Timcast IRL - Timcast IRL #1098 Trump Hit By NEW INDICTMENT As Jack Smith Attempts To BYPASS SCOTUS w/Anya Parampil

Episode Date: August 28, 2024

Tim, Hannah Claire, & Libby are joined by Anya Parampil to discuss Trump facing a superseding indictment filed by Jack Smith, Trump slamming Jack Smith over new indictment, Kamala Harris finally agreeing to do an interview, and Trump selecting Tulsi Gabbard & RFK Jr to join his presidential transition team. Hosts:  Tim @Timcast (everywhere)  Hannah Claire @hannahclaireb (everywhere) Libby @LibbyEmmons (X) Guest: Anya Prampil @anyaparampil (X) Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Honestly, I can't say that I'm surprised, but Jack Smith has filed a superseding indictment against Donald Trump in the January 6th case in an attempt to bypass the Supreme Court's ruling on presidential immunity. He's also appealing the Mar-a-Lago case dismissal. This is just in your face. Trump has been indicted again. New indictments, basically the same thing. They just carved some things out so they can try and get past SCOTUS. This is absolutely insane.

So we will be talking about that. But we got some good news, and that is that Donald Trump has named RFK Jr. and Tulsi Gabbard to his transition team. That's great. I hope that more moderate individuals join his ranks and we we get some better assurances moving into a potential next administration. And then in funnier news, Kamala Harris has agreed to do an interview with CNN's Dana Bash as long as Tim Walz is there with her. So basically, she can't be she can't sit down alone with anybody. Otherwise, she'll look really bad and she knows it. But we'll talk about that, too. And Donald Trump has agreed to the debate on September 10th. Should be interesting. Before we get started, my friends head over to Casperperoo.com and buy Casperoo coffee. It is the best coffee. And Appalachian Nights is back in stock. You guys, you love it so much. You buy it. You buy too much. OK, you buy too much, but it's OK. Buy more. And you can also get to rise with Alberto Jr. We've got Ian's Graphene Dream, which is people keep hitting us up saying they love it.

That's great. I'm glad to hear it. Shout out to Ian. And head over to TimCast.com. Click join us to become a member and support our work directly. With your memberships, we are able to make this company run and operate. And I'll stress this too. We don't do like there's a lot of podcasts do ad reads in the middle of their show. When we are live, we do not do that. For this, we forego a lot of podcasts do ad reads in the middle of their show. When we are live, we do not do that. For this, we forego a lot of money. However, I'm hoping that memberships are a better way of doing this because you as members basically give us a guaranteed income and an ability to budget, but also it makes for a better show. So we basically have two choices.

We do ad reads during the show, which I hate doing and don't want to do, or we just go for memberships. So I hope that you guys appreciate what we do and consider becoming a member because so long as you guys do become members, we don't have to go the traditional sponsor route, which I wouldn't want to do anyway. But, you know, you also get access to the Discord server, which we will have the members only uncensored show coming up at 10 tonight, which is a lot of fun where you as members get to call in and talk to us and join us on the show. So make sure you go to TimCast.com and click join us, become a member, and get in the Discord server where you can hang out with like-minded individuals. But don't forget to also smash that like button right now. Share the show with all your friends if you really do enjoy it.

Joining us tonight to talk about this and so much more, we got Anya Parampil. Hi, Tim. Hey, who are you? What do you do? Well, I'm a journalist with The Gray Zone. You've had a couple of my colleagues on, Max Blumenthal, Aaron Maté. And I recently published a book called Corporate Coup, Venezuela and the End of U.S. Empire. You want to hold it up?

Sure. I was happy with how the cover turned out. I like the art. So there it is. And it is compiling some of my reporting on Latin America, particularly Venezuela, over the last few years and analyzing U.S. regime change policy and kind of how it's blowing back against our interests as Americans, including now on the border. So I hope that by putting it out there, maybe somebody in Washington will start acting like an adult when it comes to our foreign policy. But I'm not hopeful. I'm not hopeful. Yeah, me neither. Well, we'll see. We'll see. We got a lot to talk about. So it should be fun. Thanks for hanging out. Happy to be here.

Libby is hanging out. I'm Libby. I'm hanging out. I'm Libby Emmons with the Postmillennial. Glad to be here. I'm glad you're both here. I'm Hannah-Claire Bremel. I'm a writer for SCNR.com, Skater News. Follow them at TimCastNews on the internet. Let's get started. Here's the big breaking story from the Post Millennial. Jack Smith filed superseding indictment against Trump in January 6th case. That's right, ladies and gentlemen, a guy who was already ruled to have no authority to bring one case against Donald Trump, now because of the Supreme Court saying that the president has immunity when it

as it pertains to official duties, Jack Smith has filed a superseding indictment against Trump, basically bypassing or attempting to bypass a SCOTUS ruling. This is insane. Postman reports a Washington, D.C. grand jury on Tuesday returned a superseding indictment in the January 6th case against Trump, charging him with the same four counts he had been charged with over one year prior by a different grand jury. The 36-page superseding indictment charges Trump with conspiracy to defraud the United States, conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, obstruction of an attempt, obstruction of and attempt to obstruct an official proceeding, and conspiracy against rights. In a court filing, counsel, Jack Smith, his office wrote that the superseding indictment was presented to a new grand jury that had not previously heard evidence in this case

and reflects the government's efforts to respect and implement the Supreme Court's holdings and remand instructions in Trump v. United States. Holy crap. They even admit this is what they're doing and why they're doing it instead of acknowledging maybe we can't bring these charges against Trump. It's no, because of what they said, we respect that and we're going to charge him again. Yeah, they even said the defendant had no official responsibilities related to the certification proceeding, but he did have a personal interest as a candidate being named the winner of the election. So that's how they say that, you know, the immunity ruling doesn't apply here. I mean, you have Jack Smith, right? You have one job, which is to get Trump.

So I guess if you have nothing else to do with your time, of course, you would try again. You don't want to be a failure at this, you know, terrible, terrible position you found yourself in. Yeah. And it's really an example of writing the rules kind of as you go along, because the Supreme Court, according to the civics lesson I got as a kid, is supposed to be the highest court in the land. And for me as an American, I just feel like it's very depressing that our democracy is just being, it's been made into a joke. I think this is the kind of news that Democratic insiders or liberals sitting in coastal cities across the country get really giddy about when they hear they're like, ooh, they're

going after him. But the rest of the world honestly looks at us like as if we've taken all of that, those ideals that we preach and ripped it up, lit it on fire. And it definitely makes it seem as though we have no leg to stand on when it comes to one of the major issues that I'm interested in, which is regime change. You know, we constantly are running around the world saying that these other countries are undemocratic or not abiding by the rights and ideals that we hold true. And now it shows it just shows the rest of the world demonstrates the rest of the world that we have no authority to speak on those issues. You've actually put me in a good mood about this now, because you're right. You know, around the world, the U.S. is like, we have to remove Assad from power. It's our responsibility

to be involved in all of these wars. Ukraine, we have to send all of our money in billions, hundreds of billions of dollars. Oh, boy, better send all our money to Israel next. And now all these other countries are just like, yeah, the U.S. is full of it. Yeah. And so, look, they you know, I certainly think it's a smear on the reputation of a country that is reputation is so smeared, it's hard to see what it used to be. But at least the military industrial complex and the warmongers can no longer pretend except to their cult members who will just keep waving the flag and voting for their garbage. Yeah. And on the issue of just how the world's looking at us, I actually, I put in the afterword

of my book when the Stormy Daniels indictment came down, I think it was Nayib Bukele, the president of El Salvador, tweeted, like, the U.S. cannot talk about the weaponization of the judicial system or dictatorships abroad anymore. And it's weird. Think about being, you know, in any country around the world, you're looking at the U.S. and thinking the first U.S. president to be indicted on any charges, period, is Donald Trump before we went after George W. Bush or any of the other major actual criminals. And George W. Bush, basically his administration lied to the United Nations about weapons in Iraq in order to start a war there.

When did that's you don't get prosecuted for that. When did the criminal indict or when did the criminal conspiracy take over? Like the United States wasn't always being ruled by interventionist warmongers. But I have to imagine it was sometime after World War Two. You think liberal economic order, the what is it the Council on Foreign Relations talks about how after World War Two, European allies, United States decided that we're going to create a global structure for how we make everything operate. Yeah. And since then, it's just been like, well, we don't need to declare war anymore. We're just going to go do it. Yeah. I mean, that happened, too, with what was it with the Desert Storm?

And the Congress was basically like, oh, go ahead, president, do whatever you want. And then you had the Patriot Act and you had this continuous seeding of the people's authority and power to the executive branch. Right. The expansion of the federal government is probably the biggest factor in all of this. Yeah, all of these bloated agencies. Right. And it's the justification of, well, they have an obligation. I refer to this a lot,

but the Secretary of State of Maine, when she said, I'm not going to put Trump on the ballot because I have an obligation to the country. Ma'am, you're in charge of Maine. And Trump at that point had not been convicted of anything. Right.

It was real overreach of time. She was teaming up with Colorado. Right. Trying to do that. Which, of course, that effort in Colorado was led by a not-for-profit out of D.C. that hated Trump. That was like its own point. That D.C. nonprofit has led these efforts in multiple states.

It's interesting, and I know you live in D.C., but it's interesting that the expansion of the federal government and the supporting economy in D.C. is really what's sort of colluding to keep can keep these movements in motion. How about we look into Loudoun County, Virginia, and what the average job there is? I think there's probably some jurisdictions of the planet that have very, very, very high net worth. But I think on average, Loudoun County has the highest in the world. I could I could be wrong. I mean, maybe Macau or something or Hong Kong. But in the United States, Loudoun County has the highest in the world. I could, I could be wrong. I mean, maybe Macau or something or Hong Kong, but in the United States, Loudoun County has the highest median income. So again, you go to Malibu and you might find ultra wealthy individuals,

but there's a lot of, you know, day laborers and a lot of, um, you know, like more of a gradient in terms of, yeah, gradient Loudoun County,

everyone average County. That is like 150,000 per family. Yeah. And I think it's followed by Falls Church, Virginia. Yep. There's also Arlington County, Virginia. I wonder what these people do. Stafford County, Fairfax County.

I mean, Virginia has a lot. And, you know, it's interesting. I would assume that a lot of these people are the ones that are cheering on the indictment of Donald Trump. Absolutely. I passed through here, Loudoun County on the way, it was all Harris Wall signs. But you'd be surprised, actually. It's not so cut and dry. There are a lot of people in Loudoun County across the board who are moderates,

who are sick of what the establishment uniparty has been doing. And, you know, look, the neocons and the neoliberals, the Democratic Party, they formed their unholy alliance because of people like Donald Trump. Bernie Sanders joined them. So that's unfortunate. But there are a lot of people out here that I'm their fans and like we're 30 seconds away from Loudoun County. Yeah. So we show up and, you know, you'd be surprised that the people who live here. But I have to imagine a lot of them are lobbyists. A lot of them represent, you know, military interests and things like that intervention. Northern Virginia, from what I know about it, really developed because of the expansion of the federal government. And again,

the economy that goes with that, meaning lobbyists or different special interest groups that are headquartered in D.C. because it's commutable. Yeah. And I think, you know, maybe that's not horrible, right? Rural states need some kind of expansion of jobs. On the other hand, if you have a concentration of elite people who suddenly all think the same way, I can only imagine that someone in that group is going to say, well, we really know what's best for the country. Yeah, I think that it also depends on what exactly is driving that expansion. And it's clear if you drive through Northern Virginia now that it's the military industrial complex. And my husband always calls it the necro economy.

That's basically what it is. You just see one military contractor or spying contractor after the other. But to your original question of when all this began, I sometimes think that it was actually first 1913 establishment of the Federal Reserve handing our country over to a banking cartel that then got us involved in World War I. I think that was the inception of that unipolar global world that was then born through the process of World War II. I think if the U.S. hadn't intervened in World War I and hadn't sacrificed an entire generation of Americans, the entire graduating class of Princeton basically died fighting that war for France and Britain when I thought we actually fought a war to be independent from Europe. I think that whole, that network of, and that idea that the United States is tied to Europe somehow

and this transatlantic relationship that came through, yeah, first the creation of the Fed and then World War I. That's really when the promise of the United States, I think, fell apart. I was thinking that. I was thinking that. And Ian's not here, so I'm going to say this next bit in honor of him. But when you mentioned the necro economy, I love that because D.C. is a swamp, literally is a swamp.

And for those that play Magic the Gathering, swamps represent necromancy and evil. And I think it's just fitting. I wonder if the people who made that game were like, what kind of terrain could we use to represent evil malice and death and profiting off death? It's like in the never-ending story. It's like, I don't know, DC does that. What's DC? Swamp? Yeah, we'll do swamps.

Yeah, let's do that. There you go. Let me pull this up from Nicole Shannon, too, because she made a statement on the indictment. This was a great statement. Shannon says, I'll admit I used to kind of roll my eyes when people claimed that President Trump was being persecuted. I was looking at it through the distorted filter of the media. Well, I just completed my first cross-examination of our second New York ballot access case, where the DNC-aligned PAC attorneys

questioned me like a criminal. Okay, I get it now. Our justice system is clearly being co-opted and abused by nefarious people with malevolent political agendas. And then she posted the clip where they bring up the indictment against Donald Trump. We do have major breaking news. Special Counsel Jack Smith has just filed a superseding indictment in the federal election interference case against the former president, Donald Trump. Let's go straight to CNN's Caitlin Pollant. Caitlin, we don't need to hear what you have to say. CNN, you're garbage.

