Timcast IRL - Timcast IRL #1082 Democrat Rep Calls For CIVIL WAR CONDITIONS To Stop Trump Winning 2024 w/Nick Frietas

Episode Date: August 6, 2024

Tim, Hannah Claire, & Libby are joined by Nick Frietas to discuss Democrat Raskin calling for Civil War Conditions if Trump wins 2024 election, riots erupting in the UK over unchecked immigration, Kamala Harris running without any real policy plans or positions, & the global markets crashing around the world. Hosts:  Tim @Timcast (everywhere)  Hannah Claire @hannahclaireb (everywhere) Libby @LibbyEmmons (X) Guest: Nick Frietas @NickJFreitas (X, YouTube) Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In a viral clip from five months ago, Congressman Jamie Raskin says that if Donald Trump wins, they will move to disqualify him through Congress, invoke civil war conditions and tell the Trump hordes that Donald Trump is disqualified and not allowed to be president. It's currently the number one trending topic on X that this guy's basically conspiring to commit an insurrection against the will of the people should Donald Trump win. But I can't say I'm surprised. This has been the bubbling conversation for some time. Now, whether or not it means something, it could just be bloviating. This was at a conference or some kind of bookstore convention. And we'll go through this because it is certainly taking the news by storm. But there's an actual civil war happening. Apparently, also trending on X was civil war. Why? Because riots are ongoing in the UK. And the prime minister said he's going to bring a standing army to start arresting people for online and offline comments. And it's getting pretty wild.

There's British native rioters. There's immigrant Muslim rioters. There's people being attacked. It is getting absolutely crazy. And so we'll go over that story. Then, of course, we've got just all the Kamala Harris stuff. I mean, she's got no policy positions. Who is her VP going to be?

The no policy positions is really the craziest thing. Then we've got breaking news. It's a crazy news day, OK? Google was ruled by a federal court as an illegal monopoly. Shout out, YouTube. We've got soldiers struck in an Air Force base in Iraq, which is a story is developing. And then we got RFK Jr. dumped a dead bear in Central Park. It's a crazy day. Also head over to TimCast.com. Click join us. Become a member to support our

work directly because with your help, we can help fight the fake news with our program, which is real news. And we try to sort through the lies and misinformation. As a member, you'll get access to our Discord server where you can hang out with like-minded individuals and also join our members-only uncensored call-in show coming up tonight. We have those Monday through Thursday at 10 p.m. You don't want to miss it. Also, smash the like button right now. Share this show with your friends. The show, of course, is available on iTunes, Spotify, and all podcast platforms. If you ever miss an episode and you can't find it, you can find us there as well as YouTube. Joining us tonight to talk about this and so much more is Nick Freitas.

Hey, thank you very much for having me. It's great to be back. Awesome. Awesome to have you. Who are you? What do you do? Oh, well, first of all, I love the new digs, second of all. So I host Making the Argument over on YouTube, and we dabble in social media.

And then I'm also, I mean, I hate to admit it in public, but I am technically an elected official. So I'm a member of the Virginia House of Delegates. But other than that, I'm a pretty decent guy. Only technically? Are you literally? Literally. I'm literally.

Gosh, damn it. Right on, Walt. Thanks for hanging out. It's always good to have you, man. Oh, it's always a pleasure. Libby's hanging out. I'm here. I'm Libby Emmons.

I'm with the Postmillennial and Humanevents.com. Glad to be here. Did you add that because of your son? Oh, yeah. I can't think about, I can't, I can't think in my head, Libby Emmons from the Postmillennial. Libby Emmons from the Postmillennial. Joking, like thinking about my kid making fun of me, which he does so well. That's what he's there for, I think. I think so. Yeah. To keep you humble, I've heard. I'm Hannah-Claire Brimelow.

I'm a writer for scnr.com at Scanner News. I'm really happy to be back with both of you. And let's get started. Here's the story from Legal Insurrection. Rep Raskin in February, quote, it's up to Congress to disqualify Trump if he wins. So it's going to be up to us on January 6th to tell the rampaging Trump mobs that he's disqualified. It's kind of wild to hear. And this story is going pretty viral, but legal insurrection did the groundwork sourcing this clip that's going viral with tens of millions of views on X. And it's sourced back to five months ago, back in February, on February 17th. Very few views, only 7,558 views, but somebody did find it. And so we have in the full context,

he's talking about actions they need to take. And well, let's just play the clips you can hear for yourselves. Constitutionalizing Jim Crow. And then it's not until the Warren court for a couple of decades with the white primary cases and Brown versus board, where you get a different kind of Supreme Court on the side of the freedoms and equality of the American people. But the court is not going to save us. And so that means the only thing that really works is people in motion amending the Constitution. But again, it's necessary, but it's not sufficient because what can be put into the Constitution can slip away from you very quickly. And the greatest example going on right now before

our very eyes is Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which they're just disappearing with a magic wand as if it doesn't exist, even though it could not be clearer what it's stating. And so, you know, they want to kick it to Congress. So it's going to be up to us on January 6, 2025, to tell the rampaging Trump mobs that he's disqualified. And then we need bodyguards for everybody in Civil War conditions, all because the nine justices, not all of them, but these justices who have not many cases to look at every year, not that much work to do, a huge staff, great protection, simply do not want to do their job and interpret what the great 14th amendment means.

And I'm glad that Sherilyn's creating her new center so we can bring that back to life, even as we're continuing to amend the constitution as professor Hassan has invited us to do. What a, a wild thing to say to a group of people so casually that we will need bodyguards for everyone's civil war conditions, what he is saying that if Donald Trump wins on January 6th, they must stop him from taking office. What do you think happens then? Well, just remember, Tim, when they say our democracy, they mean theirs, not yours. Your vote, your vote apparently doesn't matter because they can disqualify your candidate if they don't like him. And so they've tried lawfare. They've

tried just about everything else. One guy tried to even shoot him, right? And now we're at a point where, yeah, you trump mobs. Not our fellow citizens, not the people that might disagree with us on policy or candidate preferences. No, no, no, mobs. And it just goes to show that when it comes to securing themselves, they will stop at nothing. When it comes to securing borders, not so much. But when it comes to fighting their fellow Americans and people people that might disagree with them on policy they'll pull out

all the stops right it to me a lot of the messaging coming from raskin and other high ranking democrats has always been uh not warning about potential political violence but like manifesting it you know really just trying to say like this is how bad it is and it's really you know we don't know what could happen, but one of you maybe should do something about it. I mean, it's very strange and I think also divisive, right? This is the same party that I'll turn around and say, we're the party of unity and we're togetherness and all this stuff. And then they're saying we have to do everything we can from our branch of government to not let the other team's person, you know, take office if

fairly elected. That's crazy. Yeah. I think it's wild that Jamie Raskin thinks he knows better than the Supreme Court in so many areas. Well, they don't do any work, according to him. And that he thinks they don't do any work and don't have any work to do all year. They do an enormous amount of work. They look at an enormous amount of cases and decide what they think actually could be in

violation of the Constitution and that they should hear it. The other thing that always blows my mind about this, when you in violation of the constitution and you know that they should hear it the other thing that always blows my mind about this when you hear some of the people on the left talk about the supreme court they have this idea that what the supreme court is supposed to do is essentially validate whatever leftist politicians want and oftentimes they will criticize supreme court decisions where the supreme court comes back and says this needs to be solved by the legislature um what do you mean it needs to be solved by the legislature? No, we just want you to issue down an edict. Wait, we're supposed to do some work? What are you talking about? Are you kidding me? How dare you, sir? That was a big deal with the EPA rules a couple of years ago.

The Supreme Court said, you know, hey, EPA, you can't force West Virginia to do all of these things because that's up to Congress to decide. And I think one of the key things that the court has been doing in this past term is, and you know, in the past couple of terms is to tell these federal agencies that they are not actually authorized by Congress or the executive branch to put out all of these laws. I saw this interview with Mike Lee on Tucker Carlson that just dropped the other day, where Lee was talking about how on his desk he has two stacks of papers. I mean, he probably has more, but two stacks, one of laws that Congress has passed and one that's like the Federal Register that all the agencies have put out. And it's, you know, a couple thousand pages versus like masses and masses of thousands of pages that the Federal Register has put out. And it's like these edicts that all of these agencies just released to force Americans into doing things that the agent, how the agency interprets the law.

And to a certain extent, how the president interprets the law. He's the one that puts out all these executive orders saying include more gender stuff. Yeah. Well, it's the overturning Chevron was one of the best decisions the Supreme Court has made in my lifetime, simply because I don't think people fully understood what this was. The original Chevron decision essentially said that when an executive branch agency interprets the law in such a way, promulgates pages upon pages of regulations, can ruin your life, shut down your business, confiscate your property, the Supreme Court had said,

well, we're just going to assume that the federal branch agency got it right. So when you bring a case before the Supreme Court or when you bring a case before a federal court, the burden is on you to prove that the federal agency got it right. We're not going to look at both of the, we're not going to look at the case before us and say, well, we're not going to assume the feds got it correct. So thank God they overturned Chevron. It was a ridiculous decision in the first place. So this is pretty funny. I want to pull this up from the bulwark. In this context of civil war conditions, yeah, the bulwark disagrees. They said that they simulated what would happen if Trump wins. And it's really funny because they actually say, you know, it's 2025. It's March.

Trump is back in the White House. And I'm not going to read this blovied and garbage. But overall, they just say, like, we should worry less about the extremes of mass attentions, large scale organized political violence or the mass scale domestic deployment of active duty military forces to suppress lawful protests. They mentioned that Trump found it difficult to fully execute his most ambitious plans. Funny, because that's quite literally what every single one of us who says we want to support Trump has been saying. He's not going to be able to bring in the army. There's not going to be this like mass mobilization of for deportation. I asked him, how do you mass deport? He says with local police. So it's not going to be this large military operation. I have long said if Trump wins, we're going to get a marginally good administration. We're going to see peace agreements. We're going to see better border security.

None of it's going to be perfect. And we're going to go, it's pretty good, I guess. The economy is going to improve. Maybe many of you noticed the market crashing today because people are scared Kamala is going to win. Yeah. The bulwark now going, actually, if Trump wins, it's probably going to be mostly the same.

Mostly the same. Nothing crazy happens. Dave Ramsey did this interview with Theo Vaughn and Theo Vaughn was asking him like financial advice. And I remember Dave Ramsey going, you know, I've made money and lost money under all presidents. And so I think there is a level of like it's not as hysterical as people who make money off of politics believe it's going to be. You know, part of what bothers me is is sort of the hysteria that comes with a lot of this, because you were mentioning Chevron earlier. And, you know, Chevron got marketed to the public as this is the Supreme Court saying you don't have to listen to experts. Yeah. Right. And that's like not it at all.

This is just the misinterpretation from one side that has a bias. And I think that there is so much just anti whatever they're doing sentiment. And you do get it on both sides of the political aisle, but definitely from the left and progressive movement that they have made it this fear-mongering game that's ultimately extremely dangerous for, or harmful for people who are trying to just live daily life. I will say this though.

I think the thing that is different about this particular race is not just the fact that the left absolutely despises Donald Trump. I think it's also about, this is the first time, this is the first time we will have an administration in my lifetime, both Trump and J.D. Vance, who are adamant that the biggest threat is an unelected executive bureaucracy that has just grown completely out of control. And they are looking

for ways to go after that in a way that no president in my lifetime has. And the federal bureaucracy is going to defend itself. And so that's the part where I see this being different than previous races. I don't hold out a lot of hope that any politician is going to save us or an administration is going to be able to do it. But if there's one that will go after the federal bureaucracy hard, it's this one. And what's more exemplary of the federal bureaucracy than a person who has just been installed as the Democratic candidate, right? Like, you don't literally use their just, like, administrative power to be like, this is who it is now.

Yeah. This is what I actually fear, though, right? A Donald Trump presidency and administration will be marginally good. He's going to hire some bad people. Maybe he learned his lesson. He'll hire some better people. It'll be OK. We're going to be moderately happy with it.

I think the economy being good means many people will be very happy with it. Kamala Harris has no policy positions on her website. She's not received a single vote. She was installed. And they're showing polls where she's within the margin of error of beating Trump. And if that happens, that's what really scares me. This is the powers that be saying,

can we enact Chinese communist style governance in the United States? Because if Kamala Harris wins, that's what it is. And it's unfortunate that it really comes down to Trump and oblivion. And I don't mean to say that Kamala Harris is going to be like Hitler or anything like that, although some guy from Splinter News, which used to be Fusion where I worked, actually believed my over the top tweet where I said she'd start 800 wars. And he thought it was real because they're not smart people. What I mean is Kamala Harris winning signals the end of the republic.

Yeah, it's I really do think if Kamala wins, you're going to wake up and you're going to buy bread. You're going to wake up. You're going to go to the store and get milk, bread and eggs. You're going to turn on the TV and you're going to watch your Fox News or Newsmax or your ABC, whatever it is you're watching. Kamala will be president. There will be there'll be expansion of war. There will be mass spending and you will have no say and no power over it it will not be a dramatic overnight end people will not be rounded up and put in camps none of that it's just going to be the beginning of the end of the republic

which is no more representation by the people i think that's right and we're seeing no representation by the people in the democrat party and you also are seeing something which is fascinating, which is all of these Democrats saying, and it's a good thing. And we like it this way. And please tell us what to do. You know, beat us some more. That is what we are into. Can we also acknowledge, too, that when you talk about

the reason why they were so upset about Chevron, this whole idea of like the experts now alone, that's always been the progressive objective. If you go all the way back to Woodrow Wilson, right, you know, you're the president of Yale University that believe that, or was it Princeton? Sorry. He goes, what we need is wise experts within the bureaucracy that are going to run the country and the constitution stands in the way because it has all these checks on federal power. So this idea of experts running your life, managing the economy,

that's the objective. It's not an— Well, and the presidential—the executive branch has been—what's the word? Conglomerating power? Is that accurate? Accumulating power. Accumulating power for decades and decades and decades. I remember when they put through the Patriot Act, and I was just like, this is a horrifying accumulation of power. And this was actually something great that Democrats gifted us in the first Trump administration.

