Timcast IRL - Timcast IRL #1119 SHOCK Report PROVES Trump Right, 15,000 Migrant MURDERERS AT LARGE w/Riley Moore

Episode Date: September 28, 2024

Tim, Libby, & Josie are joined by Riley Moore to discuss DHS revealing there are over 600k illegal immigrants with criminal records at large, Allan Lichtman & Nate Silver sparring on X over their predictions for the 2024 election, and Israel attacking Beirut with strikes targeting the leader of Hezbollah. Hosts:  Tim @Timcast (everywhere)  Libby @LibbyEmmons (X) Guests: Riley Moore @RileyMooreWV (X) Josie @TRHLOfficial (X) Clint @LibertyLockPod (X) Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

It's a crazy new report. 15,000 killers, 20,000 sexual assault convicts, 60,000 robbers are among the illegal immigrants that were released into this country and are currently at large, proving Donald Trump was right. We knew he was right the whole time because we pay attention to the news, but the media is acting like it's not true. And now we've got the horrifying report, which has been going viral all day, just about all of the at-large criminals, serious criminals. And it's no surprise that when you hear about Trende Aragua and these other gangs and the crime that is happening in various cities, it's no surprise the media is trying to lie about it. We've got another story that the National Crime Victimization Survey says, guess what? Crime is way up. So when they go

and ask people about crime, yeah, crime's up. The FBI report says crime's actually down, technically, because no one's reporting their crimes to us anymore. So we'll break all that down. We got big news about, you know, Israel reportedly killing the leader of Hezbollah. You know, I imagine most people don't care as much about foreign policy because it's less likely to affect you. But considering we're looking at World War III over here and it's right before an election, this may actually be extremely important. So we'll talk about that. And then I'm really excited for this one because Nate Silver and Alan Lichtman are going at it on X. Alan Lichtman is the predicted professor. He's the guy, he's got the keys to the White House. He can predict who's going to win. He claims to have gotten them all right, except for Gore v. Bush. Now he's claiming Harris will win. Nate Silver's also given Harris a 58 percent chance to win.

But Nate Silver's pointing out that Alan Lichtman's prediction model, the keys, it favors Donald Trump. Trump should be winning based on his model. But Lichtman is like, no, I'm right. You're wrong. So we'll we'll talk about that, my friends. But before we get started, check it out. The new song Coming Coming Home, featuring Phil Labonte, is out now. And definitely go to TimCastMusic on YouTube. Check out the song. There's a link in the description below. You need iTunes.

We're playing this one safe, okay? So here's what we're working on, right? So if you go to GetComingHome.com, you need to have iTunes so you can buy the song on iTunes. Here's what happens the last time we release a song. We rely on streams. We rely on, you know, you guys buying the song. And then we get told it doesn't count and they're not going to put our songs on the charts. Fine.

They want to play games. Fine. Here's how they say it has to work. Okay, you go to iTunes. You buy the song, 99 cents. And if everybody who listens to this show buys that song, we will be the biggest song ever. And the song is about the destruction of our cities, the failure of our leaders, and what is being left behind for our veterans and our first responders. It's not overt. We don't

literally sing like, oh, look what they're doing. We're just singing about how we feel that we're seeing the decay in our cities. So definitely check out the song at GetComingHome.com. Don't forget to go to TimCast.com. Click Join Us. Become a member. Support our work directly. It's a great Friday night. Smash that Like button.

Subscribe to this channel. We've got a massive panel tonight. Joining us to talk about this and so much more is Riley Moore. Tim, thanks for having me on. Riley Moore, State Treasurer, West Virginia. Also Republican nominee for Congress in West Virginia. And quick shout out to Jay over at True Performance Fitness. He's a big listener. He loves this show, watches it every night. So I just want to say, Jay, what's up, dude?

Right on. And I think you're the only member. Well, you're about to be a member of Congress. I think it's a foregone conclusion. I think you're probably the only member who can do a kickflip. I guarantee I'm the only member. So right now I am the number one ranked skateboarder state treasurer in West Virginia. I'm looking forward to being number one ranked congressional member in skateboarding. Unless somebody really good shows up, then I'm going to be pretty bummed. I think maybe in 10 years or so we're going to start seeing more members of Congress who skate. It's just a generational thing.

Yeah, I think you're right about that. Cool. We have that video where you landed a kickflip to fakie on the bank. Yeah. Yeah, yeah. We got Clint hanging out. Yo. Liberty Lockdown is the show.

I also do the Best Political Show with Luke Radowski, former co-host of This Fine Program. And by the way, I can confirm, I saw him doing kickflips when I got in here. He ain't lying. All right. This guy's got swag. Thanks. What else? I do Tower Gang. Don't watch that. We got Josie in the building too. Hi, I'm Josie. I'm the redheaded libertarian on X. I do outside media work here at TimCast.com. And I also host a show on X called Spaces with Josie, where I interview some of the coolest people on the planet. I just had Rob Schneider on my show this week. Wow. Libby's hanging out. I'm Libby Emmons. I'm hanging out. I'm had Rob Schneider on my show this week. Wow. Libby's hanging out.

I'm Libby Emmons. I'm hanging out. I'm with the Postmillennial and Human Events. Glad to be here, everyone. Here we go. Let's jump into the news from The Washington Times. This is a headline. I tell you, this is a headline.

15,000 killers, 20,000 sexual assault convicts, 60,000 robbers among illegal immigrants at large. The Department of Homeland Security knows of at least 660,000 illegal immigrants at large. The Department of Homeland Security knows of at least 660,000 illegal immigrants at large in the U.S. with criminal records, including, as they say, why is the number different in the headline? It says 13,000 convicted of killers, nearly 16,000 convicted of sexual assault, and 56,000 involved in dangerous drugs. Thousands of other migrants have been charged but not yet convicted of those and other crimes. I see.

They are part of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement's non-detained docket. ICE provided the data to Congress and the House Homeland Security Committee released it Friday, just as Vice President Kamala Harris was to land in Arizona for her first visit to the border in more than three years. It may be shocking to hear the Biden-Harris administration is actively releasing tens of thousands of criminal illegal aliens into our communities. But their own numbers conclusively prove this to be the case, said Rep. Mark Green, committee chairman. On social media, former President Donald Trump said the new data should force Ms. Harris to cancel her border appearance. Kamala should immediately cancel her news conference because it was just revealed 13,000 convicted murderers entered our country during her three and a half years as borders are. That's crazy.

These numbers are absolutely nuts, but all they're doing is quantifying what we already knew. I think the really funny thing about it, though, is how they – I don't know how you look at this and you would agree that crime is down. No, the fact that there are criminal aliens in this country at all is inherent that there are criminals in this country. And being here is illegal. Just the act of being here is illegal. I'm appreciating that talking point, getting more airtime. I think I saw Nancy Mace and someone else, some other member of Congress saying the first thing they did was break the law. They're all criminals. Right.

They've all committed a criminal act. Yeah. And every state now is a border state, including West Virginia, just not far from this studio that we are at in the Eastern panhandle of West Virginia, an illegal immigrant from Venezuela this year murdered a woman, turns out was also a convicted murderer in Venezuela, and then set her on fire. Oh my goodness. Wow. That happened here. That's horrifying. So that is, it's happening everywhere. It's happening everywhere. Every state is a border state. What I find really interesting about these numbers is that these are people who were already convicted of crimes. It's not just that they are suspected of crimes or that they did these crimes when they

came here necessarily. These are people who were convicted in their own countries and then came here. My question is, how do they know this? And if they did know this, why were they not immediately deported? Dude, these people are coming in and CBP is like, hold on there a minute. Are you a murderer, rapist, robber? I'm a murderer. OK. And right this way, sir. Come on in. Well, one thing that happens, though, is that part of the questions that the Border Patrol asks are, are you afraid to go home? Do you fear for your life in your own country? And if you answer yes to those questions that you're afraid for your life in your own country, they say, OK, we can mark you down as an asylum seeker.

Come on in. And because they removed the wait in Mexico policy, everyone is just waiting here. But what's interesting too, is if you talk to immigration attorneys, most people who apply for asylum are not actually eligible for it. And they are not approved for their asylum cases. But the cases happen so many years down the road, that it's very difficult to get them out. And we have a DHS secretary who does not believe in the policy of deportation, even for one person. Well, if there's any list of people that ought to be deported, it'd probably be the 15,000 killers, 20,000 sexual assault convicts, and 60,000 robbers. At this point, you have to assume

this is Cloward Piven, that they are in fact trying to overthrow the system. I'm trying to be nice. And I say, on the surface, you look at the jobs report, you look at the mass spending. How are they going to deal with the mass spending for, you know, Ukraine and Israel and Taiwan? Right. They got to bring in as many workers as possible and just flood the system because that's you got to get the jobs numbers up, right? That's me being nice.

When I see reports like this, I'm like, these people aren't working. Like this, this does not, you cannot explain. If their real goal was simply, we got to get more workers, fast track work visas and all of these things, they wouldn't be bringing in murderers and rapists. They'd say, no, no, no, you can leave,

but the people who are going to go, you know, get jobs can stay. They're not. They're letting them all in. Well, you bring up the funding for Taiwan, Ukraine and Israel. And of course, that was a huge part of the border bill that was rejected in June. It was the majority of funding for all of these foreign things. And there was like way less funding for the border and the funding that there was for

the border. And I'm glad that, you know, you're going to be our congressman because I think you'll fight against this kind of stuff. Well, thank you. Yeah. Well, the first thing Riley does when he gets in is he just funds Israel like a hundred billion dollars. But the thing is that in this in this bill, the the funding that was for the border was for more judges and for more agents so that they could process people into the country faster. It wasn't for border faster. It wasn't for border security. It wasn't to prevent illegal immigration. It wasn't to make sure that the

people who get away and aren't even quantified get deported and get sent home. It wasn't to find the, what, like 300,000 missing children. It wasn't to actually perform proper vetting on the sponsors who are bringing people in. It wasn't for any of proper vetting on the sponsors who are bringing people in. It wasn't for any of those things. It was to allow for more people to come in. And it still facilitated what, like 5,000 some people a day, 1.8 million, which is already far more than Trump had in 2021. It was 480,000. Yes. Yeah. And let's not forget there have been, and to their own admission, so who knows what the real number is, hundreds of people on the terror watch list that have made it into this country. Terrorists. Terrorists that they will admit to us that have come into the country. God knows what the actual number is. I do think the current polling, though, is also interesting, too, because where do most of these illegal immigrants go? They go to communities where there's already people from

Venezuela or whatever country they're coming from. More than half of the Hispanic population in the United States are saying they're going to vote for Trump, right? Because it's making their neighborhoods more dangerous. They don't want this nobody wants this wasn't it matt gates that just said i think it was yesterday or two days ago that there's uh shoulder fired missile launchers that are being what you didn't hear about this no yeah that that's that's according to matt gates they said they came across the border there's those teams that are that are trying to take out trump they in fact have uh shoulder fired missiles to try and take out trump force one or whatever they call it i have no idea if this is true this

is according to matt gates though so it's like he's pretty reliable i'll tell you the iranians that's that's the claim i i find it hard to believe that it's in fact happening from the iranians without there being some sort of permission like like why would you allow these people into the country if you're not also working in tandem with the people that are doing this it it doesn't really add up to me they arrested the the Pakistani guy yeah but they didn't arrest the people with the I mean they know that there's a bunch of strike teams with shoulder fire missiles but they don't have them how did you get those missiles over the border I mean it's not like a suitcase where you're like oh here's my missile like how how did they get across the border I mean have it's not like a suitcase where you're like, oh, here's my missile. Like, how did they get across the border?

I mean, have you guys ever been to Tijuana? Oh, yeah, I've been to Tijuana. Yeah, and you can walk. That's where I pick up all my shoulder fire missiles. Yeah, you can, like, the border. You can walk across. That's true. You can swim.

Yeah. Apparently, there are people, because I'm hanging out in Tijuana, and I'm on the beach, and you walk to the fence, and there's a big hole in it. You can literally just walk through the hole. And then there's nothing on the other side. I guess it is pretty porous. I mean, it's literally a gigantic hole in the fence that I was like, I could, you know, a fat person couldn't squeeze through it, but I could. And then if you look way down, there was one CBP guy just standing there.

And I'm like, I guess if you climb through, he sees you. But what they do is they have those things that you go underwater with. You ever see them? You like hold it and then you like press, you pull the trigger and then it's got jets

and it pulls you. And they're like fun. I don't know. But they have, they'll put on scuba gear and they'll go underwater. They go not that far up in Tijuana

and they just go underwater and they go, I don't know, you know, 500 feet into the U.S. and then pop up and walk right in. That just sounds amazing. Like lit them in the country if they went through all that trouble.

Yeah. But, you know, I was when I was down there, I was talking to a guy. I had an Uber and I was kind of kind of scary. Really? We're in this Uber and the guy is like he's like, oh, you are from America. And I'm like, yeah. And he's like, I used to live in America. I got I had to leave.

And he basically said that he lived in like San Fran for a decade illegally. He was an illegal immigrant working in a legal job. And then he had to come down because his mom got sick or something. So when he tried to come back, he went with the cartels who put up a 40 foot ladder and he climbed the fence. And then when CBP came, they pulled it from him and he fell down and broke his legs. And he was just like, I'm going to go back. And I'm like i'm like geez dude that's like it's it's so messed up i don't know like the sentiment they have there is like whatever it takes to get into the united states well that's the thing about our natural rights everything in the bill of rights applies to anybody with feet on our soil so they get it they get in two feet on the soil and then

they're entitled to have a you know to to have to the Fifth Amendment, to be entitled to the Sixth Amendment, to be entitled to the First Amendment. So that's what's so important about them getting in here. And they get in here, and they get processed, and then they can go missing, and they never show up for their trial four years later. Joe Biden's dismissing them. It's like his move for mass amnesty. Yes.

