Timcast IRL - Timcast IRL #1078 Secret Service Warns Of ANOTHER TRUMP ASSASSINATION Attempt Coming w/Charlie Spiering

Episode Date: July 31, 2024

Tim, Hannah Claire, & Shane Cashman are joined by Charlie Spiering & Viva Frei to discuss Secret Service warning another Trump assassination attempt could occur, the FBI saying a social media account with anti-Semitic posts could belong to the Trump shooter, a DNC official admitting that Kamala Harris is weirdly unpopular, and a man coined the American "Nostradamus" predicting Kamala Harris will win the 2024 election. Hosts:  Tim @Timcast (everywhere)  Hannah Claire @hannahclaireb (everywhere) Shane @ShaneCashman (everywhere) Guests: Charlie Spiering @charliespiering (X) Viva Frei @TheVivaFrei (X) Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

An email from a Secret Service counter sniper warns of another possible attack on assassination attempt on Trump's life, saying that the Secret Service should expect this before November, possibly within the next 30 days. Now, the email wasn't necessarily the counter sniper saying we have intelligence. This will happen. It's him saying we have failed miserably. We take our jobs very seriously and we cannot wait because we will likely see another attack before November. This is it's crazy. Apparently, the agency deleted the email right away. They're not happy.

Stuff's being said. There was a hearing today. Hawley and many members of Congress, they were slamming the Secret Service over their failures. And this seems like these hearings, I got to be honest, a big, fat waste of time. We're not getting clear answers. We don't know exactly what's going on. And this email is pretty damning. So we'll talk about that.

Plus, the news surrounding Venezuela is getting crazy. And there are questions as to whether an election like Venezuela is happening here in November. Could we see similar things? I'm not so sure, but it is interesting. We've got undercover video from James O'Keefe of someone from the DNC saying, yeah, Kamala can't win. At the same time, the keys prediction, they call it. This guy is leaning towards Kamala Harris winning. And he's gotten since 1984, every presidential election correct, except for Al Gore and Bush, which is contested and strange. But I don't know if I trust this guy. So we'll talk about this. We've got a bunch of other stories.

Maybe we'll get into the whole weird thing with J.D. Vance once again. Before we get started, my friends, head over to castbrew.com to buy coffee. Why? Because it's the best dang coffee you will ever have. And I'm allowed to say that because that's an opinion. Right, Viva? Yes. All right.

My lawyer clears it. I'm kidding. He's not really my lawyer. But buy Appalachian Nights. It's everybody's favorite. Rides with Roberto Jr., of course. And we've got Alex Stein's Primetime Grind and Ian's Graphene Dream. When you buy Casper, you are supporting the show, and you're also getting a delicious cup of coffee.

So I strongly recommend it. Also, head over to TimCast.com. Click Join Us. Become a member because the members-only uncensored show will likely be very fun and very funny tonight. And if you want to join in, you've got to go to TimCast.com. Click Join Us. But also, don't forget, smash that like button. Subscribe to this channel.

Share the show with all of your friends and family. Joining us tonight to talk about this and so much more, we've got Charlie Spearing. Charlie Spearing, senior political reporter at the Daily Mail and author of the book Amateur Hour. Ah. Congress and the White House. And it was really funny because you have this book, Amateur Hour. And Viva Frye was also here and was like, how did you plan for this how did you know to write it yeah I was here in January we promoted it

and I warned there's a very real chance that Kamala Harris could be the next president of the United States and now it's looking like it's even closer yeah it would be funny if Trump has to throw away all those 45-47 hats because if she gets in before the end of the year she's 47 and then Trump would be 48.

But we got, so thanks for hanging out. It should be fun. Viva Fry is also in town. How's it going, everybody? I was told to never leave a thing blank on the internet, so I'm just going to fill this in right now to state the obvious people. They'll still screen grab it. Oh, crap.

I'm done. It'll be white dudes for Harris later on. My mother did call me a brat growing up, so maybe it makes sense. I guess everybody knows me, Viva Fry, former Montreal litigator. I'm not even a lawyer anymore. So not only am I not your lawyer. So your advice was bad. I voluntarily relinquished my Quebec license because it was only serving as a basis to people to file anonymous ethics complaints because they didn't like

my tweets. Oh, that's nice. We got Shane Cashman hanging out. Good to be back. It's fun to talk about Charlie's horror book about Kamala. I'm the host of Inverted World Live every Sunday, 6 o'clock Eastern. Hannah Clare, what's up? I'm happy that we're all here together, especially with apparently our soothsayer, the one

who can predict the future. Yeah, you made me laugh because you're like, well, basically I'm on a second book tour now. So this is really working out in your favor. Maybe not the American public. Did your book jump when this happened? Definitely. It's now like a one week wait over at Amazon.

So definitely check out some of these, one to three weeks. So definitely check out some of the other sites. I wrote a book about Kamala Harris being awful and then she's the nominee for the Democrats now. It's like, all right, well, that's perfect timing. Does that make you want to support her because she's really helping your career? Well, I haven't sunk that low.

I don't think my family will allow it. There have been some jokes about how if she becomes president, then the book will sell even more. And if she doesn't, then we're pretty much done. We've got to move on to the next one. Yeah, it would be like writing a book about Dukakis or something. People would be like, at the time it mattered. Now when it's brought up, it's like, who? Well, that was the whole thing. People were like, why are you writing a book about Dukakis or something. People would be like, at the time it mattered. Now when it's brought up, it's like, who? Well, that was the whole thing.

People were like, why are you writing a book about the vice president? And we don't necessarily write books about Al Gore or Dan Quayle. You know you should have said. But usually it's like, well, with Joe Biden's age and his declining health, there's a very real possibility that he'll become the next president. I know, and you're right. He will become the next president. That logic is correct when someone says're you're right. We'll become that. That logic is correct. When someone says, why are you writing about Kamala? And you're like, well, look at all these reasons.

It would have been better if you were like, I had a vision. A frog spoke to me and told me this is going to happen. And anyway, thank you for hanging out, everybody. It's going to be fun. Let's jump into this first story. We've got this from S.C.N.R. Secret Service sniper warns of another possible assassination attempt within 30 days, quote, because we should all expect another attempt to happen before November. Now, that's 97 days. I guess technically that's 92 days. But the story goes, a U.S. Secret Service counter sniper is warned of a potential assassination attempt within the next 30 days. An email sent on July 29th to the entire uniformed division. The individual strongly denounced the Secret

Service handling of the rally in Pennsylvania, where a would-be assassin attempted to kill former President Trump. The sniper claimed the man was not intercepted because agents and counter snipers were forced to do their jobs with their hands tied. Hands tied. I wonder if that was intentional. During the event, the gunman fired multiple shots, this we know. The Secret Service sniper vowed to continue speaking out

about the agency's failure until five high-level supervisors, one down, are either fired or removed from their current positions. Quote, this agency needs to change, if not now, when?

The next assassination attempt in 30 days? Because we all should expect another attempt to happen before November, he wrote. We've exposed our inability to protect our leaders due to our leadership. The technicians who worked on 713 and Butler PA did their job with their hands tied. Sadly, we have fallen short for years. We just got lucky and look good doing it. I have conveyed these thoughts to not only supervisors to include the current captain within CS, but those responsible for training us only to be brushed off as if those with less experience somehow knew more than me. Now, I have to wonder.

We have this we have this post, Susan Crabtree. She's a political reporter for Real Clear Politics, and she's posted this. She says the agency quickly deleted the email a knowledgeable source told RealClearPolitics, full email with name redacted below. If what happened in Butler, PA was intentional, either they pulled back intentionally knowing this guy was coming, saw him sneak in and said, let him do it, someone higher up, or there was direct official involvement in the actions of this individual, they would want to delete this email saying we failed. It's going to happen again. And if it is going to happen again, because they did fail, all the more reason to shut down this

communication from a Secret Service counter sniper warning we should expect another attempt. And whether it's opinion, an educated opinion or whatever, this is someone within the Secret Service who's worked there for some time complaining about what's going on, how it was handled, and that they should expect this again. I imagine this person has information that leads them to believe. Again, let me stress, I'm not saying there's direct intelligence, that anyone's reporting this. I'm saying it's a person working in the Secret Service. They're going through their run of the mill daily operations thinking we may get another attempt before November and we need to be prepared for it.

You had and what we've witnessed in these congressional hearings, it's a public announcement, an invitation almost. And I'm not saying that to be cynical or every fear hides a wish. What they've displayed by a level of incompetence, if you want to grant them that charitable interpretation of incompetence, is that the idiot today comes up and says, we lacked imagination in understanding that there's people out there who want to kill the president. No, you lack basic common sense to do the most basic thing where you can get a neurotic kid who's never served in law enforcement to say that roof should not be unsecured. Just to clarify, though, that was a quote from the hearing today. We lacked the imagination.

We were lacking imagination because we didn't understand that we live in a world with bad people. Their job is to anticipate that. But it's been a public announcement to the level of deficiency if you take them at their word, which I don't. In 2015, someone tried grabbing a gun from a police officer in an attempt to take Trump's life. The idea that they didn't know this could happen is laughably insane. Especially after the Iranian alleged increased threat. And when I say I don't take them at their word, this wasn't incompetence. This was something far more sinister.

And I'll revert back to my notepad here. This was they made a public announcement that they're at incompetent at best or corrupt at worst. In which case, you know, expect something worse in the next month or two. They were willing. A haunting slogan there in that letter. We just got lucky and looked good doing it. That's the sound of a very frustrated agent

who's dealing with a lot of bureaucracy, preventing him from doing his job, and he's got a lot to say. I mean, Susan Crabtree is a good reporter. I know her personally. She's very well sourced with the Secret Service. She helped uncover some of the details around that Kamala Harris protective detail agent

that sort of went nuts and started attacking her superiors. So that was also just one more sign. And she definitely filed a lot of articles about the whole DEI affecting the Secret Service. I could imagine that what we're witnessing is the implosion of the deep state. And so I look at something like this. And the question is, with the fervent zealotry in the media about Donald Trump, I think maybe we underestimate the amount of threats to Trump. And it is possible that this was i think

what buzz patterson was calling it was intentional incompetence is that what we refer to it as the idea being that there are so many threats to trump because of what the media does all day every day that they need only stand back and stand by and eventually somebody sneaks in and they just sit there and say well you know if it happens i'm of two minds of this there is a slim pot slimmer possibility in my mind i could be totally wrong that this is secret services failing like you mentioned the agent going crazy and this email the chain of command is breaking the intelligence agencies are in bedlam because the deep state is in flames as brett weinstein, they're just winging it now. And maybe something like this happens because they just they have no idea what's going on anymore.

The chain of command is disrupted. We have an incompetency crisis. I believe we have a managerial crisis, partly due to DEI and things like this. And maybe it's just we are worse off than we realize in terms of function of government. At the same time, take everything I just said, but they intentionally want this to happen because they are desperate and winging it and everything's falling apart and it's the only play they have. Either way, I think we are witnessing the deep state, the permanent government, whatever it is, is breaking apart. They didn't lack imagination when they wrapped D.C. in barbed wire for Biden's inauguration. Right. Like they they know to expect certain threats against him. Then this is a total collapse. And I think it is a managerial problem and competence.

But there's people behind the scenes allowing nefarious actors to climb through all that. And I think that's true for a lot of federal agencies. I think of it as if you were remodeling an old house and it has linoleum. Well, we peel off one layer of linoleum. You might get the subfloor, but you might also get five other layers of linoleum. A lot of these agencies are comprised of people who were hired or installed during different administrations. They have different goals. They have different views on this whole thing.

And so, you know, again, I'll go back to something I reference all the time, which is, you know, the Saturday after the RNC, I was waiting for my flight and watching CNN and CNN was reporting that Trump's team had no idea that there was a threat. And that's why they sent him out on stage during the Butler rally, which means that and I assume Trump's team refers to his Secret Service team, meaning that there is a breakdown of communication with literally one agency that's at one place in Pennsylvania. I can't imagine with the breakdown, whether intentional or not, is like with the agency as it moves around, you know, from Washington to the satellite offices that are across the country. I mean, ultimately, I don't think it's a cooperating agency. And I think there are lots of different people, you can see it in the sniper's letter, who are frustrated because they devote their lives to what they think is an honorable purpose purpose only to sort of be misled and abused by whoever's currently calling the shots well speaking of the lack of imagination like when i went up to butler pennsylvania the night of the

attempted assassination and as soon as you get to the site the number one thing you see is that giant water tower there and my imagination was like well if they had a secret Service sniper up there, they would have easily seen the threat. Turns out they didn't have anybody on the water tower, not to mention a drone or any other things. Not just that they didn't have a drone. They turned down an offer by the state, whatever, SWAT to have a drone. And we say like, I like the idea of intentional incompetence. And who was it that told me that, you know, there might be whistleblowers within the agency? I'm joking. It was you, Tim. I like the idea of intentional incompetence. And who was it that told me that, you know, there might be whistleblowers within the agency?

I'm joking. It was you, Tim. You know, that they're going to. It was from the convention. But this email that you're reading, that's a sincere email from someone who does want to do good in an institution where there's deliberate incompetence. And you can imagine the higher up saying, dude, shut the hell up. The disarray that you're complaining about is by design. It's not by accident. But deliberate incompetence. I don't like that. Right. When Buzz said intentional incompetence or the phrase, because if if you want something bad to happen, so you

deliberately line up the pieces so that it will happen. That's just deliberate. That's just intentional. It's the appearance of incompetence. It's like, oh, I'm sorry, I left the door open. I didn't realize your dog would get out, and that's my analogy. Or, you know, leave something on the floor that you know the dog's going to eat. Causable deniability. It's deliberate. It cannot be but deliberate. And the guy says we lack imagination, so we turned down a drone offer, which we would have accepted had we gotten it.