You know, they say when God closes a door, he opens a window. Donald Trump being curtailed meant they were setting precedent against the power of the executive branch, often in bad ways, but in some ways still acceptable. So this means that hopefully after another Trump administration, we can set some standards and say, hey, here are the precedents set. But again, that being said, we've still seen Steve Bannon, and this is through Congress, go to jail. The DOJ deciding that Bannon and Peter Navarro should go to jail and Merrick Garland should not. So the challenge is, as much as I'm hoping to see a real curtailing of executive expanding, expanding executive authority, Democrats just abuse the system when they're in the executive branch anyway, and Republicans don't stop them. No, I think that's, that is absolutely the case. And that's why, that's why I feel, I don't know, I feel like something's different this time. And

in part, it's because like, look, I'm, I'm part of that classical liberal group where I want to save the Republic and I want to, I want to curtail federal power. But I also think we're in a situation right now where so many people on the right feel as if it's no longer good enough to say, well, imagine if we were in power and we did this. It's like, yeah, we've been saying that for decades. The left will be happy to use the curtailing power, the constitution to curtail federal power when it doesn't suit them. And they will come right in and completely ignore it and rely on a federal bureaucracy, a compliant media, you know, higher education. They will rely on all of that to back their play because they're the good guys. So when they do it, it's for good and noble purposes. And when

we do it, it's a complete violation of the constitutional process. You're the oppressor. Now, I'd like to jump over the ocean to the UK. We have the story from The Independent. Not that I trust The Independent. So before I even read this, I'll say, yeah, I'm going to read you this, but we're going to try and break it down for you to the best of our abilities because the media is lying for sure. UK riots live, fireworks thrown and police van damaged in Plymouth after nearly 400 arrested across country. Anti-racist and far right protesters have clashed in Plymouth, Devon amid a wave of violence sweeping the UK. I don't know if far-right means anything here because you basically have just a bunch of local native British people upset over the violence and the two-tiered policing that they've been seeing pertaining to migrants and many Muslim individuals in the country.

So the media, of course, will call them far right by the simple act of them rioting. Anti-racist, I don't know if I believe that either. We just call it far left or whatever you want to call it. But the riots have been getting absolutely crazy. They say almost 400 people have been arrested over the mob violence spring across the UK with the prime minister setting up a standing army of specialist police officers to deal with further attacks. In this story from Sky, Elon Musk hits back at Sir Keir Starmer after civil war comments dismissed. So we have this post from the prime minister saying, this is not a pro, this is not protest. It's pure violence.

We will have a standing army of public duty officers. We will ramp up criminal justice. We will apply criminal law online as well as offline. We will not tolerate attacks on mosques or on Muslim communities. And then Elon Musk says, shouldn't you be concerned about attacks on all communities? This exempt Elon Musk hit the nail on the head with the hammer so perfectly the nail was driven straight through the wood. This is exactly what many of the people in the UK have been saying, that there is a two-tier justice system. When it comes to migrants, the children of migrants, or many Muslims, they're not seeing accountability. But then you look at Tommy Robinson. The things they have done to this guy will send shivers down your spine. I don't know if you

guys remember when they locked him up, they put him in jail, and they weren't feeding him properly. And when he finally gets released, because it's been a long time since I covered the story. He's gaunt and frail because he's not getting the food he needs. And now they're threatening to arrest him. They're claiming that while he's on vacation, he's the one organizing and directing violence. It's happening. It's not true, but it is nuts. If you ever listen to what Tommy has to say, and I'm not like I'm not saying I'm a big fan and I follow his work. I've seen videos. I've seen the videos recently of him addressing the controversy. He's like, we should have equality under the law.

And I'm like, yes. He's like, all people of Britain should be treated equally. I'm like, he's like, the working people are getting upset. The mass migration is not what they want. I'm like, OK. And then they're like, lock him up, throw away the key. I mean, that's what the UK has wanted to do for a really long time. They want to be able to prosecute people for things they say online.

You know, if it doesn't fit with the narrative and mainstream culture that they are promoting. I mean, what it makes me think of is when there was that attack on schoolchildren who were going from a school to a park in Ireland. And Conor McGregor, the UFC fighter, was really vocal about like, hey, things are not OK and we need to do something. Can you imagine if the Irish government had then been like, we don't like your tweets. You have to go to jail. I mean, no one would have been OK with it. And there's another commenter whose name is something my mind. He was arrested for some online posts at the time his wife was pregnant and they kept him incarcerated on this. You know, Serge is not. So hopefully he knows his name. But she had her baby.

You know, it was just like, why are you prosecuting this guy for something that everyone knows is wrong? This is this is all kicked off by that story that you guys probably heard about the the guy who stabbed three little girls. That's right. At a Taylor Swift dance event class or something like this class. Yeah, this guy was the child of I believe they were Rwandan migrants. And so this really fascinating thing happens.

If anybody with half a brain, you ask the people, why are you protesting? Why are you writing? What I've been able to put together is after this, you get a bunch of people protesting, saying that native born Brits are not being treated fairly under the law, that this crime is getting out of hand and they're not doing anything about it. And then in response, you get gangs coming out and fighting. So we start seeing dudes in balaclavas. They're holding up one finger. They're saying al-Akhbar. They're saying things like free Palestine.

And they begin beating random people. So there's videos that's going viral. One viral video is a 70-year-old pensioner being just beaten. He went outside for a cigarette. They attacked him. And this is just what I'm being told. I am not an expert on the UK, that this leads to a greater escalation where then you get a bunch of white British people coming out being like, you want to beat up our people. And now it's now they set fire to like a holiday inn that was holding a lot of these these migrants. They call them asylum seekers. I know that's true. But I also don't know if it's the same as illegal immigration in the United States. So I don't know what to call them. Yeah, they go with migrants, but also that's the lefty papers say that. So it's hard to know.

But I don't know if they're illegal, if the government, like, because it's different in the UK, I'm not sure. So we'll just make sure that context is clear. But the important thing to understand is the media is saying, oh, the riots on the far right were all spread by disinformation because they thought a migrant stabbed these girls. And I'm like, no, they didn't. They like I watch the Lotus Eaters podcast. Carl Benjamin is not a moron. He knows exactly what's going on. They try to lie to you and say, oh, these poor dumb fools,

if only they actually knew. But they were tricked by Tommy Robinson. No, they're upset that there are grains of sand making a heap. And so I see people online being like, it wasn't even a Muslim migrant who did it. Why are they mad? Why are they mad at Muslims? And it's like, dude, there are a hundred factors that all combine to make a great weight upon the camel's back. Three little girls being stabbed to death. It's not about whether a Muslim migrant did it. It's that this is what lit the fuse for the powder keg that was sitting there the whole time.

Well, and also like this, the setting fire to the hotel was in Rotherham. Is that how you say it? And that's where there was a grooming ring of Pakistani men grooming 1400 British girls into like a sex trafficking ring.

And that was poorly documented. It was poorly addressed. It was poorly prosecuted. And a big part of why it was poorly prosecuted was because British prosecutors didn't want to be seen as racist for going after the Pakistani men who had done this to the girls.

And every time there's a catalyst, the left likes to rush out and forget that there was all kinds of conditions that led up to it in the first place. It just becomes whatever the catalyst was and they treat it like it's an isolated incident. Unless it's police brutality or something. Yes. Yeah.

Unless it serves the narrative, right? The issue is never the issue. The issue is the revolution, right? Well, Levante, where are you? Yeah. And that's what this always goes back to. And so it's this idea where we're going to ignore all of the conditions. We're going to ignore all of that. We're going to pretend like this is an isolated

incident. And then we're going to categorize you because you're oppressors, right? And these are the oppressed. And so you're automatically the bad guys. You're automatically suspect. Apparently, it's no longer mostly peaceful protests, right? You're the bad guys protesting. And so we're going to use the full weight of the law, the full power of government to come after you in a way that we never would have done this when it was people that we ideologically agreed with doing the protesting. And people see enough of this and they say, fine, if the rules don't apply, then screw you. And that's the part where, again, I don't want that. I certainly don't want to see that in my country.

I don't want to see it in the UK or anywhere else. But I'm a little bit shocked that the left wants to sit here and pretend as if, oh, I can't believe this is happening. My gosh, using rioting and burning things down in order to achieve political objectives. But they don't acknowledge that they riot, right? They're protesting. They're fighting good fight. I mean, even here in the article, they're referencing the other half of this as anti-racist. So they're doing whatever ideological gods work that they think that they're supposed to be doing. And instead,

they're, you know, just as culpable for the damages that are being done to these cities because really that's what I think progressive governments fail to acknowledge, which is that they do damage

by not acknowledging when things become extreme. And part of that is because I think they ultimately want them to be extreme. I agree. There's a teacher in hiding still in the UK

for having shown a picture of Muhammad in class. Wow. Still in hiding. And London, this is, I think I learned this on the Lotus Eaters podcast and I fact checked it. London is 37% native born British. So I think the math is really obvious.

You know, people say, you know, why is there a two tiered system of justice? Why did Keir Starmer come out and say, you know, violence will not tolerate attacks on mosques or Muslim communities? And Elon's like, what? Shouldn't you be concerned about all communities? He should. But here's the issue. In London, 63 percent is not native born British. So he's doing simple cost benefit analysis. If I side with the minority, the majority will cause more problems in our major urban centers. Well, there you go. It's pretty obvious who to side with then. Even though the UK is still majority as a whole, native born British, the major urban centers, which basically control the seats of governance for the most part, and I don't know if it's true

in the UK as it is in the United States, but as massive influence, they're not British. So the politicians that are beholden to them, the lefty politicians, they're going to pander to them. One thing I did hear is these riots basically mean that Labour, the left, is done in the next election. But I think it's meaningless. I don't think they are. They just had an election. I mean, they would have to call a new election. And Rishi Sunak called a snap election, which probably he regrets now.

No, because now he regrets now, you know, because now he's out. But these guys would have to call an election. Like, you know, I was talking to people in Canada about Trudeau and how everybody hates Trudeau, but he's basically got a coalition with the NDP, which is the far left group. And so they don't have to call an election until sometime next year.

And like, Polyev has to keep his, the conservative leader has to keep his attention strong and keep his support strong until such time as Justin Trudeau decides to call an election. I mean, it's ludicrous. That's a ludicrous system. When I look, one of the craziest things, that was when Labor had the largest victory I think they've had in their history post-World War II. However, if you look at the total votes that they got, it was actually less than what Corbyn got in the previous election, and Corbyn got crushed. And that's because, again, people weren't voting for Labor as much as they were kicking out conservatives, which I completely understand because the conservative party for 14 years conserved nothing except what the left had already put in a place prior to them getting back into power. And I think we're going to start to see this in a

number of places where, again, you look at this with the United States, having an R by your name doesn't mean that you're actually a conservative or you actually want to conserve principles. It just means that maybe you're not quite as crazy as what's going on in some of the other places on the left. But I think more and more voters are waking up to the idea that, no, I want contrast. Are you going to fix what is going on right now? If the answer is no, you don't get my vote simply because you might be slightly less crazy. I'll hold on for somebody that's actually going to fight. Well, let's jump back to the United States. We have the story from SCNR. As bad as it is in the UK, I hate to tell you, my friends, it could get bad here for similar reasons. Kamala Harris' official website lists no policy positions or platform.

The campaign promises to continue protecting our freedoms, delivering justice, and expanding opportunity. So let me get this straight. She has not received a single vote. She was installed at a DNC on a phone call. She has no policy plans or positions. And the funny thing is her campaigning commercials make it sound like she's not even in office right now. So we'll pull up her website. I didn't believe it.

When you first go to the website, let me do this. Let's go to KamalaHarris.com. You're greeted with this. Donate to Kamala Harris. Certainly I will not. and then this is all you have you can donate you can join the campaign there's their information meet camelharris take action store you'd think if you clicked meet camelharris you might get something you don't you just get her bio but it's but it's it's it's vague it's vague it says like civil rights. It says reproductive justice or something. It doesn't even talk about the really fancy neighborhood she lived in in Montreal with her mom when her mom was at McGill.

Nothing in here. We're in Westmount, which is like this great neighborhood. Nothing here tells you what her plan is, how she wants to fix things. I'm actually deeply worried about this because we would have a president who's installed with no positions if she actually wins. This is the Democrats basically sitting there being like, you know, that communist party in China, they can get things done. They can build highways overnight. They can seize your property just like that and then build a highway right over it. No, no, no worries. The rumor is back in the day, I think Trudeau went there too. Democrats were fawning over the efficiency of authoritarianism. And they were like,

if only we could run our government like you do. Kamala Harris represents this, the party choice with no policies, vote or else. But I'll throw in this clip. I think this is the right clip. This describes Kamala Harris. This clip, don't play it. Here we go. Describes her whole campaign very well. You know, we have to stay woke. Like everybody needs to be woke. And you can talk about if you're the wokest or woker, but just stay more woke than less woke. Yeah. You know. Okay. I'd like to play it again real quick, but I want, I want you to consider one thing as we, as we hear, listen to this this again why is she laughing the the other hosts of the show at recode are not laughing at all and she just starts randomly laughing in the middle of her

sentence there's nothing funny being said genuinely let me play it again and and consider what's this laughter we have to. Like, everybody needs to be woke. And you can talk about if you're the wokest or woker, but just stay more woke than less woke. Yeah. You know. Does she have Tourette's? I'm not even joking at this point.

