Timcast IRL - Timcast IRL #502 - Twitter REFUSES To Bring Back Trump Despite Elon joining Board w/Elad Eliahu & Libby

Episode Date: April 6, 2022

Tim, Seamus of FreedomToons, and Lydia host editor-in-chief of the Post Millennial and on-the-ground reporter for Timcast.com Elad Eliahu to discuss Twitter's choice not to reinstate Trump, Twitter employees melting down over Elon Musk's new stakeholder status, woke TV shows, Oklahoma's new law criminalizing abortion, and the fallout from global conflict. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Elon Musk is now on the board of directors over at Twitter. Wow. He's promising significant changes and improvements. Some people think it's a smokescreen. Elon Musk comes out and says, who wants an edit button? And then Twitter comes out like, actually, we tweeted we are working on an edit button a week ago. So Elon actually didn't do anything.

However, many people said, Elon, bring back Donald Trump. And Twitter said, no, no, we're not going to be bringing back Donald Trump. Some people are concerned that this is just a pump and dump. Elon buys up 9% of the company. Then the stock price skyrockets. I think he's already up somewhere around like $750 million towards his investment. And then he waits a little bit. People start building faith in the platform that it's going to fix things.

Then he sells off his stock and jumps ship. I'm not entirely convinced, though, because apparently Elon actually called the Babylon Bee, asked them about their suspension, and then said, I might need to buy Twitter. So I think Elon will try to make some positive changes. It probably won't be that much, though. I can't imagine him bringing back Alex Jones or anyone else. And apparently Twitter is saying it's not going to happen. So we'll talk about that. But we've got some really, really crazy news.

Oklahoma has effectively banned abortion outright, except I think only in the instance of the life of the mother. Colorado did the opposite and basically is allowing unfettered abortion up to the point of birth, I believe. Right. Is that up to the point of birth? There were no restrictions. No restrictions. In the law. And so, wow. We definitely got that. That's going to be huge. So we'll talk about that.

Plus, we got a billionaire saying the end is nigh, or he's just saying inflation is going to get really, really bad. And you can blame Joe Biden. Joe Biden is going to be extending the student loan relief, freezing payments. AOC is saying just cancel it. AOC is also embroiled in a scandal where apparently her campaign was funneling a million dollars to two PACs and not documenting what they were doing. And the FEC dismissed the complaint, waited a month, and then released the information saying, oh yeah, the complaint was correct though.

AOC was apparently, I'll be careful to describe what she was doing, but funneling money to other organizations without tracking it, which, you know, I guess you can call dark money or as some have said, illegal. The organization that sued said that there have been way, there have been many other people that have been, have charges against them for way less than what AOC did. So we'll talk about all of that. There have been many other people that have been have charges against them for way less than what AOC did. So we'll talk about all of that. Joining us today is Elad Eliyahu.

Would you like to introduce yourself, Elad? What's up, everybody? Tim, thank you so much for having me on. My name is Elad Eliyahu. I'm a field reporter. I contribute for Timcast. I'm also on Instagram, YouTube. I cover protests, civil unrest, political rallies. Tim, thank you for having me on. Absolutely. You've actually covered Trump rallies, protests for us at

timcast.com on the ground. So you've actually got to talk to progressives and conservatives and get the full view on the ground. Awesome. I've been at the Trump rally in Georgia. I was at a Trump rally in Arizona. I was in one in South Carolina. It's super interesting to see how the Trump rallies differ now from when they were during the presidential. They're a little bit more lackluster now. It's interesting, too, to see Trump endorsing only people who say the election was stolen and things like that. So it's really interesting to see the dividing line play out at these Trump rallies. I'm going to be at another Trump rally this weekend. I believe it is in North Carolina.

Thanks to Tim. Oh, yeah. Right on. Cool. We also in North Carolina. Thanks to Tim. Oh, yeah. Right on. Cool. We also got Libby. Hey, Tim. How's it going? Who are you?

I am Libby Emmons. I am the editor-in-chief of the Post Millennial. And I love coming on the show. You can find me on Twitter at Libby Emmons. We have like a bunch of stories from the Post Millennial for the Twitter stuff. That's because we're awesome. Yeah. Yeah.

The one I like is Andy Ngo captured a whole bunch of Twitter employees freaking out. That was amazing. Yeah. Oh, no. I tweeted that everybody at Twitter now works for the whims of Elon Musk. He owns 9%. So every single time that woke progressive clicks that button or submits that form or helps facilitate Twitter in any way,

they are putting money in the pocket of Elon Musk. And it was amazing to see the Substack vice president tweeted out that they're hiring and that disgruntled, triggered Twitter employees need not apply. Yep. That was actually pretty based. I love that. We also got Seamus.

Yes, I am here. Seamus Coghlan of Freedom Tunes. I create animated political cartoons. I upload a new one every single Thursday, sometimes on Tuesdays. And I'm happy to do the show. Also, I love the idea of these Twitter employees being like, you know, we can't just let some powerful tech billionaire decide what can be said on the Internet. This is ridiculous. This is very unfair.

Someone needs to look into stopping this. Too little, too late. I think I am amused by the idea of these Twitter people having a very bad day. But hopefully Elon actually makes positive improvements. I'm also here. I'm Sarah Patchlitz. I'm producing in the corner. Before we get started, my friends, head over to TimCast.com and become a member to help support our work. As a member, you will keep all of our journalists gainfully employed as they write articles all day, every day. We have a story here about apparently a Fox bit a Democrat. So I hope they get their rabies shots. It's kind of scary.

But you'll also get access to exclusive episodes of this show Monday through Thursday at 8 p.m. So subscribe, become a member. We're going to have one of those episodes up tonight. Don't forget to smash that like button, subscribe to this channel, and share the show right now

wherever you can. Grassroots marketing is the only way we grow the show. We don't do big ad buys, and it's very difficult to compete with the corrupt mainstream media when they're getting propped up by YouTube. But with your help, we can do better. So we really, really do appreciate it. Now let's get into that first story from the Daily Mail.

Bad news. Twitter says it will not reinstate Trump despite Elon Musk vowing significant change to woke platform after taking a board seat with 9% stake. But this also means it's, there's going to be no Alex Jones, no Milo Yiannopoulos. Twitter said it has no plans to reverse any policy decisions and it's, and it's committed to impartiality in the development and enforcement of its policies and rules. Now that being said, okay, they say our policy decisions are not determined by the board of board or shareholders, and we have no plans to reverse any policy decisions.

As always, our board plays an important advisory and feedback role across the entirety of our service. Our day-to-day operations and decisions are made by Twitter management and its employees. They can say that, but I'm not entirely convinced because I do think with a 9.2% share, Elon Musk has substantial weight. A lot of people are pointing out that I can't remember the guy's name. Someone, they said someone, was it Ryan Cohen? He bought a stake in GameStop and then got a position on the board or something like

that. I'm not entirely sure. But people are saying, look, even though it's not a controlling share, it's not 50%, it scared them enough to give Elon what he wanted in terms of a seat at the table. And part of that arrangement with Elon says he can't buy in any way more than 14.9% of the company. So I think they're scared of a pump and dump. I think they're scared he's going to get too much power. And I think Elon might actually have an impact on this platform. At the very least, if they listen to what the man has to say, he's going to make

all of them much more wealthy. And if they don't, well, then they can... I mean, the dude's... Whatever he's touching is turning to gold, right? With Tesla, SpaceX and all that stuff. Yeah, he's doing a great job with all those things. But where does it even... Where does this go?

And I gotta say, everyone's really excited about Elon buying a portion of the company. Then this morning we hear that Elon is on the board of directors. Does anyone really believe there's going to be substantial changes to this platform? I think everyone was looking for something a little hopeful. I think people want things to be better on Twitter where you can say true things and not be banned for it. I don't know that Elon Musk is going to provide that kind of change, that he would have the power to do so.

I think like, what is it, like Morgan Stanley also owns 9.2%. Is it 9.2? No, no, no. I think he's the largest. He is the largest. Are you sure? Because I was looking at it the other day and they had a 9.2 share. So BlackRock owns something like 6.2, 7.2.

I could be wrong. You're all going to watch it. I don't know. I mean, I took a look at it, but I don't know how to find it fast. But yeah, I know that. But they haven't, they probably haven't affected any substantial change. But Elon Musk obviously made this buy in order to affect change. I like Elon Musk.

So that's the question. Does he have the power to do it? Does he have the wherewithal to do it? Will he be allowed to do it? $3 billion, $2.89 billion purchase to make this move. You know, I like Elon Musk. I don't know if anything good is going to happen from this, but boy, is everything just so boring.

He's also had a lot of back and forth on the platform with Jack Dorsey, which I think has been so interesting because Dorsey the other day apologized that's right that was really interesting i think his perspective um dorsey has two percent 2.25 right two i don't know i had i thought it was two but uh you know but look look look it's interesting when trump was in office and when trump was on twitter it was like being on a roller coaster every day. It was fun. Right. And now that he's gone, it's just like every day it's like, oh, look, and they bombed somebody again. And so Elon Musk comes in and he's like, I'm going to make this ridiculous $3 billion purchase.

And I'm like, all right, something's happening. So hopefully something happens. I got a lot of thoughts on this. I hope this isn't just an expensive way to make sure that he doesn't get banned off the platform. He's like, as long as I have almost 10 percent stake they're definitely not gonna ban me off the platform but i have a lot of thoughts on this because as we're seeing different social media platforms emerge and then others become old and kind of useless i'm not sure that same thing will happen with twitter i see some of these old um social media companies try to stay

relevant one way or another facebook by buying instagram and doing their new meta thing but now we're kind of seeing how tiktok kind of took them all over very quickly but at the same time um ambivalent because as you guys know trump just started truth social and that fell flat on its face so if there's no way which way to go and while he might be a better alternative than say jack dorsey or parag the current ceo He's not going to be a CEO. Yeah, but that influence will be good there. But also, I think we need to be critical of Elon Musk. I'm extremely hawkish when it comes to China. And they just opened a bunch of factories in China

and many companies in China at the whim of the Chinese government. And he's praised them. He's praised them. Oh, no. Awkwardly as well, because he also praises american values too so i don't know if he's a businessman just trying to play into both sides also ten cent a

chinese company has a five percent stake in tesla so there's a lot of different loans and influence there something to keep an eye on but better than the alternative the thing with truth social is it didn't offer anything new to the concept of social media it didn't even offer trump well it didn't even offer trump yeah what am i going to sign up for what's the point like yeah the concept of social media. It didn't even offer Trump. Well, it didn't even offer Trump. Yeah. What am I going to sign up for? What's the point? Like, yeah, the point of Truth Social was to sign up and see what Trump says. And I still just get his little statements in my email.

But that's the thing about the new social media platforms, right? Getter and Truth Social, whatever else you want to throw in there. They're not doing anything disruptive to the industry. And there needs to be a disruptive influence for it to have any hold. Like TikTok did a new thing, whether you like it or not. Yeah, no, exactly. And what a lot of conservatives have been saying is we need conservative social media platforms. That's not true.

We need social media platforms that everyone wants to use but which also won't ban conservatives. And so these sort of market themselves, and it might be cynical. They might understand they're actually selling a niche product to people by giving them the hope that it will turn into something more. But ultimately, it just gets filled with conservatives. Regular people who don't have any kind of political bench or people on the left are still using Twitter or Instagram, and it doesn't really get us anywhere. Also, I don't think these other social media alternatives are actually free speech platforms like they claim to be. I think it was Gab, but there's a couple of other like twitter wannabes who do have a direction they're not i'm not a free speech absolutist you can't have every single thing on your feed all the time

the gore the other stuff that we don't need to get into but these they they call themselves free speech but there's something different so everybody has their own version of what they want to call free speech and gab has as close as you can, but even they don't allow doxing. I agree with that. But we had Torba here, and he was like, nobody likes that. You know what I mean? Weren't you not even allowed to talk trash about some people? I forgot the exact examples.

No, Gab is kind of wild. Gab, their policy is if the First Amendment allows it. And then I said, yeah, but the First Amendment doesn't allow doxing. And he's like, well, there is an exception. Now, that's still an interesting point, because there was a great conversation that happened to Tucker Carlson a couple of years ago where someone said, you know, Tucker was talking about censorship and free speech and hate speech. And they said, Tucker, would you allow someone on your show to say a bunch of racial slurs? And he was like, no,

of course not. He's like, exactly, because you have policies for your platform. Now, the issue there is, while I agree we don't like racists, Fox News, Tucker Carlson's show, is his show where he has a space for one guest to come and sit down, and of course he can curate that. Twitter is claiming to be this open public forum that has actually taken over the town center.

In that case, yeah, we shouldn't all be just the arbiters of truth and morality determining who is or isn't allowed to speak. Don't kill those. But you want to grab it and just not crush it. It's too late for that one now. Well, no, no. I'm saying if you squish it, it stinks. They're stink bugs. So just ball it up and throw it in the trash.

You got to give a warning about the stink bugs. Yeah, when you crush them. I thought you should just let them climb on King Kong. I'm ruthless. I'm hawkish. I was taking that bug out of it. Yeah, but stink bugs are clumsy. You're going to bomb that. Stink bugs don't do anything. They're funny.

They're just stupid. I'm just anti-bug. I don't know. It's irrational. Climb King Kong. Usually we just watch them do their thing because stink bugs are everywhere. I was. I was actually sort of distracted.

I saw a couple of you guys looking and I was like, I'm going to take it out. Oh, it's a big mistake. I saw these swords around too. I got a little bit excited. I don't have any firearms. I was walking through the hallway in here, and a stink bug was on the wall and saw me. And what the stink bugs do as a defensive move

is just kamikaze. They just jump to the floor. And so I'm walking, and it just, like, falls in your ear and goes, and I'm just like, this stupid thing. It's so dumb. We were talking about something important a moment ago. Yeah, what was the last

thing you said i'm sorry i do think though that i mean we're talking about uh trump and trump being on platforms and twitter says they have no plans to put him back on but that doesn't mean they won't yeah at some point can you imagine if trump was back on twitter it would be really a lot of fighting would be hitting his life alert like oh my goodness his life alert what a fantastic day that would be could you imagine if we got to see him tweeting throughout this presidency did you see i mean what would be great would be trump replying to biden's stupid things like biden's video last week where he told all american parents to affirm their kids in gender transition and it's just like what are you what do you say like you don't know what that means that the devout well when i was this is a true story when i was a little kid

i told my mom i wanted to be a pumpkin nice i'm not making that up you are my little pumpkin but no but this is like actually a true story i was like a little kid my mom would be like he says he wants to be a pumpkin and it's like yeah i was i don't know i was a little kid could you imagine if they were like well all right i guess and then just like that's my question is like put a pumpkin over my body? Why is it only gender we're supposed to affirm? Why aren't we supposed to affirm dinosaurs or dogs or when the kid walks around thinking that they're a cat or a robot?

