Timcast IRL - Timcast IRL #273 - James O'Keefe Is SUING CNN, They Are ROYALLY Screwed w/Jim Hanson

Episode Date: April 27, 2021

Tim, Ian, and Lydia join retired Green Beret weapons specialist and author Jim Hanson to discuss the Project Veritas lawsuit against CNN, TV ratings plummeting as people grow weary of wokeness, the abolition of the police, the Supreme Court's choice to hear gun cases, and the meteoric rise in gun ownership among regular people scared about the state of the nation. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

James O'Keefe, Project Veritas, they have sued CNN for defamation. I think they've also already sued Twitter, but we're going to go through these stories. I think James has CNN dead to rights, man. You've got this woman from CNN tweeting out a statement from Twitter and then saying something totally different on TV. I think James can easily prove malice, which means this woman either knew she was lying or had reckless disregard for the truth. Considering she tweeted one thing and said another, how are you going to tell the judge it wasn't, it wasn't actually me. I don't tweet. I

don't run my account. Maybe that's true, but either way, it's going to get thrown to discovery. Her account, she said it, maybe it was someone else. Great. Now we go to discovery and you'll publish the proof and you'll be deposed and James will get to question you on camera. It's going to be big. He's going after Jack Dorsey as well. And wow, James O'Keefe may be the most important person right now in the culture war because he's actually, I think he's going to win these. He has really, he's doing things that people should have done a long time ago. Things that I've said, like, why aren't people doing things like this? Like when Twitter bans you and then says, this is why they banned you. It's if it's not true, sue them. James is doing it. When CNN smears you

with lies, you sue him. James is suing them. The New York times, man, you know, you know, I'm really, I'm really upset with cops because I feel like most of them aren't getting off their asses and doing anything that's standing up for themselves. Many are, don't get me wrong, but too many aren't. So when I see someone like James standing up, I'm like, bravo, good sir. So we'll talk about the decline in media and their pathetic failures, as well as the Oscars. Horrifying failure. Ratings are down 58%. Good.

I didn't watch it. I didn't watch Mortal Kombat, which is an amazing movie, by the way. And we'll go through a bunch of other stuff. Gavin Newsom is getting recalled. Hey, it's a good day, I guess, right? So we're hanging out with Jim Hansen. How's it going, man? Outstanding. Good to be here. You want to just give a little quick introduction for who you are? Who am I? I am Jim Hansen. I'm the author of Winning the Second Civil War Without Firing a Shot Unless We Have To. Did you hear that 20 former generals in France

warned Macron that France is headed towards civil war due to leftist dogma. Who isn't? I mean, that's the thing. Let's have this argument. I was kind of hoping Bernie Sanders would get nominated by the Dems so we could go capitalism versus socialism, freedom versus totalitarianism. So we missed that. But Biden might as well not be there. You know, the woke crowd is running him like a sock puppet.

So, you know, we're going to get it anyhow. Let's get that split done. Pick your tribe. Pick the winning tribe because you're not going to like it. We also got that 2A thing coming up. Supreme Court has granted a, what is that, a writ of cert? Is that what it's called? So we're going to hear an argument on the right to bear arms out of the home.

Could be broad, you think? Yeah, I think the reason they picked this case and turned down the previous ones is because they can do a broad ruling on this because it's got all the hallmarks and the amicus briefs from places like firearm policy coalition are devastating to the idea that you can't bear arms outside the home so there's no question you can the only question is what restrictions can they put on it and i think they're going to say very few there's also the question i mean did you read the filing from was it the firearms what's it called firearms policy coalition i was reading their briefing and they were like what about crossing state lines yeah what if you're what if you what if you live in you know uh you know indiana want

to go to illinois yeah supreme court might just be like you know what carry around guns 2a we'll talk about that we got ian he's chilling chilling. Yes, Ian Crossland over here. Thanks for having me. And me in the corner pushing the buttons. I'm doing the camera switches. Very important part of my job. She is the king, queen, emperor, and empress of camera switches. Thank you, Jim.

I appreciate that. Absolutely. And also, don't forget to go to TimCast.com, become a member, because we're going to have a members-only segment coming up. You just go to the website, TimCast.com, click members only, sign up. And then in the members area, you'll see a bunch of really great conversations. We talked with Michael Knowles last Friday for like almost an hour, I think, about religion. And I think it was a fantastic conversation.

So definitely want to check that out. Now let's jump into this first major story we got from Fox News. James O'Keefe suing CNN following permanent ban from Twitter. Quote, we've, it's not a quote, but we've never lost a lawsuit. Project Veritas expects to launch a defamation lawsuit against CNN on Monday. Well, my understanding is that they did, but the story from Fox includes a little bit about Twitter. So we'll read this first. They say, James O'Keefe is taking action against being permanently banned from Twitter and plans to go after CNN with a defamation lawsuit expected Monday. There are people on Twitter who are impersonating me who still remain on Twitter.

He said, I will depose Jack Dorsey under oath and tomorrow I will sue CNN. Project Fair has already launched a lawsuit against Twitter for defamation in New York after the social media giant removed the founder for exposing CNN for manipulating political events. Twitter claimed O'Keefe was removed from the platform for operating fake accounts, which he denied. That's a statement of fact. And I've long said, because we've seen this before, I'm pretty sure it was Twitter that Twitter said Milo Yiannopoulos was operating multiple accounts. And when you ask them about it, they say, we don't comment on our individual users. And I'm thinking, if that's a false statement, if they're lying, why don't these people who get banned sue Twitter? People don't. There's a good reason why they probably don't. It's really, really expensive. I mean, we're

talking hundreds of thousands of dollars, plus these big corporations, Twitter, they got billions. How do you go up against that? Well, James O'Keefe is, and it would seem very clearly and plainly, he's not operating fake accounts and Twitter lied. Well, now we've got the statement from Veritas on CNN. Check this out from projectveritas.com. This is where they get them dead to rights. Project Veritas sues CNN after network hosts said Project Veritas' ban was a result of misinformation crackdown. If you think defaming us is without consequence, think again. James O'Keefe announced today that Veritas has filed a lawsuit against CNN in Atlanta, Georgia, a federal court. CNN anchor Anna Cabrera said Veritas' suspension from Twitter was part of a, quote,

much broader crackdown by social media giants on accounts that were promoting misinformation. Project Veritas' Twitter account was in fact taken down, but for supposed privacy violations. Even Cabrera previously tweeted that Veritas' ban from Twitter was the result of alleged privacy violations, proving she knew what she subsequently reported was false. Cabrera had knowledge of Twitter's original reasoning for banning Veritas before she went on air and acted with malice when she said that the platform was part of a crackdown on those promoting misinformation. CNN's own reporter Brian Fung followed up with Twitter and Project Veritas about the ban and reported that the account had been banned for privacy

violations. A CNN clip that closely resembles the Veritas video used as justification for the ban has been allowed to remain up on Twitter's platform. The lawsuit comes on the heels of Veritas' historic legal victory against the New York Times, defeating a paper's motion to dismiss in the New York Supreme Court. Veritas is also suing Twitter for defamation and expects discovery and depositions to follow, which will help uncover the truth. It is stunning that the most important action taken to uncover the truth might just be Veritas suing in their own defense. Good. Like you said, let's fight.

I mean, that's the game. We've been sitting back on our heels too long and letting these people abuse us. We know they're lying. They lie all the time about whether or not they discriminate against conservatives. They obviously do. Now he's got them dead to rights on a couple of things. And while deposing Jack Dorsey sounds like fun, I think

defenestrating him for defamation would be a much better way. Figuratively. Yes. It's a great word. Defenestrate. I do love that word. I'm looking it up. What does it mean? It means to throw out a window. It's a great word. Defenestrate. I do love that word. I'm looking it up. What does it mean?

It means to throw out a window. It's a very specific word. But we mean figuratively in the context of a legal conflict. Throw him through a legal loophole. There you go. Perfect. Right. From the second floor of the law library.

Yeah. Like when someone says throw a book at you they don't mean literally do it they mean use everything against them but i do love that word growing up a friend of mine would be like i'm gonna throw you out the window like when we were playing board games if i beat him repetitively that was his answer i didn't know well did you beat him figuratively or literally right i beat him figuratively this is youtube so obviously we're talking about lawsuits but but uh no no here's what i here's what i was saying. Veritas means truth. Project Veritas.

What do they do? They do undercover reporting. They do investigative work. And what's funny is we may get the truth now because of a lawsuit. We may actually have Veritas sue over being defamed and then get these reporters under oath to tell the truth. Well, we knew we weren't going to get truth from CNN. We don't even get news from CNN, and that's in their name. So the idea that they were going to do that, and they would be forced to.

And now you made a good point when we were jawjacking before the show that Anna Cabrera either needs to lie and say she wasn't the one tweeting, or she needs to figure out that, hey, if I get busted, CNN's paying it, so why worry about perjury? Well, maybe it's not a lie, right? So, Anna Cabrera of CNN tweeted that it was due to privacy violations, then went on TV and said it was a crackdown on misinformation. Which is it? And then you were like, she'll just say it wasn't her tweeting. Well, maybe it wasn't her tweeting. Maybe she's got an intern who just tweets random things, you know, that's newsworthy

and she doesn't actually pay attention. Either way, a judge is going to be like, okay, let's find out. And at some level, those who were both on CNN official accounts of some sort, because her Anna Cabrera account is a CNN account. So in that case, it's still CNN's responsibility. And at some point we don't have to care. We can just light the bonfire and dance. I think this is so great because as a journalist, you need to understand the responsibility you have on your shoulders

to take that mantle of a journalist and to lie or to be lazy with your journalist is grounds for getting just raped financially. That company can just get

devastated financially if it's promoting lies. When has that ever happened, though? Dude, the idea that you can say journalism is telling the truth and all this, I have not seen that happen in the bulk of my adult life. When was the media telling the truth?

Well, for instance, on this— Walter Cronkite lied, and that was like 1960s. On this show, if we misrepresent facts or things, the stream will get demonetized. Because you're conservatives, because you're right of center. If you're left of center, you can say whatever you want. Well, Ian's definitely not conservative. Okay. Well, Ian's here for you to beat with a stick with his good ideas that are thoughtful.

But no, the idea that the media is going to tell the truth, they never have. But it's not about conservatism. I was talking with Michael Knowles, and I was like, look, first of all, I really doubt Michael considers me a conservative. My positions are fairly liberal. The issue is that we know reality. We agree on objective facts and reality. And, you know, I look at someone like, you know, James O'Keefe, Project Veritas, and I'm like, I honestly don't know his politics. I'm assuming he's a conservative because he speaks at conservative events.

But I've never asked him, like, what do you think about taxes? All I know is that he does investigative reporting and he goes against the establishment. Yeah. And then let's make a clarification here for me. I'll state that I am right of center politically, but I am anti-woke is my main goal right now. I am against the idea that wokeness should be the policy of America. And whatever that turns my politics to, I can't see myself voting for a Democrat, right, because all of them are subsumed by that. So I don't mean to say you're a conservative. You're definitely not.

But I'm not making that point. I'm just – it's a broad way. We need a better word for our team. It's like – You know, everybody's trying to come up with what the right distinction is, and I don't think there's one. Nah, that's good. I think – I don't know if it was you who brought this up before, that the second American Civil War would be more like Syria with a bunch of different factions. Was that you?

That wasn't me, but that's a good point. Yeah, so a lot of people think that a civil war would be like the left and the right marching at each other like the American Civil War. And it's like, no, no, like Syria. You have like 24 different factions of people all fighting each other and the government, just absolute chaos. And I've heard people say, it's the nationalists versus the globalists. And I'm like, no, that's not true because I'm not a staunch nationalist. I'm about individual liberties, freedoms.

And I'm fairly pro-America, but not nearly as many Trump supporters. Some have said it's authoritarian versus libertarian. That may be it. That's probably the best distinction. That's the one I like. And that's the Ayn Rand distinction. That's producers, looters, and moochers. That is the statists versus the individualists.

You should read that book and decide which team you're on. However, you then see the Boogaloo Boys standing up. I can't remember what city this was. And the Proud Boys walk by. And they call them statists and a bunch of other slurs. Right. Bootlicking statists and then slurs, and I thought it was hilarious that they said that. But the Proud Boys don't view themselves as statists for the most part.

No. But they were pro-Trump, so that's more – so there's like – it's kind of weird whatever the factions are. You also have like urban and rural because when it comes to the law, they need vastly laws to function especially gun laws right urban versus rural is a huge component it's the blue cities so this is the crazy thing i was i was reading uh i was looking at some polls they found that even in red states the city centers are still blue i went to a very very red state went to a tiny little town with like 20 000 people and it was blue there were like black lives matter flags and i'm like that's so weird. That is weird.

You go five minutes out and everyone's waving Trump flags. That's so weird. But it's the permanent bureaucracy. That's where, if you look at the places where the left took over during the time from like the Cold War till now, they took over the government,

the permanent bureaucracy, they took over academia, and they took over the culture. Well, the culture's not, obviously not out in the red states, but the other two are. And that's where they live. They're the teachers' unions and the government. I got to tell you, I look at what's going on, and I'm like, isn't this predictable? Collectivists organize and defer power to the authorities within their groups,

and individualists are individualists, and it's harder for them to organize so individualist is another big component which may just be it's collectivist versus individualist authoritarian libertarian so i might be you know personally kind of left libertarian recognizing it's much more difficult to be than right libertarian but it's just where i'm at my ideas fall and it's it's about being an individual and respecting individual rights to say no i don't want to participate i choose i choose not to and then the authoritarians who are like i'm gonna tell you to do what i want and if you don't do it to you know we'll beat you with a stick or something but there you go that let's that's a fine distinction because i think now the what i call

the right my team is the tolerant team and the woke team is the team of dogma and cancel culture and all the rules they have. And you either, you know, they're tolerant of everyone who agrees with 100% of their dogma. Well, guess what? No. And I'm fine. I would have leftists of any flavor they want in the new sordid America where our tribes are split, you know, statist individualists. You can come over to our side as long as you don't try and make people do stuff. Well, so going back to the original story, what do you think happens if,

what do you think happens in this lawsuit? I mean, I don't see how CNN wins this. I can see how they win it because it's the amount of money and what they have, and the system is relatively rigged in favor of corporate interests and corporate lawyers in this, and the bar's hugely high for mouths. You got Anna Cabrera saying it on Twitter. This is good. I will say of all the ones I've seen, this one makes me the happiest.