This was from today. A bait. It's just, it is deliberate. And I don't know what more anybody needs to hear before you come to the conclusion it was a deliberate let it happen on purpose or make it happen. I think the Secret Service agent sniper is correct. And before November, there will be another attempt on Trump. I believe that if Donald Trump on his own with no security and no Secret Service decided to go for a walk in New York, his life would be in serious jeopardy. No one crazy person with Trump derangement syndrome. Trump needs serious security.

And for that matter, so does Kamala Harris. They all do. So does Joe Biden. They should redouble all of their security because I'm not trusting of anybody right now. Well, and you want to go like full black pill conspiracy theory. Kamala Harris might be more at risk from an opportunity perspective. God forbid something happens to Kamala Harris.

They get to demonize the right. They get to then say, it's too dangerous to have voting in person. We've got to have mass mail-in voting. And then they get to swap out or, you know, Hillary Clinton. Put someone else in who's less popular because they know damn well

that Kamala Harris is not popular. As far as I'm concerned, from an opportunistic perspective of a deep state that wants to lock down this election by controlling the means, she would be the bigger target is not popular. As far as I'm concerned, from an opportunistic perspective of a deep state that wants to lock down this election by controlling the means, she would be the bigger target, not Trump. I worry about a manufactured retaliation.

Absolutely. That's what they want because they've already developed this idea, this caricature of the MAGA extremist. Oh, the MAGA extremist is the guy who tried to shoot Trump. You know, an anti-Semitic,

anti-immigrant guy shoots the president who, Trump, who's called anti-Semitic and anti-immigrant. Let's bring this up. We have this from NPR. Social media account with extremist comment could be tied to Trump gunman, FBI says. Now, I find this story actually really fascinating because they're basically saying this guy

was anti-Semitic. They say there were over 700 comments posted from this account. Some of these comments, if ultimately attributable to the shooter, appear to reflect anti-Semitic and anti-immigration themes to espouse political violence and are described as extreme in nature. Now, I want to pause right there and say, well, anti-immigration, why would they go after Trump? That's the case. But the real issue here is not that the account exists. It's the story, because we've already heard from from Gab about law enforcement requesting information on an account they believe to be the shooter where he was defending Joe Biden as recently as two or two and a half to three years ago, about three years ago.

Now we're getting a story that actually was anti-Semitic and anti-immigration. Meanwhile, the the other comments were pro Biden and defensive of their policies. I'll tell you this. You choose. Good luck, everybody. Good luck figuring it out because I think, as Shane and I were talking about this this weekend, they are flooding the zone with crap

so that no one can figure out what is going on. It's like, oh my goodness, this story alone, it was like the gaming account that was initially linked is no longer there. And they don't even know that this account is. They're just flooding the zone zone with garbage but not just that i mean if the story turns out to be true these are comments from 2016 when the kid from four years ago 2020 when the kid was 16 and talk about flooding the the the field with crap or poisoning the well you got christopher

ray comes out last week saying it might have been shrapnel that hit trump's ear and then people ran with that story now they're going to run with this and by the time this gets debunked or whatever and it's already controlled the narrative and just to make sure we hit this point from the hearings today fbi deputy director says there was no there's never been a doubt that trump was hit by a bullet despite director ray spreading shrapnel conspiracy it is intentional they are trying to make sure let me put it this way. Democrats are going to be like that. The FBI said that they don't even know if it was a bullet. And then you're going to be like, no, the deputy director says it was. And they're going to be like, what are you

talking about? Then you're going to come out. You're going to be like we had this story from Gab. The Post was was pro Biden. Are you nuts? We got the FBI saying that the guy was anti anti Semitic. He was anti immigration. I mean, the FBI is not saying, like, at least Gab is saying we are a social media company that has been contacted by the FBI in the wake of this event.

Here are screenshots of the messages they have requested. Like, what's so frustrating to me about the FBI is, you know, FBI Director Wray says, well, maybe it was just shrapnel from the teleprompter,

which has been disproven over and over again. That night, his press person puts out a statement saying, no, it was definitely a bullet that hit Trump. And then now we have the deputy director saying, oh, no, it was never a question. 100%. There's so much internal disarray to the point where it's like, of course, people call for the ending of all of these agencies. They're not functional. What did you call it? Reality buffet?

Yeah. The buffet of reality. It's the offshoot of my post-reality thing because anything you want to be true, you can just go find to be true. Yep. So, you know, it's like I think of, I forgot who it was online. They shared an image of someone who died, but it wasn't the wrong person. And they chose that image of the Pawn Stars son because they knew people would recognize that son, but the son who actually died wasn't the one on TV. So then everyone believed that post.

And then that post was deleted. And now everyone, you know, it's so any people, it's like a Mandela effect happening in real time. People will believe, you know, there was shrapnel, there was a bullet, anything. So where we are now is a liberal will Google search. And if Google's going to send them the sources that they're likely to click on. Google's going to say, we're not doing this for politics. The algorithm is sending them what we think they want to see. And what do they want to see? Trump was not shot.

And then conservatives. So you're going to be at family dinner. Your liberal aunt's going to come over. She'll be like, he wasn't even shot. It was glass. And you're going to be like, that's not true. That's when the buffets clash. You're going to pull up the story.

You're going to go, look, look at this story. And she's going to go, that's fake. I'm going to pull it up. Then she's going to pull up NPR and go, see? And then you're going to be like, good luck gonna go look look at this story and she's gonna go that's fake i'm gonna pull it up then she's gonna pull up npr and go see and then you're gonna be like good luck proving to your family what's true or what's not good luck knowing it's why i forget the intelligence thing is you know you can't control what people know you can only control when they know it and so you'll have the information eventually uh crystallized and in the meantime it's as far as i'm concerned christopher ray for what he said last week should be fired because if that's not participating in the event it's participating in the cover-up and the confusion.

And by the way, I got another one here. Disarray. Ha ha ha. Look at that. Bada bing, bada boom. Okay, I'm never having a whiteboard again. I didn't even want to know it was wrapped in plastic and not open when he sat down. So he didn't have to pick up this whiteboard.

But the compulsion for the droving. They're beyond corrupt. This is Christopher Wray giving that narrative feed that he needed to change the story. What they did in 2020. Intelligence lied about the Hunter Biden laptop story. They suppressed it when Baker was in Twitter. They're doing the exact same thing,

mutatis mutatis. Now, intelligence is lying and the internet or Google and meta are censoring. It actually also reminds me of the Rittenhouse, Kyle Rittenhouse's trial, right? There were so many people who believed that he shot three black people, and that was never true.

They identified as black, by the way. We now know that. Oh, okay, sure. That's not true. And so when, you know, I saw so many social media posts after he was found not guilty of people being like Do not even talk to me about like liberals saying like don't even talk to me about this

I if you think he's not guilty then he like I can't like Hysteria around this thing that like they won't even go back and just read the basic facts of the case They have decided on the narrative they have decided this person is guilty and they're not moving forward I started thinking about that when people were watching the Rittenhouse Video and two people could watch the same video walk away with it completely different interpretations and we're not moving forward. I started thinking about that when people were watching the Rittenhouse video and two people could watch the same video walk away with completely different interpretations and we're watching the same exact video.

Apparently the Guardian watched the entire trial and after the conviction, after the acquittal, said he was acquitted of having killed three black men at a BLM protest. I mean, this was years after. I don't know that you watched the trial. That's the thing, though. There are certain things that are concrete. With the Butler rally, the

teleprompters weren't broken, so it cannot be this glass shrapnel thing. Is that a whiteboard or a mirror? That's what I would look like if I ever turned Hasidic, by the way. Now Tim is going to get accused of a great many things. Amazing. It's a picture of Viva. I was looking at you and I drew it.

You can keep it. Another whiteboard. No. That's my whiteboard now. Let's do shirts for you. It's all just, I believe these hearings and the way they behave themselves and their smirks. There was a smirk. The guy Abate today

had like a Peter Stroke type smirk. It's to provoke people into doing something stupid because they get so enraged listening to this. and by the way uh there was something apparently peter stroke was paid a settled 1.2 million dollars uh got a severance package or something that came up today and they were asking who in the fbi approved the 1.2 million dollar settlement for stroke and 800 000 for his lover there lisa page this the fbi tried to frame trump the fbi with with authorization for deadly force raided his mar-a-lago place when they had no reason to do it they want him dead and so what i've watched now is confirmation of this in real time well and think about like the gretchen whitmer

case like the kidnapping case and how involved fbi was with that there are so many times that the fbi as an agency acts questionably and it's somehow allowed to just sink back into the shadow they're there for working that's what they're there for. Right. But if you destroy us, if you question it, then you're an extremist. I know. Can I just pull up the story from June? It's from Fox's ex FBI. Honcho McCabe says Intel community members scared of being jailed by Trump may flee the country. And so the questions I asked when this went down and I believe you were there, Viva was, does Trump derangement syndrome exist? Of course it does. There are people who believe fake things about Trump who are insane and scream. They post about it. They're getting fired for doing these things. And three, is it possible some of these people work in intelligence and law enforcement?

And the answer to that is yes. And with those things all being true and a story like this, they may flee the country in fear. Is it possible that someone in law enforcement, someone in some federal capacity who hates Donald Trump, who believes the worst things about him, is terrified of going to jail and wants the worst for Trump, may engage in this untoward behavior? Let's just let's just operate on the purely hypothetical, exaggerated, hyperbolic assumption that there are people within the FBI who would go to jail if their conduct were revealed through some form of investigation. Those people exist hands down.

Clinesmith, who falsified that document that they submitted to a FISA court, that's the tip of the iceberg. So take for granted there are literally people within the FBI who would go to jail if their conduct was exposed. What would they do to prevent that? I would like to see the FBI shattered and scattered into the wind, as they say.

As JFK said. Before something happened. But I also believe that if that happens, there will be rogue domestic terrorists now that left the FBI, you know, and they're just waiting to perform violence. So I want to I do want to get into the Venezuela thing in just a second. I don't it is hard to predict how this all plays out. But I want to stress from the previous segment, Secret Service counter-sniper writing that they fear another attempt on Trump's life before November.

How have we not redoubled, quadrupled for all people under Secret Service protection? We've got to fire these people immediately. We've got to go in and, you know, you've got to brush. Like, you're brushing the hair to straighten it out, the knots out you've got bad people who don't know how to run this ship whether intentionally or otherwise there are serious problems and there's a real threat to the lives of even people we may not politically agree with and i will stress all

of us here and i would say every single person watching wants the best for kamala harris we want her to retire peacefully after she loses and she can go and dance with Megan Thee Stallion and do whatever it is she's going to do. Absolutely. And Joe Biden can sit in a rocking chair with his grandkids as they're playing in the, well, his grandkids are probably in their forties or something.

The grandkids that he acknowledges are the ones that he doesn't know. They won't play with them. I'm just saying like, I'm hanging out in the pool. I hope that we get a Trump victory. Trump brings us a marginally good administration. It's not going to be dictator, iron fist, Project 2025, Donald Trump, because Project 2025 doesn't even prescribe these things. Donald Trump's going to appoint some moderately bad people.

We're going to get some decently good policy. Economy will probably improve a little bit. Border security will be a little bit better. We uh wind down some of these wars and we'll be marginally satisfied and i hope that's what we get we are not going to get iron fist trump going and arresting people there's not any military tribunals none of that's going to happen and so i hope for you see him throwing agents in jail absolutely not i don't don't really i mean mccabe's clearly overreacting because he was also a former agent that was in the crosshairs

and he just got a nice... He's talking about himself. A nice network deal. He's doing just fine. Tim, I sent it to you. I mean, former FBI official Peter Stroke reaches $1.2 million settlement with Justice Department

over Trump-related texts. Former FBI special agent Peter Stroke, he reached $1.2 million claims that the department violated his policy. They paid him $1.2 million. This is where it's another act of provocation. They paid him $1.2 million because he said they

violated his privacy by revealing the fact that he was talking about an insurance policy against a Trump presidency that he never wanted to see. It's freaking bizarro universe. You know Cheetle's going to get a deal after this see. It's freaking Bizarro Universe. You know Cheeto's going to get a deal after this, too. She's going to get some job, some nice job somewhere. Maybe a book deal.

Definitely a book deal. Maybe a Netflix deal. I assume she's going back to what, like Frito-Lay or whatever she was doing before? There's a joke in there that I will not make, but she'll get a lifetime supply of Pepsi and Cheetos. Let's jump to the story from the Post Millennial. From OMG, O'Keefe Media Group, DNC compliance manager says Kamala is weirdly unpopular, won't win in 2024. us let's uh let's jump to the story from the post millennial from omg o'keefe media group dnc compliance manager says kamala is weirdly unpopular won't win in 2024 i like kamala harris but i don't

think she'd win this year this is joyce d how do you pronounce it de serce no idea let's go game of thrones yeah in yeah in a new undercover video released by o'Keefe Media Group on Tuesday revealed DNC and Kamala Harris campaign compliance manager. Oh, wow. And Joyce DeCerci saying that Harris will not win this year, adding she's weirdly unpopular. I like Kamala Harris, but I don't think she'd win this year. She's weirdly unpopular. I think a lot of that is racism and misogyny. And the vice president is so easy to attack.

Right. She doesn't have any accomplishments to speak of because she's vice president. She doesn't make laws. I agree. It's pretty interesting to see that internally at the Kamala Harris campaign, former Biden campaign, and at the DNC,

this is not some low-level guy. It's not the highest level guy, but they're outright admitting what everyone feels. Kamala? She can't win. By the way, I just went to his Twitter feed. These posts are protected. And the biopic, for anybody who's interested,

he's wearing a face mask. So that tells you a lot of what you need to know. But it's an amazing thing. Weirdly unpopular, their word of the week is weird. It is, right? It's weird that they're using it to describe their adversaries when clearly they're using it internally to describe themselves. They're trying so hard with the weird thing.

