Timcast IRL - Timcast IRL #472 - Russia Orders INVASION Of Ukraine Sparking WW3 Fears w/Larry Sharpe

Episode Date: February 22, 2022

Tim, Ian, Chris Karr, editor in chief of Timcast.com, and Lydia host New York libertarian gubernatorial candidate Larry Sharpe to break down the Russian authorization of 'peacekeeping troops' to Ukraine, the ending of the insane mask policy that exposed the leftist agenda, the use of hatred by democratic candidates in campaign materials, and whether burning an American flag should be a problem. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Vladimir Putin has formally recognized the eastern separatist regions of Ukraine as independent states and has ordered peacekeeping operations within those regions, which is tantamount to an invasion of Ukraine, which is kind of a pointless statement because they already invaded Crimea. Now, this one really gets a lot of people because, of course, you have people, we have people in chat already saying that these eastern regions, they've already declared their independence. Though initially even Russia didn't recognize their independence. So I don't understand what that argument is all about. Only now is Russia saying they recognize the independence of these regions.

Long story short, I'll just tell you my personal perspective before we get – I want to make sure I get into all the news and break down the facts for you. This is going to be a tough one because there's propaganda. It's warfare. We're in fourth and fifth generational warfare. So you're going to be seeing people who are going to try and sway you and convince you of their evidence. This is the nature of war, and you've got to just figure out what you think is true and who you trust. It's difficult. But I have friends who live in Ukraine, and I've regularly kept up with them and asked them about what's going on.

And to put it very simply, for many of these people, they view it as an outright invasion. Of course, there are people in the eastern regions who are sympathetic to Russia, but they don't, you know, based on the people I know who have lived there, who know people from there, they're like, nah, Russia is just, it's a pressure campaign. It's a tactic they use. They justify the invasion by saying, oh, look, they voted for it, then asked for our help. Now we can come in. And then they do. I don't think the U.S. will do anything. And I think this is happening because Joe Biden is too weak to do

anything about it. I think there's an opportunity for Vladimir Putin. He's taking it. He knows that Joe Biden is probably scared about what his family's involvement with Burisma was and now what can really be done. But it's also hard to know for sure what's true because obviously the corporate press in the United States is pro-war as pro-war can be, and things will likely escalate. Now, we got a lot of articles that have popped up in the past couple of weeks, as well as today, talking about the fears that this could escalate into a third world war, which probably just hyperbole, or it could be legitimate because China wants to move in on Taiwan. And this could be the major distraction, a battle, a war in Eastern

Europe that gives China the opportunity to move in and take this territory that they claim is theirs to begin with. I love it when I talk about this stuff, immediately get people saying, you're wrong. Russia's not invading. They were voted in. Same thing with Crimea. And then when I talk about China and Taiwan, I get people commenting and they're like, Taiwan is part of China. What are you talking about, Tim? You're making clickbait. Okay, sure. Yeah. Welcome to warfare. Everybody's got an opinion and everyone's got their 50 cent armies to post things that they're going to say. One side is right. One side is wrong. The corporate press in the United States is going to scream Russia's the evil force of the world when it's the bigger threats. China is complicated. We'll put it

mildly. So we'll get into all of that. Obviously, there's a lot to talk about as it pertains to global conflict. And I already know people are going to be like, but Tim, what about civil war? Oh, don't worry. Over the weekend, there was an Antifa shootout with a local homeowner in Portland, which is, it's dark stuff. A homeowner basically told Antifa, you're violent extremists, get away from my home. And then a shootout started. Antifa's probably lying about everything. They've already lied about a ton of it. So it seems like things are getting, you know, pretty serious. Not to mention what's going on in Canada with the freezing of people's bank accounts

and a vote to basically make the emergency powers permanent. Man, dark days indeed. Well, joining us to discuss all of this is Larry Sharp. Do you want to introduce yourself, Larry? I'm Larry Sharp, and I know you might say to yourself, man, that guy is handsome. How could he be smart? But I happen to be both, so we're very lucky that I am both. I'm lucky I'm giving New York a second chance at electing me as I'm running for governor of New York on both the Libertarian line and the Forward Party line, and I hope also the Unite line to create an actual coalition against the establishment to make something happen.

So I'm hoping that we can make that happen. That's what I'm doing, and I'm here. Thank you for having me. Yeah, yeah. Not to mention there's a whole bunch of really interesting stuff to talk about as it pertains to domestic policy, taxes, a lot of stuff we were talking about before the show, so we'll get into all that. We also got Chris Carr. Executive editor at TimCast.com.

Happy to be here and join you guys. Forward Party, that's Yang, right? That is absolutely Andrew Yang. Very cool. Yes, indeed. Yes, I've made a coalition of all the misfit toys. That's very exciting. Andrew Yang is one of my faves. How's it been working with him? Good so

far. Still new. Let's hope I have some awesome stories to tell. Well, I want to show off this before I get started. Someone sent me this in the mail holy freak I'm gonna be putting it on the wall at some point thank you so much that's it at Ian Crosland big piece of wooden beauty and I am Ian Crosland I'll see you soon indeed he is I'm also

in the corner pushing buttons very excited to have Larry he's a hilarious guy and he's very sharp as well pardon my pun I listen to his podcast on occasion. It's very enjoyable. You guys should check it out. Don't forget, go to TimCast.com. Become a member to support our work.

All of our great journalists, people like Mr. Chris Carr, who like their job, would love it. Yeah, I would go as far to say love. He would very much appreciate it if you became a member to help him stay employed. Yes. And that's how we operate. We have some sponsors. We do some sponsors in the show. But membership is what makes all of this possible.

So we will have an exclusive members-only podcast up tonight around 11 or so p.m. So make sure you sign up. You don't want to miss that. And don't forget to smash the like button. Subscribe to this channel. Share the show with your friends. And let's get into that first big story out of Axios. This is crazy news.

Putin orders Russian peacekeeping operations in eastern Ukraine. The latest in a decree recognizing the independence of the Donetsk People's Republic and the Luhansk People's Republic. Putin ordered the Russian military to conduct peacekeeping operations in the occupied Ukrainian territories. The separatists don't hold all the territory they claim. So recognition could swiftly evolve into war unless Russia limits its operations to the separatist-held areas. Analysts have also warned that Moscow could also use any attacks on its

troops in eastern Ukraine, real or fabricated as a pretext for a broader war. The separatists declared independence in 2014 and have waged a low-scale war against Ukrainian forces since then with military backing from Moscow. The fighting has escalated since Thursday, with Kiev accusing separatists of persistent shelling across the line of contact. I just want to point out, though, I don't believe the corporate press. I don't know exactly what's going on. The U.S. is typically run by establishment political warmongers who will lie to justify invading or triggering a war or whatever. There was a lot of reporting that

Russia would seize Kiev and occupy and then hunt down supporters of the president, which is all just propaganda BS. It's a complicated situation. You know, I mentioned in the intro, I have friends down there and they view this as Russia just building up an excuse to seize more territory in eastern Ukraine because they don't want Ukraine becoming a NATO force, but they don't want NATO on their doorstep. But I don't know what to believe, to be completely honest. I certainly don't believe Vladimir Putin, but am I supposed to believe Joe Biden or is this all just some dirty game? I'll say one, sorry say one more quick thing. As this was heating up, we got reports that at the Ukrainian embassy, they started destroying computers and data.

Well, as most of us know, Joe Biden was criminally involved, at least I should say in my opinion it was criminal, with Burisma and his son. Getting, was it $83,000 per month being on the board of directors for a Ukrainian energy company. And then Joe Biden, quid pro quo, told the president, fire the prosecutor. The prosecutor was investigating this company. And then as soon as he's out, the guy who founds it comes back. It wasn't until Donald Trump came in, the guy fled the country again. So look, I think it's simple. My view, Joe Biden's panicking. Joe Biden was playing dirty with Ukraine along with the rest of the Democrats, probably because they want to set up an oil pipeline going through Ukraine, the Qatar-Turkey pipeline. When Donald Trump was president, all this disappeared.

For four years, there was nothing really going on here. What happened? Then Joe Biden comes back and all of a sudden war is breaking out. It's awfully convenient. I feel like this is actually a good thing. I think in the reality what will happen is they'll take over a certain chunk of the country. Russians look good. We look good because we can say we saved Ukraine.

There will be some kind of negotiation. The Norwegians or the Swiss or someone will come in and build some kind of peace program. They'll call it the Kiev Accords or something. They'll call it something like that. They'll call it the Kiev Accords or something. They'll call it something like that. They'll call peace and it'll be settled in a way that is acceptable for everybody enough. It's distraction against the disaster the Russian economy is. It's distraction against the disaster our economy is. So it's good distraction against all those things. And it sets up China for a negotiated deal on Taiwan. So it sets everything up in motion. So I think this is all

great in the long run for everybody. Everyone's going to be happy, meaning all the establishment will be happy. The individual Ukrainians, they're going to be screwed. If we have to send any troops, we're going to be screwed. But the establishment is going to be just fine. Putin is getting a bunch of pro-Russian, see where Russia, hoorah, hoorah. I know our country is a disaster, but isn't it great to be Russian? And the same thing over here. We're not talking about how bad our economy is. Look at the news. It's all Ukraine. We're not talking about how bad things are here. It's all Ukraine. So we can all talk about that. Good distraction. Life is good. And we settle it without fighting or actually having a battle. And that sets up China to have some kind of

negotiation for Taiwan, which it'll be Hong Kong-type negotiation for Taiwan. There are a bunch of these articles that keep popping up talking about – what is this one we have? From the Sun. Here we go. How Russian invasion of Ukraine may trigger conflict in all corners of the globe in terrifying World War III expert warns. This one's from January.

There were a couple today. Every week, you get a handful of them. And obviously people are already saying the title we used is – because I mentioned the fears of it. Well, the challenge is do I act like these articles based on my bias are all fake and just say that no one is really scared about – if Russia moves into eastern Ukraine, will that be the distraction China needs to move in on Taiwan? Will China start using similar tactics on Taiwan? I think that's a legitimate concern. And then if we get spread thin across the board, what's Iran going to do? What's going to happen in Yemen with Saudi Arabia? What's North Korea going to do? So I think there's a possibility there. But I do think it's fair to point out all these big stories that are popping up, like Russia would occupy kiev that's insane yeah that's not going to happen and also the u.s i really do not believe maybe maybe this will come back to bite me in the

ass i do not believe the u.s will have active troops in eastern ukraine or in ukraine fighting with russians the u.s is going to wag its finger and i think it's like you're saying larry i'm i'd be willing to bet that joe biden and his people are sitting there and they're like hey this this russia stuff is fantastic news for us. Absolutely. Like our approvals in the gutter. Everyone's mad at us. You've got protests.

They're going to do a DC convoy. Quick, scream war and point to Russia. Yes. And we'll shake our fists and see I'm strong. I'm so strong against these Russians. Putin's a killer. He can do that very easily. It's a smart move for him to do that.

But in reality, if there are any U.S. troops there, and I doubt there will be, but if there are, it'll only be after they're sure it is a safe settlement, like a North Korea, South Korea type thing, right? Where we know the odds of actual war are so slim, then we might put troops there maybe. But I doubt we will. The Germans still want that Russian energy, right? And the Germans run Europe, right? The Germans couldn't win it in military, but they won it it economically so they still control europe and they want that russian energy so they're not going to fight a war over that well actually i mean that's that's that's the big thing isn't it was the cutter turkey pipeline sure that western nato the u.s they

wanted to get that i bring it up fairly often because it's significant to everything that's going on um and it's more than just this. I mean, you can get reductive and go beyond why this pipeline mattered. But Qatar was going to build a pipeline going up through Syria and Turkey. Syria said, no, Russia is an ally of ours. We won't do it. Then conveniently for the U.S., a civil war erupts in Syria. And then the U.S. is like, well, we got to get rid of Assad now. Oh, it's funny how that guy was blocking your pipeline. And now all of a sudden you oppose him and you want to go to war there. Obama then basically funds a lot of the really awful stuff directly or indirectly that's happening down there.

You get Syria collapsing. Then all of a sudden it moves up into Ukraine because that's where the Gazprom Russian pipeline goes through. It's about a quarter, I believe, around a quarter of the energy going into Europe. The West wants to displace that, compete, and lower prices. Russia won't let them because Russia's allied with Syria. So now the U.S., they engage in conflict in Syria. So I'll tell you the funny thing. We sit here and you've got the American corporate press going like, Russia is invading Ukraine. And it's like, and what did we do with Syria? That was an ally of Russia. And we were arming rebels. We were calling for Bashar al-Assad to be removed, saying he was all

these really awful things. Russia's doing the same thing in Ukraine right now. This is all part of the proxy war over energy. And some of our weapons actually killed Russians. Yeah. Right? So some of the Russians were killed by our weapons. World War III didn't break out.

Yeah. Because nobody wants World War III. Right? World War III is bad for business. Yeah. What they want is small proxy wars. Small proxy wars, really good for business. We learned that after World War II is bad for business. What they want is small proxy wars. Small proxy wars, really good for business. We learned that after World War II.

Small proxy wars, great for business. So we want lots of small proxy wars throughout the world. That works very well for the military-industrial complex. But I would say any possibility of a World War III – actually, I'll put it this way. Some have actually chatted with us and said that World War III started a while back. It's just that we're not in that generation of warfare anymore. So now what we're seeing is propaganda, media manipulation, cyber warfare. And I think it's fair to say that if that is modern warfare, we are in World War III. Well, I would call it Cold War II. Let me see if I could, right? We had Cold War I after World War II, which was Soviet Union or Russia as number one, China as a union partner.

The MAD, Mutual Assault Destruction, was nuclear. But the battlefield was espionage, right? That was the battlefield during that one. We won that war, right? But, of course, we had an advantage. We had better espionage. We had more money. We had more nukes.

We were ahead. Cold War II started right after because what America does well is win the war world lose the peace right so we lost the peace and now we have world now we have cold war ii it's reversed china is now senior partner russia is now junior partner the mad mutual destruction is cyber when it was nuclear and now we're fighting in the markets and not in espionage so i think we're in Cold War II, and you're right. We're losing. I say we were losing. The cutting off of the bank accounts makes it feel a little more lukewarm. Because in the Cold War, citizens weren't getting screwed over by stuff, really. They were ducking and covering, and the nine-year-olds thinking they were going to protect them from a nuke, living in terror.