But Nicole Shanahan and many other moderates and former Democrats are now realizing that there is a criminal element within our government. Mark Zuckerberg the other day admitted that the FBI and the Harris- administrations were at the White House were pressuring him to censor. And the funny thing is, if you know the news and you break it down, you understand what Mark Zuckerberg is really saying, though he doesn't want to admit it. He says the FBI came to us and said there was going to be some misinformation about Biden and Burisma, which keep a lookout for it. So when the Hunter Biden laptop story popped up, we censored that. The reality is criminal elements of the federal government went to Mark Zuckerberg and said, do not let people expose our criminal actions. And he said, you got a boss. That's what really happened. And at that point, people were in this amnesia. Mark Zuckerberg may have actually been buying the story that it was a fake Russia propaganda.

Like that was just absurd, especially now that the Hunter Biden indictment itself confirmed that the laptop story was real. It does feel a lot of I've never seen actually U.S. politics exposed as such a show or theater before. That's really how it feels to me. And on the Jack Smith issue, I just think it's outrageous that CNN would never mention the fact, for example, that his wife actually works as a documentary filmmaker who made the whole documentary about becoming Michelle on Netflix. She's like basically a propagandist for the Obama family and the Democratic Party. And her husband is the one overseeing this operation to now usurp our Supreme

Court to weaponize the judicial system against a former sitting president. I don't know. Who made the Obama documentary? Jackson's wife. What? Really? That's crazy. What? Yeah, you can look up her name. It's something like Kate. I can send a link also over.

I was like, wait, wait, wait, wait. Yeah, I was listening to that. Katie Chavigny? Yeah. No way. Is that for real? She's like a hardcore Democratic Party. Operative, sounds like.

Producer. Becoming. Yeah, be a producer. Becoming. It's called Becoming. Yeah, for some reason, that was what Michelle decided to call her memoir. Wow. What are you trying to say there?

Nothing. Yeah, Trump's special counsel's wife worked on Obama film and donated to Biden. This is a two-year-old story. How did I not see this? That is crazy. Can you imagine if the tables were turned i mean we don't have you know a netflix production company dedicated to producing pro-trump propaganda on net or on on us in u.s media it just doesn't happen but if that were possible and there was a a judicial official or a politically appointed official working within

the judiciary to take out obama do you not think that would maybe be the story for CNN? Wow. That's fascinating. I don't think CNN can tell the difference, though. I think they are past the point of the logic there. Like the Caitlin Collins and Bill Maher the other day. It was pretty clear. Yeah.

I think obviously they would say if it was happening to someone else, they would see it. But I don't think they're aware of their own bias. I don't think they could tell you why it's an obvious conflict of interest for special counsel Jack Smith, who's currently going after Trump, to be married to someone who is actively donating and supporting the legacy of one of the leading Democrats in the party. I mean, I think they they really believe that that's OK, because that's how much they hate Trump. It's so illogical. I'm still laughing about becoming. Yeah. They also think that that's OK, because that's how much they hate Trump. It's so illogical. I'm still laughing about becoming. Yeah.

They also think that they're objective. They actually think that. So when it turns out that Kamala Harris' best friend who introduced her to her husband is the head of ABC, and that's the only network she's willing to debate on, like nobody bats an eye at that. For some reason, everyone thinks that's totally OK. And when you have Pete Buttigieg and all the others coming out and saying, you know, don't like nobody bats an eye at that. For some reason, everyone thinks that's totally okay. And when you have Pete Buttigieg and all the others coming out and saying,

you know, don't debate on Fox, don't do interviews on Fox because they're too biased. But somehow ABC is this breath of fresh air or something. It's absurd. It's weird too because you can only name one, right? It's Fox. I mean, I know Newsmax is out there. There is actually really just the one.

It's just the one. And then all the conservatives can be like, well, CNN and MSNBC and NBC. And yet only Fox is the enemy here. And Fox is limited. I mean, look who they've gotten rid of in recent years. Yeah. To be what they are. Let's jump to the story from the Post Millennial.

Trump says Jack Smith engaging in election interference with new grand jury indictment in Jacek's case. Quote, the illegally appointed special counsel deranged Jack Smith has brought a ridiculous new indictment against me, which is all the problems of the old indictment and should be dismissed immediately. Now, connected to the story is Jack Smith appealing the dismissal of Mar-a-Lago seized documents case. The gist of it here is they the courts ruled that he was illegally appointed. Is that is that correct? Yeah, well, they didn't rule that. The Supreme Court didn't rule that. But Clarence Thomas, Justice Thomas said in his concurrence on the immunity ruling that he thought

Jack Smith was unconstitutionally appointed. And this resulted in was it Judge Cannon? Judge Eileen Cannon. Yeah. Trump appointed judge in Florida dismissing the case entirely. And it is an absurd case. I mean, the classified documents case is ridiculous on its face. They even brought fake evidence. They staged photos. That's right. They yeah, it was evidence tampering. So so the simple version is Trump had a bunch of documents scattershot in a bunch of random boxes. They pulled them out, found them, laid them on the ground and put confidential stuff on top of them. So it looked like Trump had all these folders that said top secret on them. They put on those cover sheets. Yep. They put on those cover sheets. And then they scattered it around and they were like, Nick Fuentes was in Mar-a-Lago.

This person's in Mar-a-Lago. They're going to get the documents. These were just in Melania's closet. It's like, why are you rifling through her closet? There wasn't even anything in there. Yeah. They just know she has great taste. They want to see what she has. I'm sure they picked up some good evidence. The other thing is, where's the Biden investigation? Why is Jack Smith only caught up on Trump? If he cares so much about classified documents, why doesn't he go after- They had a special counsel for Biden. Not the Jack Smith. He was a sympathetic old man who would never be convicted by a jury because he was just too kind and dotty and old.

We didn't get pictures of the Biden garage where their documents were stashed, did we? Nope. I love the document story, though, because one thing that I do think gets overlooked in it is what the documents were. And there is a freak out in blob media, such as the Washington Post, for example. Did you call it blob? Yeah. I like that. Another word for the Post, for example. Did you call it blob? Yeah, I like that. Another

word for the swamp, I guess. And they're they're obsessed by the fact that Trump apparently had information about an ally's secretive nuclear program. Don't couldn't couldn't tell you which ally that would be. Or I would like to know personally why Trump had that document. It kind of makes me feel like he had it to protect himself from something. I'm not sure what. Or again, it depends on who this ally with the secret nuclear program is. But another another issue on that. It was just stunning to me once I was watching CNN. Jake Tapper was interviewing the former Secretary of Defense Mark Esper and asking him, like, why do you think it's so bad that Donald Trump would have these documents lying around? And Esper said, actually, that it would prevent the United States.

He said this from executing a successful strike on Iran. He's like, there could be logistics documents about our plans to. Well, excuse me, are we going to war with Iran? Is that that's news to me. Apparently, Mark Esper was privy to some information or some plans that haven't been made public or haven't been discussed in Congress, which is supposed to be the authority that declares war. We've had a couple people pass through here recently who believed that Kamala Harris's election would be bad for Israel and that they would cut a deal with Iran. And I'm just like, I think that's ridiculous.

They are literally the deep state military industrial complex. They are going to redouble their efforts and they're going to try to exacerbate the conflict so they can get the war with Iran. And Donald Trump, I don't think he's even perfect on the issue either. But I think the principal conflict that the deep state had with Trump is that he wanted to get our troops out of the Middle East. Not perfectly, but he tried getting our troops out of Syria. He's set a deadline for withdrawal from Afghanistan. They lost their minds over that. And I think that was the principal catalyst that set them off to try and destroy him. Yeah. And having dialogue with other world leaders such as Putin. I mean, I went to the

Trump-Putin summit at the time I was working for RT, which was super fun because we were at the center of the conspiracy to elect Trump, you may recall. And it was, for me, incredible actually to witness a U.S. president acting like a statesman and sitting down with a powerful leader of another powerful country and supposedly acting in good faith. And I later interviewed the deputy foreign minister of Russia who was involved in those negotiations. And he told me really does demonstrate that I do think Trump tried, but that the president is up against a lot more than we realize. And it's even more than Bolton and Pompeo and these characters. Do you know the one time the media praised Donald Trump as presidential? When? Any guesses? When? I can't remember. I feel like you had to guess. When he withdrew? No, no, no, no. There was. had a guess. When he withdrew?

No, no, no, no. Oh, no, when he bombed Syria. Of course, of course. And Brian Williams said we were guided by the beauty of our weapons. Yeah, I remember that. Trump fired 59 Tomahawk missiles into Syria. And then all of a sudden the media was like, is this Trump's presidential moment? Is he stepping up?

And I'm like, holy crap. Stepping up by using all of the weapons. They complain in the liberal, the Democrat media industrial complex about, say, the pipes in Flint. And I got a simple solution. Hey, those missiles they fired, how about that money that goes to building all of those? We like, you know, fix the pipes. Doesn't that win for everybody? But that's never the game. And it's because they don't want to solve these problems. And this is true for a lot of the pro-lifers who are anti-Trump saying, oh, Trump's not. No, they want to maintain the problem so that they can keep making money off of it. We even had one of the guys from the Freedom

Caucus. I can't remember who it was, said that they had the ability to end Obamacare and leadership came to him. This is a Republican said, do not vote to end Obamacare because we need that. We need the wedge issue to raise money. Oh, that's terrible. This is what the machine is and always have. And I don't say always, but has been for probably since 1913. And abortion definitely is used in that way, because I remember when the Supreme Court ruling came down, my immediate thought was this is almost like a gift to the Democrats

to keep the one issue that they have alive, the one issue that they also had a chance to resolve, but they won't because they just want to keep pitting us against each other. And it's like Americans are just in a pinball machine and we just deserve so much better. You know, the Planned Parenthood PAC was like, yes, when the Roe thing came through. Right. Because they have so much to do now and they can fearmonger like there's no tomorrow. I mean, this is what's been fascinating about the abortion issue is, you know, everyone could then go to their states and battle it out. Instead, pro-abortion groups, especially Planned Parenthood, can look around and say, your life is about to end. Did you know that everything you hold sacred is about to be ruined and just make so much money off of it? Well, that's what happened with the human rights campaign and other groups that were

advocating for gay marriage. When they got gay marriage, when Obergefell went through, they didn't have anything to fundraise on. And that's when they really started pushing all of the trans stuff because they were like, oh, let's let's come up with this new issue so we don't have to give up our half a million dollar a year not for profit jobs, you know, in nice buildings in D.C. And now we have the transing of American kids simply so that these, not simply, but like in large part for the fundraising efforts. And it's Human Right Watch that issues those travel advisories, right?

Yeah, those are funny, aren't they? Every couple, especially during the summer, they'll release these. You guys probably know it, but they'll release these lists where they're like, you can't go to Georgia. It's it hates trans people. Don't go there. It's it's bizarre. It's this really intense fear based fundraising. These there are a lot of Democrats who genuinely are terrified to go into a rural area as they really do think that, like, everyone's wearing MAGA hats and they have guns and they're going to attack you.

For real. There was I can't remember what the story was. There was some, I think it was a man on the street where people were asking about crime in big cities and the response to them is liberals were, were like, oh yeah, well all these conservatives are complaining about the cities, but I'm fine here. But you know, if we were to go there, what they would do to us. And you know, if a black person went to a white rural area, I'm like, none, none of that is true at all.

Like you drive anywhere and nobody cares. Everybody leaves you alone. You could be in full, like, drag and go into rural Nebraska and walk into a supermarket and then they're going to be like, howdy. And you're going to buy food and they're going to be like, okay. And they're going to be like, I don't know, whatever. I don't care. That's true.

And you have, like, these coastal elite groups thinking that the entire rest of the country is backwards and homophobic and racist. And you, I dare you to walk into a Walmart anywhere in this entire nation without seeing some white grandma with like a bunch of like biracial grandbabies perfectly happy buying everybody a bunch of Legos and stuff. You know what I mean? Like that's the country. The country is, is very well. And the politics don't reflect. No, I'm glad you brought up Walmart because Bentonville, Arkansas is having this huge population boom because of Walmart's building. That's the headquarters of Walmart. Right.

And they're expanding it. So they're bringing a lot of people. They have a Walmart museum there. So they're having babies? I watched this interview with this girl who was like, you know, I lived in New York and I lived in D.C. And then I was in Miami and they offered me this job. And I really didn't want to go because, you know, I thought it was going to be, you know, backwards and conservative. And now she's like, I love it here. It's great. Which, you know, of course, locals are like,

well, they're bringing their own values. But there really is this like kind of overstated fear of rural America, I think, especially in 2024. And then you get there and everyone likes it, you know, and I just think that there's so much of the internal anxiety that that left leaning people like both just people who live their lives are super political, but and voters create for themselves that makes it unable to tell the difference. That's why I mentioned with CNN, like I don't I really don't believe that they can tell the difference between what is biased in their favor versus what is just bad, fearful, anti-conservative. I think it also sort of reflects how sort of subtly racist the Northeast is, where so many of these values originate and where I grew up. There's a lot of segregation. There is a lot of like, you know, what is it? The racism of low expectations.

That's a thing. There's not like a ton of mixing between groups. And then in the rest of the country, there is. And like in New York and Boston and Philadelphia and New Jersey and all of these places where I lived, it's like, it's very separate and it's separate within the universities. It's separate within academia. The higher up you go, the more separate it becomes. A really good example or circumstance that explains a lot of the wokeness is, do you remember when there was that media campaign about the talk that black parents give to their children?

I remember that so well. And it was created by white liberals from upper class areas who are isolated from the rest of reality. And felt guilty. Well, because the talk isn't unique to black families in this country. When I was a kid, my white father, we had the talk. He said, son, what do you do if you get pulled over? You got to put both your hands on the steering wheel.

