Timcast IRL - Timcast IRL #520 - Elon ROASTS AOC, Says She's Hitting On Him w/Nick Freitas

Episode Date: April 30, 2022

Tim, Ian, Seamus of FreedomToons and special guest live-producer Chris join commentator and Virginia state delegate Nick Freitas to discuss AOC's hysterical tweet and the Elon Musk response that roasted her, Elon Musk being correct about democrats move leftward, Desantis slamming Biden over the new 'Ministry of Truth', Biden's insane truth minister, and the Biden debt forgiveness plan. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

So AOC tweets about hate crimes going on, that hate crimes will be on the rise because some billionaire with an ego unilaterally controls a massive communication platform. And Elon Musk says, stop hitting on me. I'm really shy in one of the most epic clapbacks and smackdowns. And the internet is in uproar. The far right is pouncing. They're all throwing their arms in the air and cheering while the left is outraged and saying, real, real mature, Elon. Oh, the internet is back, baby. It's like good old 2015, right, where people posted silly nonsense and Elon Musk was bringing

it back. I think Elon Musk understands why Trump made the platform fun, and I think he's confident he can make it fun again, and he kind of is. AOC responded, and we'll get into that and some other news. We've got the Ministry of Truth. Congratulations, Joe Biden, on launching a government anti-terror Department of Homeland Security, quote unquote, disinformation governance board being run by a woman who sows disinformation. But isn't that on purpose? You know, people are all acting like we're supposed to believe the disinformation governance board is opposed to disinformation.

Imagine if I opened an ice cream store and the goal was to stop the sale of ice cream, like we're going to open the ice cream store and then go around making sure nobody. No, what? If you start something called the disinformation governance board, it sounds like you want to be in control of all of the disinformation. And the woman running it, her name is Nina Jankowicz, is sowing that. Rhonda Santis has called this out saying, not on my watch, Joe Biden. And then the culture war is lit up again because everyone's like, woo, go to Santis. So that should be fun.

We'll talk about this. It's Friday night. We're chilling. We're having a good time. Joining us to discuss all this is Nick Fritis. Thank you very much for having me on. Do you want to introduce yourself? Sure. So I'm currently a member of the Virginia House of Delegates, but other than that, I'm a good person. All right. So that's good. And then, yeah, other than doing that and being a husband and father of three kids,

and of course all of the time with the beard maintenance, that takes up most of my time. And then obviously I'm also the host of Making the Argument, where we actually try to help people formulate good arguments and avoid really, really bad ones because conservatives do do that at times. You want to show us that quote on that mug? I'm going to have to. Actually, I'm going to do this. So we do this thing every Tuesday. We do Thomas Sowell Tuesdays, and I always end it with, and that's why Thomas Sowell is a national treasure and not allowed to die.

And so I present this as my tribute to the Tim Pool team. Appreciate it. So, yes, thank you. There was a vote on my Instagram on which mug I should bring up here. That's a good one. And this one won overwhelmingly. There's this one and a Ron Swanson one, a couple others, but that one won. Well, all right.

We also got Seamus. Also, I could not agree more on Thomas Soule. He really is incredible. I'm Seamus. I have a YouTube channel called Freedom Tunes. We upload cartoons every week. Go over there. Check it out.

Like, subscribe. Hit the notification bell. We'll be uploading a couple things next week I think you guys will really love. Got Ian Crossland over here from iancrossland.net. What's up, Nick? Good to see you again, man. You too. Always great to have you around on the show.

How's the – well, we'll get into it on the show. I want to know about how the House of Delegates is going over in Virginia. I'm sure we'll touch on it. And we got Chris over here on the right. What's going on, homie? Oh, hey. What's up? Yeah, I'm pushing buttons. That the right. What's going on, homie? Oh, hey, what's up? Yeah, I'm pushing buttons.

That's me. Lydia's out. Is Lydia on her honeymoon? I believe she is. Is that what's going on? I think this is happening. I think this is happening. She got married yesterday.

Congratulations, Lids, if you guys are out there. So we were like, hey, we could take the day off or, you know, not and do work. And Chris is able to fill in. So for today, Chris is pushing buttons. Chris, of course, many people may know, is the chicken tender. I am. Taking care of Chicken City

and making all that stuff work and doing all the code and basically building the whole thing. And Chicken City is our second most successful show. Yeah, if you've seen the Chicken City Super Chats, you know Chris built that. That awesome algorithm. He's a genius.

Oh, yeah. Anyway, let's stop rubbing his teeth. But for now, he's pushing buttons. So let's do this. Before we get started, head over to TimCast.com and become a member to help support our work. As a member of TimCast.com, you get access to our exclusive members-only segments from this show. They go up Monday through Thursday at 8 p.m. And you're also

keeping our journalists gainfully employed. And they love you all so much because you're allowing them to have jobs. But more importantly, it's all about the mission. When you become a member, we're going to do more crazy stuff. We're going to, you know, we recently put up a billboard in Times Square calling out this journalist for doxing libs of TikTok. We're going to do more stuff like that with your support. And we're going to hire more journalists. We're going to do more stuff like that with your support and we're going to hire more journalists we're going to work on more projects we're building a new studio and boy are these cultists salty about it they're just so angry they're like someone tweeted tim pool's building a cult in west virginia and it's like there's a construction crew building a studio and putting in microphones like we're talking about like we have we have a house i think it's really funny we're like how many

people live in that house and i'm like three and three. And they're like, oh, really? I'm like, dude, there's like, it's a bunch of desks and computers. What do you think? We got it. We got a studio going on. But I guess it's fair to say, who said, tired of having to collectively stress about what explosion of hate crimes is happening because some billionaire with an ego problem unilaterally controls a massive communication platform and skews it because Tucker Carlson or Peter Thiel took him to dinner and made him feel special. To which Elon Musk responded, stop hitting on me. I'm really shy. And a blushing emoji. Michael Malice, you can see under here, says he ratioed her in minutes. And then the response to him was, so you don't know how the ratio works. Got it.

And she got ratioed. So here's the funny thing. Jack Posobiec, I guess, captured what AOC said. I guess some people are saying she deleted it. AOC said, I was talking about Zuckerberg, but OK. I think she deleted it because she realized she only made it worse yeah to be fair she was talking about zuckerberg you think so she says controls a platform and was taken out to dinner by tucker carlson or peter teal zuckerberg was famously taken out to dinner for some meeting by conservatives

and he currently controls a platform i just think it's hilarious that elon musk threw back in her face what she does because ocasio-cortez famously says stop hitting on me you're trying to date me i think it's funny when people criticize aoc her stands go she's not gonna date you bro it's like is that your only is that is that your bit is that your bit because okay all right well elon musk just threw the pie back in her face yeah also, also, is Mark Zuckerberg considered right-wing now? Old Mark convincing people to commit hate crimes? What is this? Well, anybody to the right of Karl Marx is considered. That's true.

Oh, no, no, Karl Marx himself is far right. He was racist. Oh, true, true. And a womanizer. Tim, Tim, you have to remember, real racism hasn't been tried yet. If they did it the way Marx wanted, it would work. Oh, yes. been tried yet if they did it the way marx wanted it would work oh yes it's funny how it's you know russia's coming out saying that they want to denazify europe or something like that and then

you think about the similarities between the woke cult critical race identitarianism all this stuff and it's like yeah i understand the similarities i don't think they're the same one's more like i guess ultra traditionalist and one's ultra progressive one wanted to destroy the culture one wanted to restore it but they were both authoritarians who wanted government based on race and so here we go i don't i don't see a very large difference between these two groups speaking of karl marx yeah no karl marx he was the absolute worst and part of why he's so interesting is because when you look at his personal life you see how unbelievably poorly conducted it was. And it's just the case that when people don't want to live properly, they'll try to create philosophies that justify being a bad person, basically.

And that's what Marxism is. And it's just sad to see how many people have bought into it and how much destruction it's caused. There was a – Paul Johnson wrote a book called Intellectuals. Yes. Where he went into the personal lives of like Jacques Rousseau and Karl Marx and pretty much all these intellectuals. They were predominantly left-wing, but he wanted to say like, okay, how well have these people actually lived out their own philosophy? And it was incredible.