This one I might actually go stack the wood for the bonfire in the hopes that good will triumph over evil. Because if anybody deserves to get kicked for this. It's CNN. Yeah. I've had people tell me that even though Veritas has won that, stopped the motion to dismiss from the New York Times, they still don't think they'll win. Yeah, no, that's a huge difference. I mean, okay, you get to continue with your lost cause lawsuit. But they get discovery. Yeah, good. And all that's good.

But there's got to be something to discover and you can't unless you get an email from like dean backett or whatever his name is saying um let's lie about you know o'keefe and veritas which doesn't exist because they do that in meetings instead you know so hopefully though in cnn because of this because they've got this bold-faced lie to start with that they would dig deeper. You know those guys are so lost. Look at the video they got of that one, you know, the technical director guy. It shows there is malice. You know, there is actual malice as a company policy. So I don't know.

Get them. Launch the alpaca. It sounds like CNN, based on this technical director, that they're a political organization. Yeah. I wonder then if, you know, even if it's just one guy. So for those that aren't familiar, Veritas got this technical director from CNN Undercover basically saying they wanted to get Trump out. They want to push, you know, climate change stuff and fear and propaganda. I wonder at what point does the government come in and say you're acting as a political organization and the things you say are donations or I don't think it's I don't think it'll

happen because things like this never happen. It would happen if they do if they diffused with the government's intentions, like they're promoting the covid death numbers helped the Biden administration, you know, that's what he was saying. He was saying, like, we got Trump. That's what he said. I don't think there's any question that's what they're doing and have been doing for as long as I can remember. The question is, will anyone have the guts to do something about it? You get a guy like Rick DeSantis in 2025, right, and he decides to bring in his pipe hitters like Rick Grinnell and some other people and put them in positions and go ahead

and call in the leaders of all these government agencies that you own, that work for you, and say, you today classify CNN as a 527 or a PAC. Do it. And then make them fight you in court. That would be a bunch of First Amendment arguments. Good. Who cares?

Let's have that fight from doing it. Do it first and make them fight. That's what they do to us. See, they go ahead. Biden had 60-some executive orders. They ban guns, then say, take us to court. Exactly. Let it first and make them, that's what they do to us. Yeah. See, they go ahead. Biden had 60 some executive orders. They ban guns, then say, take us to court. Exactly.

Let's do it to them. Pay back some medevac. You think Trump didn't do that because he just wasn't on his radar? I think Trump did it because the right does not have a bench like the left of people who know how to do that stuff.

So what you got to do is exercise your executive authority. You're the commander in chief and chief executive bring those executives bring the leader of every agency who has jurisdiction in and say tomorrow you declare cnn a 527 or a pack or tell me why you're not going to and if you're not pack your shit pack your stuff you're out but trump wasn't a fascist yeah he didn't that sad? No.

I mean, it's a good thing. It's sad the media lied nonstop all day, every day, and Trump actually wasn't sending in the troops. He wasn't shutting down the press. He's a little too laissez-faire, a little too libertarian for my tastes. You want to be more authoritarian? His 501, I think he should have went for, like, what is it, the social network law that everyone's freaking out with.

230. Section 230. He didn't do anything to circumvent the power of these authoritarian corporations, and it's almost to the point of flaw. He could have done more. He didn't know. He didn't have good people around him, and he didn't get to it, and he should have. And there are people warning him.

But there's a lot of problems with the Trump administration that he didn't get things done. Mostly personnel. And that's why I have faith now. If you take a guy, and I keep saying DeSantis because I like his style now, and he's actually competent. You bring people in, and now it's a generation down. We're past Trump's generation. We're into the Gen X version of right-wing politicians.

They are more active. You had the laissez-faire is a great way to put it. They're not doing things. We're under attack by the left. Fight back first and make them counterattack. And then let's have a fight on our turf. It's the libertarian. There's too many of them.

And not Big L, but, you know, they're just like, I'm not going to lie, cheat, and steal. Right. And so if you don't, what did Jordan Peterson say? He said something to the effect of if you are not capable of cruelty then you will be a victim to those who are and it's true and it's it i don't think it's an endorsement to be a cruel person it just means you got to be careful of the cruel people who will who will manipulate do you want to win

or do you want to lose and pretend you stood on the moral high ground while the united states becomes a totalitarian state. Well, the issue is... I'll fight. Sure, sure. But the issue is they cheat. So it's one thing to fight.

It's another thing to cheat. And if you start cheating, then you're promoting the same system they do of manipulation and deception. Their argument is the ends justify the means. Oh, once we win, then we get what we want. No. Once you win power, you have to keep using the disgusting tactics that you use to get it to keep it. And so if we stoop to that level, then we just are in the mud with them and we're not actually making a better system at all.

One thing I have a problem with is when an enemy cheats, if you don't know they're cheating and then you try and cheat to defeat them, then you look like the bad guy because it's obvious that you're cheating. And, like, so you have to either be equally as deceptive, which I't i don't justify i don't like that although maybe there's a time and a place for it so in this regard and you guys are welcome to disagree with me this is something that i've been thinking i kind of think that conservatism contains the seeds of its own destruction because we will not play by their rules and we will allow them to walk all over us because we think that we're doing the right thing. I think this is intrinsically weakening. I see this as being a big flaw and I want to do the right thing and I want to uphold these good principles.

But at the same time, it's like, how do we properly fight back and really make it happen? That's tough. Go up to the line, dangle your feet over the edge, lean forward and punch somebody in the face figuratively using as much of the rules as are available right now. Our people have been 10 steps back because they're like, Oh, we don't want to get in the muck,

get in the muck, the muck dirty. All right. Don't break the law. Don't knowingly break the law. Do every single thing you can to game the system. And we don't want to do that because we want the moral high ground, which doesn't exist.

But it's not just that. It's do you want to live in a society where people are honest and respecting your rights? Or do you want to be in a society where people just game the system to gain power? If you don't win this fight,

we're not going to have any rights to keep. So if you don't, we won't push it to the limit now to keep the republic, then guess what? We can go back and get nicer about it after we won't push it to the limit now to keep the republic, then guess what? We can go back and get nicer about it after we at least fight him to detente. It seems like there's, I don't see a solution. I see use the tactics that defy the ethics, the morals, and the goals that we desire, or watch them do it.

Okay, I'll give you an example that I really like that's happening right now that's part of the whole winning the second Civil War concept. Federalism works. What's happening in Montana, Arizona, Oklahoma, and Texas, they're Second Amendment sanctuary states or in the process of it. They say if you pass a garbage law, our state will not enforce it. Now, then we get into an argument about preemption and those kind of things. But let's put those markers down.

Did you see in Ohio when the ATF guy got arrested? No. So an ATF guy goes to this woman's house. Apparently, she bought a shotgun and he was doing a checkup. And she calls the cops because this guy's banging on her door. And she's like, I don't know. He is wearing like a polo. Well, so this is a ridiculous video.

It's from last July, and the cops come out, and this guy's got a gun. So they're like, don't move, and he goes, let me get my ID, and they're like, stop, so they draw their guns because his hand's going to his waist. They end up putting him on the ground. They end up arresting him. He's screaming, I can't breathe. They try to put him in the squad car. He won't get in, just like George Floyd uses his head to resist, and he won't get in the car. He's like, I got a he's screaming i can't breathe they try to put him in the squad car he won't get in just like george floyd uses his head to resist and he won't get in the car

he's like i got a medical condition i can't breathe he ends up you know i guess he's suing but i think it was ohio that said if the atf tries to come and enforce it their cops will arrest him good for violating state law you know and there's an argument this wasn't this case wasn't that it was this guy they didn't know who he was right and then when they arrest him they're like he's actually got a badge he might be a cop and they're like, he's actually got a badge. He might be a cop. And they're like, well, he shouldn't have resisted. And I'm watching this like, why did he resist?

Why didn't he just put his hands up, cuff? And then just say, I'm sorry, officers. I'm a federal agent. They would have checked his pocket. Sorry about that, buddy. And then cuffed him. Instead, he resists and fights him. But let's go back to the media because we have this other story I really want to talk about.

The Oscars. From Variety. TV ratings. Oscars really want to talk about. The Oscars. From Variety. TV ratings. Oscars plummet to record low. Down 58% compared to last year. This is... There's something bad to this. There is.

But let's talk about it. They say, Per Nielsen Live, same-day preliminary national numbers, an average of 9.85 million viewers tuned in Sunday evening to watch a more intimate and stripped-down version. That's a

58.3% 13.75 million viewer drop from last year. 13.75 million people! Now, get woke, go broke. You want to make this garbage content and keep pushing your incessant pandering? People aren't going You want to make this garbage content and keep pushing your incessant pandering?

People aren't going to want to watch it. The negative is that we have no cohesive culture we're unified around. We're not all being like, we love the Super Bowl, we love watching the Oscars, because it's become hyper-partisan and fractured. Okay, and good. Because here's the thing. Our

unifying factors before, we did have like the Super Bowl and some things that would draw both sides together and we could get around. There is nothing left that can do that. And I think that's a good thing for the short term. I think we need to tribalize and go ahead and say, we will not patronize your woke lecture session. It's a struggle session. You know what I mean?

It's a Chinese communist struggle session where everyone goes on and admits their wrongs and wears the hair shirt and flagellates themselves who wants to watch that if you're not a cult member so now if we opt out and we being the anti-woke crowd whatever we determine ourselves to be it's a big tent you know i'm a big anti-woke tent guy so if as long as you're not hassling me, you're welcome in my tent. Don't patronize them. This is the craziest thing about, you know, when I sit down with many conservatives because leftists are worried about getting canceled. They will bend the knee to the cult, even anti-woke left. There are many anti-woke leftists, like they're very socialist, but they don't like the cult.

They don't want to come on because they're like i'll get canceled right and so so i end up talking to conservatives where on any like policy issue we will have a debate but when it comes to the core elements of what's happening in this country right now we agree there's a you know what i think it is because we talked a lot about religion with michael knolls we've talked about this with many other people it's a judeo-christian moral framework versus a might-makes-right fascistic moral framework. An Anglo-Saxon legal background. So conservatives

and liberals in the United States share the same moral framework, even if atheist liberals don't want to accept it. Like the Fifth Amendment is rooted very much so in Blackstone's formulation, rooted very much so from the Bible, the story of Sodom and Gomorrah. So when you have liberals who are atheists still agreeing with the right to a speedy trial, innocent until proven guilty, it's like this is a moral framework built upon religion. Now, you may have removed many of those components or things you didn't like about it.

I respect that. But there's still that similar moral framework. The woke operate on a fascistic moral framework of might makes right. There is no truth but power. So that's the divide right now. So I can disagree with Ben Shapiro on tax policy, but we agree on morality for the most part. There's probably a lot of issues we disagree on. But if it comes from like a libertarian or a classically liberal American framework, then we're all basically getting along, be it disagreeing on political issues and then cracking a beer and having some pizza or whatever.

Agreeing to disagree, which is no longer possible with the woke left. All right. They don't even believe it because they believe that our system, our side of the fence is evil and dangerous, killing the planet, killing people and all these things. So they have, you know, because it is a secular religion to them, it is it is inherent on them to fight and take us out. And so they can't agree to disagree. It's not possible in their moral framework anymore because silence is violence. I don't I think most of these I think maybe to the the priests of the woke the woke religion.

But I think most people who follow this are more like blind zealots. They don't actually know or care what the rules are. They just know that it's like they turn on the TV and everyone's bumping shoulders or elbows saying the same thing. There are no rules and that's just it. Exactly. You can't know what the rules are, but they know they're scared.

And so what they're doing is they're looking around and they're trying to anticipate what they shouldn't be doing next. So I look at Jimmy Kimmel, for instance. He goes out on the street in Hollywood and he asks questions of people and they give him really dumb answers and he makes fun of them. I know there's a lot of conservatives who do that to leftists. They'll go to leftists and ask them questions and get dumb answers. And the leftists to right, they'll find right-makers and get dumb answers. And there are a lot of, it's really easy to do

with enough editing. Because people are stupid. I mean, that's the main problem. Well, because a lot of people are stupid. Right, for sure.

People, on average, are average. There you go. But if you go out for 10 hours and you ask, you know, 100 people,

you're going to find a decent amount of dumb, an average amount to average, and a decent amount of smart. Then you edit out all the smart and average people and get only dumb people and you make it look. But I will tell you, man, I've done so many interviews with people on the left and I've talked to many of my friends on the left and they don't pay attention. I talk to my average friends who are either like leftists, like legit Bernie leftist types. They pay attention.

They're active. I think they're missing a lot of information. And then I talk to the average center-right or right-wing person, and they're politically active. They may get things wrong, but they are reading more news than the average person. You talk to the average liberal, my friends, I talk to them, and they'll

say things like, I was talking to my friend, and we were talking about something with Woke in Hollywood or whatever, and they were like, well, you gotta admit, white people are kind of bad. And I was like, what does that mean? And they were like, you know, and I'm like, I don't. Like, what does that mean? I don't understand what that means.

I grew up in a mixed-race area, so I don't know. You're from the white suburbs. What does that mean? And they couldn't give me an answer. It's just something they heard someone say somewhere, so they just repeat it, and that's it. It's performative virtue signaling. And they want to do that because right now there's only two things that get you. One is wearing the hair shirt and saying that I'm bad because of my skin color.