That wasn't almost laughing. She was struggling. Like, that was weird. There's a lot of women who do that just to throw it out there there's a lot of salads who do that when they eat salads but also when they are um concerned that what they're saying doesn't make sense or that they're not going to be taken seriously or when they're uncomfortable themselves with their own measure of authority that's what i was thinking because i think part of it is that she doesn't have a personality or any idea why she's there i don't think she really knows what stay woke means someone has just given her this i think she

knows what it means for sure i think that's one of the only things she knows i think she knows like that and what progressive is but i think all slang is lost on kamal harris and that's why she's up there being like haha am i using Am I using this term correctly? Ha ha ha ha. Like she doesn't know any of it. She just knows that this is something that works for the youth voter. What it means to be unburdened by what might have been. She's so unburdened. Let me tell you, she's unburdened in the brain. I think the real question here is why you why are you guys all such racist sexists? I mean, that's that's really what this comes down. Well, I can't. How dare you? How dare you demand that a

presidential candidate have policy positions? No, it's okay, because I'm actually not able to be racist because I'm a minority. This is historical. It can't be racist. I would accept that I'm fairly sexist. I'm comfortable with that. I mean, I think you're right. I think Kamala Harris is actually doing

the best thing she can do, which is waiting for the voters and probably her, you know, puppeteer strings to tell her what her her policies are. Her campaign is only two weeks old. How dare she? I mean, she really couldn't just adopt policies on her own, have actual thoughts in her brain. It's going to be funny when she rolls out Project 47 and it's basically just like a complete rewording of Ag 47 just like the same thing you know it's like uh well because they they they have adopted trump's policies hilariously when joe biden was wanted to bring in the tariffs and uh everyone started showing him his old tweet they were tweeting at him and other democrats like here's joe biden saying tariffs are a tax on the poor and mocking

donald trump for it now saying he wants to do the same thing. And it's the right policy. I think the problem with Democrats is that they chased themselves on the Internet into a corner where they were trying to pander to the corporate press and the far left, which is basically the same thing. And so in order to stay in the limelight in the corporate narrative, they need to, you know, appeal themselves to these woke journalists. So they started just saying whatever they thought they wanted to say, which was mostly insane, like defund the police. And then when it actually came time to do the math, they were like, Trump's kind of a moderate. His policies are very popular.

So you're going to have to do that. But now what are you campaigning against? Yeah. I mean, the boogeyman's they have created for themselves, right? Which is why none of it makes a lot of sense. I think Harris is a weird choice. And what I really would like to hear from are just regular people who think of themselves as Democrat. Like this person didn't win your vote during the primary. She apparently has all the cash to to win this election or at least to make a splashy entrance into the campaign so late in the game.

As far as I know, you probably can't ask your delegate to vote against her. They're going to fall in line. And now she doesn't even have policies for you. I mean, this is a person who the media initially said was calling everyone up and saying, I'm going to earn your vote. No, she's not earning anybody. In fact, the DNC just expects you to fall in line. Well, Kamala Harris is running on her identity, and that's why there's no policy positions on her campaign website, because it's all about her innate characteristics.

And that's why you're a sexist racist if you even question it. I mean, as soon as she became the nominee, I can't remember who I was talking to. I said, let me give you the campaign strategy for the Democratic Party from now until November. It's very, very simple. For about five minutes, they're going to try to get you excited about Kamala Harris. That's going to fail because not even Democrats are excited about her. You want to know how I know? Because she ran for president before and didn't even make it to her own state's primary. Nobody is interested in Kamala Harris. She didn't have a record as attorney general in California. She didn't have a record as a U.S. senator. The first time she got out there, she was trying to roll off of being Barack Obama's pick.

And she failed. Right. She failed in all of it. Then she became vice president by virtue of her identity. She was given actually a pretty important task, which was go fix the border. She failed miserably. Didn't even visit it in a timely manner. Arguably, she did exactly what she wanted to do, which is to let more illegal immigrants in.

Right. But she's achieved nothing. And now they've got her in this position where, again, who who in the Democratic Party that could have actually been a formidable candidate with respect to either debate or policy or record or whatever it was, who is going to be the guy or the gal that says, no, no, I'm going to step in way of the first black woman being the Democrat nominee for president. So I got a quick question, right? I'm just I'm just perusing the Kamala Harris store and I could not but notice these models. And I'm just wondering myself,

do you think this model actually was like, I love Kamala, please let me wear the shirt? I thought that shirt was photoshopped. What they do is a lot of these models will get paid like 50 bucks to wear a white t-shirt. And then these websites will automatically put this stuff on the shirt. So I'm wondering if this guy, there, there was a company in there like,

hey, you want to be a model 50 bucks? Like, sure. And now he's on Kamala Harris's website. But she does have these really great cups that I really want to buy, but I don't want to give her any money. Childless Cat Lady Club. Just wait until she loses the election. If she loses, then buy it.

You'll be able to get it. Yeah, really. Like, maybe, like, used or whatever? It's like the team that doesn't win the Super Bowl. Or even just buy it once she's done, because then you'd just, I mean, yes, you'd be giving $35 to pay off the Kamala Harris debt. I really want to buy the childless cat lady club mugs

because you send them to women you don't like as an insult. They'll be like, what is this? Like, how dare you? Or they'll like it if they're Democrats, I guess. I don't know. Yeah, the problem is buying it actually just gives Kamala Harris money. And, you know, we don't want to be doing that. That is the snafu there.

I mean, I think it's kind of strange that her. Look at this one. Look at this. You had that one up earlier. Did the Washington Post made this yard sign? What is this? I want it so bad. It's got question marks.

Do they only send it when they finally. Maybe they only send it after they... I only want it if there's a question mark. Like, how did we get here with Kamala? It says, be one of the first to proudly display your support for Kamala Harris and her running mate. And it's just got question marks and masking tape on it. It reminds me of when companies do mystery box sales. You can buy their product. The mystery box of vice presidential candidate.

One of the things that you said that was interesting to me, which like Democrats are not excited about about Harris. And I think that's true because we did not see a surge in voter registration. No, really. It did not turn out that people were like, wow, great. I will vote for. I think the people who didn't want to vote for Biden are not excited about, you know, his vice president sliding into his spot and essentially trying to market herself both

as a surrogate and as like a more progressive alternative. You also have to ask the question of, okay, so if they can't get you excited about their candidate, what do they have to do? They have to stoke the hatred for the opposition candidate. And so that's why, you know, you had one week of, we all need to lower the temperature in the room. Okay, stop being mad at us. And then five minutes later, it's going to go right back to threat to democracy. They're all proto-fascist, everything else, because they have to. Nobody's voting for Kamala Harris because they are just oh so excited about Kamala Harris. So they've got to hate the other guy, and they're going to continue to do that all the way to November. It's been amazing to me.

Libby mentioned this as well, but how much of her campaign immediately. I mean, it's like 15 days old right now, and it's already completely been about identity politics. There is nothing other than maybe the women rights issue, which I would argue is still kind of an identity politics issue that they are channeling. It's all about race and sex. Maybe, Anna Claire, you'd like to make your own version of this, but you invert guns and girls. Control girls, not guns. What about control girls with guns? No, let girls have guns. Control girls, not guns. What about control girls with guns? No. Let girls have guns.

Let girls have guns. Yeah, that's a good one. Girls just want to have guns. Oh, that's a good one. Someone's going to make that shirt. That should be tie-dyed. I'm going to make it. I've got a GOA conference to go to.

That one's going to sound like crazy. It should be tie-dyed. Yeah. Very Cyndi Lauper. And steal the font that they had for the childless cat. I'm going to texti Lauper. Yeah. Wow. That is a good one. And steal the font that they had for the childless cat. I'm going to text my wife right now like, babe, quick, tell Hamilton. Hopefully she's listening because that's a goldmine right there.

There's some ammunition company that's like racing. What's crazy too is that Kamala Harris keeps trying to run like she's running against Biden. But like for the past three and a half years, they've been trying to get us to say Biden-Harris campaign. And now that we're saying it, they're like, no, that wasn't us. That wasn't us. When his administration puts out a statement, they're like, we as well are into this as an independent. It's so weird. What's crazy is how the way her ads are, the way they're focused on the policies as though they're not involved at all.

They're like, Donald Trump doesn't want border agents. And it's like, Donald Trump's not in office right now. You are. She's like, when I'm elected, I'm going to do these things. Like, but you are the vice president. Do them now. Or do them. How about just do it now?

You want to close the border? Do it now. She's going to have to. She's got to campaign against Joe Biden. And how can she campaign against the administration that she is second in command of? She's campaigning against it, but also claiming a right to his debate spot, right? I mean, are you Joe Biden's body double or are you a separate campaign? And a right to his campaign war chest.

There is a serious FEC question right there because when people are donating money, OK, who did they donate it to? Can you can you really just slide into that position now and get ninety one million dollars? Because if you are, I'm pretty sure some other candidates like, wait a second. I think she should only be able to do it if she picks Joe Biden as her vice president. They just swap places on the ticket. Basically the same ticket. Right. If it's her and somebody completely different, our mystery box vice president, mystery box vice president. You know what I mean? Like then this is not the same thing at all.

And no one should have to treat it like it's the same campaign. Well, let's jump to this story from Forbes. Kamala crash. Trump blames Harris for stock market downturn. In case you missed it, Wall Street's fear gauge, the VIX, hits highest levels since the pandemic market plunge in 2020. We've got, where do we have this one uh washington post dow sinks more than 1 000 points in global market sell-off and for good measure where's my where's my phone oh it's my phone's right in front of me well let me just uh

disclose what i'm currently down today eighteen thousand dollars i'm not a big stock market guy i don't have very much in there but but that's my losses for the day. Thanks to, I do believe Kamala Harris and Joe Biden. This is the administration that is currently in. It is their policies. They've been spending money like crazy on app, on just total garbage, like the Ukraine war. It's no surprise. We're going to see hyperinflation. They've been paying off student loan debts, even though the Supreme court said not to. They are dumping your money into the market. And I don't mean in a way that would actually bring prices down. I'm saying they're causing hyperinflation by just spending like lunatics.

But there was an interesting point Trump truthed out. When the polls started suggesting Kamala was going to win, the market starts going down. And it's not the only factor. Obviously, the jobs report was bad. Unemployment is up. Jobs are down. Expected jobs are supposed to be way higher. The jobs report, I Obviously, the jobs report was bad. Unemployment is up. Jobs are down. Expected jobs are supposed to be way higher. The jobs report, I think, was like 117K.

That was ridiculous. It was supposed to be 117. Very, very low. I think it's fair to say that when people believe Kamala is going to win, they sell. They are concerned that if they're in the market, plus with this downturn, it causes panic. If polls start showing Trump is winning, the market's going to improve because people are going to want to be in these companies. A Trump administration will make your 401k better. It did last time.

Do I have the do I have the tweet up here? I got to find it. Let's see. Here we go. From Real Development CFA. Your 401k is getting unburdened by from what has been. Sure is. Yeah. There was a report from

Goldman Sachs that came out on the 4th that said it raised the likelihood that we'll see a recession in the next 12 months from, I think it was 15 to 25 percent. And I think this is really going to weigh heavily on voters' minds, especially young voters as it goes to go to the polls. Of course, retirees, people who are getting ready for that, I'm sure they are. They are thinking about this as well. But they've lived through more elections. Young voters who are, you know, maybe one or two election cycles in being able to cast their own ballot and are trying to plan their financial future. I mean, it really seems telling that one candidate seems to make the stock market happy and one doesn't. Right. And making the stock market happy is also making jobs. We have huge unemployment numbers now.

What is it? 4.3% highest since October 2021. And you have Joe Biden just recently when he was asked what he wanted his legacy to be. And he said that he cured the economy and the environment. And so I think we're just waiting to see what his cure for the environment must be. And look, I can understand there's a lot of factors going on right now.

A lot of stuff is going on with interest rates in Japan that is causing a lot of people that invested in the U.S. markets from Japan to pull their investments in order to pay back debt because they've raised interest rates. There's a ton of stuff. There's a potential looming, like, wider spread war in the Middle East, all of it.

But so much of this, here's my major takeaway from all of this is that there are certain economists that predicted stuff like this would happen. They're usually from the Austrian or Chicago school, right? So that's your Mises guys, your Hyatt guys, your Friedman guys, your Sol guys. And they always get told by the establishment, oh, they're being ridiculous. This is absurd. That's not going to happen. There is no problem. Inflation is transitory, right? Like all of that. Stop listening to the people that keep telling you everything's okay when Democrats are in charge because Democrats are in charge and start listening to the economists that have

said over and over and over again, you can't spend money the way the federal government is doing. You can't print money to create prosperity. You can't engage in the sort of practices that we're engaging in because it will lead to a recession. This isn't mysticism, right? If you are just printing dollars, if the federal government is throwing hundreds of millions of dollars at the Taliban right now, right, you are going to end up in a bad situation.

You know, that story is so wild. Oh my, Sean Ryan was talking about this months ago. The U.S. is just accidentally sending $230 million to the Taliban. Accidentally. Thank God Elizabeth Warren pushed so hard for those 87,000 additional IRS agents in order to make sure that Americans paid their taxes, because otherwise the Taliban would have never gotten their money. My favorite thing is they brought the meme back where it's rockets from Gaza into Israel, and then the Iron Dome, and it's like, my tax dollars somehow also my tax dollars. And it's like, someone tweeted, in light of the news about the Taliban receiving $230

plus million in the US government, I'd like to bring back this meme. Yeah. I feel like people should stop paying their taxes until the government figures itself out. I know they never will, so that's never going to happen. But it just seems crazy to me that they're like, you can have to pay every year. And I always think of the meme where it's like, government, you owe us money.