You got to take your keys and your wallet. You put them up on top of the dash. You turn the light on. You turn the car off. You turn the radio off. You roll your window down. You put your hands on the wheel. The cop walks up.

He sees your hands. You say, my wallet's right there. You can grab it and hand it to him. And this is how you're supposed to react. They started acting like this was only black families that had to have these conversations? Because the people who run these campaigns, the people who exist in these political circles are from white, white, wealthy enclaves that don't actually have to deal with any of this stuff. Their crime rates are low, so they don't understand policy. They don't understand how to alleviate crime. They don't understand how to maintain a city. And then when they get in

trouble, they're in smaller scale communities where their wealthy parents call the city and take care of it. So they go, wow, this is how it must be for all white people everywhere. Meanwhile, in almost every other place, white poor people go through a lot of these same problems as literally anybody else. But this is the isolation that leads them to creating these, I call them awful policies, affluent white female liberal policies. Well, when I lived in Brooklyn with my son, when he was little, we had to talk about how to talk to cops in the park, which was like, if a cop tells you to do something, just do it. Keep your hands free. You know, don't don't don't ever have a toy gun in the park, not a water gun, nothing. You know what I mean? So, yeah, all parents tell their kids like how to

deal with authority figures that have guns. But then there's Governor Kathy Hochul of New York, who says that inner city black students don't know what a computer is. I mean, the the obvious discrepancy between that should just, I think it really captures what a lot of elite Democrats are experiencing every day, which is they have no idea. That Kathy Hochul thing was ridiculous. Wasn't that crazy? It was so offensive. Yeah. And I think she'll just keep her office, right? She believes it. She believed it. And then her office was like, no, she didn't really mean it. And then you had all of these like black kids from the Bronx on TikTok making jokes

about Kathy Hochul being like, like sniffing the computer. The guy, he's like, he's punching the laptop and like scared of it. Yeah. Then I think one of the best videos ever on this issue is Ami Horowitz's voter ID video where he went to Berkeley

and asked a bunch of white college students if it was racist to have voter ID. And they're all like, yeah, you know, because black people don't know how to get IDs. This is what Kamala Harris said. And he goes to Harlem and the Bronx in New York. And they're like, huh? Like, yeah, I got an ID. What do you mean?

And he's like, well, they said it. They said you didn't know how to do it. He's like, what are you talking about? All of them had one. That is one of the oddest talking points, because, yeah, it does really belittle black people. And it has a very there's a simple solution to if that were true, then the solution should be get people IDs, like go on a campaign to do that instead of saying that, you know,

you can't have a basic voter ID law in place. Because as someone who's covered elections or observed elections in other countries that are like being actively undermined by the United States, Venezuela, Bolivia, for example, they're actually very proud of the fact that they have to present IDs and go through this arduous process to vote because they say that it makes their system very secure. And here I am, like, what if I told you that in the United States, we can't get people IDs? It's very bizarre. Can I read to you guys what Kamala Harris said about voter IDs?

Sure, yeah. I don't think that we should underestimate what that compromise on voter ID laws could mean, Harris said. Because in some people's mind, that means you're going to have to Xerox or photocopy your ID to send it in to prove who you are. Well, there are a whole lot of people, especially people who live in rural communities, who don't. There's no Kinkos. There's no Office Max near them. Of course, people have to prove who they are, but not in a way that makes it almost impossible for them to prove who they are.

So you don't have to prove who you are. That's the solution? Yeah. So because poor people can't get to a photocopy machine to send in their ID. It's probably at their local library. I got a simple solution. Olivia can do it. We can do it.

Only landowners can vote. That solves all the problems because now it doesn't matter. You know, look, I'm thinking about what about back in the day when we didn't have IDs? How do we do it then? Simple. You had a land deed. Right. And so you just, you know, show your land deed and you're good.

Is that the idea? No. Back then, when landowners were the ones who were voting, you needed to prove you owned land. There has always been a requirement that you prove you are a member of the community. I agree. We should not make it so that only landowners vote because now we live in a society where there are renters. Not everybody wants to buy a plot of land.

Plots of land are very expensive. There's a lot of people. So you need an ID to prove that you're a member of the community and your address on the ID should reflect the jurisdiction that you're voting in. So if you're voting for a congressional district, but your ID says you live somewhere else,

you can't vote. Sorry. Bye. Have a nice day. I think that makes sense. I mean, I think that that's because you're bigoted. Yeah, it's because obviously I'm a terrible person, but I used to be opposed to voter ID laws.

And then the more I yeah. And then the more I got involved in looking at it, I was like, it's actually not a problem. I repeated those talking points without thinking. Right. Isn't that funny? That's like what changed your mind? problem. I repeated those talking points without thinking. Right. Isn't that funny? That's like. And what changed your mind? Yeah.

What changed my mind? A couple of things changed my mind. One, just voting more. And then another thing was the situation with illegal immigration and people just automatically being registered to vote. So like the motor voter laws, that seems kind of crazy that you just automatically get registered to vote because then you're not taking any real responsibility for it. And I think that if you have to, you know, own your opportunity to vote and own your duty to elect representatives,

you might determine that you should be a little better informed. I thought that made sense to me. Let's jump to this next story. Once again, from the Post Millennial, we've got big news, ladies and gentlemen. Kamala Harris has agreed to finally do an interview. And it's such big news because Kamala Harris has not given one at all. So that the moment she decides to actually just talk to the press, it apparently is headline news. I'm not kidding.

It's not just the Post Millennial that wrote this breaking. It's being picked up. It's trending. Everyone's like, wow. But guess what? Tim Waltz will be with her, and it's going to be with Dana Bash. So, you know, part of me wants to say softball interview, but that's not fair at all. It's going to be more like t-ball.

It's going to be more like power puff. Powder puff. Yeah. It's going to be more like T-Ball. It's going to be more like Power Puff. Powder Puff. What's Powder Puff? Powder Puff. Like, they're going to chuck little cotton balls at her, and she's going to be like, woo, look, cotton balls. Well, she's probably going to rely on her. Not even the same realm as baseball. No, I don't think there's any baseball going on here. They're going to give her the questions in advance.

It's not even table tennis, you know? It's just a photo op where she stands with the bat and pretends she did something. Meanwhile, her security blanket slash emotional support dog, Tim Walls, is there to field any kind of questions, you know? You should get like a little harness and then they're part of the BDSM community. You know, they're. I'm sure that would help them. Hoping about their kink.

They're extraordinary base. You know, the thing is, the last time she did an interview was late June and she appeared with a Kentucky based pro pro-abortion advocate who later appeared at the DNC. She has a really sad story. You know, she was attacked by her stepdad. It's really bad. But even then, that was the last time we heard from Kamala Harris in an interview setting like this. And she wasn't alone. You would think, you know, this person who wants to be president is going to appear solo, but she won't do that. That's how much she respects her voters. She'd rather put her own sense of emotional security first.

Not only a person, but according to their logic, she's a strong woman of color who apparently can't do an interview without a white man sitting next to her. I mean, that's how they see the world, right? How does it look for them to be promoting this woman as a great leader and a woman of color? And yet she can't do an interview alone. It's honestly insulting. That's a good point. As a white, she's so pro white men. Maybe that's good for the country.

I think it's so weird that she's showing up with Tim Waltz. And her husband is probably going to be there, too. Well, he's going to be in the green room, of course. He's going to be ready with a bag of Doritos like any good man would be backstage, you know. But yeah, I really think that it's it's sad that she needs someone to come hold her hand, that she needs someone to be there with her, that she can't show up and speak to this reporter who's already. It's going to be an easy interview. Who's already like ready to do whatever she wants. She's ready to just bend over for Kamala Harris.

We were talking about something much worse. Didn't say it. You were mentioning how ABC is hosting the debate and it's seen as this great victory, even though there are all of these interests behind the scenes that are obviously very political involved at ABC. Dana Bash is someone that I feel like doesn't get talked about enough. But, you know, I like to watch CNN a lot, actually, because it someone that I feel like doesn't get talked about enough. But you know, I like to watch CNN a lot, actually, because it's where I feel like I can see the political theater

being rehearsed. It's like Steve Bannon says, watch MSNBC. Yeah, you really I learned when I worked in a in a in a TV studio, when I had all of the mainstream media playing that you could kind of see where things were going just based on watching them. But Dana Bash, I know you broadcast a lot, Tim, but she's up there. I think she might give you a run for your money. She's always on CNN. I don't know what else she does with her life. But she's also someone who was married to the former chief of staff of the CIA. Bash, that's where she, you know, Dana Schwartz is her name, but she took Bash.

And it's very, you know, it goes back to this idea that there's a big family in the media. An incestuous relationship between the government and the media. Yeah. And all you have to do is watch Dana Bash to see that she doesn't even hide her allegiance to just the deepest core of the U.S. security state. This is crazy to me. It seems like the internet is what broke that machine. For the longest time, intelligence agents are former and current and their families are working in corporate media. What was it? It wasn't Mockingbird? Yeah.

Mockingbird were the intelligence agencies. Yeah, competing. Mockingbird. And that was the – what was the name of the hearings where that was uncovered? Church? No, I don't remember. Church Commission? Was it? I don't know. Anyway, long story short, it's it's fascinating that once we got to the Internet era and independent shows were able to emerge that started rivaling or even beating the quality of these programs, the narrative's breaking. Donald Trump's victory in 2016 was not supposed to happen. The deep state was caught off guard. They legit were, you know, it's fascinating. They were

gargling their own waste in the media. Hillary Clinton has a 99% chance of winning as they all were patting each other on the back and going, ho, ho, ho, ho, with their pinkies out. And then Trump won. And they were like, it's impossible. The only explanation is Trump's a Russian spy. That explains it. Well, and then that totally undermined his foreign policy for his entire presidency. It was by design because he'd already laid out that he wanted to shake things up and take on the established foreign policy, you know, the blob as as actually that that term came from Obama's former chief of staff or national security adviser, Ben Rhodes. He actually called it the blob because he was part of it.

And yeah, Trump obviously ran on on taking that on. And so they planted the seeds of Russiagate just engaged. And I do think it wasn't just a domestic political play. It was to undermine his genuine attempts at diplomacy and good faith outreach to the world that I think are the aspects of the Trump presidency that should be commended the most. Like, I just don't understand why we can't have a president who wants to talk to the world and just make deals instead of sending guns around. So we are change in the chat.

Luke Rutkowski says it was the church committee in 1975. We got a super chat saying Luke is screaming right now. Well, Luke has every opportunity to come and hang out on the show and set the record straight on all of these things whenever he feels like it. So, but yeah, church committee hearings. So we kind of got that. MKUltra was uncovered under that. I think COINTELPRO was in that as well, as well as Mockingbird.

Yeah, COINTELPRO. And sometimes it feels like we talk about those programs as if they were something that happened in the past and were exposed. And then they stopped. Yeah, you got to look around and wonder. Yo, like if you're a millennial, your parents were alive when this stuff was going on. Like your parents were, I don't know, probably teenagers or actually young adults.

So this is very recent history. And I love that meme where it's like, well, we know the CIA did bad things in the 60s, the 70s, the 80s, the 90s, and 2000s. There's been no reforms. Nothing has changed, but they certainly aren't doing anything bad now. Yeah.

What are they doing now? Yeah. We don't even really discuss it. Oh, no, no, no. I think we know what they're doing now. What are they doing now? We. We don't even really discuss it. Oh, no, no, no. I think we know what they're doing now. What are they doing now? We don't know everything they're doing. But one thing I'd say is they're involved in perhaps like the indictment against Donald Trump.

Oh, for sure. Or how about the two impeachments against him, which are also ridiculous and insane. I'd have to imagine that it's not just the CIA. What were they accused of recently where they came on? They're like, no, no, we have nothing to do with this. We're not involved. It was a big story. And people were claiming the CIA was involved in some kind of related to this.

They claim that they don't do domestic work. It's only against foreign adversaries or whatever. It might have been J6. I can't remember. Was it just the spying that was happening all throughout? Yeah, I think it was related to activists getting spied on or something. And they said, we only target foreign individuals or whatever we don't operate with in the United States.

But I'd be willing to bet, it's not just that. We know the FBI is deeply involved in helping Joe Biden get elected. Here's my view, super simple. For the longest time, television media was under the control of, even after the church committee hearings, we know about Mockingbird. We know that they're're planting stories we know that they're actually writing the stories

and giving them to journalists and then put their names on them yeah and even after 1975 it kept happening the internet comes around and all of a sudden independent voices way too many of them rise up and their narrative starts breaking trump wasn't supposed to win hillary was supposed to win they were caught off guard gargling their own waste. Trump ends up winning. And for four years, the system is fractured. The narrative machine of the deep state isn't working. The media is trying to lie and it's failing. And now what they did was colluding, getting Facebook to censor the Hunter Biden laptop story and the Burisma story. All of these efforts and the shadow campaign, as Time Magazine called it, to make sure Joe Biden won.

And he did. And it now looks like they're holding on by a thread. They cannot maintain this. Their psychotic wars are failing. And it looks like Donald Trump is actually going to win. Right. But we'll see. We'll see.

