Now, if the kid was going around like strangling cats and like killed somebody, the parents should be like, he's nuts, please. But a kid who's facing like serious charges, I mean, I guess the issue is the parent might be like, look, you're 17. You're going to get a slap on the wrist, but it's's your fault i think a lot of parents would be like i'll take the blame for you i've seen a couple videos of of people who are former you know serious drug addicts heroin whatever else who who i watched one interview with a girl who was like oh my dad ultimately let me get arrested like after years of trying to intervene i would just relapse i would go back to what i was doing he covered for for me, paid for legal fees. And then ultimately he, you know, said, I, I, I, whatever I'm doing is not helping you. You're continuing down this path. You have to face the consequences of what's going on. And that

ultimately is what changed her life. I don't know if that's true for everybody. Again, criminal justice is a very complicated system in America, but I think especially in Hunter Biden's case, if we're going to go with the, he is an addict who was in the throes of addiction during this time. I think it sends a weird signal to be like, but luckily his dad's the president, so he doesn't have to face the consequences where millions of Americans do. I think he will commute a sentence. He's not going to get sentenced. But if he were, I think he would commute it because he gets in the talking point of, I'm trying to create a culture of family values and they've gone after my son because he's me.

He will try to spin it as a campaign issue. Like this is just the evil Republicans coming after me and addiction and fatherly love and they'll try to give it a positive spin. And from what I know, he's probably going to get sentenced if he gets sentenced in October, which would be interesting because what would that do to people right before the election? How would they view the family then?

Patriot American says, Tim, I take amphetamine salts in the form of Adderall to help me focus. I plan on quitting. Does that disqualify me from purchasing a gun or a parts kit? I believe if you are prescribed the medication and you are not wielding a weapon while under the influence of said drug, then you are fine to own the weapon. I'm pretty sure, however, they may try and claim whatever mental issue you're having is grounds to bar you from getting a gun if you're diagnosed or something. Oh, no, we can't do it. But in my world, if I were Supreme Chancellor, I'd say, I don't care if you have crack, pot, meth, MDMA, whatever. If you are not, if you have a gun in your possession, actively on your person, and you're doing drugs, we are going to remove

that gun from you, sir. That is very stupid. And we don't trust you because we don't want to be around you. You are, you are doing very serious drugs. If you are doing drugs and you don't have the gun on you and the gun's at home, locked or whatever okay just don't drink and drive you can drink you can drive just not at the same time right you see what i'm saying simple enough yeah i think it's fair but in in in in terms of federal law i think you're probably fine because it says unlawful illicit it's specific about illicit drugs right and prescribed medications but if you are operating wielding a weapon under the influence of a drug, then you're in trouble. Of caffeine? That's funny too, right? Slippery slope.

Everyone's on drugs. Caffeine is a psychoactive stimulant, no question. It's the biggest psyop on earth. Yep, yep. They wanted to increase productivity. Everybody drink your caffeine. Loading it up and everything. Remember when those people were dying from the lemonade or whatever? Is that what happened? They upholed it, ultimately. Did they die from it?

Yeah, there were a couple. I mean, at least the two that I remember reading, they had other heart conditions, but the argument was that they were unaware of how much caffeine was in it. Yeah, it was like an insane amount. Yeah. But it wasn't just like a random person who drank it. I went like five weeks without it. Just drinking it on like one day a week. It was life-changing.

I think it's good to cut caffeine periodically. Oh my God. Intentionally go through a period without it um because you become really tolerant to it so you can just drink tons of it the first like eight days are gruesome and then it eases up after that the dude abides 95 says sorry to break it to you tim we can't have nukes it's scoda's precedent an arm can be banned if it's dangerous and unusual and if it isn't in common use but i like the way you think wrong private entities do have nukes. They're just regulated and restricted. That's a fact.

But the point is how the U.S. government views a corporation, individuals, they're the same thing. They're just legal entities in various tax form. Private entities are allowed to have nuclear weapons. I see what you're saying. They can borrow these weapons. They can't. They can claim they can. And if they are, then they're basically taking a dump on the Constitution. But so long as these massive multinational war machine companies are producing

and holding nuclear weapons, then yes, the fact is private entities can own these weapons outside of people have control over them. And that's the thing, too. It's like if the argument is, yes, but they're companies. Sure. Form your sure form your own company felt the form and then your company has the weapons i know a bunch of dudes who have like we're like level four ffl or whatever it's called and they've got all the bells and whistles and all the guns because their companies are legally allowed to have them because they're manufacturers and distributors and things like that. So, I do understand there's nuance to it. Let's go. Kyle Ellis says, I never thought

I'd be so glad to see Ian. Still, overall, I rate Ian rolling a 4.2 out of 20. Overall? Okay. I'll take it. I'm just getting back into the swing of things. Love you too, man. Joshua Peak says, it's going to be like Rick and Morty

when the dollar goes to zero and the military guy is like, who is paying me to yell at this guy? Yeah, that was funny. The dollar is now worth zero. So who's paying me? Then they all just go rogue. Charlie says,