And the person is like, how much? And they're like, we know, but we won't tell you. Ha ha. It is we know, but we won't tell you. And if you mess it up, jail! Federal prison. You know what I think about this Afghanistan story is I don't know that it was an accident. Oh, I don't think it was. So we talked about how under the Obama administration, ISIS just flour flourished just a whoopsie obama kept slipping

on banana peels just couldn't seem to to get those rascals and then donald trump walks in hits the button and they're gone you look at donald trump's plan for withdrawing from afghanistan and then joe biden gets in and whoopsie days he slips on a banana peel. Or the deep state likes the chaos in the Middle East because it destabilizes the region, allowing the U.S. to basically exert authority without any interference. So you go to any one of these nations and you've got to deal with a Gaddafi

and you're like, ugh, this Gaddafi guy. Well, now there's no Gaddafi. U.S. has free run of Libya in any way they need to. Not that we're going in there like we are with other countries, but you get rid of a Bashar al-Assad and then all of a sudden the U.S. is free reign of Syria, which the U.S. desperately does want. So I have to wonder if they weren't accidentally sending hundreds of millions of dollars to the Taliban. Yeah, like maybe they

just wanted to send. But the thing, too, is after we left Afghanistan in a very bad way, the Biden administration said that they were going to help rebuild the region. So they said they were going to give a lot of money to the Taliban. And then they didn't say the Taliban. They said Afghanistan. Yeah. But the Taliban was in charge of it. So I don't think it was a mistake.

I think it was an intentional thing. And they just don't like the framing now. No, I think that's accurate. I think one of the things that I appreciated, I remember when Trump first got into office, one of the biggest concerns was, oh, we're going to have World War III, we're going to have this, we're going to have that. And then all of a sudden, lo and behold, we get involved in the fewest, you know, actual large scale conflicts of, you know, any president in recent history. And the difference was, is that it wasn't that Donald Trump was afraid to use the U.S. military

when it was perhaps appropriate or necessary. The difference was, is that it wasn't that Donald Trump was afraid to use the U.S. military when it was perhaps appropriate or necessary. The difference was is that he understood the difference between a punitive expedition and spending 20 years trying to rebuild a country in our own image. Right. He wasn't interested in the latter. He was interested in the former. You want to screw around. Again, the bombing of the embassy in Iraq and Baghdad was a perfect example of this. Was his response, OK, we know Iran is behind this. We know the Islamic Republic Guard is financing this and strategizing with people to do this. Let's invade Iran and try to set up a parliamentary democracy. No, it was, who was in charge?

I'm killing that guy. And lo and behold, Iran was like, oh, oh, this is different. This is not beneficial to the people in power. Because he's not killing a bunch of civilians in Tehran in order to send a message to the Ayatollah. He's killing people within the inner circle of the Ayatollah. That sends a very, very different message because quite frankly, in the Middle East,

strength is respected. But it has to be strength and it has to be power directed at the people who actually hold power, not their civilians. That's why Trump was so good at that. But to be fair, I think strength is generally respected.

You look at domestic policy and you look at the UK, you look at the United States, why is it that the far left will get away with the acts of violence they commit while we desperately beg for accountability? Why is it that Steve Bannon

and Peter Navarro had to go to prison and Merrick Garland does not? Well, it's because Democrats are willing to use power, Republicans are not. So if you're not willing to use the power vested in you by the American public when you actually get it, don't be surprised if Democrats, even when they're out, when they're in the minority, they're going to still do whatever they want. Yeah. Yeah. Yep. Yes. Well, I'm glad we're all

in agreement. Show over. Remember, I was just looking up this old clip. You remember Jared Bernstein, chair of the Council of Economic Advisors from Joe Biden? Oh, yes. Who said the government definitely prints money and definitely lends that money by selling bonds. Remember that whole clip? He had no idea. He had no idea what's going on. And now here we are in a massive, you know. What I've been saying for a long time is that these are the grandchildren of the liberal economic order and they inherited a system they do not know how to run.

Correct. And wealth lasts three generations. Yeah. So now it is, you know, oof. And they think it's inherently evil. Like, I remember I had this, we had this argument on the floor of the House of Delegates with somebody who was a trained economist, right? Like, she had studied under. Allegedly trained economist.

I mean, at MIT, the whole deal, she had studied under a Nobel laureate, the whole deal. We're having this whole argument about minimum wage increases. And I'm arguing like, look, you can't just arbitrarily increase the price of something and not expect there to be negative consequences as a result. And it was like, well, that may sound good in Economics 101, but when you really study, I'm like, really? So demand curves change when you feel like it because you're a leftist? That's not how reality works. But again, they honestly believe, and I'm watching this trained economist shift from attempting to make an economic argument, again, shift from making an economic argument to I care about people more than you do. Well, hot damn, if that's how it works, you just got to care more. I think guilt

you into doing what you want. I had no idea. What's your experience like working with Democrats on a state level? Because again, we get like the Jamie Raskins, who I think are really trying to hang on to federal positioning. And sometimes I wonder if it's easier for Republicans and Democrats who are kind of looking to do what's best for their state to strike compromises. Not anymore. Not anymore? No, I don't think so. That's been my impression of the parties, at least on the federal level, that they,

at one point in their history, had a similar common set of values and goals. They just differed on how they wanted to get there. But that doesn't seem like the parties on the federal level. At one point, the Democrats, you could make an argument that they took more of a populist approach with respect to trying to take care of the working man and the whole deal. And I get all of that. The problem was, is that the Democratic Party got eventually completely co-opted by this leftist ideology. They fundamentally believe, they don't come out and say it, right? But they fundamentally believe the way that Marx explained the world. There's oppressors, there's oppressed, and their job, their duty is to stick up for the oppressed. And the only way they can do that is by seizing

more power. And the main enemy is, whether it's free market economics, whether it's traditional family, it's anything that stands in the way of them perfecting society and taking care of people who desperately need them. And so the end result is, is that I'm not talking with somebody, we're no longer dealing with the Democratic Party that wants to argue over the top marginal income tax rate. We're talking about people that fundamentally believe that the United States needs to be recreated in a totally different image of what it actually was. And so does that now, are there people within the democratic party and at the state level that think all this, you know, cultural stuff, like with drag queen. I was nonsense. And they don't want to seize the means of production.

Sure. And you know what they do? They sit there quietly. They shut up and they vote the way that they're told to vote because otherwise they'll get a primary challenge and they'll lose. Before I jump to our next story, I want to give a shout out to Matt Gates, who posted a very flattering video clip. And I really do appreciate it.

Matt, we're huge fans. And he writes, the Timcast audience is so fire they will literally stop on a highway meeting to say hey thanks for your support and your vote today joe it's 14 seconds check this out what's up man matt nice to meet you joe i have to say this because I always see you talk about it. I always love watching you on TimCast, man. Oh, dude, it is an honor. Representative Gates, he's my favorite member of Congress because he bucks the system. He challenges it. He actually stands up for what regular people have been asking someone to do.

I don't know that it always works out perfectly. Speaker Johnson is not perfect but telling mccarthy telling the iou machine the the this this backroom dealing that we're not going to play this game anymore was one of the most epic things i've ever seen and uh and matt also does a tremendously great job in general with understanding what what regular people actually want so uh it was an honor and a privilege to see that video clip and i'd really do appreciate it he's effectively making it a meme now where because he's mentioned it twice i think where he's like the timcast people always come up to me and so he posts a video but let's jump into the in the news here google is a monopolist judge rules against tech giant an antitrust suit ladies and gentlemen this is a massive benchmark case i think

they're calling it scnr reporting. This is in a Monday ruling, a federal judge deemed tech giant Google a monopolist that hugely benefited from default distribution agreements. In 2020, the Department of Justice in 38 states filed an antitrust suit against Google. The suit alleged the company had violated the Sherman Act, which was established in 1890 to promote fair competition and prevent monopolies. Judge Amit P. Mehta of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled that Google has illegally monopolized internet search and ad markets during the past 10 years. After carefully considered and weighed the witness testimony and evidence, the court reaches the following conclusion.

Google is a monopolist. the trust of hundreds of millions of daily users. But Google also has a major, largely unseen advantage over its rivals, default distribution. Meta said that many users search for information through a browser that's preloaded onto a device like Apple Safari, and that default is extremely valuable real estate. Because many users simply stick to searching with the default, Google receives billions of queries every day through those access points. Google derives extraordinary volumes of user data from such searches. In 2020, Google's internal modeling projected that it would lose between 60 to 80 percent of its iOS query volume should it be replaced by the default GSE, General Search Engine, and Apple devices, which would translate into a net revenue loss between $28 and $32.7 billion,

and over double that in gross revenue losses, the judge said. The power of defaults is evident. However, from the share of Bing users on Edge, Bing's search share on Edge is approximately 80%. Google's share is only 20%. Even if one assumes that portion of those Bing searches are performed by Microsoft brand loyalists, Bing's uniquely high search share on Edge cannot be explained by that alone. The default on Edge drives queries to Bing, et cetera, et cetera.

There's a lot more here, but this is massive because I'll explain what I understand about the YouTube end for you guys. is a video host, video distributor, advertising marketplace, advertising distributor. By combining all of these things and subsidizing video hosting through their advertising agency, they own the market. It is extremely difficult for Rumble to be able to get the level of ads on their platform because YouTube basically functions as a default. They have everything, one-stop shop of all the markets combined into one. Now, people in the past have talked about breaking it up and what would it look like. How about this?

YouTube can host your video and your video can appear on the front page, but no algorithm or transparent algorithm. Or how about this? Reverse chronological subscriber-based front pages. You subscribe to a channel, the front page will only show you the latest posts from only channels

you've subscribed to. That would be great. Well, YouTube doesn't like it because YouTube wants discovery. I don't like discovery. I just want to see what I subscribe to. That's why I subscribe to it. Yep, and so that would rely more on sharing

and word of mouth and advertising, which is the normal way to do things. What's happened now is people are like, I subscribe to Timcast IRL. I watch every single night and it's not on my front page and it's difficult to find. I go to subscriptions. I go to that tab. Not even a guarantee. Even my own mom was like, one day I went to find the show. It wasn't on the front page. Went to youtube.com slash Timcast IRL. The video wasn't there. And she's texting me like, is the show not live? While we're live. And then she's like, for some reason video wasn't there. And she's texting me like, is the show not live while we're live? And then she's like, for some reason, it wasn't displaying. It's because Google wants to control

what you watch, what you think about, because, well, they have the entire access. By controlling revenue for the user, because they control the ad space, they can make you say what they want to say. It's one thing if they say, hey, we don't allow certain things on our platform because personally we don't like them. What they're actually saying is we don't allow you to say certain things because the advertisers get mad. Whoa, whoa, whoa. We've got, so we use Rumble distribution for our video hosting on timcast.com. There's no rules. Why? Because we're paying for a service for them to host it. There are rules, don't get me wrong. It's like, don't do illegal things. But they don't tell us what we can or can't say because we're just paying customers. By YouTube combining all of this, they've created a system where you

can't host videos privately. You can't even, if you take a video down, they can still give you a strike over it because they've combined the whole thing into one. Look, I think it should be broken up. I think ad sales and ad delivery should be completely separate from YouTube's video and delivery, but they're all one big company. So this is one of those areas where as a free market, I've always been a free market purist, right? And so I've always wanted the market to be as free as possible. And if you do the best job, then why can't you grow to a certain degree of market share? Like, why can't you do that? Like degree of market share? Why can't you do that? The biggest historical example was always Standard Oil. Everything got cheaper,

the bigger Standard Oil got. There was never this point where they cornered the market so entirely that they just raised prices and when you had to do it. They just did the best job. But this is also an example of me becoming so frustrated with the left, with the way that they operate, with the way the government actually manipulates markets, that I've gotten to a point where it's like, you know what? I've had my problems with the Sherman Antitrust Act and how it's affected and how politicians will actually manipulate it to try to get campaign donations out of companies so they don't get investigated by Congress. But I'm also at a point where it's like, screw you guys. Screw you guys well screw you guys like i i am so tired i am so tired of you pretending like you're operating within the free market when in reality what you do especially a place like youtube or google is you say we're just a platform and then you operate

like a publisher in order to you know manipulate the markets the way you want or to manipulate information the way you want and then the moment you get called on it you come back no no we're just a platform but let's let's even separate this yeah i don't care if the only search engine anyone wants to use is google if everyone in the world was like google google wins they own search 100 fine they've combined advertising distribution hosting all into one so search is youtube is the second biggest search engine in the world if you want to argue that it's not it's not a monopoly to have second biggest search engine in the world. If you want to argue that it's not it's not a monopoly to have the biggest search engine, I don't care.

But then when Google defaults their own ad delivery, ad sales and combines all of it into one, now you can't compete at all with anything. So it used to be that if you were on TV, there were multiple advertising agencies. You'd go to one that you thought would do the best job and get the best prices. You went to one because they negotiated better deals. They did bigger packages. So then when they got you on TV, it was a little bit cheaper because they have an existing relationship. Or you could be like, you know what? You guys were really bad. Your ad sucked. I'm going across the street. Now it's just Google. Because if you want to sell, it's going to be Google ads or YouTube ads. That's where people do everything. I mean, massive spending on social media. YouTube is running all of it in one. You

break those apart, let it be its own company, and then what do you end up having? If Google AdSense or AdWords, like two different things, if they were separate companies, they would not be saying, we only deliver to YouTube. That's a ridiculous thing, right? You'd go to a digital ad distribution and say, where will you distribute my content? And they'll say, here's a list of online video distribution sites that we sell to. It includes YouTube. It includes Vimeo. It includes Minds. It includes Rumble. It includes BitChute. It includes X. And here are the rates per platform. You could then be like, I trust you to algorithmically or through a human. Here's my budget of X amount of dollars per month.