I mean, you read about Jacques Rousseau and the kids that he fathered and immediately threw into some of the worst orphanages in Paris where they basically died of like starvation and neglect. And then Karl Marx, who always said within communism, right, the last phase of capitalism is people will actually pay their employers to work and that's crazy because that doesn't really happen except in Karl Marx's personal life where he actually had a servant that he didn't really pay and repeatedly you know I won't say raped but repeatedly had a just had enough fair with right of you know so it was great he he actually he actually had the manifestation of the last phase of what he said capitalism would bring about yeah well and this

is why you have to be extremely suspicious of people who harp on and on about how they love humanity in this abstract sense yes because very oftentimes they're trying to overcompensate for the fact that they treat everyone in their personal life like absolute garbage which is fundamentally the only way you really can love humanity is by treating those around you well instead of throwing vague platitudes out there about how much you want world peace and end poverty, etc. Somebody posted a photo of Antifa marching,

and they were like, why wouldn't anyone want to be Antifa? And I'm like, are we doing this again? They're saying the same thing again. But what I noticed about the photo was that the Antifa guys were really scrawny, like gaunt, like thin. what's wrong with that tim these people haven't lifted a heavy object in their lives no not all of them i'm sure some have there are probably some you know some guys you know i'm not saying literally everyone but you look at antifa they tend to be they tend to be the what they call the laptop class they're not working class they get money from sitting around complaining on the internet,

either for writing for BuzzFeed or something. You're really subtweeting me here, man. And I'm just like, well, look, it's one thing if you are part of the laptop class and you advocate for the workers and you recognize the value of hard work and you're not saying give me free stuff while I smash your windows. It's another thing when you don't do any work and then say, I'm the workers of the world. That's me. You should unite with me. I'm like, thing when you don't do any work and then say, I'm the workers of the world. That's me.

We should unite with me. I'm like, dude, you don't do work. Like marching around and complaining about stuff. Sometimes there's an element of work in there. We got to fight for our rights. I get that. But you ain't lifting any rocks or building any walls. You're not growing any crops.

It's fascinating how little these people actually know about their whole world. Well, we're not building walls, Tim, because we believe in bridges. I'm sorry that you don't. That's right. Now, AOC was a bartender, and everybody makes fun of her for that. That was the most productive thing for humanity she ever did, was tending bar. And look, I'm not saying that pejoratively. I'm saying I have bartenders that I know that are really good friends,

and they are providing a product or service through voluntary cooperation within the marketplace. God bless you. That's what I'm saying. Bartenders do actual work. That's the one thing you shouldn't smear her for. Being a politician is really embarrassing. Being a bartender isn't. Oh, I know.

Exactly. I'm one. I feel horrible about it. I have voluntarily given bartenders my money in the past. Right. I just think it's funny that people found the one thing she was good at to complain about. It's like, so she actually had a job. She was doing it.

She was working class. She was providing relaxation and entertainment to tired individuals. I think bars are fantastic. Why make fun of her for that? Yeah. Make fun of her for having an economics degree and not knowing what capitalism is. Or for tweeting things. She knows what capitalism is. It's mean.

That's what capitalism is. Capitalism is when you're a billionaire, actually. You can't be a capitalist if you're not a billionaire. She posted on Instagram, she was like, people aren't capitalists because they don't have billions of dollars. And it's like, what? That's how that works. So, did you Google it?

Look, you know, to be fair, I can't blame her. These colleges are just garbage. Oh, one of the biggest eye-opening events for me was I kind of went to college late in life. I was out of the military already. I was like 30. I was in an English class. This is what surprised me.

I was in an English class at Northern Virginia Community College, and then all of a sudden the professor pulls out the Communist Manifesto for us to read because nothing screams english literature like a book written by a german communist but um he comes back the week later and asks the class like what do you think of capitalism the student raises his hand and goes well i think capitalism what's destroying this country and i just had to stop i'm like look just real quick can you can you tell me what you think capitalism is and he proceeds to go out well, well, capitalism is this rigid class-based structure where the people that – I said, no, no, no. I didn't ask what Karl Marx's caricature of capitalism was.

I said, can you actually give me the definition? And the professor looks over and goes, well, can you? I said, yeah, it's a form of economics where people exchange goods and services voluntarily and property rights are respected. Okay, we can use that. Oh, well, thank God we can use the definition of capitalism when we're discussing capitalism. But you're right. That was the point.

Everyone in that classroom had a version of capitalism taught to them that bore no resemblance to what capitalism actually is as an economic system. Exactly. Sorry. The simple definition is it's an economic system built upon private exchange of goods and labor. Yes. That's it. I think she might be complaining about that the problem is actually greed.

I mean, maybe capitalism unfettered creates oligarchies of private corporations, which is the problem. So unfettered of any kind of economic system is dangerous. You always need some sort of regulation. Otherwise seize control will attempt to seize power but i think it's greed that she's really talking about but i mean if you have greed in a communist system it's it turns out way worse than greed in a capitalist system from my experience well you know again referencing thomas soul he used to always bring this up he's like whenever we try to explain greed is the problem for something soul likes to come back and look at it and say, okay, great. Go sit on your couch

right now and think really greedy thoughts and see what happens. Nothing, right? There's always an action that we have to actually look at and observe to determine how, you know, because Alexandria Corsica-Cortez, Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, some of the greediest people on the planet, if you actually look at the definition of greed, which is I want things without actually having to work for those things. I want to be able to take those things from an authoritarian standpoint. That's far more greedy than, hey, I want some stuff, so I'm going to go ahead and produce a bunch of goods and services that people will voluntarily exchange with me on.

Right. Yeah. And I would agree, Ian, that any system, when it becomes unfettered, is going to be problematic. And I think the problem is they fail to see that these flaws of human nature are going to exist within any system. So, and like you said, when you have a greedy communist dictator, I think that's a lot more dangerous than a private individual who happens to be greedy. And often, like you said, what they will refer to as greed isn't always necessarily

greedy. Sometimes it is. Like, yeah, a lot of giant corporations are extremely greedy. A lot of actors within the market are greedy. Sometimes it is like, yeah, a lot of giant corporations are extremely greedy. A lot of actors within the market are greedy. But that's a question of the level of virtue our society has cultivated, not necessarily just the economic system. Right. Because if everyone's greedy, then no one is greedy, relatively, because it's relative. Greed is relative to the system you've set up it to exist within. Well, even I don't know if I entirely agree, but even if everyone is greedy, I don't think

I don't think any system is going to work if everyone operating within that system is vicious. Like you said, Nick, so greed is more the intention, but you're saying it's the outcome that produces the problem. Is that stealing then? Is she talking about stealing? Yeah. So here's where I go back to, right? The question is, again, people are flawed. I think we can all agree on that.

People are flawed. The question is, does the economic system you have adopted, what does it encourage or what does it incentivize? Within a capitalist system where essentially I have to protect your property rights and we can only engage in exchange if it's voluntarily and theoretically to mutual benefit, well, then now I have a positive incentive structure. The best way for me to do that is providing as many people as possible goods and services that they want. That even if I have a negative intention, I have an economic system that fuels that intention in a positive outworking. If, on the other hand, I'm gaining it by taking your stuff through force and violence. Well, I mean, I'm sorry. I don't think that produces better results. So there's another example of this in a certain sense.

Scott Pressler, he's well known for registering people to vote and he's also really well known for cleaning up cities he went to baltimore he went to a bunch of cities and he's cleaned up garbage and it was funny uh he got a bunch of trump supporters to go out and clean up garbage and the communities were like thank you so much for cleaning up and making our neighborhood nice and it's no problem we want to show people we're here to do the work to make the you know make our everyone's lives. And then the media smeared him. They were like, he's just doing this to get Trump votes. And I'm like, oh, no.

Oh, he sure tricked us. He went out and cleaned up a bunch of garbage to convince us that he was a good person. I mean, he did. So, you know, in looking at AOC's complaints about capitalism, it's like, shouldn't the attitude when a big business is like, we're going to make a billion dollars by curing diseases. You'd be like, oh, okay. Now, I think the real criticism is when these companies don't cure the diseases and when these companies start to – when they say, well, we don't want to cure it because these people are customers and we want to keep making money off it. The issue is AOC sees that and says that is all of capitalism.

And it's like, no, that is a corruption of the system that we need to deal with. These offshore bank accounts is another one because you can't really call it stealing if they set up a loophole for themselves legally and then take the money and put it somewhere where it's not supposed to be. But it is stealing. It's just they just wrote it on paper that this is no longer considered stealing, and then they do it. So how do you face that?

So there was a tweet from Jen Perlman who we've had on the show. She's progressive. And she said, you know, we've got to end these tax loopholes. Billionaires don't pay their fair share. I said, what do you think is fair? Is 55% fair share for billionaires? And she said, I think if we close the loopholes, it would be 20 to like 25 to 35%, which is actually lowering the tax liability

for the wealthy. But I think a lot of these people on the left are actually concerned about the corruption and manipulation of the tax system as opposed to how much they're actually paying. And I completely agree. So like maybe if we can have that argument, be like, yes, figure out a way to make sure those who are supposed to pay taxes do pay them and we can lower the taxes.