They keep they keep sort of hinting at. And if Kamala gets into office, I'm sure that it's going to be an executive order of mass amnesty or something. So so what? So Congress is in charge for the Constitution. Congress is in charge of the naturalization process. And but they need to have a uniform naturalization process for everybody. They can't just say, oh, the southern border goers can be just be get, you know, amnesty and everybody else has to go through a process. It has to be one general thing. So what they're trying to do is in order to completely change the fabric of our country,

they want to put these immigrants into these little towns in Ohio and in Pennsylvania and and, you know, just install these immigrants into those places. And what that does, eventually, if they're naturalized, they go into the census and the census is what determines the electoral college. So they're like, all right, well, these blue states are going to have more electors. And this is a very long game. And this is what they're doing. That's why that border bill that they tried to push through would have codified everything happening now and offered amnesty to all these people.

That's what Elon Musk has been warning about for about a year now. So Josie just hit on something. Just to put a finer point on it, the apportionment of congressional districts is not made up of citizens. It is made up of residents, people, just people there, right? So it could be, you know, if you have, just like you said, massive amounts of illegal immigrants living in a, there are some congressional districts where maybe half of them can't vote, but you still get a congressional district out of it. That's crazy. Something also interesting with this, I actually, I interviewed Chip Roy on my show and he, and we were talking about this because he had come up with the SAFE Act. And the SAFE Act was essentially to not let illegal immigrants vote.

So we were talking about that. And I had told him and the Constitution and under every amendment added to the Constitution about voting, which are 15, 19, 24 and 26. It all says it is the right of citizens. And then they go on and they want to kind of amend the Constitution, make the right of residents so this is this is very important to look at this is why they kept um they were changing the language several years ago and i think they kind of dropped the campaign but they start you know when they're saying don't call them illegal immigrants call them migrants they started calling them undocumented citizens this was a big google search the phrase undocumented citizen that's sneaky. Yeah,

because if you change the language, you change the laws. And so that's why they're saying woman means whatever you want it to mean, because then it changes all of the laws underneath. Well, that's a big thing, too. Like I just saw in The Intercept the other day, and I posted about this. They now don't want you to say migrant. They didn't say exactly what you don't what they don't want you to say. But for at first, exactly what they don't want you to say. But at first they said, don't say illegal alien, because that's dehumanizing. No one is an alien. And then they said, say illegal immigrant instead. And then they said saying illegal immigrant, that's- No one is illegal. That's villainizing. People aren't illegal. Oh my goodness. So now you say migrant,

and now they don't want you to say migrant anymore. And the next thing is just going to be mass amnesty for everybody. Everybody in the world is a citizen of the United States and Americans get no rights. Yeah. And look, the word alien we've been using since the beginning of this country, the Alien and Sedition Act. Yes. It's still on every federal piece of paper. Right. Are you an alien? Yeah. Right. Yeah. I mean, so that's... They change the law when they stop using the word. Yep.

Yeah. Just like they entirely changed Title IX and all of the civil rights legislation when they changed the word woman and when they conflated biological sex with gender identity, which totally changes the entire definition of those terms. I think we got to come up with words. You know, what are we doing over here? They're saying newcomer. They keep changing language in this weird way.

We got to go the other direction. What can we, what's the word? I don't want to be mean, but we want to be descriptive. You know? I just call the illegals criminal aliens. That's what they are. Yeah. Criminals and they're aliens.

And I just put the two words together. I suppose that's good. Well, that's legally what it's called. That's what they are. Criminals and they're aliens and I just put the two words together. I suppose that's good. Well, that's legally what it's called. That's what they are. A criminal alien is an individual who came to the country illegally. I've never been a big fan of illegal immigrant and I'm like, the immigrant himself is illegal? He's contraband? Nah.

I don't like it because it takes up too much space in a headline. It makes them sound it's like a lot of real headline. It makes them sound like it takes up a lot. It's like a lot of real estate. It makes them sound based. But I say this to the progressives and they're like, don't say illegal immigrant. I'm like, I agree. I say criminal alien.

Yes, me too. And to Chip Roy's bill there, which is very important. They're like, oh, that's already illegal. They can't vote in elections. Don't forget, in New York City, they do allow people who are not here legally in this country, who are non-U.S. citizens. I think that got struck down. It did get struck down, but they're going to try again. And they're trying again in other municipalities across the country as well.

But they did pass it. Yeah, and it got struck down at the high court. But they want them to vote in local elections, local school board elections, city council elections, anything that affects them directly. But then we see like what happened in Oregon, where because of the motor voter laws, they registered, you know, I think 1300 or something. Maybe it's more than that. People who are not actually eligible to vote, they just automatically defaulted to you have a U.S. passport and you're eligible to vote. I can tell youed to you have a U.S. passport and you're

eligible to vote. I can tell you why the SAVE Act is so important. It's because in the Constitution or the Bill of Rights, you have the Ninth and the Tenth Amendments. And that says anything that we didn't write down in the articles, it goes to the states or to the individuals. And the founders left voting to each state. That was important to them that how you want to vote in your state is how it's going to be. We're not going to do a uniform thing for this. And that's why there's no voting aside from the electoral college process written into the Constitution. So they started regulating it. They did first with the 15th Amendment with the slaves. And then they're like, all right, well,

women, we shouldn't discriminate against them either. And they kind of kept elaborating. They gave federal power of a sense to the federal government when it came to regulating elections. Now, having so so under the Ninth Amendment, early on before any of this, there were states that were having freed slaves vote in their election, there were states that were having women vote in their elections, Colorado and Wyoming, I believe. So, they're at a point where the states are like, well, it is our right, you know, because we agree with states' rights when we want to. It is our right.

We can hold these elections. If we want to have illegals vote in our elections, then hey, we can do that. And you know, they technically can under the founders, but there is precedent now for the federal government to regulate states when it comes to something huge like that. And as they kind of already did with putting citizens in each of the voting amendments. I'm about as strong a states rights guy as you can find, but I still think

that if it's a federal election, there probably has to be federal guidelines for who's allowed to vote. Because otherwise it's total madness. But in the end of the day, what all of this is doing, whether it's California giving them driver's license, healthcare or whatever else, it's the erosion of what it means to be a citizen. Literally, what can you do as a citizen

that a resident cannot? That list grows smaller and smaller and smaller sometimes constantly i mean like shrinking a legal resident of this country is paying the same taxes you just can't vote oh a legal resident right right right yeah no no if you're here illegally it's like you a lot of a lot of you know the left always says oh legal immigrants they pay their taxes and like when they buy stuff but not gonna file because they're gonna get deported what do you mean exactly yeah so essentially the rights that you have the difference in between somebody who's a resident here and a citizen is continually shrinking which

i mean erodes literally kind of the sanctity of citizenship in a country which it comes with rights but also comes with responsibilities like you just talked about, like taxes, right? Kind of civic duty, some things that are supposed to come along with rights. It's rights and responsibilities. But, you know, those things are kind of set aside with all these giveaways that were – and you saw in California here recently they're going to have a $150,000 giveaway. It got vetoed, but $150,000 giveaway on first-time homebuyers for people who are here illegally. It's like, okay, if they came out and they said permanent residents who are non-citizens were going to give you a house, I'd still be like, oh, wow, that's crazy. What about citizens?

No, it's illegal immigrants. Yes. And what did – was it Kamala or was it Pelosi? I think it was Pelosi. And she's like, well, people want the American dream. Yeah. It's like, yeah, people who were born here. Well, and keep in mind too, I spent the first 35 years of my life in California. Over half of my friends that I grew up with have never bought a house because in California,

it is so cost prohibitive. They just simply can't do it. Well, I had to leave the state. I had to leave my home to buy a house. Well, exactly. I had to go find a new home. And that's what most people born in California end up doing that. But my point is, if you're going to turn around as you have all of the domestic-born population fleeing to cheaper pastures, and then you're going to offer a $150,000 forgivable loan or whatever you want to classify it as to allow illegal immigrants to purchase homes, that's unbelievably unjust. I figured it out.

All Gen Z has to do is crumple up their ID, throw it away, go to the border and be like, I'm here illegally. I'd like a house. And then they'll be like, right away, sir. Yeah, it's literally, you get a house, healthcare, driver's license. Well, I think there's a long game there too. I mean, they default on their mortgage and who buys it up? BlackRock, State Street, Vanguard. Yeah, it's not just with mortgages either though.

It's with rental income. I was reading about the recent kerfuffle over Springfield, Ohio, which a lot of people were talking about, nobody had ever heard of before, really, but including myself, you know, I never paid attention really to Springfield, Ohio, but I was reading about it. And in a lot of cases, what happens is the illegal migrants are illegal aliens, criminal aliens. What are we coming up with? I don't know. Criminal aliens, border crossers who came in. These are mostly people on Joe Biden. That's not fair. They're illegal. This is the parole program. These are people who came in on Joe Biden, Kamala Harris's parole program, primarily from Haiti, Venezuela, Cuba, Nicaragua. So what happens is as part of

that program and as part of their temporary protected status, they get all of this money for housing. So they come to landlords, building managers, and they say, I have all this money for housing. So all of the rents jack up to meet that. So people are paying like $3,000 a month for apartments in Springfield, Ohio. And then you have some landlords who are saying, OK, well, since I know that if you pay $3,000 a month, you're going to cram 20 people in this apartment. I'm now going to charge you per person. So they're charging rent per person in these apartments, making it very difficult for people who just want to live without being crammed into an apartment with 30 different people. Very impossible.

It makes it very impossible. And the same thing when the government got involved with education. same thing happened the price is jacked up when they got tuition yes exactly same thing when they got involved every time they forgive it exactly they jack the prices up because they're essentially getting a blank check from the crazy thing too when you need health care and if you if you look at your bill when insurance pays it it's like six hundred dollars but if you say, listen, I don't have my insurance or my insurance doesn't cover this, I'm going to pay out of pocket,

it's like $100. It's so bizarre. We had Michael Franzese on The Culture War this morning. Do you guys know who he is? Yep. And he was talking about the racket he was involved in where he ultimately went to prison. And he said he was running gas stations

where he was committing tax fraud against the government. $1.8 million a week. And I started laughing. And I'm like, I think all the libertarians are probably clapping right now. They call us Robin Hood. They call us Robin Hood. Pay your taxes, everybody. But I know the libertarians were cheering.

Yeah. Tax evasion is kind of based. Anyways, I wanted to give a quick- Hey, you'll go to prison, though. Yeah, I know. Don't do it. But I'm just saying. It's cool, though, otherwise.

I want to give a quick shout out to thomas mazzi who absolutely nailed it on this prediction that the save act would ultimately be dumped by uh speaker mike johnson it's exactly what he did they ended up with a continuing uh resolution i think it's called uh to continue the spending for another couple months and they allow the elections to still be basically wide open. So this dude is a disastrous mistake. I am not pointing the blame at, yeah. Well, I mean, it's like, is he better than McCarthy or? I don't know.

Who cares? Watching Kevin McCarthy get ousted was hilarious. I agree with that. I agree with that. It was almost as hilarious as watching him try to get in. I know, it was great. That was insane. I agree with all of that.

However, it would be nice if we stopped spending to oblivion because we are really on the precipice. As Thomas Massey highlights all the time, $35 trillion, we're racking another trillion every 90 days or so. That's truly the definition. If you open up a dictionary and you look at it, it's like, that's unsustainable. That's how we're living right now. And Speaker Mike Johnson is not going to remedy that i i would say this though to me i'd rather shut the government down over the border than the budget at this point that makes sense yeah i would rather shut the government down over the border than the budget because it's if well you had an opportunity to do both yes if mike johnson had just done what he was promising to do that would have been the pathway. I imagine you're in a tough spot,

Riley, because you're going to be coming in in a few months and they know who you are and you're going to be, I imagine, more along with a lot of the Freedom Caucus guys and so I imagine they're probably going to be making plans, like, how do we deal with this guy just like all these other guys, you know what I mean?

Yeah, I don't know. We're going to see. You've got to squad up with Massey like that's yeah but but that but that's my thing i'd way look let's say we let's say we got the like we got the budget fixed somehow let's say wave a magic wand you got the budget fixed if you can't if you lose the country does it matter if we got two million people pouring over the border? It doesn't matter. It doesn't matter. We've got to fix the border or you're going to lose the country. You're just going to. Well, the other thing too, that's part of the border problem is that we are not seeing people come in who want to be Americans. We're seeing people come in who want to take what

Americans have or take from the government or create their own enclaves. At the height of immigration, when it was Ellis Island and it was like that great age of immigration and all of that stuff, even when you had a million people come in, which I think the highest year was a little over a million, like it was either 1912 or 1907. I looked it up the other day. Now I forget. Those figures seem quaint nowadays. Right?

Right. You had people who were coming in who wanted to be American. And the people who came in and didn't like it and didn't want to be American, they went home. We no longer have a situation where we do not have the ruling class saying, come in, be American. Send your kids to public schools. Learn how great America is.

1980. Assimilate. We now have a situation where people hate the concept of telling people to give up their culture and become American. And if that's what we had, if we had 2 million people coming in saying, I want to be American, I want to learn about America, I want to be a patriot, that would still be way too many people. But it would at least be, it would at least be people who wanted to integrate into the fabric of our life. And that is not what we have. We have, the ruling class hates our culture, and doesn't want it, and doesn't want anyone to be part of it and wants to overturn it. So it's not just that they want to destroy the borders. They want to destroy the culture that we have created. Yeah, real quick, I just want to freak everybody out.

I pulled up the debt clock. This is 1980. As of this day, 1980, the U.S. national debt was just shy of $1 trillion. It was $994 billion. All right, well, let's do this. Why don't we jump to 1990? 10 years later. 10 years, $3.4 trillion. So triples. Let's go. That's in 10 years. 1990, let's jump another 10 years. 2000, it was 5.5. Didn't even double. Didn't even double. All right. Now let's go from 2000 till 2012. 16 trillion. It jumps three times again. And then if you go from 2012 to today, 30, 35.4 trillion.