And the other one is going ahead and allowing them to put you in your place. And they don't want to get caught, but they're not informed as to why this actually is. So they can't, to your point, make a coherent case for why they suck. Well, they just think. They just know they suck. They just think if they say that, the other person blindly agrees. Right. Right.

That's the talking point. That's what the TV told me to say. You're supposed to nod your head. When someone just goes, what does that mean? It reminds me of that moment with Joe Rogan and Barry Weiss. Did you ever see that? I'm not sure. So Barry Weiss was a New York Times,

I think she was an opinion writer. She goes on Joe Rogan's show, and Joe Rogan mentions that he likes Tulsi Gabbard, and Barry says, oh, she's such a toady for Assad. And then Joe just goes, toady, what does that mean? And Barry says,

I don't know. She didn't know. So the video goes viral, and Jimmy Dore makes a video, and he's like, look at this. And I think Barry's pretty cool, but that was one of those moments where you've got to know what you're talking about, otherwise you're going to get called out. So some people – she was working at the New York Times. How much you want to bet? She's in the New York Times newsroom, which we know is woke.

And someone said that, and she goes, yeah, I know, right? And then she says it. Someone goes, yeah, I know. Right. None of them actually know what that means. I guess it meant sycophant, but she like couldn't even spell the word. I'm not trying to be mean like, you know, but if you go on, if you go on a show like Joe Rogan and you say something, back it up. Otherwise I'd have just been like, you know what? You got me. I shouldn't even have said that. Or just, you know,

if you don't know that that means he's bad, why did you even go there you know because it's the only lick they had on tulsi i mean i i like a lot of the things she says you know what i mean she's a democrat and she's an odd kind of democrat which i can respect she's a republican now she probably is a republican but she's on that side of the fence still but yeah she was she was wrong about some things she said about asad he's a he's a horrible tyrant and she apologized for him and don't do that but like you said no you're doing it don't just repeat the latest thing that everyone's saying know what your criticism is instead it's like people just blindly repeat but they're reading from the woke prayer book right all

right which is what it is treat it like religion, and it makes things so much simpler. It's remarkable. It's like a lack of responsibility. And it's funny because it falls into, you know, Republicans like to say personal responsibility a lot. Well, I'd imagine if you believe in personal responsibility, you're probably going to be responsible for your information gathering more so than someone who doesn't. Someone who thinks the collective will take care of me opens up the New York Times and says, must be true. New York Times said it. Put the phone away.

And I wish more people on the right or the individualist side, our team, would check their sources. Because there is so much garbage and static and worthless information that gets passed around by people I like. And I'm like, what? It takes 10 seconds. Click the link. Right. Even Twitter is telling you, do you want to read this article? Read the link right you know click even twitter's telling you do you want to read this article read the article before you retweet it easiest way to put it is that on

the right a failure to collect proper information tends to be the exception and on the left it tends to be the rule right so the reason i say tends to is that i think there are a lot of people on the right who get it wrong a lot of the time but is it 45 percent of the time versus 55 percent of the time they get it right versus the left which is the other way around right so i look at a lot of conservatives i remember watching this one video where journalists went down to actually it was uh there was like a youtuber who goes down to like his trump event ask people questions and you get a lot of like half-cocked answers where they you know they read more than just the article, but they didn't quite understand it fully. So they'll say a few things, then hit a roadblock and be like, that's

the extent of which I can argue this. And sometimes it looked dumb because of it. But you look at like, you know, my favorite is the Ami Horowitz video where he asks the kids at Berkeley about voter ID being racist. Have you seen that one? And they're like, they're saying the most insane things ever. Or actually Steven Crowder just did a change my mind on voter he says you know not having voter ideas racist he sits down with these people and they can't even explain their ideas they want to but they can't well and they end up making the point that what they have is the soft bigotry of low expectations you know you don't believe that black people have either agency or the ability to act as normal American citizens. How racist is that? I think they do.

I think Candace Owens said this, that it's because black conservatives act like equals. Right. It's really interesting when you have these college students. I don't want to rehash that. More about the media and the lack of understanding. But when you look at these liberals and they believe the things they just saw on TV, it's remarkably racist. Think about this. You get this young woman in this Ami Horowitz video, and she says these things about

black people, which are ridiculous and untrue. She's saying overtly racist things, disparaging an entire race of people because CNN said it. That's horrifying. Yeah, that's the cult in action. Basically, if your leader says something and youly you believe it, you agree with it, and then you repeat it, and someone challenges you, your leader will be there for you to get in front of you and rebuff it for you. But in this case, the leader's not there to back you up. So you hear it on TV. You assume that someone's going to protect you in defense. There's no logical pathway, right? No, it's just blind faith.

I was in San Bernardino. Devotion. I was in San Bernardino during a protest. There was Trump supporters, and there was Antifa. And I was walking back and forth, asking people, like, yo, what's up? What are you doing? Trump supporters all say, you know, here for Trump, you know, America first, yada yada. I walk across the street, and I see a group of Antifa, and I was like, hey,

would any of you want to mic check, mic check, mic check? They all start chanting. And then I'm like, I stop. And then they stop. And I was like, I'm just wondering. And the woman goes, do not, do not answer any questions from journalists. And I'm like, what is happening? She basically starts telling them that journalists will ask them questions to confuse them. If you've got a group of people that will hear an external thought

and just start mindlessly chanting, that's a cult. That's definitely a cult. And the reason that they get in trouble when they get singled out from the flock is normally they've got those people to protect them. Either one person knows another point. So if you've got a dozen leftists, well, maybe one person knows one more additional piece of information. But collectively, none of them or individually, none of them can make that coherent point.

So they have to flock together. And I'd rather that's, again, individualist versus statist. They're used to being force-fed information and just ingesting it and regurgitating it. It's amazing. And they're happy that way. They don't want to think about it. They want to feel. Does it make me feel good? Is this the right right thought to feel i just want to fit in yeah i

tweeted i tweeted oh i tweeted this like a couple weeks ago two plus two equals seven and then i replied to the tweet i'm just trying to fit in like that's the joke when they said two plus two equals five a bunch of leftists are like actually i do understand why two plus two could equal five and it's like they weren't arguing language the left was literally arguing that mathematically you could argue math it's like no you can't argue math make the formula work it's like code you can't argue with your computer actually i think the code i put in should work because this word actually means the computer is going to be like error. But you can change outcome.

And that's what wokeness does. Equity is their ability to say, OK, you can't do math. But what you did was a math like operation. Therefore, we're going to give you credit for having math. And we're going to pass you to the next level of math like teaching. And now you don't know anything. You didn't learn anything that's useful. But you got told you did.

And that's the whole concept they're doing now and saying, again, another racist concept. Black people can't be taught math the same way as white people. Well, yeah, I'm pretty sure they can. Or you're some sort of eugenicist racist where you believe there are actual physical differences and somehow they're not capable.

Neither of those is a good look for the left. Isn't it weird how Democrats have always been the racist party and they remain that that way i mean and they project that's why because that's why they're so mad about it is because they're scared when white liberals walk down the street they're scared of black people all right when i walk down the street i'm scared of black people who are bigger than me but not most of them you know not because they're black right because you're on the street you're worried about anybody who are bigger than me but not most of them you know not because they're black right when you're on the street you're worried about anybody who's bigger or dangerous um you know honestly i'm not you know why i'm not worried about anybody i've actually been mugged once

but for the same reason when i'm crossing the street i don't expect to get hit by a car it's just people don't want to hurt other people for the most part. And the odds are against it. Did you know Robin DiAngelo, who wrote that book, White Fragility, actually said, I think it was her, correct me if I'm wrong, that when she goes to parties full of black people, she's uncomfortable around them. Jim's the expert.

Oh, because I wrote the myth of white fragility. She said that, right? Yeah, and what she believes. Let me just say something. Like, if you're taking your cues from a woman who admits to you she's a racist and is uncomfortable about black people, maybe you are following a racist. This is the weirdest thing to me. I've been to so many parties in Chicago.

There have been a bunch of times where me and my friends are like, we're going to a party. Where at? It's like on the south side somewhere. We show up and it's like, you know, 50 black people. And it never crosses our mind. We show up. We're like, hey, we're like high-fiving people. We're like, dude, where's the cups's i can't i can't fathom this

well but her whole ideology revolves around the fact that she's a racist and so are you and so what and that's the entire woke concept is white liberal guilt says i feel this way i project it onto you therefore you do therefore you must in order to validate the fact that I'm not just a horrible, weak, disgusting person. Maybe she's right. She might be. There was a video where this guy is doing a TikTok, and he's just gleefully saying that he's racist. He's like, hey, listen, I'm not going to actually say it, but he says he's racist. And he's like, there, I said it.

Why is it so hard? Just admit it. And I'm like, okay, you're a racist. I have more trouble with that. There, I said it. Why is it so hard? Just admit it. And I'm like, okay, you're a racist. Right, okay. I'm not. I have more trouble with that. But that's the difference because, like you said, we treat black people like people, not black people. They treat them like black people, and they have to have them be black.

That's why they had to invert Martin Luther King's concept. It can't be just content of your character. We have to focus on the color first. Otherwise, we're not doing anti-racism it was uh i think lauren southerner said this that uh the chauvin verdict was it was a serious blow to the black lives matter movement because they got their verdict i mean so i i didn't listen to her full argument i just saw it passively mentioned by one of my friends like hell look what she was saying and i and i thought about it and i'm like i i don't know exactly what her idea was but the general idea that the chauvin virtue is bad for them, it's true. They need the victim narrative.

They need to claim the system opposes them, but they just handed you guilty on all counts across the board. It did two things. It hurt the victim thing, but that won't matter because they'll keep running with that because systemic racism. But what it also proved is that domestic terrorism works. And they got the verdict they wanted because every single potential juror, what did they say? I'm scared the mob's going to come to my house. Well, I don't think every juror said it. I thought every one.

We had a few people during the jury selection where they were like, yeah, I'm worried about this a little bit. And then we had the one alternate who came out and said, I didn't want to go through riots and destruction again. And I was worried they'd show up to my house in retaliation. And I'm like, she ain't talking about Trump supporters. No. Ain't no Trump supporters rioting and showing people's houses to do that right all right you want to talk about the capital sure that's the seat of politics it was a bad thing but in terms of afternoon right in terms of the past year not trump supporters right and the idea

for for black lives matter they now have learned over the course of last year's insurrection and this year's insurrection that if they threaten violence, they get what they want. They're tweeting that. They're bragging about it. That's the definition of domestic terrorism. And so it's time, you know, when we get the reins of power again. The FBI said that there's no evidence and that it's white supremacy. It's the real threat.

So, you know, these people can romp around and do whatever they want. No one seems to care. But I wonder if there's going to be a backlash. Oh, there's a backlash brewing because one of two things is going to happen. Law and order is going to be reasserted, you know, and we'll have one standard for all Americans. Like what is the 14th Amendment? I suck at amendments. 14th. Okay. Thank you. The quality under the law. Yeah. And that has to be true. And right now it's not. All right. There are two tiers of justice and they won. Like you said, Black Lives Matter won. But that's not going to stop their victim mentality because systemic racism says that the entire system has to change, not just win one victory. They're winning due to domestic terrorism, not because they've overturned the system and replaced it with equity. And because there's no one to stop it. There's no law enforcement agency. There's no military.

There's no police. And this is why, you know, I've been saying, you know, screw it. Abolish the police. I left the city because we saw the riots getting worse. I had a good local suburban police department. They were cool dudes. They helped me out when I had problems. They were at my house in a moment's's notice those guys are all right in the

city proper they couldn't handle anything i mean the the cops are better at locking up conservatives who didn't wear masks than they were the rioters because because the da's for the most part so i look at it now and i'm thinking you've got right now ted wheeler in portland saying please help us unmask these anarchists these these people and it's like bro you were supporting these people last year you were outstanding side by side with them complaining about trump while they were throwing firebombs you come out now and say now you're trying to stop him okay he exploited the anger against police while the the city was on fire okay while buildings in the city were on fire. I know the fact checkers are going to be like, that's not true.

The city didn't burn to the ground. And now he's coming out and saying, I need your help to stop them. He's got mug shots at him from when they arrested him last year and let him go. That's right. We just put the mug shots out. So these cops, here's what I'm angry about. So you mean to tell me that you're a cop in portland and the police the mayor throws you under the bus and then he uses you and the anger against you to get elected to get re-elected

and then after he gets re-elected he says okay now i want to arrest him and and these cops are like that sounds good i'll keep licking his feet like at what point do you stand up for yourself at what point do you as an officer live on your feet? Because right now, I'll tell you this. Every single police officer in Portland is a groveling, sniveling little weasel sucking up to Ted Wheeler, the police commissioner and mayor. Or they agree with the left enough that they don't care. And here's the nice thing, though. Here's my solution to that. I'm the Mr. Solution Man.

But let's do the great sort and let's have blue state and red state policing. If they want to have gutless weasel policing in the cities and not arrest people or let them go and do those kind of things or gym owners. Okay. Yeah. And do that. Then let's have the gym owners leave and let's take the cops who have, you know, enough intestinal fortitude to say, I'm not going to put up with that and lick the boots and

let's have them move to the red States and there'll be our cops. Yeah. I'll hire those guys in a heartbeat. The cops that aren't willing to stand up for move to Florida, Texas, Oklahoma, Montana, and let's start the sort. It's the great sort into our tribes. Let's do the Federalist thing and move to where people share your values. And one of my values is don't break the law and steal my stuff or hurt me.

I'm like, you look, if you want to live in Portland, do so with my blessing. You want to live in Minneapolis? By all means, your choice. You want to live in New York?