Sounds good to me, right? Well, people should be committing crimes and people should have less taxes. No, no, absolutely. I mean, yeah, there's a lot of manipulation within the tax code. And like, again, I sit on the finance committee. We write the tax code for the Commonwealth of Virginia. And there's a lot of debates in there about tax credits or subsidization or or things of that nature and i think there's a very good argument to be made that no it's like there's the tax code should be relatively simple to understand and it shouldn't

be something where you're setting up a system where the people the best lobbyists get the cutouts the problem that i have with the whole fair share argument is because they never come back and say, oh, this is what a fair share is because they don't want to, because they want the argument of the rich aren't paying their fair share because now they haven't defined what that is. And they're also ignoring the fact that the wealthiest, whatever, half of the country, the wealthiest 10% of the country pay the vast, vast, vast majority of taxes, especially at the federal level. There's no question with all the loopholes, with everything, they pay the vast majority of it and they pay the federal level. There's no question. With all the loopholes, with everything, they pay the vast majority of it, and they pay a higher percentage than what they actually control within the economy.

That's just a fact. I just got to tell people, taxes are crazy. They're insane. Yes, seriously insane. Anybody who runs a business knows exactly how insane taxes are. And a lot of these leftists are people who don't run businesses. No. As soon as you start your own business,

look at David Hogg. Yeah. He tweets like, why is it so hard to start an LLC? What's going on with all these regulations? Like, yeah. Yeah, hey Dave, go find a mirror. Look in it real hard.

But no, no, look. He's a young guy and he didn't know. And he got a cold splash of water in the face. I'm not here to rag on him. I'm here to say, stand alongside me, brother, and let's figure out how to make this easier for Americans to create businesses. You know, the way I see it is if somebody says, you know, if AOC came to me and said, I think, you know, I just got my paycheck and these taxes are insane. I'd be like, let's work together on a solution. I'm glad you're finally seeing the problem we're seeing. What can we do to fix it? If somebody is an activist and they're going off

the rails and then something happens to them where they start to realize, I'm not going to rag on them. I'm going to be like, come over and let's do this. Let's fix this problem. Yeah. Well, I think fundamentally the problem is envy. So for all the talk that the left does about how greed is destroying our economy, in some respects, I would argue that it is. I think that an unvirtuous population is a very dangerous thing, and greed is not the only vice that's commonplace in our culture. Now, I would say that generally the market economy gives you more of what the people were already interested in in the first place.

So it's going to veer off into a negative direction if you don't have a population that has positive values. However, 100 percent. But but on top of that. So I don't think capitalism is perfect. I don't think a market's perfect. There are certain regulations I certainly believe in. But at the same time, it seems to me as if other systems like socialism are literally built atop vice.

So while capitalism can allow for greed to flourish, socialism requires envy. The issue is that these people know communism works and it works really, really well. Once you've killed everyone who disagrees with communism. So you just got to remove that surplus population. And what happens is you end up with a very, very, very tiny, tiny population. So you have to kill a lot of people, which is why they've always done it. Yeah. So if you have because because humans are not homogenous, because humans are diverse with different ideas, you'll have this big population and some are going to dissent. So what are these these communists always do?

Kill them all, and hopefully you keep purging the dissent, and you'll keep your rigid, fear-based economy functioning. Well, this goes back to Shamish's point as well. I've asked this question before. I'm like, all right, you're a socialist. So, again, capitalism is the private ownership of the means of production and distribution through voluntary exchange. Socialism is the collective ownership of the means of production. Here's my question.

You want to be a socialist in a capitalist country in the United States of America. You can be. You can go get some of your friends right now. You can go get property. You can go share it collectively. You can open up a commune. And not only will I, as a raging capitalist, not bother you, I will fight to lower your taxes.

The only thing I ask in return is you can't force me to go with you and you can't force me to subsidize it. That's it. And that's not good enough. No. So they're free to live the way they want in this country. They want to require me to do it. Right. This is what I always find funny because Ron Paul said something like this country allows socialism. They need to just go make their commune and they'd have it but they don't do it and it's because they don't actually want communism they don't actually want socialism they want your stuff that's why they say we want to seize the means of production it's like dude somebody works really really hard and builds a farm what happens

the communists seize the farm because the means of production and that everybody starves they don't want to do the work they just want what you got and they will burn the system down to get it which brings me to the next story we have here from the new york post editorial board elon musk's right the left has gone insane i don't think we need the new york post to tell us that elon musk is right about that but he is now they show this meme from elon musk which we talked about the other day it's from from Colin Wright. And you can see, you've got these little stick figures. People in 2008 who are left of center and stayed where they are became centrists, and by 2021, in that same position, are now considered right-wing.

This is factually true and correct, and the media is desperate to debunk it. So let's have this conversation. First, let me just show you some snippets. The Washington Post immediately said what Elon Musk's polarization graph gets wrong. What do they do? They show congressional charts about House caucuses. So you're telling me that because the Democrats march in lockstep on their policy, that means they're not going far left?

Please. Let's go down to how they, so there's a couple things to actually point out, but I'll come back to that in a second. Here's how they actually map it out. Republicans are far right and the middle of the road people are center right. The Democrats have moved somewhat to the left, meaning the center is still the center. But the Republicans have stayed where they are. Ah, you see, the Republicans have always been far right. The argument from The Washington Post is that, well, the Democrats did move far left, but you see, the baseline was always far right. So the Republicans actually are far right. My attitude is we, the Washington Post and other media outlets are trying to create this narrative

where they've, they've created the, that they've pinpointed where democrats moderates and republicans are then taken the overton window and shifted it so it puts the conservative in the far right quadrant and puts them as centrists you can get rid of the the underlying graph and we can clearly see that democrats have shifted far to the left it doesn't matter what you think of conservatives let me show you you a couple tweets. We have this one from the New York Times. They play a clever game with this one. The Republican Party has barely shifted to the right. Look at this. The Democrats, they're, what, 300% further left?

Here's the game. The median party shows the Democrats are only center left, and they used to be far right. Now the New York Times can justify the Republicans are far right. And the Democrats are just center left. So when we say the Democrats have gone too far left, we're talking about in 2008, Barack Obama saying he does not believe in gay marriage. And by 2021, Joe Biden says, affirm your children. Now you've got schools teaching kids about and you've got

surgeries on children. So it's like if you want to if you want to talk about where Obama used to be and where the Democrats are now, the Republicans are actually to the left. Republicans are now pro LGBT. Yeah, not all of them. The Republican Party has absolutely moved to the left. That's not even a question in our cultural culture overall has moved very swiftly and very far to the left i can't hear another analysis completely lacking in self-awareness from some lefty about how being on the left is just the normal default position and therefore moderate and everyone to the right of them is far right it's completely ridiculous i think everyone anyone who isn't on the far left recognizes that too and so they're just speaking to their own echo chambers because i've never heard a conservative or moderate person say anything along those lines.

Basically, everyone agrees the left has gone further to the left and everything else has, too. So one of the things they're saying is someone posted this tweet and they were like. Mitt Romney, who was the presidential nominee for Republicans in 2012, is now considered on the left of the Republican Party. And we nominated Joe Biden. The Republicans have gone far right, blah, blah. It's like Mitt Romney is not called a leftist or a left-leaning person. He's called a rhino and an establishment shill. There's a difference.

And Joe Biden, who you nominated, said recently to affirm your children. Yeah. His his the president for which Joe Biden was vice president under campaigned against gay marriage. Well, look, with Mitt Romney, it's an easy mistake to make. So let me just spell it out for the audience. Just because someone is unbelievably lame doesn't necessarily mean they're on the left. So it's possible for Mitt Romney to not be. Yeah, I think it's a a stark um admission from the left

well it well here's the other thing that i love right is that as soon as when they are a republican nominee or when they were the republican nominee the left says they're they're racist and they're bigots and they're horrible human beings like i'm old enough to remember mitt romney being the worst yeah you know racist on the planet. And I remember the same thing about John McCain. John McCain was every Democrat's favorite Republican until he got the Republican nomination. And then Keith Olbermann's on the TV going, he needs to suspend his campaign right now and get the white supremacist under control within his own party. So the bottom line is that I don't care who we run on the Republicans.

I don't care who they run. They're always going to be a racist, sexist bigot, according to the left. And then whoever we run next, they're like, oh gosh, I remember the good old days when it was Mitt Romney. Right. Who was it? Michelle Obama? Somebody was eating candy with George W. Bush? Yeah. Or no, Ellen.

Well, Michelle Obama and George Bush are also friends. She tweeted out about how he's her partner in crime, something along those lines. Oh, my God. Was that so cute? Was it war crime? I mean, like, literally, I don't know how that— War crimes?