More than doubles. More than doubles. Huge number. But just to, if you rewind to 1980, it was less than a trillion in 1980. That means the nation had existed for over 200 years to get to a trillion. We now do that every hundred days,

ladies and gentlemen. 200 years versus a hundred days. So the reason why the powers that be want to want more immigrants in here, trillion. We now do that every hundred days, ladies and gentlemen. 200 years versus 100 days. So the reason why the powers that be want more immigrants in here, because what that does, that waters down people who believe in the American values, which are the Bill of Rights, which are the Constitution, which are kind of our founding principles. And once they have people that aren't going to die for their country, they're going to die to get, you know, like into the country maybe, but they're not going to die for the principles of America, then they're able to kind of change the Constitution.

They're able to get those votes to change the Constitution, to amend the Constitution and get rid of the Bill of Rights and pass laws that nobody's going to fight against and going to assimilation. People were assimilating with their values, but they were still able to, we had little Italy, we had Chinatown, we had, you were still able to have your culture, but you were an American because you assimilated with the values that were America. And there was a trade-off. We got pizza and they got the Bill of Rights. Exactly, cultural exchange.

Yes, exactly. I mean, what we're doing now is we're essentially treating this country like an economic free trade zone. And if you want to come here and work illegally and undercut the wages of hardworking Americans, the corporate elites are more than happy to give you a job. There's a reason why E-Verify passed a very, very long time ago. And in many states, they've not been able to implement it. It didn't pass in West Virginia. We don't have E-Verify in West Virginia.

It got killed by Chamber of Commerce and these other guys. E-Verify, oh, it's so costly to business. We can't, that's bull crap. Like to verify that somebody is legally working in this country should be one of those in the category of citizens rights, things that we should be doing. This is not if we're just an economic free trade zone, then what's the point of all this?

There's no point to that. I think the problem, too, is that, like, yes, they would assimilate. But what do they assimilate to today? Like, what is the shared cultural framework by which we operate? This doesn't even have to do with immigration. Like domestically, we are incredibly divided on what it means to be an American. Oh, sure. So I think that is the other reason that there's, it's a bigger challenge for migrants or illegal immigrants or legal immigrants to assimilate to our culture because there's a lot of dispute just domestically as to what that culture is i mean honest question the you know uh new york's got pizza philly's got

cheesesteak chicago's got hot dogs is that it like are we florida has florida man florida man but but you know what is the god bless florida what what is the strong culture of our regions? You know, off the top of your head, it feels like they're intentionally diluting what it means to be American. Yeah. It feels that way. And the regional identities are being diluted as well. Yeah. Just listen to accents.

The southern accent is disappearing. You know, a lot of it's just being replaced with like the standard American speech. There's still a little Midwestern accent. But for the most part, we got to start calling. Homogeneous. We got we got to keep it real. West Virginia with the accents. I love the accents around here. Well, you know, that's the thing.

It's there's a lot of parts of West Virginia where people live rurally and locally. And so they're not getting the propaganda. Yeah. The propaganda is telling them how to speak, what to like, what to listen to. I got to tell you, Riley, it's pretty crazy when I go to like, what is it, Shepherdstown? Shepherdstown, yeah.

And it's got the pride flags everywhere. Oh, yeah. It's a bit much up there. It is a bit much. So many of the people that move into Shepherdstown are former World Bank employees. What? Really?

Yes. Are they affiliated with the college there? No, they just retire out there. Some of them retired. The property's on the river, man. Yes. Because it's beautiful. It's beautiful, and a lot of them are retired.

You can walk to the little stuff. Oh, yeah. Retired World Bank employees. Can afford it. Some CIA guys are retired out there, too. World Bank is basically the financial arm of the CIA, along with IMF. That's basically what they do. It's a liberal economic order. And the CIA is

intelligence and action, and IMF is economic mechanism. So of course they all retire and they live next to each other. Well, they come here because they don't want to live in the squalor and disgusting garbage that they've implemented or helped implement. True.

The way that we find our cultural values is we look at what the communists want to overthrow. What have the communists always wanted to overthrow? Family, religion, history, truth, logic, borders. Good books. Yep. Yep. Being beautiful, because that was part of 1984, where it's like, you won't be able to tell the difference between what's ugly and beautiful. When we're omnipotent, we're not going to need any need for science. We're going to be able to make things up as we go along. And a lot of that's coming true. So our whole cultural identity is disappearing into, you know, ugliness and kind of like not knowing if you're a boy or a girl and just this kind of blob of just,

it was a melting pot and now it's like all the stuff got mixed together in the melting pot where it's not, it's only gray goo. Yeah, it's gray goo. Perfect. Have you seen the clips that like Libs of TikTok will post and it will be like some TikTok person who shows pictures before and after and before they look sort of nice. They dress nicely. They have clear skin. They look nice. They look healthy. And then they go through gender clear skin they look nice they look healthy and then they go through gender transition and they look butchered and beaten up and their their eyes are dead right their eyes are dead or like even they have tattooed their eyes and now you can't even see the color of them anymore it's very disturbing and it is part of this destruction of what's beautiful and i think

to a certain extent destroying what's beautiful is part of the cultural destruction because western civilization has created some absolutely unbelievably beautiful art, like from the cathedrals to the paintings to the books to, you know, beautiful walkable towns, all of these things. Libby, you're from New York? I mean, look at the buildings they used to build in New York to the ones they build now. Yeah. If you look at the old masonry structures. Yes. to the ones they build now. Yeah, if you look at the old masonry structures. And now you look, there's this building that sometimes comes up on my Instagram,

which randomly I look at Instagram to relax, which I think it's because it's all architecture and art and stuff on my Instagram. But there's this building that's right on Central Park South. It looks like a needle, practically. It just looks, it's this straight up sort of stick. It's hideously ugly. The views are spectacular.

The apartments are ridiculously expensive. They're millions and millions of dollars. But it's not a beautiful building. It looks like a scar. And when you look at it from an aerial view or with the park in the background, it looks like a scar on the park. It looks like a big ditch. And it doesn't look like, you know, City Hall is this giant, beautiful masonry structure. There's buildings in Brooklyn Heights. I used to work in one of them that have these beautiful copper roofs,

absolutely spectacular buildings. And we don't build them anymore. I think, I think to a large degree, we no longer have the, um, the technical capability to do that kind of work. We don't have the workmanship. We don't have the trades that do that kind of work. We have these big unions that do glass and steel and engineering. And there's certainly some beautiful things you can do with that. But it's nothing compared to what we used to build and the way that we used to build our cities. I want to jump to this story. We got this.

This is CNBC bringing up Alan Lichtman's prediction that Harris will beat Donald Trump. Now, this story came out September 5th. And since then, Nate Silver has had wildly different predictions. And just recently, Alan Lichtman and Nate Silver got into it on X. This is very interesting because it looks like I'm going to say this right at the beginning, so we don't bear the lead. Trump's going to win and we'll break this down and I'll explain why. But Nate, Alan Lichtman is the professor who has what he calls the keys to the White House. He says that he's been right on every election except for Bush v. Gore going back to the 80s. Nate Silver has a

forecast model which says, based on what we're seeing today, here are your probabilities. Nate Silver also weighs the bias of each of these polls. Now, Nate Silver's calling out this professor, saying his keys are ridiculous. Trump's favored to win by his own methodology. And Lichtman's just like, nah. But I agree with Nate Silver. Let me show what they're saying. And then we'll get into why Trump's going to win. Lichtman says, Nate Silver has finally seen the light. Weeks after I predicted a Harris victory, he has come down from a two third probability of a Trump victory to a 58 percent probability of a Harris victory. Nate Silver says the funny thing is, if you actually apply his keys correctly based on how he's applied them in the past, they predict a Trump victory. More about this soon. LOL.

Lickman says, Nate, you don't have the faintest idea about how to apply my keys. You are neither a historian or a political scientist or have any academic credentials of any kind. Oh, you got him there. Nerdfight. Everybody knows in debate when the guy says, I'm in Mensa. You know who's losing. He says, remember, you were wrong when you said the keys could could could early predict Obama's reelection. And Silver responded, I've spent way too much time on this and have a lot of receipts from how you've applied your keys in the past.

At least seven of the keys, maybe eight clearly favor Trump. Sorry, brother. That's what the keys says. The keys say, unless you're admitting they're totally arbitrary. And he may as well. You know, I look at this guy and I'm like, what, does the CIA go to Lichtman and say, hey, here's who's going to win? You know, just say it. Because when you look at the keys to the White House, which we've got right here, I'm going to go through them as quick as I can because we do this periodically. And we're going to ask the panel about this. And you guys watching at home live, get your super chats in and then we'll we'll we'll see what people think.

So he's got 13 criteria. If more than what do they say if more than six are false? Let me see how they break this down. Is it six or is it eight? Let's let's I want to make sure I get the numbers right here. They say the results are in. He's saying Harris is going to win. Lichten revealed his decision on Thursday. The Democrats hold the White House. His forecast is based on the historical index model. He developed it, analyzed the political landscape through the lens of 13

true or false statements. If six or more of the statements are false, Trump will win. All right, number one, party mandate. After the midterm elections, the incumbent party

holds more seats in the House of Representatives. Okay, clearly that's false. The Republicans are winning. So that's one for Trump. Contest. There is no serious contest for the incumbent party nomination. He put true. Which is false. The Republicans are winning. So that's one for Trump. Contest. There is no serious contest for the incumbent party nomination. He put true. Which is false. Which is false. That is

false. Biden's gone. Harris was put in. Dean Phillips, RFK Jr. There were many people who were, Marianne Williamson, but he said no serious. serious. Okay, well, R.K. Jr. The only reason it wasn't serious is because the Democratic Party used their lawfare to destroy the candidates who were pushing back against Biden. So that's two for Trump. Hold on. Let's take it at face value.

And he's saying it doesn't matter if they cheat or otherwise. If there's no contest for the incumbent party nomination, that's it. And so the argument I've heard is he applies this only to the convention. Is the convention in disarray? All right. No, no, no. That's fine. That's fine. I'm going to say I take that away from Trump. It's true. Okay. Incumbency. The incumbent party candidate is the sitting president. False. Yeah, it's Kamala Harris.

The next one is third party. There's no significant third party campaign. That is true. Well, RFK is out. All right. There's only two for Trump. He needs four more short term economy. The economy is not in a recession during the election campaign. True. We in a recession. We've technically been in a recession for a while. Chief economist for Bloomberg, I think it was, said that based on these indicators, we use a conservative model of determining when we're in a recession, but based on where we're at now, this is a recession. Yeah, they've changed the definition of the word recession. It used to be two back-to-back quarters of minus 1.5.

Not to mention, we've got this from Postmillennial, Big Lots is shuttering 350 stores. And I know you guys, I'm glad you're sitting down for this because I'm worried about you when I tell you this, but Hooters shut down 40 locations. Oh, no. I know, I know, I know. When Hooters, now look, we can joke all day about Hooters, but they got wings and they

got boobs. And if you can't sell those, holy crap. Okay. So I don't know how, his argument is the government has not asserted a recession is happening. So there's a question there. And mine is, are you asking, is there a recession? Or are you asking what the government is saying? But he says the economy is not in a recession. Okay, he did not put the government says the economy is not a recession. I give that to Trump. I think

based on the metrics, based on the fact that you can go around asking everybody that prices are really high, what do you guys think? Yes. Yeah, I mean, 100%. So the Fed has acted, right, to try to throttle inflation for one, right? That's why we have interest rate hikes all over the place, which has made the real estate market tight, which has then made everything else tight because real estate is usually a leading indicator out there as it relates to the economy. So, yes, I mean, and not to mention we hit the inverted yield curve a few years back when this whole thing started kicking off with Biden. So all the indicators have been there. We've had two negative quarters in terms of – or not negative, but smaller quarters in terms of growth for GDP, which, yes, all those things indicate. And also, also, your rate of income growth has not exceeded the actual inflation rate.

So, in fact, people are getting poorer in real terms. And I think that's what matters most. All right. So I think we agree. The economy is not in a recession, but wages are down, prices are up, and people are struggling. I think that favors Trump.

For sure. You know what? If it doesn't, that'd be crazy. But you know what? Let's just, we'll put a pin in that and come back to it. We'll put a pin in that one. Long-term economy. Real per capita economic growth during the term equals or exceeds mean growth during the two previous terms.

True. Well, that's a very academic thing. I'm going to ignore it. We're going to come back to five. Look, because Trump's still going to win. Policy change. The incumbent administration affects major changes in national policy. True. She's been the vice president for three and a half years.

She's the one who signed 33 tie breaking votes in the Senate to make what is happening now happen. How is she affecting major change when for the past three and a half years, everything happening is her. Nothing's going to change. You even had Joe Biden recently saying that Kamala Harris had been involved in every decision he's made and that she, he, you know, she was involved in everything foreign and domestic policy. She said she was in the room as it related to Abbey Gate in Afghanistan. She was the last one in the room. Oops. But, but so, so for this one, the incumbent administration affects major changes in national policy. No, they don't. Absolutely not.

That's ridiculous. In fact, I think Gallup and a bunch of other polls show that people view Trump is the change candidate. Yes. And so that's three for Trump. Next is social unrest. There is no sustained social unrest during the term. We have had ongoing anti-Israel protests on the campuses.

It's going on for over a year. And it just happened again the other day. Well, it happened in protest of Netanyahu in New York. anti-Israel protests on the campuses. It's going on for over a year, and it just happened again the other day. Is that not? Well, it happened in protest of Netanyahu in New York. And of course, you can't forget that that followed directly the BLM protests in 2020 that continued through the election, that there were a lot of, there's been a lot of civil unrest for years.