But the shutting off the bank accounts makes it feel kind of hot. It's not hot. Like a hot war would be when bombs are dropping and houses are getting blown up. Maybe. But I think maybe in the future, we bring it up often enough, fourth and fifth generational warfare, hot means something else. I'm afraid of the AI, really. If we're talking about a hot World War III, it would be like people are stuck in the metaverse and then the AI starts dropping bombs. Ultron, dude.

Yes. But you got to remember that the idea of capturing land is nowhere near as valuable as capturing IP. IP is the value now, right? Land is less valuable than it ever was compared to World War II days, right? Now, look, what if the Chinese invaded

and captured California? Do they care? Only if the IP is gone. If the IP is still there, they win. If the IP shifts to Austin or something, what do they get? They got a bunch of expensive land they have to quell. That actually sucks. Yes, that's all they got. Northern California is pretty good.

Southern California is basically drought ridden. Yes. So if they don't get the IP of Disney and of Silicon Valley, they don't get the IP, what's the value? So they're trying to capture IP, which China is doing very well. Very, very well. Yeah, Disney, absolutely on board. I loved it when Disney Plus thanked the Xinjiang security forces for helping them with their movie. And it's like the same security contractors that have the Uyghurs in concentration camps.

But talk about IP capture. There you go. It's a lot. See, this is the future of war. It's the control of resources, manipulation, propaganda. It's getting LeBron James to come out and defend China. It's getting Mark Cuban. And who was the other guy?

Was it Steve Kerr? Was that his name? Yeah, Kerr. And also John Cena. John Cena apologizing for China. Oh, yeah. Yeah, yeah. Steve Kerr is the Golden State Warrior coach.

Yeah, yeah. I'm pretty sure he came out and he was like, look, we got a lot of problems in America too. It's like, oh, dude, come on. Sure. But, yo, I think what's happening – I don't even want to repeat the things that are happening in Xinjiang. I mean that's just nightmarish what's going on with those people. But then you got – what was her face? That woman on – was it Savannah Guthrie?

Was that who did it? The Olympic opening ceremony. Oh, yeah. A Uyghur Muslim. So she was like, see, look at that. You know, repudiation. Oh The Olympic opening ceremony with a Uyghur Muslim. So she was like, see, look at that, you know, repudiation. Oh, wow.

There's a Uyghur. See? Everything's fine. Yeah. Direct CCP propaganda. Brought to you by NBC. What if my best friend is black? How could I be racist?

Exactly. Yeah, exactly. I think about World War II and how I would live my whole life like, oh, of course I would support the invasion of Nazi Germany and the, you know, the destruction of Nazi Germany or whatever. But now, today, it's kind of like we're looking at it again.

Do you support an invasion? Do you support war? Do you support putting your life on the line and risking everything that we have? World War II, most Americans didn't. Remember, we never declared war on Germany. Germany declared war on us. Yeah. We didn't care about any of that stuff.

It wasn't for – we declared war on Japan because Japan attacked us first correct we didn't remember the speech the day that will live in infamy yeah his words were

I want a declaration of war against the empire of Japan Hitler declared war on us we didn't declare war on him technically we were funding the British and the French as best we could

the French we were absolutely funding them but declaration of war America wasn't concerned about that. Remember, all wars begin for terrible reasons, but they always end for ethical reasons. Right? So they began because someone bombed us or let's go get the Germans. But it ends because freedom. That's not how it started.

Right? So wars always end because of something amazing but they begin because of garbage i think world war one didn't didn't begin to end the the empires yeah but now it was the war to end the empires yeah no it was because people were being stupid in europe that's why i started three cousins couldn't along with each other three cousins couldn't like each other that's a good point like at what point if you have a defensive pact with a country do you renege on the defensive pact? Or don't have one. I'm not going in.

Yeah, you got invaded. Or don't have one. You can't have one. NATO is a defensive pact. And we should not be in it. I'm interested in that path. Wasn't that Trump's position as well? Yes.

Well, Trump was better. Trump wanted them to pay more. I think he didn't go far enough. Oh, wow. I would have removed ourselves out of NATO completely. Why are we in? NATO was a pact to stop the Soviet Union. When the Soviet Union fell, we should have removed ourselves from NATO.

All NATO has done is started problems for us. I mean, one thing I was saying earlier is why should any American care about what's happening on the eastern borders of Ukraine when our southern border is not a priority for this president or this administration. The idea that they would be sending U.S. troops to eastern Europe for some threat of Russia but not be willing to secure our own border is laughable. Well, there's two parts I want to bring up here. I do care, and we should care. It doesn't mean we should send young Marine soldiers and sailors to die, right?

And it's not black and white in my view. I think we can use the bully pulpit. We can talk about it. We can try to make it better. We can get the American people to care. We can do that and assist. But I don't want to say, look, I was a Marine. And when I was a Marine, would I have left my legs in the streets of Manhattan? I'm a New Yorker. Would I have done that? Of course, I do it today, right? If I thought the Chinese were coming across the border or something I'd leave my legs in the streets of Manhattan today and I'm an old man now

and I would still do it. But do I want to send my kids who my kids are now 17 years old do I want to send my children to go fight and die in Ukraine? No. I don't.

But do I care? Of course I care. I don't want them to have trouble. I don't want them to be bombed. I'm a human being. I have compassion. I don't want them to die. But it doesn't mean I want to send my children to die. What I might

want to do is try to help them defend themselves. Maybe I'm okay with that, right? Or talk about it or whatever the case may be. But people have the right to fight their own wars and to create their own governments. We had a civil war. We had a revolutionary war. That's how we started our country. We won't let others do it. We were under the yoke of the British Empire for, what, 100 years? And then we decided that the best way for us to become independent was war. The Canadians thought, nah, we'll do it peace. Both are the right answer. Each nation decides on its own.

Then we had to have a civil war. The Canadians didn't have to have one. That's fine. Both are the right answer. Apparently, we were hanging out with Stephen Marsh. He wrote a book on Civil War. Yep. And he was mentioning –

I read his book. Canada actually had some very serious periods of instability in what? Yep. It was 82 and 95? Yep. So, you know, it's not all perfect. No nation is. Yeah.

No nation is. If you've got to put people together, they're going to want to fight each other. That's how it works. Now, hopefully, we can do it peacefully through politics and through talking. That's the best way of doing it. And that's what Canada decided. And that's good. We didn't.

I got a feeling in Ukraine that the Russian is going to send peacekeepers in and then Americans are going to be funding the rebels for the next 20 years again and arming them. And then the rebels are going to become the villains when we're done with it. You know, I just want to say, man, Ukraine is amazing.

Beautiful country. I got to hang out in Kiev for several months. Amazing food. Poverty wages. Good people. Beautiful cities. And absolutely horrible, you know, what we're seeing here, man.

It was kind of crazy to see that this country, what was it, Luke was saying, it was like the Afghanistan of Europe. I went for a walk when I was in Kiev with some coworkers and a friend. We were going to get food. And you can see buildings that still have bullet holes from World War II, I think it was, or whatever. When there was artillery firing, they just never repaired some of these. Inside, it's fine.

But outside, you can see the scars of war. It's kind of sad because these people are... The people I met and hung out with are just good, hardworking people who want to just do their thing. But I think sometimes they want to keep it there on purpose. They don't want you to forget. There are aspects of, if you go to Germany,

parts of where the Berlin Wall used to be. They keep that stuff there so you don't forget. They don't want you to forget what happened. So a lot of times people purposely say, well, I could fix that wall, but no, you should look and go, oh, right, war is bad.

Let's not do that. I love it then when they start tearing down the statues in the U.S. And they're saying there's a meme where it's like, well, what about moving the statues of uh of the of the nazis in germany to museums oh wait there aren't any because they destroyed all it's like but as you mentioned there's parts of the berlin wall there are still remnants and you know look i i understand if you've got a statue venerating the confederacy or the or

some of these people like the clan or something okay i get we don't want those statues up in the middle of a park or something but you put them in a museum if you're going to remove them and you do it by vote you do it by community organization you say how many of us agree on this the problem is you get these lunatics who come in with ropes and just rip them down against that's that's anti-democratic it's fascistic it's authoritarian as much as i'm not a fan of the statues either i think it's important if we don't put up a plaque or have some remembrance of what that was and why it was there, you're doomed to repeat your history. I like the idea of just auctioning

them all off. Just auction them off. Raise money for the state, which you need money anyway. Auction them all off. And then if you're some rich guy who cares about the heritage, which is often and common in most states in this world, the rich guys will spend ten a time. They will buy it. They'll move and they'll put it into their –

and they'll donate it to the museum. But if you're some guy who really hates some Confederate general and you want to tear a statue down, great. Get the people together, buy the statue and have a ceremony in your front lawn and destroy the damn thing. Look at this libertarian guy with a free market solution. You got it every time. Guilty as charged.

Let's talk about – let's move on to what's happening in the United States because we got this story. I don't know how to feel about this. This is – let me read the title. The Guardian, one dead and five wounded in Portland shooting during protest in park. Authorities describe confrontation in Normandale Park between a homeowner and participants in police violence protests. Now, I don't know how to feel about it because the conflict itself, the fighting, the shooting, of course, is just outright bad. Regular people defying Antifa far leftists and saying, get out of my neighborhood, is people waking up to the crisis and refusing and rejecting it.

But it leads to this. And this is what's scary because we don't we don't we don't want shooters on our streets you know the people the people who um they they post stuff you know there's that joke f around and find out and i'm like man you really don't want to find out no matter who you are you might wear the shirt you might wear the hat we joking we have a joke shirt says step on snack and find out the reality is i i assure you you don't want to find out you know the people who think that you know they would get into a conflict and have a good time of it, you don't want to be worried about your kids.

Because you might think you're tough, you might think you're brave, but what about when it's your kid who's at home and these people are fighting in the streets? So stories like this, man, I like the idea that regular people are saying no to the far left. I don't like the idea that's resulting in this, but I feel like this may be inevitable. So here's the story, just to give you a quick summary. These Antifa far leftists, they're doing their marches as they normally do. They were armed reportedly according to them and, um, some, you know, other witnesses pose, but I don't trust them. So what they said was this guy comes up to

him screaming at him saying they're terrorists and they're the cause of all the violence. And that if they go near his house, he will shoot them. And then abruptly open fired, shooting six people. One of them died. Five are injured. And then they critically injured him. They then go on to claim to the press they were unarmed. Yet this guy's critically wounded. They claim that he just attacked them.

I don't believe any of it. If I were to make my assessment based off what I know about the far left extremists, these Antifa types, I'd say that, you know, look, there's a video of these guys pulling a guy out of his truck and beating him. They were armed with rifles. They were blocking an intersection. The guy was honking at him, said, get out of the way. Apparently the guy saw their guns, showed him that he was strapped. They pointed weapons at him. He said, tried. He pulled his gun, pointed at them. Then they they grabbed him and started beating him how much you want to bet something similar happened this time the only thing is this time the guy was like i ain't playing any games and that woman is dead and this guy might die as well so this kind of stuff gets scary man but i don't know what you

what your thoughts on the uh thoughts on this are larry because you mentioned you read steven marsh's book on civil war where do you think What do you think about this? Where do you think this is all going? If we don't create someone who will step up and say, look what you just said, right? Your thought process is exactly correct. We need people to think how you're thinking. This is, I don't want to F around and find out, right? I don't want to find out. And this is an example of someone who did and it hurt everybody, right? Nobody won in this, right? A bunch of people went to the hospital. Somebody died. This is lose-lose. Someone's got to step up and go, wait a minute. Okay, I get you're mad. Let's talk this damn thing out. And that's an important piece. And I hope we begin to do that.

And the only way we do that is by having someone, like what you're talking about, say, hey, can we not fight? Can we not do that? If I was the mayor of the town and I've got Antifa out or BLM out or January 6th people, whatever I got, or I'm Trudeau and I got truckers, I don't walk away. I literally go there. I physically go there and say, I hear you. You got an issue or a problem or concern. I'm going to give you a time and a place where we can talk about this. And let's try to make this happen.

You start doing that more and more over time. The damage has been done, has been done for so long. It isn't fixed by one guy doing one thing. It needs multiple people doing this often. This should be the norm. We should make protest anger. When they do it, we respond with, okay, what's wrong versus I will hammer you. When you respond with I will hammer you, they become desperate. Desperate people do desperate things. It's just human nature. What did Jefferson say? I'm going to get it wrong.

When peaceful protest is impossible, violent revolution is inevitable. Did I get that right? Was it Kennedy? I thought that was Jefferson. Those who make peaceful revolution impossible make violent revolution inevitable. Thank you. There we go. Thank you for doing it right.

Yes. But I don't know. Look up who said it because we'll make sure. So I want to make it possible. Kennedy. Kennedy. I want to go out of my way. I want to make it possible.

And executives have to do this. It must be mayors, governors, county executives. As a nation, we don't pay attention to congressmen or senators. We don't. We only pay attention to executives. They have to be the ones doing this. But I don't want to be – I don't want to now bring up the pessimism here. But when we were talking with Stephen, the point I made, he said something similar.

He's like, when will you and your country realize you're tearing each other apart? You need to come together. And I said to him, you know, you're Canadian, right? And he says, yes. I'm like, you like your socialized health care. And he said, right. I said, okay, abolish it. Go full private free market.

And we got peace. And he said, point taken. Right. He's like, I won't give that up ever for anything. And so for me, you know, these individuals, for instance, these Antifa types, they are consistently violent. They are consistently extreme. And they are of the political faction that, for instance, in California tried to repeal their civil rights legislation from their own constitution. And they nearly succeeded in doing so. When that comes up, I just got to say, I'm sorry. There's no circumstance in

which I negotiate with that person and say, we'll take away some of the civil rights protection. It's not going to happen. I felt like they didn't exist until 2016, Antifa. I never even heard of it until 2015, 16. They did. They were at Occupy Wall Street. We just called it the black block element. It seems like it's a response to Hillary Clinton's DNC screwing over Bernie Sanders and ripping any hope from that party. And then the Federal Reserve printing insane amounts of money and devaluing the currency. These people have no hope. And now they're out there with COVID lockdown smashing stuff up because they can finally be outside. But if we focus on the problems like that, I think that we can quell the violence and calm people down.