And I just, I don't think they know. So they've been tweeting at me like crazy. I can't remember what I posted. I posted that Kamala's Project Special K will force women to get abortions. And the military will go and kidnap Hondurans and bring them to America to force them to live in your home. 800 wars. 800 new wars will begin. That means four new wars for every country on Earth and some more than one.

And some more than four. And I get this wave of responses saying, you're weird. You believe insane things. And I'm like, like, like dude i don't believe for a second that the krasensteins think that tweet's real because they tweeted me and i tweeted them all the time but they're pretending like i'm literally saying there's a real thing called kamala project special k but the response was that it was like you're weird and i'm sitting here being like y'all don't know who you're dealing with. Like, weird? You want to see weird? I bought a

95-foot-tall billboard in Times Square of my rooster. We'll play weird. But this attack, they try it again and again and again, tweeting at everybody, calling them weird. I think it actually works on conservatives. Conservatives are getting so wound up over being called weird that they're doing this troll campaign where all of these leftists and liberals on X are just spam posting at people that you're weird. That's weird. And people are actually freaking out. They're like, I'm not weird. You're weird. Don't call me weird. Here's you weird. And they're posting pictures of Democrats and things like this. And I'm like, bro, I'm weird. I love it. It's kind of an odd jujitsu, right? It's because like there was that document from the Republicans as soon as Kamala was sort of de facto nominated,

there was a talking point from Republicans that they were going to describe Kamala Harris as weird. So they're basically turning it right back on Republicans. Like, you want to call Kamala Harris weird? No, you're weird. And then the childish food fight. I love middle school. It's fun to be here. No, I've literally always taken being called weird

because it's happened at least once or twice before. I've always taken it as a compliment because it does mean sort of not within the norm and curious and interesting. It's just the way they're using it now, like a grade school insult coming from the party that is recording, you know, anal sex in the Senate, flashing fake tranny titties on the White House lawn. These are programs and they're going to turn around and call somebody else weird? Seriously? I mean, first, it is a compliment. It means you're unique. But the people doing it, they're not weird.

They're degenerates and hypocrites. But it is, you know, it's funny politics. I don't care for that line. I'm just like, okay, I'm weird. I've always been and always will be and endeavor to do so. You're reminded of the deplorables line that Hillary Clinton used against Trump

and everybody proudly embraced the term. We are deplorables. So it's very interesting. Why aren't the Republicans this time being like, yes, we're weirdos. We're weirdos for Trump. And again, to Viva's point, who is calling you weird?

Their main candidate for being weird is J.D. Vance, who is married, successful and has a family. Served in Iraq. Weird, weird guy. That should have been the retort. If that's weird, I want to be weird. The response is OK. I think that's the thing, though. Next question, I guess. Doesn't matter what they think. And I think part of it is this is all turning into a very hyper emotional moment. You know, the reality is Kamala Harris was a progressive prosecutor who did terrible things and I don't want her to lead the country.

I think she's not a good pick. There was a reason that she couldn't secure the Democratic nomination in the first place. So they can say J.D. Vance is weird and her party can acknowledge that she's weirdly unpopular. I mean, what's telling about this is like, it's not weird that she's unpopular. She's not likable. She was never popular. But ultimately, like this is just some sort of narrative storm that we'll get for what these two weeks.

She'll formally be installed. The media media thing will move on. And we're going to continue the march of the celebrities endorsing her. It's making her cool. She was just down campaigning in Georgia with a big crowd. Megan Thee Stallion twerking on stage. But again, like we are these... We are the establishment. You're the weirdos.

Right, and are these the celebrities that you like? Like, do you want to model your life after these people? Do you want the Mark Hamill's? Do you want the... I don't know. So, here's a clip from The Daily Show that... Here, we'll play this clip. So, about J.D. Vance, because of how odd he's turned out to be.

I got it. Odd. Whoa, whoa, whoa. Hold on. Like, full stop how odd he's turned out to be. I got it. Hold on. Full stop. What? It's comedy. It's laughter. No, but I mean like, how odd he's turned out to be. I'm like, no, seriously. What? I read the news all day, every day. It looks like he's wearing eyeliner. His deep blue

eyes are very weird. I actually find Is that what they're arguing? I don't know. I don't know. My point is this. They're not saying anything. And listen to what Jon Stewart says. Let me play this. Boy, did that dude drop a turd on launch. I've never seen anything like that. Listen, listen, listen.

One day they were like, the heir to the Magga fortune and the Magga, the Prince JD shall march. And he comes out and he's like, I hate cat ladies. Misleading, of course. of course the camera was old and he's but but hold on like this is almost on par with bill maher being like jack jack prosobics says we endeavor to end democracy like john stewart saying that i'm just kind of like okay oh i don okay. What's odd? A guy criticized cat ladies?

The Simpsons made fun of cat ladies for 10 years. I figured it out. What's weird is that he married an immigrant, and the Democrats are the party of racists. So flip it around that way. It's weird that he married an immigrant. He's married happily with two kids, served in Iraq, had a successful business. That is weird to a bunch of degenerates who demand. My point is over replacement level. My point is, is that there's no substance to this in any way.

And it's not even a strong attack as it were. I mean, they lie about Trump so much. They say Trump said he wants to ban all Muslims from the country and he called Nazis very fine people. And I'm like, that's a lie. Like, those are egregious. And don't get me wrong. Trump did say early on, he's like, we got to put a stop on Muslims in the country until we can figure out what's going on. The very fine people, the Muslim ban, as they called it, was actually seven countries, which included countries that were not Muslim. And Trump never called white nationalists very fine people. He actually literally denounced them. They will outright lie in the press, run those lies. And I'm like, that's egregious. This time they're like oh he's odd and i'm like okay well trump's team deserves a huge part of the blame right because they weren't there to fill in the gaps nobody knew really knew who jd vance was so it's the democrats leapt at the opportunity

to define him as a weirdo and then propose all the other all the other details about him and who he was but there's the trump campaign wasn't filling in the gaps. Even supporters of J.D. Vance were not out there defending him or filling in the gaps or really explaining who this guy was. Yes, but. They just left it a big vacuum. They're not saying anything. If they came out and said J.D. Vance kicks dogs for fun, I'd be like, wow, that's crazy. What are they talking about?

That's weird. I would call that a little bit more projection from Biden. All Buttigieg did is go, how odd is he? And then he's like, he says, I don't like cat ladies. And I was like, oh, did he? Tim, did you? Did you out of ruffs? And Trump did defend V he? And then he's like, he says, I don't like cat ladies. And I was like, oh, did he? Tim, did you? Trump did defend Vance pretty recently. He's like, he loves family.

Last night on Laura Ingraham, I think. Right? They finally got to it. But that was a week ago when they started this. See, I just think it's because it's sort of weird and irrelevant. It's kind of hard to respond to. These comments are from 2021. Like, Vance was on Megyn Kelly's show.

Oh, Cat Lady. Right. Like, it's been this weird slow roll the cat lady thing at first they were like the cat lady widely known you're trying to hype it up mitt romney mitt romney complained about that to say oh well he's actually anti-ivf that like the member kamala harris's team put out a happy world ivf day to everyone but jd vance but he never attacked he's also there are like resurfaced comments of him being like if you can't have family if you try to, we should have empathy for you. That's very sad.

I think maybe they should have been more aggressive, but there has been a counter-narrative to this the whole time. It's just sort of intense hysteria around trying to make J.D. Vance into some kind of villain because I think, to Aviva's point, they can't attack him for his family, so they have to attack him for... Kamala Harris. Kamala Harris is boring. Right after the convention, J.D. Vance

went shopping with his kids to Walgreens, and that was like a perfect image to display him as a family man. Oh look, he's out with his kids. And then he just kind of went back in the bunker. You realize that whole couch thing, the rumor or the joke that he pleasured himself

to two seats of a couch? You haven't heard that? This required the explanation because there was a couch meme about him looking at a couch and the couch is playing like Barry White music and everyone's like, what the hell is this? There's a rumor. Someone misquoted him from the book as having admitted to having pleasured himself between two seats of a couch. It's a lie. And yet the left has run with that and memed it and Mark Hamill has done it. By the way, did you know that even Snopes confirmed that the fine people hoax was false?

Seven years later. I send this to somebody who's a diehard Democrat and they say, yes, Snopes got it wrong. And so people, they will believe the lie. I don't think you have to counter their stupidity with much merit. And I don't know how you can own that. Yes, if he's weird, I want to be weird. But here's the issue. The issue is that conservatives genuinely don't like being called weird,

and that was the point of the attack. Not that there was anything actually weird. It's that conservatives are offended by it, and they're trolling and triggering them, and they're riling conservatives up. And honestly, I find it to be quite hilarious watching conservatives on X lose their minds and be like, you call me weird?

I'll call you. Here's a picture of you. You can't call me. And I'm just like, I'm weird, bro. I posted a picture of Trump hugging a giant rabbit. It didn't work. So I added storyline to, I'm showing you this. I try to keep it as weird as we can. It's a work of art. This is my magnum opus. I'm so happy. This is my magnum opus, everybody. This is a picture of Trump in paladin armor hugging a giant rabbit, and it says, you'll never know want or loneliness again, Trump said.

The world was cruel to you, but you have Trump now. You see, I posted one of these, and it got a couple hundred retweets, and that's usually what happens when I post my AI nonsense. This one has got four million views. You gotta write a short story to this. A children's book.

I think you're in the market for a children's book. A runaway bunny. I just want to tell you, the response from the left has been like, boy, these MAGA people are weird. Boy, you're all weird. And I was like, guilty as charged. And they're like, that's what a weird person would say. I'm like, my dude, I'm not running for office. If I was ever president, I would abolish Social Security. I would I'm never going to run for office. You never want to see me run for office. If I was ever president, I would abolish Social Security. I'm never going to run for office. You never want to see me run for office. I will say whatever I feel like saying, and you can call me whatever you want. I'm rolling in it, baby.

This makes me laugh. I'm busting out laughing to myself, and they're like, you're weird. I'm like, uh-huh. And there are conservatives who are like, oh, well, I never. I think some of it is our terminally online society, though, right? Like, right and left, although I think, you know, a lot of left-leaning people tend to be more, especially young voters, tend to be even more active online. But, you know, being called weird or having people respond negatively to something you post or say, like, that hurts the psyche for the online person in a way that is upsetting.

Whereas, like, if you unplug, you're like, I don't actually care about any of your opinions. Like whether it's saying you guys are the party that thinks men can be women. So I don't care about your judgment or just generally said, like, I don't actually know any of you anonymous people who are calling me weird online. Like it doesn't actually matter. There's a lot of humorless people on the right wing Twitter too. Like you see them repeating Angela,

that Angela, Angela character. Everyone thinks like, I'm like, that's just a character. Yeah. Whatever. Yeah. Like that's a character. And everyone's like, I'm like, that's just a character. Yeah. Whatever. Yeah.

Like that's a character. And everyone's like, this is an example. And she got 30 million views. So, so, uh, and, and we're, we're blowing her cover. Um, people are like, when I tweeted this, they're like, come on, Tim, let it happen. Uh, she, she always posts these things about how she's a bold childless lib and it's just her walk strutting towards the camera and walking away and conservatives go nuts and she posted one where she was dancing and she's like this 42 year old child free lib is loving

life conservative so mad and she got 30 million views like a lot of people she got me so many times before i could finally determine that it was a parody account i felt stupid i never got angry i was like is she for real because it's like I don't know if she's for real. I don't want to pick on her. I feel bad for her. But she's amazing. She's amazing. Well, it's very interesting that the election has really kind of come down to having kids or not having kids. I'm so glad natalism is taking center stage.

Kamala Harris's number one issue is abortion rights. And that's sort of what this election is coming down to. Are we really going to turn it into a fight between the childless and the family people? That's why they want to fight for Supreme Court changes, too. Let's pull this story up. This is from the India Times. Not that it is the most reputable source, not to insult India Times, but they've written about this, and this is the Keyes predictor.

This is, what is his name, Alan Lichtman? Alan Lichtman has predicted correctly, they say, every presidential victor since 1984, except for Al Gore. And I think it's actually, to be fair, that was a contested, disputed election that went down to the Supreme Court, so maybe you got it wrong. He's, apparently now, he's predicting, likely, a Kamala Harris victory so far. The criteria that he asks, simple, true or false questions, are in his mind so far leaning towards Kamala Harris. And I got to be honest, it's a guy who's good at guessing. I think his questions are absurd nonsense. But his intuition must be pretty good to get this many elections correct. So they say

the million dollar question before the electorate is who's going to win. Alan Lichtman, who is an election forecaster, the professor that said that who said that the key to the White House is with Kamala Harris is also the Democrats party's nominee. The prediction which has made it in the present, blah, blah, blah. So it's leaning towards Kamala right now. His final prediction won't come until after the DNC. There's the Democrats who are likely to appoint Harris, blah, blah, blah. The Republicans, they say that she holds six keys, including primary contest, short-term economy, long-term economy, policy change, no scandal, no challenger charisma. This is all utter nonsense. So a lot of people are actually saying, oh, this is brutal. This guy's predicting Kamala Harris. Man, that that's bad for trump but let's break this down in uh on the 21st professor who accurately

predicted past elections says biden can win i'm gonna go ahead and say you're wrong alan is that the same professor yeah it gets even worse dynamite on on june 30th i sent you that i'm just looking at this while you talk on On June 30th in USA Today, historian who predicted nine of the last ten elections results says Democrats shouldn't drop Joe Biden. I agree with that. They should have kept him. This is the problem. When you make both A and not A predictions, you can just go back and select whichever one you want to say. Hi, I got it right.