Trump has won the argument, especially with RFK Jr. and Tulsi Gabbard. But can he win the actual game? And can he win the can he win the vibe game? You know, I mean, this is the thing that's really being pushed and it takes a lot. I mean, we were just talking about, you know, believing like previously believing things that it turned out to be not not true at all. It's hard to break out of a mindset when that's all your friends are saying that, when it's all your family is saying that, when it's everybody at your workplace and that you come into contact with who is saying that. So it's hard for people to think for themselves,

which is really a shame, but it is hard for them to do that. And so if those people who can't think for themselves and just go along with what all their friends say, show up at the ballot box, I don't know if they're offering free mimosas or whatever, then they'll probably vote for Kamala Harris. I think Trump won the vibe game. I think Trump won the vibe game and the argument. So for people definitely won the argument. He won the argument. No, no question. Again, especially with RFK Jr. and Tulsi Gabbard. His argument is now we're a big tent party and we're trying to be accommodating and compromising to as many people as we can because we all agree we want to help America. Then you have the vibe. He's laughing. He's having a good time. And people on the street, when you see these men on the street interviews, are saying Trump's Trump,

Trump, Trump. The question is, whatever the real campaign is to win, are the Republicans, is Trump prepared for that? So voting in the park, universal mail-in voting, ballot harvesting, that's vibe feelings. None of that matters when procedure is against you. The question is, can Trump win procedurally? Yeah. Well, and he needs the RNC to step up and do their job. One other states. Yeah. One, one point I would just make since we were talking about the church committee and learning about how we were even able to learn or confirm what was true about our past is that that was possible thanks to Frank Church holding these committee hearings. Back then, you know, he was a liberal Democrat who was anti-war. That used to be what the Democratic Party was, but now it's

completely flipped, where the Democratic Party is actually the machine running the wars, trying to push us into confrontation with Russia. They've become the neocon party, even gone a complete 180 from my own lifetime when I thought, you know, growing up that the Democrats were the anti-war party. So it's just, I don't know how that happened. Does anyone else know how that happened? So when Bernie Sanders and it doesn't start here, but with Bernie Sanders trying to lead a populist leftist grassroots revolt in the Democratic Party, Donald Trump led a right wing populist revolt in the Republican Party. Bernie Sanders is how would I describe him? Frightened and weak-willed. And Donald Trump is arrogant and hot-headed.

So you take a look at what happens. Bernie Sanders at the popular base, I describe it as he shows up to the ivory tower and he knocks on the door and he says, listen, we got all these people behind me and we say,

I should be president. And then they just dump water on his head. He goes, oh. And then he just stands there. Donald Trump walks up and goes, listen, we got all these people, you're letting me in. And then they just dump water in his head. And then he just stands there. Donald Trump walks up and goes, listen, all these people, you're letting me in. And then they start banging on the door and they splash water. And Trump goes, don't you splash water on me and then kicks the

door in. Trump gets pissed, says, F you know, Bernie Sanders says, please don't hurt me. Please, I'll stop. So what ends up happening is the neocons and the Republican Party lose their minds. All of these conservatives are never Trump is. And they're like, no, Trump is awful. He doesn't represent us. We don't want him here. We don't want him here. And then Trump wins. And they're like, OK, we have no choice. It's the best we can do. But the these are the run of the mill conservatives. The neocon establishment were like, screw that Hillary Clinton. And so they jump to the Democratic Party. It's why you have Bill Kristol, right? And people like him that are basically,

we've got to restore the Republican Party. The Democrats are the closest thing to a warmongering elite that we have. So we're going to work with them for the time being. And this, and you end up with the Democratic Party harboring the neocons,

but come on. Hillary Clinton was like, she's a warmonger. She's one of the like, she's the warmonger. She's one of the like she's the warmonger. You know, I mean, we can rag on George W. Bush and all these people. But Hillary Clinton is right up top. Well, Bush, you kind of get the picture, the idea that he wasn't running the show. She was running the show, you know, when she was at the State Department.

She was like ideologically committed. Bush was kind of just the idiot son that they put up as cover for Dick Cheney and Rumsfeld and all these other people that were the Hillary Clintons of that administration. And then Obama himself, I don't know how much he, I mean, I don't even want to talk about him, to be honest. Obama. Obama. That's what they called him, Obama. He's our true king running the show behind the scenes, right? He's going to get his fourth term with Kamala.

Yep. Yeah, indeed. Why do you think it took him so long to endorse her administration the obama maybe because i mean i think ideally they probably didn't want to run her but it would have just been too anti-democratic to remove biden and then kamala it would have just exposed the whole sham i mean it or i think it was planned wasn't going to endorse her for several weeks ostensibly to let her have her moment in the sun. But the Clintons endorsed right away. So many other top Democrats did. And I think Michelle and Obama really held out. I mean,

I do think that he is ultimately the kingpin for a lot of vibes from the Democratic Party. But it's interesting to me that he doesn't actually seem to like Kamala all that much. Well, haven't you ever, you know, seen a seen a cartoon? The supervillain has lackeys and the lackeys screw up, but the lackeys never get, you know, fired or kicked out or whatever. You know, the supervillains henchmen will go and do something, ruin it and then come back. And the supervillains is like, well, OK, I guess he's like, you imbeciles.

And he bops him on the head. That's it. Barack Obama didn't want Kamala Harris, but they're just lackeys. That's it. But the didn't want Kamala Harris, but they're just lackeys. That's it. But the Clintons did want her? No, I think that Obama backed Kamala Harris becoming the nominee. Otherwise, she would not be the nominee. Right. And then I think that part of their deal was that they were going to wait a little bit before endorsing her, so it didn't look like a coup, even though it did. But instead,

it just made it look like he was the only high ranking Democrat that wasn't that interested in her. I don't know. I thought it looked entirely orchestrated because you had, you know, you had endorsement. Wait a little bit. Endorsement from somebody else. Wait a little bit. Here's a couple more endorsements. Here's Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries talking about it. Now the Obamas are on board. Don't you guys love the Obamas? You remember the Obamas? Now you're on board too because, you know, Barack and Michelle. Yeah, and I

think that that was an intentional orchestrated. And it did allow them to control the media cycle. And they controlled it. They did a masterful job of controlling the cycle. I want to jump to this story from the Post Millennial once again, breaking Trump names, Tulsi Gabbard and RFK Jr. to presidential transition team, quote, As President Trump's broad coalition of supporters and endorsers expands across partisan lines, we are proud that Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Tulsi Gabbard have been added to the Trump Vance transition team.

Now, here's the reality. Tulsi Gabbard was being set up to be the heir to the Democrats. She is a woman of color. She was they loved her. She was a member of Congress. And then she betrayed Hillary Clinton for Bernie Sanders and they lost their minds. RFK Jr., he's a Kennedy, need I say more? And they kept him out because these people don't want to adhere to their weird cult like ideology or structure. And it's fascinating now that we see this. This is tremendous for Donald Trump. But why is it that the best possible Democrats are Republicans now? I think it's that the parties themselves are a little bit irrelevant once you have Trump at the head of this party, because his values are not the uniparty values. So, you know, Mitch McConnell and Chuck Schumer may as well be in the same party. I think I'm going to say something that's unpopular, and I think that,

you know, there is there's a lot of benefits to having Tulsi and RFK in the part are on his transition team. I think they bring a really interesting perspective. I think it's good for, you know, moderate voters undecided. But I do think that there's a chance that some of these appointments make the core MAGA base supporter kind of nervous that the campaign that they were so invested in is changing. And I think part of that has to do with, you know, immigration and some other things. I don't know that it's true. I'm just saying that, you know, it's one thing to have one or two former Democrats. But when you start if if the the dyed in the wool, like I am voting MAGA, Trump is who gets me to the polls. Voter

starts to feel like he is changing too much. I think it will. I don't know. I think they'll still turn over him, but it will create anxiety within his party that could mar the first couple months of his his term. I just think that, turn over him, but it will create anxiety within his party that could mar the first couple months of his term. I just think that, you know, Trump is relatively moderate on a lot of issues. And so are RFK and Tulsi Gabbard. But I think that it doesn't I think that this alignment is not even so much about issues or policy, but it's more about worldview. And I think that that's a much more aligning and much more necessary joining than a policy joining. Because what we have now is a Democrat Party that looks at the world and says,

we want, you know, more abortions, less children, we want to trans our kids, we want everyone to be forced to buy certain kinds of cars, we want everybody to be, you know, forced to buy certain types of foods. We want to control the way you live. We want the government to be your primary partner in life. And then you have, you know, RFK, Trump, Tulsi Gabbard, and a whole heck of a lot of MAGA people who would say, we want government out of our lives. We don't want you to tell us what to do with our kids. We don't want you to tell us what to do with our bodies. That means we don't want you pushing abortion. We don't want you to tell us what kind of car we get to drive or where we can live or what kind of housing

we can live in. So I think it's more of a, you know, pro-government partner in your life worldview and an anti-government in your life worldview. And that's a much bigger divide. And there's a lot of policies, I think, personally, where I would compromise if it meant everybody just left me the hell alone. You know, I want to disagree because we have this article from 2019 and it's, you know, here we go. I'll just pull this one up because there's a bunch of different versions of it. But this is Times Republican or Winchester Times memo to Trump trade Bolton for Tulsi. This is July 1st, 2019. Conservatives were calling on Donald Trump to fire Bolton and bring Tulsi Gabbard on because Tulsi was right about foreign policy and Bolton was was a maniac.

I said back then Donald Trump needs to bring on Tulsi Tulsi Gabbard as a national security advisor or in some way his administration. And this would help win over many independents. I also Andrew Yang because Andrew Yang was very popular among liberal leaning independent voters. A lot of people say, no, no, he's crazy. He wants to be a socialist. Don't care. This is not Donald Trump saying he will enact those policies. It's Donald Trump saying, I'm listening to you as well you are here in the conversation vote for me bringing on

tulsi i think is the right move and it's late but i'm happy to see it happening and i actually think a lot of the maga people are going to be happy about it especially since she's come around on 2a she's endorsed donald trump and it's a democrat joining the ranks this is basically like going to a mega voter and saying you know you were right the whole time. They're going to go. That's right. I was. I think it's a really good play for Trump politically. I do. I think that it kind of is throwing back to the energy of his 2016 campaign, because for a while it just felt like this. Now the campaign was overtaken by the walls.

Kamala fever. I I'll say something now that might be controversial. And I know you're going to accuse me of having Israel derangement syndrome. But the way that I see it is that I don't totally see them as switching teams. They are all part of the Adelson money network. You have Tulsi and, and RFK Jr. running around with Rabbi Shmuley, the dildo salesman and pledging allegiance to Israel. And for me, as much as I have supported Tulsi in the past, I was a big RFK Jr. fan, actually. I was. But the reasons that I love them is that they were committed to ending forever wars and

to issues like free speech in the United States. And for me, all of that, even if you can understand Ukraine and you can, you know, understand Syria the way Tulsi did, I just don't get how you remove those issues from the Israel lobby and the fact that they're the greatest threat to free speech in the United States with their anti-BDS laws. You just had NYU now say that you can't say Zionism on campus because that is also considered anti-Semitic. And, you know, they've actually criminalized speech around the country. And to see RFK and Tulsi just, you know, pledge allegiance to Israel while... They did, though? Well, RFK, absolutely, and Tulsi. And they repeat the script. They repeat the script,

and they say all this stuff about Israel being our great ally. I mean, RFK himself was just doing fundraisers for Rabbi Shmuley's personal security. OK, so that's a little bizarre to me. And it just feels like it just discredits their position on war and speech. I wouldn't call any of that Israel derangement syndrome. I'll clarify Israel derangement syndrome. We had a guy in the show who literally any question that was asked about anything policy wise was Israel. We had a members only caller who said I'm concerned about the fentanyl crisis in West Virginia. And when 30 seconds that was asked about anything policy-wise was Israel. We had a members-only caller who said, I'm concerned about the fentanyl crisis in West Virginia. And within 30 seconds, he was talking about Israel. And I'm like, this is the issue.

You know, my thing is anti-intervention. The United States' interests are not in sending out our troops to military bases overseas in every part of the globe and expanding the liberal economic order and nation- building in Afghanistan. Whatever the the the the parasite is that that infected the United States, probably in 1913 with the start of the Federal Reserve, has manipulated what this country is supposed to be. I look at the history lessons of the founding fathers leading up into the Civil War and the lessons learned at the Civil War.

And I'm like, wow, man, these people were fighting really, really hard and they really wanted to be left alone. And then at some point we were like, wow, man, these people were fighting really, really hard. And they really just wanted to be left alone. And then at some point we were like, nah, let's go get involved in foreign entanglements, which is weird. And then after World War II especially, we just stopped declaring war and started just doing whatever. I don't even want to say we, the parasite in this country. Vietnam was like that. Like all of those later 20th century foreign wars that we got involved in were like that. There was no congressional oversight. And I was so horrified with that, with Desert Storm,

right? And with the yellow cake and all of that. And I remember- Or the babies. What was that woman? She claimed the babies were being killed. Yeah, the Kuwaiti ambassador's daughter, I think. Right. The baby's getting unplugged from- Just lies. Right. Which is like actually what happened in Gaza, by the way. Well, and so I was like watching this whole thing and just how Congress gave up its power. And that's something that I think is so frustrating because this is supposed to be the people's representatives. That's the

people's house, right? That's where we get to tell the guy who lives down the street, who's representing us in Congress, what we think should happen for the benefit of our district and for the benefit of our nation. And they just gave up not their power. They gave up our power to the executive branch. And I think that they really need to pull that back. And you've seen the executive power just expand and expand and expand, you know, like not just in the 20th century, but you have like George Bush, it got bigger, you know, Obama, it got bigger. You know, Trump, it got bigger, Biden, it got bigger to the point where now with, you know, now you have a situation where

they can tell this, tell schools, if you don't let boys go into girls' bathrooms, we're not going to give you free lunch aid. Yeah, that's shocking. So let me just pose this question then just as a thought experiment. Taking away the legitimacy of the Trump case and the political attacks on him aside, do you think that there's any dangerous precedent with the Supreme Court ruling that it does put the president above the law? It doesn't. Yeah, it doesn't actually. So it's crazy. The ruling is the president's official duties are immune because we are asking him to do those duties. If he engages in a behavior as to his official duties that we feel are not part of his official duties, he gets impeached. If he's impeached, he can then

be criminally charged. That makes the most sense. If we lived in a system where you could criminally charge the president for anything he did, even under his presidential duties, you would have the weaponization of the system against their political opponents, which is literally what we're seeing. Yeah, that's why the SCOTUS ruling was important. Barack Obama murdered Anwar al-Awlaki and Abdulrahman al-Awlaki, two American citizens. By all means, I'll have a conversation with a neocon or a neolib about why Anwar al-Awlaki was a jihadi waging war against the United States and he was a traitor. And the argument is still then he needs to have a trial, even if he's not there. That proves to a jury he as an American citizen has waged his levied war against the United

States and its people. And thus, that's that's a death penalty. Someone is attacking us. Well, Obama didn't do that. He blew him up and then he blew up his son. Now, I think Barack Obama should be criminally charged for that. That being said, I haven't seen the full court case and the evidence. So what we should do is he should be post presidency impeachment, which is never going to happen. But this is what should happen. The impeachment is as president, you are given military options by your advisers, your lieutenants, your commanders, etc. They would give Barack Obama something. It was referred to as the disposition matrix. They called it the kill list. And they would basically give Barack Obama a list of people that looked like baseball cards, folders and said, which one should we exterminate? Should we kill? And Barack Obama signed off on each and every one. And it involved American citizens.