And it's not just civil unrest on the left. We've seen civil unrest on the right. As soon as the COVID lockdowns came in, there were a bunch of Michiganders who went to Lansing and said, give us our jobs back. You can't destroy our businesses like this. All right. And so the argument I've heard is that the anti-Israel pro-Palestine protests are not sustained social unrest. They're localized protests. So we don't count those. I don't think that's accurate because they are funded internationally. I know. I know. What I'm saying is they're making arguments for why it does or does not protests. So we don't count those. I don't think that's accurate because they are funded internationally. I know. I know. What I'm saying is they're making arguments for why it does or does not count. So you know what? Let's come back to number eight and number five and just say

right now there are three for Trump. Number nine, scandal. The incumbent administration is untainted by major scandal. He put true. True. OK, that's crazy. Let me just start by saying Abbey Gate was like four scandals in one. The failure of the Afghanistan withdrawal is a massive failure, was a major scandal. They gave up Bagram Air Force Base in the middle of the night, abandoned the Afghan security forces. These guys were landing helicopters and running and fleeing. The Taliban comes and seizes all the weapons. Regular Afghani citizens were raiding and looting Bagram Air Force Base. Then, on top of all of this, 13 American servicemen and women were killed in a bombing.

And that's still just one scandal, right? And then when they were bringing the bodies home, Joe Biden checks his watch. And the media lies about it. The Abbey Gate scandals and then the scandal continues in which at the the families invite Trump to Arlington Cemetery. He agrees to come. And then the media and the Democrats attack Donald Trump. And then all the families one by one start coming out and saying, we invited you. You didn't come. This is your fault. And that's just that's just a chain of events in numerous scandals stemming from the Afghan withdrawal scandal. When when the Afghan withdrawal botch a botch withdrawal happened, that's when Joe Biden's approval rating actually started going down. So now what are we looking?

Is that four? That's four for Trump. We're counting. All right. Here we go. We got a couple more. And he only needs two more. and we're ignoring number eight and number five. We are siding with Lichtman on this one. And I still, guys, I'm going to show you proof that it looks like Trump is going to win. I want to be very careful when I say this, but there's a better indicator. All right, the next one is incumbent charisma. The incumbent party candidate is charismatic or a national hero. False.

Not a chance. Agreed. I agree with Lichtman. If he said true to that, I would have walked out of this room. I would have just been like, I'm out of here. Party candidate is charismatic or a national hero. False. Not a chance. Agreed. I agree with Blake. If he said true to that, I would have walked out of there. I would have just been like, I'm out of here. So that makes five for Trump, right? I'm keeping tally.

Yep. Okay. Now, we still got a couple more, and Trump needs only one more to win. Challenge your charisma. The challenging party candidate is not charismatic or a national hero. That's ridiculous. What? Donald Trump, reality TV celebrity, is not charismatic? Look. Or national hero. That's ridiculous. What? Donald Trump, reality TV celebrity is not charismatic?

Look, or national hero, he got shot. He got shot and he stands up after getting shot going against every biological urge that we have

in ourselves to say, hey, I'm okay. You guys need to fight. I'm going to give this to Lichtman. Oh, man.

Oh, my God. You know why? Because I don't need it. I don't need this to make his model say Trump will win. Fair. I'm going to just come all out. If Trump's anything, he's charismatic, though. My goodness.

Okay, but the argument they make is Trump is divisive and half the country hates his guts. Yeah, that's true. Okay, because he's not a Reagan, you know, where he's a movie star. So, fine, fine. I'm going to ignore number eight, number five for right now. We're going to ignore that. Even though we think we have an argument for why it should be true. No, no, you can have it, Lichtman, because we got five points for Trump and he's only won one.

The next one is 12. Foreign military failure. The incumbent administration suffers no major failure in foreign or military affairs. Abbey Gate and the Afghanistan withdrawal. Six. Trump wins. Next up, 13. Foreign military success.

The incumbent administration achieves a major success in foreign military affairs. Six. Trump wins. Next up, 13, foreign military success. The incumbent administration achieves a major success in foreign military affairs. False. That is seven for Donald Trump. And then if we want to be nice and go back and look at number eight for social unrest, and we want to look at short-term economy, Trump's got nine. Nine of 13. That predicted Trump victory. But let's just get rid of economy. We can get rid of charisma. We can get rid of social unrest. Trump still wins. And then I'll throw you the very last one. Shout out to pro American politics on axis says this is way more predictive than Lichtman's keys model. It's predicted every election accurately since 1952. And what is this party affiliation for

every presidential election going back to 1948? And the only incorrect assessment was 1948. Every time party affiliation was favored, every time there was an election, the party that was favored won. So in 1952, Republicans were favored. They won. 1956, Republicans were favored. They won. 1960, Democrats were favored. They won. 1960, Democrats were favored. They won. You can go all the way down the list. Even 2020, Democrat party affiliation, Democrats won. Right now, as of 2024, Republicans have a five-point

party affiliation advantage, predicting, along with all of these going back to 1952, that Donald Trump will win. That being said, you guys better go out and vote. Yeah, for sure. When you're saying party affiliation, is that the amount of people that are registered for this party or favorability towards the party? So let me clarify. It says, which political party do you think can do a better job

of handling the problem you think is most important? The Republican Party or the Democratic Party? The pushback they've given is, well, this is arbitrary. Who cares? Blah, blah, blah. Gallup asks people, what is the most important problem in the country? They then show

the issues mentioned as the most important problem. In 2020, COVID-19 was considered the most important problem. And when asked, majority of people favored the Democrats

on the most important problem. Lunatics. Anyway, though, right now, economy and immigration are the top issues yeah of course that's gonna go to trump boom for sure trump wins yep now go vote because the shadow campaign yeah and just everybody listening and watching let me tell you one reason it is so important to vote yeah Like a state like West Virginia or Wyoming or one of these other big Republican states.

Of course, he's going to win. Yes, he's going to win these states. But the popular vote, we got to bank popular votes because if he can get over the hump on the popular vote too, then it's going to be harder for them to delegitimize the election just like we did in 2016. Gotta bank votes. If he won West Virginia by almost 70% last time, let's get to 75% or whatever that number is.

Wasn't it 86%? Yeah, I think it was about 70%. 70%? Yeah, it was about 70%. Maybe it was Wyoming that was 86%. Yeah, Wyoming was the only one ahead of us. To go back to the litmus test that basically decides the outcomes of this predicted model, for me, my biggest concern is the escalatory trap that we're in with Russia. So for people like me that are paying attention, the obvious answer to who is most likely to de-escalate it is Donald Trump.

So I think that you go down the line of important questions like that for people like, what's your highest priority? I think you're going to get, as said a five-point lead i'm surprised it's not higher to be honest uh for donald trump but oh dude this this this israel stuff right now is freaking me out me too and and the russia stuff obviously they're that you got trudeau being like by all means fire american artillery shells and long-range missiles into russia and putin's like nuclear war like if if Like, if American missiles land in sovereign Russian territory, that's war. And they're just like, okay.

Biden said, they eventually said, apparently, that Ukraine was not to use the new long-range weapons that were sent. Storm shadows. Yeah, to go deep into Russia, which I thought was interesting. But he also said he would never give them F-16s, and he did. Many promises.

Every single promise that was made was broken. I mean, we already have troops on the ground in Ukraine anyway. We have guys in Kiev who are— They were there before Russia invaded. Yeah, now they're helping the— Wall Street Journal had a bunch of this stuff. But, yeah, now they're, like, helping the targeting systems and all of that kind of stuff. So any other time that would be classified as a co-belligerent?

There was that whistleblower. Is it Tejera? T-E-X-I-E-R. Tejera. Yeah, he whistled. In Massachusetts, that guy. Yes, yes. And he said that there was boots on the ground in Ukraine.

And now he's like in jail. I just want to... The concern that I have is that the Biden-Harris administration is going to try and concoct more ways that the U.S. is at war before the election, because a wartime administration usually wins. Yes, you're right. Well, and then you've also seen the Israeli strikes in Tehran, now in Lebanon. It seems as if they're also fomenting a wider war right before

the election. Let me pull this up. Let's get this story going. We have this story from CNN. Israel says it targeted Hezbollah leader in strikes on Lebanese capital. So this is the breaking news. It's been going on all day. Explosions continue to rock southern Beirut. And it's getting crazy out there. Beirut authorities urge displaced people to seek shelter. This was in response, I believe, to—we have a video here. Take a look at this. I don't know when this is from, but this is reportedly a video of the Iron Dome intercepting Lebanese missiles.

Yo, this stuff is wild. Look at this barrage. I'm pretty sure, this is the Iron Dome that's firing in the air like that? I think so. Because I'm like,

I don't think that's Lebanon firing right there in Tel Aviv or whatever. Or Hezbollah. Right. Oh. Yeah, that's them knocking,

that's them intercepting everything in mid-flight. That's crazy, man. And so this stuff's been going on, what, like nonstop for decades, basically, or what? Well, it's escalated tremendously as of late. You know, they took out the lead diplomat for Hamas in that Tehran strike. And now, allegedly, the reports are that they took out the leader of Hezbollah within the past few hours. I mean, look, no love lost for any of these people. But I'm just saying from my vantage point, the fact that we are arming and funding

one side very heavily, and they seem to be taking pretty extreme measures to go after their enemies, I'm very concerned that the U.S. military will also get kind of sucked into this conflict. You know, I see an impasse. I see, you know, for me, I'm largely anti-intervention. Actually, part of the dossier that they leaked of J.D. Vance was him. They said that when they did research on him, like, he's very anti-interventionist. And I'm like, I like this guy. Me too.

That dossier was actually pretty good in my support for JD Vance. The problem I see now is we're in it. That's it. We can sit here and daydream all night about what it would be like if we weren't funding what was going on. But we're in it. That's it. We are in it in terms of funding. But you know, it's a big increase to have troops.

We sent troops to Gaza to build a beachhead. I know. And they were getting shot at. And we also have troops going to Cyprus to help get people out of Lebanon. Exactly. And we've had U.S. troops in Israel for a long time. So it's not the same as Ukraine in that regard. I feel like we're at an impasse.

It's begun. I don't know. Weren't there also U.S. teams involved in helping the hostage rescue teams? Yes, I believe that. There was reports of that. I mean, there were Americans being held. They've since been, you know, murdered by the terrorists.

But I think the Americans were helping with that. And the challenge I see, like basically what I'm saying is I want to sit back and be like, why are we involved in this? Why is this our our issue? And then it's like we've got we've got troops there and tens of billions of dollars.

But and but it's like the conflict with Iran and with with these surrounding countries, the involvement we've had in Iraq and Afghanistan. Like I find it confusing why we're not helping. Like there's three Americans who were imprisoned for allegedly attempting a coup in the Democratic Republic of Congo. And I don't know why we're not helping those guys. It was like three guys. They tried to overthrow the government of Congo. Should we help them? Well, there it was an allegation and there's not really evidence that that was their intention.

But I'm just saying I'm saying you would think that they probably know. Shouldn't we help Americans wherever they are? They were college kids who went with their friend to the Congo to visit their dad. On the subject of Israel, I'm curious, your thoughts? Yeah, one of the things to keep in mind here, and a long time ago I worked on the Hill, too. So I'm privy to, at one time, a little more intelligence than I am now, which I'll probably have access to again here soon. But a lot of the guys and the bad guys that they're dealing with, Hezbollah, Hamas, whoever it is, every time they say death to Israel, what's the next word out of their mouth? Death to America.

Death to America, right. So they are kind of on the leading edge of a lot of this stuff. Now, I don't think anybody wants U.S. troops involved in some kinetic conflict in Israel or anywhere in the Middle East at this point. But they're about the size of New Jersey and can be overrun very easily. And I do think it is in our interest to have a country like Israel in existence in the Middle East. I think it serves us well and our security. They are a democracy. They are Western-leaning.

They're a Western nation in my book and you know I think it is in our interest to stand with Israel I do think it is in our interest it is unique is there a limiting principle to that claim at which you would say okay this is too far if they were to launch a nuke

on Iran tomorrow yeah I mean that's you know obviously that hypothetical is always kind of out there wow yeah i think it was samson yeah see that's but that means there is a limiting principle but i mean for many people in congress there is no limiting principle oh yeah with abortion no limit well you know look my thing is uh i i hate it when i see these people they go on tv and they're like we should not be funding Ukraine. Ukraine is not our conflict. And then they're like, what about Israel?

Oh, Israel. I mean, Israel is different. And I'm like, well, articulate it. It's fine. You can. I think there's a difference between the two countries. I think we've had a longstanding alliance and relationship with Israel, Ukraine. To be fair, the best argument I've heard for Ukraine is that we do have a treaty with them that stated if they were to be invaded, we would come to the defense. It's not a treaty. It's just a memo from 1992. It's just a memo.

But it's the best argument is the assurance. Not ratified by Congress or anything. Right, right, right. And that's why I'm typically. Oh, then it's just a piece of paper. But that's why I'm still pretty much we shouldn't be involved. But that's the best argument I've heard is that we said, you get rid of the nuclear weapons, we will defend you.

And then we were like, later, suckers. Yeah, we promised super duper hard. Is it like the Budapest memo? We said, yeah, give up your nukes and we'll protect you. Which, by the way, is like the worst incentive ever because we did that with the Libyans. Like, yeah, hey, how'd that work out for Gaddafi? Not good. We killed Gaddafi

right when he was really boosting the African continent and bringing everybody together for manufacturing and all of these things. Gold-backed currency, though. Big mistake. He was going to do all of that stuff for Africa and lift the continent up. My point is

I would appreciate if people could articulate an actual reason why they think Ukraine no funding, Israel yes funding, and then Taiwan's never even mentioned. And I think there are there that you could make the argument. Like I said, like we've had a longstanding relationship with Israel to help them defend themselves from the onslaught they've been receiving from these neighboring nations. And it's an ongoing act of conflict over what are we doing? 70 some odd years. And Ukraine is the Soviet Union collapsed in the beginning of the 90s, and we have no business.