Absolutely. And then when they come and burn your house down and then the cops arrest you because you weren't wearing a mask when you fled your home, what do you want me to do about it? I'll laugh. And it was, I'm watching it on TV from my house in red state America. You're going to like, they're going to throw a Molotov at your house and the TV from my house in red state America. You're going to like,

they're going to throw a Molotov at your house and the cops are going to be like, peaceful protest. You're going to start, run out of your house. Where's your mask? Do you got a vaccine passport?

No, but that's good. See, it's the idea that things had to get worse so people would pay attention. So now we got the normal people have been affected by this and the normals were sitting, you know, doing their stuff.

I think a lot more. Sure. Every day. Not enough, right? But every time they do something crazy, affected by this and the normals were sitting you know doing their stuff i think a lot more sure every day not enough right but every time they do something crazy it takes one more person who says that's ridiculous yeah but the issue is while this is going on right here's what happens the cops in a city like minneapolis or in the surrounding areas do something and then these people who are watching an escalation in crime and violence are blaming the police still they're like why aren't the police doing their job and then the cop shows up and there's a woman with a knife about to stab another woman so the cop saves the one woman they go why did the cop do his job but okay there's no answer so those don't work for them right let's do

it yeah that's the answer and that's if you're a cop with enough you know self-respect to go ahead and say i will not let someone treat me like that. I also wonder why it is that so many conservatives even bothered with fighting the abolish the police thing in the first place. You don't live in those cities. They voted for it. Look, so when the leftists are like, stop and frisk is racist. It must be stopped.

I'm like, I don't live in New York. Not my problem. You voted for the Democrats and they appointed these people. And now you've got these policies from the police department. You should probably stop voting for these people or vote for somebody else. I don't know who you should vote for. I'm not saying, because they've had Republican and independent mayors as well. But first of all, okay, stop it first because it's bad.

I lived in New York for some time. I don't live there now. So why should I care if someone who lives in New York votes to get rid of their own police department? Why should I impose my will on a city I don't live in? Let's stop federal funding of police departments that do stupid stuff. Trump tried to do something like that when Portland and Seattle

were, where he was going to stop federal funding going to cities that allowed Chaz Chop type insurrections to happen and did nothing about it. Let's make that the standard. Don't give a dime of my money. I'm actually, at this point, I'm kind of like, if the left doesn't want cops in these major cities, I agree.

Now, I'm down. I support them. I think most of the people there do, though, because if you go and look at a poll. Are they standing up, going outside and saying? No, no, no. Are they voting for, not voting for Democrats? They, no, no. Are they voting for Democrats? They're voting for Democrats. They're voting for Kamala Harris?

Mm-hmm. And they're not standing up publicly for the police? Nah, they can say whatever they want to pollsters. I know what they really want. Well, they're showing it. Actually, I've been thinking a lot about this, and I'm like, you know what, man? When I lived in the Philly area, I was obviously in support of the police. Why?

Because they helped me out. The local cops I had, it was a Philly suburb. They were good dudes. I went in there one day and I was like, you know, I was trying to, I think I was getting my firearms license. I talked to the cop for a little bit. He's an awesome guy. We talked about it. We agreed.

And it was a couple blocks away from my house. That kind of policing, that's what AOC said was a good thing. She was like, good suburban policing, not like these urban centers. At this point, I'm kind of like, you know what? Right on. I left. I don't live like these urban centers. At this point, I'm kind of like, you know what? Right on. I left. I don't live in these areas anymore. I'm not going to impose my will on you.

If you live there and you're vocal and you say you don't want cops, hey, get rid of your cops with my blessing. And the criminals will obviously stop criming once you stop policing. Oh, no. I mean, crime will. I think crime will get substantially worse. Massively. However, is it my choice? I don't live there, I think crime will get substantially worse. Massively. However, is it my choice? I don't live there.

No, and it's not your problem. And let that happen. I love the idea. I can get behind defund the police in your own city. Exactly. I will vote for an increase to hire the good officers, give them a promotion, and bring them to my area.

Exactly. Because, and the other thing is, my neighborhood doesn't have a lot of crime, so we really don't have to spend that much. So why is there crime? It's not the police didn't bring the crime. The crime was there. Minneapolis, a major urban metro, wants to get rid of their cops.

I think they should do it. I do. I don't live there. I know there are a lot of people who live there who want police, but I'm sorry. The way the system works is we all vote for our representatives. They go to the seat of you know government and they they represent us if your your city is is is dominated by people who don't want cops i'm sorry man do you have the right to be like well we should have cops anyway or should you should you respect the will of the people who want to live in crime infested you know gang territory and we can shoot like escape from minneapolis and all these follow-ons for escape from New York.

But listen, I think a lot of conservatives make the mistake of assuming these people actually want police. And it's the craziest thing to me because, you know, I talked about this last week. You had the story of the woman in New York City runs up to the other woman and puts a bullet in her head, right? No national story, no protests, no riots. Why? Stop assuming they actually want police to stop this. They don't care. I wonder.

I wonder if it's that or if they're cowed into submission. Because there's an element of if you've lived under those circumstances, you're essentially an enemy occupied territory. You know, the gangs, the criminals, the bad guys are a lot scarier. But the cops aren't there that often. Where's the Black Lives Matter activists to stage a protest? I'm not saying they have to. And I'm not trying to play this game of like they clearly don't care about, you know, they only support. No, no, no.

I'm saying if they don't come out and say this is something we care about, want solved, I'm not going to assume they do. And I think a lot of conservatives look at this. They're like clearly people would prefer to live the way we live. And I'm like maybe they like the violence. I'm not kidding well and i don't think the black lives matter people have any interest at all in fixing that that's not their game their game is in gaining power so they use you know black oppression under the police as a grievance to gain power and distribute it and be the ones who do that so they're not going to fix that that doesn't help them according to gallup something

like 80% of people in black neighborhoods want more cops. Or they want the same level and then like 26% even more. But I'm like, listen, if you tell me you want cops and then do literally nothing, first of all,

you can tell me you want something, but if you don't do anything to get it, I don't believe you. I've said this for a long time. Actions speak louder than words. I've had so many people say to me like, Tim, I would love to do what you do. I remember when I was traveling around the world and a bunch of young people say, Tim, I want to go to Ukraine and Venezuela and report on news too.

How do I do it? And I'm like, buy a plane ticket and just go. And they go, no, I'm not doing that. And I'm like, well, then you don't want to. Because if you did, you'd do it. I had so many friends who are like, I want to go to Egypt. And they would just buy a plane ticket and go. And I'm like, because they wanted to. But so many people say they want something and they don't really mean it.

So these people were like, yeah, I want more cops. Will you stand up and just say those words on your porch in order to make it happen? No, it's too much work. So then you're back to the idea, is there an advantage to cruelty or honestly pragmatism as a policy for the side that opposes that and you're kind of saying yes and i agree with you let them suffer the consequences of their own choices or lack of action wait why do you say suffer all right because they're by an objective standard they may not feel they're suffering enough to change it, but they are, in my opinion, somewhat objectively suffering from the ravages of crime. So that's exactly it, right? Imagine this. You want the right to keep and bear arms, right?

Sure. You would like to have the right to defend your own home should the police, or I'm sorry, should someone break in your house, you want to be able to defend your property and yourself. Yeah, I have that right. And not, right, we do. We all have it. The leftists are saying, these people are crazy. We're trying to help you.

What is wrong with you? There's gun violence. We are helping you. How many times have I heard it from leftists where they're like, why don't you accept our government health care? We're literally just trying to help you. And you're like, because I don't want to live that way. So I looked at these cities and they're like, abolish the police i'm like yeah it's your your city not mine and it's good

i don't want to live like you you don't got to live like me federalism says you do what you want you know gather your tribe live how you want and guess what you get the consequences of your own actions if you do if you gather with good people who don't commit crimes, who want to live and prosper, guess what? You get prosperity, you get security. And good, let's do that. And I think the people

who live in Minneapolis right now, who are of the mind that police are good and they won't do anything about it, maybe because they'll get fired, maybe they're scared of retaliation. And I'll tell you this, if that's true,

you value your current position more than you value the, than you feel threatened. Right? So it's very simple. If you were, if your house is on fire and you felt like you were going to die, you'd run out of your house into the street with nowhere to go because it's better than being in a burning building. If you're in a house that's on fire, but it's like a small kitchen fire in a pan, you'd be like, it's no big deal. Someone will put it out. It's fine.

That's where they're at right now in Minneapolis. They don't realize what's happening and they don't care. They're like, eh, someone will deal with it. I'm fine here. Well, they're throwing water on a grease fire is what they're doing. And that's going to blow up in their face. And again, we don't have to care. Exactly.

So here's what it is. Right. There's a grease fire. Somebody's sitting in the living room. They're like, eh,'t have to care. Exactly. So here's what it is. Right. There's a grease fire. Somebody's sitting in the living room. They're like, ah, they're putting it out, but they're throwing water on it. Right. And we're saying like, dude, it's a grease fire. They're throwing water on it.

Get out of the house now. And they're like, no. I'm all right. I'll be over here. I know the fire's bad, but it's just, I'm in my pajamas. Am I going to go outside? It's like cold out. I might.

Well, eventually the fire will get better for they'll have no choice to leave. And you know, maybe that's when people will really move. But what I really see when I see this is that the cops who don't quit, it's because they feel secure. They don't think they're going to be threatened by this. Kim Potter didn't think she'd be Chauvin number two. Well, here she goes. These cops don't believe it. Now we got another cop in Elizabeth city, North Carolina. I i think seven cops three resigned already apparently unrelated to the incident they just resigned because cops are resigning uh not too far from here there's a police shortage in a local town and they're like we got to figure out what we're doing about this because the good cops are

already quitting good the rest of them think they're safe or the money's worth it now and in in a lot of cases they're not willing when've got a family and you're living paycheck to paycheck, they're not willing to take that risk. And I can understand that, but what are you going to do? The crocodile's coming for you. It's going to eat you too. Imagine it this way. You're in a big house.

You're in the living room. The kitchen's on fire. You're sitting there with your kids. Do you recognize the fire as a threat enough to get your kids out of the house before the fire consumes everybody and kills them? Or is someone going to be like, nah, I'm fine.

And then a month from now, their home is in the newest autonomous zone and a stray bullet hits their kid. And they'll be like, why didn't I leave when I had the chance?

Because you saw the fire and you said, I don't care. I feel safe and I feel fine. Nothing's going to happen. And so be it. You're entitled to it. I'm not telling you what you should or shouldn't do. I'm just saying it for me. I left. I feel safe and I feel fine. Nothing's going to happen. And so be it. You're entitled to it.

I'm not telling you what you should or shouldn't do. I'm just saying it for me. I left. I was like, yeah, I don't want to be in the city with riots. I think they're not seeing the fire in their house. They're hearing the fire alarm go off. And it's been so many false alarms that they're just ignoring the fire alarm. I was in a building when I worked.

This is a hilarious story. I worked for, when I was working for Fusion. I'm in, I think it was like the fourth or fifth floor. And I'm sitting – they had these little restaurant booths in this big loft space in New York City. I'm sitting with someone on my team on our computers. All of a sudden, the lights start flashing and the – and I'm like, all right. I immediately stand up, unplug my computer, throw up my bag, and I'm like, let's go to my teammate who was like, we're leaving. I'm like, the fire alarm is going off.

Get your bag. Let's go. And we grab our stuff and we start walking to the door. No one's moving. And I'm like, yo, let's go. And then I leave the building. And then I'm standing outside and the fire department rolls up. Two trucks pull up.

The fire department, they jump out. They're in full gear. They got their axes and they got their air and everything. And I'm like, man, what's going on? They rush in the building. And then a few minutes later, one by one, the employees start coming out. And I'm like, did you guys wait for the fire department to tell you to leave the building? When the fire alarm has been going off for like five minutes?

And they were like, oh, we didn't know if it was a false alarm or something. Turns out there was a fire. It was a small fire found in the basement. It wasn't a big deal. And I was just like, wow. All of those people just stayed in the building. And if the fire in the basement actually did cover that front door, they'd all be dead. That was amazing to me.

Apathy. I mean, it's just what everybody's there. They're too busy to think about it, too busy to do. And they've been scared to act. Now that's the biggest thing that freaks me out. And that it goes to your whole point of why is nobody do anything because

they're scared of the consequences of action. I'd rather be scared of the consequences of reaction, you know, take action and then see what happens. And that's that's really the difference between, in my mind, the right and left. You know, you look at the left. They're waiting for the herd to move. And on the right, we're like, I might blow some stuff up and see what happens. You know, let me let me rattle some people's cages, kick over some conference rooms, tables and see what happens next.

Because then I've got the initiative. None of this implies actual violence. These are rhetorical flourishes and hyperbolic rhetoric. Okay. Let's be clear. Not that it matters all the time. Yeah. But let's talk about what's going on with the Supreme Court.

Oh, this is fun. Yeah. So the Supreme Court has agreed to hear a case on carrying guns in public. I mean, that's the breaking news, right? So they say the justices who have not issued a, who have not issued a major Second Amendment ruling since 2010

will hear a challenge to a New York gun control law. It's, they've granted, what is it, a writ of, Don't say, cert. Don't say the long word. I don't know how to say it. Certiorari.

Certiorari. Certiorarishiorari. Something like that. Some Latin words. Susidio. So the Supreme Court said on Monday that it would review a New York law that imposes strict limits on carrying guns outside the home, setting the stage for its first major Second Amendment case in more than a decade.

The move came in the wake of a recent spate of mass shootings, which were followed by calls from Biden and other Democrats for stricter restrictions on firearms. It kind of sounds like they're going in the other direction, though. Well, let me see. We don't know for sure. There's that dusty old parchment that nobody wants to read anymore that every once in a while these guys pull out, you know, and they take a look at and it's actually got some words in it.