My son for a while thought maybe he was a robot. I have another truth. What about a superhero? Why are we not affirming kids who think they're superheroes and believe they can fly? Why aren't we affirming those kids? They can just jump off buildings. I do have a true story of the dangers of this kind of affirmation.

When I was a little kid, there was a Nintendo game called Mighty Bomb Jack. And so I took a plastic shopping bag and put it over my arms like a cape and started jumping on the bed yelling Mighty Bomb Jack. And I fell. And I banged my leg on the bed yelling mighty bomb jack and i fell and i banged my leg on the bedpost i started screaming and uh almost seriously hurt myself if only see my parents they affirmed me they told me i was similar i'm kidding they didn't actually this true story when i was a little kid yeah when i was like was it a firm or maybe a little bit of neglect no it was neglect is good for a kid they didn't care the little kid was running around doing dumb kid things right

look i think that's a good thing i had had a Buzz Lightyear costume, and I jumped off my couch attempting to fly when I was like two or three and broke my ankle. Did you really? Similar instances. Yes. Good work, everyone. Well, I thought I could be a ballerina, and so I got signed up for ballet lessons. And during a recital, I fell off a stage.

Oh, my goodness. They clearly should have kept me home. No, that's good affirmation. Your parents should encourage you to do arts and sports and all that stuff. What they should encourage you to do is like, I don't know, take chemicals that permanently alter your body when you're too young. They shouldn't kill their grandchildren before you've even had your first sexual experience. Well, I think this one's particularly simple.

You wouldn't give a little girl breast implants to affirm her sexuality. You wouldn't give a little boy breast implants either. I don't understand why they're going to do anything about this. My son once asked me what I would say if he told me he wanted to wear nail polish to school. And I told him that I would say absolutely not. And then I was like, and ask me what I would say if you were a girl.

And I was like, you would also not be allowed to wear nail polish to school. I don't care what your sex is. There's no nail polish in school. I want to talk about Elon Musk though. Let's jump over to this article from the Post Millennial. Twitter employees triggered by Elon Musk buying ownership stake in platform.

Elon Musk is now one of the largest shareholders this we know. And we have a collection of tweets from employees. This is Andy. Andy Ngo did all of this reporting. Cassie Nick Rumbaugh, a data scientist, is among the employees and contractors very upset, saying a prominent transphobe buying a large stake in Twitter is not at all funny.

I think it is. Yeah, it's very funny. I think it's hysterical. Big laughs. I'm honestly kind of terrified right now. You see, the reason why I don't respect you, Cassie, because you literally have nothing to fear because Elon Musk isn't going to do anything to you. I mean, we're sitting here being like, I doubt Elon will actually even get anything done. And you're like I'm terrified.

Of what? Of some guy who lives far away from you you've never met before who is going to do nothing? I just – you know what I'd be more worried about? I'm more worried about a wasp coming through the window. Yeah. Because sometimes those wasps, they climb through the edge of the window. Those are scary things. That's scary. That's right there.

Those white Anglo-Saxon Protestants breaking in i know that's right they got the gin you know they're just getting drunk over there here we go here's one we've got uh gerard taylor says my current sentiment stock is up yay but what about our company culture pronouns it's one guy they all have the pronouns maybe he's on the board of directors once a year he'll come in and vote on stuff and the day-to-day operations will be run by other people he's on the board of directors. Once a year, he'll come in and vote on stuff. And the day-to-day operations will be run by other people. He's going to be one guy voting on the board. He's not going to be able to do anything dramatic.

He's going to go to the other investment companies and say, look, if you want this to make more money and you want to fix the platform, you've got to give a little bit back. You're not going to see Trump. You're not going to see Alex Jones. They're going to keep their misgendering policies, but they're going to do little things here and there little tidbits like the Babylon Bee will get reinstated and conservatives will be like yay and then you know I'll be like see look now people are building confidence in the platform coming back

you had truth social you had getter you have gab you have all these platforms trying to compete parlor you need to stop that Elon's going to be like here's how you do it and very little will change in my opinion I hate that those are all copycats too though like i hate that the so-called conservatives never have new ideas it's not a fresh type of social media it's literally here let me copy and paste twitter and then have our own version of what we're going to censor and then you know hope that we're successful literally just steal it yes what is idea and also not offer anything on our platform that would get regular people to want to use it. Yeah.

I mean, there's nothing, there's no appeal to these websites other than this is where conservatives can go. And what's the point if we're only talking to ourselves? It's like there's a big stadium. Yeah, that's really the interesting thing, too, is why would you migrate over to these other platforms? You know, the thing with Facebook, I keep wanting to get rid of Facebook, but my whole family chat is on Facebook. And so it's like, if I want to know when the reunion is, I have to stay on Facebook and find out.

But I do think that it's key to have something new, like you guys are talking about. If you're going to invent something new in an existing space, you have to have a reason for it. And none of these reasons, these are like ideological reasons, but they're not operational or aesthetic reasons.

Yeah. Well, it's hilarious because oftentimes conservatives will look at something that the left has completely dominated and they'll go, oh, man, the left created this new thing that they then ended up exerting disproportionate control on. How can we do that? I'll tell you. By inventing a new thing, you then exert a disproportionate amount of control on it.

And that control can be in favor of free speech rather than banning left-wing people. But they completely missed the point because, as you said, what we need is innovation. Yeah. And I think also Zuckerberg and Dorsey probably didn't start off as leftists. I mean, the default as they were coming up and doing whatever they were doing and going to school. The default was leftism. Exactly. So that was their moral gain.

Zuckerberg used to talk about freedom. Why does anybody want to be on Twitter? Why does anybody want to be on Twitter? For what reason do you want to be on Twitter? To hurt other people's feelings or maybe have your feelings hurt. For news and memes. The only reason conservatives want to be on the platform is because Twitter is a space where prominent politicians, personalities, journalists are sharing ideas. It's where a lot of ideas originate.

The problem is the left has no interest in conservatives or libertarians or post-liberals for that matter. So there's literally nothing you gain from being on the platform other than talking to people who already agree with you. The left can go on Twitter and say something. Conservatives will see it. Liberals will see it. Conservatives go on the platform other than talking to people who already agree with you. The left can go on Twitter and say something. Conservatives will see it. Liberals will see it. Conservatives go on the platform and say something. Liberals never see it. That is kind of interesting, isn't it?

So there's literally no benefit to anyone associated with libertarianism, civil libertarianism, like true liberalism, not the woke garbage. There's no reason to be on the platform. There's going to be some high-profile journalist who's going to be like i need to go on tv and cry because people were mean to me and it's like that's funny because like the new york the new york times the new york times and msnbc don't talk to us about the fact that we've been swatted seven times or had the bomb squad called to our house me tweeting that does nothing to affect the corporate garbage world that i no longer care about. You don't think you have a lot of liberals following you?

I do. Yeah. But, like, my point is conservatives, libertarians, moderates have no influence with the establishment. And they're not going to on any of these platforms. So why care about being there? If you can't get your followers on other platforms, well, then you've got a cultural problem. Well, then you'll be in an echo chamber, though, if you go on gab you're really twitter is already an echo chamber that's my point i think you get more you have like a bigger spectrum than you would on gab though

i wouldn't know because i've only been on gab for a couple of weeks but what i saw there wasn't you know as politically diverse or you know there's even there's more to twitter too than just politics and on gab and these other other social media platforms it feels like it's solely focused on conservative politics and then it's the most extreme of them, it feels like it's solely focused on conservative politics. And then it's the most extreme of them, too. I feel like it's the same thing that happens once you like redline or not redline, where you gerrymander a district and you make them more red and deeper blue, then you're just going to get more extreme candidates who are willing to pander harder.

But this is part of a larger problem, which is that conservatives only have politics, right? Politics is the only sphere of our culture in which conservatives have any stake or any ability to affect any change. Conservatives don't have a stake in publishing or the arts or anywhere else. And so that's the bigger issue.

That is changing. I'm working on it. It is changing. And that's interesting. And conservative counterculture in the arts, I think, is a movement that's about, you know, that should be about aesthetics. It should be about interesting work. It shouldn't be ideological. And the work that currently exists on the left side of the spectrum is entirely ideological. And it's ideological at this point by design. So what we need to do is work, you know, to like have good content, which I think, you know, you guys are both doing that is not political and that has and the left is more bearing on culture. Yeah. The left is producing more and more ideological garbage that people don't want to watch. It's because it's shitty and nobody wants to watch it.

Exactly. Well, it's there's there's two big things happening with with liberal arts. I mean, in a literal sense, not the college sense. That too, though. And it's that one, there's a severe lack of talent, probably due to the fact that meritocracy is out the window

for these people. So when you are hiring people for the sake of your ideological points, you're going to get someone who's never done the job before who has no talent doing it, but that doesn't matter because everyone should have an equal,

it should be equity, so everyone should just do this job. It's very obvious when these people have this ideology where it's like, take the tools from the farmer and give it to the farmhands. Oh no, they don't know how to farm and then everyone starves to death. That same principle applies to every other industry. But the other issue is just that when you've got a lack of talent, but also a desire to inject ideology, which doesn't work.

No, it makes bad art. It makes very poor work. A great example is, you know, the kind of garbage I watch. So I thought you're about to say Freedom Tunes. I was like, why are you going to come at me that way? She's looking right at me. I have a really good example right in front of me. Except for the Fauci episodes.

Those are weird. I don't need to hear it. If you look at the Star Trek stuff, it used to be good. And now I haven't watched a lot of the new Star Trek, but I do watch red letter media talking about it. And then I sort of like dip in a little bit. Do you know what the news? It's a disaster and it's all ideological.

And it's like, there's this affirmative action hire on the new Picard. She's terrible. What do you mean? Raffi? Is this one character? But how is that? So she's terrible what do you mean um raffy is this one character but how is that there's i don't know so she's very stupid and it's sort of impossible to believe that she could have gotten into star fleet oh well i mean that's just but that that's like a a plot choice right about a character so

you could make very poorly done sure. The bigger issue I have is Picard is one of the first, I believe, the first follow-up to the 90s series, which ended with Deep Space Nine. And since then, all they've been doing is prequels. Why? Because we are culturally stagnant. Yes, that is true. I'll explain this. We are culturally stagnant. I just want to clarify to everybody.

You know I'm a big Star Trek fan. You don't got to be a Star Trek fan to understand this. In the 90s, we had new Star Trek shows. They were wildly popular. Star Trek The Next Generation was one of the most popular shows of all time. It was syndicated on three networks. That's huge. After that, they said, what do we do now?

I don't know. Do a prequel. Now, a lot of people do like Enterprise, but it's a prequel. We're just like, go back in time. I thought it was boring. And take existing stories. Where are we now? Discovery. CBS's a prequel. We're just like, go back in time and take existing stories. Where are we now? Discovery. CBS, a prequel.

Stacey Abrams is the president. They're accused of ripping off the story. Here's the best part. They start Picard, which is finally, the 90s Star Trek gets a sequel series, and what is it about? The first season is basically Member Berries. Member Riker?

Member Picard? Member Data? And it's like, okay, yeah, I'm a big fan of all those things. It's fun to see them again. What's season two about? They go back in time. Because something happened in 2024 to turn Earth into a human supremacist planet. And the fascists must be stopped. And I'm like, why is Star Trek at the same time that I live?

I want to watch Spaceships. Well, also, here's the thing. Spaceships. Space. Aliens. Well, this is what's so boring about it. Even if you're trying to cram your worldview into something where it otherwise doesn't belong,

try to come up with some clever analogy for it instead of going, human supremacy. We're going to talk about human supremacy. Do you guys get it? And watching at home, do you get it? Do you get what we're actually talking about?

It's so obnoxious. Are people gay on the new Star Trek? What? Are there any gay people on the new Star Trek? Well, in the reboot movies, they made Sulu gay.

Like, they did a scene that didn't need to be in the movie that was... This is one of the issues. I think Takei was actually not cool with that even though he's gay.

Right. He said, make new characters. So in the movies, they did a scene where it's like they're coming to port or whatever This is one of the issues. I think Takei was actually not cool with that even though he's gay. Right. He said, make new characters. Yeah. So in the movies, they did a scene where it's like they're coming to port or whatever. And then Sulu runs up to a guy who's got a daughter and they kiss. And it's just like that did nothing for the movie. I don't care if the characters are gay.

John Constantine. Do you guys know who John Constantine is? DC character. They did a movie with Keanu Reeves. It wasn't really true to the original character. He's an amazing character. This character has been bi since 1992. So he has boyfriends and girlfriends, and it's like a part of his character arc.

So when I see a show, I'm watching DC's Legends of Tomorrow, and he's got a boyfriend. I'm like, oh, I get it. His motivation is that his boyfriend's soul was trapped in hell. I'm like, yeah, I understand that. I have no issue with that. That's fine. It's when they take characters and they put things in plots that don't make sense

for the sake of just virtue signaling to their audience, like, look what we did. It feels shoehorned in. I feel like Chris Ruffo found something that like with a Disney, one of the Disney directors saying that they're trying to make like 50% of the characters LGBTQ. Well, that wasn't just the director saying that.

They have that, I think, on their mission. I think they have that written down that by 2050 it would be... And that's just not a very interesting way to do it. It doesn't make for good stories to say I'm going to have this character with this specific characteristics. When you're writing characters,

you have to listen to your characters. You have to invent them. They have to be authentic and real. And you can't just apply stuff to your characters. You have to invent them. They have to be authentic and real. And you can't just like apply stuff to your characters and say, you know, here's my character, Mary, and she's going to be all of these things. And I'm just going to make that work and shove them into that character. It has to be real. I'll tell you why I think woke plot writing doesn't work. You have to understand the motivations to feel for the story. And the example I'll give you is when the Batman animated series won,

I think it was the first Emmy, I could be wrong, for an animated series. And it was with their episode in the origins of Mr. Freeze. Do you guys know this story? Comic book villains used to be one dimensional.

I'm going to take over the world. And then in the Batman animated series, they write the story about a scientist whose wife is dying of a terminal disease. So he cryogenically freezes her and then starts misappropriating corporate funds from his job to try and find a cure. When the boss finds out, he says, you're stealing my money. Shut it down. He's like, no, you'll kill Nora.