This guy sounds like a crock. There was a famous post on Twitter, back when it was twitter not x not dead naming and it said something like i can't remember the sporting event but it was like football team is going to score the game-winning touchdown against this team in the super bowl with this amount of time left with this score and it was made like a year before and then it went viral after that happened and everyone went holy crap how did he predict it how do you think he predicted it he made uh 75 predictions he made like seven 700 posts every every possibility of every like basically looking at the stats and the teams of of all the things and then every time a team got eliminated he'd

delete the post and then all that was left got eliminated, he'd delete the post. And then all that was left was like 10 posts about what was going to happen, and then when it went down one way, he deleted everything else, so there was one left, and everyone went, how did he do it? Well, I would go back and want to see the publications that Lichtman put out back 20 years ago. It's a lot easier

to burn a piece of paper. Alan Lichtman, a history professor at American University who has accurately predicted past elections, said in an op-ed on Saturday that President Joe Biden can win against Donald Trump. No, he can't. Your prediction was wrong, sir. But let's pull up the... Dang, that hurts his record. Yeah, his record must be bad.

Biden Lichtman can lick Biden. This is the... Zoolander. The Keys to the White House is a prediction system for determining the outcome of presidential elections in the United States. It was developed by Alan Lichtman and Russian geophysicist Vladimir Kailas-Borak in 1981. It's 13 questions, a checkpoint, that assesses a situation. So what are these? Let's start. Party mandate.

After the midterm elections, the incumbent party holds more seats in the U.S. House of Representatives than after the previous midterm elections. So the incumbent party does not hold more seats. So that would be false. No primary contest. There is no serious contest for the incumbent party nomination. Yes, there was. So, OK, incumbent seeking reelection.

No third party. All right, let's do this. Let's jump down to the current predictions that he has for Kamala Harris. Party mandate. Does the incumbent party hold the House of Representatives? False. That's an easy true or false, right? No primary contest.

True. What are you talking about? RFK Jr. and Dean Phillips, there was an absolute attempt at a primary. They just shut them out. So, false. Incumbent seeking re-election. False. That one's funny.

No one believes that Kamala Harris was secretly running the country while Joe Biden was. Now look at this. No third party. Likely true. RFK Jr.'s polling in double digits. So that's false. Short-term economy. Okay, I i mean this one becomes more subjective but does anybody like do the polls show people are confident in the economy right now no i just skipped ahead i'm sorry i saw no social unrest

likely true what flipping world is this guy hold on hold guy let's play this game here you go how would you rate the condition of the national economy right now for all groups 37% fairly bad 27% fairly good 23% fairly bad looks like it's going down

right and so we're looking at 60% in the bad category so when we jump over here and they're like short term economy is good. Most people are saying the short term economy is really, really bad. Strong long term economy. I don't know, again, how you break those apart. But how are these true? It's false and false.

Major policy change. To be fair, I probably give that one true because Kamala has no record. No social unrest. There was massive protests and riots and occupations over Israel only a few months ago. So, yes, social unrest. No scandal. Are you kidding? Biden just dropped out.

We still have the month of August. So we're looking at false, false, false, false, false, false, false, false, false. No foreign or military failure. How are we defining that part? False. Israel, Russia, false. No foreign or military failure. False. Israel, Russia, Ukraine. Major foreign or military success. False. There's nothing.

Charismatic incumbent. False. Agreed. Uncharismatic challenger. True. Are you nuts? Trump may be one of the most charismatic presidents challenging we've ever seen. The entire thing should be false.

Predicting a Donald Trump victory. Just pumped his fist and said fight, fight, fight after dodging a bullet. Joe Rogan gets out every week practically talking about how Trump is a good stand-up comic in his delivery. I mean, he walks into UFC, the place erupts. This is, I mean,

first of all, I think Lichtman now is full of schlichtman. And I would like to go back and see. I think he's been lying throughout his career, but it's easy to like, I mean, first of all, I think Lichtman now is full of schlichtman. And I would like to go back and see. I think he's been lying throughout his career. But it's easy to like, you know, when you go back and refer to the article where he said any one of things. And yeah, nine out of ten, he's amazing. As soon as he said Biden could win, they should just be like, yeah, he's gone. Like, your predictions are done because.

Time to go back to the octopus. Here's the interesting thing. There's no incumbent. Right? Incumbent seeking reelection. False. to the octopus here's the interesting thing there's no incumbent right incumbent seeking re-election false these shouldn't even apply to kamala harris who's a an unknown so like you are not dealing with an incumbent versus a challenger but i love that he put uncharismatic challenger true donald trump who people can't shut up about. Except for never Trumpers, right?

Never Trumpers are always like, well, he's so brash and he's gross. Weird. He doesn't laugh. Weird, weird, weird. Not Brad. But, you know, so I can understand where, like, obviously this is false, but I can understand where someone who just doesn't like Trump has said, like, no, he's not charismatic because they're deluding themselves.

I think the no primary contest is interesting because no one has been allowed to challenge Kamala Harris. I mean, it was really fall in line immediately behind Kamala Harris. She wasn't actually involved in the actual primary. When people were casting ballots, she wasn't on the ticket as the front, or as the top of the ticket.

Her polling numbers are pretty good for someone who was just installed at the last minute by party elites. The polling numbers are nonsense. it's a question of manufacturing consent and not reflecting reality but i just went to his twitter feed his uh his title is distinguished professor of history american university author of 12 books wow this is this is crazy it says no third party is turned false when there is a major candidate other than the nominees of the democrats and the republicans RFK Jr. is in the double digits. But they refuse to acknowledge him as a major candidate. I mean, there's really, really resistance to acknowledging that he could have an impact on the election. Yeah, well, he might he might endorse Trump. I do think it's a possibility.

It says for upcoming elections, key force turned false when a single third party candidate consistently polls at 10 percent or more, indicating they're likely to receive 5 percent or more of the national popular vote, perhaps because he's running as an independent. Didn't Ross Perot run as an independent? Ross Perot ran as an independent. Yeah, it's ridiculous. They're not they're not mentioning RFK Jr. right now. No scandal when there is bipartisan recognition of serious impropriety directly linked to the president. Biden's debate performance

was panned by both parties. Look, if this guy's prediction with Kamala Harris turns out to be correct, then it's all fake. There was no scandal for Obama? Oh yeah, he was a scandal for you. There was no major

bipartisan where he was directly connected that you know the fast and the furious the sicking the irs on the second party no those were but bipartisan directly so bipartisan the point they're making is that when both parties blame the president for something both parties have attacked joe biden for being mentally incompetent unfit to the point where he dropped out of the race biden could not win and now perhaps they're saying kamala kamala's got no scandal well house democrats just democrats joined republicans in voting to say that that biden and harris were responsible for the crisis at the border and i would consider that a pretty big scandal here Let's not manufacture the scandal.

Let's just make sure that it materializes. Republicans file impeachment proceedings against Kamala Harris for dereliction of duty at the border and for lying about Joe Biden's fitness for office. She participated in covering up Joe Biden's mental unfitness and knowingly basically planning to steal

his 14 million votes. Impeachable. So you can impeach her on two things. She'll never get convicted. But that's a legit scandal. Scandal where she's directly connected. I think it's weird that Republicans have been trying to make this case, that somehow she's guilty for this giant cover-up,

but it hasn't really taken root. Here's what I love. If you look at the civics polling, and you choose 18 to 34, 67% are in the bad category only 28 of uh 18 to 34 year olds think the economy is good but uh let's let's let's play this what do you think will happen if i pick democrat anyone how would you rate the condition of the national economy right now if you pick democrat and then we have to go with those options fairly good say

39 say fair well you don't get it but just like do you think it'll be the plurality will be that it's good i don't think so bad i don't think so let's find out democrats 49 look at that absolutely well it's still not 50 still not 50 but that, no, that's 49% fairly good and 27% very good. 22, so they're at... Oh, man, why would they put that underneath? Yeah. What do you mean? That's how they did fairly good and very good.

So only 24% of Democrats think the economy is bad right now. It's because of the bounce back from COVID. What do you think Republicans are going to say? Oh, it's going to be like, dude, it's so bad. Well, you can average it out now that you know the... Bang. 64. Now, let's play this game.

If 18- to 34-year-olds are more likely to align with the Republican view of things, I wonder what that says about their leanings this election. And let's jump to independent. Independent voters, of course, they're going to say it's bad. There's no question, because Democrats live in Wally World. Well, you could imagine... Just show your friends and family this. Be like, dude, if you're sitting here and you're saying that Kamala Harris is fine,

Biden is fine, the economy is doing great. Ask yourself why Republicans and independents both agree the economy is bad to large numbers. Well, I bet you that's the demographics of who statistically is more likely to be a Democrat. It's going to be young people who now see the prospect of a student debt loan being forgiven. It's young people who are not necessarily paying taxes out the wazoo or have a family to support. And as you get older, you get more conservative, and then you realize these things really have an impact.

But just might be the demographics. Young people tend to be Democrat and are totally oblivious to what's actually going on. I wish it was broken down to who's a parent and who's not. You might be able to. Is it the childless cat ladies? Or who works for the government? Who works for the government and who doesn't?

There may actually be an advanced internal thing when you sign up for the crosstabs, but let's do men and women. Let's do men and women. What do you think men say about the economy? Men are going to be more tend to be very bad, fairly bad, and women fairly good do you think men men say about the men are going to be more uh tend to be very bad fairly bad and women uh fairly fairly good yeah so 35 percent of men say it's in the good category and then you have uh 37 saying very bad 25 saying fairly bad among women

it uh it's fairly comparable okay fairly comparable um what do you think about racial breakdown white people say that it is mostly bad. Forty one. Very bad. Twenty four. Fairly bad. And only what do we have? Thirty two saying it's in the good range. Black or African-American think it's actually good right now. Fairly good. That's interesting because I have to wonder. We know that the Democrats are really worried about losing this vote, it may be that they're intentionally prioritizing the black community with programs trying to earn those votes.

Hispanic and Latino think it's actually bad. And other, I appreciate that Asians fall into other, and they think it's bad as well. Do you have a religion drop tab there? There's not. Let's get politically incorrect while we're at it. There's college degrees.

What do the immigrants say? Post graduates. Oh, no, do college degrees, because that, I guarantee, is going to be way skewed in the fairly good, very good. It's like 50-50. Nothing like... It's like 50-50. 33 saying fairly good, 14 very good.

Go to post graduate. I am post graduate. Oh, okay. Yeah. I'm wrong. Yeah, post graduates are fairly split. Seems pretty in the middle. College graduates, looks like they're leaning towards it's bad.

And non-college graduates are probably going to say it's the apocalypse. Yeah, they say it's really bad. 65 plus, they're having an okay time, but they still think it's mostly bad. Everybody seems to think the economy is bad. 1834. Do we do that already? Yeah. They think it's bad.

Very bad. 67%. So I'm just looking at basically every group except for black Americans think the economy is very, very bad. How could they claim that the economy is good for Kamala Harris right now for her to win? Yeah, that's pretty stunning for good old

Alan Rickman. Alan Rickman. Who probably has tenure, right? So he's just like, I don't know. It seems fine to me. Like I don't have to worry about anything. Let's talk about Venezuela. Not because, to be honest, I care about Venezuela all that much.

But we have the story from the New York Times. Street clashes turned deadly as Venezuela's power struggle deepens. The fatal violence comes as both President Nicolas Maduro and the opposition claim claim victory in the presidential election more protests were taking place on tuesday what is this a cvs receipt they're holding up maybe that's the cost of groceries i'm not trying to actually be funny that looks probably the election tab to be completely honest but it's just so long i had to assume at least 16 people including a soldier have died and about 750 more arrested as a result of protests in Venezuela. Election officials declared the nation's autocratic leader Maduro the winner of another six-year term early Monday, saying he handily beat former diplomat Edmundo Gonzalez.

But the government, didn't you say it was Maria the other day? I did. The opposition leader, they said it was Maria in the Al Jazeera thing. Oh, okay. Maybe that's the opposition leader, but I thought it was Gonzalez. But the government has not released the full results, but I thought it was Gonzalez. But the government has not released the full results in many countries, including the U.S.,

have said the vote was marred by widespread irregularities. So what we're seeing now is, I don't know if I have any tweets pulled up for this one. Oh, yeah, take a look at this.

This is from Visegrad. The streets of Caracas packed to the brim with protesters out to support opposition leader Maria Corina Machado. Oh, yeah, that's what you said during her first major speech since the election interesting

i never know if these things are real though it could be three years ago right and uh what is the date on this one they say it's from today but uh alerta mundi uh it says the streets of venezuela overflow to protest against nicholas maduro's fraud so what i see here and why i find it interesting is that there's been um some articles written about civil war i think it was like rolling stone wrote one a bunch of them are writing and you know what i i should probably pull this up because i think people should yeah it was rolling stone and i think people should uh see what they're talking about not that i'm saying it's all you know true and correct or whatever let's see if we can get this

article pulled up also after that pull up the bbc article from 2012 when venezuela bans private gun ownership if anybody wants to see what's also america under kamala harris so take a look at uh rolling stone and uh here's a quote this is from uh where they said this is uh george let's see ohio state senator george lang was warming up the crowd ahead of a speech from jd vance quote i'm afraid if we lose this one it's going to take a civil war to save the country and it will be saved it's the greatest experiment in the history of mankind and if we come down to a civil war i'm glad we got people like bikers for trump on our side there's a dot dot dot so who knows what he actually said he later wrote that he regretted the mark, which was made in the excitement of the moment on stage.

They go through many different people in on the right who have talked about whether we're at war or there's a civil war. So the reason I think Venezuela is interesting is what happens when there is. I don't know, indeterminate election or at the very least, the way to describe it is no one accepts the result of an election. We're not Venezuela. Venezuela is much, much smaller than the U.S. And we have hyperpolarization and geographic polarization. As I was saying yesterday, there's no way anybody in West Virginia is going to be like, well, I wanted Trump, so I'm going to go drive to New York or D.C. or Philly.