I've got to double-check. I've got to double-check here. I remember in the 2000s going to these protests, and they would hold up signs of George W. Bush with Hitler mustache. Yeah. Now, this is hilarious. A couple years ago, there was a poll that found Democrats had a more favorable view of george w bush than trump and that their view of george w bush moved positive from negative i'm sorry man y'all have lost the plot because they don't have principles they never believed anything they just they just repeat whatever their television tells them to this is correct

it's not like they didn't like george bush because that actual reason is not to like george bush there are very good reasons very good reasons very good reasons but that none of those are why they didn't like him they don't like him because they were told not to and now they're being told to like him so they go remember the good old days when bush was i remember the good old days of uh the protests against george delia bush and then barack obama was like uh listen here uh i'm gonna be president and we're gonna end these wars and then it's like i vote for you sir thank you for your vote now kill those kids fire the bombs and i was like wait wait what are you doing he's like i'm gonna blow up some kids and i was like president obama please don't he's like i'm doing it and then he pressed the button and blow up kids and i was like you know what man but it's

different he did it with more drone strikes yeah right right actually automated the process uh his only scandal was a tan suit you guys yeah that's what i've been told well it's not a scandal that he killed american citizens without charge or trial you know that was just yeah no no no no that wasn't a scandal no i know no one cared they literally didn't care i thought his signing of the nda was scandalous and i didn't hear enough specifically back on that specifically the indefinite detention provision they signed the nda i think every year he should have ripped that thing apart along with the patriot act that's the energy he came into office with. But, dude, do you genuinely think Barack Obama was opposed to those things?

I think he was and then realized he'd get killed by the deep state if he did anything about it after the third day in office. Yeah. Remember, okay, this Let's Move campaign by Michelle Obama. They got into office. It's like, all right, we're cutting sugar out of our diets. Let's move. Let's get healthy. Like a week, couple weeks go by. And this is in Katie Couric's like, all right, we're cutting sugar out of our diets. Let's move. Let's get healthy. Like a week, couple weeks go by.

And this is in Katie Couric's documentary Fed Up, which is great. And then all of a sudden the Let's Move campaign got co-opted by the sugar industry and became about an exercise campaign. Let's work out. It doesn't matter what you eat. Just keep eating your sugar. Let's just, let's move. Totally twisted.

They got twisted by the people they surrounded themselves by. The people that he surrounded themselves by were oligarchs, shockingly. He came into office and said Abe Lincoln was his hero. When he left office, Teddy Roosevelt was his hero because he realized he couldn't do what Abe Lincoln did. That's the energy he had. I agree to a certain extent, but it's also possible that he was lying when he was running for office.

Wow, that was a big lie. Yeah, it was all lies. One of the first things he did was signed off on the bombing of a Pakistani village killing women and children. I'm more to think that he got twisted by it. I mean, how can you get into that position and not get twisted? In one day? Yeah. Literally.

Before he even got in, he was probably getting groomed. He got – choice of words. Good one. He gets inaugurated, and then he goes into office, and he's like, I want to do all these really great things. And they're like, here are the documents. And he opens them up. Oh, I've been radicalized. Blunt those kids.

I've got a couple of daughters I've got to think about. It was a few days into his first term that he authorized these strikes in villages. I saw. I was there. He was lying. They were all lying. They all campaigned and stuff. It's all just lies.

I wish it was that easy. I think that there's a machine. The one person who didn't lie in my lifetime was Donald Trump. Ron Paul's been pretty good about not lying. Oh, yeah. No, Ron's great. I love that there's a machine. The one person who didn't lie in my lifetime was Donald Trump. Ron Paul's pretty good about not lying. Oh, yeah. No, Ron's great. I love Ron. Dr. Paul is the man.

And hold on. Hold on. I want to clarify this statement about Trump. Trump lies about stupid things related to his personal life and his gravitas. My hands are big and glorious. Right. When Donald Trump said, I want to end these wars, he really, really tried. No new wars.

He was trying as hard as he could. He said, I'm going to keep this promise. He wanted to build a wall. He started building a wall. I'm like, okay, well, that guy's doing what he said he wanted to do. Barack Obama was like, we're going to end these wars. And then within a few days, he was like, I'm blowing up kids. Yeah, well, there's a reason the deep state tried to unseat Donald Trump,

and they didn't have the same effort directed towards Barack Obama. He did everything they wanted him to. The crazy thing about Trump, because when Trump first got into the race, I'm thinking to myself, you've got to be kidding me. Like, you have got to be kidding me. There's no way I trust this guy. And what shocked me was when he went in there, it was one of the biggest areas where I thought, oh, my gosh, I can't believe how great he is, was on foreign policy. Precisely because I always found myself in this weird place where you got one people over here that's like, let's invade everything.

Right. And then you got another group over here like you should never go to war for any reason whatsoever. I'm like, actually, I think there's actually kind of a good middle ground here. And Trump really did take that position where it was he would kick your ass. But he wasn't just going to do it arbitrarily. I mean, when he had a perfect excuse, if he wanted to escalate with what happened with Iran and the bombing of the Iraq embassy. He had a perfect opportunity to be able to really double down on that.

And the fact that he came back, he goes, I'm not going to drone strike somebody and kill a bunch of innocent people in the hopes that I'll get a couple bad guys. Because one, it's immoral. Two, it's actually counterproductive on a practical level. And I'm sitting here going, if you would have told me this would have been Donald Trump talking this much common sense on foreign policy, five years ago I would have said you were nuts, but he was. Well, we had a great economy. COVID happened the last year of his presidency.

He takes some of the blame for some of what went down because he was advocating for some of this lockdown stuff too. And then everything got out of control. You give the government an inch to take a mile. I think he did a pretty good job. And I think he deserves another term, especially coming up 2024. I think what we're seeing with the recession or retraction of the economy by 1.4%, I'd call that the death knell for the Democratic Party. And now on top of that, let's pull up this next story. DeSantis takes aim at Biden's new Ministry of Truth during press conference. Now, here's a guy who's standing up. I don't know if DeSantis will run if Trump runs. I think he said he won't. But let's talk about what's going on with Joe Biden's Ministry of Truth. Speaking to reporters

in Williston, DeSantis started the discussion about the board by saying he honestly thought it was just a belated April Fool's joke. They're actually going to create in the Department of Homeland Security a Bureau of Disinformation. It's basically a ministry of truth. What they want to do is they want to be able to put out false narratives without people being able to speak out and fight back. They want to be able to say things like Russian collusion and perpetuate hoaxes and have people like us be silenced. And Jen Psaki said that she believes the intent is to stop disinformation.

How does the government stop disinformation? Here's the example I gave. Ian, what color is the sky? Dark black tonight. Depends on what time of day you ask. Seamus, what color is the sky? I'm taking his answer. What color is the sky?

I'll go with blue. Ah, we have two different correct answers. Hold on. The sky right ah but at night it's black ah but it's not really blue during the day it's just the refraction of sunlight it's actually black so depending on which way you're looking it's that's it's the six and the nine thing where people are looking both ways the government can use whatever justification to claim something is fake news and then eliminate it they shouldn't be allowed to do that under the First Amendment. I'm willing to bet they get sued into oblivion and this gets struck down by the Supreme Court. Oh, I think this goes more back to what was being discussed before. That's the whole idea of self-censoring.

It's not that they're going to come out and put you in a gulag under the Bureau of Misinformation. What's going to end up happening is that there's going to be a strong motivation for people to not go against whatever the government line is. You saw that. Nobody put any Twitter, Facebook, executive, Instagram, nobody put any of them in jail over COVID information. They just did enough threats

to where people self-censored. I'm going to tell you exactly what it will be. Open up your ears, good friends, because let me predict the future. In one year, one year's time, we'll be in the throes of a presidential primary, potentially two, if Joe Biden is not going to be running again. He says he is. YouTube will come out and say any story in the news that goes against the narrative from the Bureau of Disinformation will be considered fake news and removed from the platform.

Because we want to maintain integrity, we are turning to the experts at the Disinformation Governance Board to make sure false narratives spread by Russia aren't allowed. And then we won't be able to share certain stories because a story will come out saying Hunter Biden punched a baby. And we'll be like, look at this video. But the Bureau of Disinformation will say that's not true. That never happened. And then YouTube will say, according to the experts at the Bureau for Disinformation, that didn't happen.

And you posted fake news. So we took it down. Just like those experts from the intelligence agencies who told us that the Russian or I'm sorry, that the Hunter Biden laptop story was just Russian disinformation. You mean the woman who's literally running the disinformation governance board from Fox News, Biden's disinformation director referred to Hunter's laptop as a Trump campaign product and helped push disinformation by claiming that intelligence officials said it was a Russian collusion hoax or something. Yeah, I mean, it's horrific. It's exactly what we can expect from a regime like this. However, I do agree with you that the more serious problem is people tend to self censor. And so, look, I'm not the first to point this out. But if we had a media which was completely bought, sold and controlled by the government, we really wouldn't expect the messaging

to be any different than it currently is. They all hold the one hegemonic narrative. They're going to gaslight you and lie to you and try to shut down any information to the contrary. And even when that information gets out there, which it happens to from time to time because of the internet and the fact that we have widespread access to misinformation. We heard about Hillary Clinton's emails. We're hearing a little bit about what might be going on behind the scenes at Twitter. Project Veritas does a fantastic job exposing political leaders and organizations the left is sympathetic to.