And keep and bear are co-equal. All right. So we've pretty much established you can keep arms. You know, they like to argue about which ones, but that kind of dc versus heller but it's a pretty broad interpretation on that in common use and useful in the militia that's a lot of guns now bear arms what does bear arms mean the fun thing is in dc versus heller judge scalia had or justice scalia had a blast dogging the other justices who are trying to pretend that bare arms was only for military use or only meant in the home. You don't bear an arm in your home.

You don't. You bear an arm when you take it into action. That is, it is an action verb. Bearing arms is an action. How can you secure a free state if you can't leave your house with your weapon? Yeah, you know, there's large swaths of that state that are outside my house that actually impact my life and so right now i have a concealed carry permit in virginia i can carry concealed or i can carry openly because virginia is an open carry state but if i go to dc where i actually need a gun i can't carry one

legally right that's garbage here's what's interesting here the hill says supreme court declines to take up three gun ownership cases this is from the 19th now when this came out people were upset they're like oh here it is supreme court's not going to hear the cases it could just be that they decided it would be pointless to take up these three when they take up when they can take up this one. And this one they're taking up is fairly broad. They've got a chance to decide what type of restrictions you can place on open or concealed carry as it applies to all 50 states. And what they need and what – there's a very outstanding –

we mentioned it earlier – the Firearms Policy Coalition put out a great amicus curiae brief, which is probably pretty mispronounced. But it said the idea is that the lower courts want guidance. They're acting on their own right now, and they're all going in different directions. Some of them are saying you can have no restrictions, some, some, and some anything you want. So they need guidance from the Supreme Court, which is why they took this case. They can give one set of guidance that says, and I think this is why they do it. We'll find out.

But they can say okay you can uh you have you have to issue a permit if you're going to require a permit it has to be shall issue not may issue which is the way they get around that so shall issue and you can't put undue burden on the person applying in order to make the process so onerous which they do yeah that's what i mean at dc dc versus heller was about it's so hard to get a permit and you couldn't get one unless you disassembled the gun huh a gun that's disassembled is really hard to shoot somebody with well it's still almost impossible to get a gun in dc yeah and and this is another the chance though to ratchet that up another notch you know so scalia went a long way in dc versusller. I think this is going to be the next step. I think we've got a solid 5-4 majority.

I hope Justice Thomas writes it, right, because he would be a savage on this, and he's due to do something like that. You know, he's been around long enough. He wants a legacy. This would be a great legacy. Scalia has Heller. He'd have that. And then write one that says, yeah, actually, the words in the Constitution that are in English

that are really easy to understand, they meant what they said. Holy crap. Will this have any effect on, like, ATF regulations and NFA potentially? That's interesting. I don't think it needs to. All right. Because it's not about what type of guns. It's about can you take any gun.

Right. Right. A.22 pistol up through, you know, a.308 sniper rifle. You can either carry them or you can't. And what restrictions can you or can't you put on the open or concealed carry of any of those? And then do we get concealed carry reciprocity so that if I have a Virginia license and I have to go into D.C., I can carry where I need to. It is insane that you can be a law abiding citizen driving from one place to another, and that state could still try and arrest you. Now there's a federal law protecting you if you're, if you're traveling with weapons through the States. However, they say,

well, you know, if you're, if you get off the highway for gas or something, they can try and get you. I know people who have suffered because of that. Yeah, I don't recognize the right of any state to disarm me, so I will admit that I have violated laws about that because I just don't think they have the right to. I think it's incumbent on the government to make it legal to exercise my constitutional rights, and I would love to think this is the time it's going to happen.

So the Supreme Court could put out a blanket ruling that, what if they put out a blanket ruling saying not outright, there can be no laws regulating the right to keep and bear arms, you know, therefore, you don't need a permit at all.

No, I think they're going to, if they do a broad one, I think they will recognize certain classes of restrictions, felons, you know, crazy people, whatever the things are. There's a fairly broad set of things. Twelve year olds. Right.

I don't twelve year olds open carry. But whatever it is. Why not? Well, because they're twelve. And I don't believe children are adults. So I'm willing to make a distinction. What was what was the age of adulthood when the founding fathers of the Second Amendment? Yeah, I don't care.

Our kids have gotten a lot dumber since then. So what's the argument then in 50 years when they're like, you gotta be 30 to own a gun because 26-year-olds are just out of school? Well, we changed that, right? You can change stuff like that. I think what you want to establish though is there has to be a rationale

that is widely agreed on. Not just a very narrow niche thing that says, well, we're kind of scared of guns, so we're going to make it almost impossible for anybody to carry guns in our neighborhood. There's another interesting thing, though. I mean, in many red states, they're passing constitutional carry. I think, was it Iowa or was it Utah?

Was it Utah? Iowa. Texas now is on the verge of passing constitutional carry. So what do I care if New York does? I don't live there. I suppose people of the state of New York might appreciate having this ruling for sure. And it's a good thing if we get clarification

because the main point actually, I don't think is either pro or anti 2A. The main point is that how can we have different standards across the board for what the rules are? Some states say this, some states say that, some counties say something different. We need guidance from the Supreme Court that explains to us what the rules are. Some states say this, some states say that, some counties say

something different. We need guidance from the Supreme Court that explains to us what the rules are so that there's uniformity, I suppose. And the other thing is the Second Amendment is not a second tier amendment. Right now, it's treated differently than the other amendments in that they have to provide cause and do other things. You know, it's contingent on certain things that free speech is not, you know, that the right to not self-incriminate is not. There are no contingencies there. There should be no contingencies other than the legitimate, you know, things that we agree these people should not have guns.

And let's make that as narrow as possible. I wonder if we're consistently moving towards more and more rights under the Constitution. Interestingly, there was the period of war where we didn't have free speech. We had the Office of Censorship. And then free speech as we know it, I think, didn't take effect until like the 60s. Because there was a period where you couldn't yell fire in a crowded theater. And then that was overturned, I think, something like 40 or 50 years later 50 years later so then we actually said okay free speech means you can actually do these things i think there's a there's i think it's earlier than that i'm not sure when brandenburg v ohio was but it was it was somebody knows put it in the chat and then lydia will tell us but the bottom line is

that that is not contingent you know and and we move towards the idea that the common sense English words in the Constitution mean what they say. 1969. And let's do that. Okay. Yeah, so there was a ruling, I think. The initial one was, was it Abrams, I think it was? No, Schenck. 1919 was when justice was like, you can't say fire in a crowded theater.

And then in 1969, they're like, actually, you can. You just can't incite to imminent lawlessness or whatever. Yeah, and it has to be something that was going to happen. So let's have a reasonable standard like that. And that's understood, because one of the things that Scalia did in D.C. v. Heller is he codified the individual right. He said, here's what this actually means. It should be in common use, and it should be useful for potential service in the militia.

All right? That's simple. And that can change over time. It was a musket. Now it's an AR-15. Good. Let's go with it. I do love just the – you know, I don't think conservatives should be all that worried.

Or actually, no, maybe they should be. There's pros and cons to having an argument with someone who has no idea what they're talking about. You know, it's really hard for them to properly regulate firearms and they don't know what they are right so it's like we're gonna ban ar-15s and you're like all right my aks are good you know it's like you know what you're talking about no so there's a bunch of different kinds of guns you don't know what you're talking about yeah the other problem is that they're like fully semi-automatic assault rifles must be banned and you're like i got no idea what that is does it come with a chainsaw bayonet?

Yes. The problem then is you get cops who are like, I don't know. You're under arrest. I've talked to cops. All right. So I'm moving out here, and there's some areas because we're really close to the state border. So I'm like, I'm going to ask the different states what their rules are. First thing the gun shop told me was, don't bother.

They have no idea what they're talking about and so sure enough i'm like all right well let me let me call one of these you know departments in a nearby you know across in a different state not one that i live in and ask them what their rules are just in case and he's like you need a permit and i was like so if i if i have like a long gun in my trunk and there's no ammo you need a permit and i was like okay so like even long guns like in the trunk yes and i'm like so handguns permit and i'm like how do you get a permit for a long gun you get a permit and i'm like okay thank you have a nice day there's you don't get a permit that's that's ridiculous like the cop didn't so imagine the cop pulls you over do you got a permit for this you know 410 break action you know it's like, no.

My smoothbore brown best that I was bringing to the reenactment. My flintlock. You need a permit for this. I don't even know how to get a permit for this. It's a flintlock. You don't need an FFL for this. And they're like, you're under arrest. And it's going to happen. And that's the problem with cops in these blue areas.

So going back to it, so I'm like, you have to fund them, whatever. Because then I'll tell you this personal responsibility. If you want to live there, and these people are saying defund the police, and you won't take responsibility for defending them, then I'm not going to defend you either. I'll tell you this. If you still want to live there, and you won't take responsibility for protecting yourself, I'm not going to defend you either.

And those two things dovetail perfectly, which is why I carry. You know, I'm relatively certain that there's not a cop following me everywhere I go. If there is, he's really good. That's one sneaky guy. But if there isn't, I know that I can take care of myself. Now, I'm not usually the prey, but it doesn't matter. I carry so that I could intervene if someone else is being abused. You know, if you don't have a gun, I'm 100% less likely to intervene in a bad situation than I am if I do. Because I know I have the trump card.

Right? So I will help people. And that's good for society. Maybe you shouldn't, though. If people don't take responsibility for themselves, you run the risk of facing liability for intervening. Let me pull this story because i want to continue the continue the gun conversation but we need some we need some context here the daily beast reports march was a record month for first-time gun buyers after atlanta and boulder

mass shootings i wonder why they add that last part because perhaps the reality is you'll lose in your argument well that it's an npr article Let's pull up. First time gun buyers help push record U.S. gun sales amid string of mass shootings. Isn't that funny how they try and just jam that in there? So the people bought them because of the mass shootings. They want to conduct. No, no, no. This is what the media does with false framings where they're like, oh, people are so dumb. Why are they doing this?

Like, yeah, too bad. You're not you're not winning this one. The regular people want to bear arms. They want to protect themselves and they're afraid that biden will get away with his gun grabs so those are the two things driving it and like you said that's driving the left crazy and and there's probably a lot of people who saw that joe biden wants to make 50 bmg an nfa item and they were like wow so if you buy a barrett right now, it's going to triple in value if I can get this. There you go. It's a good investment.

Sam, we need a Barrett. 50 BMGs. My wife's the gun acquirer in our family. Check this out. NPR says, first-time gun owners, young and old from across the country, are helping to push record levels of gun sales for what looks like the second year in a row. Quote, my gun store has had a run like I've never seen before, said Todd Cotta, the owner of King's Gun Center in Hanford, California, in the state's agriculturally rich Central Valley.

It was just an avalanche of new gun buyers for the first time. These buyers are white, black, Asian, Latino, and come from all political beliefs, and they're being driven by uncertainty fear and a need to feel safe gun sellers across the country said the pandemic and civil unrest over the past year have pushed customers to feel they must take control of their family's protection fears of congress passing new gun control legislation in the wake of a rash of mass shootings since march are also adding fuel to the buying craze industry industry insiders said. So, okay, I guess they've got a source.

And they added the idea that people watched the violence going on. They watched the insurrection. They watched the police not being allowed to respond to it. And they decided if I cannot rely on them to do it, guess what? We, the people of the well-regulated militia, are allowed to own the means for our own protection. You see that video where someone's driving down the street? I can't remember which city it was, but there's like a couple of guys and some women just with AR standing in front of the street, in front of their block, just guarding it. It's expected.

Part of the Second Amendment, the well-regulated militia part, specifically expects people to, in the absence of government security to provide their own security that's why you're supposed to have a weapon useful for service in the militia well guess what if you're standing there you're so much less likely to become a victim than anyone else so maybe this is the wrong neighborhood and the bad guys make a left turn yep and a lot of people mistakenly think, well, I think the left does this on purpose. Well-regulated means the government regulates it.

And it's like, why would it be in the Constitution restricting the government's authority if you believe it's literally giving the government authority? That makes no sense. No, and Scalia destroyed that in D.C. v. Heller. Well-regulated means well-trained. And that was, you know, it's a difference in context of historical language it's it's well equipped and functioning and so if if they said a militia is required but they might not you know if the point is they need to be armed it needs to be

well regulated and regulated in the sense that they are functioning machines that have been taken care of and properly you know are available for use and the people using them are able to do so. Trained in using the weapon they control, not the government control. Because that was the whole point is, was this tied to malicious service in the military or in the National Guard? And Scalia was like, no, and that's not what they meant. And he went back and showed the hysterical context that said, we mean this so the government

can't say, come get you. Oh, we're feeling oppressed. Can we have our our guns back because we'd like to overthrow you how's that work the government regulates your right to protect yourself huh i'll pass yeah i'll pass yeah it's not and i think a lot of people on the right too because i hear a lot of people say it's to protect ourselves from a government gone rogue or whatever i'm like it's for everything it's for everything it's for foreign adversaries who want to, you know, send some boats and crash into our shores.

Nah, we're under the teeth. And it's for a tyrannical, you know, insane government. What people don't realize, though, is that there are places right now, like Ontario, Canada, for instance, where they kick in someone's door, walk in and say,

shut your mouth and beat old people. There's a video right now of some cop, you know, I guess, it was in America, I think, though, where he like beats an old woman. In countries where the people don't have the right to bear arms, the cops act with impunity.

They know they can kick your door and beat the crap out of you. If they're wrong, nothing's going to happen. In the United States, it's not about overthrowing the government. It's about the cop being like, let's be really careful when we go here because these people might be armed.