You're right, Ian. What happens with these people is they're despondent, dejected, they're angry, they feel there's no path forward. And then along comes a demagogue who says, your answer is communism. They adopt it. And then we now have an expansive force of people who have identified the problem. They've identified a certain thing as the problem. That's not really their problem they they they uh unfortunately will often side with the very establishment that has caused them these problems and led them down these this path like you mentioned you know hillary clinton and all that stuff yeah they they'll they'll come out and be like we hate the democrats and then you'll get

someone like contra points for instance saying but you have to vote for Joe Biden. I'm like, look, my thought on Donald Trump for 2020 was I can choose the ivory tower elites who gutted this country or the bull rampaging through the ivory tower. I'll take the bull. Let them run around and kick some stuff over for once. And otherwise, what? We go back to square one? Yeah. You brought up a very valid point here. People always think, how bad does that have to get before people revolt? There's no answer to that because people will stay in horrible situations forever. It's a phenomenon called learned helplessness. What they require is hope, was what you just said. And some demagogue gives hope, right? And the best example I can give you is Russia, 1917. Peasants forever, 300 years, no real revolts.

I mean here or there are some sporadic revolts, but no real revolts for 300 years. Here comes Lenin. Hey, how about this communism thing? And all they knew was, well, it can't be worse than this, right? Sadly, they were wrong. It was. But they didn't know that. They had hope.

And the hope was, oh, this guy, he's telling us something. It's not what we got now. We know what we got now. Sucks. And we've been sitting here for 300 years. guy, he's telling us something. It's not what we got now. We know what we got now. Sucks. And we've been sitting here for 300 years. Okay, let's try this communism thing. And it was basically the same thing for them. Different name, though.

And nicer flags. So there was some benefit, I guess, to it. But that's about it. Maybe some emotional satisfaction. There was some of that, sure. Absolutely. So you get that. I think it happens here, too.

And if two sides are fighting, there has to be some hope. And that's the third party thing. The reason why I think, and I am blatantly biased, I know I'm biased. The Libertarian Party, I think the liberty movement is the answer because it's the only movement where you don't have to convert. You can be as liberal or as conservative as you want to be. Just don't force your view on others. You want to have a commune? Good. Have your commune over there. Just make sure government isn't paying for it. We'll make government smaller. Do your commune and you'll be fine. You want to have more free market? We can have that too. We can have all of those things if we change the environment. Right now, we can't change the environment. The reason why people get so angry is because they realize this.

If the other guy wins, he or she will enforce their will upon me, which means I must take the lesser of two evils. But, I mean, some of these people are authoritarians. Yes. But the people aren't authoritarians.

The leadership are. What people want is someone who will save them or make them feel better with their lives, better solve their problems. Now, you might say to yourself, but Larry, they're voting for you know, authoritarians. People don't want freedom. I don't mean to be cruel.

People want happiness. People want happiness, not freedom. If they believe freedom will get them happiness, they'll vote for freedom. If they think some dictator will get them happiness, they'll vote for freedom. If they think some dictator will get them happiness, they'll vote for a dictator. They will vote for whatever they believe will get them happiness. Our job in the liberty movement is to show them that freedom is the answer, so they vote for it. I completely agree, but I do think there are authoritarians who enjoy being authoritarian.

True also. And, you know, man, the this story i told before we had a funny update on it and it's a good example when i went to a sushi restaurant with my girlfriend and we walk in it's very small the sushi restaurant is maybe like 30 feet by 30 feet maybe everyone's sitting down no one's wearing a mask but there's a mask mask mandate so we walk in oh yeah and the guy grabs a couple menus menus and he goes, you need to wear masks. And then I went, oh, nobody's wearing any masks. And he was like, oh, but you have to wear it.

And I was like, I don't understand. Like, nobody's wearing masks. Well, they're sitting down and eating. And I said, OK. The table was literally about six, seven feet in front of us. I was like, we'll sit right there and then we'll eat. And he goes, OK. But if you get up, you have to wear a mask.

So I'm like, yeah, no problem. He hands me and my girlfriend a mask and i say okay we're literally three seconds from sitting down when a person at the counter goes put the mask on and i was like i'm just gonna sit down literally right here it's a couple and they were like no put the mask on and i said are you serious and all of the staff simultaneously went yes here's the funny thing about it. We got an update. This mask mandate was in Frederick County and it went into effect, I believe, just after New Year's in January. Now they've rescinded the mask mandate abruptly about a month later.

Why? Oh, well, cases are down. In a month? What? You enact it and then repeal it? Like, instantly. The people there just do as they're told. They have no interest in thinking about the problem, thinking about the policy or thinking about how psychotic

it was they were doing this. The only thing in their mind was whether they like it or not was adhere to the authority or get out. And so we did. So when you have, I feel like the culture war and the crisis work we're facing is, you know, types like Antifa, for instance, that are willing to go around with rifles and tell people you can't drive down this road anymore, anymore, chanting whose streets, our streets, forcing people off of public property. They want to, they want to use power against other people. I don't, I'd kind of like to mind my own business, which is why we're in the middle of nowhere with a bunch of chickens. Get away from everybody else. Leave me alone. Right. So I love the Liberty movement stuff, but I do feel like, you know, the question that came up with that with Steven was these

people won't, they want to rule over you. They want to. And so if you take the approach of, if only you just left me alone, they'll say I will. And then they'll still try to impose their will on you. I suppose the quote is when I am weak, I ask you for freedom because that is according to your principles. When I am strong, I deny you freedom because that's according to mine. And that's what we fear with these types of groups. What I would argue is, I'm sorry.

I'm just going to ask, what is the libertarian approach to a mob that is equally authoritarian and unreasonable? Yep. What's the approach to that? So let me cover two pieces if I could. The first one is, I think what people want more than anything, this is universal, is purpose.

Purpose is critical. Yeah. So when I don't have purpose, when I feel without power, when I feel like I don't have anything to do, and all of a sudden the government says, your purpose is to make sure people wear marshmallows on their heads. You will go out of your way to make sure people are wearing marshmallows on their head. You won't care why. You won't care what they're doing. Just I have purpose and I have power. I'm going to make sure you put marshmallows in your head. So I think that's the real issue. If we give them other forms of purpose, they'll go there. People want to feel useful. People want to feel important. People want to feel empowered. People want purpose. The problem is we've shut people down for two years, sucked away their purpose for two years,

and the only thing they have is marching in the streets. I mean, there weren't this many activists before COVID. Why? They had to be at work at 9 o'clock in the morning. That was their purpose. Well, now you don't got to go to work anymore. What am I doing? Oh, Janie's yelling about Antifa.

What's Antifa? I don't know. Let's go. And they're doing it, right? Oh, we get to have guns? Oh my god, now we're all powerful, so again there are leaders, but the perfect storm was shutting everything down

and creating a bunch of young men particularly, but also young women who had no purpose, so they will go do whatever is required, my goal is to create more purpose for more people less of them will be in people. Less of them will be in the streets. Less of them will be trying to impose their will because they have other things to do. That's the thing. I'm never going to stop the authoritarian. Can I lessen them? Yes. Can I

make their recruitment a whole lot harder? Yes. Bad people are bad people, but they're nothing without armies. So if I shut their recruitment down, I make everything better. But how do you do that? Right? And so I'll throw it back to this story I was telling, right? When you have people who are in a – I mean, look, Frederick, Maryland is not the biggest city in the country. It's moderately sized. It's about an hour or so outside of D.C.

No one showed up to tell these people, do as you're told or else. It was just all of a sudden like an official announcement went out. Everyone heard about the official announcement. So they all put flyers in their doors and said, OK, that's it. We're just going to do it now because I heard it through the grapevine. And that's not even about recruiting. That's just when the state decrees it, everyone just says, OK. But what if all those people actually had careers and jobs and families they were working on right now?

They wouldn't even have noticed. Well, no. I mean, this is a business, right? Everyone's here working at their job. And all of a sudden, they're told by someone else, oh, they did a mask mandate. So you don't want to get in trouble. Better do as you're told. And they all say, okay.

But you just put the point. You don't want to get in trouble. Yep. Right. Once you make the second piece is no opportunities. So when I have limited opportunities and my only opportunity is just to sell water, I will do anything to sell water. Because if I lose an opportunity, I got nothing. So if I think my only chance is really this job that I have, I will do whatever it takes to keep this job.

If that means I got to yell at you, I'm yelling at you. If I got to throw you out physically, I'll do it because I want that job. So I'm saying the environment is the issue. What I don't want to do is punish the player. What I want to do is change the game, right? People tend to react to their environments. And the more we have the right environment, the less people whack badly. So that's what I want. So I'm sorry to answer your question. How do you handle a mob, right? Remember, in a mob, the person who runs the mob

is the guy or gal who yells loudest. That's who controls the mob. So you've got to be over there and you've got to be able to talk to that leader and get them to either acquiesce or look weak or stop or agree with you

or in some way, shape, or form to the group goes, oh, you know what? Maybe I should be watching Netflix instead of being here. I want to tell you a story real quick that proves your point about whoever controls the mob. The person who yells the loudest is the person who controls the mob and it's literal. It's absolute literal. So during Occupy Wall Street, there was this very funny moment where everybody shows up to defend the park rumors of a police raid were coming everyone shows up in the early hours of the morning and there's a huge there's thousands a couple thousand people there at zuccotti park and occupy some guys standing up on this ledge because the park slopes downhill so there's a part where you're like a five foot ledge and he does the mic check mic check and

then everyone yells and he goes, should we maybe go march? And then everyone mutters and looks around. Nothing happens. Then some woman goes, mic check. And then they all yell, mic check. And he goes, I say, I say, we go march. And then everyone goes, wah. And they all just start following her.

It was an amazing thing to watch. I'm like, the guy asked if you wanted to do it and no one knew when the lady just screamed everyone just started marching yes absolutely magical that people just

hey if you yelled it I'll do it yes absolutely the issue is there's a book called The Book of Five Rings by Miyamoto Musashi yes

one of my favorite books excellent book book on sword fighting by the greatest swordsman in Japan, real person. It's actually mistranslated. It's supposed to be the Book of Five Scrolls. But they messed up and the ring you use to put the scroll in, so they messed up in translating it. So it's actually the Book of Five Scrolls.

And in the book, he mentions the idea of fighting multiple enemies. Right? And he talks about the idea of if you have a lot of enemies in front of you, don't be afraid. Drop the leader. The rest will run. That's his entire piece. Now, I take that not literal. I take that as control

the leader. I use the Lincoln analogy. If I make my enemy my friend, haven't I destroyed my enemy? So I don't have to kill the leader. I have to make the leader my friend. I make the leader my friend, the mob goes away. The same thing. Take out the leader, the rest disperse. You're a slave, like what they did with the Incans.

I'd rather not enslave people though. I think it was the Spanish took the emperor hostage. That's correct. They basically kept him as like a house servant for a month or so and they controlled the empire. It wasn't Montezuma. It was the Incan. Oh, the Incan one. Yes.

Okay. Yes. And they controlled the Incan empire after that and then they killed him quietly. Yep. But yeah, that's how you do it. You take the leader. Exactly right. In battle, if you cut down the leader, the troops. Yep. But yeah, that's how you do it. You take the leader.

In battle, if you cut down the leader, the troops don't know what to do. This is old battle too. So modern age might – This is new battle. This is why the Marine Corps always has rules in the Marine Corps. If you ever see the Marines, we have a blood stripe, right? We are the only service that has a red stripe in our dress uniform. That blood stripe comes from the Battle of Chapultepec. Is that right? I think that's right. Is that right? I'm not – one of the battles in the dress uniform. That blood stripe comes from the Battle of Chapultepec. Is that right? I think that's right. Is that right?

One of the battles in the Mexican War, I think that was the right one, where the officers were killed and the non-commissioned officers took over and still captured the city anyway. And from that, only E4s and above get that red blood stripe. The Marine Corps teaches you that when the captain's shot, the hill still must be taken, which is so when leaders get killed, Marines still step up and do the job. This is what leadership is about. Good leadership is about creating more leaders, which is why often cults of personality fail because once that person is gone,

there's no more leaders there. It's all gone. If you create a movement, a real movement, you create more leaders around you. So one guy drops, the rest pop up, and the hill is still taken. Right. It's not that we don't need a leader. It's that we need lots of them. Yes. I always say the liberty movement does not need a savior. It needs hundreds of heroes.

It is the Battle of Chapultepec in 1847. Chapultepec. Chapultepec. That's where. That's cool. Chapultepec. I still remember my Marine Corps history. I've been a Marine in 30 years.

And I still remember my history. It was an E-4 that picked up the – No, it was a bunch of noncommissioned officers, E-4 and above, who basically picked up the issue and kept going. If you ever watch – I had my daughter and I watch the movie Full Metal Jacket. If you ever watch, it's the part where they're ready to attack the city of Hue. And as they're moving into Wei City, there's a bunch of explosions. The captain drops. The second the captain drops,

the staff sergeant gets up. Let's move! And the staff sergeant takes him, and he's still moving into the city anyway. Band of brothers, too, man. When they drop behind enemy lines, the captain goes down, and the lieutenant's forced to take over. All elite units have that. But mobs are not elite. So mobs don't have that.

Trained elite units have that esprit de corps. They have that way of thinking. Mobs don't. It was Napoleon who said, if you want to get rid of a mob, give them a whiff of grape shot. Right? Fire around and the mob will disperse. Yeah. My favorite movie to quote, of course, The Patriot with Mel Gibson.

There's that great scene where he's talking with, I think it's Cornwallis and he says, stop killing my officers. Could you imagine what war would be like? People running about and then he has – that's the point. But then I love his response. He was like, so long as your officers are killing women and children, we will – I will order my men to fire on sight, which is awesome. I love that movie. Mel Gibson was amazing in it. But that's the point. It was – don't kill the officers.

Just kill the lowly people and then let the officers live because we don't want disorganized warfare. It's an insane thing to think that there was a time where people were like, we're going to war and I want you dead, but we'll be gentlemanly about it. Because you would capture the enemy Duke and then you'd sell them back for ten times the money you would make with a peace deal or with a beheading. And then their son becomes the duke and hates you. There's no point. So you're saying our approach to Antifa is all wrong. We should be capturing their leaders and selling them back to Antifa? They wouldn't be that valuable.

I think that's what the law system has been doing. They've been incarcerating them and bailing them out, basically. Isn't that a similar thing? They're paying themselves to release the— Yeah, actually. Yeah, they arrest them, then the Antifa raises money through crowdfunding to pay to get them

out of jail keeping this industry rolling. Could you imagine if that's the real reason there's not enough... There's not as many prosecutions with Antifa and they get released a lot?

It's because there's an industry around it. I paid lawyers, politicians getting funding, donations, crowdfunding websites. They're all like, look, look, look,

if we convict them then we stop getting the money from this economy of activism and we and we have to pay to incarcerate them on top yeah that's right we lose money i wish that was unbelievable but it's not i wish that was unbelievable but it's totally but but but i mean what would you do i mean that's a free market right no no government's by default not a free market yeah by default once it's government it's by default not a free market. Yeah. By default. Once it's government, it's by default not a free market. Right?