And yet, even with that information, they just say that's A, Russian disinformation, or B, a discredited conspiracy theory, or C, you're a bigot if you repeat it. And so people shut up and don't say anything. And so they don't really need this ministry of truth, to be honest. Project Veritas puts out a video showing a human being say something malicious or nefarious, and then these fact-checkers are like, it was deceptively edited. It's like, but there's a video of them doing it.

Well, the thing that I get really worried about this, we had a bill someone brought where they wanted to incorporate a class within the public school system that would help children identify fake news and misinformation. And me and my colleagues are looking at each other like, this is like some big brother

crap right here. Oh, no, no, no. We're going to have a list of groups that will come together. And you're looking at it and it's like, oh, it's the Virginia Education Association, the National Education Association. I mean, it's one left wing group after the next determining, helping these kids differentiate between true information and misinformation. And that's the part

that scares me because so many of the issues that we look at right now, when you look at, if you have eight hours a day with a child from the moment they turn five and enter kindergarten, all the way through middle school, high school, and then college, and you have essentially warmed them up to this idea that, oh yeah, the government helps you decide what the misinformation is. Then you get to a point where they don't even see it as censorship anymore. This is just another useful service that my government is providing on my behalf. Yeah. We need to get a bunch of –

No, no, keep going. I'm sorry. No, I was just going to say that's the part that is terrifying to me because, again, this isn't crazy conspiratorial stuff anymore. When you actually have them setting up this department within the Department of Homeland Security, which is designed to protect us through anti-terrorism, right? That's the part where, no, they are preparing a narrative where if you have a couple generations of this,

people just start to assume this is just normal, right? Yeah, absolutely. I think part of the reason they're setting this up is because they are panicking. They see that people are able to access this information. And so even though they've repeatedly lied, it's possible that they're starting to get worried that because they've lost their credibility, people are going to stop believing them. I would also say, piggybacking on your comments about the public school system, the fact that the government is sort of left alone with everyone's children for eight hours a day.

It's such a bizarre societal shift that we almost never talk about on the right that people are expected to have their children educated by complete strangers. Crazy. That's completely unprecedented historically. You wouldn't let someone who you didn't know, who you weren't at the very least aware of their lifestyle choices, let alone someone you might admire enough to allow them to form the mind of your child, have eight hours alone with them per day. And yet not only do we do so, but it is considered a right for teachers

to be able to have access to your children in this way and even have secret conversations with them about sexuality. That's disgusting. What did Joe Biden say? He did. That's true. But what else did he say? Oh, man.

I have no – in what context? Schools and kids. Oh, he thinks that it's the right of the teacher – your children. He's like, when they're here, they're yours. He's talking to the teachers when he says that they're yours. Creepy. Freaking creepy. children he's like when they're here they're your he's talking to teachers when he says that they're yours i said i freaking creepy i got a bunch of people angry because i said i think a lot of parents don't care about their kids because they send them off to institutionalized learning facilities where they don't know the teachers and then just don't even know what their kids are

being told or taught don't that that seems crazy to me so i maybe it's my bias because i was homeschooled when i was little my mom she very much paid attention to what we were what we were learning and stuff like that and actually helped teach us and then my dad did as well so maybe i see that like my parents cared about what we were learning and they talked to us and i look at these parents where it's like i'm in florida and my kid goes to school and i got no idea what's happening out there yeah why would imagine if you took your kid went up to a random house, knocked on the door and said, can you watch my kid for the next eight hours every day for the next 12 years?

Well, but random person. This is this is why this is why I go back into the whole it's the whole social conditioning of something. If if your parents went to public school and then you went to public school and now you have your kids and you send your kids to public school, this is just something you do. There's a certain degree of social inertia with respect to some of the decisions we make and we think if it was good enough for my parents good enough for me then it's good enough for my kids without recognizing that no the the window is shifted a little bit with respect to

what they're talking about to your kids because your kids might come home and maybe they'll be able to do the math that they were supposed to learn how to do or maybe they'll be able to understand some of the you know the science they were supposed to learn how to do, or maybe they'll be able to understand some of the science that was supposed to be taught. But they're definitely going to understand various left-wing concepts of gender identity. Yep. And whether it was naive of the people at that time or whether there was some legitimate reason, they believed that the public school teachers who were going to be left alone with their children or their children were going to be left alone with had values that were

roughly similar to their own. So they weren't going to have to worry about their child's mind being malformed in some serious way. But of course, that's not something that you can ever trust strangers to not do. And Tim, you mentioned that people wouldn't go to a stranger and say, here, have my kid for eight hours. Today, it's even worse than that. It's that stranger coming to you and saying, you have to give me your child for eight hours. It is my right. That's disgusting. I heard consumerism defined in a very interesting way a couple of years ago. And it was basically that it is the act of outsourcing more and more things from the

household. And there are a lot of things that it does make sense to outsource. But then there are certain things that it's very strange to do that with. And I would say the education and formation of your children is one of them. And yet we've done it in the most cynical, capitalistic, assembly line sort of way that would make even the most sociopathic robber baron blush. And it's completely championed by the left. Back in the day, I'm talking about a thousand years ago or thereabouts. If you had the money, you could send your kid to be educated in Venice, Italy, by the most intelligent scholars of the time.

That was your choice. If you didn't have money, maybe the king would come and say, your kid's coming with me. Or a Swiss boarding school as well. Yeah, a Swiss boarding school you get sent to. It was prestigious if you knew the people they were going to go study with and you wanted them to learn that kind of thing. That's understandable.

But today we have the option. As humans now in the United States, we have the option of where to send our kids so we but to like you said to give that up to the higher power i think is lazy well and i do think we've been indoctrinated there there are well wealthy parents you know people who know what's going on are finding ways to keep their kids away from these schools it's the regular working class people who can't afford it because you know you look look at what the rich families do, the ones who can afford it the least, they'll find private schools. They'll talk about

it, or they'll send their high school-aged daughters off to Switzerland to a Swiss boarding school. Well, again, there's nothing wrong. Again, going back to the whole capitalist thing, capitalism is also about specialization and division of labor. We're all good at different things, and we find where it fits. So I'm not, we homeschool our three kids.

My oldest is 19, so she's gone through the whole process. I have a 16-year-old son, 14-year-old daughter. Here's what we found. It wasn't that we just completely said, all right, Tina and I will be the only ones educating our children at any point. No, we had co-ops that we went to. We had other things. My son

and I took a blacksmithing course together. There was all kinds of ways that we could reach out into our community and find people that could educate our children on things that were either cool and unique and in line with what they wanted to do or was something that we couldn't do. Because bottom line, you get past fifth grade math, I'm done, man. I got nothing for you at this point. I don't know. Google it. So we still have those resources. We can find the difference was, is that when one of my child was struggling with something, we could find the resource that would help them. And when one of my child was excelling with something, they were able

to go as far and fast as they possibly could. None of them had to sit there and wait for 28 other kids, right? Or none of them had to deal with some of the, I love the socialization, like, oh, okay, socialization. My kids go to, you know, educational events. They go to political events. They go to sporting events. They go to community events. So they get plenty of socialization as homeschoolers. Now, yeah, you're right. They don't go to an institution every year where every once in a while they'll walk in on two kids having sex in a middle school bathroom. So they don't get that socialization, right? But that's the sort of thing that's going on. And this idea that it's either you have to be responsible for every aspect of your child's education or you send them to a government school. That's that's a false dichotomy. It's not an either or proposition.

Yeah, I agree. But I also want to make another point here. So you mentioned that there are a number of ways that you actually can outsource homeschooling. And I agree. That's obviously very important. But clearly you're vetting the people out who you end up leaving your child alone with. And that is the important difference between a homeschool co-op and a public school. I want to go back to this woman, the Ministry of Truth. We have this tweet from Christina Pasha. Oh, you can see I retweeted it. She says Biden's Minister of Truth force away, lock us down. This is what we want. We want to be criticizing. This lady is the definition of unwell.

She's supposed to be this disinformation person, you know, executive director. Whatever the government says, whatever the authority says is true. That's her attitude. She tweeted, long story short, I think we as a country might be too free spirited, to put it diplomatically, to comply with social distancing recommendations unless they're forced upon us. So force away. Lock us down.