What's going on? Why are we there? I don't know. Yeah, and I guess one of the frustrating parts, though, is, you know, and President Trump says it, like, what are you going to do, President Trump? I want peace. I want the killing to stop in Ukraine.

That's what I want. And it feels like that's not what they want right because as bobby kennedy's pointed out very clearly that there was a deal on the table right to broker some type of peace deal and then a year and a half ago and right and that was completely scuttled um and certainly look i'll take their point do we want russia on the border of poland no probably not um But to that, the issue of Israel is quite a bit different because we're not talking about like territorial gains. We're talking about like extermination of a country that is aligned with us as it relates to anti-terrorism activities

and things like that. This is my question then, right? So, you know, Trump comes in, you got Ukraine, Russia, and right now there could very easily be you keep Crimea. You've got a you've got a naval base there in a massive industrial port. The Donbass, we're not going to let that go. The fighting stops. And then there's some concessions. Maybe Russia gets certain access via a land bridge to Crimea, but it ultimately ends the conflict. That doesn't exist with Israel.

Trump, Trump comes in and says, I want the fighting to stop. They're screaming down to Israel. Yeah. Hamas has they removed it. But in in their charter was the line from the Hadith about how they are required by their religion to kill Jews. The thing with Israel is and it's a question I have for you guys, because I don't know that I have a good one. What do we do? You know, I Clint, this one's you, because I'm genuinely curious about the libertarian perspective on this. What should the U.S. do right now? Like, let's say you woke up tomorrow and they said, Clint, you are 897,426 in line for the presidency, and it's you, baby, somehow. What would you do? And I preface this— So my first day on the job, I have to bring peace to the Middle East? That's right. Well, no, no, no, no. My point is just, if I look at Ukraine and the attitude they

give Trump is, do you want Ukraine to win? And I'm just like, I don't care. My genuine response was almost like, do you want Russia to win or Ukraine to win? I'd be like, I don't care. Well, you heard what Trump said. He wants less dead people. And that's a good answer. That's a good answer. And then I'd give a be like, I don't care. Well, you heard what Trump said. He wants less dead people. And that's a good answer. That's a good answer. And then I'd give a better answer than I don't care. OK, I'm just being a kind of a dick. But with Israel, it's like if we cut ties to Ukraine and tell them you're on your own, it's like, well, like, good luck, buddy.

Yeah, we do that for Israel. Israel ceases to exist. Like they get they get bound into oblivion. Well, maybe. I mean, if it's true that, in fact, they have nuclear weapons, then they can probably defend themselves. So and then if we detach and say you're on your own and then Iran has won Hamas. Yeah, I don't know. It's not easy.

It's funny because Ben Shapiro brought this up, and I think it's a terrible – it's a real argument that's actually not a bad argument, but it's a terrible prospect. He said that if we do not provide the support to Israel and they go Samson option and launch a nuke, like World War III, we don't want that. So it's better that the U.S. remains involved, keeps these boundaries drawn. And I'm like, that's a terrible prospect. It is. Well, and there's so much going on. But it's better than them nuking somebody.

I mean, what? There's so many like regional conflicts that we're not super familiar with, like the Sunni versus Shia, all of this sort of interpersonal cultural stuff that we don't really know about. Real quick, sorry guys, I'm just curious, Clint, if you could implement a policy, would it be Israel on your own, or do we go in and say we need peace? Well, I think at minimum there needs to be a phase out into them being their own autonomous

nation that no longer takes aid from us. But I apply this principle to every country all over the world. I don't think that if you aren't able to exist without America being your benefactor in perpetuity, that's a problem that you need to figure out at some point, and it has to stop. And that applies to Ukraine. I mean, we are actively funding basically the entirety of Ukrainian governmentality. And money's getting stolen. Yeah, of course. And it was corrupt.

It maintains or it continues to be corrupt. So that needs to end. I just apply the same principle across the board. I say same thing with Taiwan. It's got to figure out its own security at some point, or it has to negotiate some sort of agreement with China where they either bring them in or they allow them to have their full independence.

So I think that the same rule applies. What I don't like is when, and I like you a lot and I hope you end up in Congress, but I will say I after the clean break document in the mid-90s, all of the wars that we fought in the global war on terror seem to have been to the benefit of Israel and very much to the detriment of not just the American people, but most importantly, American soldiers. That is where I find it to be most wrong. I think that Israel is basically a large pro-West American weapons manufacturer, security, cybersecurity. The liberal economic order comes into existence around the same time that, you know, Israel is basically, you've got, well, the liberal economic order came a little bit before, but the Israel-Palestine stuff started erupting, I think, like 10 years later. So you have the, after World War II, all these, you know, world leaders are like, we don't want World War III to happen. If World War III happens with nuclear bombs now, it's game over, man. So here's what we're going to do. Lo and behold, we now have the IMF, the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, the Swift Payment System. We've got the CIA. The Council on Foreign Relations brags about the machine they've built.

And so when it comes to the Middle East, Iraq and Afghanistan, Gaddafi. What are the big talking points there? Saddam Hussein wanted to do trading outside of the petrodollar. Gaddafi wanted to do trading outside the petrodollar. Gaddafi wanted to create an African union. He wanted to bring a bunch of countries together and strengthen, much like BRICS. And so we came, we saw he died. I see Israel as, what do they do? They make weapons. They do cybersecurity. He wanted to bring a bunch of countries together and strengthen, much like BRICS. And so we came, we saw he died.

I see Israel as, what do they do? They make weapons. They do cybersecurity. They're developing crazy missile guidance systems, things like that. And for the U.S. to have this hub of operations that allows them intelligence in a region they are trying to disrupt, and long have been, you know, the Mujahideen in Afghanistan, the United States, then you've got issues. I think the premise is flawed, though, because has that disruption throughout the Middle East been to our benefit or has it created a sustained peace in the Middle East? The answer is no on both accounts. But you misunderstand. The liberal economic order does not want peace. Oh, well, OK, then you're right. Your premise is correct. Yes. Yes. My point is we're looking at

this like, why are we engaged in this? It's leading to war, conflict. U.S. men and women are dying. And the liberal economic order is not a conspiracy theory. It's on the CFR's website. They talk about this. You can read the whole history of it. Their attitude is petrodollar supremacy. That means we're going to take over Iraq. We're going to take over Afghanistan, which is a pincer strike on Iran to get Iran to fall in line.

Sanctions. Iran has not been falling in line. Why the conflict, Israel-Iran? Well, I largely view Israel as, it's funny because the people think that the U.S. is the craziest thing to me. They think that Israel controls the United States. And I'm like, I think it's much the other way around.

I think the United States has vested interests in the operations in the Middle East and Eastern Europe. There is a large conflict going on for decades over getting cheap energy into Europe to expand the European economic bloc because we're competing with the BRICS nations, which are now getting stronger and rising in power. So I think the principal reason why the U.S. is so hell-bent on Israel, yeah, we're trying to basically flatten the Middle East and it's Iran specifically. Well, we give so much money to Middle Eastern countries. Ukraine, of course, is the top.

We give a lot of money to Israel. And then there's Afghanistan, Yemen, Egypt, Jordan. These are all places we give money to. Syria. It's like every place we go to end up with. We give Israel a lot more. Yeah, well, we give Israel, we have like a deal to give them some certain amount of money every year that Obama signed. But we've given, we've given.

And we sure, yeah, I mean, they are an ally, but all of these other places aren't even allies. We've given Ukraine more money than Israel has received in five decades. Yeah, that's right. But it's so crazy that we're giving so much money to places that are not our allies, where you have people chanting death to America in the streets. But do you know why? In my opinion, is that the reason that they give these large sums of money to these nations is actually goes along, goes into what Trump was doing in negotiating peace between Israel and those enemy nations. Is that, yeah, you're right. They're not our allies.

We were buying their go-along with Israel. Like, that's really what we were witnessing. And I don't support that. The strategy of giving U.S. dollars to these countries is to get them to use the dollars. That's true, too. To strengthen confidence in the petrodollar. To a certain extent.

We do need that. If we're not isolationist, we need that. At what cost, though? So remember, that money to Egypt, which is, if I remember correctly, just over a billion dollars a year, that came in after Sadat cut the deal with the Israelis. And back when we weren't giving any foreign aid to Israel, remember you had Yom Kippur, Seven Days War. I mean, and it was Nixon that came in and was like, they're either going to be gone or we're going to jump in here or we're going to do something. But my point about Israel in terms of our cooperation is the intelligence sharing is helpful.

It is helpful to us. I'm just going to say this, is I would much rather have these culturally very significant Christian places in the hands of the Israelis than Hezbollah or Hamas. Why does it matter in terms of, do you think in terms of like... I don't think Hamas is going to give me a visa to visit the Holy Sepulcher. I understand. Yeah, I think that's 100% right. Well, I'm sure that's true. I mean, the UN just recently put together a thing

where they were saying to get rid of all the Jews in certain parts of Jerusalem. I mean, this is the problem with creating a nation out of whole cloth, which is essentially what happened in 48. And now because of that, you have a people that have a very different cultural framework that are surrounded by people

that don't like them. And that's really the issue. And like, it's going to be an issue until there's some sort of catastrophic resolution is what it appears like. The problem is, is that it seems as if we are edging ever closer to that catastrophic resolution as opposed to a peaceful one. And you asked me to start off this whole segment, what would I do? I think that ultimately the main reason that Israel is able to behave in the way that it has as of late, taking out, like doing head of the snake strikes in Tehran, I mean, in the capital of Iran, doing it against the leader of Hezbollah just a few hours ago, is that they know

that we are the big guy on the block and we are going to have their back. And unless you actually signal that there is a limiting principle to our allyship, well, then they have no reason to ever go to the negotiating table and treat their neighbors with any sort of respect either. You're saying the U.S. should just send a strong example to Iran and Lebanon right now and say, stop the war because we got Israel's back. No, that's not what I'm saying. No. But they do know that, though. Don't forget the other. We're not doing anything. I mean, we give Israel funding. Yeah. But now Lebanon's been firing rockets at Israel endlessly since October 7th and long before

that as well. And now Israel is firing back. But and I just want to make clear it's not it's Hezbollah. And Lebanon itself used to be a very peaceful country when it was run by Maronite Christians not that long ago. And what has happened is there's funding on the other side. Who funds Hezbollah and Hamas? It's the Iranians. Who's funding the Houthis down there in Yemen right now, right on the border of Saudi Arabia? It's the Iranians. They're funding conflicts all over that

region. And to bring it full circle, President Trump was the only guy who was able to come in with the Abrams Accords and get Arab nations to recognize Israel and actually try to bring peace to the extent you can. The Iranians aren't going to come into the fold of that. Obviously, there's a Shia-Sunni split in between those Arab nations and this Persian nation that happens to be Shia over there in Iran. But at least you could have some counterbalance there where it's not some tiny little nation of Israel on its own and have some type of alignment with the greater Arab world in that region, which I think actually would have made it a lot safer. And then the Biden administration just basically did nothing and left the whole Saudi part of it on the table.

And he should have got a Nobel Peace Prize for it. I mean, Obama got one just for being elected. Right, that was crazy. Yeah. Yeah, I'm with you on the Abraham Accords. I think Trump did a really good job with that. And for the first time, there was a level of peace happening in that region.

I could be wrong about this, but doesn't Barack Obama hold the record for most children killed by a Nobel Peace Prize holder? I think that has to be correct. By a large margin. By an infinite margin, actually. I mean, I don't know.

Who've won the Nobel Peace Prize drone to U.S. citizen? That too. I mean, maybe there's a list of Nobel Peace Prize laureates. There might be someone in there and you're like, oh, that guy was a monster. Going back a whole long time. So he may not, but I think he probably does. I think that has to be true, right? Oh, he's, of course.

Oh, Yasser Arafat's got one. I saw Yasser Arafat had one. Does he really? Yeah, here, scroll. Yasser Arafat has a Nobel Peace Prize. Okay. That's really funny. You think he's killed more children?

I don't think so. Than Obama? Not a chance. Eight years of bombing the Middle East, that adds up. I don't know so then obama not a chance eight years of bobby i don't know the first intifada was pretty bad the un got one that's silly ah jimmy carter great well he's still building houses right he's very old yeah where's oh what did they split obama for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples what is that he promised super duper hard. He promised super duper hard that he would bring world peace. And then he bombed.

It's such a great participation trophy. Thank you for being here. It's the, we don't really pay attention all that much. Like, does anybody know who Narges Mohamedi was? Never heard of her. Yeah.

I mean, she's fighting against the oppression of women in Iran, promoting human rights. You know, what's interesting's fighting against the oppression of women in Iran, promoting human rights. You know what's interesting about fighting against the oppression of women in Iran is you have you've had a lot of women who are Muslim, who live in oppressive countries, who are forced to wear certain types of clothing, forced to do head coverings and all like that. And they're always like, where are the American feminists? Where are the Western feminists trying to help us overthrow our oppressors so that we can live in a free way? And the American and Western feminists are like, oh, that's just your culture. Your culture is to be oppressed. So we're okay with that

because you're minorities. We've got to recognize diversity here. Right, you've got to recognize diversity and some diverse cultures oppress their women and that's just okay. They don't want to come off as Islamophobic. There's a hierarchy of what and some diverse cultures oppress their women. And they don't want to come off as Islamophobic. There's a hierarchy of what you're allowed to be. Yes. In the oppression Olympics, there is. We must respect that culture. And then also they're also busy oppressing actually women in our own country through the trans movement.