So no, not at all. How do you bounce that out libertarian style with like the authority of governments having control of the authority of government and being libertarian about it? That is one of the broadest questions I've ever had. I'll be a little more specific. How do you feel about like public roads being owned by the government? Yeah. As a general rule, that's not a real thing in America. Like Americans don't want to hear that.

So my idea has always been instead, you raise money for infrastructure by leasing out naming rights from that infrastructure. So an example in New York City is a great example, meaning so for example, we have dozens of bridges in New York City.

They get mentioned hundreds of times every day on the reports, the traffic reports. We see them on Google Maps. They're in TV shows all the time. Imagine if it had been the George Washington Bridge, it was the Netflix Bridge or the Pepsi Bridge. The Bud Light Bridge. The Bud Light Bridge.

There you go. Oh, my gosh. 100%, yes. Go trick and drive. They would easily pay us $100 million a year. How do I know that? Because I brought this up in 2018 and there were bankers talking to me about how long is the lease? What are we talking about? How long will it go? Because you have to

have it for at least 12 years, at least 10-year lease because culture has to also change, right? So just because I want to name it the Pepsi Bridge doesn't mean I still won't call it the George Washington Bridge. So culture has to change to get the Pepsi piece on there. Plus they also control maintenance. But we still own the asset. We own the asset. A leasing right, leasing, name me, the rest of them. You front load the contract.

So if they screw up on the maintenance, we remove the contract. We get our money up front. New contract. So now what happens is you raise money. You end the tolls.

Tolls in New York, 15 to 18 bucks for one bridge, one way. Yep. You get rid of those tolls. Now the regular working poor and the middle class can drive across the bridge.

Truckers, independent truckers aren't getting hammered because they pay per axle. So that now goes away. And you don't have to pay for the maintenance of the bridge. You take the cash. You pay for the MTA. This is brilliant. Maybe we should auction the name of Freedomistan so it will be like Netflix. Oh, my gosh.

You'd make at least $ million bucks for the first year. Netflixia. Netflixia. I don't know if any of these corporations would want to be associated with our free domicile. No, they would. We're building the new facility. It's like 50 acres in the middle of West Virginia.

Why don't we just do that? You want to name it? You got to pay. It's only good for, we'll do a five-year lease. But that's what government should be doing, but it won't. Here's the reason why. Government is backward. In other words, government says we're doing something, so government should pay some crony, some friend that I have to do the work with taxpayer money.

Should be the opposite. I'm giving you government land or government. You should pay me. Why am I paying? Why? Because, well, if you pay me, I can't reward government land or government. You should pay me. Why am I? Why? Because, well, if you pay me, I can't reward my friends with jobs. And remember, government is always two things, a monopoly and a jobs program. It's always those two things.

If you take away the jobs program and take away the monopoly, government has very little power. So they want to make sure that they're always spending money to create jobs so you become loyal to the government. So that's why they always create an office of this, an office of that, and they put $14 million towards it, $10 million towards it, because now my buddy and his son and daughter all get jobs now. And once you get your population dependent on government-controlled healthcare, you never got to worry about losing power ever again. Correct. Do you think in the age of of fifth generational warfare, meme warfare and stuff that naming roads and bridges, corporate names is dangerous? Why?

Just because it brainwashes people to think the corporations are in control? They already think it. And then the other thing is they already think it, number one. And in many cases, they are. I mean, Amazon is in heavy control already. But no matter what, the person who actually has control is the person who can arrest you. That's the person who's actually in control, right? Whoever can arrest you is actually in control.

So that's number one. But the second piece is there won't just be one bridge. Amazon won't own all the bridges. Well, they don't own any of them, right? They just have the naming rights. The naming rights. They won't own the naming rights to all the bridges. One of them will be an Amazon bridge. One will be a Pepsi bridge.

One will be a Netflix bridge. Look, if Amazon wants to get two bridges and drop $200 million a year, they can get two bridges. It's fine. But there'll be a bunch of bridges. But this is actually a really good idea because check out this, right? When you're leaving New York, you got a couple of different options for your bridges, right? Yes. Depending on where you're going. So when you're going north out of the... What's that? Washington Bridge? George Washington Bridge. What's another option Washington Bridge? George Washington Bridge. What's another option outside of the George Washington Bridge in the same direction? You can go to Tappan Zee Bridge.

Well, it's actually called the Mario Cuomo Bridge. Oh, all right. I still call it – because they – we – well, you remember something. We are an empire, so we always have to name our monuments over – about our royalty. I would love to rename FDR. Now, hold on. So you've got the Cuomo Bridge and the Washington Bridge, right?

Yep. Now imagine, because this is an amazing idea, imagine New York leases them out and then Coke buys one and Pepsi buys the other. Oh, that'd be awesome. Hold on, hold on.

But hold on. Then one day you're driving and you hit a pothole on the Coke Bridge and you post on Twitter, these potholes on the Coke Bridge are trash, I'm taking Pepsi. Coke's going to be like,

we've got to fix this bridge. Absolutely. We've got so much money to fix the potholes. And they'll fix it fast, too. They will. And cheaper. That's a great incentive. And cheaper.

You could rename it the FDR. What is it, a freeway? The FDR? Yeah, FDR Drive. That would be nice to rename. Absolutely. FDR Drive. It's kind of scary to think, though, that you're going to be like, you're going to make a right onto Netflix.

Once you get to the Pepsi bridge, you need to exit onto the KFC highway. Yes. But the other option is horrible infrastructure being paid for by poor people. The advantage of this right now is the left will always say, I want corporations to pay more. Me too. Let's just do it voluntarily. Well, they're going to voluntarily pay for your infrastructure.

I want Netflix to pay for the MTA. I'll get them to do it voluntarily. Well, they're going to voluntarily pay for your infrastructure. I want Netflix to pay for the MTA. I'll get them to do it. They'll happily do it. Companies like Google and such have a $10 billion marketing budget. That's just the marketing budget per year. $100 million, easy day. They don't care. Do you think it would be okay to sell the name of New York City to Google and just call it Google?

No, no, no, no, no. Just call it Google. No. Terrible idea. What's the difference? Infrastructure is infrastructure. Once you do the city, that's monopoly. I don't want monopoly.

But it's just a name. But it's the city. It's one city. You've just made another monopoly. We have enough monopolies. I want to sell things where there's lots of. Right? Lots of.

Lots of. And they can compete against each other. Lots of. They might want to buy two or three of them. Good. Put tons of money there's lots of. Lots of. And they can compete against each other. Lots of. They might want to buy two or three of them. Good. Put tons of money in it. But not all of them. What if Google buys every available infrastructure, outbids everybody? And so it's like, once you exit at Google 1, you turn left on Google 3. Google 4 is when you... It's a valid point. And if that becomes a problem, let's cross that bridge. Nice. Lovely. becomes a problem let's cross that bridge nice uh right yes if if i hope that becomes a problem i hope one company wants to spend three billion dollars on and pay for new york city's infrastructure

this is let that be a problem it's a brilliant idea i mean i mean truth be told uh like when it came to setting up freedomistan we just called that i think luke came up with the name it's like you know like afghanistan or whatever. Stan meaning city. And so he was like, call it Freedomistan or something. Freedomistan. I said Freedomistan. We could raise money to expand our operation by offering someone up the chance to buy the naming rights for a certain amount of time. And then whenever we're talking about it, we would call it like Joe's Plumbing Headquarters or whatever.

100%. Why not? Look, I was talking about the MTA, right? The MTA is an old system, right? The disadvantage of New York City is that its system is very old. The subway is over 100 years old. It takes forever to fix anything, to repair anything. So I want a brand new system.

It's too expensive and it's a garbage system. How do you fix it? Okay. At night, for those of you who don't know, an MTA at night, literally every other train, it's down every other train. So make every other train a freight train. Allow freight to come into the city. Well, the first response I get is, well, you can't have freight coming to the city. The tracks aren't ready for that. I guess that means

that FedEx and Home Depot and Amazon have to build all new tracks, won't they? And what we'll do is every hub they create, they name their own hubs. So it's the Home Depot hub, it's the so-and-so hub. It's not going to be the Moynihan station, again, named after our hubs. So it's the Home Depot hub. It's the so-and-so hub. It's not going to be the Moynihan station, again, named after our elites. It'll be the Home Depot station. It'll be the so-and-so station. They'll get all the information. They'll rebuild the entire system. We'll get more freight going to the city, less trucks on

city roads at night. They're happy. We're happy. And we get a brand new system. And we can lower the cost to about a buck a ride. Have you considered running for some kind of political office? I have. And here's the worst part. That plan's been on my website for four years.

Wow. No one's taken it. I mean, we talked about it. Oh, that's a great idea. One of the nightmares of New York is shipping. Yep. It's so difficult. New York City particularly. Yes.

Getting goods into a city so dense is insane. The roads are shot. Correct. The parking is ridiculous. They've banned like you can't non-commercial vehicles can't even park in Manhattan because it's just too congested. Correct. So like your plan. This happens now. Now, literally, if you want to be eco-friendly, the city is in a place we have enough hubs. You could literally have walkers,

people who are walking goods, people who are backpacking. You could use bikes, whatever you want. Like an Uber type of thing. You could make Uber. Whatever is the right thing. The point is, as a governor, I don't have to make that decision. I change the environment, and then I got better players. Larry, Larry, solving problems for regular working people, it doesn't work for the elites because the problems keep them in power. But as long as I give them something, which if you notice, I'm always giving the elite something. And it will create new problems for them to worry about. Correct.

I give the elites because if you try to just fight the elites the elite something. And it will create new problems for them to worry about. Correct. I give the elites, because if you try to just fight the elite straight up, one-on-one, you lose. Don't charge a machine gun nest. Correct. So I bring them aboard. I bring them aboard in helping me out. Here's what I'm sure of. Amazon wants to advertise. So does

Google and everyone else. And they don't know how. They're throwing this stuff all over the place. They're figuring out how this thing works. I'm giving you away. And I'll talk about it on top of it as governor. I'll talk about it. Dude, if Fifth Avenue was Amazon Ave and then you had like Bed Bath & Beyond Ave or whatever. I don't want to change the streets. I'd be down.

Because the streets in Manhattan are all numbered. I guess it helps you navigate. And it's easy to navigate. So I don't want to change streets. That's going to run up. All my policies are always set up to help the working poor and the middle class. But this is interesting.

And that will hurt the working poor and middle class. So I'm not okay with that. So if we're talking about bringing freight into the city on the tracks, on the existing massive... You said subway?

Rebuilt. Be rebuilt subway trucks. That's going to save these companies insane amounts of money. Yes. So they have a massive profit incentive for investing in this if they get access to it.

Yes. And it's just their marketing budget anyway. They're not paying any extra money. No, I mean like – So I'm not causing them to pay any extra money out of their budget, but they're putting more money into infrastructure. But I'm not talking about the naming rights. I'm talking about – necessarily, I'm also talking about if you allow the trains to come in instead of pubs. hubs, they're going to say it's going to cost us X per year. If we invest $100 million, it'll be X minus Y.

We're going to save money over 10 years. We're going to put more money in our pockets. 100%. They'll save money after the first year. That's right. And they'll build it faster. So if there's an opportunity for these corporations, for the elites, why isn't this stuff getting done? Why would you when the people in power just fight each other?

As long as we maintain this two left-right dichotomy, there is literally no need to fix anything. We just fight each other. If you look at any – I'm the oddball here. If you look at anyone else running, go to their website and look for policy. You will find none. What you will find is other guy bad America. Other guy bad America. That's what you'll find.

And that happened since, believe it or not, Al Gore in 2001. All consultants tell their people, don't put detailed policy on your website because then your enemies will attack you on it. So don't put it on. I think the opposite. Third party has to. We don't get noticed without it. I want to read for everybody a text message I received today proving your point. I don't know if I should read the guy's name.

Should I? Probably not. All right. I'm not going to read his name. But I got it. He says, hi, Tim. He says, hi, Timothy. This is candidate for Congress in New Jersey's second in office. All right. I'm not going to read his name. But I got it. He says, hi, Tim. He says, hi, Timothy. This is candidate for Congress in New Jersey, second congressional district.

I tried calling today to introduce myself. I'm a lifelong New Jersey and civil rights attorney with a 27-year-long career in law enforcement. And I'm running for Congress to replace turncoat Jeff Van Drew. There we go. I'm trying to build an early staff. Would love your money it's not the first uh tax i've received i also because it's it's it is the season right um let me see i got another one in here somewhere here we go uh let's see who is this one okay here

we go hi tim it's candidate the dirt road democrat that will defeat the queen of q anon marjorie taylor green in november i said you know what man i've gotten a bunch of these tax from democrats the dirt road Democrat that will defeat the queen of QAnon, Marjorie Taylor Greene in November. You know what, man? I've gotten a bunch of these texts from Democrats and all of them are like, I hate this person. So give me money. Yes. That's all of them that way. What's happened now, again, this is a left versus right paradigm.

It's now a point where my victory is you losing. My victory isn't me winning. My victory is you losing. So your pain is my joy. Who wins with that? No, no one. No one. This is Gandhi's eye for an eye and we all go blind. This is not the way of doing things. It's got to be how do we fix things that makes things better. I can't get past the other guy bad if I don't have a solution. My point is, if I can show someone that my way will make their life better, I have a chance of them voting for me. And I still get it when I had idea when it came to cannabis, right? And I said, let's regulate cannabis like onions. It's a plant, regulate like onions. Let farmers grow if they want to grow a craft, grow in New

York State. If you're poor, grow your medicine in your backyard, right? My saying was if you like your dealer, keep your dealer, right? Because you don't have to get a special license for it, right? It's a plant, right? So regular onions, all good. People still talk about that. Like I'll be in New York, a car will drive by, roll the window down, go, Low shop, regular onions.

Literally that will still happen. That's the point I was talking about earlier with it, which is for every policy, you want to have a policy that is radical enough for someone to notice it, but familiar enough for someone to accept. So regulate, oh, that's familiar, like onions. That's weird because there really aren't that many regulations on onions. In New York, there are too many probably. Probably just like carrots or something, but I don't care.

You pick the vegetable. Regulate like a vegetable. Now, oh, it's different. In New York, there are too many probably. Probably just like carrots or something. But I don't care. You pick the vegetable. Regular like a vegetable. Now, oh, it's different. It's a plant. This is why I really liked Andrew Yang. And I forget the woman's name. Was it Marianne Williamson? Yes, Marianne Williamson.