And the Constitution says you can't just go and kill American citizens. He did anyway. But it's still a part of his official duties. I respect that he should be impeached for that. And what would happen now is an analysis of those actions that happened. This is what, 12 years ago when I think it was, was it 12 years ago Abdulrahman was killed? 2016? No. No, not, gosh, 20, oh. Not 2016.

I think it was 2012. But I could be wrong. So we would impeach him. We would have an inquiry. Congress would then look at the evidence and say, we do not find sufficient reason to believe Barack Obama had a legitimate official duty in killing a 16-year-old American citizen in Yemen, a country we are not at war with, and bombing a civilian restaurant. After the impeachment, then the jurisdictions with interest, the locations with jurisdiction, I should say, or the jurisdictions withstanding, could then criminally charge Barack Obama,

which would include San Diego, Boulder, Colorado, as well as the federal government. So it wouldn't prevent a criminal charge of a president committing war crimes in the future? It just means that—so here's the challenge. Let's say you have a president and an adversary blows up one of our ships in the South China Sea or whatever. We have a ship going near Taiwan and China blows it up. The president responds by sending in a strike group or whatever, which encounters an unidentified vessel that will not respond to hail. And then it opens fire in the U.S. So he instructs them to blow it up, destroying what turns out to be a Russian vessel that was working alongside China, triggering a response from Russia, saying you jumped the gun. Now, there's questions about whether it's the official duty of the president to in a time of emergency after we were attacked.

And let's just say, like, the story is legitimately we were attacked. It's witnessed by everybody. There's videos, unprovoked attack on American vessels. The president issues an immediate reprisal and response against the vessel that attacked us. I don't you can try to impeach him, but I think a reasonable political body says, well, look, the president has to make difficult choices. It may have started a war, but this is official duties.

Now, let's say the president sends in a vessel and then fakes a military action, bombs itself and then lies about it and then claims it was an official duty. We have to have that investigation. Is he actually actually acting in his official capacity? Turns out he wasn't. Then he's impeached. Then he's convicted, removed from office for war crimes. And then he's criminally charged. The reason why that's important in the event the president takes a legitimate action in the interest of the United States, that was a difficult decision, but it is a decision that had to be made. He should go to prison for it because a Democrat gets mad. He a Republican or Republican mad he's a Democrat. Yeah.

No, I guess it then becomes a case about what is presidential duty and that's what gets debated in the future. Not that I also think that any president's ever going to get prosecuted for something bad that they did. It's only going to be something like, I mean, I would have loved if they would have tried this with Bush, but. Oh, man. Bush.

He tortured some folks. All of them. I mean, Obama and Bush. Clinton. I mean, Clinton set the precedent for the Iraq war, right? Bombing Iraq without congressional approval. It's the challenges for the most part, official duties. We know what they are, but you are right.

There's a lot where it gets into this really like fine print-esque area where it's like, well, the president was having a conversation about his personal vehicle, but it was in the Oval Office. Is that official, part of his official duties? And the argument is, well, his security in a personal vehicle matters. So this conversation is, someone will say, no, he's talking about private personal finance stuff with someone just because in the building doesn't make it. And then you're having that argument. And that's where things get messy. The real problem is not whether or not we can impeach and then convict a president.

The SCOTUS argument. I'm glad it came down the way it did. The real problem is we don't have a functioning political body. No, we don't. If we had honest politicians, first of all, the 17th Amendment is garbage. If we had actual representatives who cared about the facts and wanted to do right by this country and not just partisans trying to fundraise and sound good on the internet. And you had senators who actually cared to represent their states. You would have had Barack Obama impeached. First, there's an impeachment inquiry over the killing of Abdur Rahman al-Awlaki.

Then they would argue, in fact, his actions were part of his official duties as president. And for that reason, he cannot be criminally charged for this unless we impeach him for it. We then find him to be criminally negligent in the murder of Abdulrahman Al-Awlaki. And for that, we find it to be a high crime or misdemeanor. The president, while perhaps well-intentioned, used with reckless disregard the might of the U.S. military and blew up a civilian restaurant, killing civilians as well as an American. And he says it was an accident. I'm sorry. We are driving down the road and you're reckless and you accidentally kill someone. You do get criminally charged for that reason. While it was his was Obama's duty to answer these calls, he acted recklessly and with disregard for human life,

particularly of an American, and for that he should be impeached, convicted, removed from office, and then criminally charged for reckless homicide or something to that effect. If we could prove in that trial that Barack Obama said, I'm going to send a message to all jihadis who would wage war in America by killing the son of a terrorist, which I think is what he did, then that's life in prison. That's murder. That's first degree. I believe that Barack Obama killed Abdulrahman Al-Awlaki because he wanted to send a message to jihadis that the United States, I don't even want to say we, the United States is willing to murder your children wherever they may be. He wanted them to feel that their children would be safe nowhere. We're not at war with Yemen. We have no legal authority for bombing civilian

locations in Yemen. And Obama did it anyway. And the argument from the Obama administration was he should. Whoops. We were targeting a different guy and we accidentally got him. Why did you bomb a civilian restaurant in a country without a war with in the first place? Shock. And shout out to Luke Rutkowski, We Are Change, who actually was at the DNC. And I can't remember, was it Charlie Gibbs who they asked? And the guy, or I can't remember who it was. He said, well, he should have had a better father.

So this was pre-2012, actually. Should have had a better father. That's the justification for Barack Obama bombing a civilian restaurant and killing an American as well as other civilians. That is nightmarishly illegal, in my opinion. And the man. But now I'm going to just I'll hit it out of the park with this one or not, not not probably the right turn of phrase I'm trying to use, but let's exemplify this to the to the uptenth degree. After everything I've just explained, the man has faced no justice, not even an inquiry from from from Congress, not even impeachment inquiry.

And Donald Trump is facing multiple criminal prosecutions for the most absurd and insane things imaginable. The first president to actually get charged. And it's B.S. because there are criminal elements in our government that are willing to let evil people do whatever they want. And Donald Trump is I got to be honest, I think for for a lot of these things he was involved in at the federal level, he was bumbling about. I don't mean that disrespectfully. I think they went to him and said, Mr. President, bomb this country. And he was like, we're not doing that. And they were like, no, we are going to do it. No, you're not. You're not doing that. And they're like, do you not get it, Mr. President? We're the CIA. We're telling you who is going to be targeted. And Trump's like, no, no, no, we're not doing that. And so then they're like, we've got to remove this guy. He's in our way. But what you're missing is that they only prosecute sitting presidents based on lies, not based on the truth.

That's it, too. There was a recently a interesting interview that Tecca Carlson did about Watergate with someone who was there at the time. And that seems like a total put up job as well. It seems like it was entirely faked. So let's jump to this so I can stop ranting about why I'm mad at Obama. The Post Millennial reports Kamala adopts another Trump policy, pledges hundreds of millions to build the wall i told you she was going to do this this debate is going to be hilarious so trump's agreed to the debate

what's it going to be they're going to be like um uh former president trump you uh would like to build a wall and kamala goes i want to build a wall i'm building a wall and then i'm doing that too okay i'm doing that true and then she'll be way shorter she'll be like me too me too that's why she wanted to sit down at a desk. You think they'll give her like, you know, either extra high heels or like some telephone books to stand on or something? This is interesting because I wonder if they are going

to request like something to level so that, you know. I think they want her to look shorter. Like if someone on their campaign is smart enough to be like, no, you want to be shorter because if Trump seems at all aggressive, then everyone's going to be like, oh, you want to be shorter because if Trump seems at all aggressive, then everyone's going to be like, oh, he can't be mean to ladies. That's not nice. He can't be mean to that little girl on the stage.

That little girl? That was me. I think he should. Is Tim Walz going to be with her on the debates? Probably. Behind her, fanning her, cheering her on. The bags of Doritos. He throws her a bag of Doritos. Or maybe we'll get to see his

tuna mayonnaise taco. I'm just surprised, honestly, that, I mean, because usually Democrats are so, that's one of their big issues, right? To demonize Republicans is with immigration. So why do you think she's now responding to pressure on this issue? Because black community members in Chicago were screaming, we are being replaced. Yeah. So when the great replacement theory reaches black neighborhoods in Chicago, the media has got a big problem on their hands. And Trump consistently led on the issues that actually matter, right? He led on immigration. He led on crime. He led on the economy. And that's

one of the reasons he did well in his debate with Biden, which is that he could always return to the issues and be like, things are bad and I will fix them. This guy's in office and made them worse. And I think, frankly, it's the sort of same argument with Harris, right? She's in office and either she is complicit by doing nothing or she's that ignorant, at which point, why would you put her back in the White House with more responsibility? Something that I just want to say about the current crisis, because this is Something that I just want to say about the current crisis, because this is something that you might not hear a lot and something that I have learned through my reporting in Latin America is I know people make the point a lot that a lot

of our immigration issues right now on the border are blowback from our meddling regime change wars, yada, yada. But there's another element that people might not realize. For example, right now we have Venezuelans primarily coming into the country. I wrote a whole book. I don't want to give the whole spiel about how we destabilize that country, but I think I spell it out pretty clearly in the book. What people might not realize is so Trump, he did launch this policy to recognize a shadow government and really aggressively sanction their country, really strangle it to the point that people were wanting to leave and they'd left and gone all around Latin America. It wasn't until Biden came in and and agreed to grant Venezuelans temporary protected status that they actually started coming to the United States because that's pretty much a green light. You can work before you have a green card and all these these, you know, you get you get special treatment. It's like wet foot, dry foot

that we had for Cubans. But a lot of people get here and actually realize they don't have a great life. They're living in tents. Maybe life was better back home. The Venezuelan government actually has a policy where and they've done this all throughout South America, where they've chartered Venezuelan government planes to bring people back to the country, repatriate. It's called Vuelta a la Patria. It's an official program. They've done it with hundreds, if not thousands of people now. And I had a conversation with the Venezuelan foreign minister in New York a few months ago, and he represents the government that actually controls the borders and the ministries

of Venezuela that we don't recognize because we recognize the shadow government. And he said they want to do that with the United States. They've reached out. They've even tried to work with the UN to start to try and see if there are any Venezuelans who want to go back. And it's because we don't recognize that government that we can't actually have a remedy to this crisis. And it makes you wonder why we don't even have an embassy functioning this crisis. And it makes you wonder why. We don't even have an embassy functioning. In Washington, D.C. right now, there is no Venezuelan embassy. It's empty.

And yet we have millions of people coming here who need services. So it's just an example of how this is an issue that gets weaponized by both parties. But it seems in some ways there could be a solution. Like not destroying countries and then having relations with them. Well, I want to say something that actually was surprising to me that up until not that long ago, actually, Venezuela had U.S. visa on entry. And I was actually surprised to learn that when I went to Venezuela, that I could just walk in Americans. Yes. And Americans are allowed to at the time. Now you require a visa and it's heavily restricted as things have gotten substantially worse.

But I went I think it was 2014. Oh, wow. And I was surprised to learn you walk up, you say I'm an American. They say, welcome to Venezuela. It was that easy. Well, granted, I had to flee the country because they accused me of being CIA. But that's a different story. That's a different story.

But what why is it, though, that the Biden-Harris administration admits, you know, like it's sort of an open door policy for like 30,000 Venezuelans among other countries per month? I don't know. Why is it? Why is it? Well, I mean, it's kind of obvious. I mean, it's Venezuela, Cuba, Nicaragua. So I was looking. Well, it's not just Venezuelans.

No, no, no. It's like a selection of countries that are really going. Oh, well, those are countries that we've like uniquely targeted. Yeah. Regime change over the last year. I can give another example. I'm just curious as to your take, because I've spent a lot of time in Nicaragua as well, where the United States funded very violent riots in 2018 to try to overthrow the government.

We have harsh sanctions on the country. We've seized a lot of their assets. And earlier this year, I went to Nicaragua and I passed through El Salvador. And, you know, I saw firsthand the flight that I was told about in the media of people coming from North Africa and Africa, it seemed mainly filtering through the Salvadoran airport. The Salvadoran government has a policy where they won't let them out, but they'll let them on. So they went next to Nicaragua. I've never been on a full flight from El Salvador to Nicaragua like

that before, but it was all mainly African, North African, even some Chinese migrants. And Nicaragua used to have a policy where they would not let any of those people out of the airport because they were coordinating with us to slow the immigration to slow migration and people wouldn't even bother going there but since we've tried to overthrow their government strangle and and and and strangled their economy they've actually started letting people out they even have a special visa for those people so all they have to do is pay and go on and it's pretty much if you ask people in the street, why is this happening? They're like, yeah, the U.S. tried to mess with us.