People are not taking this seriously. Wow. Now, that was from March, and that was still a rather extreme position. Americans are too free. Remember when Fauci said it's time to shut up and do as you're told? Yeah. Yeah. These people are nuts. Well, it blows my mind because she was saying this in 2020.

Right? Yeah. So she was saying this in 2020, right? Yeah. So she was saying this, again, under the Trump administration. Because I used to have this theory where it's like, okay, leftists think they're always going to be in power. And when they're in power, they want all these new government powers and authorities and whatnot because they trust their own people to do it. But one of these days, they're going to get somebody that they recognize, oh, this is a problem because I don't want this guy having this much power. And I've come to the realization that they seem to like it. Yeah, masochism.

You're talking about? I mean, it's just, well, this idea of government authority and power and somebody telling them what to do and what the right answer is. And again, I always thought that clearly they're going to understand at some level, I don't want anyone that's president to have this power. And I'm starting to think that's not true, and it's crazy to me. Well, I would disagree to some extent. I hear what you're saying, but I think the reason that they support it

is because all of the people forcing their worldview onto everyone else who has any level of power right now is on the left. And so what they appreciate is the fact that people who would not obey them are being forced to by the state. And so ultimately, because as soon as you have someone like Elon Musk come in and who is potentially going to be the owner of Twitter here and simply says, I'm just not going to bully the people you want me to bully, they completely lose their minds.

So it's not so much that they like having decisions made for them, though I think there's an element of that there. I think they love making decisions for you. They are the most conforming anti-conformist. Well, not only did she tweet this authoritarian nonsense, she has several tweets like that. She's also outright spread disinformation herself, where she said the Hunter Biden laptop story was a product of the Trump campaign, things like that. So are we really supposed to assume that they have the best intentions? No, no, no, no. I think, as I stated earlier, if you create a store called like Swords and Things, I would

assume you're selling those things. I would not assume you're trying to stop those things from being sold. So when they create the disinformation governance board and put a woman in charge of it who sows disinformation, I think the purpose is entirely clear. Just lying to us about what they're trying to sell to the American people. She must have a bunch of self-hatred because when she's saying force me and lock me down, that's really disgusting and masochistic, like self-hate type of thing. Yeah, I know.

Some people are into it, you know? Maybe she's like, you know, daddy government. Not to the, maybe, yeah, but that's masochistic. To have this kind of psychopathy in power is devastating. She also said this, Jack Posobiec has this tweet. In 2020, she said that the executive branch shouldn't have the power to determine what is fake news. She then goes on to say that it's fake news that Facebook has a bias against conservatives and then adds she's funded by Facebook. So, sure. She was right on the first point.

The executive branch shouldn't have the authority to determine what's fake news. Now she quite literally works for the Department of Homeland Security under Joe Biden determining what is fake news. Brilliant. Quite amazing. But this is my my point that they're fine it's just a product of them wanting to force their worldview on other people right i mean so when it's the trump administration no the government doesn't have the ability to determine what's true or what's false but as soon as biden's in office i mean it's unsurprising right it feels very much like nazi germany man like 1932 when they set up that that board of what is a ministry of it was gobles go balls pardon me yeah the propaganda arm again i the the thing that blows my mind about all of

this is that there there's this overwhelming faith in government power in order to achieve certain positive ends and again going back to thomas soul because i do that regularly it's this whole idea of the government doesn't deal in solutions the government government deals in trade-offs. But if you've built in your mind that really what this is about is government wielding power to compel people to do the right thing, and really this is just a question of getting the right people in the position to be able to wield that sort of authority, well then this kind of makes sense. If you understand that people are fallible, therefore the people in political power are fallible, then you're a lot more cautious about them having this kind of authoritarian power over things.

And it is amazing to me that we are not that far away from when you had legitimately, we still do have violent communist governments that are suppressing speech, suppressing their own populations, and doing so through propaganda, government-controlled propaganda. And to think this is an okay idea, and that it's coming from the left, right? The very people that used to, like, stick it to the man. Are you kidding me? Well, let's – I'm going to do something else right now. I am going to defend this woman, not because of this video.

Jack Posobiec tweeted out, meet the Biden DHS national head of censorship. Please do not retweet this video as it may upset your new internet overlords i don't really want to play this do i have to play it's really gross but yeah probably i'm gonna play it guys i'm really sorry you have to hear this one all right but we're gonna play this don't play at all though saying them in congress or a mainstream outlet so disinformation's origins are slightly less atrocious fake accent it's how you hide a little lie it's how you hide a little lie it's how you hide a little, a little lie. It's how you hide a little, a little lie. It's how you hide a little,

a little lie. When Rudy Giuliani shared that in town from Ukraine. Or when TikTok influencers say COVID can cause pain. Ah, it hurts. She put that on TikTok, that CCP tech.

She put that on TikTok. And I, you know, I saw this video. I did say I was going to defend her and I will. But when I saw this video, I thought to myself, I think there's something about left-leaning millennials where they never grew up.

The world is Harry Potter. Yeah. Voldemort's the, you know, everyone's Voldemort. And they post these videos on TikTok as if they're children. Like, I'm sorry, ma'am, you're in your late 30s, and you're heading up a government institution, and you're singing Mary Poppins. I just, I feel like these people are children. Yeah, I mean, they reject adulthood. They reject responsibility, ultimately.

And I think that's, well, I think that's a lot of where the gender insanity comes from as well. Part of becoming an adult is being firmly rooted in either your masculinity and your femininity. And if you are called to marriage, starting a family, having children, but they completely reject that responsibility. And so they start to reject the concept of gender altogether. I'm going to defend this woman because my point is that... Not gender, sexuality. You're allowed to have fun.

Gender is a nonsense term. You're allowed to have fun and do fun things and have hobbies. If you're older and you like skateboarding, perhaps. Some people are like, you're too old for that. No, it's good exercise. Maybe you like playing Magic the Gathering. Hey, hobbies are fantastic. Fun ways to exercise your mind or your body.

I got no issue. You want to sing songs? That's great. But in your job as a disinformation expert singing about this weird stuff, you're starting to get a little weird with it. But here's where I will defend her. Jack Posobiec tweeted this out, and I think he should not have. We're good friends with Jack, but I think he should not have posted it's he wrote he wrote i saw it so you have to see it and it's

a video apparently of this woman in college with another woman and i did not mean to play that it is not good it didn't sound bad it is not good okay um it's it's d plus material c minus maybe but i'm not here to make fun of a woman who was in college and wrote a song with her friend and just filmed it and put it on the internet. I think that's fine she did. If I saw, if this video came out today and it was on TikTok, I'd be like, hey, keep it up guys, you know, keep working hard, keep practicing, keep writing. One day you're going to hit that number one, you know, I would encourage young people to do good stuff. We also have this one from the Daily Caller, Flashback video of Biden's

minister of truth singing about effing her way to fame and power. The vibes are horrendous. No, no, no, no. This is stupid. She's making a point in the song she's singing. I want to play it because it's actually, you might not like it, but she is good at what she is doing. In the song, she's talking about how she's talented and works hard, but isn't notable or famous. It's a bit. It's a musical. She then says, who do I have to F to get fame and power? The bit is that in Hollywood, that's how you do it. She's making fun of Hollywood and everyone laughs. I'm going to play a little bit of her singing, just so you can hear. doubt it but she was rich everyone adored her and the world was after saints but she was a bitch

she's actually really good it doesn't surprise me you get a theater major like a theater actor to be the propaganda minister absolutely someone who knows how to do that performance what bugs me about this is they took the one thing she's good at and then plastered on the internet. She's okay. She's not even that good. She's singing from her chest. She needs to sing from her core. She's gesticulating. Her posture is really bad. Her shoulders are all hunched. She could be a lot better.

She's 78% good. Ian, she's going to fact check everything you said. You should sing from your ear. I am not here to give her a Tony. I'm just here to point out that she's singing well. People are enjoying it. They're having a good time. She's probably cool.

Don't personally, but doesn't mean she's not a psycho. I don't think she's cool. I think she's nuts. But why would you highlight something that is like a positive about her to try and own her? Like when they showed AOC dancing on the rooftop and they're like, look at her. And I'm like a college student having fun? Am I supposed to? You think that makes her look not cool?

It makes her look personal. I think there's something of a generational difference here too with respect to what one generation tends to think is this is something that discredits a person versus what a younger generation thinks discredits a person. So I think some of this is a misread of how are you going to influence your audience with respect to how to think about her. So I see this.