You can't. So they get into a fight with the security guards. The cryochemicals spray all over him. He becomes Mr. Freeze. His entire motivation motivations that his wife is dying and he will stop at nothing to save her life and so it's kind of sad but he's a bad dude because he hurts people and then it ends with him in his prison cell like saying like oh nora and he's holding a snow globe and it's like miserably sad this guy became a villain that's like wow

those motivations man when you see these woke stories like The Craft where they put a spell on a guy to turn him gay, I'm like, what is your motivation here? Yeah, why do it? Like, ha-ha, let's make a jock gay. And I'm like, I don't understand what that has to do with, like, your motivations in life. Are you just mean people? That's LGBTQ representation, Tim. They're trying to tell us that that's where gay people come from. That's what they're trying to tell us that that's where gay people come from there's what they're trying to say in in in legends of tomorrow john constantine he's this uh he's he's like a an exorcist he has a

boyfriend his boyfriend's soul gets damned to hell and this makes him distraught i'm like i understand that motivation i don't you know have attraction dudes but i can understand caring about someone i understand that motivation a lot of these woke shows are motivated by weird things, like when Brie Larson in Captain Marvel steals the clothing of the guy on the motorcycle. I'm like, what was the purpose of that plot point? Was it to show us that Brie is just a bad person and that feminists are mean?

Why in the story is it like she's going to steal a guy's clothes and steal his motorcycle from him? I've said this before a number of times, but it's really important whenever you're making anything and this holds true for what we're doing with freedom tunes as well even though we're talking about politics when i'm making something i'm not thinking what point can i get across what's the agenda here that's very rarely the case it's usually just looking at a situation and saying what do i think is funny and obviously because i am a conservative person the things that i'm going to think are funny are probably things other conservative people are going I think is funny and obviously because I am a conservative person the things that I'm going to think are funny are probably things other conservative people are going to

think is funny when they look at the issue or are funny when they look at the issue if you go into it going I desperately need the audience to know every single piece of my political worldview related to this issue you're just going to make garbage it's going to be really really boring it's someone someone super chatted us and we'll go back in the super chat section and read through it but i do want to point out a bit of what your point was and this is from um i can't personal alarm or whatever but he was saying that uh before the empire before the dark days and this is an uh another uh who tweeted this um i'm sorry not tweeted who posted it they eddie he was saying before the empire before the days, all of these social media platforms were conservative. And that's mostly true.

Remember, remember when Phil, Phil DeFranco, he hosted Gary Johnson on his show, Libertarian. Mike.com, which went woke originally was all about libertarianism and Ron Paul. Interesting. Twitter was Donald Trump and conservatives and it was dominated. The Twitter was a lot of journalists who are, you know, talking and a lot of news organizations Interesting. I don't remember that. boring and broken. Well, because they're only interested in their ideological perspective. They're not interested in new ideas. They're interested in entrenching and enforcing the existing ones. It's so troubling that all these companies have become ideological in one direction or another because then it also leads other companies to also want to become ideological. So now we have Disney trying to inject whatever liberal values, but then we have the Daily Wire,

who is a news company, right? They hire journalists. They make news podcasts. But they're also getting in the kids' entertainment business. I'm not sure if they're going to inject any values in their content. But it just sucks that every company now has developed a political angle one way or another because I don't know if that's what the market has to bear. We force it onto these companies. The Daily Wire realized that,

as Andrew Breitbart said, politics is downstream from culture and for too long conservatives have neglected to be producing any kind of cultural content. Typically,

conservatives just complain about stuff and then they're content to complain about it as, it's like, imagine being in the Titanic and complaining

that it's sinking and then not doing anything to like save yourself save others or stop the sinking from happening and that's what it was for a very long time the daily wire is like let's start bailing water or at least build a life raft so their content probably will have values in it but it's going to be values we recognize and probably like. Well, and the values should come into the work in an organic fashion. Exactly. As well. I mean, that's what it should be like. I remember this was years ago now, but I was commissioned to write a play for the Williamstown

Theater Festival. And I was working with a director who was older and she was single and she was trying to decide if she should have a child, even though she didn't have a partner. And so we were talking about this. And I was like, was like okay well we you know this is what she wanted to do a play about i was like okay cool so we started digging into it and very very organically the take of the play started to be uh no you probably shouldn't have a child without you know a family structure without not intentionally. You probably should not intentionally create a fatherless child on purpose just to satisfy

your own pleasure at this point. And that was a very organic perspective. And it ended up not getting produced and getting me into a lot of trouble. And I didn't stay at the festival very long. But I didn't go into it saying, I want to write a play about the integrity of the family unit. That's just sort of what happened. I wrote a play that was about taking responsibility

for your reproductive material. Yeah. No, absolutely. And I would agree with you. This stuff has to come about organically. All entertainment is going to have values in it. People just can't escape this. And it's part of the reason why storytelling has been so central to human culture and civilization,

because we get our moral values from the stories that we tell each other, the stories that we're told as children, that we pass on to our children. And so the idea that they're going to be value neutral is incoherent. It's basically an impossibility. There's no point to a value neutral story necessarily because how would it exist? And exactly, it's not even possible. The question is, are these perspectives developing organically because someone's trying to tell a story and their worldview is inevitably going to work itself into it? Or is this a piece of propaganda which exists explicitly to get me to accept

something I might not otherwise accept? That's something interesting, too, that I think of a lot about, like Bible stories, right? So you have a lot of, you know, there's been a lot of critique about the Bible and like from a liberal worldview that this is, you know, anti-everybody or whatever. But if you look at the Bible, the stories are not telling you how things should be necessarily in the Old Testament. Yeah, that's interesting. They're telling you how things are, right? These are our ancestors expressing their perspective on life and culture and the world as they're living in it. And they're giving you that perspective. No, it's an interesting combination because there are obviously moments that are instructive, but it's not as if because something is described in scripture that

it's being approved. Exactly. And that's so interesting. You know, and there's, well, we could go on about this for a while, but there's so many interesting stories where you can see, you know, the trajectory of something is not what you thought, like when Joseph gets sold into slavery in Egypt. And it turns out that if Joseph hadn't been sold into slavery in Egypt, all of the Israelites would have starved to death. So what was the right thing to do? I don't know, like that's fascinating. Exactly. I want to mention this. I don't take a more liberal interpretation. I really do believe in the Bible. But at the same time, I find it fascinating that basically every religious text that I'm familiar with is narrative in some sense. It's not just a list of things that you should and

shouldn't do. There's some of that, right, when you look at a catechism, for example, that lays out the rules, but it's so clear that humans understand through story in the strongest possible way. Well, that's the great, it's everything. Here's something interesting. The old stories. I read this, so you guys will have to tell me if it's correct or not. But I was reading this opinion piece about heroes of the olden days like Hercules and these ancient heroes who would challenge the gods, fight against them, or the titans. Today, our heroes are all a part of the establishment and the authority. Superman and Batman. them were the titans today our heroes are all a part of the establishment and the authority superman and batman well as much as they're sometimes at odds like batman is a vigilante they still call upon him and he still upholds the status quo superman does the same thing i think a lot of comics have done a great job exploring these ideas in in real ways that were thought provoking challenging certain um you certain rigid moral standards. We had

Captain America. He's basically propaganda in World War II. Then you have this arc where he becomes nomad. He's like, I can't stand for this. Or you have Civil War where Captain America's like, I will not stand for the government forcing people to register. And then you have the industrialist Tony Stark who's like,

do what the government wants, the corporation working with government. These ideas were really interesting, and it made these comics from one-dimensional to multi-dimensional, challenging our own worldview, but in positive ways. Now, instead of being like, here's an interesting character arc. Captain America believes in freedom. The government wants you to register. How would he handle that? Now it's just like, you're all racists and you're all big bigots and bigots should be punished and racists should be excised. So the wokeness in

content is just becoming, it's reverting back to the one dimensional aspect of old comics. That's just, well, there was such an interesting thing that happened and bizarre when Barack Obama became president and when he was running, which is all of the people who had said up to that point, question authority started saying, trust the government. The president is your friend. And it's like it was, you know, people forgot that Barack Obama was just a politician, you know, just like all the other politicians. He's very similar to all of the politicians who have ruled our country.

Yeah. But he had that painting that said hope. Yeah. Sure. Right. Yeah. Well, but he had that painting that said, hope. Sure, right. Yeah, well, Shepard Fairey had the painting. He was supposed to end racism, though. I feel like that was supposed to be the deal with Obama. He was supposed to end the racism. Yeah, but now people say that, you know,

the fact that we had a black president doesn't mean anything at all in terms of the progress away from being a racist country. Exactly. Which is so weird, which I find it bizarre. No, exactly. They'll never say these kinds of things beforehand, right? So when you're supposed to vote for Obama, it's, look, this is going to be a giant step towards ending racism.

Of course they didn't say, well, look, if we elect Obama, that is not at all going to prove that this is a non-racist country. It means nothing. Vote based on values and not skin color. Obama wasn't even extremely liberal. As I understand, I think he was against gay marriage when he announced. He was against gay marriage when he announced. But hold on, hold on. That was a very different time.

He was pro-universal health care. He campaigned on that in 2007 and 2008. He also voted against the Born Alive Act in 2003 or 2002 as a senator. So he was very far to the left on abortion. And on a lot of economic. So he was very far to the left on abortion. And on a lot of economic issues, he was as well. I think basically no one in public life was in favor of gay marriage if they had a political career at that point. Yeah, Hillary Clinton, I think in 2016, she wasn't even in favor of gay marriage.

Like leaked emails came out or something. Let's talk about families, though, because this is a story from the New York Times. This is huge. Oklahoma lawmakers approved near total ban on abortion. The measure is part of a wave of stringent abortion restrictions enacted by legislators

in Republican led states. Lawmakers in Oklahoma on Tuesday approved a near total ban on abortion, making it the latest Republican led state to forge ahead with these restrictions.

The measure, Senate Bill 612, would make performing an abortion except to save the life of a pregnant woman in a medical emergency, a felony punishable by up to 10 years in prison or a fine of $100,000. Now consider that in an emergency. That means the doctor can be like, we've determined that, you know, if you keep carrying this baby within the span of a month

or two, you and the baby will die. And that's still not a valid reason to have an abortion. Unless I guess you can argue that two months, that time duration, that duration is not a contributing factor into whether it is or isn't an emergency. The felony goes to the doctor, not the mother. So yes, performing the abortion. So also when you're talking about these instances of medical necessity, oftentimes what they're referring to is procedures which are not actually technically abortions but could result in the death of the unborn child if they perform the operation to save the mother. So I'm curious to know

which exceptions are actually being made. I think, check this out, this is really, really interesting. They say if the passage, its passage came after Oklahoma became a major destination for women from Texas who were seeking abortions after that state enacted a law banning the procedure after about six weeks, a very early stage of pregnancy.

If allowed to take effect, SB 612 would be devastating for both Oklahomans and Texans who continue to seek care in Oklahoma. A coalition of abortion rights groups, including the ACLU of Oklahoma and Oklahoma, call for reproductive justice, said in a statement, nearly half of the patients Oklahoma providers are currently seeing are medical refugees from Texas. Now Oklahomans could face a future where they would have no place left in their state to go to seek this basic health care. I want to point out, man, I was I was I asked this question before. I want to avoid making very hard predictions, but I believe abortion may be a major catalyst for this looming civil war or whatever conflict we're in.

We're at the point now where it seems things have calmed down. There's a meme where it's like, where'd anti-fun BLM go? People must have not been paying their bills. And I'm just like, yo, it's winter. Come on, calm down. Yeah, they can't be out there now. It's too cold. Right.

Summer is when things get crazy and they tend to. They only want to fight fascism when the weather's good. It's too cold. Right. Summer is when things get crazy, and they tend to. They only want to fight fascism when the weather's good. It's weird. But also take a look at what's happening politically with like January 6th. Birkenstock. They're filing subpoenas against people. They're having to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars to combat these subpoenas. They're being charged with contempt. So it's still very much hot in terms of some kind of escalating conflict.

Now, with Oklahoma outright being, we've got too many refugees from Texas who want abortion, so we're going to ban it basically outright. This is going to be a major catalyst because at the same time this is happening, Colorado does the inverse. The right to abortion in Colorado is now guaranteed under state law with no restrictions.

So my understanding is this is up to the point of birth. Is that it? Well, I read the law and there were no limits or restrictions. So my understanding is this is up to the point of birth. Is that it? Well, I read the law and there were no limits or restrictions. So probably, right? I mean, there were no limitations at all. It was a four-page law. And yeah, it didn't say that you couldn't have an abortion at any point. Blue states, there's 15 states that are similar.

Colorado said that they wanted to be a sanctuary state for abortion and so did California. And both of those, California I know was putting money in place in order to help women who are poor get there so that they could have their

pregnancies terminated in the state. The point is there's no compromise on this issue at all anymore. There used to to be there used to be compromise tulsi gabbard saying safe legal and rare that used to be real i feel like that was even bill clinton that was the that was the old idea was where we are where we are now is oklahoma says no colorado says no problem and there's like literally no middle ground of like well maybe there are some conversations we have about medical issues. Nope. Well, several years ago, a couple of years ago, remember, it started, I think it was Lindy West started saying, shout your abortion.

And there was this whole thing about like, be proud of it. And I think that totally backfired. You know, I personally have never been in favor of abortion, but I've been like, OK, safe, legal and rare. I guess that makes sense. And then as soon as it started being like pro-abortion, I was like, and I'm now entirely 100% thoroughly at least. I don't think it's a catalyst for civil war, but I do think this is a catalyst for a potential second presidential term for Joe Biden because I think this is an issue that so many liberals

and leftists are so passionate about. Also, I feel like this is an issue that traditionally right-wing leftists are so passionate about. Also, I feel like this is an issue that traditionally right wingers only played lip service to. I feel like the Republican Party, it's made up of three core groups, the neolibs, the neocons and the traditionalists. And the only people who really care about the issue are the traditionalists. Also, like, Donald Trump only became pro-life when he was running for president to pay more lip service to this group. Another issue is – Hold on. I got to answer at least one of the points.