Now it's kind of revenge. And so it's the kind of thing that has a very simple solution. If you're the United States and you want to stop that, go to the Nicaraguan government. Say, we're going to release your assets. We're going to end sanctions. We're going to stop trying to meddle in your affairs. Just please go back to this policy of stopping the flow of migration to the U.S. southern border. And yet for some reason that won't happen. It is because I'm left with no other conclusion that they want people coming.

They want it. Yeah, absolutely. Yeah, they definitely want it. I went over the numbers. California's estimated estimated two point seven to three million illegal immigrants living in the state. They are getting extra congressional votes for Republicans to win a presidential election. They need to overcome the Democrats bonus five to six electoral votes. That's insane. And the same thing is true for Republicans in Congress as well. Congress, because Democrats are getting around five to six additional congressional seats based on the amount of illegal immigrants they've allowed in the country who don't get to vote, don't get a say in the matter.

Republicans have to have a majority greater. So this is basically Democrats operating on a political handicap. Republicans have to work extra hard to get extra seats to be able to overcome that advantage that they've they've cheated to give themselves. So they certainly want these people to come in. Yeah, they want it so that they just maintain their power because it's really just a power struggle. It could easily solve. You could even start sending some of these people back, not with massive deportations, voluntarily.

And the other governments might, you know, like I said, the Venezuelan government would happily charter planes to do so because they've done it elsewhere. So why aren't we doing that if it's such an issue for people? It's, you know, the U.S., our government obviously doesn't care about our people here. And that's the only conclusion I can draw from it.

Have you spent time in Venezuela? So I went down there and my view is, while I certainly think the U.S. has policies, let's just say, not aligned with helping Venezuela function properly. I'll keep it as light as I can. The U.S. is absolutely against Venezuela and has policies that harm and damage the economy there. I certainly think that their own policies have done this to themselves to a great degree as well. Well, I would argue that no Venezuelan government official that I've ever talked to denies that there's corruption.

Venezuela is a petro-state ever since... I don't mean corruption. I mean the function of their economy doesn't work. OK, well, let me give an example of someone that I profile in the book. His name is Francisco Rodriguez. He's a Harvard educated economist who worked in the Venezuelan government and left, got into fights with Maduro way back in the early 2000s when Maduro was a legislator. He's been in the U.S. since, working on Wall Street. He's heavily opposed to Chavismo and Maduro's government. But he, because he actually cares about the people of his homeland,

doesn't support this aggressive U.S. policy of attempting to strangle their economy and cause suffering in the country. And he actually conducted a thorough academic study with his Harvard chops and his Wall Street chops. And I can pull up the page somewhere in the book because there's a picture. I actually show a chart that he produced. Venezuela's economy is entirely dependent on oil. And he shows through time series data that every major drop in Venezuelan oil production occurred directly after a U.S. sanction was issued on the country. Oh, yeah.

And he said it is a smoking gun implicating the U.S. and Venezuela's economic downturn. And he said the quote that he gave me is, and of course, because he's in the opposition, he says, of course, the economy was being mismanaged. It was, you know, not it's not perfectly run, but no one, nobody was predicting a major crash in the oil market or in their oil industry or in their economy that they saw. And so without that U.S. intervention, there's just an absolute and he's not the only expert that I turn to in the book. And I agree with that. I just think that the function of their economy doesn't make sense. Which part of it?

Well, this is the thing about it. It's not a socialist economy where everything's controlled by the state. No, but they create fake jobs. 60 for what? For like... So, for instance, the example I often give, and granted it's been a decade since I've been there,

but when I went to buy a cell phone, you can't just walk into a store, meet one person and buy a cell phone. They made me go through a bureaucratic process with like six different steps. And when I asked them why, the answer was the government requires the creation of jobs. Jobs are good for the economy. So they regulate in such a way that jobs must exist, even if the jobs are actually inefficient and bogged down the economy. That being said, I agree with you on the oil thing. The United States wants to be completely in control of who can buy, trade and sell oil. And it's how the U.S. maintains its control over the over the liberal economic order. Americans are in for a rude awakening, mostly urban dwelling liberal Americans. Now that Saudi Arabia has jumped the petrodollar deal.

Exactly. The coming conflict that we will see from this, if Venezuela starts doing deals in one, their economy will. And their economy will skyrocket. Yep. Their economy is going to jump straight up. And rubles.

And rubles. And there's an Iranian supermarket that is building and expanding on Venezuela because of our sanctions. Like who would have thought that Iran would have a base of influence in the United States or on the U.S. continent? I'm sorry, the American continent. We've been talking too much. It's going to be wild. Because of a policy crafted by John Bolton and Elliott Abrams. It's like our policy just doesn't make sense.

The the my view on this whole thing is that the neoliberal, neocon establishment says we have to retain military supremacy over the planet and suppress anyone who opposes the petrodollar because the U.S. doesn't produce anything. We produce culture, you know, and then we export it basically because of the force we have in the occupation power that we have. But for the most part, that's the only thing we actually export, which means by any sane metric, the U.S. economy should not be anywhere near as strong as it is because we don't export enough goods. We import way too much. Our economy is good because we have a bunch of cannons and guns and drones pointed at a bunch of other countries saying trade oil in

dollars or else. Saudi Arabia dumps this deal. And now China is doing big deals in yuan and rubles, especially the conflict with Russia. Venezuela is going to see a rebound of their economy for this reason. The U.S. will struggle to maintain their imports. The simple way to explain what this means for all of you is that that $1,500 MacBook you love, it's going to cost you $10,000 in a few years. Real quick, it's not inflation. It's that the only reason we can import a computer that's manufactured in China is because we control the petrodollar. So that means when we want to import goods, we get them at a premium rate because if anyone wants to buy oil, they've got to buy U.S. dollars first. Our export is literally the control of the currency required to buy energy. Now that

that's breaking, we're going to try to buy a laptop from China and they're going to say, why do we need U.S. dollars? We don't need them anymore. So it's going to cost you $10,000 for our labor. That's why the great idea is to bring U.S. manufacturing home and to be energy independent. And so Trump's plan was the petrodollar system is failing. I'm not saying this is literally what Trump was thinking, but the Trump side represents the liberal economic order has failed. The petrodollar system will fail. sure we're producing, manufacturing and bringing our troops back because we will not be able to sustain this massive military expansion when we don't control the oil system. And the deep state said, no, bomb Russia, bomb Ukraine, bomb Iran. And that's how we're going to maintain the system.

And Venezuela as well. They put absolutely. I mean, John Bolton writes about in his memoir crafting the coup policy, this shadow government that they recognized forcing Trump to do that or pushing Trump to do that. I mean, just one other point to make, because I think this is something that for Americans, I wish that we knew how ridiculous our policy is. So when Trump recognized the shadow government in Venezuela, at that time, Venezuela was providing us with about 7% of our oil imports, canceled those, put sanctions saying we can't buy Venezuelan oil. Okay, that's great for us. Russia's share of the oil market immediately jumped by 7%. I have a graph in my book showing.

I think it's because they're probably buying Venezuelan oil and selling it back to us, which is stupid. But then Biden comes in and puts an embargo on Russian oil. So we lost 10 percent of our imports. Obviously, we don't have the infrastructure in place here to make it up. And just one more point. We hear all about this like communist socialist dictatorship down there. They actually would do business with us. They would have been happy because they started actually opening up their oil market to foreign investment. And because we were the ones boycotting, they went to Russia and China. I have sources on Wall Street who want to do business with the Venezuelan government, but their main obstacle is not the socialist government down there. It's the U.S.

Treasury Department, which is somehow so ideologically obsessed with just overthrowing anyone who resists the liberal order that we are now at a point where you could have maybe made the case that this interventionist foreign policy, even if we're morally opposed to it, was benefiting the United States at some point. That's no longer the case. And when it comes to the dollar and the fact that everybody's ditched it, that wasn't just something that happened because they wanted to.

It's because we weaponized the dollar. And it's just... It was happening under Obama. What can we do to make it stop? I remember in the 2000s, I think Alex Jones was talking about this, that Russia and China were preparing to dump the petrodollar. And he's warning about this some like 20, 15, 20 years ago. And now it's happening.

And so I think in the future, Donald Trump, you know, he's negotiating with Kim Jong-un. I think ultimately Trump is going to, the Trump policy would probably be Venezuelan neutral. Should be. He's going to say, I don't know about these countries. I don't care about them. Their people are not my people. You want to sell me oil? Give me a good deal. I don't care what you do.

That should be the policy. Unfortunately, I do think the fact that now the Venezuelan opposition group that drove this policy under Trump and now pushed Biden to give Venezuelans temporary protected status wants to build a base of political support in Florida that operates like the Miami Cubans or anyone else that says we're one issue voters. You have to be very, very aggressive on. But to me, that's not that's not putting America first, obviously. And if you come here and you're a citizen, you can't really be forcing me. You're so you're how you have a stake here now. Right. You're a part of this country. Well, that's the idea. And we don't have a culture that advocates for immigrants to assimilate into American values and American culture. And what we have most of the time

is we have all of our major institutions saying that America is a bad and terrible place to be and hating us. Yes, that's true. There's another component to the immigration thing that I think is important. It's the need Democrats have for remittances. We ask ourselves,

why was there this big story that we're giving $12 million to Pakistani gender studies to shore up the petrodollar? We need people to want the petrodollar. So if we go to Pakistan and say, hey, we're going to give you $100 million to spend on these programs, we guarantee how they spend it. In their minds, they're thinking, hey, so long as everyone's buying using dollars and dollars are valuable, we're getting free stuff. The purpose is by give what and this is what this is what they're doing by giving U.S. dollars to foreign countries. The foreign countries have an interest in other people using and spending that money. If everybody all at once said U.S. dollars are worthless,

Pakistan would be like, sorry, I can't take your dollars. I'm not going to get me anything. So they accept them. Other countries accept them. Both countries are now being tricked into sharing spending with our money. Remittances do a similar thing by destroying foreign these other countries and Democrats allowing these people to come to the United States when they then make U.S. dollars working here and send them back to their home country. Their home country has an interest in buying and spending with U.S. dollars. They want those remittances. Trump's going to say, I don't care about those countries. I don't care about remittances. I want the I want America as a country to be healthy and

functioning, not the pulsing nucleus of some liberal economic order. And since we talked about earlier, you know, transatlanticism and this weird Trump was so correct when he said NATO's obsolete. I, as an American, don't understand why our main allies are the people that we fought to be independent from. And just one more point on Venezuela. Part of the reason that I developed an interest there is that I as I learned about that country, I saw they're actually very similar to us. They were we had the British. They had the Spanish. You know, they came over, had a slave economy and fought for independence then from the European powers. Actually, their revolutionary

independence leaders fought alongside ours in the U.S. Revolutionary War, laid siege to King George's troops because they saw our fight as the same fight. And I actually think in a world where the U.S. was acting in America first, our main allies would be Mexico, Venezuela, the countries that are powerful in our immediate neighborhood. Venezuela has the largest oil reserves in the world over double what Saudi Arabia has and the largest untapped gold deposits in the world. And our policy has turned that over. You know, we could have just gotten along. It could have been great. And instead, you have the Russians and the Chinese there. And, you know, I'm not one of those people that's like scared of that. But I just think it's like, wow, our policy is so dumb.

It's it's wealth through might. The liberal economic order is basically I can give the most charitable steel man. I'll give I'll give their version of events because they write this on the CFR website. After World War II, there's a genuine fear that another full-scale war of this level would result in the annihilation of mankind. Nuclear weapons had begun to proliferate. And so there had to be a stabilizing force. By creating a variety of international agreements, and that includes financial power and military power.

IMF, all that. All of that stuff. Yep. By issuing loans and creating debt, you keep people locked in and this locked into obedience. And this was the plan to stabilize the planet. Here's how the debt system works. IMF issues loans to these countries and then says, you're in debt to us. Now you have to do as we say.

But hold on. Don't worry. You're the wealthy leader of this country. You're going to live in luxury with your infinity pool and your Bugatti as long as you do what we say. And they say, you got it. Then huge portions of the taxes from this country and the labor goes back to the IMF, keeping them forever entrenched in this international system. The idea they had was this would create a stabilizing force where you have less incentives for war. The reality is they created a gigantic squid like monster with tentacles ripping into these foreign countries, entangling the United States and other European states into this whole quagmire mess they could not maintain that their children don't know how to maintain and is resulting in severe animosity and actually

creating the potential for a grand World War III scenario with Russia. Russia doesn't want to abide by these crackpot rules. And the U.S. – we had a Ukrainian now who's got a warrant for his arrest for blowing up Nord Stream. The U.S. – Vladimir Z. Yeah, Vladimir Z. It was Volodymyr Z. That's right.

Yeah. So the U.S., because of Russia's ability to sell energy at a higher rate through Gazprom into Europe, decides we're going to seize Ukraine. We're going to seize Syria. We're going to destabilize these countries because that's what the liberal economic order must do to maintain the system because we're the good guys, they say. And all it's done has destabilized these regions, often intentionally so that we can justify our military expansion in these countries for the purpose of energy exploration and removing any competition. And it's resulting in a conflict with Russia, potentially China, Venezuela, Iran, which maybe we win. But, you know, the reality is in a nuclear war, there are no winners, just survivors. No. And I think the people who are at the top of this octopus, whatever you want to call it.

Squid monster. Squid monster. Not only do they want to repress U.S. sovereignty and the sovereign rights of Americans, which we've made a lot of progress over the years to gain or fought really hard to gain. They kind of forgot. They just they just they have this doubt of humanity there. They don't understand that, like every single country is also going to eventually fight for their sovereignty. Every group of people around the world is going to push to be free and to have their own state, their own will enacted. And we can't impose it on them.