They're going to stay where they are, in which case, why would you see clashes? However, that being said, you can take a look at what happens. I'm actually thinking that what's happening in Venezuela is more likely to happen if Trump does win. If Trump wins, then liberals in major cities go nuts and riot and smash, tear down posters and lose their minds. You remember the coup, the failed coup, Operation Gideon in 2020 with Venezuela, and then had the private security, private missionary firm from here, from Canada, became an American citizen and failed when they hit land. And then that's one of those things where you don't know what's real or not, because Maduro said it was the CIA. And then his opposition said it was Maduro.

Right. And it looked like it could be him lying to make it just kind of like a Venezuelan Northwoods. You look at the failure that is Venezuela. And it's funny when the leftists are like, that's because the CIA is doing it to them. It's like, shut up, dude. It's like everyone knows the CIA does that stuff. So I think Maduro is like, well, we're going to frame. But the idea that the I was in Venezuela 10 years ago. And I can tell you that everything they try to do doesn't make any sense. The story I use I use to exemplify this is trying to buy a cell phone because they mandate jobs because jobs are what give people access to currency. It took like five to six people to buy a cell phone. Whereas in America, you walk into a T-Mobile and you walk up to one guy and say, I want to get

that phone. And they go, okay. And they pull their tablet and they start swiping and can I get your ID? And then they, here's the phone and then,, okay, swipe here and then we'll fill this out. And it takes like 15 minutes. You sign it. One guy, you're done. In Venezuela, you go to one guy and say, I'd like to buy a cell phone. He says, okay, fill out this form. Okay, now you have to go to cell phone acquisition.

So that's upstairs and around the corner. Then you go to cell phone acquisition and say, here's a list of phones you can buy. And say, okay, I want this one. He goes, okay, here's your ticket for that phone. Now you're going to go to warehouse retrievals. And then you walk over to one guy and he goes, there's your ticket. Thank you. And he walks in the back. He finds the phone. He brings it back out. He says, okay, now you're going to go to uh warehouse retrievals and then you walk over to one guy and he goes there's ticket thank you and he walks in the back he finds the phone he brings it back out says okay now you're going to go to you know to purchasing then you walk over and i'm just like why and the guy i was with who's venezuelan was like the government mandates the

creation of jobs so they require all of these companies to have as many jobs as possible and it doesn't work it it drains the economy it fails so this is what venezuela is so when you see like this coup stuff and they're like it's not maduro maduro was on camera giving a speech to his country and he grabs an empanada out of his drawer and eats it this dude is not competent right but anyway i digress you made an interesting point as to where we're most likely to see violence and it would most certainly be if trump wins because you go back to the summer of love where you have a convicted felon who likely died of at least drug contributing overdose george floyd and a summer of riots you have donald trump nearly assassinated live on tv

there wasn't one window broken imagine what there would have been had such a thing occurred to joe biden so thousand percent right. I was also just looking up the crime rate in Venezuela, given their gun laws, and I just found an article from Bloomberg talking about how the crime rates actually dropped because of Venezuelan migration, so that's also... Yeah, but where are they going? Where are the Venezuelans going? The issue to consider is that what we are seeing in Venezuela against Maduro is it's the people against the socialists, but it's the people in the cities.

In the United States, people in red rural areas are not going to go out. And like you mentioned, someone tried to kill Trump, not a broken window. When Trump wins, the people will behave like this. They're going to attack their own cities. They're going to riot. There's going to be mass unrest. And then the question is, does it get bad enough to where it could actually destabilize things at a national level? I'm not so sure because each state is effectively one

Venezuela. They have to deal with their own internals. Trump could very well just be like, good luck. Your riots in your cities have nothing to do with the federal government and you have no ability to overturn or change anything at the federal government level. Have a nice day. Well, Trump supporters certainly aren't going to go rally on the national lawn and then go take a look at the Capitol. The current administration has made it pretty clear that they're not going to stand for that. Trump supporters are going to volunteer to run down to the Capitol to protest. But that's the interesting thing.

The reason why I say it won't look like what's happening in Venezuela isuela is because people in west virginia aren't going to go to new york or whatever but you you could theoretically see i mean we saw we saw january 6th how on one side of the building you have people riding fighting with cops and and attacking you know uh police and people are being attacked cops were were they like throwing tear gas or whatever flashbangs into the crowd just abject chaos on the side, they're marching around like tourists with doors opened by police, having no idea what's going on. So I think in the event of a Kamala Harris

victory, let's be real, we don't even know if it's going to be Kamala, you may see something like January 6th. I mean, we already saw January 6th, but that's not going to be widespread chaos in cities. If Trump wins, I think you get Summer of Love times 10. Well, you had the Women's March in 2016, the day after the inauguration.

We woke up and walked out of the building and there was a massive Women's March that was relatively peaceful. So it's just a question of how angry they are going to be this time. I mean, there was a lot of rage, but at least it wasn't violent. Was that when she said she wanted to blow up the White House? She did make some weird threats that day, yeah.

Yeah, it was crazy. Who was that? Madonna. Madonna. Yeah, yeah. And then she meant that she was saying she wanted to put them on blast. That's right. Get everyone on Twitter talking about us.

Blow it up with love is what she wanted to say. She was like, no, like social media blow up. Like, you know, when you tweet about somebody and then everyone's tweeting at them and it's like, yeah, nobody believes that. And then especially with what just happened to Donald Trump, especially with what the Secret Service is saying now, this agent being like, hey, we may see something. I don't know. We're on a powder keg. What I'm hoping for, Trump wins. The cities are in control of what I like. Dude, like New York, do what New York does.

OK, I got I'm not going to tell New York what to do. West Virginia, we're going to be fine. There's not going to be any riots here. I'm not worried about that. New York's got to deal with New York problems. But I think Trump may just be I'm not I'm not going to do anything. There's not going to be an insurrection act. There's not going to be National Guard. I'm not going to get involved. States deal with your own problems. That's not the federal government's problem.

And then after a month or two, it dies down. Trump starts taking action. And once again, we get a marginal presidency that we're all kind of like oh that's that's okay i guess yeah well a marginal president presidency followed by touchwood publican and horror eight years of jd vance who might have some more transformative elements no way jd vance is going to be if first of all the idea that we get a republican trump and then jd vance wins twice again we get 12 years it's then J.D. Vance wins twice again, we get 12 years. It's very unlikely because people people adapt to their circumstance. So even if things are good, people will, depending on what the sentiment is nationally, you could have a good economy. But if people feel like let's say in the first three years, the economy goes up.

And then in the last year, the economy dips a little bit. Now people are feeling like they're losing. You get a shift. So I just don't believe that Trump, Vance, and Republicans are going to march in with this mandate for leadership and be like, we are overhauling anything. No, they're going to go in

and they're going to be like, I'd like to appoint this person. Democrats are going to be like, no, and they'll go, aw. I don't know. I'm anticipating mass deportations if trump actually gets in i mean and i say mass deportation is not in the order of tens of millions but beginning with objective uh criteria of criminals or criminality i don't believe trump will be the

wrecking ball he's promising yeah i don't know but i think i only got four years to do it he's not like he's i don't think we see mass deportations. I think we see deportations. The question of mass might be the qualification, but I do think we see deportations. I think we see that. And I think at some point it does get bad enough that even the Democrats will say, Trump wasn't all that bad.

We're going to maybe go back and revisit 2016 to 2020. It wasn't that disastrous until 2020. And I think other people have roles to play in that. But the nightmare that they fear when they get into the reality won't be as bad as they thought it was and they might actually see that things will i don't know stabilize that i can see i can actually see trump on colbert at some point like i turn around because they're going to be so desperate wasn't he already on colbert well yeah i mean but that was pre-everything right you know when they were trying to he was on on Fallon, Fallon did the

hair thing, and then Fallon got... Oh, he wasn't on Colbert, it was Fallon. He might have been on Colbert at some point, but yeah, I see that happening at some point. If he gets elected and there's like a, it could be a turnaround. I actually think this is kind of you know, telling because I'm thinking of Jon Tester's Senate race in Montana, and this is, you know,

one of these contentious races where they're saying Montana is effectively a red state, you know, it's got always wins. He held off on endorsing. I don't know if he I haven't checked today if he's done it. But for a while, he wasn't saying anything about Kamala Harris. And so I think you'll see the emergence of a class of Democrats that are sort of more in line with maybe Joe Manchin, who are sort of saying, like, we're not like those those progressives, like we have more shared values. And so then when things, you know, presumably get better economically under Trump, they are more easily able to say, like, look, I voted for some of

those policies. My record isn't like that. I'm thinking of the Democrats who just voted against Kamala Harris in this this House resolution on immigration. Right. There are people who are starting to say, like, we're parting ways with the Biden-Harris administration. And so you might see people who posture more moderately and have success with Democratic voters in a way that this progressive wing is starting to see, you know, it just isn't working. I want to jump to the story from The Wall Street Journal.

America's new political war pits young men against young women. A majority of men under 30 support Trump and Republican control of Congress. A sharp reversal from the 2020 race. Young women strongly favor Democrats. We'll pull this up. This is from America 2100. Will young will young men vote Democratic in 2024 percentage identifying as Republican in 2023? Forty nine percent of young men identified as Republican. What was, 49% of young men identified as Republican.

What was the age of the young men? It didn't say. Okay. And then we have this year. This is, of course, what many people have seen. This is an old survey. 12th grade girls, overwhelmingly liberal, very few conservative. But for boys, it's inverted, overwhelmingly conservative.

And then we have this from the Wall Street Journal AP vote cast showing that young men overwhelmingly lean Republican and women lean Democrat. So much less women Democrats, much more male Republicans and men favor Trump and women favor Biden. I think that, you know, I've said this before and I welcome the ire from the feminists. This will not play out well for women and men lead. And it doesn't matter what these women want or think. And the issue is strongly that men don't men can wait as long as they want to have families. And so what's going to happen for a lot of these women, not all of them and maybe even a majority of them, but enough women are going to be approaching 35 with their doctors telling them, having a child at 35 is considered a geriatric pregnancy, and you are at risk.

You need to consider that you're getting too old for this. And these women are going to be like, oh, no. And the men are going to be told by their doctors, looks good, mate. Have a nice day. Come back when you're 40. So these young men and these women, they go on dates and the woman's going to say something like Kamala Harris or whatever. And the guy's going to be like, not interested. I'm sorry. Look, I'm looking to have a family. I want to have kids. I want to buy a house and find someone that I'm going to be with. I'm not really interested in being with someone who holds these values that I think are detrimental to raising children. More importantly,

a 35 year old guy is going to be talking to a 28 year old woman. And a 35 year old woman is going to be trying to talk to a 35 year old guy and they're going to say not interested. Guys, you know, and I know the feminists, they get really mad about this one in the leftist sexist. I'm like, okay, well, you know, do whatever you want to do. I'm just telling you what the data shows. So this, I think, ultimately lends itself to more and more women are going to be childless. Men will be selective, but this will result in more conservative children like we're already seeing and then give it 20 to 40 years and the Chelsea handlers of the world will be alone and isolated from culture. It takes only a small percentage shift culturally for the entire surface of culture to appear one political ideology. What happens when these women get artificial wombs and they don't need men anymore? It's just a bunch of single mothers with babies. They're going to struggle. It's it's it's it's same issue. It's going to be substantially easier for young men and conservative women to have families because the dad working and the mom raising the kid and the mom does work, too, but just, you know, less so while she's having the kid versus women trying to maintain birthing pods. If artificial wombs even come to market in the next 10 to 20 years, surrogacy is going to be out of reach.

And many of these people just don't want kids at all so here's what's good here's what i see happening based on the trends right now and this is not accounting for variables chelsea chelsea handler is coming out being like i'm 50 years old and i can do drugs and wake up in the morning as if as if that's the measure of happiness well but that's fine for her that's that's the measure of happiness. Well, but that's fine for her. That's fine for her. The point is, when 20 years from now, someone born today, what are they likely to be, conservative or liberal? The answer is plainly conservative, based on birthing fertility rates among conservative versus liberals, based on trends among young people. If the next generation leans even 5% more conservative, the market shall provide. And so this woke stuff won't play because they're not going to get memberships and they're going to adapt to what the market wants. Chelsea, Chelsea Handler will find herself posting into

the wind on social media and people are going to be like, look, what you're saying is annoying and offensive and it's not, it's not appealing to our customer base. She will be 70 years old being like, how did I lose touch with society? Why am I the odd person out? If 55% of this country says we want Patriot content, then these companies like Disney, they just go, for every $100 we spend,

how much do we make if we do liberal stuff? Eh, you might make 30 bucks. What if we do conservative stuff? $31? Okay, go conservative. You make more money. I don't believe these statistics in general. I mean, I find that they are sort of not self-fulfilling, but self-propagating. They put these out to try to rationalize what they want to see in the market.

But let's assume that it's accurate. I try to understand what is the brain pattern that results in women being democratic. Is it just the one litmus test of abortion that's been become such a prevalent question that they engage in what is basically what Gadsad refers to as like suicidal empathy like that? It's so important on that one particular issue. They will sacrifice the rest of their country no open immigration through you know foreign wars like i i try to reconcile the idea that they're empathetic so it's based on empathy and yet they support endless foreign conflict which is the sort of maybe that's a uniparty but democrat uh policy right now i or the litmus test the abortion is so important that that's not young no it It's that women are more susceptible to social pressures than men. That's it. That's sexist, Tim.

It's true, right? I'm joking. I don't know. It is scientifically proven that women are more agreeable than men. Men are hardheaded and make decisions about what they want. Women are more agreeable and willing to work with the group. This makes total sense when you look at evolutionary biology. So what does it result in? Women are more likely to look at the dominant narrative from the media and say, it's better to just, you know, fit in.

And men are more likely to be like, no, I'm right and I'm going to do what I want. And most guys are wrong and crash and burn in economy or otherwise. But most women tend to be more average and aligned to the center. This is akin to the greater male variability hypothesis. Well, you also have to consider immigration in your formula because we do have millions of people crossing the border, millions of immigrants who want to stay and probably will stay.