I disagree. To Democrats, this is a virtue signal but not a strong moral issue. Democrats are not – do not – so the Democrat view on abortion is you're flushing away human waste. They consider it no different than taking a dump in the toilet. They say – right? So it's just – it's a clump of cells. Who cares? The conservative position is you murdered a baby. There's a very strong conservative moral position opposed to this. There is not a very strong moral position in support of it. There's a virtue signal in support. Do you think this is a number one

issue for more Democrats or a number one issue for more Republicans? It's a good question. Well, you think it's a number one issue for more Republicans? Hands down. I'd say Democrats because they, women's health means nothing more than abortion. When we talk about women's rights in this country nowadays, we're exclusively talking about abortions. I'll let you get to your point in a second though. But the same thing with this Oklahoma bill where the same issue that they faced in Texas was that people are just going to different places to get their abortions. And these are really just affecting poor people differently. They will just go to other places to get their abortions and these are really just affecting poor people differently but they will just go to other places to get their abortions you can't take like michelle wolf who goes on

stage and goes you get an abortion and you get an abortion that's disgusting and you can't take lena dunham who says she wished he had one and compare that in terms of she wished she had one even though she can't take that in terms of motivating factor and compare it to conservatives saying you are literally murdering babies and we will stop you. It's hard to get in the middle of this rhetoric. But one last point that's also going to make this very difficult to enforce or once it is illegal, or if Roe v. Wade was ever overturned, it would go back to the states. But then in the states where it is illegal, the abortion pill and different medical technology exists such that abortions are extremely easy to have even without having a doctor. So because during COVID we weren't allowed to meet with doctors,

you had to meet with a doctor to get yourself an abortion pill prescribed to you. But during COVID, they lifted that because they didn't want people meeting with doctors. Now, since they're changing that rule, they're getting abortion pills mailed in from different countries and different continents. And there's not a lot you could do to stop this. We're not going to start making this illegal for women to get the abortion pill off the market. We're not going to jail them. That's the worst political move to try to penalize the woman for getting an abortion. I just think it's a losing issue. I just think it's a losing issue. I want to kind of interject here because this is a very important issue for me.

So you mentioned that left-wingers more or less see this as an arbitrary medical procedure that people are only opposing for these archaic religious reasons. On the right, people see this as the termination of a human life. Earlier we were talking about the fact that there used to be middle ground on this issue. I think the fact that there isn't anymore just means that we've all become more honest with each other and with ourselves because this isn't an issue where there can be any middle ground. Either you're slaughtering a child or you're not. I think with respect to looking at alternatives women may pursue if their state illegalizes abortion,

we know that even though people did flee to other states, overall abortion in Texas went down by about 60%. So some lives are being saved by this law. Again, it can be difficult to quantify. But the more states outlaw abortion, the fewer unborn children we will see dying. And I don't think there's any pro-lifer who's going to say that's not a win just because some people aren't following that law. It's tragic when that law isn't followed. It's tragic whenever an unborn child is killed. But banning that and seeing it occur less often

is a move in the right direction. Liberals are motivated by tribalism, care, and fairness. They will march if told to march, and they typically will get away with it. If that means slamming, banging on the doors of the Supreme Court or Senate building because Brett Kavanaugh's there and they scream that he's a violator or whatever, if they're told to do it, they'll do it. So you don't need abortion to motivate the left to go out and protest for something. The right is motivated by very little. This is one of the big issues that has motivated them to actually get out and protest. In fact, there's a progressive pro-lifer right now.

She gave a press conference because apparently she had taken baby parts from a university that they got access to, and she took them. And I don't know exactly the full story. Apparently she was giving burials to the babies or something to that effect. I'm not entirely sure. People are trying to claim that she's like Gosnell 2 or something something like that but she's actually a progressive pro-lifer these were given to her like it was a whistleblower situation oh is that what it was yeah yeah okay so so you so when it comes to pro-life you really just have to look at it like take a look at what how the left describes the issue of abortion when they're like what happens if you have a miscarriage and it's just

a clump of cells versus a baby being killed? People will run into a burning building to save a baby. They won't run into a burning building to take a dump. There's a clear motivational distinction here. Are you guys life at conceptioners? Yeah, I would say fertilization. I'm not pro-life, but that's a scientific fact. Okay. Libby, if you don't mind, I can ask that to you too.

If I think that life begins at conception yeah i think it probably does yeah um i do think though that we are telling women the wrong story i think we're telling the wrong narrative about um what life is about what meaning is and what being a mother is all about uh we tell women that our culture tells women that um their lives are limited when they become mothers, that it's going to put a damper on your ability to do stuff, right? And to a certain extent, yes, there are limitations. Once you become a mother, you have to prioritize, and you prioritize differently. But it's not going to ruin your life, right?

Being a mother actually makes your life that much better. It's a terrific bond. It's a very deep bond between mother and child. This is why I'm very pro-motherhood. And I think that it's important to tell women, poor women, because you're not seeing the overeducated white liberals running around getting their abortions. They get one with their kid.

But you are seeing them running around getting antidepressants. You are seeing that as well. But women are losing their rights in a lot of other ways. This is like the only right that women are allowed to fight for. They're not allowed to fight to say that they are women. They're not allowed to fight for bathrooms. I don't want to deviate too far from what your point was. I don't have any of that stuff.

I want to bring it back to what you're talking about. Can I add something to it back to what you're I was saying, can we your question, you asked if life at conception, where were you going with that? I was just going to say I want to reject that there isn't a middle ground on this issue because I do believe I was looking up the stats to try to find it specifically

but I think most people are in the country, I think it says right now currently 59% say abortion should be legal in all or most cases, while 39% say it should be illegal in all or most cases. Illegal, I couldn't tell what you said, illegal or legal.

Currently 59% say abortion should be legal in all or most cases, while 39% say it should be illegal in all or most cases. So I think there is a middle ground in our country. I think people already generally agree that less than 20 weeks, that's when most abortions do occur.

They're cool with that. But late trimester, I feel like most people are on the same page about that, except the people on the fringe. And I think the problem with this issue is that the fringes are the most volsterous or voiceless about this issue, right? The extremes are the ones who care. The evangelicals are the religious people who say it starts at conception. And then, you know, crazy abortionists who don't care if it's until the moment of you giving birth so that's where the conversation gets

centered around even though those are the most fringe cases and that's the problem and why I think some people don't think there is a middle ground I think most people in the country again 59 are cool and I want to mention this I got to stop you because Elad I think I'll challenge your stats Gallup has from 2021 in terms of i want to mention this i gotta stop you because you're a lot of your ears yeah i think

you're i i'll challenge your stats gallup has from 2021 48 percent believe abortion should be legal only under only certain circumstances 32 say legal under any circumstances and 19 say illegal in all circumstances which means the majority of americans restriction abortion. I'm looking at Pew public opinion. Yeah. So that shows. And I've also got Gallup. Gallup says it's 50-50. It depends on the statistics that you're looking at.

Yeah. But I really want to say this. So it may absolutely be the case that there are a large number of Americans who say that there's a middle ground here. But 95% of biologists, according to a five-year study and survey of biologists, say that life begins at fertilization, regardless of their position on abortion. So the truth is life begins at fertilization. That's what the science says.

And I believe that we need to base our policy around the best information we have on what human life is and endowing every living person with said rights, not necessarily what the polls say might be politically popular. Real quick, I do want to point out Elad's stats. I checked them. Yup, Pew says exactly what he says they show. I'm kosher. I will challenge them by saying when provided with a more nuanced distinction, we can see from Gallup three categories as

opposed to just two. When you're giving a binary choice on legal or not, some people might begrudgingly say, well, I guess then we should just have it be legal. When given the option for limited circumstance, no circumstance or any circumstance, the plurality what restrictions in some capacity. As drugs become more common and ubiquitous, the abortion pill is becoming more common and ubiquitous. You will not have to go to a doctor to receive it in the future. So if women do choose to take the abortion pill and terminate their pregnancy,

what do you think our government's response should be? If there is no doctor who prescribed the pill or it's some doctor in India, a fake doctor who's just selling pills, right? So they acquired the abortion pill and they chose to terminate their pregnancy. How should we penalize that woman? I think becomes the most politically toxic thing

you could do. And that's where it has to end up. We don't want to penalize the women. But I feel like at the end of the day, if they're the one who ends up making the choice, then that's where we end up. That's kind of total bullshit. Which part? So penalizing women for having an abortion? Wait, so if a woman chooses to take the abortion pill that she got illegally, then what should the – if abortion is illegal, what should the penalty be?

You want to jail women for terminating their pregnancy? I don't want to make abortion illegal. You don't want to make abortion illegal. But if you do, if it is illegal, you think that women should be jailed? No, I'm going down the only steps that make sense. If we make abortion illegal and somebody chooses to get an abortion, these are just, you know, if we make a law that we have to prosecute people. Should someone be, you know, imprisoned for attempted suicide? I don't think abortion should be illegal. That's not my point.

I don't think you should be sent to jail either. I think you're rationalization, which doesn't make any sense. I think you're so I'd like to respond to this because you're looking at a very specific circumstances. You're creating a hypothetical scenario where all abortions are obtained by women getting these pills. I'm talking about these cases. Sir. So even if that does become the case, there's still going to be ways to police other forms of abortion. I agree with you that some things are going to slip through the cracks that doesn't necessarily mean you're going to go prosecute women and it doesn't mean we can't prevent abortion in other scenarios so how do you deal with the case so a woman she's three months pregnant she gets an

abortion from india what do you what do we do okay first of all there aren't abortion pills that will terminate your three-month-old okay so on so... Like, it's... The abortion pills that exist are pretty early term. Okay, so let's say... Very early term. Like, by the time you're three months, like, there's a baby in your body. Okay, so they work within the first trimester, 14 weeks,

so a woman acquires a pill from India that induces, you know, an abortion to happen within 14 weeks, and it's illegal in whatever state she does it to. I'm trying to get to the base of it. How do we penalize it when there's no doctor involved? Well, no, but I don't think this is getting to the base of it because we're talking about a restriction that applies to abortions

across the state of Oklahoma at all points in conception with few potential exceptions, though I want to look into what they're saying with respect to those exceptions. You're talking about a specific scenario of abortion pills that would be particularly difficult to prove in prosecution. So I think what needs to happen is you have to ensure that those pills are not allowed in the United States of America and anyone who sells them is prosecuted. You should ensure fentanyl isn't in here either, though.

What you're saying is because this would be difficult to prevent, it's not something that we should attempt to prevent. Well, how should we penalize it? Okay. Well, yeah. I mean, the dealer... I think Seamus makes a really good... You've got to wait and let people finish their point before you just start talking over each

other. I think Seamus makes a really good point, which is the dealer of the abortion pills should be the one who's held liable. Good luck trying to go to India and penalize China. And then in those cases, you can't penalize anybody. That's true of drugs, too. I think that's the future of abortion then in our country. It's people illegally acquiring abortion pills when they can't receive them from doctors in states where it's illegal. I think you can get them up to 10 weeks.

I think the future of abortion pills is going to get it even further. But I think to say that there are instances that our laws can account for is not an argument for why we shouldn't have these laws in the first place. The argument is if you think it should be illegal because it terminates a human life, the issue is that you can't track early human life. So if you were to view abortion as no different than a murder, the issue is that someone who is born and has a life is tracked in some way. And when they go missing, the murder typically, not always, but will be noticed in some way. Someone went missing. A woman who gets pregnant, doesn't tell anybody, then aborts the baby. There's no evidence of the existence of the

loss of human life. If you were to view it in the exact same way, that it was a murder, then the law should be treating it identically as it was a murder. That is to say, it doesn't matter how the woman commit the act. You can drive from Illinois to, you know, to Indiana and illegally acquire a gun and used to commit a murder. Yeah, it's still illegal. So we will penalize the woman is what I'm trying to get to. Because if you do think abortion is murder and then the woman on her own volition acquires and then aborts, then she murdered the child.

Not necessarily because intent has a lot to do with this. So if a person doesn't understand what they're doing, they don't recognize that they're killing a human person because they've been propagandized. No, I think there's a good point to be made there because women are told that this isn't murder. So I think there are people who fight in wars. For insanity, please. No, I don't think so. That's the basis of an insanity plea that you didn't murder, so I think there are people who fight in wars. For insanity, please. No, I don't think so. That's the basis of an insanity plea, that you didn't know right from wrong. You can't plead insanity because you're literally insane.

You plead it. You don't know the difference between right and wrong. So if you go to court and they say, you killed – this has happened. A woman killed her kids because she said that once they become 12, original sin will send them to hell. That's insane. Yes. Yes, exactly. And so she

bludgeoned her kids to death and then uh the court said why do you do it and she called the police after she did it and she was like i need help cleaning this up my kid i killed them they said why and she goes to make sure they went to heaven so she was deemed insane yeah see that that would be insanity so the issue is if you want to penalize abortion as though it were murder, you would have to treat the woman as a murderer. Yes. Well, so basically murder is handled by the states. And I would argue that as a matter of legislation, it makes sense to be merciful to these women because oftentimes they literally do not know what they're doing. They're told an abortion is a procedure just like any other where they're flushing some cells out of their body and not a human life.

So I would absolutely prosecute the doctors because they know exactly what they're doing. I think the vast majority of women in these circumstances have no idea. I totally and 100% disagree with you. I think that women know what abortion is. They know what pregnancy is. And when you're pregnant, you can tell that you're pregnant. A lot of things change about your body very quickly, and you know that you're pregnant. You know that you're carrying a human life.

It's apparent. Pun intended. What? Pun intended. It's apparent. But you know that you're pregnant. You know what that entails. No one doesn't know what they're doing or thinks it really is a clump of cells, except perhaps, you know, girls under 16. I do not think that women should be prosecuted for having abortions

any more than I think people who are suicidal should be prosecuted for attempted murder. It just doesn't make any sense. These things, you know, these things are going to happen. Women have been aborting their babies since long before birth control pills or whatever, abortion pills or surgical procedures or anything like that. And there have certainly been lots of circumstances and countries in which women are prosecuted for having abortions. There was, I was obsessed with Norwegian literature for a while, and there was this book, Growth

of the Soil, I believe. Was it Growth of the Soil? Yeah, by Newt Hampson. And there was a woman who was prosecuted for attempted abortion. And she ended up in prison with a whole bunch of other ladies who had attempted abortions. And they were all there raising their children in prison. And that's the kind of thing that you would start to look at. You would start to look at imprisoning children for having been born to mothers who have a lot of kids and didn't want anymore, as it was in that book, was primarily the situation.

I think that what we need to do as a society is have more respect for parents, for parents' choices. We have to be supporting families more and not constantly trying to, you know, force everyone to adhere to, you know, the government's dictates for your lifestyle. I think that has a lot to do with it. There is a chance that the abortion pill doesn't actually work. They say the abortion results in an abortion one to two weeks, anywhere from 54% to 92% of pregnancies. And it also says if the abortion doesn't take, it could result in birth defects if pregnancy doesn't end. So I think I would not be surprised if they do ban abortion outright across the board in the United States or just in many states.