And that ensures that warrants are more likely and more often to be needed, used, and enforced. And it crosses the only place that gets sketchy, like Breonna Taylor, Louisville. That was bad all the way around. Pretty much everybody involved with that situation on both sides was wrong. There was nobody who was right. And so it's complicated i like the idea that the police should think twice before they kick my door in right because if you kick in my door in the middle of the night i will return fire if i hear fire first and i don't hear police and and the context is brownie taylor's boyfriend was not charged with

shooting that cop because you have a right to keep in bare arms and he said the door kicked in they're like i don't know he can't charge him i mean it's and it all that matters is his perception you know if he can reasonably believe that it was you know other drug dealers who were coming to steal his stuff or whatever or hers then he's got a right to to defend himself against them so the the idea though is that the right starts with the individual, not the state. Right. We overrule them. Individual liberty trumps state power. Now, I think one of the big problems we have, a lot of people might be buying guns,

but we're continually getting restrictions on guns. The left is continually—I don't like saying the left because actual leftists believe in gun rights. You know, Karl Marx said so, and they they love that quote under no pretext but it's the the corporate establishment like neil lib dems they are getting guns banned they are getting for for nonsensical reasons i think that's going to be tougher to go because here's the thing i also hope that somebody brings a case that they take cert on that that involves weapons like i want the assault weapon ban tested i want them to go ahead and it's meaningless it is meaningless but let them pass a meaningless stupid uh you know inaccurate ban on

assault weapons and then let's take it to the supreme court and then let's talk they're like okay yeah so what you've actually banned is semi-automatic weapons with a detachable box magazine is that what you're saying? And let's have that argument. And then let's go back and let's read the precedent, which is in Heller, and that says, well, no, I'm pretty sure that's the proper weapon for common use in the militia. So that's everything, you know, with the Woodstocks. You can't just say scary black guns.

But it's not. In Maryland, the M1a is considered an illegal assault weapon because people are going to be running around with m1a it's like it is but the scar 20s same same same caliber or i actually i think i think the m1a might be uh i think it's 308 yeah uh scar 20s is 308 but the scar 20s is like a more modern, reliable, and for some reason that one's fine. Again, I think they're operating off the who told me which gun is scarier concept. And then someone had a list, and it's people who don't understand it. Let's go ahead and take this to the Supreme Court.

Let's test it based on ban whatever you want. I don't care. Just do it. All right. Then let's go and let's have people who actually understand this make the argument from our side and say well if you're doing that then the ruger 1022 you just banned that you know well if it's got a pistol grip yeah exactly and why what does the pistol grip got to do well it makes the round more dead you know we can have right we win those arguments and we have precedent right now precedence on our side the arguments on our side logic is on our side what is their

argument for banning pistol grips? Because it's scary looking. It's a military weapon. And again, the idea they say banning weapons of war. We want to ban weapons of war. They already did. Well, guess what? The idea was that citizens should have weapons of war because that's what you take to serve

in the militia. So you have to. A musket was a weapon of war at that point in time that happens to be basically an AR-15. Yeah, what if I want to have a destroyer? How much do those things cost? Maintenance on that

is really where that's problematic. What if Elon Musk is like, I'm going to build a destroyer? The NFA, we get pretty close to the NFA taxation is theft. I'm willing to say we'll draw a line.

An individual soldier's weapon is different from a crew-served weapon or a tank, helicopter, fighter jet. Because I'd love to have an A-10. I'd love to have a Predator drone. That'd be fun. Why can't you? I know. Is it considered arms? I mean, you could own a tank.

Yeah, you could have the drone. I think it's the armaments, the missiles, and the fun stuff. So, well, why can't you have those? You could have. And I've got friends who own armored vehicles. Yeah, I know I have friends who own armored vehicles, but mostly the weapons are debilled. I think that if people have an issue with the Second Amendment got to change constitution and right to keep and bear arms is broad and you know you know more learned individuals than i have gone over this crowder did a big thing on all the guns they had back in the day volley guns have been around since

the 1300s yeah so you know i know someone was like it's not really full auto it's a budget but effectively they they they pull the cord or they light the wick and then they go and it functions very similarly. How do you treat arms jurisdictionally like with the high courts? As new weapons become advanced, like nuclear weaponry, for instance, a dirty bomb, that's considered an armament. So when do you say this, the Second Amendment, doesn't cover this arm? Yeah, that's a good question.

I think the idea being look at what the individual foot soldier in the military is using and draw the line there and that's what that's what scalia did with heller dc he said this is essentially the guns that would be useful for service in the militia is where it is you know a nuclear weapon is would be useful for service as you know a nuclear weapons guy in the militia but but not as an individual foot soldier. What about, like, depleted uranium rounds? Those are nasty. They're nuclear weapons.

Yeah, I think it's fine to ban that. You know, it has to be something that would be not needed, because you can always escalate, right? But there's a base level that it's useful for service, and let's just be common sense about that. You know, and that can evolve. Everything does. You know, we got iPhones now instead of parchment and quill.

What happens when we switch handled that to directed energy weapons? That's what I was thinking. And they're going to be like, those aren't arms. Those are, you know, energy devices. They don't they don't fall. Well, Antifa is using it. Right. They use the lasers to dazzle blind cops. Yeah. And that kind of stuff.

And that's bad for you. So I think there's an argument to be had about what is a weapon and what is an arm. And, okay, do we have to have those arguments? Yeah, we do. On like a weapon-by-weapon basis or bullet-by-ammo-by-ammo basis? We do that. I mean, that's why the lawyers for the people who make that stuff earn their pay but who is that a supreme court decision every time i doubt it you know that's why i mean the the what the supreme court's job is is to set a standard that's smart and that standard tells

the courts below if this weapon is in this case in common use and suitable for service in the militia as an individual foot soldier is that something then that meets that and then they let the lower courts and the agencies that have jurisdiction make the rules now if someone doesn't like the rules they could sue and then that can you know they can decide but it's it's pretty tough to get it back up to the supreme court you know there's a lot of toing and froing below that like how long did it take for this case to actually make it to where it is now yeah i don't i don't know when it was filed. Years, right? Always years. And good.

Like I said, I want – let's get some – we got a 5-4 solid. And I think we might get 6-3 on this one. 5-4 because Roberts is an encounter, right? Roberts is a squish. And he blows with the breeze. He could literally be the guy who says, well, I don't want to make it 6-3 because I want him to think that the court cares about kids getting killed or something. That's what the media tries doing with every single one of these. It's like,

oh, all these tragedies. Some guy tweeted, he's like, the Supreme Court has agreed to take this. It's ridiculous. At a time when there's rampaging gun violence, Democrats must pass these laws now. Okay, we'll pass the laws, and then the Supreme Court will rule, and then you unpass them. What was the title of that article that you brought up earlier?

Do you still have it pulled up where they said amidst gun – But they mention insiders suggest that is causing people to buy weapons. Okay, insiders. I don't know who those insiders are. Project Veritas was more credible than just saying insider. Project Veritas shows me the guy speaking. You know what I mean? But they're like – the title insinuates that it's because of mass mass shootings but then the article goes on to say it's because they're afraid of

like local violence it's it's the second order effects of the mass shootings it's not the mass shootings all the second order effect is i don't want to be disarmed right i don't want to be a guy who doesn't have a gun to protect myself if a mass shooting happens i don't want to be the guy who can't buy a gun because biden got away with banning him you know i don't want to be that so it's those second order effects not the mass shooting they want to be the guy who can't buy a gun because Biden got away with banning them. I don't want to be that. So it's those second-order effects, not the mass shooting. They want to use the mass shooting to prey on the emotions of the weak people. And there could be a lot of grandfathering in. So if you go and buy a gun now, they might say, okay, now you can't buy it.

So, for instance, I mentioned the M1A. In Maryland, if you bought the M1A personally before the law passed in like 2013 you're allowed to have it yeah good luck telling the cop who doesn't know that right it's like i don't worry i bought this in you know january of 2010 he's like oh i don't know what that means it's illegal you're under arrest so it doesn't matter even if they do but for the most part a lot of people are like buy it now before they ban it otherwise you can't get it and it might go up in value if they if they put it under the nfa national firearms act i want to bear it i deserve a barrett i've been very good this year absolutely i got a thumbs up yeah well biden said he want he said you should make that he said nfa right yeah well there you go then then what you can't get it you know and then we

get back to the the bullets i love when they talk about the AR-15 rounds, you know, a 5.56 or 2.23 round. Tumbles to create a massive wound channel to destruction and people die. They've never seen like a slug for deer hunting or whatever? Seriously, I mean, I've got a 12-gauge slug. You can shoot me with an AR-15 all day, one round from a 12-gauge slug, and I'm laying down. You know? So it's absurd. Like you said, they don't understand what they're talking about.

So let's bait them into it. I don't think we have to bait them. I think they're baiting into it. You just have the argument in the Supreme Court. Let's do this. And then, you know, you win, I hope. If we don't win, then there's cause for my follow-on book to winning the second Civil War without firing a shot. It's October when they're going to be going through this, right?

I think so. What if the Democrats packed the court before then? Then we've got other issues. I think that's another place where I think then you call for a constitutional convention, and I think maybe we start doing sanctuary states and talk about what do we do if they do things that make the constitution that i served you know and swore to defend no longer relevant if you make it no longer relevant make it a purely political document then i don't think we have a republic anymore and you know i'm not going to call i am

doing everything i can i wrote the book specifically to try and stop this so our team needs to get in action and scare them into stopping things like packing the court you know stopping things like doing the crazy things they want to do before that happens because our team's pretty fed up i i people who i have known for years and decades are saying things that i would have considered so far out of bounds, you know, five, ten years ago. And they're not going to stand for this. So let's fix it now within the bounds of the Constitution while we can. Macron had, in France, 20 generals say that leftist dogma is going to push them towards a civil war.

And it's interesting because they may be in front of us or behind us in terms of the cultural crisis or whatever. But in February, there were many high-profile individuals in France saying that leftist ideology was destroying France. And Macron said, oh, I ignore this. It's not true. I'm not going to do anything about it. And I don't know what's going on in France. I don't follow French politics. But I saw the story from The Times in the U.K the uk and i'm like i understand what they're

saying yeah and what they followed us last time with the whole revolution thing if they go first this time i'm fine with that let them test fly it or maybe and then maybe we learn from that the conversation around civil war has been going on for a long time in the u.s from major outlets like the hill from the atlantic etc maybe they're now finally catching up. And maybe it's going to be worse for us. Well, and it's kind of unavoidable. If you don't discuss it, you can't stop it. So we have to go ahead and look at it. And the left has to realize that there are consequences.

I'm not threatening any kind of insurrection revolution or anything like that. But if you don't think we'll do it, if you go too far, you're wrong. I swear to God, I have a deal with Kurt Schlichter. I'm warlord of the East. He's warlord of the West. If the flag goes up, if we run the balloon up and the game is on, that's the way we're organized. Let's read some super chats. All right. So let's see here.

Christian Jam Gochian says, I detest Biden, but I have to give him credit for being the only president with the guts to officially declare that the systematic killing of my ancestors by the Ottoman Turks was a genocide. There you go. I don't know why Trump didn't. Yeah. David Brady says, Hey, Tim and crew, I was wondering if you could shout out my magic Discord server. Really proud of it.

It's called MTG Table talking and can be found on this board cool right on a lot of people are mentioning the tree of the tree of liberty so uh you know watered with the blood of tyrants all right let's see set me free says share the project veritas cnn director video admitting that CNN is propaganda. People are not aware of that video. Also, predict that climate change awareness is up next so you appear to be psychic. Well, he said it in that video. Russell Warner says, Tim, what if defund the police is actually a pretext to set up central policing?

Could make grabbing our 2A a lot easier. Just a theory, however. I can't help but wonder if it's not exactly what's happening. Cheers, team. A lot of people have been saying that, that the goal to defund the police is to get federal police. I don't believe it because that would be ridiculously hard for the feds to do. No, they suck too much at everything. Yeah, there's not enough people. How would they actually implement what New York has, 30-something thousand cops?

Then you've got every small jurisdiction. There's no way to replace they'd hire uh private cops and then deputize not possible like blackwater not possible uh a lot of things are possible yeah okay maybe maybe over the course of 10 years when there's no cops because they're defunding them now they'll start bringing in federal police so there'll be a gap of no cops for 10 years or something like that i fear fear the private police. There's not enough private police to police every jurisdiction in this country. I'm putting RoboCop in my neighborhood.

Apparently there's a bunch of unemployed police looking for work. Yeah, and there's not enough to police every jurisdiction. I'm just saying, if these police are going unemployed... Federalism and the downward slide from that will stop. You can't do it. Alright.

Can't get away with it. Michael Thompson says, First time Super Chatter longtime viewer. Thank you, Tim, for your daily dedication to the truth, no matter the party. Sour Patch, thank you for every button pushed. And Ian, my dude, your presence and opinions complete the show. Love from Omaha, Nebraska. That was awesome.

There you go. Thank you. Sent Me Free says, Donate to Project Veritas to help fund their lawsuit against the New York Times and CNN and Twitter. Wow. Hellbound Wolf says,

First, it was don't tread on me. It has turned into stop treading on me. And now we need to come together and say tread on me and face the consequences. Nice. This is just crazy stuff.

All right. What is this? Sweet Lou said ian went from trump's too fascistic to he's too laissez-faire in what two months where am i yeah he's coming around i got a lot of mixed feelings about that guy donald trump yeah eric miller says left is pro-control right is anti-control control could be for a charitable cause but the right will say it's my individual individual choice to do that if you choose to give money it's charity if you're made to it's taxes that's right which is theft rad number two says any plans to have dave smith back on he mentioned being interested in running for president in 2024 on the libertarian party ticket very interesting yes we do have interest we'll see what happens all right let's see we got a bunch of super chats

here let's see what we can do we got too many super chats you guys are awesome the one free man says when the left attacks the dull thud over a long period of time with aimless mob rule chaos and protests when the right attacks it, immediate, and precise from individual action with unmistakable reason. And so the issue is it's really shocking to people when you get a far right individual who engages in some kind of terror, but the ongoing

incessant dull beating from far left extremists is ignored by the press because it's not breaking news someone got punched in the face. But if it happens a thousand times, they're never going to report a punch in the face, but people get the picture. Good insight. All right.