I'm like, she's actually a pretty good singer. This doesn't strike me as, oh, well, gosh, that's why I have a problem with her. It's not because she's the authoritarian czar of a government disinformation. I don't think that's it. So, yeah. Yeah. Also with the AOC thing, so much of that was manufactured i don't think i knew anyone who was upset about her dancing because i don't live in the film footloose do you know

a single conservative who was genuinely mad at her for dancing i don't think it was the majority but there were people on twitter who were constantly making fun of her for it that's just true okay there was one thing that was done with that whole thing that i did think was funny and that was they showed her dancing, and then the thing said, when you're first in line for the bread line. That makes it funny because she's a socialist. And make memes out of it, for sure.

Absolutely. And I think that's fantastic. But I didn't know anyone who was genuinely upset. Like, oh, she danced? Horrific! This clip from the Daily Caller, and I think the clip Jack Posobiec pointed out, it's like, guys, you're reaching. Dude. Yeah, but that first one wasn't reaching, where she's like, Rudy Giuliani is a political politics crap.

Well, she was spreading misinformation in that little cutie Mary Poppins song she was singing. And that was directly relevant to the job she is now going to be performing. Exactly. And real quick, I think people saw that and criticized it which was warranted and then grabbed other stuff of her singing as if it was bad that she sang yeah no no no i agree yeah also i mean we understand the concepts of information and misinformation differently than the left does and that is to say we understand these concepts correctly because we understand that the purpose of information is to help a person form their

worldview so that they can know the truth the left sees information the value of information is to help a person form their worldview so that they can know the truth. The left sees information, the value of information is anything that helps them reach the end of bringing their political worldview to fruition. And so to them, misinformation means anything that gets in the way of the social order I'm seeking to establish, which is why they were constantly saying that they were trying to crack down on misinformation, even though the things they labeled as misinformation were then revealed to be true, and they never walked their policies back. I just want to point out, I think it's funny, like, you know, that we're all here, like, this lady's spreading dangerous disinformation, and then Ian's like, she's singing from the chest, her shoulders are crouched up. She wants to get better.

Ian's getting to the heart of the problem. He'll be better. No, I think, I'm just saying, like, Ian, you took theater. So he's singing from a different angle from us, where ours is purely political, and he's looking at her performance like, no. No, I think – I'm just saying like Ian – What's her name? Jankewitz? You took theater. Yeah. So he's singing from a different angle from us where ours is purely political and he's looking at her performance like, no. No, her shoulders. It's like relax your shoulders, let your head fall back and keep your chin low. So to your point, I think this is – we were having this debate a while back and it was the whole idea of postmodernism and deconstructionism. It was the idea of what is the philosophy which informs the left and the way they think about these things. So when you've accepted that there is no such thing as

absolute truth, whether it be moral or just factual, and this is all a question of power structure, and it's all a question of which group is going to dominate the power structure in order to help their group or their tribe or whatever it is, you're absolutely right. Misinformation is no longer this idea of what is actually true because there is no objective truth. There's just power struggles. And right now, they want their group to be on top. And the way that you do that

is by controlling the flow of information. And they honestly believe it's going to produce positive results for the people that they care about. So it's not as if they have purely nefarious, and we would consider it nefarious because we think it's rooted in a lie, but they can actually convince themselves, I'm doing a good and noble thing on behalf of marginalized populations. And anything that stands in the way of achieving that for your so-called truth is irrelevant.

Yeah. This is also sometimes known as the problem of moral licensing. So this idea that because I'm a good person with good motives, anything that I want to do is acceptable in order to achieve that goal. And of course, what always ends up happening when you hold that position is you just become a bad person and then the fruits of your endeavors tend to be horrible as well.

Guys. Yeah? I think I know what we need to do. Uh-oh. We need to get Nina Jankiewicz cast in a Broadway musical. We need to allow her to take her talents and run with it.

Ian, stop criticizing her abilities. No, never. Because you remember what happened last time an art student dropped out. Oh my gosh. Oh my gosh. Did they make 1984 a musical? I'll never give up on you, Nina.

Ian will instruct you. He will teach you how to sing. There was another art student. There was another art student that no one believed in Couldn't draw people And was criticized for it Is that really what it was?

That was a big part He had a hard time Drawing the human form That is fascinating That is fascinating Well yeah And just that An authoritarian despot

Who murdered people Failed to see individuals As what they were Was that before The World War I His trench warfare In World War I Or after?

As far as like Getting an art When he got rejected from art yeah oh that was i'm pretty sure that was after world war one but i don't know i think i think he started before but i'm just waiting for media matters to write oh yeah tim pool compares nina to hitler because she sings disinformation board to the nazis disinformation board but that's about it. Neiman hasn't done anything except for that cringe musical. Yeah, I have to admit, when that first press release came out describing what it was, as I'm reading it, I'm hearing it in a German accent.

The Department of Homeland Security will be setting up a disinformation. Tulsi Gabbard made public statements that this is stuff they've been doing anyway behind the scenes. Now they're just codifying it. Somebody superchatted saying Twitter was their disinformation governance

board. And now Elon bought it. So they're like, all right, just do it through the government. Clearly we cannot rely on the private sector to do this properly. We have to step in for ourselves. You have to crack a few eggs if you want some omelets. How do you stop a government like our government from doing stuff like that?

Like we're supposed to vote the right people in so that they stop it from the inside. What was your answer? Lawsuit. I think the government's going to get sued on First Amendment grounds, and the disinformation board will be disbanded overnight. It can't last. The first step is always vote for the right people, right? Theoretically, if the right people are running. Second is, yeah, you sue the government.

You actually use the separation of powers in order to do it. And the third one is, you know, it's the passive resistance, right? It's the peaceful resistance. It's the government. It's like, I'm not going to comply with this. Let's see how much you really want to enforce it. Yeah, they'll go to, like, Twitter's board or they'll go to the developers and give them a gag order and say, give me your code, give me your login info. And the people will be like, well, if I don't, then the feds are going to come raid my house

and put me in a prison for a year without seeing anyone. So they do it. But a way to passively resist that is to get rid of the centralized services so you as a tech company don't control the login data or the password data. It's encrypted and unavailable. You ever see, Seamus, you ever see that South Park episode where they're imagining George Lucas and Steven Spielberg ruining Indiana Jones? No, I don't.

I don't think so. So it's like... Didn't they already do that with the fourth one? Yeah. Oh, my gosh. There's a scene where it's like, I think it's like Deliverance, and there's two, you know, like, redneck guys, and they're like, you look mighty good, and they, like, take Indiana Jones, and they go at him.

And I was just thinking, like, based off what you were saying about income tax and stuff it'd be funny to do that scene but it's the government taking your income tax like hey there boy that income's looking mighty good it's like no stay away federal government oh i'm coming yeah well the income tax is another one of these things that's just part of the status quo now so people don't understand how unbelievably insane it is especially at its current rates the idea that just working and being productive results in you being penalized by the government taking your wealth from you I would love to have an expert on the show to go deep on the history of income tax it got started 1913 are you familiar so it's technically technically it actually started under Lincoln Lincoln was the

first person to actually level like a federal income tax and was ordered to pay for the Civil War but yeah did it become like truly constitutional the way we have now until you actually pass the 14 16 16 16th amendment yeah 16th amendment of the constitution it was fascinating because the original debate was all right we're gonna we're gonna do this right but it's only going to affect this portion of the population and we're going to cap it at three percent and you actually people going wait i thought you said one percent you can't you can't put it at 3%. And you actually have people going, wait, I thought you said 1%. You can't put it at 3%. If you put it at 3%, they'll actually take all 3%. And now...

I'm way wrong on 14. 16th Amendment. Income Tax Amendment. 14 is the one they're trying to get Marjorie Taylor Greene on. Yeah. Dude, did you see her talk to what's his name? The reporter? Acosta. Yeah, Acosta. He was trailing her and kept asking her. She's like, just pull up the text you're talking about. Read it out loud right now.

And he did. And it basically shows exactly what she was saying is true. That she was questioning martial law. It was insane. They just lied. Acosta was looking at the ground. I'm just asking questions. Misinformation is any information that is bad for the regime or used against the regime.

So right now, if you mow someone's lawn for $10, you've got to then, when you receive that $10, you've got to give the government, depending on your tax bracket, between like 27% or 37%, maybe even more. And that's just for the income tax.

Now, if you're running a business, you've got to split the employment tax. There's going to be 7.5% on the business end, 7.5% on the person's end. And so that typically goes in with the income tax. But now you're running a business, right?

You get $10. The business takes the $10. You then say, okay, now what do I do? I'm going to pay myself because I'm the employee of my business. So I got to give $27 to the government. Then I got to give the business has to give 7.5% to the government. So now you're actually at, about 36 or what are we looking at? 35%. Then you've got, then you take that money and say, okay, great. Now I'm going to buy the fuel I need for my lawnmower. And then when you go and buy that fuel, you got to give the government another cut for the, for the sales tax and the gas tax is it just, it just, it's going to be, it's going to be taxed at every single level.