You're going to see people fleeing states. You're going to see people doing backroom abortions or whatever, pills or otherwise. But I think what's more likely to happen first is geographic polarization. Yeah. So like what we're seeing with women in Texas fleeing to Oklahoma. Now that Oklahoma bans it, you're going to see people in Texas fleeing to Colorado. Yeah. And then they're going to stay in Colorado.

And then you're going to see states become hyperpolarized by, it's going to be by geography. Then you're going to see a bunch of states that are pro-abortion with no restriction and many states that are anti-abortion with no exceptions or limited rare exceptions like health of the mother. And then it's going to come down to the hyperpolarization of this country, control of our institutions, and you are going to have a strong moral issue for people on the right who are like you are literally murdering babies. Because we saw it in Virginia when that woman, what was her name, Tran? What was her name? That politician? She wanted restrictionless abortion and she was asked by a judge, would this mean that a woman

who is literally about to give birth, she's dilating, you could abort the baby? And she goes, there would be no restriction. Then you had Northam say, well, we would take the baby, it would be delivered, it would be made comfortable and then the woman would have a conversation with her doctor about what to do next, as if to imply they would kill the baby after it was already born. He came out later and he was like, I meant in the case of severe defect. I'm like, the baby's alive.

So where does that lead to if people are going to flee these states? Let me start from here. If Roe v. Wade is overturned, as many believe it will, especially on the left, many have told me Republicans will not push for a federal ban on abortion because they think it's a states' rights issue. Okay. Then you get all the blue states saying no restriction on abortion, like they're doing already. It's 15 states that are seemingly to that degree.

And then you have the red states all saying ban an abortion with limited or no exceptions, you're going to have hyperpolarization in this country. And that is planting the seeds for interstate conflict. We have that in a lot of areas, though, also. Yeah. Well, I find it fascinating. I agree with you. And I was just going to say that we're going to see increased polarization just on the

basis of geography. Left-wing people are going to leave these red states and then the blue states are going to become bluer. The red states are going to become redder because only people who are comfortable with those abortion laws will move there, etc. You were making a point earlier just about this being politically pragmatic and what could happen. Is this going to result in Joe Biden getting a second term? I don't think so. But it's also an interesting question, because as we were discussing earlier, there is a debate here over which side cares more about this issue. We were pulling up different polls that had a bit of nuance to the question of abortion, asking, do you think it should always be illegal, legal in

some circumstances? Part of the issue with these is they usually end up with some kind of framing that could be considered biased. I know that Gallup poll just straight up asked people, do you identify as pro-life or pro-choice? And it's a pretty neat 50-50 split across the nation. It's like 49% pro-choice, 47% pro-life, and then 5% with no opinion. I find it difficult because too, though, because in that framing too,

I feel like not all pro-lifers are from conceptioners. I think that's probably true. And a lot of people consider plan B abortions and it gets really, and you're right, there's just so many gray zones. There is something to be said I think that also kind of relates to how Trump's saying the election was stolen. And pragmatically, strategy-wise, I don't think it's a great strategy, but he's staying true to his principles, and the people who back him up on those principles are getting rewarded with his endorsements.

Yeah, well, and I think part of what sort of adds to my position, and we'll see, we'll see what ends up happening, but part of what I think bolsters my position is the fact that, as Tim said, pro-lifers see this as a child being killed, pro-choices just see this more as an abstract struggle between religious fanatics and the secularists who want to preserve people's rights. The question is, do you care more about that kind of abstract battle than you do the fact that food is more expensive. You're having a harder time feeding your family. Gas is as expensive as it's ever been. There's turmoil on the foreign stage that we probably wouldn't see with a president who is

a little stronger. It's actually a toss-up, and you're probably going to care more about the things that affect your life in a more direct sense. But if you're going to ask people to balance those questions against another human life, they're probably going to choose to save the person or believe in saving the person. But in this instance, the pro-lifers don't even have to make that choice because the people who they would be voting for not only want to end abortion, but would ideally be able to get this country stuffed together

and get gas prices down and return food costs to something more normal. In regard to the Civil War stuff, though, I'm extremely optimistic because I think it's a good thing that one of the top issues that we care about and have to deal with in our country is abortion instead of hunger or crazy inflation or actual i mean it's i hate using the word privilege but it's a relatively privileged position to have this the top issue you care about and to make a joke from earlier maybe we might need to not blame those russians for the war crimes in ukraine because they were propagandized so heavily by the Russians to denazify. There's an interesting question.

There's an interesting question. I reject the premise, by the way. So obviously, but the wars that we're involved in now, I know people who fought in those wars. They were propagandized as young men to believe that going to the Middle East and, quote, unquote, fighting for our freedom was the right thing to do. They ended up doing things over there that they very much regret, but I would not charge them with murder. Sure. Would you? I think it would.

Would you? Because you scoff at this idea that being propagandized means that you shouldn't be held accountable. There's a difference between trying to liberate the Iraqi people and then the war crimes also committed by certain soldiers on the ground. So if you're on the ground and massacring people, even if you are a U.S. soldier, you should be penalized because that's not what our army teaches you.

I would agree. And we do, by the way. And also the thing is with the Iraq war, we have the benefit of it endeling poorly, and that's why we get to look back at it so poorly. But if we were able to set up – the problem with Iraq is that we weren't able to set up a democracy thereafter. So there's a lot to – But I didn't ask about war crimes. I didn't ask about things that our nation would consider war crimes and that our country's a guest is against in terms of its policy i'm talking about the united states being involved in illegitimate wars where people died i would

say they're legitimate i wouldn't call them illegitimate you wouldn't call them illegitimate even though congress didn't declare them well the congress hasn't declared a war since world war ii am i calling every war since world war ii illegitimate no why not they didn't go through the process well we don't do a lot of things by the constitution the congress is the first thing that's mentioned in our constitution but you know they barely have actual power and as much as i'd like to be a constitutionalist in practice de facto we have a commander-in-chief and he's the person who makes the foreign policy and in our current world that's the way it needs to be we can't have our president be strapped by Congress.

Congress can't agree on what – Then we might not have got involved in two 20-year-long wars that resulted in countless suffering. The Senate kicks off anything. The Senate and Congress is extremely indecisive, and they would get nothing done. We need a leader to be able to act freely and quickly on the world stage, in my opinion. I think also – I'm very hawkish. I think most of these wars are justified. I don't want to get involved with Ukraine because I want to be focused on the Chinese stage in my opinion i think also i'm very hawkish i think most of these wars are justified i don't want to get involved with ukraine because i want to be focused on the chinese though so that's why i would justify a lot of these wars not the war crimes though there is some leniency

in times of war and i understand things get crazy but as war crimes is a completely different thing and we do prosecute americans who commit war crimes yeah and i never said we didn't and i never said that we shouldn't if someone commits a a war crime, they should absolutely be prosecuted, and I think we just plain don't see eye to eye on the powers of the presidency, the executive branch, and whether we should have been involved in any of these disasters. It feels like people do overlook the war crimes, because I was joking originally about the Russians. I do feel like Ukraine's getting a little bit more extra scrutiny

on their obvious military propaganda than Russia does. We like to talk about how corrupt Ukraine is, which given it is corrupt, but the most corrupt shithole on planet Earth is actually Russia. So do you know what I'm talking about there with giving a little bit more slack to Russia than Ukraine? I'm not as sure on that, but I would agree with you that when you're looking at that situation, I mean, I don't have a dog in that fight, frankly.

Well, that's part of why I don't want to see the United States government get involved at all. Even if there's a country that i would say is more likely to be in the right i wouldn't say that the united states should go defend them or fight for them oh so you think even if a country is in the right we shouldn't assist and defend them it depends on whether it's a struggle there are certain instances where it might be necessary for us to be involved do you think zelensky is heroic for defending his homeland and supposedly choosing not to leave and continuing to fight instead of surrendering? I think, yeah.

I would think that that's probably a good thing for a foreign leader to do, to stay in their country and fight if someone's invading. Do you think we should be sending weapons to Ukraine? No, I don't think the United States government should be involved at all, to be honest. Okay, but then otherwise it literally just falls to Russia. Should we not let our allies abroad know that we have their back in any capacity? Well, Ukraine isn't a part of NATO, and that's part of why they're having this entire conflict. I don't think it's the United States' responsibility to ensure that Ukraine doesn't fall to Russia. Sure. Are you worried that any other countries will get a hint and a wink and a

nod from the U.S. withdrawing from the global world stage as much? Are you scared this might trigger other conflicts is what I'm getting at. Well, what I think is much more of a serious risk is the fact that we have spent the last 20 years involved in foreign conflicts in the Middle East and they all ended disastrously. And what we showed other countries is that we're not serious about fighting the wars that we do want to fight in the long term. Kuwait went nicely.

Because we don't get involved. I think overall the United States, even if you want to have this more hawkish approach and say we want to be taken more seriously on the foreign stage, we want to show our enemies that we're not weak, I think, A, to get the American people on board with that after you have just completely failed in your foreign policy and basically every major respect is going to be impossible, even if you think that we should or would make us look good on the foreign stage. I mean, that trust has just been completely lost. Could I ask you this? Yeah, sure. I want to ask you this one last thing. This is what like foreign policy people say that

if we didn't stand at all with Ukraine, that China would get like a wink and a nod that we're not willing to defend Taiwan. I want to ask you, what do you think about that argument? And also, should we defend or supply Taiwan with weapons? Because that's the next step. That's the next Ukraine. That's the next conflict. I think that's a really good question. So part of the reason Ukraine has been such a disaster, in my estimation, is that our White House and Joe Biden, our intelligence agencies, the war machine was basically saying they believed that Russia was going to invade. And then there were no precautions taken. So I think if we had established a no-fly zone prior to them invading, that could have deterred them from invading. That's even more hawkish than me.

Well, I'm not necessarily saying that we should do that, but I am saying – That's actually a fairly fancy war position. I don't think so because I think Russia invades anyway. And then if you knock down – if NATO calls a no-fly zone and then Russia invades and then they shoot down a jet, that's still World War III. As my understanding – Yeah, no, it absolutely could be. If we're talking about Taiwan specifically, though, I'd have to look at the situation. I don't have a set position there.

I do understand your concern that if they get Taiwan, that's a big problem for us. I looked up the best data I could possibly find on this issue. Abortion doesn't weigh particularly heavily for either party, but there's a plus five Republican percentage. So when it comes to the issue of abortion, Republicans at 28 percent view it as a top issue, Democrats at 23%, and independents at 25%. So Republicans do have the plus five. That is to say, when all of these changes are happening with abortion, it doesn't seem like it will be the biggest motivating factor, but it will be more likely to motivate Republicans than it would Democrats. It's interesting that climate change is up top there. Yeah. Did you see- Well, for Republicans, it's 8%.

Yeah, Republicans don't care. percent right but it's interesting because um did you see there was some data that came out from ok cupid and tinder that if you don't care about climate change it's a deal breaker the ladies are not going to go out with you as a matter of fact they came up with this term petro masculinity oh i love to describe the combination of um of the man who is uh you know of racist, but is anti-climate, is racist, is nationalist, and is misogynist. So if you don't think that climate change is a super big issue, then you're apparently petromasculine and this is a problem. I care about climate change as much as Barack Obama does.

I'm going to buy my beachfront property and I'm going to relax. Yeah, I liked it because the other thing too is the data didn't say that the person that you're interested in had to be interested in taking any action on climate change or doing anything. It was just if you care about it, like if you really feel deeply about it and make sure you bring your recycled bag to the market when you buy your foie gras or whatever. Does it say which direction you have to care deeply in? Because what if I care deeply about causing more climate change? I like this.

My favorite part, too, is that nobody ever remembers that fossil fuel actually resulted in the greatest decrease in global poverty the world has ever seen. And free trade. Shout out to that. But yes. Love that. One last thing, because I just had it on my seen. And free trade. Shout out to that. Love that. One last thing, because I just had it on my mind. Sure, sure.

I don't think it's enough to just be anti-communist domestically and anti-Islamist domestically. I do think that if we believe in these values, then we should try to export them and make sure that people aren't attacking those values worldwide. And that's why I stand so strongly with Taiwan. It's not enough to be anti-communist back home. You need to be anti-communist internationally. That's why I stand with South Korea, Japan. That's why we need to work closer with Australia and India.

We really need to box the Chinese in. They are the next geopolitical threat. We do not want to live in a multipolar world where China gets to call shots on an even playing field as us. They view every part of our system as negative and bad. We'd want less of that Chinese communist influence here. See, I wish people would be honest about that because I often tell people if you like the way – I said this about Hillary Clinton.

I'm like if you like the status quo, if you like that we get our shirts made in Indonesia, if you like that it's a nickel an hour to make your shoes, you got to vote for Hillary Clinton. If you have a problem with that and war and the international policies that exploit foreign countries, you'll want a Donald Trump because he's all about America first and wants manufacturing here, which will make things cost more money in the long run. But typically everyone's standard of living will go up quite a bit. I don't think it's exploiting. I think it's helping these other countries. And it's so interesting when we talk about these prices going up and how much people care. It's because like, oh, I mean, hey, we'll make it domestically and then shirts will

be a little bit more expensive. The Americans won't care. This is coming from the same people who constantly say, oh, gas is up two more dollars. Joe Biden's definitely going to lose the election because of this. So I feel like some people are having it both ways when they're talking about that, though. Do we care about higher prices? But you're making a mistake. Donald Trump was in favor of energy independence in the United States, which was lowering gas prices.

Sure. So you can complain about Joe Biden's failed policy, energy policies. The United States, the reason you know why we give $12 million to Pakistani gender studies to maintain the strength of the petrodollar. We want to give people money and say, use it, use it. It's valuable. That way they say, OK, I'll get something for this. Donald Trump was like, secure our borders, better trade deals, manufacturing back home. That would have made many things cheaper, would have made some things more expensive.

All in all, the quality of life for everybody was going up. We were seeing businesses enacting 32-hour work weeks. We were seeing paid parental leave. These things were happening organically because the economy was booming, Jim Cramer's had the best number of our lot, but numbers of our lives. But some people, they like the idea of, for whatever reason, actually, I'll put it this way. I think if you actually know what the Democrats have been doing for 30 years, along with the neocons, don't get me wrong. Things have changed in the past five years with Republicans, not too much, but a little bit. They were exporting American wealth. They were extracting from the system, as Dylan Rattigan called it, if he was referring to the same thing.