I really felt bad for her, but I really – it was quite endearing when she was on the stage and she was like, I don't want to talk bad about people. They were trying to ask her something and she was like, I don't want to talk bad about people. They were trying to ask her something and she was like, I don't want to have to do this. And I was like, I respect that. But man, did she get roasted by the establishment corporate press. They called her the crystal woo-woo lady and all that stuff. And she's like, I don't own any crystals.

I don't understand. Andrew Yang, as a fan, I'm not that big of a fan right now. He's okay. I give him a C-. I had him at an A-plus before, and it was because his website was loaded with policy. I was like, man, he's got a policy for everything. I love it. He's like, hey, I actually thought about these things.

I want to fix them. But then I feel like Bernie Sanders, like many of these other politicians, they decide to play ball with the establishment and walk into that. They play that game. I think before, I think he tried that, it didn't work and now he's out. That's why he's out and I think it's the right move. And by the way, I have policy. May I promote for a second? Oh, of course.

LarrySharp.com. That is Larry Sharp with an E. And the E stands for electable. So you can check out LarrySharp.com and I've got all my policy there. And most of it's been there for four years. I've just added some more recent policy because the state has gotten even worse. I've had the idea of a New York state currency, an idea of a stipend, a yearly stipend that comes out of New York state. I've had all these different type of ideas.

But what Yang agrees with completely and me agree completely is third party is the only way to save the country. I don't even like saying third. It's the only way. Because I want more. More political parties. More parties. But at least one, right? It is so hard.

If you're a Democrat or Republican, you may not know this, but your party actively uses your money to sue, to throw people off the ballot. They go out of their way to get judges to remove your choice so it can remove your voice. That's what they do. They do not want a functioning democracy. They don't want primaries. They want to select the people. Remember, with gerrymandering, the parties pick the voters. The voters don't pick the parties. So the parties pick the voters with gerrymandering to make the decisions on who gets what, controlled opposition, and then non, and then those who are in charge. Then the parties

pick the leaders, so no voting in the primary, and then gerrymandering ensures they win. So they're appointing all of these leaders and begging you for money if there's a chance that someone's going to lose. Most of the people who are begging you for money know already who's going to win. They just want you to give them money so they can keep raising all the grift that's what most of them are doing you make a third or fourth party gerrymandering is irrelevant right you make a third or fourth party us versus them is irrelevant why is that because if you gerrymander for say republicans in one district right most uh rural districts are gerrymandered for republicans right most are so most city ones are gerrymandered for Republicans, right? Most are. So most city ones are gerrymandered for Democrats, generally speaking, right?

There's obvious exceptions, but a general rule. Well, now there's a third party in there. How do I know, right? Parties, if you do it right, will be specialized parties, right? So this part is going to be heavily about whatever. Healthcare for all. This one's going to be about free market cannabis, right? There's going to be a bunch of parties. So if I'm a Republican, but I'm a single issue voter on these things,

I'm going to lose that Republican voter. If I'm a Democrat, but I'm a single issue voter on those things, I lose that voter. It breaks up the gerrymandering. I think you're right. And full disclosure, I've donated to the Ford party for that reason. There needs to be something different. And I still think that one of the problems is I'm not a fan of the establishment Republicans. I like the more populist libertarian type Republicans. Up in New Hampshire, the libertarians, they run as Republicans. And the fear, though, is it's our election system. It's first past the post voting.

You're right. People are going to say, look, man, I get it. The Republicans, oof, but I will do anything to stop the Democrats. I agree. And that's why we all three parties unite. The Libertarian Party and the Forward Party have what I call the BRO program. Yes, it is BRO, B-R-O, B, easier ballot access to let people on the ballot. It doesn't mean you have to B, easier ballot access to let people on the ballot. It doesn't mean you have to vote for them, but let them be on the ballot to vote. R, ranked choice voting. If we don't make ranked choice voting happen, you are correct.

You're right. You've got to have a ranked choice voting to where you can say, I really like Larry Sharp, but if he doesn't win, I like this person. So I wrote Larry Sharp first. I really like him because he's really good looking. So I pick him on a total that makes no sense except that he's hot. And then I go to the next person

who I think of policy as good. I think that's how Trudeau won. That's how Trudeau won. Yes. So if I don't win, I still get my safety net, right? So we need that. And last is open primaries

so that people can vote in different... If I'm not part of a party, I can sort of decide what matters to me. So say I'm usually a Democrat, I'm usually a Republican, but in this specific race, nobody in my party

that it's running is worth anything. So I want to vote for the Democrat this time or I want to vote for the Libertarian this time. So I have a chance of doing so in the primaries.

So ballot access, ranked choice voting, open primaries, that will change the country. I dig it. What do you think about the Mises caucus? I'm on the advisory board. Oh, well, there you go.

Yeah. I would be on the advisory board of any caucus before with you. And I've openly said that. They're the only ones who actually took me up on it. Oh, wow. Yes. I offered it for when the Prague caucus used it. I offered it for them.

They didn't want me. So the only ones wanted me over them. So I took it. So I'm open to all caucuses. Is it, I offered it for them. They didn't want me. So the only ones who wanted me were them, so I took it. So I'm open to all caucuses. Is it caucuses? Caucusi? I don't know. I'm just making it up.

All of the caucuses. We're going to have President Dave Smith, Prime Secretary Michael Malice. Who would be the VP in that circumstance? Has he said? Has anyone mentioned it? No, I don't know. Don't know.

Smith-Sharp. Do they have to be an American? Yes. Yes. But not to be governor? You don. Yes. But not to be governor? You don't have to be American to be governor? No, I'm talking about the presidency. No, governor, you just have to live, I think, in New York.

You have to be a resident of New York State for, I think, five years. That's interesting. You just move in from Saudi Arabia and five years later be governor? Yeah, I'm pretty sure that's the rule. You have to be over 30. You have to be 30 years or older and I think a resident. It's five or seven. I forgot one or two, but a resident.

I've been a resident for many decades, so it doesn't matter to me, but it's a certain number of years. Do you think there would be value to letting non-American citizens or people that aren't born in the U.S. run for president and VP at some stage in their life? I don't know. I mean I understand why they did it in the past because a lot of people weren't born in America. We had so much immigration and we're about people coming over and royalty coming over and taking over and making American royalty in the 1700s, 1800s. It made sense then. I'm not sure now to be forward to. Would it be terrible for someone like an immigrant who's come over and learned the American dream to become president?

I don't know. Yeah, I think Elon Musk particularly. I don't know. Like they can never do it. It just seems so wrong. No, I still agree with it but i think the issue is it's a it's a safety measure against people who don't understand our culture our values our principles unfortunately doesn't seem to be working too well because we had joe biden in office

sure but that's because there is a a um malignancy growing within this country that opposes what the united states is and always has been and is seeking to supplant it and it's been growing exponentially over the past 10 years. I'm hoping you can call this bro program. The brogram. I don't know if that is that a... The brogram. I'm so stealing that. I'm calling it from now on.

It's kind of cliche. It might play. We're running through focus groups. A bit of a dad joke. I'm stealing it and giving you exactly no credit. Thank you. That's the way it should be. Yes. The challenge on the immigration issue is that, for one, we're seeing a massive influx

of non-citizens pouring into the country. Yes. These are people who see opportunity but don't understand the opportunity. And so it's a very interesting problem. I've often said I have infinitely more respect for illegal immigrants who are risking life and limb traveling through Mexico to try and come to the United States because there is a dream of opportunity. I have more respect for them than I do the woke leftists who are like America is inherently evil and all of that stuff. The problem is they're both not representing or understanding. I mean certainly I think one

ideal is better than the other, that America is great is better than saying America is bad. But we need people who understand what it took to make sure the country was great. The freedoms, liberties that allow people to prosper. Otherwise you end up with people coming here and being like, look, I don't care. I got mine. You end up with people being born here saying, I'm not getting mine, so I'll take it. And that's, it's a malignancy. I think it's growing in this country and it's displacing the people who are like, you know, I won't forget the men who died,

who, you know, made this land free or whatever the line is, right? I'm not sure that native born Americans are any more or less patriotic to be foreign. I don't really know if that's true. I know a lot of native-born Americans who do nothing but badmouth America. And I know lots of people who are immigrants

who talk great about America. And the reverse. I don't know if I could... I'd like some data on that. Is there any difference? I don't actually know. It's not... I guess to answer your question,

it's not a big deal to me either way to be forward with you. I don't really know if it matters much. I learned a new appreciation for the United States when I spent time in Peru and in Chile. When you see the national police on every corner and just like, wow, if I slip up here, the feds are on me. There's no local protection in these countries. Traveling is amazing. I lived in Japan for many years. How long? Four years. I was teaching English there. Oh, cool.

So I lived in Japan for four years. I toured China, Philippines, Korea. I had to do some work in London and Berlin. And when you're in those other cities and those countries, you do see a difference. You understand what it is to be American. Do you speak Japanese? A little bit. I still have a Japanese driver's license. I still have it on me. Oh, cool.

Cool. Nice. I keep it. It is literally like, I don't know, 30 years old or something. 30 years old? I still keep it. Huh. Sweet. I still keep it. Huh? Sweet.

Japanese driver's license. Yes. Look at this guy. Yes. Looking all young. That was many years ago. What were some of the biggest differences you noticed maybe off the top of your head? Yeah, I remember one time something was happening.

I forgot what it was. It was probably in the late 80s, early 90s, as I'm going to guess. And we were talking about burning the American flag. And one of the students asked me, I said, Larry, why do you guys care so much when you burn the American flag? Like, no one in Japan cares

you burn the Japanese flag. That's why no one burns the Japanese flag, because we don't care. It doesn't make the news. Nobody cares. I said, because you got to understand something. In Japan, you are united by so many things.

And this particularly in the 90s for sure, but even now still. Speak the same language, same religion, same school system, right? Read the same books, watch the same TV, eat the same foods. They're very much connected on a different level. But when you come to America, we're not. We don't have those similarities. We are linked by our symbols. We are linked by our ideology. That's how we're linked. The flag means a lot to us because it's a symbol of what keeps us together. We don't have the same other things. Japanese don't require a flag. That's just a piece of cloth to them. They know they're all

together. They know they're all Japanese. That's most countries, not all obviously, but that's many countries. Countries that are not as homogenous or who don't have that connection culturally rely more on symbols. And I think that was also a part of me to understand that idea that how, you know, symbols matter, how our president is one of the only leaders who is both the head of state and head of government. And it gives him so much power and how we look in most countries when something goes wrong, they blame the leader, right? Something goes wrong and they go, oh, something happened. You're a bad leader.

We do the opposite. Something went wrong. Leader, save us, right? So when 9-11 happened, somebody blamed Bush. They all said, Bush, come save us, right? That had happened in Japan? That government falls. Wow.

I think the symbols thing is very apt, very accurate because I've often brought up why I think this country is so important. We have a variety of different ethnic backgrounds, religions, and the one thing that we all have in common is that we're Americans. And that's why I really, I very much despise the critical race theorists and their ideologies that segregate based on race,

want us all to focus on races and identities. Because you can't really tell. I mean, the issue for me is obvious, and I've brought it up with the audience very often, but having someone decide for you what you should be allowed to do based on your race, and then separating people, I'm like, no, no, we're all Americans here. And that's the one thing we all have. That's our identity. Our identity is American, because there are a lot of people who are here who are first, second, third generation immigrant. Their identity is not.

I mean, if you're if you're the grandchild of immigrants, you have a very short lived American tradition. You probably don't know too much about the old country, maybe a little bit from your grandparents. What if you're what if it's your great grandparents? You have American traditions. And so the one thing that unites all of us is it's America. We have a flag. We have a national anthem. We have the pledge, all of those things. And we stand together for these ideals. We have American traditions. And so the one thing that unites all of us is it's America. We have a flag.

We have a national anthem. We have the pledge, all of those things. And we stand together for these ideals. We have a constitution. Unfortunately, now, whether it's because of social media or universities, there is a growing conflict with a lot of people who don't believe in the flag. They hate it. They hate this country.

They think it's evil. They want to see it destroyed. And they're gaining more and more power. I think there's powerful political elites. I think they can wield this raucous faction and that it will give them some kind of edge, but they can't control it. I think there's two parts that kind of make that hard. One of them is fractured media, right? The fractured media, which I think in general is a good thing, but this is a bad side to the fractured media. Now we're all watching, you know, we're not all watching Walter Cronkite tell us what's

good. We're watching individuals tell us what we kind of get, right? We're staying in those areas. Well, that's a great thing for choice. That's a great thing for freedom. It's a great thing for information. There's more benefit than there is downside to this. But one downside is that. But now a great thing for freedom. It's a great thing for information. There's more benefit than there is downside to this. But one downside is that. But now there becomes a second downside.

Our politicians, our system doesn't support anybody. So what I mean by that? All the problems that happen, Democrats are the party of bad ideas. Republicans are the party of no ideas. So no one is actually helped. I completely agree. And when no one is helped, people go, well, who's going to help me? People have problems. Now in a libertarian world, we support communities for communities to help people. That's what we should be doing in our perfect world. Obviously, we're not there. But we want to start to create a world where communities help people fall down, People make mistakes. People get in trouble. That's what happens. We're human beings. And we

want to have a world where the community step up and go, okay, I got you. You come out of prison. Community should help you. You're an addict. Community should help you. That's the goal for us to be there. We don't do that. We create programs. What programs do is they service you. They don't help you. They they service you so they keep you where you are forever so we all have jobs but actual actual non-profits that are not funded by the government those actually help people how do you know because they have a donor base you don't give money to somebody unless they show you a success story so i'm incentivized if i'm not government funded to give you a success story see look i did something we help someone i'm incentivized if I'm not government funded to give you a success story. See, look, I did something.

We helped someone. I'm incentivized to do that. But if I'm government funded, I'm not. I'm incentivized to check a box. I check the box. I get my government money. Now, you might say, wait a minute, Larry. There are nonprofits who are terrible.

Look at them. Most of them are government funded, which means what does that mean? They're not actually nonprofits. They're just government agencies that are non-unionized. So the government gets non-unionized workers. That's what that actually is. Second Amendment. Yes.