So that definitely shakes up the formula. I disagree completely. I don't think that changes the tendencies between men and women. It'll have an impact culturally for sure, but it still results in very similar things. If anything, I actually think that would be more detrimental to the left. The right likes to make the point that illegal immigrants, when they're granted citizenship or new citizens tend to vote Democrat in their first time around or whatever. I don't think that changes the argument around liberals don't have kids and conservatives do. You can you can say we're going to have X amount of immigration, but how many immigrants are conservative versus how many are liberal,

how many religious versus how many are are not. That's not being factored in. So I think mostly it's a moot point. And the result, the question actually is when you look at voting patterns, which includes immigration, liberals are having substantially less kids than conservatives and have been for 20 years. And that trend has only been exacerbated as fertility declines. Right. You see that argument made by some people who refer to Israel, how Israel used to be pretty in the middle of the road. But now they're growing even harder. Right. Because the conservative Jews are having more kids than the liberal. Yep. That's it. so how long does it take but i think you're right that immigration was marketed to women as an empathetic thing i think

you're both picking up on this because it's like what did biden come out and say he said uh we're going to grant a pathway to citizenship to people who are illegal immigrants who are married to a citizen who've been you know most of them have been here for 25 years it's emotional they're saying we have to be nice and we can't disrupt their lives and never mind the fact that there are cons to illegal immigration. Don't talk about that. It's people fleeing to stable countries. You have to let them in. We have to do something. There's a reason it's called amnesty, right? Like it's sold to women as a humanitarian act and women are susceptible to that. And I think that's one of the challenges of all of these issues, which is that men, I think, still feel a certain

traditional pressure to do masculine things, to provide for their families, to have children. Women are told to ignore a lot of their biological instincts, don't have children, delay having them, don't settle down. And so they're actually functioning very differently in society. You should look at, you know, South Korea is a good example of this. They had a similar narrative going on during their last presidential election, where it was the conservative candidates supported by young men and young women supported the more progressive candidate because they ultimately don't have the same goals anymore. It's not like everyone is trying to line up and achieve the same thing. So to your point, 20 years ago, we were looking at, I bring this point up a

lot, so I know people have heard it, but for those that haven't, liberals were having one point four three kids. Conservatives having two point zero five. Fast forward 20 years. Pew Research tracks the first time in 100 years that a generation has moved slightly more conservative on some issues. Traditionally, it was always a wave of this generation is 10 percent progressive 30 then 50 then 60 and then gen z bill clinton rocked the vote and then gen z comes around and all of a sudden they are comparable for the first time on average they are gen z and millennials are comparable politics but in some areas gen z is actually slightly more conservative now when this story first came out pure research i think was from 2018 everybody on the right is going like, whoa, we're winning the argument with young people. I'm like, no, you're not. Conservatives had more kids 20 years ago.

That means there is just generally more conservative children who hold these views their parents gave them. The right makes the argument that the left is trying to indoctrinate in schools, which is true, but the right is also at war on that issue as well. So I'd say that's a moot point. Give it 20 more years, and you're going to see the country skew a few percentage points towards conservative. And at that point, dominant culture, the pressures will exist. There will be a market for progressivism, but it will be a minority market. Stadiums, Coca-Cola, whatever. They're going to say, what's our lowest common denominator marketing strategy to maximize sales and they're going to say 55 percent of people identify as american loving

conservative patriots and 45 say other and they go okay we'll go with the 55 we make more money that's it is interesting and the going along to get along aspect of women are being more more influenced by social media or those types of pressures would also explain why self-harm ideations on social media resulting from Instagram or whatever affects disproportionately or significantly more girls than boys. That's interesting. I hadn't actually thought about the demographic shift. I'm trying to apply this, although that's like my anecdotal experience. The family members that I have who have kids who are conservative-ish versus uh liberal progressive-ish i'm noticing the gender issue

but i also thought it was more of the andrew tate influence i can certainly see how uh yeah people are talking about why why are kids listening to andrew tate and i've heard this from parents where they're like my my young teenage kids were watching andrewate the other day. And I'm like, you're like a conservative leading family. You're not liberals. And, you know, also, it's entirely possible that liberal families become overbearing and the kids rebel or whatever. But ultimately, liberals, infinitely more likely to have abortions than conservatives. Like, not literally infinitely, but like just substantially more and conservatives just have more kids in general so when you look at the fertility rate 20 years ago i wonder if the fertility rates right now are taking into consideration abortion i mean probably they're

just looking at how many children do liberals have so that includes that that liberals are just having tons of abortions and yet the child replacement rate is still pretty significant low and dropping even further. For conservatives, I think it's like 1.8 fertility, and for liberals, it's like 1. Something I've noticed, and I wonder if you guys notice with your families, that a lot of liberal areas, if you're traveling through them, are anti-family. Like, they just feel like kids

aren't welcome. Well, super pro-dog. Yeah. Super pro-dog. Or cat. Or cat. Fur babies. I hate that phrase. I i was mentioned i mentioned this several times i was flying through chicago and the family restrooms have been turned into all gender bathrooms yep and i'm i'm looking at this there's like a men's room and a women's room and right in the middle it says all gender and i'm like i know for a fact that bathroom's always been i used to work at o'hare they didn't build a third bathroom to accommodate you know agender

people it used to be the family restroom with the baby changing station. And they just said demand is not for baby changing stations. It's for gender ideology in Chicago. So they switched it. And there's baby changing tables in both men and women. Yeah. Well, I changed a lot of diapers when my kids were born. And I did, too.

That's why they had family bathrooms. Even though they had to put them on the sink. And also one thing we mentioned too is McDonald's used to have a play place. Yeah. Like that's all going away. Now McDonald's are like brutalist. It is.

Well, the employee list McDonald's where you go and you place your order on the screen and then go pick it up. It's the scariest thing I've ever seen. And I saw one in a downtown Toronto at night. Imagine there was just one clown there. There's a freaking LCD screen you go and there's like one person behind the counter

and I guess the people manually putting in, but there's no human interaction anymore. Oh yeah, yeah. The Taco Bell down the street is exactly that. I mean, I don't like it, but also when your order gets screwed up, it makes it very difficult. No accountability.

The thing is, don't go into a McDonald's late at night in Toronto. Holy hell did I think I was going to die. There's already a video of someone ordering a McDonald's and a robot arm makes everything. And there's people working there, but the robot arm goes over and then it reaches down and scoops the fries and then moves them over. At the Taco Bell down the street over here, if you go in, there's kiosks. And there's people working behind the counter. And you can walk up to the counter and wait if you want.

But why would you? You go to the kiosk and you go, boop, boop, boop, enter, and then you watch them make it. That's the future. But, you know, more to the point, going back to what I was saying is that, like Jack Pacific mentions with Pizza Hut nationalism, even fast food restaurants used to be family oriented. Because the market demanded that people accommodate children. Because they're like, look, am I going to come to eat at your place? I got kids. So McDonald's says build a playground in our fast food restaurants. Now they don't need it anymore.

They got rid of it. Pizza Hut used to be a tradition in my family and other families in my area was like that was part of your weekend night of going Pizza Hut, then movie. It was great. That was great. Those red plastic cups, man. But here's here's the jack posobic talks about it and it's fascinating jack remembers after school and it's like book it and you did well it's like we're gonna go get your personal pizza i always thought

it was really funny that you get the booket thing and then if you like read the book they give you the free pizza on the wheel because my parents would just buy pizza and i'd eat you like if my parents ordered and get your personal pan pizza i would my point is whether i read the book or not i was eating pizza but once you got the thing then you were like let's go to pizza and i get that little pizza jack wants what he had when he was a kid and he wants to share with his kids but because the fertility rate has gone way down and the market dictates there's no opportunity for him to do that anymore i always thought the playground issue was liability and hygiene. So that's, I never even thought of that.

But we had one at McDonald's on Dakari in Montreal, and I used to take the kids. The market shall provide. If the cost of lawsuits and hygiene is less than the amount they make from having the family opportunity, they keep the playground. So they could say, look, it's a million dollars a year in liability, but we make two million from families who bring their kids in. So pay the cost, take the million dollar profit. At some point, they said, liability fixed costs a million bucks, but we're only pulling in 800,000 from families. Get rid of it. Some of this is so funny to hear you guys talk about because, well, we didn't grow up that far

apart from each other, but I grew up in a rural area in Connecticut and there was a McDonald's, but it was like a drive to get there. Right. Like we didn't go often. It didn't have a play place. We didn't I can't even think of I think I can't think of where the closest Pizza Hut was. I never saw growing up, but there were local pizza places like there wasn't the book, but the local library had a huge summer reading program. And so it's it's interesting to see like the idea that, you know, obviously it's true. Corpor, corporations did what they could to be a part of culture, and they drop stuff off, whether it's cost or people aren't interested in them. But also, all of these things that people want probably still exist. They're just not in the sort of one-stop shop.

Right. I still remember growing up in Wyoming, the first day that a McDonald's was built in our hometown. So it was a pretty radical change, even though we had a Pizza Hut the whole time. Were there protests? I also think the internet's off. It was right next to high school, so they were happy. I think the major problem we have is mobile internet.

Internet's always been fine. I've had the internet since I was a little kid, as long as I can remember there was internet. And it was a useful resource, but only when you're at home, you have to sit at the machine and use it. And then around 2007, 2008, mobile internet happened. And man, I remember skating at Wilson Skate Park in Chicago in like 2005, and I have no idea what's happening in the world. I had a candy bar phone.

I could receive texts. My friends would say, where yet? And I'd be skating. I'd go home, go on the computer, and then start reading what was going on. And then there was like over a year. All of a sudden, smartphones, touchscreen, the iPhone. Now the internet was 24-7. No matter where you were, you knew exactly what was happening.

And it just exponentially skyrocketed. All of a sudden now, you are wired into the machine 24-7. I had no internet until I was like 20 like i didn't have a yeah we're kind of a rare generation or we can remember a time without the internet oh yeah when i was seven it was wait whoever wakes up first gets on the computer because here's how it worked the rule in my house was you're allowed to go on the computer for one hour and then you have to let brother or sister you know my brother or sister use it next so as soon as i got any conscious thought it's wake up bolt straight to the computer and then go on to get on the internet and then as soon as my brother would come in i'd

be on for like 45 minutes he'd be like how long have you been on i'd be like like five minutes yeah of course in another hour like as soon as enough time to download a song uh everything right downloading songs took like five hours, six hours. Right. If we even had them. I mean, I'm like seven. I'm on AOL and I'm downloading games. So always just trying to find, like AOL was crazy,

trying to find different games that were available for DOS or whatever. Wow. And then playing them. And then we had click and play stuff. So first I got click and play, so i got first i got click and play then i got games factory then multimedia fusion and flash flash for and then i'm making websites i'm making video games but only for an hour and you gotta let him oh yeah yeah yeah this is i think i downloaded a movie trailer once successfully well back then you i don't know that

you actually could it was it was a crazy moment I remember me and my friend were at his house, and we were trying to watch Dragon Ball Z on Real Player Live at like 40p. You couldn't even see anything, and it was buffering. Every 10 seconds of buffering would give you one second to video, and we were just sitting with this tiny little thing on the screen to watch Dragon Ball Z,

and we were like, yes. I remember going to a friend's house and watching him play Doom, and I was like, that's pretty cool. And that was it. And then I went home and I just had a farm. You never got to play? Winamp. You could only watch.

You remember Winamp? Did you have that? Yes, I remember Winamp. I'm older than everybody here. I don't ever remember 45. And I don't remember not being connected. I got my first email address in 96 and it was RoadrunnerDavidYahoo.com I hope't remember not being connected. I got my first email address in 96 and it was roadrunnerdave at yahoo.com. Oh, so you were late.

Yeah, but- I hope people still email you there. Is that because you're in Canada? Go ahead. Wait, where did you grow up again? Montreal, but- Canada? The thing is, I always felt like

I was always connected in the same way. The internet's one thing. I just like having a video recording device and I've always been into that. So just, I don't mind being connected this way. Wherever you are, you can upload a video. It's pronounced Mong-ray-all. Oh, it depends. I get in trouble that. I don't mind being connected this way. Wherever you are, you can upload a video. It's pronounced Mong-ray-all. I get in trouble.

Apparently, I don't pronounce it. It's Montreal or Montreal, and I go with apparently the wrong way. How do you say it? How do the French... Mong-ray-all is how they say it. Exactly, Mong-ray-all. I anglicize it Mong-ray-all.

So you're already the home of Kamala Harris. She went to school up the street from me. I was brazenly Western. It's a very nice neighborhood from what I understand. She went to school up the street from me. I was raised in West Virginia. A very nice neighborhood from what I understand. She's as Canadian as I am, and I think I'm more American than she is. Someone's going to put together a montage like the unburdened Viva saying he's more American than Kamala.

Did you used to go with your friends to Depaner? Depaner, of course. Depaner in French is the word for depaner, to figure something out with minimal resources. Is that what that means? Depaner. That's how they refer to... In French, the word for dépanné is to figure something out with minimal resources. Is that what that means? Yeah, dépanné. So that's how they refer to like... You go to a depaner to get whatever you need because it was sort of like, oh, you're missing something.

It's great. In New York, they call them bodegas. In Chicago, we call them corner stores. Yeah, we have our daigas. Go to the corner store. And then New York, it was like the bodega. And the first time I went there, I was like, the what? Bodegas. And then I went to a bodega and I said, i i want to get a like a roast beef sub and they went a what and i was like a roast beef sub sandwich like that i pointed to the hero

role no that's a hero and i was like man culture shock realize chicago's whole language it's kind of crazy though i just didn't realize that different languages and then there and then i and then i asked the guy for giardiniera and he went, what? I don't even know what that is. I had a panic attack. I was like, I can't get giardiniera. You gotta go to Potbelly's though because they're everywhere and they have it. But they don't know what giardiniera is either. They call it hot peppers.