Distribute them where most effective. And if then they came back and said YouTube is most effective, I'd be fine with that. Instead, you go to Google ads and it's like, it's YouTube. What else do you want? And you're like, that's it. You got to go individually. The same thing's true for X. Their distribution, hosting, all these platforms are combining all of these things. The issue, I suppose, is that Google owns all of it and has effectively shut out the rest of the market, causing problems for anyone

who tries to get into the space. If you're a rumble, you're struggling to deal with the costs versus how much you can make because everyone just goes, Rumble needs creators. They need content. How do they compete? Sorry. Google subsidizes their video distribution and ad marketplace. So you cannot compete. Then they get default on all the mobile devices. You cannot compete. That is the problem. Yeah, that is a problem. How did they get default on all the mobile devices? They were paying for it, right? Well, I don't know exactly it was also it was also market demand well it's it's i don't think they were like the only one for i don't know that they were default on apple always i think they weren't

super big apple was like i think when youtube gets on apple like you you boot up the phone youtube is there but maps i don't think was apple created their own maps that's right but android was google so you booted up an android device and it's got the google play store it's google's play store they've created another marketplace now google android products are better you can still go to a website and download an app apple's really bad and so the app store controls everything and they've got the money yep and they got a massive control this is also another thing that ends up happening though right and this is this is where again this is where i become more sympathetic to the idea of something like antitrust law coming in and preventing something it's not

when somebody provides a service incredibly efficiently and effectively so much the customers want it like i don't believe we should deny customers access to something when they want it a certain way the problem that that I have, though, is that what a lot of these companies end up doing is not just, you know, what do you call it when you pretty much inline all the services? I forget it. But anyways, it's the idea that they then take anybody that begins to compete with them to court. And they start using basically lawfare in order to prevent anybody from standing up because you just can't afford to keep hiring lawyers. And that's the part where I get very, very frustrated with, again, bigger companies that are trying to prevent their competition. Or what they do is they go to the government and they engage in, they're the ones that write the legislation. They're the ones

that write the regulations. They're the ones that write the restrictions. I think, again, going back to that argument I was making earlier about the whole minimum wage thing, of course you had companies like Amazon. They're like, oh, absolutely. We want to drastically increase this. They didn't want to do that out of the kindness of their hearts. They wanted to do it because it makes it harder for startup companies to be able to compete with them in competitive markets. And so they do use the system, either through subsidization, regulation, or whatever it is, in order to prevent their competition.

And that's when I believe in slamming them for it. Yeah, it's tough. I wonder if there is a reasonable position where it's the antitrust is only in play when the free market is negatively impacted by the actions of the company. I think that's meant to be the intention. It is. It's hard to do it

because there will always be political manipulation of the law. And it just, it sucks is what it is. It's hard to do it because there will always be political manipulation of the law. And it sucks is what it is. It's tough. I say right now, we saw that video back in the day. I think it was, who was it? Was it the, it might have been Rico to release this and I can't remember. Did you day? I don't know.

The Google staffers crying because Donald Trump won. And the executives, do you remember TechCrunch? Who was it? I can't remember who it was. I don't remember. Do you want to try Googling it? Google employees cry for Trump wins. It was from like 2018 or something.

Breitbart had the story. And when you see Google executives say, we can never let this happen again. Yeah. I'm like, this company needs to be broken up. Sorry. Bye bye. Oh, the guys over at YouTube right now are panicking and calling their boss and being like, should we get rid of TimCast IRL?

He's talking bad about us. Yeah, well, you know, that's another reason. If anything bad happens to TimCast IRL, even more reason why it should be broken up. There are a lot of Silicon Valley companies that do this, but I know definitely for Google, you know, they'll have an employee matching benefit. So if they want to make a charitable donation, they'll match it. But I know that, you know, conservative members or people who work at Google, there are some, I'm sure they're in the minority, they'll ask for this and they'll match it. But I know that, you know, conservative members or people who work at Google, there are some, I'm sure they're in the minority, they'll ask for this and they'll be denied.

They'll be like, oh, well, they're not a part of our program. Denied, yeah. They'll say, oh, it's not part of our matching program or we, you know, there's some issue or whatever. Like the biggest problem for me for all of this, and again, like I said, Google paid like $20 billion to Apple, you know, annually to basically control, to be the default search engine. They are monopolizing the market, making money off it, which then they use to maintain control of this. And they are completely biased in what they're doing. I went to a YouTube event in the UK several years ago. And someone I knew was invited.

And I was hanging out with them, and I got asked to come. I wasn't an official invitee, but they were like, oh, wait, oh, if you're here, you should totally come. And a bunch of people that I had known were there. One of the guys from the Young Turks was there. And so it was an issue of community guidelines. I had been invited by Google to an event in California on anti-extremism, and their concern was that fundamentalist Islam was using YouTube to recruit and bring people to ISIS. And they're like, what do we do? Because some of it's like free speech.

They're not really saying anything crazy other than, you know, like their religion. And then everyone gave their ideas, and then I just basically talked about my experiences covering the news and what i thought so when i went to the uk some of the same people were there i'm sitting down in this room full of like i don't know a couple hundred people and the guy on stage starts talking about hate speech guidelines and in the process makes fun of white people makes fun of trump voters people on the right i don't know if this might have not been might not have been when trump was in yet. And then, so after a while of this, when they were talking about, you know, the rules for the, for the platform, I raised my question. I said, define hate speech. And everyone in the room was like, yes, do it.

And they were like, uh, they didn't have an answer after like the fifth or sixth time where they were just insulting conservatives and white people. I got up and I was like, dude, I am not doing this. And I walked out and people were like, oh, he's all mad. And then I had one of the guys from the Young Turks was like, what's the problem? And I was like, how are you going to host a conference saying we want to get rid of the toxicity in NA speech and then have a guy on stage just insult people based on their race? And they're like, yeah, but they're white. And I'm like, dude,

I don't care. I'm like, I don't want to sit in a room where a guy's just yelling and insulting people. It makes me feel bad. But that's what YouTube was hosting intentionally. When see that stuff when i see the google uh crying over trump i'm like this company has got deep-seated problems and should not have the authority that it does when it comes to what people see because you hear them saying stuff like we can't let this happen again and then is it any surprise that people were Googling Donald Trump, but Kamala Harris was coming up? I'll tell you this right now.

Everybody listening. Go to YouTube.com slash TimCastNews. Subscribe, by the way. But take the title of any one of those videos that are on YouTube and put them into Google search. The video will not come up. You cannot search for my morning show on Google. They have stripped it out. Wonder why? Real quick, the last time I did this on IRL, because IRL was blacklisted on Google as well, during the show they removed it and then everyone in the chat were like,

they removed the blacklist. The video started popping back up. This happens to the post-millennial and also Google search results have changed. It used to be that you could do a Google search result search and you would get like 20 pages of results. You would get like endless pages of results. Now, if you try and click on the page 10 of results, there's nothing there. Really? Yeah. They've limited the search function so that you don't get as much as you used to. And when you try and search for post-millennial stories, I will tell you, like, I think I brought it up last week. A couple months ago, the way that I would find old stories is I would just write, you know, keyword the post-millennial. And the story that I was looking for that I wrote five months ago would show up.

And now it does not show up. It does not show up. Check this out. So I just went to the post-millennial. Jamie Raskin said Trump must be disqualified by Congress if elected. I'm going to go to I'm going to I'm going to put it right in and Google search it. It doesn't come up. This is true for a lot of other things.

I'm going to go to page 10. The New Republic's there. There's a page 10. I clicked page 10 and stuff came up. Well, there you go. Sometimes it works, I guess. But with your own title, it doesn't come up. That's right.

That's right. Here's the part where I go to the idea. What is the best legal mechanism to address something like this? Again, are you a platform or are you a publisher? And I think that is a significant distinction. Because if you are a publisher, well, then there's certain legal obligations that you have and there's certain legal recourse people have. If you say you're doing one thing and you do something else, if you engage in li if you do things like that if you're a platform you're just a platform man but unfortunately that's what we have with a lot of these social media platforms is that they are engaging in

publishing style behavior but they get the legal protections of being a platform and that's wrong well and to be fair with google particularly because it's such a huge operation the algorithm for their search is biased but i mean there was that famous study done with Gmail where Republican emails were not making it through. I mean, this issue extends to every aspect of their business. And, you know, I tend to agree with you. Like, if you're really good at a service and consumers want to use it, you know, you don't want to block that.

On the other hand, do consumers know what they're signing up for when this becomes the default thing? Oh, I agree. There gets to a certain point where it's either quasi-violation of contract because you're advertising that you're doing one thing when really you're doing something else. So there's a fraud component almost. And then it's the whole idea of are you a publisher or a platform? Because you don't get the protections of a platform if you're going to operate like a publisher. Right. Do you think that there is a version of U.S. history of our future where Google somehow gets broken up? I mean, is it too big to fail at this point? I do. And again, I will say it this way. It used to be guys like me would be sitting here going,

look, I'm sorry. I'm a purist in X, Y, and Z, and we can't utilize government power to do this. But it's gotten to the point where I'm tired of getting punched in the face constantly. I'm tired of saying, actually, you said something that really stuck with me. I've repeated this a lot. And it was the whole concept of freedom of speech. Do you believe in protecting freedom of speech? My answer is absolutely. And then you said, you know what? I used to believe the same thing. I will support your right to freedom of speech no matter what. Now I will support your right to freedom of speech provided that you believe in protecting people's freedom of speech. If you don't, well, then I'll be happy to respect your wishes and not protect yours because that's where we're at right now.

You don't get to use the same principles and ideals to slam me with it and then use it as protection for yourself. But specifically, if I say, I think the income tax should be abolished, and then someone else comes to me and says, well, I think the income tax should be 90%. That's fine. That's free speech. If I say, I don't like the income tax, and then you say, I think you should not have a right to speak at all, that's anti-free speech. I don't support that. And. And then you say, I think you should not have a right to speak at all. Yeah. That's anti-free speech. Yes. I don't support that. And people for a long time, these classical liberals were like, well, if you think these

people who think hate speech should be banned, that's free speech. We should respect it. No, I look at it this way. You shouldn't shoot anybody. Just don't do it. Right. But there are exceptions in the law when you are allowed to. That is, someone tries to shoot you. I view almost all of our rights similarly. If someone is using the

power of speech to try and strip our rights from us, our right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, I'm under no obligation to defend their right to do that. If they are advocating for policies which I disagree with, which are getting close to the line, but it's really just a policy decision and it's difficult, well, then that's free speech. And I give a wide berth to that. But specifically, and only specifically, if someone is saying you should not be allowed to express your opinions, then I say, then I will oblige you. And when they censor you, I will clap for you. Yeah.

You advocated for this policy. I thought it was horrible. I thought it was a bad idea. I didn't think you should be advocating for that, but you did. And now you want me to come and defend you for it? When you would have used that same power to come after me? The thing with Google that everybody forgets is Bell Telephone was broken up in like, what, 1982. And they were facing dissolution by the federal government. And so they split up into like, you know, a dozen, half dozen different things all around the country. Google could do something like that if they were taken to court and they could say, OK, we will divide our business up in this way, this way, this way and this way, which would be smart of them. Well, let's jump to the next story.

I hope you're different. I hope you guys are ready for a fun one for something completely different. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. poses with his hand in dead bear's mouth before dumping in Central Park as link to reporter who broke the bizarre story emerges. So there's a video of RFK Jr. telling Roseanne how he dumped a dead bear in Central Park and staged a hoax, making it look like it was a bike accident that killed the bear cub. To be honest,

I don't think he thought it was a big deal. He thought it was going to be funny, but it is illegal. A variety of laws were broken. They are not serious laws. And now I guess the reporter actually got a photo that someone took of the dead bear fake biting his hand um yo rfk jr is sounds like a fun guy to hang out with

can we just say like how cute rosanna is she's so cute is this the whole video i was taking a group of people falconing in the ocean of New York. He was taking a group of people falconing. Of course. Of course he was. As one does. A typical Kennedy outing. I was sitting there at like maybe eight or nine.

I was driving up maybe, you know, really early, like seven. And that woman in the van in front of me hit a bear and killed it. A young bear. So I pulled over and I picked up the bear and put him in the back of my van because I was going to skin the bear. As one does. And it was very good condition. And I was going to put the meat in my refrigerator. And you can do that in New York State.

You can get a bear tag for a roadkill bear. And so then we went hawking, and I had the bear in my car. Hawking. And then we had a really good day, and we went late. We were catching a live game, and the people really loved it. So we stayed late, and instead of going back to my home in Westchester, I had to go right to the city because there was a dinner at Peter Luger's Steakhouse. And at the end of the dinner, it went late.

And I realized I couldn't go home. I had to go to the airport. I just got to pause real quick. Real quick, chain of events. He's falconing. Woman hits a bear. He takes the bear. Then they go hawking.

Is that what he said? They go hawking. Finding lots of game. Then he decides to go to Peter Luger's Steaking. Woman hits a bear. He takes the bear. Then they go hawking. Is that what he said? They go hawking. Finding lots of game. Then he decides to go to Peter Luger's Steakhouse. In Brooklyn. In Brooklyn. Then he says, oh, I got to get on an airplane. No, no, hold on.

Did he have his suitcase with him and his change of clothes already? Yeah, and what was he thinking? Did he not know about these things before he put the bear in his trunk? My favorite thing is the bear has been in his trunk this whole time. He's been going from New York to down to Brooklyn. He's zooming around with a dead baby bear in his car.

He's in Brooklyn? And then he drove to Central Park with it? That's a bit of a drive. Wait, wait, wait. Did he say Brooklyn? Peter Lugers is in Brooklyn. It's like... So then he drove? It's like an hour to drive from

brooklyn to manhattan it's a it's a pain in the butt to drive yeah i mean brooklyn is like what i mean minimum two hours i would think where was he goshen new york he said so he was far up there yes so he's like like road tripping with this bear banging down the highway it's like a very weird. I just want to mention. It is weird, isn't it? The weirdest thing about it to me is I get if he's like, I want this bear. I'm going to skin it. It's cool.