What about it? How do you feel about it? I am the only candidate who is pro-2A in all of New York State. Not even close. The only one. I was the only one in 2018 who actually had a plan to end our SAFE Act. And those of you who may not know, the SAFE Act in New York State was enacted in 2013 after Sandy Hook, which by the way, did not happen in New York State,

but it was to stop all the Sandy Hooks that were happening in New York State, which was exactly none. There was no problem. We created a SAFE Act where basically what it said was, you are about a million New Yorkers who legally purchased your firearm. Now you are violent felons. Because if you have a firearm violation in New York State, by default, it's violent, whether you do anything with that firearm or not. It made literally

plastic pieces that go on your firearm illegal. It created a black market in ammunition, a black market in firearms, making law enforcement's job even harder. It made sure that people who have a smaller stature can't get accessories to be able to use firearms well. And it made sure that veterans knew that if they got reported, that they would lose their firearms. So it made veterans with PTSD and TBI issues not report anymore. It created a secret state police in that now our medical personnel have to report if there's any problem.

This actually happened. I think it was Rochester, where a guy comes in after a car accident. The nurse says, oh my God, how are you feeling? He goes, I feel so bad. I want to die. She checked boxes suicidal. State police came back to his firearms. Wow. Yes. So that kind of stuff happened from the SAFE Act. It made New Yorkers feel terrible about it. And many of them have left because of it. So I was the only one in 2018 who had a plan to actually end it. New York State is insanely anti-gun. And I mean insanely anti-gun to the point where if you take your legally purchased firearm and you follow every TSA guideline, it is unlocked. I'm sorry, it's locked up and unloaded. And you follow every TSA

guideline. You bring that firearm into New York City, you are going to Rikers Island. That is going to happen. Yes, the most violent jail in the country. You are going there. Whether you are male or a female, with or without kids, that's happened more than once. Luke was, I think it was Luke who was on this, Luke Rutkowski of We Are Change, saying that there are stories where people will be traveling through New York. And it's for like maybe an international flight or somewhere.

They'll have a legal gun. It'll be in a legal case, locked. No ammunition. Semi-dismissed. Like, you know, magazine removed or whatever. They'll check it in their legal state. And that New York City has cops waiting, knowing when you have a gun. And they wait for you to put your hand on the bag.

And the moment you do, they walk up and arrest you for illegal possession. Correct. That's accurate. And in New York State, loaded has a different definition. Loaded is ammunition in the vicinity of the firearm. What's vicinity mean? Thank you. That's insane.

Thank you. Yes. Yes. It means, I don't know, there's a box there and a firearm there. That's loaded. That's what that means. Wow. Yes. New. That's loaded. That's what that means. Wow. Yes.

New York State's insane. We have the sticker's gun laws in the country. So what I want to make is simple laws, simple, just universal transportation. How about that? Any place you go in New York State, anywhere, no matter what the local gun laws are, doesn't matter. If your firearm is locked and unloaded, you don't go to jail. That's not crazy. That is a law that people could accept. If you bought your

firearm legally, it's locked and unloaded and change the definition of loaded. Loaded means, going to sound crazy, bullets in the gun. That's it. That's loaded. Bullets are in the gun. That is loaded. They're not in the gun. It's unloaded. Just do that. Now that means other counties can have looser laws that they want to.

No worries. And many will, right? Lots of rural counties will have much easier carrier laws. And I'm happy with that. I wish there were more. But New York City is not going to be looser than that right now. It's not where New York City is. It's not where Rochester is.

Most of the cities aren't that way. So at least get to that. Plus, I want to do something else. To get a permit in New York State. New York State is not a shall-issue state. It's the cities aren't that way. So at least get to that. Plus, I'm going to do something else to get a permit in New York State. New York State is not a shall issue state. It's a may issue state. And I believe it's called – it's literally a may issue but actually a no issue. Correct.

That's accurate. So I'm going to change it to a shall issue. If they don't issue your permit in 90 days, they have a 90-day waiting period. They can check you out, do whatever they want to do. Within 90 days, if they don't say yes, it's yes. And if they say yes, and by the way, we have an example of this already in New York City with the Department of Buildings. You have to build in New York City or the real estate moguls will destroy you. So our Department of Buildings has a rule. I think it's four months. I'm not sure. If you don't get approved within four months, you're approved or whatever the time period.

Wow. I want to follow the same thing for firearm permits, 90 days. And if they do disapprove you, no worries. They must give you a reason and an appeals process. Why 90? Right now, they do not have to give you a reason or an appeals process. They just go, I don't like you. No.

That is totally illegal in New York State. Why 90 days though? Because we already Had 90 days So I want to Again Familiar enough But radical enough Alright alright

We already Right now Officially we're on 90 days But what they do is They always say We don't have enough people We don't have enough bodies And we're a May issue anyway

So they Usually in certain places They'll take two years To get a permit We need There's a Supreme Court case coming I believe right?

Yep Did it already happen? It did Okay so So that's about Certain places, they'll take two years to get a permit. We need a – there's a Supreme Court case coming, I believe, right? Yep. Did it already happen? It did. Okay. So that's about May issue versus shall issue, right? The issue we're going to have is the United States is going to fight it, and they already are. Yeah. Right?

But they're going to lose. I think. Yeah. I think. We'll see. So this is basically – my understanding of the suit is some dude tried to buy a gun and they denied him. Right? They said he needed a valid reason.

Correct. And he said, no, I don't. Now it's gone to the Supreme Court. Correct. And that's my entire point, right? That should not be a thing. If a county is going to deny you, they have to give you a reason why and you have to have an appeals process. Let me tell everybody, you know, look, there are a lot of people on the establishment left side.

They're anti-gun. I think they don't know anything about guns for the most part. There's a lot of these people who claim to. Like, I served in the Marines. I know about guns. And it's just like then you hear them talk and they don't. Like one guy I think was like an accountant and he has like a Twitter account where he talks about, I was a Marine and they made me lock my gun in the locker. And it's like, dude, you were an accountant.

But anyway, here's what people don't understand about um maryland and new jersey as i was told so when i was in new jersey i was like i would i'm gonna try and buy i want to buy a gun because um you know we had an issue someone tried breaking in the house and stuff like that and i was told new jersey is a may issue state but it's actually a no issue meaning any person who applies for a concealed carry permit, because you can't open carry at all. It's got to be concealed. They will just deny you. It'll never happen. And then I was told, but for you, Mr. Poole, oh, you'll be fine. They will get you through no problem.

Why? Well, you're famous. Yes. The powerful, the elites. Correct. The famous politicians, people with money. You don't got to worry your little pretty little face about it. I was told the same thing about Maryland. Maryland is very strict. They say it's,

you know, it's, it's a may issue, but it's actually a no issue. And then they go, Oh, but for you, don't worry about it. So you get these politicians in these States, like in Chicago, this was a big, big issue. Everybody gets pissed off about politicians. All have armed. They're armed. They have armed security. They get all that stuff and then take your right to defend yourself away. We can't have it that way. Well, I do want to go one step further. I want to allow local people to be happy locally.

And a lot of times you find a lot of people in – particularly in cities who really don't – are happy with only the cops having guns. So I want to be easier on localization, meaning I want to have a floor that is just fair to all gun owners. And then each county can loosen those as they see fit. And then we move towards looser and looser. And why do we do that? Because there's a cultural issue that we have to deal with. Guns aren't a logical issue. They're a cultural issue, right? People, to your point, don't understand guns. Most people in cities look at the safe act and go, well, it's been keeping us safe. How do you know? Well, it says safe in the name. I'm not joking. I've heard that more than once. Like, that's a thing. They don't know what it's done. They don't know what's in it. They have no idea. They just go, well, no guns because I don't want people to be shot.

Many of them are good people who just don't know what guns do, don't know the value of them, and just go, I don't like guns because scary. So we have to begin to turn them and show them that there are times when a firearm is a very good idea. An example I will often give is something like, let's say you're a small statute woman and you have a large statute boyfriend who has beaten you and now he goes away to jail and now he's out and you'd like to have a firearm to protect yourself. Now, I'm not saying you should, but maybe you want to. Again, your choice. Second Amendment is not a requirement. It is a right. If you want to, you can. If you don't want to, please don't ever use them if you don't want to. You can't, right?

You can't. I remember the story I'll give often. By the way, I don't own a firearm. Very often, I support things that don't affect me. I live in New York City. I can't own a firearm realistically, right? So I don't own a firearm in New York City. I support family law reform.

I've never been through the family law system. So I support cannabis. I don't do any weed. So all that stuff. But my point of being a story I'll tell you. When I was a teacher, there was a woman who was a complete pacifist. And I mean total pacifist. And of course, someone said, well, what if you were raped? Right? Of course, that question will come up. And she was very forward. She goes, no, no. If I was raped, I still would never want to kill anybody. Never. I want to talk my way out of it. And she goes, I was in that situation before and I did. And someone said, well, what if you couldn't? It's her words. She said, I'd rather be raped. She was, I'd rather deal with that trauma than trauma of taking a life. And I said, okay, okay. Then I stepped in. I said, okay, but would you stop someone else from pulling a gun and shooting

the guy? She said, no. Wow. I said, we're good. Then we're good. You live your rules. I'll live mine. Right? I want to shoot the guy. But that's fine. That's me. She doesn't.

I'm not here to judge her. I'm here to not enforce my rules on her and don't let her enforce her rules on me. And we're good. Well, so over at Freedomistan, we're actually implementing a gun mandate. You'll be required to have proof of a gun, proof that you own, purchased, and carry a gun, and it must be loaded. Got it. So when you're walking in, you'll need to show us,

you know, clear the chamber, and then show us the magazine, put it in, and then you can come in. Gotcha. But if it saves one life, you know, then we have to do it. Agreed. Yeah.

So we made these stickers for TimCast.com that looks like the vaccine card that says proof of gun Some people were like is this like a database And I'm like no no no It's like you literally write down on it It's a joke A gun

It's not registered with anybody It's yours you keep it No one files it My concern with guns in New York City Maybe you guys can talk me through this Is that what if like groups of kids Or young people all are armed And then they get into a fight

And it's like well he provoked it. Bang, bang, bang. And then bullets go flying through a window. You mean what's happening right now? Times 10. Why would you put 10s? Because the woman in the house that gets a gun to defend herself can't defend herself from a bullet that went flying eight houses down. But you just said times 10.

My question was how do you know it would be times 10? More guns on the street. I would imagine that it's more likely for people to have them. I'm glad you said that. You imagine yeah that's my this is my fear of why i haven't gotten fully behind this this thing yet and i respect his fear and that's why i'm saying i wouldn't force that issue upon him because his fear is a common one right i i get that completely what i'm saying is if you look at where where does all where's all the increase massive increase in violence come from? Only one thing. Not guns.

Black market. Black market is what causes all the extra violence. It isn't extra guns on the street. That's not what it's about. In New York City last weekend, I think it was seven people were stabbed. Yeah. Does anyone know this? No, because it's not guns.

Seven people were stabbed. I need common sense knife control. Right? Is that what we're looking for? Let me. Black market is what makes it. You get people out of the black market, you will have less people dying. And black market, because of the COVID lockdowns, went not just to drugs, went to labor, went to resources, went to products, went to all types of things.

Black market went everywhere. People were worried about robbing lumber trucks. That's how bad it was in the black market. And I'll make this point for you too, Ian. An armed society is a polite society. One of the reasons why these shootouts happen is because oftentimes these fights break out. People, they know no one else is armed.

There's no risk to them when they are breaking the law with a weapon they know no one else can have. So it's kind of like you've created a system in a city like New York or Chicago no risk to them when they are breaking the law with a weapon they know no one else can have. So it's kind of like you've created a system in a city like New York or Chicago where people who don't care to go to prison because they have gangs in the prisons, they can operate there same as any other place. I've met a lot of people whose attitude in the South Side of Chicago was always like, I haven't gone to jail yet. So they assumed it was going to happen. So for them, it was like, you get your gun and guess what? Here's the best part. Ain't nobody

else got them. So if you get mad at someone and you're in a fight and you use it, you don't got to worry about anybody else. But what do you think happens if you're in a city where everyone is armed? Okay. Now there's still going to be violence. Violence happens. But now you're going to have these guys being like, dude, we're in a city block where there's a thousand people. We are going to get riddled with bullets. We are going to be surrounded by people armed confronting us. The problem right now in Chicago is a guy gets a gun, they go strap and everyone runs

away. That wouldn't happen if everybody was armed. Nobody's going to pull out a gun when everyone else is going to point one back at you. Well, let me give you some data for you. People who are illegal gun owners, statistically, commit less crimes. It's a fact. You can check any way you want. They commit less crimes.

If you are a legal gun owner, statistically, you will commit less crimes. Is this minus the crime of possession? Even that, because possession isn't a crime because you own it legally. So possession isn't a crime, right, because you own it legally. So by default, you're going to have less crime, number one. Number two, the reason why there's so much violence and why they're shooting the streets is because it's worth it. Why? The black market.

If it was easy to shoot people, wouldn't people in the states that have lax gun laws be shooting people all day long? They're not. There's not a reason to do so. In other words, if I know – the reason why the black market is so bad and they need violence is there's no cops in courts. We have no cops in courts in the black market. Right now, if he buys something from me and he doesn't pay me, I can sue him. I can call the cops if he steals something. We're in a black market.

I can't. So what I'm going to do, I'm going to get Tim, say, get your firearm. Let's go teach him a lesson. And I'm going to do it in the middle of the day because I want you to see it. And Ian, I want to point something out. Austin, big city. Texas is now a constitutional carry state. Why is it that Chicago and New York are the stories of violence?

Yes. Why is it that Chicago has some of the highest rates of gun violence or Baltimore? Texas and Florida? You can own guns there. We're not seeing it. I'll give you why Chicago is so bad. Chicago is so bad because the federal government is so bad. As a general rule, what happens in any black market is you create, like anything else, one or two.

You create a Pepsi and a Coke, right? A McDonald's and a Burger King. Same thing in the black market. There's usually two gangs, Crips and Bloods, whatever, right? There's always two gangs. So when there's two gangs, there's only one border. So you only have violence when there's a border skirmish

along that one border. So there's not that much violence. But the federal government's been so good, they actually go in and infiltrate all of these gangs, broken them all up. There's not two gangs now. No one trusts anybody. Now there's 300 gangs, which makes 300 borders, which makes 300 border clashes,

which increases the violence. It makes more than 300. It's like 300 times 299 times 298. Thank you. That's the number you're going to get. Yes. And let me add this point, too. And then we'll go to Super Chats. So there was recently a Black Lives Matter activist who was arrested for the attempted assassination of a Democratic candidate.

He walked into the office of this candidate allegedly someone did pulled out a glock nine millimeter and fired several shots and did not hit a single person he decided to use a handgun he clearly didn't know how to use and people don't understand because they watch movies yes hitting someone with a handgun is not easy even at close ranges if this person was was not able to have the, if he decided to go with a knife instead, we'd be dealing with an assassination, not an attempted assassination. He walked in.