And it was resulting in American lives being worse off for it, people getting angry, and there was a backlash. So if you want to export American neoliberalism and neoconservative values, then you want to do everything you're saying, I suppose. If neoliberal is free trade and neocon is, you know, values are worldwide and not let our allies get stumped, then yeah, I'm kind of down with it. Also, one thing is that we change other countries political structure based on what we in the United States have determined would be advantageous to us. So when we go to the Middle East and say, you know what, let's turn Afghanistan into a democracy, even though it's a completely unpragmatic goal that we could never achieve, and then we waste 20 years over there, trillions of dollars, thousands of human lives, that's

what neoconservatism is. That's what its record has been. So you can talk about defending our allies, but all we have done is gotten people killed and made the situation worse over there than it needed to be. This is a really good point, though. People don't want to live in a multipolar world where China is calling the shots or at least putting pressure. An equal say as us. Yeah, and people don't want that. Americans being shipped off to foreign countries in what is typically viewed as conquest,

invading Iraq and Afghanistan for vague or incorrect reasons for the sake of expanding our power in these regions. I think we need to continue to support our allies both militarily and economically because in the zero-sum game of foreign policy, if it isn't us helping out our allies, it's them going to our enemies. What does that mean? What does that mean? It means that, hey, if we choose not to um be friendly to the philippines and when china you know acts aggressively in the south china sea and navigates through their waters with impunity that we need

to defend the philippines and let them know that we have their back okay we get that i'm talking about like you know invading iraq and afghanistan and firing missiles into syria so i i mean hey right now let's do it into a modern-day issue. Right now, if Iran is acquiring nuclear weapons, are we going to do anything about it? Why? If they do, should we do anything about it? Why should we do something about it? Yeah, why should we?

Because I don't think Iran, an autocratic Islamist regime who's threatened to wipe multiple of our allies off the map, should have nuclear weapons. What do we do about it? Well, so far it's been the JCPOA, the Iran deal, that we've been like one foot in and one foot out of. And then it's also through our proxy allies. Actually, it was Stuxnet. Yeah.

We blew up their centrifuges. And now we have our proxy allies too, like Israel, who are constantly harming Iran one way or another, trying to promote the development of their nuclear bomb. But to keep it to the modern issues, I suppose you're arguing in support of the corruption in Ukraine and the missile strikes on Syria. So it's not, I hate the corruption in Ukraine, but I think Russia is the most country on planet Earth.

Moreover, Vladimir Putin is a former KGB, actual Soviet communist. So we shouldn't have a lot of faith in this guy. And obviously, Zelensky isn't a perfect figure. But I'll tell you who's a lot further from perfect. It's Vladimir Putin, who actually poisons his political opposition and has committed war crimes in the past. And now what it looks like is continuing to do so in Ukraine. So like Syria, right?

The U.S. We kind of pulled out of there, unfortunately. We're back. Thank you, Joe Biden. As I understand, Russia rules the airspace, and that's part of the reason why Israel hasn't come as hard out against Russia as they could have. I mean, how did these jihadis and these rebels end up with NATO-backed weapons? In Afghanistan? In Syria.

In Syria? Because the West. Some of the rebel groups originally and the west wanted isis to destabilize syria because we wanted to build a gas pipeline we wanted to get rid of bashar al-assad because we wanted to build a gas pipeline there are a few reasons we wanted to get rid of well the main reason is that in 2009 the cia wanted to invade because we were trying to build a pipeline from qatar through syria and turkey into europe to offset the gas prime gas monopoly, which goes through Ukraine.

Subsequently, now we're involved in a conflict in that country because, well, surprise, surprise, Joe Biden, once he gets put in charge, his son happens to get a job, become a director for a gas company in Ukraine. All of this is tied together. We wanted to change regime change in Syria because they were a Russian ally, and everything else comes after that. That's the core issue there. But do you know why we wanted regime change because they're Russian allies? Because when we said we want to build a gas pipeline to offset the Russian gas monopoly with Gazprom, Bashar al-Assad told the United States, allowing you to do that would upset our ally, Russia. This was reported in The Guardian back in, like, 2012. The U.S. wanted to invade.

Instead, a civil war breaks out. The rebels are given NATO-backed weapons and a truck from Detroit with some guy's phone number on it, which created a huge crisis for this guy's poor company. And it was destabilizing the entire region, was the West basically being like, Europe deserves cheap gas. Now, if you like the idea of Europe having cheaper gas

because Russia is gripping them by the balls, then just be honest about it that the U.S. is willing to destroy entire regions and create chaos in Ukraine and Syria for the sake of their allies. If you like your wealth, just admit it. I think it's much bigger than just gas going through Syria. I think Syria has been become a proxy essentially for Iran. And that's why we're fighting there. Multiple countries are fighting on multiple sides. This is one of the most complicated conflicts in the Middle East. But they're Iranian proxies, and we don't want Iranian proxies to win out in Syria next to our other allies.

And we don't want Iran to continue to spread their influence. Same thing is going on in Yemen with the Houthi rebels attacking our other allies through the Saudis. The Saudis are backing the— And us having a blockade up that starved 84,000 children to death. Sure. Again, we haven't acted properly in all these cases, and there have been consequences to our actions. But I feel like if we're overlooking constantly the misdeeds of our enemies,

who are much greater and larger than ours, then we're really missing the point. Have they starved 85,000 children to death? Who? Our enemies? So, no, don't get me wrong. The Houthi rebels are terrible. Our enemies have done worse. Yeah.

And the Houthi, they're all, yeah, they're all Islamist terrorists. So then we should get involved and have the United States-backed blockade that has literally starved tens of thousands of children to death stand, even after Joe Biden says we're not going to be involved in this conflict anymore, because some people in that region also did bad things. It's a zero-sum game. It either comes down to, do we want them to be in our sphere of influence or the Iranian anymore because some people in that region also did bad things it's a zero-sum game it either comes down to do we want them to be in our sphere of influence or the rate iranian and sir uh iranian

and russian and if they if iranians and russians and chinese continue to exert their influence and expand this is just going to come to bite us back in the ass further down the line yeah i mean this is the unit this all has to do with the unipolar world order that the united states currently has and i think that's what conservatives probably should conserve and we need to do with the unipolar world order that the United States currently has. And I think that's what conservatives probably should conserve. And we need to do that by continuing to assist and support our allies in the zero-sum game of geopolitics. If they're not with us, they're going to our enemies. Well, I don't believe in child sacrifice, even in the name of supporting our allies.

Oh, child sacrifice. Come on. What is tens of thousands of children dying, starving to death so that your geopolitical goal is going to occur? And we're supporting one side. The conflict is happening. Right now, if we didn't support Ukraine, the conflict would still be happening, and the Russians are still going to be massacring people. So I'll tell you, the Russians have killed kids, and they've also killed the Tussauds.

But the United States is funding and backing the blockade that is starving the children. That's my point. If we weren't doing that, those children would not be starving to death. I don't want to go in circles because we've said that several times. My question is, you said the conflict would still be happening in ukraine how come there was no conflict in ukraine when trump was president oh i mean because putin was scared of trump in my opinion yeah yeah i think he like leaders did not were not able to predict what trump would do i think on the world stage people do not respect trump and i mean do not respect biden at all as i

understand joe biden just had his phone called, ignored by Mohammed bin Salman, the current leader of Saudi Arabia. Trump would not have allowed that to happen. The first place that Trump visited was Saudi Arabia. If they did anything like that, you know Trump is freaking out on Twitter or something, or anything, and he's holding them to account.

Saudi money is the most influential money in D.C. Trump would not let that stuff slide. If Trump was in office right now, I think we'd have more of our allies on a stranglehold. But I'm also conflicted because the Saudis have now become political. The Saudis chose not to pump oil to screw Biden over. I don't want to jump around too much. Think about that. Under Donald Trump, we didn't have the conflict in Ukraine. Putin was scared of him. I agree with that. I also think Donald Trump was actually, he was crushing ISIS. He didn't care

about Syria. He was like, get rid of ISIS, whatever. But, you know, the democratic establishment, the neocons and the neolibs were like, let ISIS destabilize Assad's regime. And then, you know, we can come and pick up the pieces or leave him in rubble as we build. Under Trump, our border was more secure, our economy was way better, and there was less war. Would you consider Trump a neocon? No. It's interesting because his chief of staff, I forgot exactly who it was, but he's been called the neocon. He had John Bolton, who was the neocon. He was surrounded by a bunch of really awful people.

Well, he wasn't surrounded by, he appointed. Yes, yes, yes, absolutely. And then he also was a big proponent of NATO. Again, he sounded anti-NATO, but what he was really saying was everybody should increase their budget to like the percent of gdp that they should be paying the united states he was he was a close supporter of japan and for the purposes of taiwan stood very strong with israel so again this could be neocon ish though it's not that's all it's it's it's america first populism and and and he's standing with nato israel and japan Japan is America first populism under Trump. Just we wouldn't expect someone who's an America first populist to walk in and be like, as of today, there's no NATO anymore.

He went to them and said, why are we paying your bills? All these people want to come out and brag about their. Oh, Europe's got all this health care. And it's like, how much do do we cover there? Like, how many troops do we have in Germany? Thirty thousand. Some ridiculous. Is it 30?

I think it's more some ridiculous number we're footing the bills for that trump comes and says you got to pay us if you want this service because he was focused on america first i think that might be the cost of the unipolar world though and if that's the cost to pay the cost of uh being a unipower the world's sole superpower that's why we have eight aircraft carriers in other countries. It wasn't though. He got Europeans to pay. He got them to pay their dues to NATO. And I'd argue that he was a neocon because of things like that. Increasing military funding

and also sending more support to our... But he was anti-war. He's anti-war through strength and that's what I consider neocons to be. He got people to pay their bills. He increased military funding and he also supported our allies militarily more and i'd consider that and the neocons and the neolibs wanted to invade in the middle east they liked isis destabilizing the region instead trump had no new wars he under his administration got the

abraham accords unprecedented peace in the middle east there was no conflict with ukraine the region was starting to stabilize the economy united states was substantially better than it ever been but the dude just couldn't shut up to save his own president his own his own you know second term he couldn't save those two congress those two senate seats in georgia either and had to give back the senate to joe biden which i feel like is an overlooked sin that donald trump committed again this was at the time with uh a lot of the election fraud stuff was just bubbling yeah he convinced people not to vote it was It was, I can't believe how remarkably stupid that was. Yeah, and now he's campaigning right now around the country

to continue supporting candidates who will only say that the election was stolen. And if you back off that a little bit, like Mo Brooks did, he'll send the endorsement too. Well, the conservatives shouldn't keep focusing on Trump as the main guy. DeSantis. You know, I think DeSantis is great. I would totally throw support behind DeSantis. I think he's been doing great things in Florida.

And I think that, you know, his leadership for the rest of the country would be incredibly effective. Parents all across the state of Florida support him. His anti-grooming bill, you know, as his press secretary coined it, is wildly popular across the country with parents as well. It is, but it's not even an anti-grooming bill. It's just like a minor restriction on some grades. Yeah, I mean what it says is that teachers in grades K through 12 cannot broach topics. Yeah, K through 3, exactly. Cannot broach topics of sexual orientation.

Cannot provide classroom instruction on gender identity and orientation. It says that they can't bring it up. It says they can't have classroom instruction, not that they can't bring it up. They're allowed to bring it up. They're allowed to discuss it. Teachers are allowed to go to children in certain circumstances that are four or five years old

and talk to them all about orientation and identity. They can't, the bill specifically says classroom instruction, which is a very specific way of talking about how you go about the class, like how you go about teaching, because they could say, I'm not instructing the kids on anything. I simply told about what me and my boyfriend do. And that's allowed. And if a child goes to a teacher and says, I have questions about something, the teacher is still allowed to talk to him about it. So the bill is for many conservatives, a half measure, but the left

has framed it so dramatically as don't say gay that many conservatives are treating it like it actually does something that they would like, when in reality it's like, oh yeah, some grades won't have curriculum, but the teachers can still talk about it. Well, anyway, parents are in favor of it across the country

and I think that it does put... It prevents them from keeping secrets. And it does say that if children ask about things, that they should tell their parents. Well, it doesn't say that. It says they can't tell the students. Teachers can't tell students to withhold information, but they don't need to tell the kids to talk to their parents. No, but it says that the teachers are supposed to tell the parents. About mental, physical, mental, medical, or physical issues. Right.

But if a child goes to the teacher and says, what's trans mean? The teacher can say whatever they want and tell no one. So it's not this bill that, it's not an anti-grooming bill. As I understand critical race theory, a core tenant of critical race theory is talking about like lived experiences. And although that evidence might show otherwise, that your lived experiences are more valuable than anything else. And what I was trying to get at here is that I had a gay teacher once, it was in fifth grade. As I remember, he was a nice teacher, he used to give out candy and everything. 10 years later, it came out and it was like found that he was actually a sexual predator and touching kids.

And that's my whole story. Critical race theory, lived experiences. That's the only thing I have to contribute to the anti-grooming bill. Let's go to Super Chats. On that note. Yes. If you haven't already, smash that like button. Subscribe to this channel.

Share the show with your friends. Smash that like button. We're going to have a really fun members-only segment coming up around 11 or so p.m tonight so become a member at timcast.com if you want to watch and we will read your super chats and what did i say smash the like button all right let's see what we got here we got a whole bunch of super chats everybody's arguing we're arguing cygnus says thanks for keeping honest journalism alive tim been a follower since 2019 you seem to be the most reliable source of mainstream political global news today. Well, I try my best. I really do appreciate it.

I get things wrong because I can only know what people are reporting and what we can fact check. And often mainstream press gets things wrong. Can I just say, it says a school district may not encourage classroom discussion about sexual orientation or gender identity in primary grade levels. Is that the actual bill? Yes. The actual bill

says classroom instruction. A school district may not encourage classroom discussion about sexual orientation or gender identity in primary grade levels or in a matter that is not age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students. Where are you reading that from? I'm reading that from page 3 of the Parental Rights in Education Bill. And so that's talking about school districts providing encouragement, not what teachers

can or can't do individually. It doesn't say that, but it also says that parents can bring action against a school district. But it can only, it can't, I mean, can it say teachers can and cannot say X? I think it, I don't know that that's. It literally says classroom instruction. It prohibits classrooms. That's what I just said.

But you're reading a different passage from it. May not encourage classroom discussion. School districts may not. That means like a superintendent putting out a message on a curriculum that's not talking about a teacher literally walking up to a group of girls at recess and saying, do you guys want to know what trans is? Because it doesn't prohibit that. That's still allowed. What it does stop them from doing is saying, don't tell your parents.

They can't do that. Yeah, they're not allowed to keep any secrets, which is different. They are allowed to keep secrets. They just can't tell the kids to keep secrets.

So if a kid asks the teacher, what does it mean to be gay? The teacher can tell them. The word teacher does not appear in the bill. Right, because it says school employees in the classroom or whatever.