But he had his change of clothes and suitcase with him to go flying. Or did he just not bring anything with him to go flying? He's just raw dogging that flight. He's just like, look, I'm going to land where I got to land. And I'm good. He always has a go bag with him at any time he has to get on a flight. Bear Skinner and a go bag. Typical Kennedy Fair.

Played the dead cub on the tuck. Let me play the rest. The bear was in my car and I didn't want to leave the bear in the car. Makes sense. Because that would have been bad. And I thought, you know, at that time, this was a little bit of the redneck in me. There'd been a series of bicycle accidents in New York. They had just put in the bike lanes and saw people, a couple of people every day and people badly injured.

Every day it was in the press. And so I thought, I wasn't drinking, of course, but people were drinking like me who thought this was a good idea. And I said, I had an old bike in my car that somebody had asked me to get rid of it. I said, let's go put the bear in the center car. What is he driving? How big is this car? Fun, funny for people. So everybody thought

that's a great idea so we went and did that and we thought it would be amusing for whoever found it or something the next day it was like it was on every television station it was the front page of every paper

and I turned on the TV and there was like a mile of yellow tape and there were 20 cop cars there were helicopters flying over it and I was like oh my god what did I do and then

there were some people on TV in Tyvek suits with gloves on lifting up the bike and they're saying they're going to take this up to Albany to get a famous friend in and uh You know what? Forget everything. I want to know what Kamala Harris' position is on storing dead bears. There are Democrats who leverage their favorite word weird against this. after a while and uh and it stayed dead for a decade the new yorkers somehow found out about it and they just they're gonna do a big article on me and that's one of the articles so they

asked me the fact checkers that you know it's gonna be a bad story he tweeted let's see how you spin this i I'm like, bro, you dumped a dead bear in Central Park. What's to spin? Can you imagine being Roseanne who like this story as it goes on, you just never know where it's going to go, right? Like it starts with like, well, I was hawking and or falconing with people. And then there was a dead bear and I thought I would get meat. Now I'm at a steakhouse.

Now I'm going to the airport. I actually have a bite like amazing storytelling by rfk i have to say oh so i guess the the the actual story from the new yorker dropped and that's where the uh let's see if we just scroll down and uh what is this political cartoon uh let's scroll down and see if they actually published the photo is that it i don't want to read this garbage from the new yorker it's always so long yeah very pretentious and it's very important oh my gosh. I don't think they actually published the photo, did they?

Oh, there we go. There it is. Just a little bit of the photo. They say, let's read their version. One day in the fall of 2014, Kennedy was driving to a falconry outing in upstate New York. When he passed a furry brown mound on the side of the road, he pulled over and discovered that it was a carcass of a black bear cub. Kennedy was tickled to find. He loaded the dead bear into the rear hatch of his car and later showed it off to

his friends. In a picture from that day, Kennedy is putting his fingers in the bear's bloody mouth, a comical grimace across his face. After the outing, Kennedy, who was then 60 and recently married to Hines, got an idea. He drove to Manhattan and as darkness fell, entered Central Park with the bear and his bicycle. A person with knowledge of the event said that Kennedy thought it would be funny to make it look as if the animal had been killed by an errant cyclist. The next day, the bear was discovered by two women walking their dog, setting off an investigation by the NYPD. This is a highly unusual situation, a spokeswoman for the Central Park Conservancy told the Times. It's awful.

In a follow-up piece from the Times, which was coincidentally written by Tatiana Schlossberg, one of JFK's granddaughters, a retired Bronx homicide commander, commented, people are crazy. That year, Kennedy moved with Hines to L.A., where he soon became acquainted. What was the point of that story? It's basically, as he told it, he gave a little more details. Well, I will say this is probably not even the worst body a Kennedy has buried. Well, they usually leave it in the car and just get rid of the car entirely.

It is JFK's granddaughter who wrote the New York Times story about it. I heard that. And on my morning show, I was like, is what? Schlossberg? And I looked her up and she's a Kennedy. And I was like, that's JFK's granddaughter. So that's like, what, his cousin? Or like cousin once removed or something.

I mean, they're a huge family. The Schlossbergs, are those the New York Times publishers too? Are they? I think your cousin's kids are still your cousins. It's just cousin. It's not removed or anything. I could be wrong. But I remember thinking it was weird because like you don't have.

I think that's correct. Yeah. It's like your cousin's kids are still just your cousin or something. That's why you say like my baby cousin and that means my cousin's daughter. I actually think they did this story a disservice. I think RFK's telling is so much better. I think the details that they dropped really added to the vibrancy of this bizarre day in the life of RFK. I actually think also, ever since he calls himself a redneck, I kept thinking, you're not a redneck, though.

You were right. First cousin, once removed. Okay, cool. i'm glad that that knowledge that chart that i read eight years ago has stuck in my brain uh but i actually think that you know this weird story about like we had this roadkill and we were going to do something with it might resonate with some people in america you know there's someone out there who is like oh yeah there was a deer so we could cut it up what's amazing is is rfk can actually go through this entire story and and it comes off far more endearing than anything kamala harris has ever said ever in her

life i gotta admit as crazy as the story is i would not recommend dumping a dead animal uh rfk seems like a fun guy right yeah for sure i want to hear more stories from him i want to go falconing like what would be great is to be hanging out with with rfk that day because you I want to go falconing. I like his talk. What would be great is to be hanging out with RFK that day because you'd get to go falconing, hawking. You'd get a nice drive down to Peter Luger,

which is great. Then you get a nice trip to Central Park with a bunch of people so you know nothing bad is going to happen. They're all drunk. Everybody's drunk. He's the one driving his hatchback. And he's the one committing the crimes, so you're good.

He was being soberly. He was like, you know what, drunk people? Good idea. Where's he going in this? What is day two of this? And where is he putting his car? What's going on? And if someone said,

hey, there's this cool bear story with Roseanne Barr and RFK Jr., you would have probably assumed that Roseanne is the one that had something to do with the bear, but no. I told you this, which is I was in the grocery store and got this news alert, which is like presidential candidate admits

to dumping dead bear in Central Park. And I, of course, because it's Central Park, so it's New York, I was like, there's no way Trump did this. It's so much better than it's RFK. Maybe one of his kids who are into hunting. Right. It's so much better that it's RFK. Maybe one of his kids who are into hunting. Right. It's so much better that it's RFK who like will not be put in a box.

You know, he's in New York going to this elite event and also somehow he has a bear in his car. I just imagine him wearing a cape as he was doing all this too. Like I was falconing and then we did a bear. Like a velvet smoking jacket. Yeah. So I was,

I was of course, you know, as per SOP going to skin the bear. But then also like a John Deere jacket. Yeah, so I was, of course, as per SOP, going to skin the bear. But then also like a John Deere hat. Yeah. Apparently redneck. It's an amazing story. Really one of America's best.

And like L.L. Bean boots somehow. No, you're right. L.L. Bean boots because that's like working man but from New England. I'm wondering if they try to bring any charges against him over this. It is illegal. What's the statute of limitations on Trump dumping bear bodies? But the statute of limitations are upon discovery of a crime. So in like the Trump case, they said Trump did it back in like 2017 and then did nothing.

So they accused him of it and it did nothing. So it's beyond the statute of limitations. This is the first time people are discovering that it's like a minor misdemeanor. It's like 15 days in jail. Yeah. first time people are discovering that it's like it's like a minor misdemeanor it's like 15 days in jail yeah but they also they said they sent the bear up to albany for fingerprinting i guess or some sort of forensic i mean the bike sorry do we still have the bike and or the bear in some kind of evidence locker i mean this is hilarious it's kind of sad and weird like cryogenically frozen no you know what happened you know what happened. You know what happened. They ran the fingerprints. They got back and like, not another freaking kid. Not again.

Nothing to see here, folks. Nothing to see here. We don't want the headache. He's just going to donate to a bear conservancy fund. I got to be honest, though. In a minivan fund. I really, I'm willing to bet they got RFK Jr.'s fingerprints. Sure.

And when they ran the prints on the bike. He's probably done all kinds of weird stuff. It's not that. I worked at American Airlines, so my fingerprints are in a federal database forever, and every law enforcement agency has access to them. Do you know when I was in third grade, they trooped my entire elementary school

to the police station to be fingerprinted? We did that, too. Yeah. We did that. Your parents let this happen? Well, they didn't know about it. It was a normal thing because there was all the missing children.

You get your ID card. Oh, no, no, no. We did it as like a, this is what fingerprinting is like. Well, that's what they told us too. And then we were all excited to do it. We fingerprinted each other in my high school forensic science class, but it didn't, as far as I know, get any sort of database. When I was little, we did the footprint.

Oh, we didn't do that. It was stranger danger. So it was like your kid's footprint taken because now it's just like, give your kid a CIA tracking device, you know, cell phone, I mean. And you'll never lose them. And then they'll also have access to the most ungodly horrifying images man has ever created. It's crazy. It's true. Yeah, we don't want to do that.

Don't give your kids cell phones. So who else do you think was with RFK on this Falcon retake? Well, the New Yorker found them. That's apparently how they figured this thing out. So how many people could fit in? There was a couple vehicles. They weren't all together. that's apparently how they figured this thing out. So how many people could fit in? Okay, what kind of?

There was a couple vehicles. There was a couple vehicles. They weren't all together. Well, look at, was it? Because remember, he said that the lady in front of him hit the bear. Well, but that doesn't mean he knows her. So this, you could, I don't know what this vehicle is,

but I'm sure someone looking at it could figure out what it is pretty easily. And then we could figure out how many seats it has. But I bet it has, it could fit five. I bet it's got, you know, driver, pretty easily and then we could figure out how many seats it has but i bet it has it could fit five i bet it's got you know driver passenger and then three in the in the back seat so this car either they have multiple car or it's one car that has now a bear as well as a bicycle and his friends whoever the car manufacturer is if they don't do an ad saying comfortably seats six and a dead baby bear in the back rfk should come back on this show and tell us this story again in more detail i think rfk jr should drop out and endorse donald trump

but that's just me he's got a fantastic bear story right now i think he's got a couple more weeks of press i think he's a little too progressive to endorse trump though i don't i don't know i think um you know what man i said this back in 2020. Trump needs to make bold moves he's not willing to make because he's got traditional advisors. I was saying back then Trump should make Tulsi Gabbard national security advisor or promise that for his next administration, and he'd win. He's an Andrew Yang economic advisor after the Democrats said no, they wanted Biden. He could have been like Andrew Yang economic advisor, Tulsi Gabbard national security advisor. Pat Buchanan was saying Tulsi Gabbard, national security advisor. Pat Buchanan was saying Tulsi Gabbard should be national security advisor.

I'd be fine with Tulsi in that position because Tulsi understands the problem with freaking U.S. foreign policy and us getting involved in wars every five seconds because she's fought at him. Right. But like I don't want Andrew Yang anywhere near advising. But that UBI, no. But I get what you're saying. But it's a political play. I get it. Advisory doesn't mean anything actually happens. That is that is true. Right.

It's just it's just him saying I'm willing to reach out, you know, across the political division for, you know, for these policies. So right now, the opportunity here for RFK Jr., if he's willing to take it and if Trump is willing to offer it, I think, you know, Trump did ask him to endorse him. RFK Jr. needs to go to Trump and say, give me a position over environmental toxins and pollutants and things like this in some way. You got your endorsement because it's very clear RFK Jr.'s passion is biphenols, phthalates, endocrine disruptors. I'd give him the FDA. Absolutely. You could also give him the EPA and be like, you know, whip this into shape and make it actually effective. I mean, look, if you went to. I would get rid of it, too. I'll tell you this.

You go to Donald Trump and it's tough because Trump's a busy guy and I've seen people try to talk to him and he's like he's got no time. Right. You can't come to him with nonsense. But if you get to like Vivek was able to talk to Trump about Bitcoin crypto and he nailed it. We need the same conversation with the emasculation of men through endocrine disruptors. You say the plastics that is in all the food disrupts hormone balance and it makes it disrupts development and puberty. This is emasculating men in the literal sense. It is effeminizing men. We need to figure this out rfk

jr you ask about he lights up this is his subject it's not just that it's everything trump would be like we don't we don't want that we don't we want strong men right we want good we want people who are going to be good soldiers good defenders of this country and the american flag good dads good dads rfk jr knows what he's talking about and lu Luke Rutkowski, he could be the deputy. I think RFK is really interesting. And I think one of the things that has gone well for him is that it's really Democrats who don't like him. I think there are a lot of conservatives who are not going to vote for him, but they are open to stuff that he says. And he doesn't. I don't I don't know if he I don't I wouldn't know when the timing of this would be, but if he were to end his campaign

and take some sort of nice position within the Trump campaign, I actually think if he is a mission-driven person, he could be effective in that. He could impact change in a way that is meaningful to him. There is something to be said for reaching out to people that you disagree with on policy, but who still adhere to basic reason, like the laws of logic. I miss Democrats who didn't believe the laws and logic was like a, I don't know, a patriarchal conspiracy to enhance white supremacy. They actually believe that, oh yeah, law of identity, law of excluded middle, law of non-contradiction. Yeah, these things are kind of important for civil discourse. So insofar as those still exist, then yes, I believe that there's something to be said for

reaching out to them. We're going to go to super chats. So if you haven't already, would you kindly smash that like button? One like equals one fight, fight, fight, and head over to timcast.com. Because with your support, for only the cost of two cups of coffee per month, you can become a member and help fight fake news by joining Timcast. Your membership helps sustain this company. It makes this show possible. And you'll get access to our members-only uncensored call-in show where you can actually call in and talk to us and our guests and be a part of the show. So, again, check out Timcast.com. But for now, we will read your Super Chats.