So that's kind of tied up in that. We do have a number. It's the Bureau of Investigative Journalism estimated between 380 to 801 civilians, including 64 to 116 children killed in drone strikes in Pakistan, Yemen, and Somalia between 2009 and 2016. Which seems like a conservative estimate. That seems conservative. I think that beats George Bush in terms of drone strikes, doesn't it? Well, I know he dropped more. I don't know if there was more. I think he was just doing civilian casualties. I would just think... Keep in mind, we keep in mind statistics are manipulated heavily on this

because they say civilian casualties, like they say enemy combatants was basically any fighting age male. Yep. Obama did that. He changed it because they were getting beat down in the press

by the civilian deaths. And then they said, ah, it's a military age male. Yep. so it's literally a guy carrying a couple of water buckets to his home from the river but he could have been headed back to get his rifle you don't know not to mention obama he killed abdulrahman al-alaki and that one is like that's like cold-blooded murder my i'm gonna say this because my opinion on that is the obama administration intentionally targeted civilian restaurant to kill abdulrahman al-laki to send a message to terrorists that the United States will murder your children if you stand against us. That's what I believe.

Even the mafia doesn't do that. They don't go after women and children. Yeah, no. And the wild thing, there wasn't anybody really on his side, political party-wise, saying a word. They're just, OK. Well, it's like it never even happened. If you bring it up, they would probably accuse you of you know disinformation or something some of these migrants that are coming over the border it's like maybe if you can't beat them join them and

they're just like well we can't beat the united states might as well move there yeah well they're moving yep well i think a lot of what's happening is you know mother theresa got one there we go there was a um you know in venezuela the reason why so many criminals are coming in, Trump is right. They're people who are in prisons and the government's being like, we're going to let you go, but go to America. And so they're clearing out their prisons, reducing crime by telling their criminals to go to the United States. But I thought Trump was making that up, Tim. Oh, definitely not. Just to go back to the Ukraine example, contrasting that with the Israeli relationship, I view it very much the same way. Trump's proposal mirrors mine when it comes to what I was talking about with Israel, is that the only way you're going to get Zelensky to the negotiating table is when you actually tell him there is a limit to the aid that you will receive. There is a limit to the munitions you will receive. Trump is saying that, and you look at Zelensky walking behind him today, and going up to the podium, he looks like a beaten dog.

He's just like, yes, we will find peace. You're correct, Mr. Trump. I love Trump's like, I have a very good relationship with the President Putin. Also with President Putin. Also with President Putin. This is the thing, okay? Ukraine and Russia's conflict is over primarily access to the Crimean Peninsula. True. And where Russia has their naval base at the home of their Black Sea fleet,

a massive industrial port. And they had a bridge going from Russia into Crimea, and it got bombed. It's exactly why Russia wants the Donbass and the regions going into Crimea. He wants land control. And a lot of people are like, he could build on the Black Sea anywhere. And it's like, he's not going to give up a multi-hundred million dollar, you know, industrial center and port where his Navy currently is. And just say, here you go, NATO, you can have it. That being said, those negotiations can happen.

Israel, these people, like there is in the Hadith, which is, correct me if I'm wrong, is this the words of Muhammad or what is that? What is it? Clerics wrote about it. Okay, where it literally says something to the effect of, the end will not come until all of the Jews are killed, and the rocks and the trees will scream out, O child of Allah, come, there is a Jew hiding behind me, and kill him. But there are Muslim and Arab neighbors that do not have constant warfare with Israel.

So I think that to argue that because of their religious doctrine, you could never see peace. I'm not saying that. Well, that seems like what you're saying. No, I'm saying that it's easy to negotiate land. It's difficult to negotiate ideological conflict. You're right. Of course. And so, right, you've got the West Bank and Jerusalem.

You've got serious conflict there. It's an almost intractable issue. It really is. And I mean, this is why we've seen decades and decades of very high level diplomacy trying to seek peace. The issue is that I think that simultaneously there are financial interests, particularly the military industrial complex in America, that benefits tremendously by there being continued warfare. That is the purpose of it. I agree, but my point is I think that there's this argument that we cannot find peace. My argument is that peace is very challenging. However, I think that there are financial imperatives domestically that make it basically impossible.

I'm going to tell you one thing that's really interesting, is that 20% of the population of Israel is Arab. They're Arab-Israeli. Very peaceful people that are living a very good existence there. Can you imagine being a Jew living in Gaza right now? I mean, like, it's... Or in any one of these other countries, they have challenges. Yeah, it's just not possible. It's just not possible. There's nowhere else in the world they can go. And look, it's been said many times, if Hamas and Hezbollah put down their arms tomorrow, there would be peace. If the Israelis do it, there will be no more Jews. Well, this is a question I ask of a lot of people.

And this is not for me. This is not me saying, like, we should give Israel infinite money. It's the question is, what would happen if Israel took down the barriers around the Gaza Strip and said, free movement for all peoples? What would happen? Well, they would get massacred. Yeah. And they did that before. That's why they built walls. Oh, walls work, shockingly. They built walls as it relates to the West Bank after the Intifada, right? It's like, we're not going to do this anymore. We have to have some control.

And after October 7th, I can't remember who I was talking to, but it was someone who was very anti-Israel. And they were saying that these people were going to where their ancestral homes were, these little villages, and like attacking them to take them back. And this is, it was their land and the land was taken from them by Israel and all that. And so I asked that question, if they took down all the barriers around Gaza and said, you are now all free to move about all of this land, what would happen? Wouldn't they write of return? Wouldn't they go back to the land they claim to be theirs? And then when they find, I don't know, like a little old Jewish lady living there, how does that go down? I think we saw what goes down on October 7th. Well, the issue is that you see the inverse of that when

it comes to Gaza, when it comes to people that are in their properties also being purged because of settler activity from the Israelis. West Bank. Sorry, West Bank. But actually, I think it has happened in Gaza as well. They're out of Gaza now. Yeah, they pulled out of Gaza 20 years ago. I know, I know. But I'm saying historically.

But regardless, I'm just saying this issue is occurring on both sides all the time. That's why I don't want to be involved. That's why I think America needs to get the F out of there. And I think the same principle applies to Taiwan and to Ukraine. I agree on the we don't want to be involved, America first, secure our borders. But if we were to say right now, at least I think it's a fair assessment, if we were like right now, like, you know what? The U.S. is done with this Israel thing. You guys are fighting all the time. You've got land disputes between your own borders, West Bank.

You haven't figured it out. So we're out. What? In like a year, Israel is flattened? I don't think so. I mean, Israel is a legit military and I do believe they have nuclear weapons. So I find it very hard to believe that they would just be conquered. But then, I mean.

Their enemies don't have nukes. They do. If we're not funding. Don't you think Iran has nuclear weapons at this point? Not at all. No, no, no. I don't think they do. Lindsey Graham would be screaming it into my face 24-7 if they had nukes.

We have declared war the moment they had actionable intelligence that they could convince the public of. But I think it's reasonable to conclude if we're not providing military aid to Israel, Iron Dome withers. They've got David Sling. What do they have? The names of the various defensive systems? Yeah, look, I understand your concern and a phase out is fine. My point is, I don't know that they can sustain their defense, which you make a really great point. If you can't exist outside of the U.S., then you shouldn't. I mean, not forever. Right, right, right.

We have to pay them forever to just keep their guns? That's nuts. And so that's why I said I feel like we're entrenched because if we say we're done, then it is, it is, it, look, my fear is I don't want to see Israel wiped out. Not at all. I want them to defend themselves from the chaos, but if they have a nuke and if we're like, we're going to phase this out and they just say, okay. And then when Hezbollah, Iran, and you know, Hamas and, and whoever else are attacking from all fronts, they just say, you know what?

Nuke Beirut. Wipe it out. Turn it to glass. And then we get World War III. You're right. It's a risk. It's absolutely a risk. But there's another risk that maintaining this current trajectory leads us towards continuing

escalations, keeping in mind that Iran is also allied with Russia. We're already in basically a very significant, not basically, we are in a very significant proxy war with Russia through Ukraine. I feel like we're entrenched. I don't know if there's a good answer for anybody. Well, I think that the answer is to have better leadership that's actually interested in peace. Donald Trump seems to be that guy. So if we're going to have a chance at peace, we're going to need people that are interested in at least proposing it. Yes. You are right. Donald Trump is the peacemaker, the dealmaker, and our best path forward for solving these problems.

He is the peace and prosperity president. He is the peace and prosperity president. That's what he was. So when did the Russians try to mess around in Ukraine in the last decade? When Obama was president, they went and took Crimea. And then when Biden comes back in. When Trump is president, they stop.

They stopped, right? And you remember they were screaming, oh, when he moves the embassy to Jerusalem, it's going to be another intifada. Things are going to go crazy. But nothing happened. Nothing happened. Because when other nations in the world see strength, right, and you can negotiate peace from a point

of strength, I mean, it says something. When China said to Blinken, you are not negotiating from a position of strength. I mean, it says something. When China said to Blinken, you are not negotiating from a position of strength, I'm like, holy crap. What is this administration on, man? Trump could walk, so you send Blinken in, and they're like, Biden, Kamala, and you? Good luck.

Trump walks in, and they're going to be like, you're not negotiating from a position of, and he goes, I'm going to nuke you right now. I'm going to make a phone call. Give me my phone. Where's the phone? And they're going to be like, wait, wait, wait, where's the football at? Calm down. Calm down. You want to see strength.

Did you hear this great story? I'm sure y'all have seen it, but where Trump's negotiating with the head of the Taliban and says, I don't want one hair on any American's head to be harmed. We were going to leave Afghanistan. But if you harm one hair on the head of any American's head to be harmed, we were going to leave Afghanistan. But if you harm one hair on the head of any American service member and he pulls out a picture of the guy's house and says, I'm going to kill you, and then walks out. He didn't say that, apparently.

Yeah, yeah, yeah. He said, do not harm a hair. And then he pulled out a picture of the guy's house and the guy looked at it and said, why are you showing me a picture of my house? And he said, you'll have to figure that one out. Yeah, yeah, that's right. That's right. But see, here's house and the guy looked at it and said, why are you showing me a picture of my house? And he said, you'll have to figure that one out. Yeah, that's right. Here's and I've already now given a lot of good airtime to Donald Trump. And I agree that he is

our best hope at avoiding like a hot war with Russia. Simultaneously, he is also signaling over the past week that he is he's basically buying into this narrative. And perhaps it's true. I haven't seen any evidence of it. We'll see. But he is buying into the narrative that, in fact, it is the Iranians that are making multiple attempts on his life. Gates backed him up on that. Yes, but he killed Soleimani. It makes sense. There's absolute incentive and imperative and motive. I agree with all of that. However, if you look at the two assailants that actually were responsible for the two first attacks, do they strike you as in the employ of Iran? No, they do not.

They do not strike you as that. So I would like more information is all I'm saying. We don't know anything about this guy. Before he starts fist pumping and going, we're going to nuke Tehran, I want to actually know that's what's going on. We don't know anything about the first guy. Second guy was a pro-Ukraine crackpot. Lunatic.

And he was also funneling passports to former Afghan soldiers to go and fight in the Foreign Legion of Ukraine. Do you know what CIA looks like? Look me in my eye, CIA. I see what you're doing. I'm sorry, but that is a straight up CIA operation all day. This guy is tweeting out in Farsi and Arabic to try and recruit people. This guy, I mean, come on. You know intelligence.

You tell me. Is he just a lunatic or what is this? Could you imagine being one of these Afghans? They hand you a passport. You're like, we'll. You know intelligence. You tell me. Is he just a lunatic or what is this? Could you imagine, though, being like one of these Afghans, they hand you a passport and you're like, you want to go fight another war? It's like, God bless me. You're like, I've been doing this for 40 years, man. That's right. You're good at it, you know?

It's like, you fought the Russians in the 80s. You want to do that again? I think this is a really great segue to tell everybody about the Rage Against the War machine. You nailed it. Rally tomorrow. It'll be on the lawn by the Washington Monument. It goes from 12 to 5 tomorrow. We still need a little bit more money for that. If you want to donate, you go to rageagainstwar.com slash donate and help us kind of reach our target. There's that tomorrow. And then on Sunday, there's Rescue the West rally,

and that one's going to have some major players that are going to be there. Both are going to have a lot of congressmen. This one's going to have Russell Brand, Tulsi Gabbard, Jordan Peterson. It's going to be completely... Brett Weinstein, James Lindsay. I mean, the list is crazy. Is it Rescue the Republic? What did I say? It was originally Rescue the West and now they changed it

to Rescue the Republic, yeah. So my apologies for that. But rallies are so important, especially this one, because the powers that be need to see how large the anti-war movement is i'm anti-war which is why i have nothing to do with this conversation i'm pro-war now i am pro i am pro defense i'm i'm non-intervention so when it comes to 1776 i'm 100 behind that yeah i'm a non-inventionist i'm not a pacifist actually i I do think this is worth clarifying. What does it mean to be pro or anti-war? You know what I mean?

Like, you guys say you're anti-war, but there are certainly situations for justified warfare. Yes, yes. So I'm constitutional. So per the Constitution, Article 4, Section 4 of the Constitution says that the federal government's responsibility is to protect the states from invasion. And that's really the war clause. And then Congress has to declare war. But question, is there any circumstance in which you think it is justified for Congress to declare war on a foreign nation, say, in the Middle East and send U.S. troops there? Yes.

I think that there are. If it could be proven that, in fact, they were responsible for bringing in shoulder fire missiles to try and take out Donald Trump, that can't go without a response. Wait, wait. So let me ask you this. If there is definitive proof, let's say everyone always argues don't trust the government. I know. Let's say. And I'm not trusting them, for the record. Clint stumbles upon, you know, absolute proof, whatever it may be, that Iran is making attempts on Trump's life and bringing in missiles and assassination teams.