I live in Arizona and like to go camping at least 20 times a year up north. With the illegals coming in, I don't fear bears anymore. I fear the groups of six-plus Mexicans chasing me off from dispersed camping. I had this experience on the flight from Miami, and it was this little kid, didn't speak any English,

and then his grandmother didn't speak any English. And she looked at me and was like, ¿Hablas Español? And I was like, no. And I was just like, part of me was like i want to see your id like part of my mind i'm like show me your id you don't speak english and you're flying in the united states show me your id like what i was just like this weird thought about like is she legally here like i don't want to think these things but this is like on my mind now when i travel and

there's people don't speak english i'm like where are you from why are you here what are you doing here if you can't speak the language? All right, we got one more. Cindy Drelick says, Ian is back. I'm buying his graphene dream. I love cats, but I love Ian more. Alex's charity is awesome, but Ian is back. Make America graphene again.

Don't leave us again, Ian. Cool shirt, too, by the way. Oh, thanks. Yeah, you going to give the proceeds of your coffee to a charity? No, I already promised that he would invest them into a graphene company. Oh, perhaps it'll be universal matter. I have a call with the CEO lined up. Are they publicly traded? Negative.

Ah, then you can't. No, but let's fund that thing to the moon, literally. Yeah. All proceeds will be used to enrich Ian and his graphene expenditures. I love that. I love that. All right. We'll make a space elevator.

What we're doing is, and there's been no hard launch. We just have to bring Alex in. If you go to Casper.com and you buy Alex Stein's Primetime Grind, if you use the promo code VoteAlex, you'll get an additional bag at half off. Only if you have Alex Stein's Primetime Grind as your main purchase, you get one more bag at half off. The same is true for Ian's Graphene Dream with VoteIan. You'll get any other bag, any other bag, even Alex Stein's Primetime Grind as your main purchase. You get one more bag at half off. The same is true for Ian's Graphene Dream with Vote Ian. You'll get any other bag, any other bag, even Alex Stein's

Primetime Grind at half off. And then we're going to put them against each other and see who can sell them. Is it active now? Yeah. Oh, Vote Ian. Get that Graphene Dream. Vote Ian. I hear really good things about it. I haven't tried it. I haven't tasted it yet. I'm just back in town. I've got to get a bag. Is there one around here I can grab before I leave?

Alright. I just drink Appalachian Nights is my thing. Yeah. All right, everybody. Smash that like button. One like equals one Let's Go Brandon. Head over to TimCast.com. Click Join Us. We're going to that members-only uncensored call-in show where you as guests get to call

and join the show and talk to us. It's going to be a lot of fun. You can follow me at TimCast on X and Instagram. And, of course, share the show with your friends. Daniel, do you want to shout anything out? Yeah, thanks for having me on. Thanks for letting me talk about coal for a little bit. Got to get in some fossil fuel conversation.

Daniel Turner, Power of the Future. Daniel Turner, PTF on all platforms, powerofthefuture.com. And if you like sheep and you want to see some of the most beautiful sheep in all of America, Bristol Farm Virginia on Instagram is your favorite Virginia preeminent sheep farmers. Bristol Farm Virginia on Instagram for some great farm content. Do you sell that wool? Do you just like ship it out? We give the wool actually away for free because we have so much of it.

I just hate to see it go to waste. Wow. So we give the wool away for free. I love everything carbon, man. I appreciate that you're on the front lines actually moving this carbon around or getting it to be moved around where it needs to go. Thank you. Good to see you, brother. Likewise.

And I did a cleanse. I'm not going to talk about it here now too much. I did a seven-day intestinal and liver flush. My God, the stuff that came out of me was beyond reprehense. I texted Tim immediately. I was like, I sent you a text. I was like, the stuff that came out of me is beyond recognition. I do not recall.

Oh, yeah. Or do I want to? You shut it off in your mind. I was like, it's too gruesome. I took pictures. Oh, good. If you want to see that, only if I've got your permission. Otherwise, I feel like it's forcible and it's a violation.

I don't want to see it. I didn't even want to know what happened. It is life changing. We're going to go to the members only show now. Yeah, maybe I'll tell you about it behind a paywall sometime. See you later, Hannah Clare. What an exit, Ian. Dude, it was awesome.

Yeah, it's been so fun having you. I really like that you rushed through promoting your organization to mostly focus on your sheep farm. I really appreciate that. I'm Hannah Clare Bremla. I'm a writer for scnr.com. That's Scanner News. Follow all of their work at TimCastNews, Twitter, Instagram. I'm HannahClare.b on Instagram. I'm HannahClarebire Bremelot. I'm a writer for SCNR.com. That's Scanner News. Follow all of their work at TimCastNews, Twitter, Instagram.

I'm HannahClaire.B on Instagram. I'm HannahClaireB on Twitter. Bye, Serge. See you later. Serge, your hair looks great, by the way. Thanks, man. I noticed it on last night's show, too. We will see you all over at TimCast.com in about a minute.

Thanks for hanging out. you