All right. Token Black Guy says, howdy, people. Tim, y'all should try and reschedule and schedule a sit down with trump at mar-a-lago yes would be great let's see uh jose alfredo diaz says this is going to be a top five show well you know it is because nick is here well absolutely polypure says i wanted to be first and And three crying emojis. What does it say? Loudly crying face. That's the name of the emoji.

All right. C. Cowboy says, Nick, for the love of all things, wholly run for governor. Oh, gosh. Would you ever do that? You can't make me. But then why did you run in the first place for the position that you have? So I got out of the military in 2009. And at first I thought I was going to get involved in policy and foreign policy because I was furious with the respect of what our government was doing.

I got involved in politics, got asked around. I said no. The second time I got asked, I did it, ran for the House of Delegates. And look, I've ran for Congress before. It was in 2020 of all times. And oh, my God, I get Spanberger who's probably, you know, he was running for governor in Virginia. Look, I don't, it's not that I don't think that it's important to have people in, you know, elected office and whatnot that are going to do the right thing. I'm just increasingly, I'm increasingly disillusioned.

And that's not the guy, that's not the guy you want running for, I don't know, higher office. You don't think we need a cynic in office? No, I do to some degree, but I also, here's the other thing that I've kind of realized about myself. It's not that I don't think it's not that I haven't enjoyed my time as a legislator. It's not that I don't feel it's an incredible honor to be able to represent people in the legislature and to represent what I believe is,

you know, true. But I also don't think I'm increasingly more convinced that the cultural battle is the one that is the most significant right now and I feel like I've had far more effect in the cultural battle than I have in the legislative one running for office sucks but you know what the worst thing is the more you say exactly that the more people want you to do it yeah it's true they're like oh please can we have a politician who doesn't want to be one? Yeah. That's the best kind. Leaders who are not necessarily driven to lead but are driven to serve.

So Bailey, Missouri AG, I didn't realize he was appointed. And so I'm like, that's interesting. Here's a guy who ended up as the attorney general, not through the typical political process where you've got backroom deals and promises made, but through appointment. And he's just going at it. He's filing these claims. He's filing lawsuits. And he said that thing when he was on the show last week. When you get dropped into the major league, you start swinging for the fences.

I think that's such an interesting position to take. Someone else might have been like, I'm appointed. I want to try to get reelected. So I have to be careful. Instead, he is like, well, I'm going to throw everything at the wall and do things I believe in. And if I get reelected, great. I'll continue. All right. Quispy Joe says, that translation you did in early segment BTC, mind blown.

Here it is for you. This was a joke. I wasn't literally suggesting the CIA invented Bitcoin. I just thought it was a funny meme. I didn't come up with it. So everybody knows Satoshi Nakamoto is the inventor of Bitcoin. In Japanese, you would say Nakamoto Satoshi. Last name first. Well, Nakamoto, according to Chet GPT, is a Japanese surname that can be broken down as Naka, meaning middle or center, and Moto, meaning origin. And Satoshi means intelligent. So the name translates to central origin intelligent. And then I jokingly, I was like, CIA invented Bitcoin. And boy,

did this one get lit up. 2.5 million views. And the other thing too is like there are people who are really offended by it. They're like, no, you can't say that. I'm like, bro, if the CIA invented Bitcoin,

it's going to the moon and never coming back. Like if the global policy is to make Bitcoin the thing, buy now. HODL. I own stock in the cia yeah exactly you're good quizby joe also adds the mr b stuff keeps getting worse shaking my head indeed it

does indeed it does all right cameron kier says the last time the chicago white socks won a game biden was still running for president and trump's ear wasn't covered in blood. It's been that long? Man, it's crazy. I lived in Chicago when the Sox won. What was that, in the 2000s or whatever? I don't remember when that was. But I went down when the Cubs won, and that was fun. The funny thing is, when the Cubs won the World Series, we all thought it was going to be rioting.

Nobody did anything. Just walked through the street and everybody went home. That was it. Was everybody happy? Yes. People were happy. The curse is broken. Happy but not rioting.

So it wasn't Philadelphia. No. When the Sox won, it was crazy. So, and I don't know how much of these stories are true, but there were rumors going around. Like one of our friends claims that he saw it happen on Archer Avenue on the south side near like, where would this be? I near like 35th near like Halstead uh is that where it is Archer and 35th of the train stop I can't remember they said that people were in the street just jumping up and down and screaming and drinking and a car swerved and smashed into a wall and just got

totally total like it got totaled and the guy jumped out screaming and cheering and just nobody cared that his car was destroyed. It was nuts. Messed up. Yeah. He like swerved to like dodge people and crashed into the wall, but got out going. Yeah. Like your car is going to do.

It probably wasn't a valuable car. Let's grab some more super jets. Ethan Sacco says Missouri primary is tomorrow. If you're in the loo, go show AG Bailey some love. He's my favorite A.G. And it was an honor and a privilege to have him because he's filing these lawsuits. He's challenging at the Supreme Court level election interference from New York.

And he was part of the lawsuit that got Google labeled as a monopoly. So we're big fans. Google's probably very angry about that. No, to be honest, I'd be willing willing to bet 99 of people at google are just like huh like they have no idea and then the executives are like uh is this bad for us and then you've got the board which has to deal with shareholders being like we're gonna lose money what have we here i guarantee you this though google's budget for campaign donations just went up significantly to whatever committee is going to be talking about. Yep. Danker Supreme says when the spirit of the right believes any

action against oppression will be met with their life being ruined, they will choose any flavor of action, likely the least peaceful. Right. But that's true for anything. A rabbit will run. But if you back into a corner, it will attack you. Not that it'll be very effective, but you know, interesting, uh, little science tidbit for everybody. The reason why badgers are so considered to be so angry and dangerous is because they are one dimensional, uh, uh, uh, animals. They, they live in one dimensional conditions. They burrow into a hole. And if a predator comes to the front of that hole, they have nowhere to go. So they have to be aggressive to survive. Birds typically don't attack anybody because they have three dimensions.

They can always get away. They can always just fly away. So birds just leave. And then ground animals tend to be more aggressive depending on their capability to flee. But then, of course, there are always turtles. You know, turtles just hide. Sad story. They have a zoo out here, there are always turtles. You know, turtles just hide. Sad story. They have a zoo out here.

And some kids came. And one of the kids, they have a bunch of sulcata tortoises. And a little boy dumped ice water on the head of a female sulcata, which will kill it. And it basically put her in like a severe shock. And then she had a turtle boyfriend who was like hanging out with her the whole time while she was sick and it was kind of cute but also kind of sad but apparently she got better so we're hoping for the best oh that's lucky yeah i mean i don't really blame the little kid who's stupid and didn't realize pouring why would you pour water

on maybe it was hot and they thought they were pulling him down i mean he's like oh a turtle is really hot out and then they were like no turtles are supposed to be like that yeah yeah tortoises apparently there's like a uh we i looked this up uh there's like an international turtle community that says tortoises are turtles as far as anyone's concerned like they actually will they say turtle is an appropriate term for a tortoise or a turtle there's like a square rectangle situation i guess the problem is when people find a tortoise and throw it in the water you ever see that there's like a video online where a guy was throwing a tortoise in the water. It's like, well, he killed it. Be free.

I think Hallmark, if this lady tortoise turtle recovers, Hallmark should incorporate this story into one of its upcoming movies. Oh, gosh. It's really fun. Let it be DreamWorks. Or a Great American Family Channel. Yeah. I forgot what it's called, but I want to give them a shout out because they rock.

And let me make sure I can. If it's Hallmark, the turtle is going to have to leave her big city job and come back to the country and fall in love with the turtle. No, no, no. We have a big city girl who comes to whoever is raising the zoo. And then she helps the turtle stand vigil, the man turtle, while its lady is recovering. If you are in the area, it's the Catoctin Wildlife Preserve. And I've gone there like three or four times because it's just so fun. And it's like you just walk around. There's a bunch of animals.

And there's like they have, what do they have? They have like lynxes. They've got javelinas running around. What are javelinas? Peccaries. Okay. Yeah, little pigs. Yeah, they're hilarious.

And then they have the big sulcata tortoises, and you can buy lettuce and then wiggle the tongues, and they all, I say run, like they're tortoises. It's relative. They're very, they're like looking at you, and it's like two minutes later. They approach with intention. Yes, they approach with intention. Cutest stampede ever. Oh, yeah, and there's like 12 of them coming at you.

Bring the family. That place is fun. And they were hurt really bad by COVID, which is sad because they got a lot of animals to ever oh yeah and there's like 12 of them coming at you bring the family that place is fun and uh they were they were hurt really bad by covid which is sad because they got a lot of animals take care of and and we love animals and they got uh i think they had monkeys too for a while i don't know if they have monkeys still did you ever see that movie we bought a zoo i've heard of it but i've never seen it so it was it was um yeah not brad pitt who was uh matt damon matt damon and scarlett johansson were in it it was actually, I should have never showed that movie to my children.

Because it was like, we could have a, yeah. And now we have like peacocks and goats and chickens. Peacocks and goats. Because of that movie? Your kids conned you into getting animals? Or did you already get them? No. So my youngest daughter, my youngest daughter and I love to go to the poultry auction in

Cold Perry. If you've never been to a poultry auction, you don't know what you're missing. And my daughter and I, when we go, it's like our daddy like our daddy daughter time we will go there and she can talk me into everything so like we're sitting there like yeah we bought a purple peacock and a chinchilla and i almost bought a yeah another goat but anyway all right s mcg says a lot of this woke or calling vance weird is all talking points it's probably chinese talking points and they're showing they are in lockstep. I disagree. I think the weird thing, I can't remember who brought this up on the show, that it was likely a woman who came up with the idea. But I think the idea was to cater to women. They want suburban women to think

that it is bad and out of line with social norms to support Trump or J.D. Vance in a way that's not too over the top. Calling Trump Hitler or a Nazi might not work. But just going like, I don't know, he's kind of weird, isn't he? Now they're like, oh, yeah, I'm not weird. I don't like him. Is that effective? I'm asking the ladies. Weird thing?

Yeah. I think it probably can be a little effective to the low information women out there who are just you know drinking their bellinis and walking their cats i mean i i walked in their cats i mocked this relentlessly when it came out it was like oh so the i said the the party of drag queen story hour thinks that jd vance is weird like you don't think men you don't think men are just men you think they can become women yeah and Yeah. And you think that none of that matters. That's a male way of thinking. Right.

The attack is so that women, it's not about drag queen story. It's about are you in line with mainstream society? Sure, sure. And it's a thing for the voters that view their politics as actually part of their social class. Yeah. He's weird. Maybe it could it could be affected i i actually think uh it is less effective than the childless cat lady thing which

i also think was not that effective but mostly was to scare conservatives away from jd vance because it's like he's saying something that could upset liberals or potentially independent voters you know what i mean like they're not quite I would say they're not quite landing a punch with any of these. But in some ways, if you looked at it in the right angle, it would look like it was effective. So I get what you're saying, especially with the whole idea of like if your politics are part of like your your, you know, the cocktail parties you go to. You want to tell the other moms at the elite preschool that you voted the right way. Yeah. All right.

Sherry Thomas says, cat lady here. Trump Vance, have my vote. I don't know why anyone thinks owning a cat is related to how you vote. We have a cat. His name is Seamus. I maybe have cats secretly in my apartment. I can tell you guys I'm not going to vote for Kamala. I love cats and I don't have any because I'm very allergic.

I swear to God I never have cats in part because I'm not going to vote for Kamala. I love cats and I don't have any because I'm very allergic. I swear to God I'd never have cats in part because I'm allergic and now I have two cats because I also have a youngest daughter that can talk me into anything. I hypothetically wasn't going to have a cat and then I moved and took the stray I was feeding with me, hypothetically. This could not be true. Allegedly. And then it turned out it wasn't a boy and it actually had lots of kittens. So I think that was an adventure. I love how much you love that your little daughter can talk you into. Oh my gosh. See, I think pets are good for kids. I agree. I think a dog is better than a cat because dogs are more dependent. But I think either way, a kid having to learn to take care of an animal and be responsible for it is a great life lesson. I agree. It's worked out really well for for ours. So yeah, I'm a big fan. But I like dogs better because dogs are like honorable, loyal soldiers, and cats are kind of just like, you work for me.

What a fun energy. Don't you know who I am? The best thing I ever heard is like a dog. Dog looks at you and goes, wow, you feed me, you pet me, you house me, you take care of me. You must be God. A cat's like, wow, you pet me, you feed me, you take care of me. I must be God. Yeah, yeah, yeah. me you feed me you take care of me i must be yeah yeah i love that one and the cat is correct yeah i think dogs the dogs help raise your

self-esteem but cats keep you humble yeah yeah yeah but they're good cats and they're bad dogs you know what i mean sure yeah we have uh uh shamus likes to hide under the bed and try and destroy so we have one of those sleep eights. Luke talked me into buying it and it's amazing. You know what that is? No. It's the mattress. It's like a mattress topper or mattress that's got a water system that can cool or heat the bed. Oh, really?

So while you're sleeping, it adjusts the temperature to keep you sleeping. Yeah. So like you ever wake up, you're too hot. Yes. Never happens. If you start getting hot, the bed gets cold. So it never screws up and gets that wrong or. Nope.

I've, I've, I've had those days where like, I can't remember what it was. I skated a lot, like eight hours. And then we went and got Korean barbecue and ate like five pounds of beef or something. And then I, I woke up drenched. I've never, I've, well, I've not had a night where i ate five pounds of beef and cream barbecue in a long time but i've never i've never woken up uncomfortable i sleep perfectly and then in the morning it shows you it's like the temperature changed at these times to adjust to keep you asleep wow but anyway seamus goes in there and he goes with his claws and tries tries

destroying the water tubes so i have to give him the spritz and then he and then he gets mad and he runs yeah but it's worth it because he's funny and we named him seamus because we thought it was funny he's seamus one the cartoonist is seamus two he got seamus two that's awesome second of the cat all right kane abel says oh hannah oh already a slight if we don't pay our taxes the mob i mean the government will arrest us you know what they will do to those that vote against the Democrats in deep state? We go straight to prison without trial. Free Jan Sixers. Well, I'll let Hannah know. That's a good comment.