They said, how can we help you? He pulled the gun and he fired. And there's a lot of mistakes people make when they're first getting started with handguns or they don't know how to use one. Mistakes that I'm not good with handgun at all. So one of the mistakes people make is that when they're first getting started with handguns or they don't know how to use one. Mistakes that I'm not good with handgun at all. So one of the mistakes people make is that when they're pulling the trigger, they pull their hand,

causing the barrel to point in the wrong direction. They think they're pointing it, but they squeeze and they point to the side. So all that happened was the bullet grazed. If the guy had a knife or a machete and he walked in and walked up to the guy and then just pulled it out, knives can be way more dangerous

in different circumstances. It's the funny thing when people make that joke, bringing a knife to a gunfight, and it's like, depending on the range, a knife is more deadly. Mythbusters did this. I think it's within 21 yards, a knife is more deadly than a handgun. Every soldier has a knife at their gunfights. I mean, you've got to have a knife on you at some point. But let me give you a close range.

You're probably better off using the knife. I'm going to cover one piece if I could, and that is school shootings. To Tim's point, if everyone knows there's no guns in school, that's when you go shoot the school up, right? So when schools start defending themselves against school shootings, what started happening? They started shooting churches, right? People are going to soft targets. The thing to remember with any type of school shooting or mass killing like this, it is not, while it's a murder, it's actually a public suicide, right? That's what it really is at its core, right? As you reduce it, it's a public suicide. The person knows they're going

to be finished and they're going out in a blaze of glory in some way, shape or form. And where did they go? To a soft target. So people said, Larry, how can you stop school shootings in 2018? And what I said was, make a very simple rule. If you are a teacher or an administrator, if you want to carry and you're licensed to carry, you may. That's it. You don't have to carry, not required. If you're a pacifist, please don't, but you may. People said, no, you got to have armed guards. Okay, you should do armed guard first. Although armed guard runs away. But if I don't know who's carrying, I can't plan because I don't know who's carrying.

If I can't plan, it is a hard target. I won't pick that target. Now, that is only a Band-Aid because the problem is kids want to kill themselves. But if I just became out of schools, I make the schools a hard target. So everyone's correcting me. It's 21 feet, not yards. I misspoke.

It's a little close range. Yeah, it's seven yards. Seven yards. 21 feet. I was far away. You should probably cover that quickly instead. Yeah, the guy

from the Mythbusters. These are not in-shape guys. They had this thing where you had a sensor on a foam knife. And then the other guy had to target him with a laser. He'd pull the gun out and it would click a laser. And then even this guy, these two guys who are very much out of shape, the one guy was able to run 21 feet and poke him with the sensor before the gun could even be pulled out.

Did you do a lot of knife training in the military? No, hardly any. Well, we got to go to Super Chats though. So we'll take questions there. If you haven't already, smash that like button. Subscribe to the channel. Share the show with your friends. Head over to TimCast.com. We're going to have a members-only segment coming up around 11 or so p.m.

It's going to be a lot of fun. We really appreciate your support. But let's read what people have to say. We got Chris Stark. He says, some real wag the dog vibes going on with Ukraine and the U.S. right now. Wow. Right on. Ray P. says, Viva Frye, over 43,000 watching on Rumble, House of Common Voting. U.S. right now. Wow, right on. Ray P. says,

Viva Fry over 43,000 watching on Rumble, House of Common Voting. Wow, amazing. They sure did. That's amazing. Good job, Viva. He's doing a great job. All right, let's see what we got.

R.J. Phoenix says, if we were in the 80s, the CIA would be sending arms to Canadian citizens. I don't know about canada but point taken point taken bill hughes says armed portland antifa pick fight with violent biker game gang then blame police when things get violent pj media is that what they're saying is that what happened i don't know clayton johnson says canada needs a new government honk for american truckers lockdown dc war in ukraine is an easy way to destroy barisma records that's what i'm worried

about they announced that um with the threat of war the the american embassy in ukraine's are destroying computer records i'm like why would they do that they have all the time in the world they can put them in a car and just drive them to levive or something yeah like why then they're in kiev like oh they, they probably transferred the data and then destroyed it and just told everyone they destroyed it. I don't know, man. I don't trust this guy, this Biden guy.

I don't trust him at all. All right, let's read some more. Let's get some more super chats in here. Dylan Wa says, Tim, would you be interested in getting someone on the front lines in ukraine and other conflict areas for reporting i'm an infantry veteran and emailed pitches if i could provide this for timcast maybe i don't know if we're quite at the point where timcast.com can be funding war correspondents to be completely honest but we'd certainly love to we are um

working on a plan for following the u.s. Freedom Convoy so we can have someone there documenting it. It's going to be expensive, man. You guys got to understand. Look, if we're talking about – what is it? What is it? A six-day – no, like four- or five-day drive? Oh, at least. Yeah.

So you've got car rental. How much do you think that's going to run? It's like $300. Right now, a fortune. A small fortune. Yeah, a small fortune. Food, expenses. We're talking it might be like $10,000 to $15,000 just to hire someone to get them the resources to do this.

It might even be $20,000, to be fair. Because if we're talking about their personal compensation, their food, you need more than one person. You can't send one person on their own. We want to do this. This stuff can be expensive. But you don't got to worry about it. I'm just saying just keep in mind those kind of prices for this kind of reporting because we're doing it. And that's what being a member makes happen.

So I'm super excited for this, to be able to get dispatches every day from the U.S. Freedom Convoys. It makes its way to D.C. It's going to be a lot of fun. More insurance, too. More insurance. Oh, yeah.

Yeah, more equipment, sure. Yep. We're talking about equipment that costs thousands of dollars, insurance for the equipment, fuel, food, hotel stays, all that stuff. I mean, we can work on low budgets for sure, but there's a minimum. People want to be able to

get paid to do their jobs, right? Garrett Savant says, we are in a lukewarm war. I actually agree with that. It's not cold. It's not hot. That's why it sucks so bad. It's not cold. It's not hot. That's why it sucks so bad. Tepid war. It's not hot and it's not cold and it sucks.

You can't tell because that's the frog in the pot. If they change the temperature slowly enough, you don't realize it's changing. Oh, I like that analogy. Good analogy. So we won't know when it's a hot war because it's going so slow. That's good. I like that. Well, the way I often describe it is that when we read history, it's condensed.

We talk about the American Revolution revolution it took 20 years boston tea party and the boston massacre three years apart you know these things happen in boston it's like yeah overall three years man the speed of communications was very slow but it could be that with rapid communications it's speeding up dramatically so that seems to be something steven says tim more guns more ammunition, please stock up. Everyone love you guys telling the truth and exposing the lies. All hail the beanie. Thank you very much. We have a lot of guns and a lot of ammo. Like I have an obscene amount because I was just like, I don't know. I guess it did. You know, the guns are cool. So I just bought a whole bunch. Yeah. I was like, went to the gun store and he's like, you have a five.

So I just throw it on the pile and you know, what's this a big old's massive it's gonna be a lot of fun all right let's see we got here i miss guns i used to work in armory oh yes so i don't get to deal with them anymore home brian says canada parliament just voted to accept emergency power for trudeau yes they did yeah i think when this guy said in the 80s or the 90s that the United States would be in there, I had this thought last night. At what point are we going to step in and stop a fascist government from becoming a dictatorship? That's our job. That's the whole point of the United States is we prevent that.

And for them not to even say anything about what Trudeau just did, maybe I've got the wrong perspective and I don't have enough info, but it feels like they're going to do that here now for these truckers. They're going to come down with a hard boot. They're prepared and throw all these guys in solitary. That's terrifying. I don't see the trucker here in the U.S. I don't see that truck convoy working.

Really? I can't imagine. I can't imagine that D.C. will let that happen. Yeah. I just think somehow they're going to stop them, whether it's a physical barrier, put them in jail, take all their money, somehow.

They'll January 6 them. January 6, whatever. I think they'll do something. I can't imagine it happening. The cops in DC will gas their own residents if it means getting rid of this. When you make a surprise attack in the military, you don't repeat the endeavor the next day.

Like, they're ready for you now. Right. That's what this feels like. Yes. Yeah, but the Freedom Convoy, don't underestimate the U.S. convoy as well. Like we can't just assume they're going to be like we've not thought about on you. Yeah, I don't want to be the no-don't guy. No, I think they're probably going to be like I'm willing to bet the Freedom Convoy's got plans for all this stuff. And for the most part, it's symbolic protest, nonviolent civil disobedience.

I'm sure many of the truckers are like, we're going to pull our trucks up. The cops are going to come and arrest in tow, and we're going to make our point. You know what I mean? I don't think that these guys are just like, wow, I didn't realize there would be police who could arrest us. I think they get it. I think they saw what happened in Canada. But we'll see. I've got to be honest.

I'm willing to bet these guys – look, these truckers know – they've got strategy. Truck drivers talk to each other. They know what's up. For all we know, they're sitting back with their feet up like, y'all ain't seen nothing yet. Yeah, if they really wanted to destroy the economy, they could do it subtly where you don't know they're not hitting their mark on accident every day. I don't think the truckers want to destroy the economy. I don't think they want to destroy the economy, they could do it subtly where you don't know they're not hitting their mark on accident every day. I don't think the truckers want to destroy the economy. I don't think they want to destroy the economy. They're making a point with a protest that happens to be detrimental to the economy,

but that's not the focus is to disrupt the economy. The focus is to end the mandates. Yeah. But I think there's the power, right? If they actually were to somehow insinuate, okay, if you stop this convoy, there's a whole bunch of truckers going to stop working tomorrow. If the truckers stop working, this country's in trouble. We do

not have an infrastructure that isn't road-based. Our infrastructure is road-based in every way, shape, and form. So if the truckers don't move stuff, stuff doesn't get moved. There's no option other than trucks. So if they decide, we're out, we're not going to work for five days or whatever. Imagine if all of a sudden FedEx, UPS, all those guys, there's no one day shipping all of a sudden anymore,

right, for the next five days. We can't get stuff. I mean, that seriously affects the country. That I think, in my view, that's their trump card. All right. B Rizzle says, left my legs in Afghanistan for nothing.

I'd prefer it. I'd prefer it have been for something worthwhile. All good, though. I'm with you, brother. Yut Ton Tavern. Ton Tavern is where the Marine Corps was started in 1775. Remember, Ton Tavern in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. That's to me. I get it completely.

1775? 1775. Wow. In a tavern. So what was it like? Of course. Captain Samuel, is that right? Captain Samuel, I believe, was the gentleman who started it in Tun Tavern.

What's the story there? Why did he think they needed a new bridge? Naval personnel know how to fire cannons and they know how to sail. They don't know how to ship the ship fight. Marines were created to ship the ship fight. That's why we have the leather neck. We used to cross over with pistol and saber. We'd fight ship to ship, and the saber was to block the saber battle.

Oh, look at that. Also, if you notice, the top of a Marine Corps hat cover has a cross on it. That was so that Marine Corps snipers would know who to shoot. Oh, my goodness. Right? They'd see the cross, don't shoot him, shoot that guy. That was the purpose of the cross on top of that. Everything in the Marine Corps you see is tradition.

Remember, naval forces, and Marines are naval forces, are based on tradition. They're always more conservative. Yes, they're always based on that. To this day, I still remember my sword manual. I could still do sword manual for my Marine Corps sword. I could still do it. And then see what's with the learned sword manual, which is not for fighting. It's for a parade.

All right. Jay Schartzer says, thanks for having on Larry. He's a pretty sharp guy as far as jar heads go. Can't wait to see the impact you make going forward. Semper Fi, brother. Semper Fi. Semper Fi is the Marine Corps motto. It means always faithful.

Indeed. It's Semper Fidelis. Cut down to Semper Fi. Sterling Wilson says, Larry Sharp for president. Tell that brother to run. Yes. Well, there you go, man. One step at a time.

He's running. Zero Beat says, correction, it was the House of Commons, not Parliament, the House of Commons, the ones who passed the emergency powers. That's amazing. I loved it because when we had Stephen Marsh here, he wrote that book, The Next Civil War, he said, well, we have martial law in Canada now. They can just freeze your bank account without a court order. And I'm like, well, we agree that's a problem, right?

He's not a fan of the trucker convoy. But he certainly – when you get people who are opposed to the trucker convoy, to a certain degree I think. I don't think he's like a – I don't think he's – I don't want to say he's like ardently opposed to it. He's probably just like, I don't like these guys. But when he comes out and he's like, wow, martial law over this, you know you got a government problem. Do you remember the movie Gandhi? Ben Kingsley. Yes.

I've never seen it. One of the greatest movies ever made. Great movie. At one point, Gandhi wants to make a march on a salt mine, which is run by the British Empire. They own all the salt in India because they're the empire. So they're going to do a march on the salt mine. The Brits want to stop them. So they arrest Gandhi. Well, they arrest Gandhi, but in a way, the Indians march anyway. My point about a movement being stronger than a leader, right? The Indians march anyway. They're all dressed in white in a line and they march towards this thing. And there are soldiers

there with sticks and they beat them as they walk up, get beaten, walk up, get beaten, walk up, get beaten. And the women are grabbing them and they're all bloody. And that was a time where a reporter says, this is where the West has lost everything. You just sat there and you beat unarmed people over salt. And I think this might be the case in Canada. If we are so cruel against truckers,

this may be that same moment where people go, they're just truckers. They don't have weapons and you're destroying their entire livelihood. I'm hoping that this is that. That's why I'm telling people nonviolence, disobedience. You look at January 6th and they won't shut up about the violence. You look at the truckers and they're like, they're violent, racist, and none of it sticks. It doesn't stick. Because you got a bouncy castle, and little kids playing, and there's like little dogs, and people are just walking around smiling and shaking hands.

What they're doing with these convoys is they're basically saying, this is our statement of no confidence. And that's all. They're not hurting anybody. And boy, does the media try and lie, but it just doesn't stick. Because if you don't have substance behind what you're saying, at least a little bit, then the people are just not willing to listen to your BS. I've seen these videos where there's a guy banging a pot in a pan, and it's being shared

by all these establishment activists and journalists. And they were trying to insinuate violence. And I'm like, yo, it's people arguing. It happens outside my house. I'm like, yo, it's people arguing. It happens outside my house. I'm like, what is this? There's just, the violence didn't happen. They try and lie, man. All right, Mr. Obvious says,

this guy is too smart to be a politician. Today I feel proud to call myself a libertarian. Ooh, nice. Very cool. I'm winning. Yeah. Morgan Dossett says, the 82nd Airborne sent troops to Poland weeks ago.