And we thought forever that, oh, the Iranians, they're Shia and the Saudis, they're Sunni, so they'll never get on the same page. Well, now they both are in bricks on the same page because guess what? Even Saudi Arabia wants to preserve their sovereignty. They're looking at what the U.S. does and is like, wait, what if one day they decide to weaponize the dollar against I mean, already when you had Lindsey Graham and major U.S. officials whining about Prince MBS, it's very clear the agenda there is to one day go and overthrow the Saudi kingdom if it starts to not enact or grow along with the petrodollar, which I think is, yeah. I think it's over. Petrodollar is over. Saudi Arabia said no. Remember when the deal expired, when when when Biden put down the Russia oil embargo disaster and he called the UAE, he called he called MBZ and he called MBS and they didn't answer the phone. And they they begged Saudi Arabia to stop producing oil.

And Saudi Arabia said, we're going to sell more. Yeah, it was in the lead up to the 2020 election. Yep. So it's like we went. No, no, no. This is after Biden was calling and trying to get them to like, hey, come on. We need your help on this one. When was that? This is well after 2020 because this is Russian war. It was 2022.

Yeah. I think it was right before the midterms. Yeah, the midterms. That's what I'm thinking of. What do we do as Americans to stop this because... Vote for Trump. Trump's not a guarantee. I'll say this before we go to super chats, because we'll definitely have a lot more to talk about in the Uncensored show.

You know, I don't care that communism exists in other countries. I literally don't. It's bad. I don't care if Venezuela's socialist or otherwise, I will complain about it and I'll make fun of them. And they can do whatever Venezuela wants to do because they're not America.

And we can secure our borders. We can build up our jobs and get folks on ourselves. But this plague of expansionist, liberal economic order garbage is a detriment to the American people. Let's go to Super Chats. Otherwise, I'll rant for another three hours. What about agriculture? How come that?

We should be agriculturally independent, too. We should totally be agriculturally independent. Like when you go to the grocery store and you're just kind of like, do I have to buy produce from South America? Bagged vegetables and Trader Joe's from China. And you can always tell the garlic, like the ones that don't have the. Black marks. Yeah. Yeah.

Like the ones that don't have the roots on the bottom are imported. Let's go to Super Chats. If you haven't already, would you kindly smash that like button? Subscribe to this channel. Share the show if you like it. And head over to TimCast.com. Click join us to become a member. And as long as you all become members, I won't have to read ads during the show.

I don't think we ever will, to be completely honest. We just get a lot of offers. And I have these people that are like, you do know that most podcasts will do three to five reads during the entire show. And I'm like, if you're listening on the podcast version or after the show wraps, there's automatic ads that play on these platforms. That just is what it is. But like to disrupt the conversation with an ad read is awful. I wouldn't do it. But we don't have to because you guys have become members of Timcast. So if you want to, if you enjoy the format we do, we need you to be members of Timcast.com. But you'll also get to listen to the uncensored show where you as members get to actually call in and join the show. Let's

read your super chats. We got Kyle saying Kam actually call in and join the show. Let's read your super chats. We got Kyle saying Kamala is now supporting a border wall. It'd be smarter for her to endorse Thomas Massey's no tax on tips bill and have it passed before November 5th. Agreed. I have I have stated as such, she should come out and say, OK, Republicans, I support this. Let's do it. And I'll get Biden to sign it. I'll cast a tie breaking vote to make it happen. Give it to Biden. Biden will sign it. Yeah, she should do things now. She's in the White House. Yep. And we should clone Thomas Massey. Yes, if we can. He has children. We have to conscript them into Congress. Councilman Robert Suppenbach says, Tim, what about the possibility that Zuckerberg is just

wanting to be one of the in crowd and sees his users are overwhelmingly in support of the anti-censorship CEOs? Yeah, I mean, it's one of the things I was bringing up the other day. He got a tan. He grew his hair a little bit, a little facial hair. I think he doesn't like being made fun of for being a weird, creepy robot guy. He wants to get past that picture of him surfing where he's like super pasty white. And sorry, Mark, you're just not going to live it down. But also he already has a long legacy of being a leftist. It's it's it's, you know, it's good, good messaging right now. But like, I need at least 10 years of follow through before I really trust you. Agreed, agreed. Him taking the Elon Musk route. I accept. Mark, get on it. Don't fight Elon Musk.

Hang out with him and make a funny video and then do a podcast with him where you can talk about these issues. And if he goes the Elon route and says, we're going to change the rules on Facebook, we're going to stop being so censorious because they're not. He's claiming it, but they're not. They're one of the worst, substantially worse than YouTube, actually. Then I would actually be like, good for you, Mark. I welcome Mark Zuckerberg to see the light and do the right thing, even if it's just superficial.

Yeah, I mean, if it's good for business, that's what he's thinking about at the end of the day. And nobody uses Facebook anymore, right? So maybe he needs to make it hip. Old people. Get a free speech. Older people. It's become what the email chain, the email forwards used to be. Yeah.

Yeah, it is like that. And whenever I go on facebook just to check it's like a bunch of people from my high school seeming to have a great time i just really oblivious to like i use messenger this stuff yeah that's all i use and what i mean whatsapp he's got whatsapp yeah and instagram yeah i use instagram a lot all right wrath of ball says having no policies on our website connell harris is the personification of we have to pass the bill to see what's in it. Yeah, right. It should be a felony to vote on a bill you didn't read.

Yeah, wasn't Lauren Boebert was trying to get some time to actually read the bills and she kept getting struck down. I don't I don't care if it means no bill ever gets passed again. It should be a felony offense if you vote on a bill and you did not read it. Why do they have to be so long? They only hide stuff in it. They're only so big because they just shove everything together instead of having a proper government that debates individual issues. That's what makes you conservative, Tim. You just want government to slow down and not do so much stuff.

Just chill out, government. Well, I don't think that's conservative. I think that's a little conservative. I think that perhaps it's a sad state of affairs if the reality is we should have proper governance becomes a conservative position. I think that is a conservative position. Or like we should return to constitutional rule and maybe have a sovereign country. That's just like I used to think, you know, during the Occupy days, during the Occupy days, I used to think like, what's wrong with our country? We need a revolution because, you know, that's what young people always are programmed to think. And then now I'm just like, wait, all we need is to have a sovereign country and work based on this constitution that we already have that is obviously not in place.

In terms of how our legislature runs. It's a good point. As a young person, they say our government is corrupt. We need to remove it. And then you actually get older and you realize, hold on. The actual founding of this country put in place the mechanisms by which we can maintain and protect it. But we have bad people that are like there's mold. Yeah.

Our country's gotten moldy and we got to scrape the mold off. Yeah, exactly. It's been hijacked. As we said in 1913. Squid monster. And you were saying earlier that all of our institutions and our government, it's all teaching us to hate ourselves and hate our country. And I think that's why. It's because then we forget

that, oh, the Patriot Act and all these things took away these rights that were actually pretty good. Patriot Act is so brutal. Instead of sitting around and being like, our country sucked because of slavery. We should be like, what about these rights that we had that were taken away and that we could actually because of like the department of agriculture and the department of education but you know what i mean in terms of how it's like it's just like for sure our u.s civic education is basically like world war ii and slavery and

civil rights like there's no other there's nothing else i i'll tell you what i think happened i can analogize it for you basically you know in 1913, the United States was exploring a planet where they had gotten a distress beacon for intelligent life. And they encountered an android that said, come with me. I want to show you something. And then they went down and found these big pods. And they said, don't worry. Trust me, it's safe. And when they looked in the pod, a creature jumped onto America's face and laid its eggs in its belly, the Federal Reserve, which erupted from its stomach, killing the host and creating a xenomorph hybrid. Yeah, I think that's the plot of Alien Covenant. And ever since then,

it was lost because once we got involved, if we just hadn't gotten involved in World War One, let the Europeans settle it. That was funny when they criticized Trump for this. At the time, I was relatively ignorant on it, but I talked to Michael Malice and I because it was rather superficial. They said Trump was an idiot for claiming we shouldn't have been involved. And Michael was like, well, but really, why were we involved? And I was like, destabilization of European allies is bad in the long run economically. entering World War I was heavily slammed by the media. And that's where they created the lie that Trump called soldiers suckers and losers for dying. It's not true. It never happened. The suckers and losers are the people that, again, sacrificed a whole generation. And then it's since then just been one generation after another.

You had so many die in World War II. And then, you know,. Forget about people who died. If you know anybody who has family that served in Vietnam or Korea, it's all trickled down. If their parents survived or their father survived, there's so much darkness and trauma that came with all of those wars. It's just something that was imposed on us that's so, it just makes me so mad. All right, we got R.C. Terrell says, looking for Fourth Amendment case lawyers in Louisiana. I was intimidated into an unlawful search after dark while alone on the highway, treated like a criminal and abandoned. Meet up on the TimCast Discord.

Also, Justice League for the win. Let's go. Our Discord is so funny. I love that you would be sourcing your lawyer via Timcast and the Discord. Well, it's a network, man. It's really cool. It used to be church. You'd go to church, and then you'd be talking, and someone would be like, I need a lawyer.

And they'd be like, oh, Bill. Bill works at a firm. And then you'd go to Bill, and he'd be like, oh, yeah, we got a guy who can help you out. Now we don't meet anybody anymore. Well, it's because we lost all our third spaces. That's why you need the Timcast Discord. We need the Cast Brew coffee shop locations where people can gather. I was over by your coffee shop, future coffee shop the other day. It's such a gorgeous building. Permitting. It's a historic

building. So it's like all these restrictions on it are brutal. I can respect it. I don't want to damage a historic building. You know what I mean? But at the same time, like we kind of need the coffee shop. Here's the challenge. In order to utilize the second, so all three floors are one floor because the way the building was designed, even as a door separating it, they consider it to be an open connection. And that means that we have to have an elevator for people who are otherly abled, differently abled. The problem is the elevator we have is one of the first elevators ever created in the United States. Is it an Otis?

I don't know. Interesting. It's just, it's like the second, I don't know, it might be like the second or third elevator ever installed and it goes way back and we don't want to tear it out, but it's not legally code for use. So privately we're allowed to ride in the elevator and it works just fine. For public use, it has to be completely replaced and upgraded.

And you can't do that. We can. Because of the permits? No, no, we can. They would let us rip out a historic artifact in this elevator. I don't want to do that. So I was like, okay, what do we have to do to make the second floor and the third floor have to be a private space?

And they're like, then you have to create a separate. For some reason, even though they're separated by a door, they consider the first floor and the second floor staircase to be one open connection. Therefore, to have a business, we have to have an elevator. So how do we get the elevator repaired to maintain it as a historical elevator while getting up to code? Custom ordering insane. We'd have to like basically custom engineer elevator parts. And it's just like prohibitively expensive. So rocking a hard place on that one. Basically what we have to do is we have to restructure the first floor walls so that we can isolate it as a separate building, basically moving a door or

something. I don't know. It's weird, but you know, whatever. And it's silly and it takes a long time. Let's, uh, but then we'll have a third space, you know, it'd be great. All right. Aaron says, the fact that you don't do ad reads is one of the reasons I became a member. I will always support those who don't ruin content with ad reads. So what we will always do is we do ads are there. They're called pre-rolls. So we've done the shots for my pillow. We in the past have had a series of other sponsors. We're talking to some other ones. I don't mind doing sponsor spots at the beginning of the show before we get started. I think that's fantastic. It helps fund the show and support it. It's the most valuable position for an advertiser. And then we have a real conversation without interruption live. I think that's the way to do it. That being said, the

reality of money in podcasts is that I've been told that we are throwing away $10 million by not doing ad reads during IRL because we have like five available slots that we are refusing to sell. What, like between stories, basically? Yeah, that most podcasts do. They'll, you know, instead of me saying, let's jump to this next story, they would say, we got another story. But before we do, let's talk about this really great product. And it's a minute long ad read. And they're like, if you do those five minutes out of your show, you can make 10 million

more dollars. And I'm just like, yeah, but the show would suck. Yeah. Like it's already. I hate when I'm listening to a podcast and it's broken up with ad reads. I mean, I skip ahead, but there's programmatic ads naturally on all platforms like YouTube has it, too. And so that just is what it is. But if you're watching live, we don't do that because the conversation flows better when I'm like speaking of the Democrats. Look at the story

about Kamala of Tulsi and RFK Jr. And I try to segue between the stories in a way that the conversation flows better. But, you know, so I don't want to do ad reads in the middle of the show. I think it's bad. And it's more like public radio or something where it's like you, the viewer, make this possible. Yeah. Tim Kess is brought to you by the members. I mean, it's good.

Overwhelmingly. We do have sponsors and we do get programmatic ads and all that. But I have no problem doing the pre-ads. So we've got a couple of companies that are really interested in partnering with us. And that just means that at the start of the show, we do a minute ad read and the show starts. Joe Rogan does it that way. I think that's the way to do it. I agree. A lot of these shows, they'll have like five or six in between.