That's what Gates says is happening. You would say definitive, like if you knew definitively they're doing it, you'd say we have to declare war? I don't know if I would say declare war, but certainly I would say there has to be a consequence. If that means surgical strikes on the leadership of Iran, something to that effect. But no, I'm being honest, because you can't allow for foreign nations to be taking out our leadership structure and do nothing. Another question. If Iran were to have actually succeeded in assassinating Donald Trump, do you think we should declare war on Iran? I will just tell you right away, yes. My opinion is yes. I am anti-intervention, i uh and i'm just giving you my opinion first because i don't want to make it seem like i'm setting you up for anything sure

i do not believe a nation can stand its treaties can be valued if they allow their leader to be killed by an adversary and they do nothing i think every single treaty we have after that they're going to say you can't even protect your own president what makes you think your tree your desk garbage no i i understand the rationale and the logic is sound. You know, principally, morally speaking, I still would find it to be a tragedy because so many innocent people would die as a consequence. However, yes, probably. I think it's a terrifying prospect because, you know, war, everybody loses. But if Iran were to take Donald Trump's life, the damage to this nation would be insurmountable and irreparable.

I believe we would, it's not just about targeting our front runner for a nominee for the president. It's going to unleash a whole bunch of chaos in the streets. Militia groups are going to go nuts. It would be insane. That's an attack on our country. That It would be insane. That's an attack on our country.

That's defending. That's an attack on our country. That would qualify under Article 4, Section 4. And this is what I'm deeply worried about

because after the first attempt on Trump's life, they immediately come on and say, oh, by the way, Iran's trying to kill Trump. And if that bullet had been a millimeter

closer, we would be in a full-scale mass mobilization. And keep in mind, too. Absolute constitutional crisis. Who would we get for our election? I mean, this would be disastrous.

I think it would be J.D. Vance would take because we technically elected him. No, this was before the RNC. It would have been Nikki Haley would have been swiped. Yeah, they would have

slid her in. And she would have said war with Iran. Tehran is gone tomorrow. You're right, because it was Nikki Haley would have been swiped yeah they would have and she would have said war with Iran Tehran is gone tomorrow you're right because it was before the convention it was two days before the convention we had not nominated so this next one so so this last attempt because you know we have more than one so this last attempt would have been sent over like J.D. Vance would have been the guy and now and now they got the media you know they they did Merrick Garland did that Iranian malign influence campaign press conference. And they're just they're like Iran is doing these things, man.

And I got to tell you, I don't think Iran is not doing these things, but I do think there's selective prosecution. Right. For sure. I think China is probably doing similar things. Iran has been doing these things. Iran absolutely wants revenge on Trump for the killing of Soleimani. And they've publicly said as much. And so to hear these stories, I'm kind of like, you know, I don't trust the DOJ. But this aligns with their goals. And it probably is true. But it also probably means there's other things going on they're not telling you about. Yeah. And why are they why are they allowing like if they have intel that these teams are on the ground and that's it, you don't have them like. Well, I mean, maybe they do. We just don't know.

My concern, though, is that they are basically like the public is being made aware that this is happening. Right. And so there's there's two scary thoughts. If it happens, people will be like, we know who did it. We know why it happened. But more importantly, already people are saying the fact that this guy, this Pakistani national with ties to Iran, was organizing the assassination of Trump. And we've had two attempts. The fact that Trump is already locked down. He said he's surrounded by more guards and cops than he's ever been surrounded by. It's already an act of war against us. But we have to make sure that we will take out one of your major cities

if this continues or if this is successful. They have to know that that'll be a response. And I'm like, Trump, you are giving the deep state, who is, as far as I'm concerned, equally probable to be responsible for one or both of those attacks that have already occurred on you. You're now priming your base to then support a war against Iran when in fact it was your own government that took you out. Just be very cautious with any declaratory statements. I would say this. I entertain the possibility

that there are official elements that want Trump to lose his life and have said as much as it pertains to the Butler PA incident, because, you know, look, the feds announced they arrest this guy on July 12th, who was organizing the assassination on Donald Trump. He said he was offering up to a million bucks. A day later, Secret Service had been informed of this plan. They said that they were going to increase their security. A day later, Secret Service stands down. And I don't mean that, I'm not being cute. I'm not being sarcastic. I'm not being hyperbolic. They literally, in every instance, when they identified crooks as a threat, they stood down. When Trump was in the hold, was in holding, that's what they do. They keep Trump in

a special area to make sure they clear the threats. They said, no, let him out anyway. That's an effective stand down. When they were told by the local law enforcement four days in advance to put a counter snipers up on the rooftop, they don't. They stood down. When the Secret Service saw 27 minutes in advance, they saw this guy Crooks identified as a threat, stood down. When a law enforcement were running full speed towards the AGR building with their guns drawn, they did nothing every single time they stood down.

That being said, we can talk about the Butler PA incident quite a bit. You do have Iran publicly declaring their intention to do this. And so, yeah, I, I, I, I, I, I think Iran is trying to go after Trump for bringing it a little bit full circle. There's nobody out there that has more intelligence on what's going on inside of Iran than Israel. I'm sure you're right. Either Israel or CIA. Yeah. Let's go to super chat. It's either Israel or the CIA. Yeah. All right, let's go to Super Chat. Smash that Like button, subscribe to this channel, share this show with your friends.

Become a member at TimCast.com, and make sure you go to that rally. What's it called, the anti-war rally tomorrow? Resist or something? In the Damn Wars is tomorrow, and Rescue the Republic is Sunday. And both are going to be incredible, so I really do hope you show up. And the best thing is, after the anti-war rally, Clint, MGM National Harbor has got a big poker room just

20 minutes away. Tim's got VIP passes to both events, so hopefully he'll be at one. I was asked to speak at one, but I can't. No, no, they don't want you to speak anymore. They took it away. Honestly, I was supposed to speak, he was supposed to speak, and they're like. They took it away. They took away. No, no, no. Honestly, I was supposed to speak. He was supposed to speak.

And they're like, you guys just come in, you know, do a podcast thing and just have fun, you know, so we're just. Yep. So you don't have to speak. It's not stressful at all anymore. Yeah. Yeah. I just wanted to hang out.

I don't want to. But I think it was Angela asked if I want to do a couple minutes about anti-war stuff. And I was like, I don't think I should. I don't want to do that. No, no. You just come. You have fun. You meet Jordan Peterson. You meet other, you know come, you have fun, you meet Jordan Peterson,

you meet other cool people that you want to develop a relationship with. And we'll get Jordan on the show because we've never had him on, and he's brilliant. He's a brilliant guy. My dream when we were talking about doing poker with the boys

was to have me, you, Alex Jones, and Jordan Peterson playing poker. I'm suing West Virginia. I heard, man. I hope you prevail. I'll talk about it a little bit. Let's grab some super chats, and then I'll come back.

By the way, it's rage against the war machine, not end the damn wars. I apologize. All right. Let's grab some. We got Barely a Millennial saying, if people can vote now, they should be counting and showing us a running tally now. We know why Dems don't want to, but should the right push for this? Yes. They should count the mail-in votes right now.

Yeah. Bring them in and count them. Yeah. Someone made a good point a while ago on the Super Chits. They said that no numbers should be released at all until all mail votes are counted first. So if they want to say mail-in votes are going to get counted later because it takes too long, okay, we're going to withhold all of our numbers until you count mail-in votes, then we're going to release them.

Yeah. That way they can't do any games where they find votes. Mm-hmm. All right. Jason Swank says, last night you spoke about Helene. Tomorrow is the two-year anniversary of Ian, a Category 5 hurricane. I was in the eye wall. The eye wall wins for nine hours that day.

Wow. That's crazy. I've been in the eye of Ian many times. That's kind of weird. I just miss Ian. That's all. I was in Sandy in New York, and it was crazy to hear the the whole time

I was in the financial district and all you heard was a the flight yesterday when we were coming out it was so insane the plane literally tilts like this we get off the plane afterwards by the way I nearly had a heart attack while this was happening we get off the plane once we finally land and I walk nearly had a heart attack while this was happening. We get off the plane once we finally land and I walk up to the pilot and I'm like, come on, dude, be honest.

You were a little bit nervous with that one, right? He's like, nah, bro, I got that. So I'm suing West Virginia because poker is regulated by the Lottery Commission, but Pokemon, Yu-Gi-Oh,

and Magic the Gathering are not, despite the law saying card games cannot be played, cannot be hosted, and you cannot make wagers against them to win cash or cash-valued prizes. Crazy. So the law literally says Pokemon, Magic, and Yu-Gi-Oh, and Lorkana, which is Disney's, illegal. Yet all over West Virginia, children are playing card games for money.

They put money down, they sit down, they play a card game, and then they win cash. And so when I called a lot, at first I talked to A.G. Morrissey, and he just, he, I don't want to put words in his mouth, but he said, interesting, well, like, if you're going to go legislative route, if you're going to go lawsuit, we'll see what happens when it happens. Because one of the plans was first, let's just get legislation, where we can talk to a local rep and be like, let's just draw it up. It's extremely difficult. It really is hard because you have to define this. I think the end result is going to be there may be a period where poker becomes legal pending litigation and then litigation changes the shape of how poker is in the state. But I called the lottery commission and I was like,

I need to speak with somebody who's in charge. And I got this guy. I said, I had a question that I'm trying to understand. There are card shops all over the state where children and adults will play card games for money. They'll wager money, play a card game, and try and win money. That, my understanding, is illegal under West Virginia law, and I was told those are collectible card games. That's legal. And I said, a collectible card game is different from a card game. Yes. And I said,

okay, so hold on. Let's just play poker with collectible cards. Exactly. So we started making two versions of a game. One is called Magical Wizard Crisis. And there are four elements. There's earth, wind, water, and fire. And there's 13 power levels. And you combine

them to make powerful spells now here's the thing the wizards they're they wager they they they use their monostones as means of casting their spells and the other wizard is like oh no his spell is too powerful i better he put in 100 monostones i also have to put in 100 monostones but if my spell wins i get all the monostones and i'm like is this is this what i have to do? We have to recreate No Limit Hold'em. Alright. But the point is, the law does not say collectible card games is exempt. It says defined card games, they are illegal in this state.

So I asked him to clarify. I said, there are children gambling, and that is allowed in this state. They said, yes, sir. And I said, okay. And so I called my uh so i we we first tried to go on legislative route but it's very difficult to do uh i was talking with some big

poker pros about uh they wanted to build uh some some of the biggest pros in poker wanted to build a card club in jefferson county it's so close to dc pittsburgh philly that you'd basically create considering it's easier to get legislation through in West Virginia, a massive hub and secondary locations outside of where they normally play, which is big in Texas. Because Maryland, D.C. and Virginia, you are not getting anything done in those states. You're going to need billions of dollars, West Virginia, but it was too difficult. And the challenge was rake and, you know, are you allowed to take rake or time rake? Is it going to have to be private memberships? If we draft legislation, it's going to get bogged down, waste everybody's time.

And so then just recently I said, let's go lawsuit. Because now what I'm going to say is that the state either has to ban Pokemon or allow or deregulate poker. Poker right now can only be played in one of five historical hotels, of which only, I think, four actually have poker rooms. So you've got Charlestown Races, Mardi Gras. Then you've got, I think, in the Western Panhandle, the Northwestern Panhandle, whatever you call it. And then there's the Greenbrier. But they got rid of it.

So there's not even, my understanding is there's not even a poker room there anymore. I think they just got Blackjack. They've got table games. Yeah, yeah. And it's a dress code, and it's very fancy. I've wanted to go there for a long time. Is it worth it? Oh, yeah, it's cool.

I hear it's fantastic. Yeah, it's really cool. If they go against you and they end up banning Pokemon, you're going to have a bunch of 15-year-olds that hate your guts. No, I don't think it's politically possible for the AG and the Lottery Commission to stand up and publicly announce they will be banning Pokemon? Or Lorcana? I don't know anything about poker, but your wizard game made me start to understand it. You've explained it to me like I'm a fish. She finally gets no limits.

I finally get it. So we do have a game that we're about to come out with called Debate Me. And the way it works is everybody starts the game with 200 followers. Everybody gets two cards from the same deck. There's four factions, left, right, center, and establishment. Interesting. And the goal is to create the best debate team.

If you think you have a good starting debate team, you invite your followers to the debate. And then we reveal three cards. You then look at the two cards you have. I got Jordan Peterson. I got Alex Jones. On the board is Antifa, the Proud Boys. And then you're like, okay, my debate team is looking pretty good. I'm going to invite more followers to the debate. Then we flip over one more card. Then everybody can invite more followers. And then there's one more card. And then it ends with whoever has the best debate team wins the debate and gets all the followers.

Yeah, yeah, yeah. So this is, at its core, literally just Texas Hold'em. However, what we're doing is collectible cards. So there's going to be a Golden God Emperor Trump card. He's basically the ace of the right

and it'll be foil and he'll be able to... And we're allowed to do anyone who's been a politician, we have the right to use their name and likeness. For everybody else, we'll do gag names.

Oh, yeah. However, the game is actually meant to be a customizable expansion on what poker is, and it's meant to be played not necessarily for money, just with followers and for fun. Yeah, that's cool. But it could be. And then, so we have Karine Jean-Pierre. She's a jack, but can only be played as a six. Wait.

Only played as a six. Right. So, you know, in poker, if you have a pair of sixes, if you have a six and a six right so you know in poker if you have a pair of sixes if you have if you have a six and a six you have a pair of sixes with kareem john pierre's card if you have she's labeled as a jack equivalent of a jack but can only be paired up with other six cards which means you can get five of a kind if you have six the implication being she's not good at her job okay okay okay yeah and then um like trump the we're playing around this idea where if you get golden gun emperor Trump, at any point in the game, you can reveal that you have the Trump instantly granting. It's going to be something like if before or before the second round of invites, you reveal that card to all the players, it can act as though it's a pair of aces.

And so you lose the advantage of the information. It may end the game immediately. You might win the followers. Some people might challenge you to it, but that means a single card is better than any other card. So we're playing around with abilities and things like that. Nice. But we'll see what happens.