Right. So it specifically says classroom instruction for kindergarten to third grade. It doesn't say school. It doesn't say employee isn't in the bill either. What are you talking about? I don't know if you're reading the right bill. I'm reading the Florida Parental Rights and Education Bill. The final one.

The Florida Senate SB 1834. I don't know. I'm pretty sure you're reading something wrong. Really? Yeah. Control F for classroom instruction and read the passage. Because initially, earlier versions of the bill said pre-K, and they actually changed it to kindergarten.

But I'll keep reading while you search. Okay. All right. Chris Larson says, Hey, Tim, been a daily listener since hearing you on Joe Rogan and love the work you do. What do you think? What do you think about if DeSantis wins the primary? So Trump runs independent, thus splitting the Republican votes. I don't think they would do that. I think it's possible that Trump runs with DeSantis gets one more term and

then DeSantis runs as his VP as being the VP. He then runs for president and gets two terms. But it's possible. I honestly don't know for sure. Trump will have to allow DeSantis, or he'll have to wait his turn. Like, if Trump runs, I think DeSantis' political calculations has to be don't. All right, what do we got here? Tim Chrysler says, You should check out the S2 Underground YouTube channel titled Fifth Generation Warfare.

Might connect some dots for you and your crew. We actually get accused of talking about fourth and fifth generational warfare too much, but definitely interested in checking that out. All right. Hefty Jongle says, hey, Shimcast and crew, it's my birthday. Can I get a shout out, fellas? Have a nice night. From the Shimcast crew here over at Shimcast Central, we want to wish you a happy, happy birthday and another wonderful year of life. Hopefully many more than that.

Sammy Kin says, why do people buy $19.99 Super Chats and not $20? Is there an unspoken rule that you shouldn't buy a $20 Super Chat? If you buy a Super Chat and it has a cent instead of a full dollar amount, you are using an iPhone. This, in my opinion, is likely done by Google to differentiate who is using Android and who is using iPhone because the Android app does full dollar increments and iPhone drops it by one penny. Although I find that strange because with the insane amounts of people who use iPhone, they're seriously losing a lot of money because pennies add up. And if there's a million iPhone users who send one super chat, you're talking about thousands.

What is that? A million divided by 100. So you're looking at 10 grand. But that seems to be why they do it. I don't know exactly why they do it, but that seems to be the differentiating factor. If you're on a computer or Android phone, then it is full dollar increments. Hunter Biden's crack pipe says, those aren't stink bugs, they're NSA spying drones.

Snowden was right. Little did we know. My friends, there is an app called Akinator. A-K-I-N-A-T-O-R. And what you do is, it says think of a character, real or fake, and I'll guess who it is by asking questions. It's fun.

And so you'll think of somebody like, we did Seamus. And it was like, is your person a YouTuber? And we're like, yes. And it's like is your person a youtuber and we're like yes and it's like is he animated and we're like no he's not animated and then it's like no we said he was we said he was animated right no no we're talking about you personally to see if you would come up but ultimately it said after 30 questions it was like you're thinking of freedom tunes and we're like wow but it it doesn't ask anything overtly specific and and so then i ended up doing hunter biden the last question this is hilarious is like does he scam people and i put yes and then it's like you're thinking of hunter biden and it shows a picture of him in bed with a crack

pipe in his mouth and i'm just like wow that's the photo they're using all right then i think i think beneath the censorship surface people really don't like the establishment. Dude, I just about died because we were doing that at breakfast, just trying to figure out who it would guess and people we know. And it was very, very interesting to see who was in that system. I would recommend you all play with it. It's a lot of fun. Miss Normus, first name Dixie, says, Tim and crew, please keep the town of Pembroke

GA in your prayers this evening. A bad tornado tore through this afternoon, leaving many injured. Thank you. Well, sad to hear it, man. Sad to hear it. All right. Mike S. says, what millennial kid did not want to be one of the Ninja Turtles? I was legit Michelangelo for several

Halloweens. I am glad my parents didn't actually surgically turn me into a turtle. I didn't want to be a ninja turtle. I wanted to be an X-Man. I was like, yeah. And I was like, you know, Cyclops could shoot laser beams out of his eyes. Wolverine, he was super cool. Because he could, you know, eat claws and shh, shh, shh.

I wanted to be Jem. Jem from Jem and the Holograms. Oh, wow. Yeah. Jem. I wanted to be able to go Super Saiyan. I didn't want to be one of the Jem. I wanted to be able to go Super Saiyan. I didn't want to be one of the characters. I just wanted to be able to go Super Saiyan.

Have the abilities. I've tried to. What I liked about Dragon Ball Z is that they at least entertain the possibility of humans being able to be super powerful. And I like characters who can earn their abilities, not just have them. So that's why I like Batman.

That's why I like Dragon Ball Z, because Krillin, the strongest human being on the planet, and then he's all chill about it, but he's just ridiculously powerful, and he could fly. Well, Tim, I saw a tweet that said Batman's superpower is white privilege, so get rekt. That's actually true.

Oh, whoa. Wouldn't it have been the money? Yo, that's a really good idea. But that's only because he had white privilege. That's actually a good idea for a bit, or a comic comic it's a guy who uses white privilege as a superpower oh my gosh but he does well that's how they see themselves they say i'm using my white privilege to help marginalized people maybe you should make a comment a cartoon about it all right ryan grisaf says check the dates elon pushed for the buy on March 14th. That's more than a week before he polled people. He definitely has some ideas and plans coming.

I'd love to see it. You know, the fact that he called the Babylon Bee guys was indicative of something. Muad says, last time Libby was here, she said by her standards, she didn't think we've ever had a good president. Does she still feel that way? A good president? Not even Woodrow Wilson? I think I've been reading a little about LBJ lately.

I think he's sort of interesting. But I got to say I liked Trump. All right. Kevin Reed says, me and my wife watch your show every night. She would love if you shared to the chat Isaiah chapter 24, verse 1 through 23. Keep up the good work. Do you know what that is? Wait, can you repeat that?

Isaiah chapter 24, verse 1 through 23. No, but I can Google it. Google it. We'll see what that's all about. Isaiah. Wait, Isaiah. I could pull it up right here on my phone. While you guys are pulling it up, let's read more.

Let's see. So this is the tweet I mentioned earlier. This is, It's not a platform because liberals have platforms. Far from it. Those platforms were all conservative. Ones the left wormed into and called theirs. Commies don't have ideas, don't create.

They take, they conquer things that work to call them their own retroactively. Well, when Reddit was first started, one of the default subreddits was atheism. So it wasn't overtly conservative, but it was very civil libertarian at the very least. So very meritocratic. I think jailbait was also subreddit, so definitely libertarian leaning. That wasn't a default, though. It wasn't a default? Yeah, atheism so when you would go to reddit

it would show you as like one of their main forums atheism and people were like why you know like people genuinely were just like it would be the same as if they had a Christianity subreddit as a default it's like a religious like let people have their community for sure but the default should be like pics videos

news it didn't even have news there was no news default that was the weirdest thing like a religious, like let people have their community for sure, but the default should be like pics, videos, news. It didn't even have news. There was no news default. That was the weirdest thing. I don't think they have defaults now. They just have like all or something. Also, when people say it was conservative, I think it's just because the definition of conservative has changed so rapidly over the past 10, 15 years.

Okay, did you see that super chat about my pencil? Which one? What did they say? It says lobby, which my... Jack Hutler says lobby. My autocorrect does that too. Lobby is holding my favorite pencil, Blackwing 602. That's correct.

Lobby. I love this pencil. I love it. Who's this sexist saying Enterprise is better than Voyager? It's a liar. Who said that? Enterprise is better. Oh, right there.

Half the pressure, twice the speed. I... Man. Should we say their name? Voyager. Say his name. Oh, Scroats McGoat says Enterprise is better than Voyager. Fight me.

See, my problem with Voyager is that... It's just not even true. Who was it who pointed this out? Voyager is the first female captain. I pointed that out. First female captain, and it's a show about her getting lost. The whole series is they get lost, and they're trying to get back home for all

seven seasons. Also, they had such antagonistic characters. I much prefer the characters that work together and they face conflict together instead of constantly being at each other's throats. Voyager's alright though. Enterprise, it's not bad. It's just prequels.

It's boring. You know what the thing is? You know, like, you know what its future is. You know where it's going. So who cares? Like, it's the, yeah. And it was kind of the first time that Star Trek decided it was going to try to be something other than Star Trek. They were trying to, like, update it and bring it into the 2000s. Wait, wait, hold on.

Ghost Crusader says, hey, Tim, did you see the teaser trailer for Picard season three? Yes, they released the season three teaser a year before they released season three. Well, season two isn't over yet. I stopped watching season two anyway. Yeah, I don't watch it. I was like doing a whole arc, a whole season based on one Q plot. Yeah. I'm just like. Also, Q doesn't really.

Yeah. They made him like evil. Yeah, they'm just like... Also, Q doesn't really... Yeah. He doesn't really act like Q. They made him like evil. Yeah, they made him kind of not... Nobody's having any fun on that show. That's the problem. Star Trek has a lot of fun. They hate fun.

Remember, like, lefties hate fun. The lefties hate fun. They can't write anything fun. Q gets... His power is taken away from him. And then he's like, I don't want to live anymore. And then he ends up redeeming himself.

So they give him his powers back. And then he ends up redeeming himself so they give him his powers back and he teleports to the Enterprise Bridge with a sombrero and maracas with the mariachi band playing.

It's great. And now what they're doing is he's like, it's time for penance, Picard. And I'm like, what is this? And then he sends him

to a universe where humans are all racist and I'm just like... Come on. Can we just be done with this? It's so dumb. Let's have something fun, hopeful, energetic, interesting

about the future of humanity that doesn't suck. But it's like we can only envision ourselves as a massive suck fest. You know, we hate life. We hate humanity. We should make a show called Space Travel. We hate our innovations. And it'll be about the Galactic Republic.

What if it's like the Galactic Monarchy? They have space travel, but they just revert back to monarchy and everyone decides that that's going to be the thing. In the year 2300s, everyone realizes monarchy is the perfect form of government. It's funny because these shows are very Hegelian. The idea is they've finally achieved the perfect political system and ended history. But it's just you have one world government. I think it would be interesting if you had a sci-fi series

where the world was extremely technologically developed, but people had their own ideas and not everyone was on the exact same page ideologically. That would be interesting. Yeah. But instead it's like, no, we're all on the same team, and we believe this, and it's just boring. All right.

Malcolm Flex says, Banned for the third time on twitter only gained 3k in my alt profiles from this stint gonna have to ask elon to unban all three of my accounts good luck you know wait do you see the one about how there should be indie artists that daily wire should bring up india santa says daily wire should bring an independent artist like tom mcdonald adam chelen snow and actors that's been blacklisted by Hollywood. They are. I can't say too much. We're going to be in Nashville next week hanging out at the Daily Wire headquarters.

It's going to be a whole lot of fun. But we've been talking to them about quite a bit because obviously we're doing cultural stuff too. A lot of our stuff is similar but different. They're doing traditional Hollywood approach. I think they're now trying to do a social media thing. We've been way more social media. I announced earlier that we're going to be doing a $100,000 ad buy for Chicken City. Oh, that's awesome. And it was funny because people got mad at me for it.

A lot of people laughed. And I was like, if you don't understand why we would do something like that, then you don't understand culture. Or Chicken City, obviously. Chicken Culture. Which is pretty amazing. First, I will say, Chicken City is our second highest grossing show because we launched Chicken Party. I got to see the Chicken Party today.

Whenever there's $100 in Super Chats, it triggers a Chicken Party with lights and dance music. Now, I'm going to break it down for people who don't understand why we would spend so much money promoting Chicken Party. And I'm just going to come out and say it. Promoting, buying a commercial that is completely insane and say it promoting buying a commercial that is

completely insane and putting it on tv is marketing for the entire company because people will say what did i just watch it's like quiznos that's what i said when i saw chicken party exactly quiznos did a commercial with these weird things singing you remember that weird commercial yeah it's like we like to party oh yeah and they teach that in marketing classes at colleges they were like this was one of the most successful campaigns because it was so insane they used to do ads where there was like a picture of a woman on a swing with three legs they would do things to try and make you go what and you you your brain would be shocked by it you'd remember it we're not just willy-nilly doing things the point of Chicken City

is to make commercials that actually promote the entirety of the company and the weird cultural stuff we're doing while trying to be just silly, fun,

and just not boring, stodgy garbage. Plus, I gotta bounce with you guys. Chicken City is wildly successful. It's really cool. Like, several hundred dollars per day

generated from people just wanting to see the chicken party. So, it's working. Really? Several hundred dollars a day from people who just want to see the chicken party. So it's working. Really? Several hundred dollars a day from people who just want to see chicken parties? Yeah, I think we did 300 bucks the other day.

I should tune in more. Yeah. Some more chicken parties. We're going to get a chicken coop, dude. We're still refining the system because the way it works right now is – This is more than animation makes on YouTube, bro. It's ridiculous. Whenever a hundred dollars – there's a meter.

And whenever a hundred dollars reaches, the meter resets, and that triggers, in the code, it basically, I'll give you the very simplified version. There is, every five minutes, the computer checks, does X equal, you know,

does X increment plus one? If the answer is yes, chicken party plays, but only on the fives. So 0, 5, 10, 15, 20, 25. So the problem we're facing is that people will pay $100 at like 9.01 a.m., and it's got to wait four minutes until the check runs. So we don't have a system that can – so what we're going to do is we're going to put Chicken Party activated, like a timer showing you on the fives that Chicken Party will play.

But people are – someone gave us $75 today because they were like, eh, let's see the Chicken Party, and they paid it. People love seeing the chickens and the lights and the – That's because it's cool. And they love supporting Timcast. Well, ultimately, the reason we do stuff like Chicken City, we're going to buy billboards. Remember we talked about doing Our Pill our pillow you guys remember that we we are going to be creating culture and the point is i think about elon musk buying twitter and i've always asked this i tweeted elon musk a while ago why didn't you build an iron man suit yet and he tweeted at me building starship and i was like

that that is acceptable i was like that's at least a good reason. Why aren't more people with access and privilege doing anything interesting? And so my issue is like, I want to make this company something that is like a roguish company that is screwing with the system, that is culture jamming, that is just shaking things up a little bit and inspiring people to be active and to make things more fun. That's one thing that I really like is that you're not doing this with an ideological brand there's no political you know i mean freedom theory behind freedom is not political freedom is like you know a human right a natural right um but i like that it's really about the aesthetics it's about fun it's about you about enjoying the content, enjoying the imaginative, creative, curious process that goes into developing that kind of stuff.