But some of the biggest podcasts in the world. And everyone always says, everyone I've ever talked to in podcast and they're like oh i'm really worried if i do ads i'll lose viewership you never do it never happens and that's why the biggest podcasts in the world do this because they're making 30 million a year by putting the sponsor spots in the show i just i don't know i'd rather do members and then they go yeah but members plus and i'm like i don't want to read ads in the middle of the show all right let's grab some more super chats it just makes me think of a truman show where she's like maybe i should give you some of this hot cocoa like he's like what are you talking

about right now that is so wild tim's like talking about the border and he's like yeah i mean i really feel like everyone's getting kind of hydrated and you know maybe they should get some gatorade like it'd be so weird i have no problem with some people have asked like if we would drink their drink on the show and i'm like if you want to pay for the drinks that we have like i'm fine with that i'm not we won't shout you out during the show but like and their companies are like no no we just want you to like to have our drink to be drinking it is great for us and i'm like sure i guess what doesn't yeah it doesn't really pay that well though yeah there's not really any real placement yeah and i'm like if you're gonna pay for our drinks like we we have to pay for all this stuff for all our guests like that's fine all right here we go matthew bono says i live

two miles outside of downtown cleveland 2020 my neighborhood was littered with biden harris now i've seen all of one sign for harris waltz oh wow wow that's interesting it's not the same ticket and i think the idea that you know i think there are a lot of Democrats who feel ripped off. They might ultimately cast the rope for Harris, but they did not initially get behind the Harris camp, the Harris walls campaign. Here's a good one. Ginger Jack says, hey, Northern Virginia is debt is a death and Internet database economy. Seventy percent of the world's internet traffic passes through Nova. You can't toss a rock in Nova without hitting a Fed in a data center.

And I believe that one for sure. Interesting. Yeah, this is- I didn't know that. They want that to be the place because that's where they spy on everybody. All right, and of course, that's why I remember when Bezos was making the big competition

about where in the country he was gonna go open the big Amazon center as if Crystal City in Virginia wasn't going to win. Cause it's right there by the Pentagon. But I will, I will say Reston is, it's so beautiful. It's so fun.

Uh, Barcelona tapas in Reston. You've been there. Yeah. I love Reston. Oh, okay. Great.

Have you been to Barcelona though? Yeah. The restaurant. Yeah. Oh, wow. It's my favorite. It's like one of my favorites.

It's absolutely fantastic. Very good food. And, uh, I will give them a shout out all the time because they are very nice to us and people who work there are fans of the show. And every time we've gone there,

not every time, but several times I've gone there, people, they walk by and they're like, hey, just want to let you know I'm a big fan. You probably don't hear that out here. And I'm like, dude, actually, the people who work here are fans. I'm actually surprised to see it.

Yeah, and we love that place. You should go to the, there's a good Peruvian place as well. Oh. Oh, I'll check that one out. I like Peruvian food. But yeah, Barcelona's so good. They just do the charcuterie boards

and the ham and the goat cheese. Yeah, I love the tapas because you get to try everything. Yeah. And the olive oil just dumped all over everything. And the bone marrow. That's one of my favorite places. And I really do like that place. They're very nice to us. So shout out to Barcelona. And that's the name of the restaurant, not the place.

It's in Reston, Virginia. All right, let's go. Richard Devine says, check out Tom McDonald's new song, Everyone Needs Me. Please get him. Also, have you seen all the stuff Crowder is doing to be ready for the election? I've seen a bit of it. I know that he's basically going ham. Isn't he doing like cameras and poll watchers or something? I don't know. I've seen a bit of it. I know that he's basically going ham. Isn't he doing like cameras

and poll watchers or something? I don't know. I haven't checked that out myself, in fact. Shout out to Steven Crowder. Yeah, I don't know what he's doing. Let's go. Nick says California's 31st, what is this?

Assistant direct district? Ass district? I don't know what, I'm assuming that means assistant. Joaquin Arambula is proposing AB 805 in which the states seize sewers and appoints the oversight company. What? It will also allow additional fees on sewage. He must be hungry.

Wow. So you're saying that they want to have a company. Look, I know that Chicago sold the rights to their parking to a private corporation. Oh, my goodness. And then when you get a ticket, they would just say, oh, we're not responsible for that their parking to a private corporation. Oh my goodness. And then when you get a ticket, they would just say, oh, we're not responsible for that. That's a private company.

So what? Wait, who? Wait, what do you mean? Who says they're not responsible? The city. Oh. The city would be like- And you have no way to contest it?

It creates this convoluted system where a private company determines whether or not you're in violation of their parking, but then the city enforces it. That's freaky. So if you're disputing it, it's like a private dispute, but enforced by the're in violation of their parking, but then the city enforces it. That's freaky. So if you're disputing it, it's like a private dispute, but enforced by the state. I don't like that. That's fascism.

Shouldn't be allowed. Well, it seems like oligarchy a little bit, doesn't it? I don't know if it's still that way because I haven't been in Chicago in a very, very long time. I left 16 years ago, was it? Man, it's been a long time. 16, no, it was, I think, yeah, 16 years ago, was it? Man, it's been a long time. 16, no, it was, I think, yeah, 16 years ago. I actually was recently in Chicago, but only just for one night.

No, 15 years ago. And I went to the Art Institute after all the planes stopped working in Milwaukee. It was a great museum. Really exceptional. Chicago's got some of the best food. Yeah. I had good dinner, and I had a good museum day. Gibson's. I didn't do that. I was just right by the museum.

But it was lovely. Gibson's is one of the best steakhouses ever, but it's very expensive. But they have, I don't know if they still do, but they had a place called Hot Dogs that was very famous. That doesn't exist anymore. And it was exotic hot dogs. So they had just, they had foie gras hot dogs. I don't know, I never had that one.

I am. They had snake. Excessive's they had snake excessive they had elk alligator or whatever i've had elk and then there's a kuma's corner was right there as well and that's also a famous place that's very different from like gray's papaya where it's literally just a hot dog it's kind of crazy you know growing up in chicago we always wondered why chicago didn't have culture, why all the music and sports and celebrities were East Coast, West Coast. But I didn't really think about it until, you know, I was in my 20s that Chicago's notorious for its food. It's culinary universities and things like that, plus the taste of Chicago. Chicago's culture is food culture. That's like Philly. Philly's culture is very food culture. And giardiniera doesn't exist outside of Chicago.

And I nearly had a heart attack when I first found that out. Really? It exists at Potbelly. Yeah, they call it hot peppers. When I went to New York and I went to a bodega and I was like, can I get a roast beef sub with Giardiniera? And the guy was like, what? And I was like, roast beef sub with Giardiniera.

And he was like, kid. And he was like, what do you want? What do you want? He's a point to it, point to it. And I pointed to the hero role. And I said, this, do you want? What do you want? He's like, point to it, point to it. And I pointed to the hero role. And I said, this, roast beef, giardiniera. And he goes, okay, you want roast beef hero? I don't know

what giardiniera, what did you call it? I don't know what that is. And I was like, I don't know what it is. He doesn't love some spicy cauliflower. It's like lots of vegetables. Cauliflower, carrots, celery and jalapenos and oil. So good. That sounds good. Yeah. And I'm like, I don and jalapenos in oil. So good. That sounds good. Yeah. And I'm like, I don't know what to tell you.

Because if you don't know what it is, what do I tell you? I was like, it's a mix of pickled vegetables, I guess, and oil. Well, we don't have that. I'm like, okay. In New York, you'd kind of call that like, what? I mean, there's Chinese pickled vegetables. And then there's like antipasto. They call it hot peppers at Potbelly's.

So because Potbelly's popped up everywhere, you can go there and buy the jars, and that's how you get it. So I actually had to special order a bunch of jars from Chicago so we could have it here. And actually, we haven't brought it back over, so we need to get it. But it's great. Giardiniera pizza is my favorite. All right, let's grab some more instead of talking about food. Let's go. NYBSFP says, RFK's response to Tucker on January 6th should alarm everyone.

That did not sound like an ally. What did he say? I didn't hear. Yeah. Let's look it up. No? I don't know. Maybe we'll pull it up on the members only.

I don't know. He probably was like, maybe said something about democracy being at stake. I can imagine that. All right. Let's grab some more super jets. Michael Villafana says, you should have a selective service, a selective service number to vote.

Agreed. I don't know if that's the absolute solution, but my proposal is that if you want to vote in this country, you have to sign up for selective service. I think that solves all the problems. There's a conscription. Yep. So basically the way it works is this. It's quite simple. A lot of people said, no, I don't want to get drafted.

No, no, no, no, no, no. The only people who can vote are the only people who can be drafted. That means they'll always vote against it. Right. Yeah, that makes sense. We're going to go to war and you're going to do it. Do you want to vote? No, no war.

Not interested. Good. But we don't get to vote on war. They just do it. Well, we don't declare war either. And we don't use Apple for war either anyway since Iraq and Afghanistan. We't declare war. And we don't use sort of there and spend. We don't use money for war either. Anyway, since Iraq and Afghanistan, we use hybrid war. We use sanctions, drones, mercenaries, mercenaries. Yeah.

Yeah. PMC. Look at you. Look at Ukraine. This this whole war is other people. Volunteers. That's the most psychotic thing. Watching these videos of these people.

These people are despicable scumbags and they've got big YouTube channels and they're like, here's us operating in Ukraine and here's what we are doing. And I'm like, you're an enemy of this country and you're a scumbag. But you know what? Those poor Ukrainians. I think Ukraine is an enemy of the United States. It wasn't always the case. The U.S. basically was involved in supplanting what the country actually was. But it was a deeply corrupt country to begin with.

Now, Zelensky has no interest in the United States. He's completely self-interested. The United States is using Ukraine as a proxy for their war. Volunteers are fighting. Of course, Russia doesn't believe this. But Ukraine is causing all of these problems, working with the deep state, working with the and the British. It's always the absolutely. It's always MI6. So I consider Ukraine an enemy of this of these United States.

They are not us. They are not our allies. We have no business being involved there. They invaded Russia. Russia blames us. And now we're on the hook for a nuclear war because Ukraine scumbaggery. Now, don't get me wrong. I know the United States is pressuring all of this and implementing all of this with their stupid policies over gas and energy. But Ukraine takes responsibility. There, you know,

it is what it is. Let's grab some more superchats. All right. Jerry, oh, here, I'll read Jerry next. Jason Hutchinson says, war is an extrajudicial death sentence.

War crimes is a trope. War is the crime. Ah. Well, it depends. You can defend yourself. That's always allowed. Yeah. If we got invaded. Yeah. I'd be standing up and saying, where do you need me? Right. If a bunch of boats landed on the shores of, you know, just out the D.C. and then there was an emergency call to action and some function of government said, everyone, we need your help. We are being attacked. I'd say, what can I do? What can I do best? But that's not what this is. The United States sends our brave men and women who are willing to fight those fights to foreign countries.

For what? To enforce the petrodollar? It's just pathetic. That's what 9-11 was supposed to be, right? It got a lot of brave young men and women to run full speed to their to their recruiting office because they wanted to help this country because we were attacked. Evil man. And not the people I'm talking about. I don't mind the idea, but it just means that corrupt powers control the civil service. And if you have a conscription, you'll always get people like George W. Bush or whoever who's elite and they can draft, dodge. Yeah, I think that there's a lot of functions we should implement that would put an end to a lot of the foreign conflict. But I think there's actually a really simple thing we can do that doesn't restrict anybody.

And that's that ballots are all blank. Where you have to put it down. You have to write it in. That's how it used to be. Yeah, that's. I don't know when they changed it. it's like you're an edu you have to be an educated voter right and so um during the civil war people like to say oh do you know that abraham lincoln wasn't on the ballot uh the democrats kept him off the ballot because they didn't want him on no there was no ballot at the time the way the way people voted was you'd go in and you'd write down who you want and you put it in a box.

Voting was the parties would print out papers showing all their candidates and they would give them people say, hey, use this. Write your name on it. Sign it. And these are the names you want to vote for or something to that effect. So it was private ballots. Then at some point we have now public government ballots, which restrict the amount of people who can appear on it. And then we put D and R next to their names. No, no, no, no, no.

Everybody gets a universal mail-in vote. Everybody can vote. Don't know, don't care, but they're all blank. If you don't know who you're voting for, you ain't voting. And that solves a lot of the problems. I'd love to see who ends up for fun, like written in. Oh, it's going to be some libertarian. The winner will always be an ideological populist.

And that's why they won't let that happen. Would we have had President Ron Paul that way? I think we probably would have. The Ron Paul revolution in 2008 was massively viral. And if you didn't know who you were voting for, Ron Paul likely would have won. And his name is easy to spell. His name is easy to spell. That's what I think the Democrats would do. They would just start picking people with really simple names. It would be like Guy Wynn. And they'd be like, easy to remember. How many Joe Smiths would they field? Yep. All right. We're going to go to the Members Only show. So smash the like button, subscribe to this channel and share the show if you do like it. Head over to TimCast.com. Click

join us to become a member because that Members Only show is coming up in about one minute. You don't want to miss it. You can follow the show at TimCast IRL. can follow me personally at Timcast on X and Instagram. Anya, do you want to shout anything out? No, just thank you guys for being here. Check out my book, Corporate Coup, if you would like to hear more about all the things we were talking about. It's not just about Venezuela. I'm very focused on the petrodollar, the changing world, and how the U.S. can actually fit into it, because that's what I would like as an American. Where can they find you on X?

At Anya Parampil. Yeah. All right. Right on. And the Gray Zone, of course. Yes. You've probably heard my husband, Max Blumenthal, colleague Aaron Maté. Lots of Gray Zone friends have been on this show.

Right on. Well, it's been fun hanging out. We've got the member show coming up, so don't miss it. Libby? I'd like to shout out the Postmillennial, thepostmillennial.com, humanevents.com. I'm on Twitter at Libby Emmons, and you can check out my newsletter. What is it? It's thepostmillennial.com slash Libby.

It's just women who work for different publications tonight. I'm going to shout out scnr.com. That's Scanner News. Follow all of our work at TimCastNews on the internet if you want to follow me personally. I'm HannahClaire.b on Instagram. I'm HannahClaireB on Twitter. Thanks for everything you guys do. Have a good night. We'll see you all over at TimCast.com in about one minute. Thanks for hanging out. you