Yep. Let's see what we got here. Eli M. says, Tim, is there any chance of you getting Crowder on? The issue with someone like Crowder is that he runs his own show. So why would he leave his show to come on my show when he's already got his own show? Although it would be awesome if he did, but, you know. It'd be fun. Yeah.

Rich Lumetta says the truth will always prevail. Unfortunately, this woke BS is continuing to gain power. The not-woke didn't take these silly ideas seriously in their infancy. Now I fear it's too late. Many did. Yeah.

You know, the truth does not always win. Often in history, the victor writes the past and the truth. So if we don't stand up and take responsibility right now, there's definitely a possibility that the truth will not win. Sean Ellis says, Tim, you forgot to mention Candace Owens, who is suing Facebook's fact checkers, Lead Story, for wrongly taking her and others. They are in discovery. Interesting. Good honor. Lead Story claimed that one of my factual tweets was fake news. I called and complained because I was like, so the tweet was about Epstein and Bill Clinton.

It was 100% factually true. He didn't like the way I phrased it, though. He didn't like there was a tweet. It was condensed. I didn't post it. Someone else did. And then someone mentioned to me, hey, I just want to let you know they're saying your tweet is fake news. When you click the link to Lead Story's website, it confirmed everything I said was true.

Yet for some reason they flagged it as fake. It's the weirdest thing. It's a trick. So basically you can say something's true like, you know, bill clinton you know the private planes and all that and then they'll say this is fake news then put a link and no one will click the link no one they'll just assume it's fake news and then you know my tweets get accused my credibility gets you know maligned you should sue uh i could the problem is it takes so much time and energy And so This is the challenge Now James of course

Is like I don't care I'll sue you And maybe he's right Maybe that's the issue More lawfare I was talking to lawyers I was actually Thinking of

I think suing the Facebook Suing Facebook Is the right approach Facebook is the one Who put a big tag Saying I put fake news Not lead stories Lead stories Or I should argue this They fake news not lead stories lead stories it well or i

should argue this they would argue that lead stories are just users and we don't post the statement i'd say that's not true you empower select individuals the same as the new york times would and you give them special access right to make so they can make money and do this that does not that does not protect an intersection 230. It's editorial. Absolutely. It's an editorial decision made by Facebook. Facebook brought on a team of editors to go through content and make public statements. You can't pass the buck on that.

But, you know, I don't have the time or energy for this stuff. We need a law fair where we've got people who have pre-planned lawsuits that they can make class action in multiple states and make it easier. Because it shouldn't be on you. They're doing it to a ton of people yep well candace is suing good all right gavon d says tim if we move from a tax rate based system to a monthly subscription fee system where you can sub or unsub from government services and departments that you want access to

would you unsub the police and sub for Medicare? Yeah, maybe. That's a great question. That's a good idea. But it opens up so many other ones. I'm trying to think. Because I like the idea. We chose to drive out here on a toll road today, and we were both happy about it because I'm using a government service.

I don't mind paying for that. That's just it. I don't want to be paying for government services I don't want or don't like, but if I am, it kind of felt okay. Would you sub to the black budget? Oh, yeah. Oh, dude, if you knew. Aliens?

A lot of money in the black budget. Dan W. says, Have friends in Multnomah County and Portland Police Bureau. All are currently looking for jobs. PPB main issue with PPB is EMS structure. It gives the mayor and city council members

too much power over EMS. Sure, but like, I'd quit. On the spot. No questions. I'd be like, here's my badge, here's my gun,

I'm out. Later, bro. Yeah, you don't have kids, man. It makes it harder. I hate to cop out like that, but when you got weasels to take care of. I think it's the opposite., man. It makes it harder. I hate to cop out like that, but when you've got weasels to take care of. I think it's the opposite. I think having kids makes it easier.

And I think it's actually you're sacrificing your children's future for some perceived short-term gain. That's a fair point. It's hard. It is hard. It is hard. But what's more important, your difficulty right now? I think back, man. I talk about the story I read where a guy was on a beach with his family and a wolf showed up.

And they all cried and swam out to a rock and shivered, shaking as the wolf paced back and forth. And I'm like, wow, we've come a long way from a couple hundred years ago where the dad would, like, pull out his flintlock and arm it and then draw a sword and be like, take the kids. If I don't make it back find my brother i'm like what about bobcat dad remember bobcat it was apparently wasn't even a bobcat whatever it was it looked like a bobcat it looked like a small bucket yeah i mean it caught it jumps on his wife he grabs it he's looking at he's like this is a bobcat think think about the the people who are like family get on this boat we're gonna be on the boat for three months. We're going to land on a shore with nothing there. We're probably, you know, there's

a 20% chance of death for all of us. But the Oregon Trail, we all used to play that game where it's like, get the wagons, we're going to Oregon. Your son died of dysentery. Now it's like, but if I quit my job, my kid's not going to be able to eat a cheeseburger tomorrow. Yeah, well, maybe back in the day, the kid would just die face down in the river

and it was horrifying. And it's not even going to be that bad. Yeah, well, maybe back in the day, the kid would just die face down in the river. And it was horrifying. And it's not even going to be that bad. You get up, you find some family somewhere else, you leave, you get away from these places, you stop propping them up. Or at the very least, blue flu. If you can't quit right now, you can just, I'm not going to do it. I'm not going to respond to the call.

I'm not going to go out during the riots. Keep the job, fine, but stop. I don't understand why I see riot cops out in the street of Portland anymore. What are these people doing? The bottom of Ted Wheeler's boots must taste pretty good. Well, cops, listen. Just do it. You're getting abused.

You're getting punked by people who don't respect you and still want you to risk your lives. Come to the red states. Where people are going to be like waving flags and saying exactly where they're never locked down where you know rad number two oh and direct response uh says cops actually this was from a while ago but it does respond cops in red states are pretty bad too the unions for texas cops are coming out against constitutional carry right to record police laws and putting bad cops on the Brady list. There you go. Well, I think that's more your blue cities and red states.

But it's a problem. It's a problem everywhere there's a government. I think conservatives should be in favor of abolishing the police. You know why? Cut taxes. And then who's going to enforce these gun laws? Robocop's not going to come for my gun. No, that little dog in New York, it's going to walk up and there's going to be a speaker

and it's going to be like, hello, this is Officer Jansen from Precinct 99. Please, sir, place your gun on the top of the dog and lock it in place. And you're going to be like, shut up. I'm going to be like, shh. I'm going to spray paint his eyes shut so he can't see. Then it'll have a taser. Then it'll have a.22. Like, you don't want to mess with robot police.

I got an aluminum bat that doesn't last that long. No, but why are conservatives in support of major metropolitan urban police departments, which cost tons of taxpayer dollars, and are the ones who are locking everybody down and shutting their businesses down and taking away your right to bear arms? The problem is you can't try and judge the department based on the individual that's a big problem that we're facing is that the individual bad cops don't speak or or you know speak for the department so to destroy the department because of some bad workers doesn't isn't logical but i don't i don't think they're talking about what to tim's point he's not talking about destroying because of a

few bad cops because that's not really the issue the issue is that the people who are the activists and the people who are too passive to look out for themselves are saying we don't want policing because their their excuse is there are a few bad cops but what they really don't want is accountability for all the criminals in their midst so let them wallow in your own criminality all right 20 something drifter says as a minnesotan i can tell you all that people who can afford to are leaving minneapolis for the outer burbs or their cabins work from home means you don't need to live close to the to the office anymore amen brother there you go poor sister alan costello says yo tim did you listen to anti-flag back in the day Also are drugs legal in Chicken City

Love you guys I did listen to Anti-Flag back in the day And no no the chickens have to be on a proper and strictly controlled diet They're enclosed in a facility Effectively in jail From birth No not from birth We got them when they were babies

We put them in there They can't get out They're pretty happy with it though They get a lot of free bugs And you guys are working on the new bug drag system to catch them bugs. Yeah, we'll get a big mesh

net or something and just run and catch all those little nets. Like a hot air balloon that's empty that we pull open and then it sucks all the bugs up into it. Bug vacuum. We just take two people, hold it, and you run. And then you run together and then close it and it'll be full of bugs. Workout. Yeah, and then you bring it in and then you run together, and then close it, and you'll be full of bugs. Workout.

Yeah, and then you bring it in, and then you just let one of the chickens into it, and they'll go nuts. It's chicken heaven. Yeah. Yeah. I'm afraid of people smuggling drugs into Chicken City. Oh, they better not. No, there's no open borders, though, so you at least got that. Yeah, it's really locked down.

Highly controlled. We recently doubly fortified it. You have fences? So we did chicken wire, and then we did another layer of metal wiring around it and into the ground and everything, because we don't want, you know, we take care of our chickens, you know what I mean? It was smuggling. Yeah.

Waffle Sensei says, we don't have to stoop and become liars and cheaters to win hearts and minds. We need to harness the truth more powerfully, and it's going to require work. Know what you're talking about, speak the truth, and never apologize. There you go. Word. Nate Robinson says, first time Super Chatter, thank you for bringing Jim on tonight. His passion for fighting back figuratively is inspiring.

Figuratively. Can we make that a joke? Is that automatically air quotes what we do figuratively? No. My figuratively has air quotes, but it still means the same thing to you two. That's right. All right. Jarrett Klein says, met a girl who learned to code in college.

I said in conversation, you shouldn't need to put race on a college or job resume. She responded, literally in agreement with affirmative action. White people saying that she thinks white people are better at coding. There you go. Snowbird says, I like this guy, Hanson. He's funny and also very informative. Good stream, guys. Aw. Good stream, guys. Aw.

Good guess, man. RRM says, Tim, read about armed Naxal movement in Indiana, the radical left-wing terror which gripped many districts in, is it Indiana? Antifa and BLM are almost treading the same lines in the U.S. in, what's, I don't know, it says. Maybe it's India. India?

That may be it. Okay, India. Yeah, I think that's where. Just says in, in a weird way. Same lines in the u.s in what's i don't know what it says maybe it's india india that may be it okay india yeah i think this is in in a weird way uh same lines in u.s i think radical left wing operates the same worldwide oh yeah that would make sense all right the free man says the one free man the two the 2a ensures a relationship between the people and the government the second the government wants to take it away the second the relationship between the people and the government. The second the government wants to take it away, the second the relationship is severed and the government no longer relates or cares for the people. Or valid. Jeffrey Paris says, what role does the ICC have or should they have? For instance, our driver's license works in all 50 states.

Why not CCL, CHL, CCW? Does a new government agency need to be formed to reform or reform to accommodate lawful gun owners traveling? Let's not do another agency. Yeah, maybe it's just you have the right to do it. Let's just say it. So let it be written. So let it be done. Jacob Dobbinspeck says, I don't know about you guys, but I bear arms in my house all day.

I had a guy break into my house and sleep on my couch one night. A week before I moved in. No more games. Now I always carry at home. You know, I got a gun in multiple rooms, so fair enough. I knew somebody was going to call us on that. All right. I can't read what this one says because it's a, you know, I can't read your name.

T1A. Utah will be constitutional carry on May 5th. Euler's Workshop says says think of the philosophical and metaphysical applications of the banana banana banana futurama hey there you go profound james fisher says tim you better watch out these crazy lefties might start saying you're inciting violence by saying we're allowed to keep in bare arms they don't believe in our rights and will use their emotions to dictate our laws. Not leftists. Corporate neolibs.

Actual leftists have a quote from Karl Marx they love to recite. Under no pretext shall the worker, what is it? Under no pretext shall arms and ammunitions be surrendered.

This should be frustrated by force if necessary. Yes, something like that. Yeah, something like that. All right, let's see. RJ says, the first Space Jam won an Oscar for I Believe I Can Fly by R. Kelly

before he started... Yeah, okay. He was already doing that. A little weird. A little weird there. Hayden says, Tim, I'm attempting to write my first piece ever.

I've set up my own website where I'll write articles and make videos. My first article goes into the human level zero allegory you used. Do I credit you or did that come from somewhere else? Great conversation tonight. Human level zero? What is that? I don't remember.

What is that a reference to? I don't know. I've heard that. No idea. Ask me. Give me credit for all of it. Say I wrote, I came up with everything. Little Debbie Yvonne says,

The Second Amendment clearly states it is necessary to be well-regulated, well-trained, meaning of the time written. In order to own a gun, one should be well-trained. That's a good point. I concur. Buy guns, buy ammo, train with them. There you go. Yep.

100% in favor of training. Not mandatory. But it should be according to the Second Amendment. No, no, that's not what it means. It's well-regulated? It means well-trained on your own, not at the government's requirement or anything else. What if they're not trained on their own? There's a lot of things you don't have to do, right?

You can drive with your eyes shut. Yep, but you'll get pulled over and arrested if you do that. No, you won't. If a cop sees you driving with your eyes closed, Yep. You'll get pulled over and arrested if you do that. No, you won't. If a cop sees you driving with your eyes closed, he will pull you over. How is a cop going to see your eyes?

You're driving five miles an hour and he's standing there. I got my sunglasses on. He can't see. Ian, stop being so pedantic. No, I'm being 100% serious. If a cop sees you smoking a joint,

doing anything illegal on your phone, if you're driving by one mile an hour... He said your eyes closed and you got pedantic. You could probably be at a stoplight

with your eyes closed and the cop may pull you over. He needed to. closed and you got pedantic. You could probably be at a stoplight with your eyes closed. He hadn't done it yet. And the cop may pull you over. He needed to. Yeah, yeah, yeah. We needed a little pedantic Ian. Yeah. It's in his job description, didn't you?