I think that that's what we need more of. I think we need so much more of that. And we used to have more of that. And it got completely co-opted by ideologues. It's time to just break out of that. It doesn't matter what your political perspective is. Have fun. Create stuff. Build things. I like what the Daily

Wire is doing, for sure. Me too. The Jeremy's Razors commercial. Let's read more. We got Captain Apathy says, Tim, the left is countering the groomer narrative with talking about the very strange HB 233 in Tennessee, the home state of the Daily Wire. I don't know what that is. Do you guys want to look that up?

Victor Rodriguez says, Mr. Freeze's quote at the end, I failed you. I wish there were another way for me to say it. I cannot, I can only beg your forgiveness and pray you hear me somehow someplace, someplace where a warm hand waits for mine. Dude, that I feel like they could redo it again. So I, I, the episode is still a little campy for what it is. But it was like one of the first times they're like, hey, let's give a villain like a tragic backstory and not make him just this like, you know, like Joker's crazy. He's cool. But the Joker movie was incredible because they made him this like in the movie joker you kind of understood why he was pissed off that you guys have seen joker right the last joke when he's sitting on stage with robert de niro you get what you effing deserve i was just like oh my god like that movie was amazing

i love that tim i wanted to ask you i know i didn't send a super chat but on this idea of building culture because i know you guys focus on it a lot. You guys say that at the same time as you say, like, leave the cities. And I'm a Brooklynite right now. Every inch of Brooklyn in Manhattan is iconic. Do you guys feel like you might be missing out on helping build or develop culture by not being in the city or different cities? Like New York City, that's, you know, fashion capital of the world, Broadway, everything everything that's 20 years ago you don't think still every inch of manhattan's iconic you don't think you could have more cultural impact there no it's too you're too restricted you can't

be loud it's like you know casey and i said that a lot with new york and he broke the law a lot yeah he was flying drones around then like getting in trouble he was like driving in cars he was snowboarding in the street a lot of what he was doing yeah if you want to take those risks i suppose but uh you can't play music like you got to find a band space you can't play new york city is like the cultural capital of earth as far as i see it where would be the cultural capital i think we are i think we are resorting i think we're still number one i don't i think you're wrong i think we are city being the cultural capital of the world yeah I think we are. I think we are resorting. I think we're still number one. No, I think you're wrong. I think we are. About New York City

being the cultural capital of the world? Yeah, I do think that. I think it has been and I don't think that there is one at this point. I do think we are resorting. But there isn't a place, like when you get out of college,

you know, and you want to go do something new, I don't know why you would go to New York at this point. It doesn't have the same kind of offering as it did even 20 years ago. Wall Street, biggest news companies, Broadway. Yeah, you're talking about a whole bunch of –

This is all influential. No, this is all culture. You're talking about a whole lot of things that are irrelevant. Okay, okay, okay. Wall Street has not been physically relevant for 20 years. That's correct. Their money is – no, of course it is. But the money isn't on Wall Street.

The money is on the internet. There is a guy who – There is a guy. No one is at Wall Street, bro. No one's there. Okay. No one is physically there. They're not there, dude.

They're all at their houses. There's a guy. Yeah, they're all in houses and apartments all over the country. There's a guy who has crazy hair who's there

at the stock exchange just so that people can take pictures of him when stock stories happen because there's nobody there. Nobody goes there anymore. I don't know. I think we might be overlooking

the cultural significance of the greatest city on earth but they did they did fashion week on planet earth there's everything listen they did fashion week online right i can see all the fashion weeks now i don't have to like wait around for new york's fashion week i can see all of them online even trump tower is in new york city for a reason but we can there's a trump tower in dc there's a few of but we can move on. There's a Trump Tower in D.C. There's a few in Chicago, right? We're not going to have the greatest city on the planet. Listen, I love New York as much as the next person, but I think you're completely wrong about the cultural stake it has in the country at this point.

Maybe not as much as the next person. Rent is $3,000 to $4,000. Rent is very expensive everywhere, but also in New York City. It is higher in New York City, but it's the cost of living. This is my pitch to New York City. Right now, my age group, there are twice as many females and there are males in new york city moreover among the males among the males there's a larger homosexual population than the females so i'm telling you it is a prime time to be a young man in new york city yeah you might be

missing out if you want to lick the boot of woke people i don't like no boot of poor bro they they they came out with vax mandates and they had exemptions for themselves. It is a corrupt city full of just garbage policies. These are the people who vote for the Democrats

who appoint the police and then they protest the people they voted for. That's correct. It's absolutely psychotic. It is psychotic. It is really expensive. Look, New York and L.A.

are places you go after you've already established yourself. And the biggest mistake people make, I've seen in my whole life, is I'm going to move to the big city to succeed. And it's like, why? So you can be a bootlicking intern at a company? The best thing to do if you want to create art and you want to do things that are fun is get a bunch of your friends, pick a town, and all move there together. Get cheap places. Do stuff for fun.

Have a band. Start a coffee shop. Enjoy yourself. Like relax. Spend your money where it counts. You don't have to do the constant hustle that's required in New York where you only see your friends on Monday nights when they're off their restaurant jobs. Go hustle, work hard, and achieve in New York City. The world is yours in New York City.

You can make it there. You can make it anywhere. Thanks, Liza Minnelli. She's aging out too. But you look at all of the big YouTubers and all the top personalities and it's like people start YouTube channels from their basement in rural areas now

and they become wealthy. We actually, I started in New York City and left because it was stagnant and it was a waste of money. Come back, Tim. You could do great things here with the culture. The fact that I'm still there. You're an ambassador now.

We're doing so much more having left New York City. The fact that I'm still there is just cultural lag. Maybe we could start a TimCast branch in Brooklyn. New York is a mistake. And that's why you see half a million people flee the city over COVID. The people who have remained, it's just like, you know what New York City is? People chasing after someone else's dream instead of going and making their own thing. For the record, too, I don't think New York is lefty.

I think it is liberal and firmly liberal. We did elect a Democrat. We always elect Democrats now. But we did elect Mayor Eric Adams, who was a former NYPD officer. And he's backtracked on everything. Well, the left hates him, and he's still harsh towards the left. New York is insane people voting for insane people and complaining about the insane people who run the city. Cultural capital of Earth.

Eric Adams just fired one of – or was it a lawyer who worked for the city because she was like, you said masks would come off kids. And then he was like, yeah, well, I don't care, so screw you. Like, dude, these people keep voting for the same thing thing and then they protest it and then vote for the same thing it's laughably bad new york city is overly expensive it smells like sour milk people complain about what they vote for there was a day 10 years ago it smelled like it smelled like syrup oh yeah it was a really nice day most of the time it just smells like pot all right we gotta read more super chats let's see we got hunter b. Hunter Biden's Crack Pipe says, I believe in pro-choice.

Men and women both choose to have sex or not. Birth control or not. Then nine months later, mom can choose to keep or give up for adoption. Man can choose to take responsibility or not. Fair for both sexes. Not fair for the child, maybe. I mean, what's the alternative?

Killing it? I guess so. No, no. There's no perfect solution. We're just tragedy. I mean, I think not killing it Killing it? I guess so. No, no. There's no perfect solution. We're just tragedy. I mean, I think not killing it is better for the child in every capacity. It's weird that I see these people and they're like, poor kids would be better off being aborted.

And it's like you're telling people you wish they were dead. You'd prefer them dead. Yeah, I wouldn't go that far, but it's a bad situation. I mean, the thing about life is that every life is an opportunity to experience God's grace. And that makes it worth it, whether it's five minutes or 400 years. Amen. All right.

Let's grab some more superchats. Grofty says, Buck, Grofty has been greatly supporting Chicken City. When you give five dollars on Chicken City, treats fall down from the sky egg and the chickens all run. And it's funny when they like stare at it because they know food comes from there, but they don't know why or when. It's just like Chicken Truman Show. Having no idea who's watching these chickens, it's just hilarious. Chicken Party is fantastic, though. We love Chicken Party.

All right. Democratic Detox says, y'all not taking our DeSantis. Forget about it. Can you imagine being in Florida? It's like, please don't leave, man. Don't run for president. Didn't he win by a small margin against Andrew Gillum? Or am I talking about a different race?

And he had a whole single right after. Wasn't Andrew Gillum like a crackhead in a hotel room? He came out after. But he lost by five-figure votes. I remember that crackhead story. It was a very small. So, I mean, it's crazy how DeSantis had this come up really

because if he lost that race by those few votes yeah this would have happened yeah it's true when I was in Florida I was talking to Floridians like I was talking to

somebody who was like do you think DeSantis should be president and they were like no he should stay here and I was like alright alright Nicole Salcido says

if a mom shoots through a wall on purpose to kill her child she goes to jail what's the difference with the baby being in utero it's a mom shoots through a wall on purpose to kill her child, she goes to jail. What's the difference with the baby being in utero? It's the same child behind a wall. The child's location shouldn't matter.

That's the interesting thing. The weirdest thing about this is like if a woman is eight months pregnant and she's like, oh, no, I'm giving birth prematurely and the baby would survive. Then what does she do? Does she run to Planned Parenthood and say, quick, kill it before it comes out? And it's legal? Apparently it is. In some states.

Yeah. And then it's like, oh no, I gave birth. It's alive now. Is that really the system that we're supposed to be living in? That's a horror show. But this is what's happening

with unrestricted abortion. The other thing too is there was for a long, a conversation about viability. And the conversation was about if the child would be viable outside of the mother's body. And if it was, then abortion was not acceptable. Which is around 23 weeks, if I'm not mistaken. That's like the viability 50% outside of the womb, I believe. It keeps getting lower and lower.

I think there was like 21 weeks. We've got to read only a couple more. So smash that like button if you haven't already. Jay Rickards says, Tim is missing the point. I wish everyone would stay in New York and stop moving to Florida, except Libby can come. That's it. Thanks. What about me? What? I appreciate it.

You're going to go to Florida and trash it and talk about how great New York is. In 50 years I'll be in Florida, but not now. 50 years. If they let you. Good luck finding real estate there. GC says, I'm pro-life, but I think we should not trust politicians to create laws banning medical procedures or care. Some abortions are necessary to save the life of the mother. Look up ectopic pregnancy.

So this is what I was getting into earlier. Ectopic pregnancies are classified by WebMD, Mayo Clinic, and even Planned Parenthood. They're not referred to as abortions. So it's a situation where you're attempting a procedure, or not just attempting, but performing a procedure, that will result in the death of the unborn child to save the mother, but the intention is not to go in there and kill the unborn child. No, I mean, the other thing, too, is if you let an ectopic pregnancy progress, it will kill the child and the mother. Yes, yes, exactly.

It will kill everyone. Generally, yeah. It will be a disaster. M. Sheba says, keep talking culture, but what happened to the card game that you were working on? Let's work on it, man. Let's get it pumped out. Yes, we will, and the issue is we need someone who knows how to make games. Wait, do you know those guys who do the...

It wasn't playtesting. It was that we started with a complex game, and then it was very, very complex. It was a turn-based strategy game. We decided to make a simplified version that was a party game, but we're trying to figure out... The game took too long.

I've played the simplified version. We did this a couple months ago. I thought it was a lot of fun. I did think we got it to a good place. But I know that a lot more playtesting is required than just me enjoying it. But I feel good about the thing. Mostly the point of the game is just so that there's going to be cards of people you know and love. So I was like, let's just make a really, really simple, really fast game

where it's funny that you're having Alexlex jones trying to get you know uh big red the feminist canceled off the internet or something and then you're having you know that's you know what we should do that's fun the cards we should have the uh as soon as someone gets banned from the internet we stop printing their card and so if you had that card it's extra rare yeah all right everybody if you have that and i like it we will if you haven't already smash the like button subscribe to this channel Share the show with your friends. We are going to start recording that members only podcast, which will be up at Timcast.com. So sign up there if you want to watch it.

It'll be up around 11 or so p.m. You can follow the show at Timcast IRL. You can follow me at Timcast. Elad, do you want to shout anything out? Hey, everybody. I hope you guys enjoyed the show. You could find some of my work is on TimCast. Also, I have a YouTube channel.

It's called Barely Informed with a Lot. I do on-the-ground reporting. I do the same thing for Tim. I'll be responding to comments if you guys want to go check that out. I have an interesting video polling Trump supporters if they support Ukraine or not. Again, I'll be a lot on TimCast, so looking forward to that.

I'm Libby Emmons. I appreciate the person who said I could come to Florida. You're allowed now. I'm allowed now. You need a sponsor to migrate there now. I understand. Yeah, I understand. You're protective of freedom.

I would be too. I'm at the Post Millennial. I'm the editor-in-chief there. I'm on Twitter at Libby Emmons and coming up actually next week. No, two weeks. I'm going to be in Fort Worth at the Better Discourse event, which is brought to you by Misinformed. And it's a great conversation. It's a really fun day.

And then we all go out and hang out afterwards. It's going to be in Fort Worth. It's called it's at better discourse event dot com. And I think you all should check it out. It's going to be in Fort Worth. It's at betterdiscourseevent.com and I think you all should check it out. It's going to be a lot of fun. My name is Seamus Coghlan. I have a YouTube channel called Freedom Tunes. We upload educational cartoons and political satire, mostly

satire, every Thursday, sometimes on Tuesdays. I really think you guys should go and check it out. You're really going to enjoy it. It's going to be your favorite new YouTube channel. Hit that bell icon. I love you. Thank you guys all very much for tuning into this fiery episode of TimCast IRL. This is a lot of fun. I did not say a single word. I just enjoyed listening. You guys

can find me on Twitter and Minds.com at Sour Patch Lids or at Sour Patch Lids dot me. You can also while you're waiting for that members only segment at 11 p.m. check out Chicken City at YouTube dot com slash Chicken City where you can watch right now live our chickens just sleeping. Yes. It out Chicken City at youtube.com slash chicken city where you can watch right now live our chickens

just sleeping. Yes. It's night. But in the day the chicken party meter is available and you can watch them do chicken stuff

and it's just oh the drama. When Roberto is fighting with his son Roberto Jr. because the twins are coming in and the twins are young but Roberto's their dad

and it gets kind of weird with what the dad is doing to his daughters but I'm told in chicken drama it's all acceptable apparently what the dad is doing to his daughters. But I'm told in chicken drama it's all acceptable, apparently. So you don't want to miss that. But you can also check out Pop Culture Crisis on YouTube. Our new pop culture show hosted

by Brett Dasavik. So check that out. And again, go to TimCast.com. Thanks for hanging out, everybody. Smash that like button on your way out. And we'll see you all over at TimCast.com. Bye, guys.