Never got food from bodegas. We just go there for vanilla duches, which is for bad things I don't do anymore. No food at our bodegas. You couldn't trust it there. What the heck is a vanilla Dutch? A vanilla Dutch? What a fun cultural hour we're having. Yeah, you know.

For blunts, for blunts. Remember the internet? That was fun. Used to go on AOL. It was stationary. 56K. That was the last one because we upgraded to cable internet.

Ooh. I remember one time I lost- Cable or did you go through the- Cable. The fiber at any point? Fiber was way later. So I had 56K. I think we had 26.6.

Or was it 24? I think it's 24. I don't remember. You had dial-up. And then one day I log in to AOL. And then I open up AIM. And then I see my friend is online. And I message him and he doesn't answer. And I was like, oh, that's weird. And then I see up AIM, and then I see my friend is online, and I message him and he doesn't answer. And I was like, oh, that's weird.

And then I see him just away, and I'm like, and then one day I see him and I ask him, I was like, were you just like leave your computer on? And he's like, I have cable. And I was like, you have what? He's like, cable internet. And I was like, what is that? And he's like, oh, it's just your internet's on 24-7. And I was like, what?

And so then I went home and I was like, because we had a second phone line, and you'd be online downloading a song, And then a telemarketer would call and it would knock you offline. And then your download crashes. And then we got cable. And all of a sudden the song started coming in so fast. I have a vivid memory of the only time I heard the dial-up internet sound. I was pretty young and I only remember it once, but I think that was just rural New Hampshire

at the time where a lot of stuff hadn't progressed. It's crazy how quickly technology changes. I think of my younger sisters who do most of their homeschooling through some sort of online assistance. They will never have remembered a time without the internet, and that was not

that long ago. They won't know what a fax machine is. Unless they need like dental records sent. Now it's a digital fax. It's a PDF by email. I was checking out to see if anything broke on the news because you never know what happens. I want that acting deputy director to resign or be fired or be charged or something.

We're going to go to Super Chat. So if you haven't already, would you kindly smash that like button? One like equals one fight, fight, fight. Become a member by going to timcast.com and clicking join us and you can hang out for the members only call-in show where you as members call in, talk

to us on the show, join in. It'll be a lot of fun. Not so family friendly. In the meantime, we will read your Super Chats. Polly Pure says, or is it Polly Pure? I don't know. It's two E's, so I say Pure. Am I first? Indeed, you are first. Congratulations, you've won.

Tim is controlled. Opposition says, Trump said, if you don't vote for me, you won't have Israel for very long. I hope he's right. I hope he loses. Not voting Trump this time. I can survive four years of Kamala if America's parasite is gone. Super Cheddar, dear Super Cheddar, I thank you so much for that tweet because I've been trying to explain to people what Israel derangement syndrome is. support kamala harris who is like one of the worst human beings imaginable with no track record unappointed to actually see the united states suffer and the economy fail because you hate

israel so much is a level of derangement that is hard to exemplify but in that single super chat, everyone now knows, oh, they're deranged. Well, I won't steel man that super tweet. Super tweets? Super red. I won't steel man it. I can understand what the resentment is, is that people are saying foreign countries are taking too much of our tax dollars. Like Ukraine.

Like Ukraine. Like Israel. I mean, I can understand people saying that uh what i always find funny is that the people who say uh no more foreign war and then also simultaneously say down with israel which sounds like um your objection is not just no more foreign war i can understand the resentment the issue that people take with that there won't be i don't want to say there won't be anything left of America if Kamala is elected. It will be a wildly different America where this individual thinks, well, so long as the parasite's gone, I can live with four years of Kamala. You might not have much of your own country left after four years of another open war. Kamala's going to give Israel a blank check.

I'm not sure about that. She's still out there. She doesn't want to call Islamic terrorism. She's going to give Israel a blank check. And Gaza, too. No, no, no. Dude, dude, dude. Kamala is a uniparty establishment candidate.

The CIA, FBI, 17, however many intelligence agencies are going to say, OK, Kamala, we're funding Israel however much money they want. That much I can understand. She is a war whore and and uh and uh say a military industrial complex uh tool of the highest order is that in your book is this a quote no no no sorry i cut you off for a second no i actually thought the amateur i thought it said something else on the amateur hour and a bada bing bada boom uh no i could see that part um but no i i think there might be a rift uh developing within Kamala Brat party and the Jewish support.

I don't I don't. We'll see how it plays out. But I think the rift is only superficial for for political reasons right now to earn votes. There is no way the establishment backs off Israel. Donald Trump says he supports Israel in much a very superficial way. He likely will provide them. There is no candidate that's going to abandon Israel. It's just not reality. The CIA candidate is never abandoning Israel.

They may have abandoned Netanyahu and demand some change, but the idea that because radical progressives demand of the CIA, dude, you really think that the CIA candidate is going to be like, okay, we're done with Israel? No. They might just say the market, the market shall provide and they'll see what is more profitable of a solution.

I mean, well, to say not not not let Israel burn, but rather to say, well, I don't know, funding both sides type thing. Or I can't play out in a world where there's another economy that would outweigh the laundering that goes on through these types of foreign aid packages. But I could see where I could see where that could happen. What is the argument to that that the U.S. government have to stop supporting Israel right now? It would be the idea of the of genocide. It would be the idea of some international human rights violations where they say we can no longer support what you're doing in Gaza. So, like, what about Protective Edge? The 2014 operation, they call it mowing the lawn when Israel starts bombing Gaza to an extreme degree.

This time with October 7th, it's particularly bad. It's particularly bad. But we have seen for every couple of years what they refer to as mowing the lawn, where Israel starts bombing Gaza. And then you've got the West Bank, which has got settlements and purchases and conflict has been ongoing for a long time. I do not see anything happening now where the U.S. deep state would be like, I guess we're wrapping up here. We're done with Israel. No, I don't think it would be quite that cut and dry, but it would be to the point where the public I can see a shift in public sentiment saying we're no longer supporting this. And whether you cloak it as we don't support Netanyahu versus we don't support Israel, but we're not supporting this.

And I can see that happening the longer this goes on. And especially if it turns out that, as I firmly believe as well, there is some culpability in how that was allowed to occur in the first place. And then they say, well, this was this was sort of an opportunistic exploitation of tragedy that could have been averted or at least minimized. I could see the public sentiment shifting a little bit. I don't understand the simultaneous argument that Israel puppets the United States and it's a parasite in the United States. The the Israel derangement people think that Israel controls our policy through AIPAC and things like this. They certainly will. There's an influence. You can't under you can't deny that. And why would the U.S. stop giving Israel money?

It's it becomes a cost benefit analysis as to whether or not there's other ways that this administer the military industrial complex could, I don't know, find other ways to to grease their wheels or line their pockets. I mean, things evolve. But after, what are we doing with 70 years of U.S. pro-Israel policy? I do not see anything in modern news and climate anywhere that is significant enough where the U.S. would be like, well, after four years, we decided to wrap up the Israel project. No, I mean, some people, some politicians might say, well, after 70 years, things are no better off than they were 70 years ago.

So maybe we need to take a different approach. But it's intentional. The circumstance in Israel, the argument is that Netanyahu either allows or wants these conflicts to happen. He's funded Hamas. And the U.S. is right behind him allowing these things to happen for whatever reason. So the arguments towards Israel are just scattershot garbled nonsense. Well you certainly saw, you know, people called Barack Obama sort of the most anti-Israel

candidate and the most aggressive thing he did against Israel was try to overthrow Netanyahu through some of his operatives that were working for the opposition candidate and I think that that's sort of... That's Netanyahu though. I think that's the same thing you would get with a Kamala Harris presidency, where she would, you know... The biggest criticism of Biden was he literally flew to Israel and embraced Netanyahu. And I think that you might see Kamala Harris be a little more distant with Netanyahu, as we already saw. So let me get this straight. Let me get this straight. I don't think you're going to see any major...

Almighty Antichrist in chat saying I'm wrong. You think that the deep state doesn't want to fund Israel anymore? This is the argument? That the intelligence agencies of the United States are done with funding Israel, and that if Kamala wins, they will likely cut off funding to Israel? Is that what people think? I think Trump will

keep it going? I don't think so. Is that what you think? No, I don't think so. I mean, I don't think so, but I can see sentiment shifting in a way that I've never seen it shift in my lifetime because this particular, call it an act of reprisal, has been what it is compared to what it has been in the past. Has sentiment ever shifted the military industrial complex? No, but just the irony is that they're they're i guess the argument against why they would not change policy is they are making profit off both ends like literally giving aid to the victims of the israeli uh reprisals and you know giving aid to the military even from a strategic standpoint as tim saying like they still view it as a as a you know

a foothold in the middle east america's strongest ally in the Middle East, and they wouldn't give it up for that. So it looks like the military-industrial complex will change their mind. Good luck with that. I'm with Tim. I'm asking, was it Almighty Alchemist? So I guess you actually believe that the military-industrial complex is done with funding Israel? So then why would they, they under trump fund israel if if the machine itself north of grumman halliburton all these like their military contractors overseas if all these companies that profit off of expansionist policy nation building war and conflict have decided you know we're just done with the israel project then

doesn't matter who you vote for vote for trump doesn't matter trump's going to go to them and say now we're not interested in taking those contracts anymore. We'll give you $60 billion. We want iron dump defense. Now we're not interested. Okay. And then with the, like, I just don't understand the argument. I don't see anything happening in Israel that is substantially different. You can argue that the scale of death is more. I don't know, man, go, go back to, to all of the wars throughout the, every decade. Go back to every single operation carried out by Israel. Look at how Egypt's handled handled it. Israel and the Sinai Peninsula, all of these things, the you've got Jordan's involvement, West Bank settlements, Gaza conflict.

You've got going back to when Israel pulled out. I don't see anything substantially different. I just literally don't. To where the military industrial complex goes, that's the end of this operation. In fact, Iran fired missiles into Israel and the U.S. wants to go to war with Iran. This is the perfect to cast his belly for the establishment outside of Iran.

Well, now you're building a good argument for the guy who said, I'd rather take my chances with Kamala than have an administration that wants to go to war with Iran and using Israel as sort of the catalyst. That's Kamala. It is that when when Trump nearly died, the official narrative popped up a day later was, oh, by the way, Iran was trying to kill Trump. And so the belief is that was their initial plan. Trump, he gets assassinated. They blame Iran for it. And that's the cashless belly.

Iran, that's how you get all the Trump supporters to get behind war. Nikki Haley becomes the nominee. Then you get Kamala Harris or Nikki Haley and both want war with Iran. John Bolton wanted war with Iran. The U.S., there was a plan. Who was the military officer who came out in like the late 2000s and said there are seven nations? Do you remember? I always forget his name.

You know what I'm talking about. Yeah, yeah. Iran was one of them. And we've hit Libya. We've hit Syria. All these countries. But Iran's not gone down. We set up military bases in Iraq and Afghanistan, which gives us a pincer strike on Iran.

And we've not had the casus belli nor the resources to go into Iran. Iran fires on Israel. Kamala Harris gets elected. We are looking at war with Iran. Well, hold on. But the timeline there, when they tried to assassinate Trump and blame it on Iran, Joe Biden

hadn't yet pulled out, and I don't think he pulls out if they succeed. Pull out of what? Biden hadn't withdrawn yet. So I think the timeline there, I appreciate that they were trying to blame this on Iran in some way. Nikki Haley becomes the Republican nominee. For sure, for sure. No, but then I don't think Biden pulls out, so the Kamala factor's not yet in. I think Biden was always going to pull out, though.

I don't think. Oh, Afghanistan? Yeah, but this is already after the debate. Hold on, hold on. But either way, the Biden administration is pro-war. They want war with Iran. No question. No question. Nikki Haley would be as well. No question. Without Trump, and they say Trump was killed by Iran, Nikki Haley has the next most amount of delegates. The RNC could be in revolt, but they probably would have gone for Nikki Haley, who has second highest amount of delegates.

And then you've got a guarantee whoever gets elected, it's war with Iran. Or at least that's the direction we're going. Why would they back off Israel? Voting for Kamala Harris is the surest way to make sure Israel gets all the money in the world because they want that narrative to go to war with Iran. I think they might have lost that narrative. The hypothetical, I agree

with everything. Wesley Clark, Luke, sorry, Luke, we are change. Wesley Clark, that is correct. He said there were seven countries the U.S. was planning to go to war with and we've gone to war with, I think it's all about Iran or something. Iraq and Afghanistan surround Iran. The purpose of those was very clearly the U.S. is targeting Iran and has been for a very long time, and we surrounded their country, and we've needed that, we've needed that Cass's belly. John Bolton wanted it. We never got

there. John Bolton said when Trump appointed him, which was a huge mistake, he and this is like I what is this, 2017 next year we'll be celebrating in Tehran. And I'm like, this guy's nuts. Kamala Harris is the military industrial complex. They are not going to back off Israel. They're going to dump as much money as they can in that country because they want to use it as staging operations for their war with Iran. They need the territory to control to bring things into the Mediterranean. Joe Biden tried building the pier. What's the pier for in the Gaza? That was a beachhead for the invasion of Gaza. That is support for Israel. They say, oh, we're going to bring in supplies. BS. They want war with Iran, and they want the means to bring in supplies into Israel. They want to secure Gaza so they can have access to the Mediterranean. They're at war with Russia. They want to control the Black Sea and cut them off from the Donbass. They want to secure Gaza so they can have access to the Mediterranean. They're at war with

Russia. They want to control the Black Sea and cut them off from the Donbass. They want to move in through Israel, stock up on weapons. That way, when they engage with Iran, they've got the Persian Gulf, they've got the Mediterranean, they've got multiple attack points, Iran and Afghanistan. I guess your idea that Kamala will invade Iran kind of clashes with the Democrats that we currently understand who follow more of a policy of appeasement, right? President Obama famously made the nuclear deal with Iran. John Kerry was right there. Hillary Clinton was right there.