My understanding is that if we file this lawsuit, the attorney general's office may read it and say, we can't win in court. Therefore, we will not fight it. And then basically what happens is social poker, which is playing with your friends, becomes legal. And then it would require the legislative reps to come in and try and solve any issues. And I imagine the casinos are going to demand the issue get solved immediately. But this would – I don't see how that can win because it would require the state to regulate Pokemon under the Lottery Commission. And you're going to have every 15-year-old in the state.

And Lorcana too. Lorcana is Disney. So now Disney, the weight of Disney coming into West Virginia and saying, if you shut us down, we're losing three to seven percent of our sales, which go through West Virginia. We're not going to stand for that. We're going to lobby with this guy. We don't care. We don't care about poker being legal, but you're going to you're going to put Lorcana and Pokemon. I mean, these are massive, massive, multibillion dollar brands that they're not going to allow to be regulated in that way. It's going to put the casinos up against Hasbro. It'll be wild. For real. Yeah, yeah. But I mean, it's all, in all honesty, like it's a legitimate problem. No, I get it. Yeah.

So I think what may happen is that the legislative branch may have to repeal the existing law, which says card games. It could be simple that within a year, they just say any trading card game for any company is excluded the problem then becomes okay debate me is released and now we're playing poker in the middle of the street but we got alex jones instead of an ace right it's meaningless right you can't you can't separate the you can't do it all right we got to grab a couple more super hits i've been ranting um put a girl on says happy 700 to pop culture crisis brett and mary let's go my friends you really got to subscribe to pop culture crisis you can go to Pop Culture Crisis. Brett and Mary, let's go. My friends, you really got to subscribe to Pop Culture Crisis.

You can go to popculturecrisis.com. It is one of, it's in the TimCast family, of course. Brett Dasavik and Mary Morgan, 700 episodes. They got like 130 some thousand subscribers. It's a big show now, but it's pop culture entertainment. And you guys, if you're into that stuff subscribe and watch it if you're not into entertainment music pop culture movies video games then you don't don't don't go there and subscribe just for the sake of it but the reason why i think pcc is important is it's not that it's

right wing it's just that it's not woke right so you wonder why nobody reviewed am i racist because they're all these institutions are all woke left. And so Pop Culture Crisis is just regular people. Okay? I think Mary's very conservative, but that's fine. The show's not about that. You know, if you want to get an honest take on what's going on, it's Pop Culture Crisis. And then shout out to Tales from the Inverted World as well. All right, let's go.

Shake Theater says, Hey Tim, I work in IT supporting hospitals in the Northeast Tennessee. We have two hospitals shut down and evacuated safely due to flooding. Part of I-40 at MM3 has collapsed into the river. I can't imagine Florida right now. Wow. Sorry to hear, man. I hope everybody's okay. That's crazy.

Yeah, and we're going to get hit by the hurricane as well. Yep. Yes. I'm sorry it followed me here. My apologies. It could have went west. Brought it up here. It could have went west.

It could have. And it decided to turn around and come straight up, and it's going to slam into Appalachia. Yeah, yep. So I'm glad my family was out of the direct path, but I really, I mean, right in the Big Bend got just obliterated. There was actually a sheriff of that central county where it really got hit. It said, listen, I know a lot of you are going to stick around and try to wait it out, but write your name and your birthday. We need to be able to identify you. Write it with a permanent marker on your arm because you're not getting out of this. Yeah, the sheriffs are pretty base, but that was really, really, really over the top.

Domagod says, I kind of want Trump to pull off the presidential hat trick, to be the first president to win, lose, win without the popular vote both times. No other president has won the second term without the popular vote. Even Grover Cleveland. Trump is the first sitting president to gain votes and lose. Yeah. Normally what happens. Yeah, I didn't realize that.

Yeah, it was a big deal i mean yeah so usually if a sitting president you know let's say he gets you 100 votes in the first time for the first time ever a president got more votes than their first run and lost and that was trump wow yeah because he went from like 64 to like 74 he gained like 10 million new votes yeah yeah but uh democrats got that that procedural game. You know what I mean? They know how to get the mail-in ballots. And Republicans... If I remember correctly,

it's the second most votes anybody's ever gotten. It's the most votes a sitting president has ever gotten. Yeah, yeah. And it's the second most vote a candidate has ever gotten. Wow.

And to win by... To gain such a large percentage of votes and still lose is wild, to say the least. Yeah, well, quick shout out, though, to Watley, who's the new chairman of the RNC. This guy has lawyers on the ground like crazy. Go look at his work in North Carolina when he put five lawyers in every county around the state of North Carolina. Really, miraculously, the Republicans picked up seats when votes were getting casted correctly.

All right. Zod says, when it comes to Springfield, you need to look into the properties that the migrants are occupying. Mayor Rob Rue owns Littleton Properties of Springfield, LLC. I'm sure there's a lot of wheels getting greased in a poor town. Indeed.

Yeah, and someone else is mentioning Logantown again. I guess they're having a scandal now. It popped up in a super chat. Yeah, that was yesterday. I started looking into that, and there have been concerns about migration in that town. They're eating the dogs. They're eating the cats. Are they eating the dogs and the cats?

I don't know if they're eating the dogs and the cats But I think that that speaks to The concerns about assimilation Eat the cat, eat, eat the cat Yeah, have you heard the song? Hold on, hold on a second Why did Seamus kill me? Did you guys watch the Freedom Tunes? No Seamus, this was absolutely arbitrary

Just in the middle of the episode I get shot What? Are you his Kenny? It's because you besmirched his good name With the whole soup uh the spoon stealing stealing things so he he made uh he made a cartoon this is freedom tunes by the way where it was um if kamala had survived an assassination attempt and like all the press are saying how

brave she is and everything and then abruptly and randomly they're like we should ban tim pool from living and then just shows me i'm sitting here and I go, bang! I was like, what? Seamus? Seamus is sitting there laughing like, ha ha ha. Judas. Judas. Alright, alright, alright. Let's grab what do we got here? Corwag says, the building Libby was talking about is

night and day if you search for the interiors of McDonald's from the 90s and now side by side. Well, I'll tell you one thing that's scary. Somebody posted a meme and it said, when did we go from this to this? And it was the McDonald's or the play place to a sterile McDonald's. And I was like, when y'all stopped having kids.

Yep. Exactly. The market provides. That's a good point. Okay, this is a good one. The truth A says the U.S. went from a melting pot and became a chamber pot. Nailed it. That's beautiful.

Yeah, I know. But it sucks. It does suck. I don't want to be that. No, don't want to be that. No, we don't. Nah. All right, here we go.

So Berkeley Bossard says had to drive from Youngstown to Martinsburg today and then drove back. Could have used a freshly brewed Timcast coffee. Well, hopefully next time. We're getting there. We're getting there. And we're going to be doing this big election party. And so I don't know if you're going to be around. I am coming by.

Oh, that's right. Perfect, perfect. After you win and you do your thing. And so we're doing... Where's it going to be? In Martinsburg. Oh, it's going to be there. Great. Yeah, it's members only. So what we're doing... Where's it going to be? In Martinsburg. Oh, it's going to be there. Great.

Yeah, it's members only. So what we're doing is there's going to be tickets. It's going to be for elite members first. They're going to get a week to decide if they want to buy the tickets. And I imagine it'll probably sell out then for elite members.

Because we're only doing 30 tickets because it's limited space and it's meant to be a private party, not a big public event. We originally wanted to do a big public event. The problem is no one's going to sit in a theater for nine hours or whatever. Right.

We can't do it. Because it's going to be all election day tracking the polls. We're going to be live from like 5 to 2 a.m., rotating guests, hanging out, whoever feels like coming in. So we did in the last election. And it'll be fun.

I think we're doing, I don't know if I should say this, I'm not supposed to, but we're going to do a crossover with Crowder. So I'm going to do a... Nice. Cool. Crowder, we're going to call in and join each other's shows and we're going to talk. It's going to be fun. I think we're doing, I don't know if I should say this, I'm not supposed to, but we're going to do a crossover with Crowder. So I'm going to do a show. Oh, nice. Cool. Yeah, Crowder, we're going to call in

and join each other's shows, and we're going to talk. It's going to be fun. And then we have a couple other shows. It's going to be wild. It's going to be a big party. And we're going to have food, catering. We will probably play Magic the Gathering.

I imagine that will be a big thing because right next door is a Magic the Gathering collector's. Oh, yeah, yeah, that's right. Mamba. Yeah, those guys are really cool. Mamba collectibles, shout out. Shameless plug, Luke Rudowsky and myself,

we've been doing crossovers during big events. We'll have Roger Stone in studio, and we will go live with Alex Jones and his team over at InfoWars and do basically a simulcast. It's really neat. But not next month. No, no, no. I'm not conflicting with yours.

No, no, no, no. I'm saying you won't be able to next month. Don't make it sad, man. Because they're shutting Alex Jones. I know. I'm kidding, though. You can never stop Alex Jones. Some seven-year-old kid's going to pull out a cell phone and Alex is going to rant and he's going to go viral.

Alex is welcome to come and move in with me and we'll record and go live every night. I don't care, man. All right. Scrody Johnson says, we are in a recession and it's going to get worse. Stellantis is trying to move Dodge Durango production to Mexico, breaking UAW negotiations,

causing a major strike. And there's also rumors BYD bid is eyeing Chrysler to break in. This is what you get with the Kamalares. Cilantro Industrial Complex says, could you reach out to Snake Farm

or have boonies get Riley Moore a guest elected official board? Happy Friday. What are the restrictions on that? If we made a board that was like a Riley Moore guest board, but you didn't receive anything from it? Oh yeah, you can do that.

But there's no benefit to having your name? Like, I don't know. I mean, other than my dream since I've been 12, yes. Well, I guess it's the same thing when we do the cards. You're a public figure. We're allowed to use your name? Like, I don't know. I mean, other than my dream since I've been 12, yes. Well, I guess it's the same thing when you do the cards. You're a public figure. We're allowed to use your likeness.

Yeah, yeah. We're allowed to use likeness. Oh, we should totally do that then. Yes! Dream accomplished. The member of Congress has a pro board he does not benefit from in any way

and makes my company money. I think that one would sell like hotcakes, to be honest. Oh, it'd be awesome. Especially when you're in. I'd have to take down pictures at my house. My wife will hate it, and I'm just going to put boards up everywhere. I'll buy most of them. We'll see how it goes, but we're

all pretty much expecting you to be hanging out with Massey every day. He cruises through West Virginia a lot. He's squatting up with Thomas Massey, and then you're basically going to have all the libertarians buying your board just because, you know. We'll make a Massey board as well. Maybe we should just do that. Make a Thomas Massey board and it'll have the Clucks capacitor on it and chicken.

Perfect. One of the boards we're releasing soon is the 28th Amendment, which states chickens being necessary to the security of a free state. The right of the people to keep, bear, and breed chickens shall not be infringed. I like it. And what's funny is a bunch of states are recognizing this now. Arizona, I think, just passed a law saying you cannot ban chicken ownership.

That's right. So in cities, they ban chickens. Really? Yeah, because they're like, oh, we don't want the animals. You roosters are yelling. And Arizona was like, you can't do this. People have a right.

And I think... People have a right to grow food. I would ask you, Josie grow food. Food freedom is a... I would ask you, Josie, I believe that there is a... You don't need a 20th Amendment from this. You just need the Supreme Court to rule in the Third Amendment,

which the Third Amendment's greater interpretation is the government has no right to restrict you on your property or to interfere with your rights. I believe the right to grow and develop your own food is included in that. I don't know if you... I love it. I like that extension. I'm not going to grow and develop your own food is is included in that.

I don't know if you love it. I like that extension. I'm not going to argue that extension to that. Yeah, I would basically get rid of all zoning laws to, you know, the Third Amendment. The Third Amendment has never been ruled on by the Supreme Court. So I think that this will be a good opportunity. So the Third Amendment is no quartering. But the broader argument that scholars have brought up is like with free speech or with Second Amendment, there's the country evolves. And the true intention of the Third Amendment is that you are secure in your home from government interference, which should mean that to to a certain degree, there is greater freedoms within your own property to do what you need to do to live your life, pursue happiness, etc. That would be pretty interesting, though. They do regulate guns, so they still have zoning laws. All right, everybody, smash that like etc. That would be pretty interesting, though they do regulate guns, so they'd still have zoning laws. Alright, everybody, smash that like button,

subscribe to this channel, share the show with everyone you know. It's the best show. Everyone agrees. At least that's what I've been told. Become a member at TimCast.com to support our work. You can follow me on X and Instagram at TimCast. Riley, do you want to shout anything out? Yeah, so I'm going to be in Pennsylvania tomorrow with Senator J.D. Vance

campaigning. I'm going to come on the tomorrow with Senator J.D. Vance campaigning. I'm going to come on the show. Yeah, I will. I want to see him tomorrow. I'm with him. I'm going to see him tomorrow. So we're going to be in Monroeville, right outside of Pittsburgh. We're going to win Pennsylvania. And you can follow me at RileyMooreWV on Twitter, Instagram, Facebook, all that stuff.

At Liberty Lockpot on X. If you want to support my work, subscribe there. I'll follow you back. Liberty Lockdown is the show. It's on YouTube and everywhere else. And if you haven't subscribed by now, you're a real piece of work. Just being honest with you. I also do all one word We Are Change on Rumble.

Luke and I go live three nights a week over there. And I also do Tower Gang, which you should never, ever watch. And we got Josie, which everybody already follows on X, but you should follow her if you haven't. I'm Josie. I'm T-R-H-L official over on X. And you can go ahead and follow me over there. Or you can become a member at TimCast.com

and help support our work here. Or you can watch my show, Spaces with Josie. I have Dinesh D'Souza on with me next week. And the following week, I have Ian Carroll, which is going to be a really fun show. I'm Libby Emmons. I'm with The Postmillennial and humanevents.com.

And you can check out my newsletter if you want. It's thepostmillennial.com slash Libby. Thanks. We will see all of you tomorrow at Rage Against the War Machine in Washington, D.C.

Let's go. Thanks for hanging out.