I'm going to respond as Hannah Clare. That's a super common mistake. But I think this is the big stranglehold of a lot of effective politics, which is that conservatives are very fearful and they respect rules, which is good. But also the other side does not respect the rules, especially when they make them and they make them for you. And I think that's one of the hardest things, especially because you mentioned the Jan 6. There's like a lot of those people said, you know, I'm going to try and cooperate as best I can for the government. I don't really think I did anything wrong.

And surely the system that I believe in will be fair to me. And it's just not. And we're seeing the results of that over and over again. All right. Just Cause I'm Free says, I don't want to set the world on fire,

but the Biden administration does. Aha, that was a good one. That was a good one. You guys are familiar with that song? I don't want to set the world on fire but the biden administration does aha that was a good one that was a good you guys are familiar with that song i don't want to set the world on oh yeah yeah that's a great song and for all the fallout fans they they know that one adrian contreras says nick you're wise could you give me an explanation of why so many people are willing to bend over for the dems and say thank you sir may have? It's just self-preservation by now. I think for, so I think you have two different things that I've seen in politics among elected officials. You have some people that think that this is still the way it was 20 years ago,

where these, oh, these are my friends, these are my buddies. And of course, they say some crazy things on the floor or on the news, but they don't really mean it because we go to dinner together. And they don't recognize that there's been a major ideological shift within the democratic party. You have other people though, that they actually benefit from kind of kowtowing to the left when they're in power and they're, they're the good Republican. They're the one that, you know, the, the left can depend on. And so they get their budget amendments, right? They get their budget. As long as they go along, they get their budget amendments. Um, I do think you're, you're increasingly seeing more and more people that have identified that there's a, there's a, a much deeper ideological battle that's going on right now. And it's just

not the way it used to be. And it's probably not going to be because that ideal, again, that oppressor oppressed dynamic, the critical theory, all of it that has become so prominent in so many culturally shaping institutions that one side is going to win. I don't see how you ultimately peacefully coexist with people that absolutely want to dominate and control you. So one side is going to have to win. I hope that win, I hope that victory comes about in a peaceful way. I don't want to see conflict. I don't want to see any of that.

But these two worldviews are diametrically opposed. All right. David Robinson says, if you live in Michigan, give Trump a senator who wants to dismantle the deep state. Vote tomorrow for Justin Amash to stop Deep State Mike. Deep State Mike wants to expand the illegal programs his cronies use to spy on Trump. You know, I wasn't the biggest fan of Amash back during the first Trump administration, but I certainly think he's better than any crony rhino type.

But I don't know much about what's going on in Michigan. So as long as Thomas Massey says he's all right, then I'd vote for him over anybody else. That's just me. I trust Thomas Massey. I disagree with him on the Kevin McCarthy stuff. He has his positions, but Thomas Massey is a good dude. Yeah.

And Massey was the only guy that actually had the guts and the hype of kobe to stand up to everybody and be like you're wrong yeah he was right he's great justin bell says youtube didn't even put the stream in my home page tonight that was weird i don't get to watch live every night but i do watch every episode hey really do appreciate it man member for 18 months that me that's fantastic and uh this show succeeds in spite of YouTube. Yeah. If if we were treated like these leftist podcasts, it's remarkable to me that YouTube.

I'll tell you, a lot of these lefty shows, their bread and butter is political drama, low tier stuff. They like it when they are podcasts that get way more promotion, way way more access and all they do is insult and rag on other youtubers and i'm just like that's just bad for your brand do you want to be premium content high level shows live or otherwise then stop giving air time to these channels where it's just yelling at like other youtubers it's the stupidest thing that's what they do though very weird well because i don't know if you got the right politics that's all that matters yep the share the issue is the shareholders for the most part i don't understand why we haven't seen bigger shareholder revolt yeah are are the majority shareholders for these companies really okay with them losing money for political reasons well but the majority of the shareholders for these companies are not individuals they are uh you know mutual funds and things like that so i

mean to get anyone to really revolt against these companies you would have to have shareholders who actually pay attention to what's in their mutual funds and go to the meeting exactly so they don't have that i write it's people just having a to the meeting. Exactly. They don't have that. Right. It's people just having a financial advisor be like, don't know, don't care. And they don't even look at what their funds are. I mean, I remember talking to my financial guy years ago about something to do with like, you know, different kinds of funds or whatever. And he was like, yeah, well, you know, we have these funds and those funds.

And this one has mostly this kind of company. So you don't even know what's in the funds that you're holding shares in. I do think there's something to be said that a lot of the, like BlackRock is a perfect example of this, right? They thrive off of inflationary monetary policy, and they thrive off of having a privileged position with the politicians and central banks. When you don't have inflationary monetary policy, they start to suffer. That's when they start to, like they drop two million or $2 trillion off of their overall assets.

That's the part where I think you get people looking and going, what the hell are you doing? But if you don't curtail that, they get to exist in almost perpetuity until there's a crash. All right. Sudan Booted says, Tim, if the CIA invented Bitcoin,

why would they release a decentralized currency amongst the public? An agency that's obsessed with centralization? Because every transaction is publicly traceable and trackable. And if you're an intelligence operation and you want to know who's buying what, why not convince people that this is outside the system and it defeats the dollar and every transaction you will ever make will be tracked and publicly available. And with their computers, they know your address, they know your name, they know who you're trading with, and they can track everything you do.

Journalists with no governmental power or technology have been able to map Bitcoin transactions and figure out who's getting money and from who. So that's the thing about Bitcoin. Now, don't get me wrong, there's other cryptocurrencies like Monero and I don't know what's the other one, like Zcash or something that are easier to, they actually scramble. I think the supercomputers, the machines they got, the algorithms can still track who's doing what and it's hard to get through that. But I've long said that I thought there's a strong possibility Bitcoin was actually created by powerful governments or elite interests to create a one world currency. Alex Jones has been talking about a global currency for a long time. He talked about the Amero 15 years ago.

And then none of this stuff ever happens. But you do get the euro. Well, how you create a one world currency? If you've got massive pushback from people who demand sovereignty, they're not going to accept a global currency. What you need to do is convince the naysayers first that it bypasses authority, get them libertarians and anarchists, are cheering it on the whole time. There's literally no Bitcoin opposition. You start with those who oppose your plans, convince them to buy it, then offer to make everybody rich, everybody opts in, and then every single transaction you will ever make with Bitcoin will be tracked. So if you live in El Salvador, and I'm going to preface this with I like Bitcoin, I own Bitcoin. I think it's fantastic. I think El Salvador is doing the right thing. But let me just stress, everybody in El Salvador with their wallets and their address, the government knows exactly what they're buying,

when they're buying it, who they're trading with, and what they're selling. So they're going to know everything you do. They're going to put it in a machine. There you go. But I'm still a fan of Bitcoin because I think the privacy, you still have the choice of whether or not you are going to do the transactions in that way. You could buy a bunch of Bitcoin, put it in cold storage, and you're going to store value. It's going to retain money. It's deflationary. It's better in a lot of ways. And you don't need to actively trade the way many other people do.

It's always going to be your choice. Morgan Sanderson says, have you ever been to Peter Luger's in Brooklyn? Well worth the drive. So I get what he was thinking. Just remember you have to bring cash or your Peter Luger card. We ordered some. Luke told us we needed to order a bunch. So we still have a bunch of Peter Luger's

sauce somewhere in a freezer from like two years ago. I don't know if it's good. Did you like it? I barely remember. I mean, probably. I like steak. But I got to tell you, man, I don't know if it's good. Did you like it? I barely remember. I mean, probably. I like steak. Yeah. But I got to tell you, man,

I don't know how to cook a steak. Really? And you got to know how to do it. So my wife is the, I will admit right now, my wife is the grill master in the house. We got a big green egg. What's a big green egg? A big green egg is like,

yeah, it looks like a big green egg right but it's a grill but you can also bake on it like the whole deal when I first saw this I'm like I'm not joining the big green egg cult I am totally a big green egg guy now holy crap lifestyle it is but it's it's just a big green egg but like a big green egg yeah we've got like a thing called a joe tisserie on that so I don't know if you've ever been to like fogo de chow or the brazilian steakhouse love it so we got that same cut and my wife will do that in the big green aid where We've got like a thing called a Joe Tisserie on that. So I don't know if you've ever been to like Fogo de Chão or the Brazilian Steakhouse. Love it. So we got that same cut and my wife will do that in the big green aid where it's like

rotisserie is that I'm like, oh my gosh, rare to medium rare, anything past that and leave my home. But actually I normally just do filet and I got a bone in filet the other night and substantially better. Dude, tri-tip. Tri-tip. Better tri-tip. It's like, it's a roast, right? But you get tri-tip, you puttip? Better? Tri-tip. It's a roast, right?

But you get tri-tip, you put it on like a good rotisserie or a grain egg or something like that, like, oh my gosh, I'm telling you. Oh, it's charcoal. Yeah. Oh, yeah. I respect charcoal.

Yeah. And it's lump charcoal. It's about to become a part of the lifestyle. It's lump charcoal. You can't just get any charcoal. These vegans, man, when they're like, I got no problem with vegans

who mind their own business. Sure. But the ones who want to take away my beef... Those exist? Have you tried it? They do. The smoker part? It's got a smoker. Shut up. Shut up. Taylor here never bothers anybody. She's a vegan. She never bothers anybody. I always make sure when we order food, we'll get

wits out or whatever. But the ones that want to ban beef... That's rude. You don't take my beef. Oh, I'll go to war. Don't take my beef. Look, I'll go to war. Don't take my beef. Look, I'm just saying. I love steak, man. Oh. My wife has been

on the carnivore diet now for four months. I love that she's on the carnivore diet because like Is it really just no veggies? Every day.

What's that? No veggies? None. None. And I garden. So I have like a I grow a lot of vegetables like that.

She doesn't eat any of it. No veggies at all? For four months she's absolutely loved it. Like no garlic? Well, no, but a little seasoning. I had bone-in filet with black garlic. It was so good.

Why is it black garlic? Is it the aged garlic? Whoa, whoa, whoa. I have no idea. It was garlic, but it was black. It was black garlic? I was curious. I know nothing about it other than it tastes great.

I have so much garlic, and I know that there's different ways you can age it and stuff. I have to say this. It's born that way. I have to say this. It isn't actually. I was shocked and offended because we went to Final Cut Steakhouse at Charlestown Races, and I asked them if they had burrata, and they were like, no, we got rid of that for the gazpacho. And I was like, got rid of that for the gazpacho.

And I was like, well, I don't want gazpacho. They still have the burrata, but it's swimming in cucumber sauce. Why would you do that to your burrata? Why would you do that? Anything. Yes, I find it to be. A little salt. Hate crime, war crime.

I love burrata. It's just, for those that don't know, it's just like a big ball of soft cheese over tomato. Well, it's mozzarella on the outside with ricotta inside. It's perfect. Yes. And that's all it needs to be, and it's healthy. And then they were like, but we want to have it swimming in cucumber.

But you're telling me it's healthy? I can stop eating it as though it's guilty, and I can just eat it with- It's super healthy. Have you had that soft bread cheese that they bring over, like douse in honey? It's something they do every once in a while. Like at a Fogo de Chalo, they'll do that where they have this cheese dish that they come over and there's... Oh, I don't know. What's good is a burrata with pomegranate arils and honey on it.

That sounds amazing. Yeah. Also, what sounds amazing is head over to TimCast.com. Join us to become a member and support the show. The members on the Uncensored show will be coming up in a couple minutes. You don't want to miss it. We got a spicy story for you about these pedo hunters

and a guy who got caught. Oof. So it's a little spicy, not so family-friendly. Timcast.com. Click join us. Smash the like button. You can follow me on X at Timcast.

You can follow the show on Instagram at Timcast IRL. Nick, do you want to shout anything out? No, just love to be here. You got an X? Oh, yeah, sure. Yeah, this is where I'm going to get in trouble. Like, why didn't you say yeah? out? No, just love to be here. You got an accent? Yeah, this is where I'm going to get in trouble. Like, why didn't you say yeah? So, yeah, nickjfratis.com. You can pretty much go on any social media, Twitter,

Facebook, Rumble, YouTube, and we also have our show called Making the Argument as well. That's our podcast we do twice a week. I like that your instinct is just to be like, I'm having a great time. I'm good. I'm having a great time. Me too, also having a great time. I will shout out the'm having a great time. Me too. Also having a great time. I will shout out thepostmillennial.com

and humanevents.com. You can find me on Twitter at Libby Emmons. And you can check out my newsletter at thepostmillennial.com slash Libby. I think it's cool you have a newsletter now. I'm excited about that. You know what's funny is this morning I forgot. Whoops.

And then I was like, oh my goodness. And the web person was like, where. Whoops. And then I was like, oh my goodness. And the web person was like, where's your thing? And I was like, oh damn. Well, it's only a couple of weeks old.

It takes a little while. So I wrote it up, but I mean, I write it up in the morning or when I, before I'm probably tonight, I'll write it up before I go to sleep. That's awesome. Yeah.

I'm Hannah Claire Brimelow. I'm a writer for scnr.com, a scanner news. You can check us out, uh, follow us on the internet at Tim Kess news. We've got a lot of really cool work and, uh, I'm really proud of all of the writers there. I'm on the internet at

hannaclaire.be on Instagram and hannaclairebe on X. So thanks for everything you guys do. Have a good night. We will see you all over at TimCast.com in about a minute. Thanks for hanging out. you