They all pursued this idea that they were trying to neutralize Iran as a nuclear threat, but certainly not ready to go to war. Stuxnet. That was Obama. Stuxnet, what's that? That was when the U.S.

and Israel under Obama blew up Iranian nuclear centrifuges with one of the most sophisticated cyber attacks in history. A direct attack on Iranian infrastructure from the United States. So that's more of a neutralizing force

than open war. I mean, the only reason we didn't get war at that point was because Iran didn't declare it. But Stuxnet, it's an insane move. They said, let's infect every machine on the planet until this thing finds Iranian nuclear centrifuges and then blows them up. And it did. And it was the U.S. and Israel who did it. And that was under Obama.

Well, and Trump certainly launched the airstrike against Soleimani, which was also very provocative. Yep, and that's why I'm saying I don't get the argument. It doesn't matter who you vote for. The military-industrial complex wants this war to happen. Trump is slightly your better bet. We got no new wars under Donald Trump. That's probably why the military-industrial complex hates him so much. But we'll move on to other Super Chats,

because otherwise we'll talk about Israel forever. But, all right, here, Clintres is is back howdy people tim i get what you're saying regarding the trans boxer in the olympics but you're wrong these female athletes shouldn't have to give up their once every four years or once in a lifetime chance to compete at the highest level to make a statement that men fighting women is wrong any man who justifies a man fighting woman be it her choice or not completely lacks the noble rooster spirit you have spoken of in the past the alternative then is because there's a there's a male who there's two males i think that are boxing in the olympics against women uh then like imagine

being woman it's like this is your chance at the olympics you can fight a male or you can bow out either way you have you you've lost my view is you're already not participating in the Olympics. They're basically putting on an exhibition match where you're likely going to lose. The male fighter is actually the favorite in the betting market. Surprise, surprise, it's minus 150 because everyone's going to bet on the male to win against the female. The male had previously been disqualified. I think two males disqualified from the world championships for being male and can't fight against women.

But the Olympics have allowed them to fight. So if it were me, and that's just me, and I was in the Olympics as a boxer, and they said, you're going to box,

like if I was a woman and said, you're going to box a guy, I'd say, okay. I'd put my hands behind my back and when they hit the ring, I'd clench my jaw, tighten my abs,

and I'd stand there and I would keep my hands behind my back. when they hit the ring i'd clench my jaw tighten my abs and i'd stand there and i would i would keep my hands behind my back i just have a question though is the boxer allowed punching the uh her penis like below the belt can can what happens below the belt it's not allowed i know i look i'm trying to work a joke in there somewhere we're literally what stage the real question is uh chest shots because i do believe that in in female boxing there's some restriction on punching in the chest, in the breasts. So that may actually be an interesting factor. I mean, outright, let's just consider this. The fact that in women's boxing, there is a sensitive area in the breast that has I believe there's restrictions.

You're not allowed to strike in boxing. You can hit in the chest. It doesn't affect guys the same way. So that's an advantage for the male competitor. But, I mean, I suppose to his point, he's saying she should just fight. And my point is I'd boycott. I'd say no. Apparently it's an unwritten rule among female boxers, but there's no official rule against it.

And then also in some amateur boxing leagues, women are allowed to wear protective chest plates. So this is an obvious advantage for a male boxing a female that they do not have a sensitive area on their chest the way the way women do for boxing. Are these transgender or are these the intersex? No, these are male XY chromosome. And I don't know that they're actually trans. This is an important distinction. The story did not say they were trans. I don't know what trans means. The XY chromosome. They're not that rare genetic disorder.

They're XY chromosome males. Their sex test came back as XY. That's what the news report said. Sex test? Were they born with... XY. Yeah. XY. Were they born with, like, female genitalia? The news report said these are XY males, and they were disqualified. That's all it says. So all that matters is the issue is they are not listed as transgender competitors.

That was not what Reuters or any other article said about it. They said they are she her. They use she and her pronouns for them and said that they listed themselves as female. Look, my understanding is that the gold gold in the Olympics is $30,000. This one guy's from Algeria. What's the GDP of Algeria? It's by country. Like, America gives $30,000 to our gold. Ah, okay, okay.

Either way. Hypothetically. You want to win? The gold medal's worth $1,000. So you're going to get one of those, right? I'm telling you, we're going to see countries be like, look, we just want to win. And we're going to win by the rules. Whatever the the rules may be and so if they send a male to box females that's what you get i'm just reading one article where it says everyone competing in the

women's category is competing uh is complying with eligibility criteria quote they are women in their passports and it's stated that is the case and they are female. What are we doing to ensure by way of like that there's not just running mails and falsifying documents from countries where reliability on documents is questionable at best in general? I don't know.

It seems like it's a bit of a test run because didn't they not allow Pretty sure this guy boxed in 2020 in the Olympicslympics this male against women or against women yeah there's a photo of it let's read some more we got berenstein wolf says i've been trying to figure out how to reach you in pop culture crisis there's some more bad mr b stuff to come and i was witness to and victim of it i was a contestant for beast games i can back up everything i. I've got receipts and additional witnesses. Interesting.

Is that a story that you'd be interested in looking into? Well, Chris Burtman's been our one covering it, but I can direct... How can we get in touch? It's always hard to like... He's Man of Burt on Twitter. He's been covering this whole situation for Scanner. So tweet X post? Post at

Man of Burt and, Hannah Clare. DM's open. Yeah, or is DM's open? I'll text him right now. Say, Hannah Clare told you to message him and that he has to respond now because, you know, those are the rules. John Leroy says, Republicans should respond to weird with the same energy as your boze mean nothing because I've seen what makes you cheer. I'm good with being weird. I agree.

And they're doing half of that. But they're very much being like, you're calling me weird. Look what you do. You're weird. And they don't care that you're calling them weird. They say, keep Austin weird. Keep Portland weird. They like being called weird.

So when you're like, you're calling me weird. Here's a picture of you. They're like, uh-huh. That's what I did. It's like, this is a picture of me with no hat on and I have no hair. I am indeed bald. And then they post it like they're making fun of me. I'm like, my guy, that's a picture I took of myself and posted on the internet.

What? Like, it's a selfie of me with no hat. I posted. I went online. I took a picture of myself and I posted it online. And they're like, haha. That's very transparent of you. But, you know, I understand that sometimes you take someone's screenshot and mock them for it.

But they're like, haha, look, your hat's off. And I was like, uh-huh, yeah, I posted that. Like, that's screenshot and mock them for it, but they're like, ha-ha, look, your hat's off. And I was like, uh-huh, yeah, I posted that. I've posted that picture. I just, okay. When you go to the leftists, you say you're weird, they go, we know that, but we're pissing you off, and you're getting triggered and trolled by it, so they're enjoying it. So that's why when I made that bunny thing about Trump, they really went nuts on responding. This is the funniest thing i i wrote you know trump saying you know the world was cruel to you but now you have trump

and he's hugging the bunny and the poster's being like wow you're so weird i respond to one guy and be like appreciate it and they go that's a weird response and i'm like dude doubling down doesn't change the fact i enjoy not being status quo normal whatever we're like we're going to continue to do abnormal things call Call it whatever you want. The public's got to roll with it. That rabbit did look delicious in the picture, by the way. And then apparently the TimCast crew, my brother made it a video, and then Carter added dramatic music to it.

And so now it's like Trump, he's moving, and he's putting his head down, and there's music playing. I think you have a child program branch growing out pretty quickly. Well, I told people to add on to the story. And so a bunch of people started making their own versions and tweeting in response of like,

one is Trump running with the sword and the rabbits charging in behind him. And then, you know, it's good fun. Yeah, Trump and the giant rabbit, a tale for all children. Let's go. Richard Coffey says, my first super chat check out k flay

weirdo i like k flay uh high enough that's a good song isn't it rich c says we need to replace the label of progressive and only use the word degenerate to label them perhaps omega resets says tim i predicted every election since 1984 and the only one I got wrong was 2020 because of the shadow campaign. I'm willing to say Trump 2024. That proves it. The real Nostradamus. How old is this person? Born in 1989.

What have we here? Tyler McFarlane says, I think people need to spread the clip of kamala calling 18 24 year olds stupid again remember that ah that's that's a i mean it's an easy rebuffed uh video clip i don't think that i uh what was it what was the best one recently recycle the media talking about how incompetent and detested kamala harris is what we're witnessing with her right now it's like it's straight out of 1984 everybody was saying that she's unlikable, unliked, unelectable. And like that, within a week, the media said she's the greatest thing since sliced bread. Play Tulsi destroying her at the debate. Yeah, that's that's this is an important one by Victor says I live in California. My vote doesn't count. If illegals are able to vote in Arizona, do you recommend getting a lot of people

to vote in Arizona? The only reason your vote doesn't count in California is because you don't vote. It is the greatest effort of propaganda ever to tell people in California that are conservative, what's the point of voting? You're going to lose anyway. In AOC's district, if every single conservative person voted, she would lose. And she would lose by like 20%. She gets around 100 or so thousand votes, like 120 or something. What is it, 117 maybe?

Might be 150. And her district is around, I think, like 180 to 200,000 conservative leaning people. They just don't vote. And because they don't vote, they don't win. I mean, there's there is a reason that Andy Basia, the governor of Kentucky, is the only Democrat in that area. It's because Democrats decided that was something that they wanted to try and win. Right. And he's been reelected, I think, at least twice. It's a solidly red state in many other aspects. The idea that these are just completely lost territories because, you know, the presidency is going to go one way is kind of false thinking.

There are so many other people on the ticket that you should turn out for. Yeah, but when was there ever a Republican that was competitive in California? It's pretty... But they send Republican senators. They send Republicans to Congress. I mean... They're a Republican government. They're a Republican congressman, but not...

That's what I mean. Like, maybe you might not get Trump elected from California, but he's not the only race this year. Right. Justin Comden says, Tim, you have avoided the protests in D.C. and the 24th like the plague. Tonight you said protests months ago.

It was days ago. I wasn't talking about in D.C. I said there's unrest across the country over Israel, like at all these different universities. Avoided the protests in D.C. like the plague. Like, what do you mean? Am I supposed to go there? Not that far away i don't i thought we did talk about them because i remember talking about the the flag uh the

the flag being taken down and we also talked about the fact that a lot was on the ground there and we talked about how the problem is they stole the flag from the public and burned it down and like that and and i made the point that it's it's funny that people like don't watch the show and they're like why didn't you talk about thing my favorite however is when the title of the video like yeah like we have an episode and it's like you know donald trump uh you know questions this thing and then it's an hour into the show and someone super chats you guys need to talk about title of video and i'm like what that's the title of the video is the first thing we talked about so yeah i mentioned like burning the american flag i think is fine trump said that um

you know if you burn the american flag you should a year in jail you should get a year in jail and my my point is if he's if it's in the context of stealing public property and setting a fire in public, completely agree. If it's in the context of buying an American flag for yourself, going into your own fire pit on your property and having a fire in a safe manner, absolutely not. However, I think Trump's context is mostly that they tore down an American flag from public property and then burned it in the street. Federal property. Federal property, right. So you're in jail for that i'm like yeah absolutely you could probably make that happen absolutely you like destruction of federal property i think already i'm pretty sure there's already a law in the book saying you go to prison for that and then the left argues we're

allowed to burn the american flag minutes free speech yeah you're like you're allowed to burn the american flag and if you burn tire marks on a trans uh on a lgbt flag on the, you're allowed to burn the American flag. And if you burn tire marks on a trans, on a LGBT flag on the street, you are not allowed to burn the American flag unless you own it. That's the point. So they steal the flag from the federal property, destroy it. The law they broke, theft of public property, destruction of public property, starting a fire in public, which is probably endangering the public, reckless endangerment. And you're dealing, it's probably five years in prison right off the bat. All right, everybody. If you haven't already, smash the like button.

Head over to TimCast.com. Click join us. Become a member over at TimCast.com. Because we're going to have that members only call-in show coming up in just a few minutes. You don't want to miss it. Where you as members get to call in and talk to us and join us. And our guest is not so family friendly. So it's, you know, the kids.

Time to go to bed. It's a school night. And then we're going to talk about some awful things in the media. Should be fun. You can follow the show at TimCastIRL everywhere. You can follow me personally at TimCast on X and Instagram. Charlie, do you want to shout anything out?

Yep. Kamala Harris in the White House, Amateur Hour, still for sale. Get it. If you can't find it on Amazon, try some of the other sites. Did anybody think that you had just written it, like, recently? Yes, actually, I did do an interview where they're like,

I see that you wrote a preview of what's going on today. And I was like, no, I wrote that in January 2023, where I examined what it would look like when Biden stepped down. Wow. It's scary. Alan Lichten's going to hit you up. It scarily came true.

It's very surreal at this point, but do check it out. As we go into this election, it's important to know more about Kamala Harris than just hashtag word salad, hashtag Willie Brown. It'll give you all the facts that you need to know. Right on. Vivabarneslaw.locals.com, TheVivaFry on Twitter, and VivaFry on Rumble. I'll be back in the free state. I'm back in the free country now at least, but I'll get back to

the free state of Florida by the end of the week and back to my home studio. Right on. It was good to be here again. You can find me at Shane Cashman everywhere. The show is Tales from the Inverted World on YouTube. After last night's IRL bump, we're almost at 45,000 subscribers. So make it happen. We go live

every Sunday at 6 p.m. Eastern time. We'll see you there. I'm glad all of you could join us tonight. I think it's been really interesting. I'm Hannah-Claire Brimel. I'm a writer for SCNR.com. That's Scanner News. Follow all our work at TimCastNews on the internet. I'm also on the internet at HannahClaireB on X

and at HannahClaire.B on Instagram. Thanks for everything you guys do. Have a good night. We'll see you all over at TimCast.com in about on Instagram. Thanks for everything you guys do. Have a good night. We'll see you all over at timcast.com in about one minute. Thanks for hanging out. you