Yes, that is actually. I can attest to that. Silver Kestrel says, hey Tim, have you ever thought about having Hickok 45 for a more in-depth show on gun rights, Second Amendment? Oh, I love Hickok. I would love to have Hickok 45 on. I'm a big fan. I love his videos.

They're amazing. Whenever there's like a gun I'm looking at, I just pull up Hickok45 and watch him use it. And he explains it. And I'm like, this is amazing. This guy's great. Awesome videos. Tommy Gunn says, luckily, Barrett already developed a 416 Barrett cartridge as an alternative to the 50 BMG. The 416 is legal in states that already banned the 50.

Hey, well, there you go. You got a great audience. I love these people. I mean, when they say 50 BMG will be NFA, they're like, here's the 51. Yeah, right. We'll just. The dot 499999. Right, right, right.

It's, you know, it was really funny. We were watching The Dark Knight. You ever see The Dark Knight? And there's a scene where Harvey Dent is in the courtroom. And it's early on in the movie. And he's trying to get the guy to point out that Falcone or whatever is the leader. I don't remember that guy's name. He's the leader of the crime gang, the mob family.

And he goes, it's not him. It's me. He's a fall guy. And everyone laughs. And then Harvey Dent walks up and he says, I have a sworn affidavit. Didn't you swear that he was the leader? And the guy pulls out a gun and it clicks and misfires. And then Harvey Denton grabs it, punches the guy, and then disassembles it.

And he goes, he's like, Chinese made,.28 caliber. If you want to kill a state prosecutor, I suggest you buy American. Puts it on the table. The first time I saw that, I didn't mean anything to me. Then I started buying guns and I'm like,.28 caliber? What is that? Is that a thing? So I Googled it. And you know what comes up when you, and I'm like, 28 caliber? What is that? Is that a thing? So I Googled it, and it comes up when you Google it.

A bunch of people saying, what is this? What is 28 caliber? I love when they do stuff like that. Why did Hollywood say that? Throw a red herring in there. Sometimes I think that they do it. They're sitting around there, and they're like, let's just jack people around. Say 28?

Yeah. Why not? It's so weird. It's fun. See? And what did they get they created a thing and then people started googling exactly they i yeah someone just threw a random number or someone was just like threw a random number in the script say no they're talking about

equally possible yeah seems likely to me three three i'm not reading that would Would you talk about Seattle and the homeless epidemic? Seattle's got a homeless problem. LA has a homeless problem. California has a homeless problem. Man, California's a messed up place. Yeah, we got a mental health problem. I mean, I read a good article that somebody wrote about the fact that there are no asylums,

which they were properly closed when they were evil and rotten. But you got people now who spend their time going between the emergency room, the jail cell, and the street. And it's a cycle, and it's stupid. We can do better than that. Drizzt says, Arms are weapons, not just firearms or guns, whichever you want to call them by. But yeah, it doesn't matter what sort of weapon it is.

Energy or bullet or a freaking sword, We have the right to bear it. That's interesting. To a bear it. Jim has a right to a bear it. That's what I heard. Panther says M1A and 20S both available in 6.5 Creedmoor. I'm pretty sure

it's still illegal though. They're both available in 28 caliber I heard. Well, the SCAR-20S isn't. So I hear, yes. 28 caliber. Semi-jacketed hollow point. All right.

Big League Drew says, smack-talking police and telling them to quit their jobs. Tim, I think you forgot to put your block on before the show. So before the election, I was defending police, recognizing that we have some issues with accountability. There was a guy in, I think it was South Carolina, shot a guy in the back, the Walter Scott case. He's going to prison. That's good. We need accountability. We need reforms, not defunding the place. We need

funding for the police. And when all of those arguments failed and the people watched riots for a year and said, I'm going to vote for more of this. I said, okay, pack it in boys. We lost the argument. The election swung in favor of the riots and there's a bunch of people licking ted wheeler's boots sorry all we i hear for every day from cops who are like i left i won't deal with this you want to go look you want to go lick democrat boots you go do it i'm not going to defend you you you you've you've made your bed you lay in it and move to a red state and we'll give you new tasers matt hatter says ian you keep saying depleted uranium rounds are nuclear or give off lethal radiation.

You're wrong. They're called depleted because they contain basically no fissile material and emit very little radiation. Okay, so they have some fissile material and emit radiation. He's getting his pedantic in at the end now. I personally wish that's literally the definition of pedantic.

Define pedantic. Pedantic is when you look for, like, minor points and argue something that's like a nitpicking. Well, that's what this guy did. He said they're depleted, meaning they're mostly not. They don't have a lot in them. They have a little bit. Yeah, they're still nuclear rounds. Like a cop would see with their eyes closed.

I mean, everything emits radiation. Lead emits radiation. Bananas. No, but obviously they're depleted. Uranium is not just lead. It's something radiation. Lead emits radiation. Bananas. No, but obviously the plated uranium is not just lead. It's something else. Yeah. You know. But we're going to get pedantic.

That's right. Let's go all the way. All right. Let's see what we got. Super Trucker Podcast says, Tim, can you give us a shout out? We talk about entrepreneurial topics for truck drivers and share industry knowledge. Big fan of your show. Hey, appreciate it, Super Trucker Podcast says, Tim, can you give us a shout out? We talk about entrepreneurial topics for truck drivers and share industry knowledge. Big fan of your show. Hey, appreciate it, Super Trucker Podcast.

That's cool. Drive on. Get it? Scotty3 says, I think you meant the FN SCAR-17. Dope rifle if you like breaking optics. Got my Tim Foyle Gorilla shirt, by the way. Loving it. Keep up the good work.

I do mean the SCAR-20S. Yes. In.28 caliber. .28. .308. I'm going to invent.28 caliber now. Yeah, you should. Dan Ines says,

PSA, guns and boats do not mix well. Just saying. Sad. Tragic. Do not mix well. Qtip47 says, What are your thoughts on the election audit in Arizona? Not much.

Nothing's I've been keeping an eye on it. I don't really see much. I've got to be honest. I don't think anything's going to happen. They're doing the audit. I'm just hoping they get one vote more. They find bad ballots. One more.

No, one more than Trump lost by. Just so we can have just a national tragedy. I don't think anything's going to happen. That'd be funny. Nothing's going to happen. I don't know what that means. Let's see. Casey Finnegan says, hey, Tim, my brother had a solution to the lockdowns.

Pay the doctors and politicians minimum COVID benefits. See how long the lockdown lasts. Also, my 50 BMG was outlawed in Canada last year. Sadly, I lost mine the day after. Oh, that's very sad. Yeah, I'm sorry to hear that. Yeah. Seth says, problem with politics in America isn't polarization, it's rigidity.

America is driving on square wheels. That's a good point. People aren't willing to compromise. Scarlett LW says, IMO, Twitter should be sued on the premise they violated 230. Then they would be forced to clarify their stance. 230 is broad immunity. It's very difficult. They def uh james o'keefe it's not a violation of 230 it's just direct

defamation samuel music says a private police force would be terrifying because the constitution doesn't apply to private companies there you go all the laws under the constitution do though so you could take care of that i don't want it but i think there's ways to do it here we go mike sullivan says atlanta did a blue flu and it actually got a lot of attention not to mention got them a bonus to return oh yeah i remember that imagine how many cops could be getting a bonus if they just said nah but a blue flu it's not enough so they take the money and then they come back and they prop the system back up and then they get spat on i don't't know. I guess people have their price. Like how much money would it take for you to get spat in the face by Ted Wheeler as he laughs at you on TV?

Quartermill. I do it for a quartermill. Some of these – like in New York, they get a quartermill. I'm talking one spit. They go on TV and they just – they denigrate you and they mock you and they strip you of your honor and integrity. And some people are okay with being hapless and pathetic and growling on their knees. Can we beat Antifa with our Stars and Stripes shields? Like in The Falcon and the Winter Soldier, now available on Disney+.

That show is about a veteran, a black veteran, who is told not to be Captain America because his country doesn't represent him, deciding he wants to fight for the flag, using it to beat open borders Antifa. That's the show. I mean, what gets more American than that? That is the greatest thing. It's amazing. That's where Disney went with it.

I got to be honest. And they try to be pretty centrist, to be honest, where there's like some compromise, but, you know, wearing the American flag and all that. that shouldn't be a compromise all right jiffra says to a states a well-regulated militia means belong to a group that trains together if you're an individual then you just look crazy yeah but in order for there to be a militia people have to have guns first i get i don't't advocate for making it harder to get guns necessarily, but it does make sense to have

people be trained. When they go get their gun, if they don't know how to use it, that's kind of concerning. I think everybody should have training. Yeah, so when you go to get your handgun license, you have to do the class, you have to do the training. Yeah, only in some states. Do you need training

before you run your cake hole? You't your when you get your pie flapper you know the first amendment does not require training you need one because it's a deadly weapon that's not a constitution yeah so it's a deadly weapon that you're at if you have an inalienable right to something you can't put harsh requirements on things texas does. Maryland does it. New Jersey barely allows it. It's actually not that hard. It's tedious is the right way to put it. In New Jersey, it's tedious. It takes time.

You drive there. You sit there. You're like, and you do the little paperwork, and then you go, and then you do it again. Then you go to another place, and you get your car. Do you take an exam and a shooting exam? Nope. But it's designed to stop you from wanting to do it. Exactly.

And it worked. The first time I went in and I said, what do I got to do it. Exactly. And that's the game. And it worked. The first time I went in and I said, what do I got to do? They're like, this, this, this, and this. The first thing they told me was totally wrong. And it didn't work. And then I went back into the police department. I'm like, I don't get it. And they gave me wrong information.

It took me like three months to finally go through the whole process. It's tedious and annoying. If you think people should have tests for guns, then people should have aptitude tests for speaking in public. No, just operating deadly weapons. No, no, no. It doesn't say. The pen is mightier than the sword. The right to keep and bear arms should not be infringed, but Ian thinks you should have to take a class before you get one.

That's not there. The pen is mightier than the sword. Nothing in the First Amendment says that you have to be regulated to have free speech. But the well-regulated has nothing to do with regulation. You know what regulation means? Training. Regulation means like well-functioning. Yeah, it means that you know what your buddy's doing, more or less.

It means that you're trained along with others, you know. That's the reason for, not the requirement. Because it's a prefatory clause, that means it's the outcome of the actions in the action clause. So are you saying that insinuates anyone can have guns that don't know how to use them and that's all? That's right. Anyone can just have a gun? You think that just ends there? Yes, literally it does.

Not about militia. In fact, the initial article before it became the amendment even stated that. It's not the, they changed it. They only took it out because they didn't want to ban conscription. They thought that the statement was enough to state the government can't stop you from having weapons, period. In fact, back then it included 13 year olds. Yes, they all had guns. We don't know why they took it out necessarily. Yes, we do know because we have all of the writings of all the founding fathers. There was a fear that by saying being a part of militia is not a requirement to owning weapons would give legal argument to saying you

can't force me to join a local militia or be conscripted in a time of war. And because they viewed conscription as legal, they said just make it that you can bear arms and it's enough. Apparently they should have kept that part in, but there probably would have been a challenge to conscription, which we had until the 70s. So yes, it says you can have guns. And I think it's 100% the correct answer to get training if you don't know how to use a gun. I don't want the government mandating what that is. Like what the actual training is?

Yeah. Or requiring it. And the point is to stop the government from doing things, not to empower them to do things. Yeah, I know. It's just it makes me nervous that people control guns and don't know how to use them. Makes me nervous, too. And that's one of the risks you that's right get for living in a free country ladies and gentlemen if you haven't

already smashed that like button and go over to timcast.com become a member because we're going to have an exclusive members only segment coming up in just about an hour we usually get up around 11 or so it depends on how long we talk for but you're going to want to go to timcast.com sign up it's going to be a lot of fun. And we're going to have a bunch of new content coming up in the future. Don't forget to smash the like button, subscribe, hit the notification bell. You can follow me on all platforms at Timcast. My other sites, my other channels are youtube.com slash timcast, youtube.com slash timcastnews,

and youtube.com slash castcastle is now up. We got two vlogs already. Third is to come. And we're just rolling with it. So I don't know what we're doing. It's going to be vlogs. We're going to be like filming, I don't know, chickens doing stuff and like the cat walking around. And we had a pro BMXer jump over the Tesla the other day.

So, you know, things like that. So check that out. And this show is live on Friday at 8 p.m. Leave us a good review if you like it. You want to shout anything out, Jim? Bye. Winning the second Civil War Without Firing a Shot, because there's lots of good tips

for how to make sure that the government doesn't require weapons training. And that's your book on Amazon. That is my book. It's on Amazon. Right on. Yeah, you guys can also follow me at iancrossland.net. I have a gift for you, Tim. I wanted to give it to you on air. Oh. What is it?

Well, you're about to find out. It's a gift. It's a little stand. Here you go. Is it a record? No, it's even better. I'm going to look at it first. Look at it. What is it?

It's an obsidian mirror. It's made of obsidian? Yeah. Oh, that's cool. Whoa, look at that. It's glass. It's a type of glass. Oh, I love it.

This is obsidian? It feels like plastic. I know. That's neat. That's cool. Thank you. It's a scrying mirror, according to the manufacturer. Cool.

I like the way it looks. Right on. Very cool. And I'm in the corner. I found that quote that Tim was referring to from Karl Marx, which has an interesting spin. It says, under no pretext should arms and ammunition be surrendered. Any attempt to disarm the workers must be frustrated by force if necessary.

So his take was that the workers... Dude, we're like 95%. That was close. I'd just like to say, under no pretext, tell the right to keep and bear arms to be infringed. That's correct. Just put them both together. We get the left and the right to agree on that one,

and the corporate neolib types, you know, when you get out of there. Yeah, we'll just get them out of the way. Ladies and gentlemen, we will see you over at timcast.com for an exclusive segment about an hour. Thanks for hanging out. We'll see you there.