The MSM says to help train. But as an 82nd veteran, we aren't trained in that manner. You can fact check me by the 82nd Airborne Facebook page. So is that to imply that they're being sent there to fight? Interesting. 82nd Airborne is not a training unit. That's a fighting unit. It's an elite unit. The 82nd Airborne

is an elite unit. They're paratroopers. They're not there to train. They might, in theory, they could send some of their non-commissioned officers over to help train Poles. That might happen. But they send a unit over? That's not a training unit. Yeah. He's right.

Okay. Let's see what we got. What is this one about? All right. Well, let's – Grant Shearer says world war three is nations versus ngos battlefield is the culture maybe maybe yeah raymond g stanley jr says maga folk text me up with no actual substance yeah i get the same stuff all the time and left

is a two yep right the left still – the left is very smart. What they're very good at is getting people to be afraid of Trump. So if Trump isn't running now, they call it Trumpism. So it's Trump or Trumpism. And the right has always stopped the culture war. They're all fighting culture wars, right? The culture war thing drives me crazy because that's how nothing gets solved, right? And the next thing is culture war makes the other inhuman. And when it makes the other inhuman and a threat to everything, I can say or do whatever I want, and I'm now justified.

But the real challenge is when you have two parent factions that completely – they don't speak the same language. And the worst thing is, in the culture war in the U.S. and in Europe, you know, Canada and the U.K., we speak a similar enough language to where we think we know what they're saying, but words mean different things. Like racism means different things. Freedom. Left and right. Right.

Yep. Free speech. Fundamental understandings of the Constitution. They don't mean the same things to either side. Yeah. Even in America. I have to change my language when I speak to a more left or right audience. If I'm speaking to a more left audience, I'll use phrases like public assistance.

More right, I'll use welfare. It's the same meaning, but each one hears it differently. So you have to know your audience and use different phrases, different words. It's important because then they'll hear you, right? And I want to be able to connect and get people to see that I've got some substance. So if I'm using trigger words, shut them off. So I've got to find the right words to use

depending upon the audience I'm talking to. Yep. There are certain phrases and terms that signify if someone is left or right culture war. I mean, obviously asking pronouns is a dead giveaway of where you are and what you believe in a bunch of other issues. Absolutely.

I'll go even smaller. Saying the Democrat Party versus Democratic Party. Yep. If you are right-leaning, you say Democrat Party. If you are left-leaning, you say Democratic Party. Even though the party's name is Democratic. That's literally the name of it. Correct.

So you can say someone is a Democrat, but the party is legally identified as a Democratic. But you will find most people who are right-leaning say the Democrat Party. Yep. Most people who are left-leaning will say the Democratic Party. I bet people get mad at me for calling it the Democratic Party. Yes.

And I'm like, but that's its name. Yes. We don't call it like the Republicans or like the Republican Party. The Republicans. The Republicans Party. The Republic's Party. Yeah.

Yeah, the Republic's Party. Yeah. All right. Boxy Brown says, the bloodstripe story from the Battle of Chapultepec is wrong. The red stripe was on the uniform two years after Jackson left office when Archibald Henderson returned it to dark blue coats. Returned?

When Henderson returned it to dark blue coats faced red? I don't know. I'm not sure where that comes from. That's what we're talking about. Archibald, is that 5th Commandant? I think 5th or 7th Commandant. I don't know. I'm not sure where that comes from. That's what we're talking about. Arch 100. Is that 5th Commandant? I think 5th or 7th Commandant. I forgot which Commandant he was.

I think he was Commandant. At one point, he was Commandant of the Marine Corps. I forgot which one he was. Nick, correct? But if you turn the red coats inside out, they were blue, and then there was red. You can see the red there. He may be meaning that. You turn the stuff inside out, and you see the red stripes inside. They swapped out the red coats because we didn't have uniforms. We see the red there that he may be meaning that he turned his stuff inside out and there was the the red you see the red stripes inside they swap out the red coats because we

didn't have uniforms we see the red coats and turn inside out all right oh nick crowe says i was deployed to ukraine for a year i wish you could know the truth just know ukrainians die every day on the border and we should be supporting them i don't know about um being there personally on the border um but i do have ukrainian friends and uh you know talk to them about it but i guess it's always difficult because just because you're from there doesn't mean you know the truth either you know it's very different you could be deployed to the border it's very very different okay let's see what we got here rilo says hey larry i think lewis rossman of rossman repair group supported you

lewis is also a lobbyist i I think, for right to repair legislation. Can you make a comment on right to repair? Yes. Lewis is a friend of mine. I was on his show. He's out of Manhattan. Yes, he's totally correct. And he's trying his best to deal with right to repair.

And right to repair is a very tough issue, right? Because what happens is you now have a piece of property that you purchased, but the software that runs the property is now owned by somebody else. So then if you want to fix the thing, they go, no, no, no, no. You own it, but you can't fix it. But I own it. So how can I not fix it? And this is a problem. So how do you fix that? So actually a very simple piece. The business must decide, am I leasing this piece of equipment or do you own it? Period. That's it. Do I own it? Then I may repair it. Am I leasing it? Then you must fix it if it breaks. Done deal. You make a simple rule. Are you leasing or are you purchasing? Either one. Change your business model to either one. If I'm leasing this phone, it's broken. Fix it.

I'm not leasing this phone. I own it. I can fix it if I want to. It's a very simple fix. So like one company can sell it when the other one can lease it and you get to pick? Yes. What's better for you? Or maybe the same company could have either plan.

Oh, cool. Right? A leasing plan or a purchasing plan. If I purchase, I can fix it. I own this piece. I own it. Well, I don't like it because my software's on it. Then don't put your software in it or lease the software then, and then you have to fix it.

All right. It doesn't matter. Reaper Nation says, Larry, if you become governor, will you push for constitutional carry? People say that all the time, and yes, of course I want that. I'm being realistic, though. I live in a state that believes by every poll you can find that most New Yorkers want more gun control, not less. Even upstate? Not upstate. But again, most of the population is in the cities, right?

People always say it's New York City. It is. It's also Rochester, Syracuse, Utica, Buffalo. All the cities are blue. They all hate guns. And they're all violent, which is insane, but that's just what it is. So I have to be realistic.

I have to go baby steps to constitutional carry. Would I like to get there? I would. First step is ending red flag laws. Second step is ending SAFE Act. Third step is constitutional carry. We have steps to get there. Yeah, I think people should understand, man.

For one, I'm to a absolute. The Constitution is Constitution. I certainly think there could be reasonable limits like owning nuclear weapons. This is the one that got me in trouble. All the outlets started yelling at me because I said, I think the Second Amendment protects the right to own nuclear weapons. It says the right to keep and bear arms. It's not about guns. You're right.

It's not about guns. And back then, privateers existed in Corsairs. Private individuals owned warships that could flatten coastal cities. And they were hired by multiple different kings and queens to do just that. Now you've got Halliburton and Lockheed Martin and Raytheon, and they certainly own very powerful explosives and weapons. Individuals can too, if private businesses can, if they can make them, all that stuff. Now, if you want to argue they shouldn't be allowed to, it's like, oh, okay, absolutely.

Change the constitution. I don't think you have to. There is an exception. If you could realistically argue that owning a certain thing is actually a direct threat to others. Now, that would be an argument. I'm not sure it's right, but that could be an argument. For example, let's say I want to have, I don't know, chemical weapons in my backyard, right? Someone could argue, yeah, but that's a threat. If anything goes wrong, lightning strikes that thing.

If lightning strikes your ammo dump, then your property is blown up. I'm shaking my head. But if lightning strikes your chemical plant, then everyone gets chemical weapons dropped on them for miles away. So I think that's an argument. You could make an argument without having changed the – I disagree. I disagree. There's inherent risks to owning anything you can own uh a car sure it's full of gasoline

absolutely and i could have a leak and a fire could start and you could be like look your your ownership of combustibles is a threat to my home therefore you could and i think that's why you have an argument i don't i'm not saying it's absolute but I'm thinking any given thing that has a realistic possibility of having mass killing, I think you can have an argument to decide is this the thing that – where do we draw the line, right? You've got to amend the Constitution. I think you could have the argument without amending the Constitution. That's what I'm saying. I think you could. But then it's basically stating the Constitution doesn't matter.

No. I mean free speech is not free speech. If I threaten you, that's not free speech. Right? So there are some – we have to draw a line on what's a threat. Well, we draw a line on that. Same thing, right? But keeping in varying arms is different from –

Me saying I'm going to go do something. So like speech is somewhat nebulous in that respect. But there are people who are free speech absolutists that say speech is not action. And I'm not that. I think if you're actively threatening people and you're making people feel like you're actually going to hurt them or kill them, that to me isn't free speech.

Particularly if you're someone who is physically in some way smaller or what the case may be, I think there is a point where you go, yeah, that's not, no, threatening is not an answer. I disagree because right now we have a large political faction in this country that says words are violence even if you don't actually threaten them. You could say something like, I think X group is bad, and they'll say, that was a threat. That's violence, and you're making me unsafe. So what?

I'm not allowed to say that? That's exactly where they're going. Yes, and that's a cultural issue. Right. And I think we have to change the culture. But this is why we have a constitution, to be a barrier against these dramatic changes that if you want to change it, you've got to change the constitution. I think instruction and incitement to violence is not free speech. Well, you're just an absolutist now.

I'm not an absolutist. Okay. you just said absolutist now i'm not an absolutist okay uh uh because i my my view is the the first amendment it has some um it it can be a bit nebulous in certain respects what is free speech what is the intent what is the right to the press it's about self-expression specifically the right to keep and bear arms is about defending the country from threats foreign and domestic. And arms back then literally were warships. Sure. That means cannon, grape shop, man o' war, frigates, privateers, corsairs. So it's not necessarily about the view of the founding fathers because technology changes.

It's about what was the goal of defending people's right to speech. It wasn't to defend you to go up to someone and scream in their face and threaten them. It wasn't their intent for you to instruct people on committing crimes. It was their intent to offend. What was the right to keep and bear arms? It was the Founding Fathers' intent for you to have the same capabilities as government in terms of warfare so that you could both aid and resist. You could aid the government in times of war, so you could both aid and resist uh you could you could aid the government times of war should be invaded and you could resist the invasions or

tyranny but let me go once further then all right so you're saying i could own a warship then okay true weapons but i'm going back then warship what if i were to take that warship and park it outside your uh home that happens to be on the coast point the uh cannon at your home and then start yelling i'm gonna blow your home to pieces i'm gonna blow your home to pieces and i just thought yelling that for i don't know me and my boys yell for weeks on end but it's simple you say hey you the the the i mean they didn't have police back then now police forces came around shortly after, I think, late 1700s. So likely what you would get is people just generally being like, get your shit. Stop.

Don't do that. Shut up. But what could they really do? But do not know what they could do. But do you in your own mind, do you still think that is free speech? Do you think that is? Well, I don't think the First Amendment, the First Amendment is basically about your right to expression. Sure. Your religion,

the press. It's not about you threatening people. Yep. Or so that's why I'm saying there are people who believe it covers everything. Right. I don't think that was that was the intent. The intent was that you could meet at a local bar and talk about how you think the government is tyrannical. Right. And that you couldn't be arrested for doing so. Now, Second Amendment was literally about keeping and bearing arms, period. I understand the quest to interpret the First Amendment to better understand what we're doing with it. And there's a challenge there because, you know, if you play that game of threatening

isn't allowed, well, then people can change the definition of threatening. Well, the Second Amendment is – It's mostly about defense. It's about defending yourself. So at what point is the weapon used for offense? And at what point is offense a form of defense? No, no, no, no. That's a horrible history of war, but the Romans and the Americans basically invade so you don't get invaded.

You never want to be on the defensive end. That's wrong. Preemptive war is wrong. And if you walk up to someone and punch them in the face out of fear they were going to punch you, you committed a crime. So a nuclear bomb is not a defensive weapon. So why? It wouldn't be covered under the Second Amendment. I'm not sure that's accurate.

I think nuclear weapons have defended us against World War III for literally 70 years. But as a usage scenario, it's used to destroy areas, not to protect yourself. But owning a nuclear weapon literally is defense. What do you think guns do? Is a gun going to shield you?

When the bullets are flying at you, do you shoot the bullets out of mid-air in slow motion? I do. No. A nuclear weapon, depending on its size, can take out a military fortification, or it can, let's say a fleet of warships are coming at you an open fire

you can take them out it's it's a weapon you weapons are used for defense and offense and in america if you buy a gun and then use it as an offensive tool against another person you go to prison if you are minding your own business and being a law-abiding citizen and someone uses that gun against you and you defend yourself with it you don't well actually sometimes you do depending on the state you're right York State, you do. Sorry, yes. All right, all right. Let's take part of this. We'll bring this conversation over to TimCast.com member section.

We've got an interesting article about policing. Austin cops being indicted. I think this is very, very interesting. So head over to TimCast.com, sign up, become a member, to help support all the work we're doing, and we really appreciate it. We're going to have that member segment up around 11 or so p.m. Smash the like button, subscribe to the work we're doing. And we really appreciate it. We're going to have that member segment up around 11 or so p.m.

Smash the like button. Subscribe to the channel. All that stuff. You can follow us at TimCastIRL on Instagram. And I guess it's soon to be Truth Social. I don't know what's going on. It's really hard to sign up for. Yeah, I hear it's overloaded. I saw it big time.

Oh, yeah. And you can follow me at TimCast on Instagram or wherever else. Larry, you want to shout anything out? Absolutely. Please head over to to shout anything out? Absolutely. Please head over to LarrySharp.com. You can also Google Larry Sharp. I'm on all the interweb things. I'm on Twitter and Facebook and YouTube and all the things.

I'm even on locals. I'm on all the things. LarrySharp.com or just Larry Sharp. Please follow me. Send them for my email blast if you want to. And if you want to support, you can always donate. We even take crypto

nice Chris car 17 on Twitter come check out the feed yeah Ian Crossland hit me up at Ian Crossland dot net really cool to meet you man this is

great combo looking forward to carrying it over to the after show yep very enjoyable libertarian talk without the libertarian party which is what I always look for when I talk

about libertarian stuff you guys may follow me on Twitter and minds.com at Sarah Patchlitz. You mentioned your website for donations, right? Yep. LarrySharp.com. Just want to make sure we get that in there. Sharp with an E, and the E stands for electable.

Right on. We'll see you all over at TimCast.com for our members-only podcast. Thanks for hanging out. Bye, guys.