At a certain point, like if you want, basically, if you want to make $4, you have to make $10. Right. Every, every aspect of, of monetary exchange taxed, and that's just too much. So it's really difficult to have an argument with a libertarian when they're like, taxation is theft. And I'm like, well, now it is, yeah. If you come to me and you say that taxation makes sense in these certain contexts where it's like the roads, everyone loves that argument.

I'm like, well, look, I think taxation is fine. Maybe the income tax is not, but certain taxation I have no issue with to a certain degree. Like the founding fathers even said taxation, but we should have representation. We're at the point now where it's like literally everything you do is taxed. Now they want to tax how many miles you drove on your car. It's like, dude, I already bought the car and I bought the gas. The gas was already taxed for how much i was going to drive now you're gonna tax my car by saying odometer now if i sell the car gotta pay another tax but i bought i gotta pay a tax if i get the money i gotta pay a tax everything you do then you die they tax you again well i i love that the whenever they make this stupid argument that i can't believe that warren buffett pays

less in taxes than his secretary bullcrap all right he pays a much higher income tax rate the difference is the capital gains versus there shouldn't be a capital gains i mean it's a form of double taxation so i i got my money through income i then pay taxes on that income i then take some of what's left over and i reinvest it into something that helps somebody else start a business or hire more people or expand their operation in the hopes that maybe one day i will actually receive a profit from selling this and then you're going to tax it again. And now it's at a slightly lower rate. And so that's where they come up with this justification.

And it's just crazy to me because ultimately what we're doing is we're disincentivizing productivity, right? Yeah. Gambling tax is actually the stupidest one. People don't realize that when you wager $1, so say you put, you put 10 bucks down on a roulette and you say 10, 10 bucks on you put you put 10 bucks down on uh on roulette you say 10 10 bucks on red you win 10 bucks you owe the government two dollars and 80 cents so you're wagering 10 dollars for a chance to win less than 10 dollars like there's a tax on all of those winnings

and then uh you can't you can't claim losses on more than you've gambled so if you walk in with 100 bucks and lose it that's too bad you can't claim what came claim a loss on that than you've gambled. So if you walk in with $100 and lose it, that's too bad. You can't claim a loss on that unless you're a professional gambler. Yeah, so also when you look at Biden's policies and his proposed policies with respect to capital gain tax, one way he plans on taxing the rich, quote-unquote, is to have everyone who makes more than a million dollars have their capital gains tax increase from 20% to 40%. And the idea is, well, that's only going to hurt rich people.

But obviously, if you are a wealthy person, you's only going to hurt rich people but obviously if you're a wealthy person you are not going to bet 100 of your own money to only potentially keep 60 of the winnings because that's an idiotic move to make and so small businesses that need investment from wealthier people just aren't going to end up being formed if that policy ever takes effect and you know what they're going to do it's're always going to exempt if you buy government bonds. So if you want to give your money to the government and get a guaranteed 3% interest or whatnot, oh, yeah, sure, you can do that all day long. They'll make all kinds of exceptions for that.

But if you actually want to invest in a private enterprise, well, now all of a sudden we want to tax the hell out of you. And this unrealized gains is the biggest BS I have ever heard of. It's literally money that you haven't made. There's no such thing as an unrealized gain. That's why it's called unrealized. It's literally they are taxing something you don't have. I'd like to pull up this story we have here from the Daily Mail.

GOP leader Kevin McCarthy claims Biden's plan to forgive $10,000 in student loans is to distract from his failing agenda and stunt to subsidize degrees of the elite and leave working Americans paying the tab. For all of my progressive friends who are sitting here saying, I don't understand why anyone would be opposed to forgiving student loan debt. Don't you want to make people's lives better? You're just saying you want them to suffer because you suffered. Let me explain something very simply. What I'm saying is that I do not believe the government should take from the poor to give to the higher income earners. Low income earners will be paying the sub paying the taxes that subsidize high income

earners getting their debt cleared. And the high income earners who have the debt got to spend that money and do things with it. Now, I am for student debt forgiveness. I say we tax the universities and seize the endowments and forgive all the student loans that way. But if you're going to tell me that you are a reverse Robin Hood who wants to steal from the poor to give to the rich, I'm going to say screw off. Yeah. Also, whenever someone says something like, I can't imagine why anyone would oppose forgiving student loan debts. Like, why would you admit that? You're telling on yourself, dude. That's really embarrassing. It's actually not that hard to figure out because it's a regressive tax people who get degrees actually do tend to make more money and the idea that someone who a already paid their college off

because they worked through college or already paid their debt off or decided to start working in a trade should be on the hook for the money that someone else who's making more money than them voluntarily took on his debt is insane well i, I got asked, do you believe that the government should forgive student loan debt? I said, I don't think it can. They're like, what do you mean? Of course it can. No, no, no, it can't. There's no way. When you say forgive, what you're essentially saying is that the person that lent somebody

was now saying you don't owe it back. That's not how the government did this. The government took tax dollars by force and then distributed it in the form of loans, which you voluntarily took. So the government can't forgive that. All they can do is transfer the responsibility for paying it onto somebody that didn't take out the loan. So that's all that's happening. This should never be talked about, can the government forgive student loan debt.

It's should the government transfer student loan debt off of people that took the loan and onto people who didn't take the loan because that's what they're going to do. So they could forgive the interest, I guess. Hold on. What if they seize the endowments from the universities or tax the universities to pay back those loans? I mean, the bottom line is that legally the universities were in a position to be able to, you know, again, the money went to the person, the student.

Yep. And the student chose which university that they went to. So as much as I think the university has totally been in bed with the government in order to make all this happen, right, I still don't think you could – I still don't think you have legal grounds to go and seize their property as a result of this. As much as I would look at it from kind of a cosmic moral sense and be like, well, karma is a – Well, I think the universities are corrupt. I think the loan situation is predatory. And I think you get a look. We want millennials buying houses and having families.

Many of them are settled with debt because they were told to get these loans out and they weren't smart enough to figure out why they shouldn't have got that. And so I'm like, OK, if you want student loan forgiveness, then you got to take it from those universities that got that money. These are the universities that went to these students and said, you have to do this. What are you going to do unless they have these recruiters at universities who go and tell you why you need to go there, how much it will cost. Then these people go and get these government-backed loans. Now they're in debt. Okay, the system can eat itself.

There you go. Problem solved. Oh, look, from a karma perspective, yes. From a legal perspective, I don't see how you do it. The people that are truly the most responsible for this are the politicians that advocated for it. Because they're the ones that actually cast the little vote. They pushed the little button saying, yes, we should make this a portion of the budget. There's a way to do it without taking any money from anybody, and that's just terminating interest on all loans. So you've got to pay

back the principal. If you borrowed $40,000 from somebody and you spent $40,000, you've got to pay it back. But the interest rates, which are compounding, we just delete those. Gone. Because those interests weren't granted to you. That's just them saying, oh, it's been 10 years, so now we say you owe us another $50,000. And it's like, well, that $50,000 didn't come from anywhere. You're saying I owe it to you?

We can get rid of that. I mean, the government shouldn't be in the business of doing these sorts of loans anyway. Agreed. And that's an incredibly unpopular thing to say, and it is absolutely 100% true. Because we've created, especially since most of the universities are either public-private partnerships or they're state-run universities. So again, this is the government subsidizing another government agency in order to push a particular agenda.

And then it works out perfect for politicians because they can first approve the loans with no intention of you ever having to fully pay them back and then come back and say i'm the nice guy that's going to forgive this when they know damn well they can't forgive it they can only transfer it on to other taxpayers yeah well and the real scandal is that so many people feel they need a college education in order to make a living and also that in a number of circumstances that can actually be the case we need to ask ourselves if a person cannot have a well-paying job with a four-year degree, which actually isn't true, but let's just say it were the case, then why is that? And why aren't we trying to solve the problem of the first 12 years of education that everyone

has provided for free, not preparing them for the marketplace? Now, of course, it's because public school is a racket. It's a horrible system. They don't really have your child's best interest in mind. But a parent who is homeschooling their child obviously has the best interest of their child in mind. And they're going to ensure that their child is educated in a way that will prepare them for the workforce so they can be a productive adult. I think it's sad that people think they need college. Yeah. There's trades. There's entrepreneurial entrepreneurship. Well, I mean, you listen to Elon Musk talk about this.

You listen to like Gary Vee talking about it. So it's the same thing. It's like our schools are not designed to actually do anything to help out with entrepreneurship. It's designed to make, the best version is designed to make very good factory workers. The worst version, it's designed to make really good conscripts. And the problem that I have with all of it is, what did you expect, right? You have the government running an institution where they don't actually have to be responsive to the end users or the customers of the product or the service that they're providing.

Because every time we try to pass any sort of legislation, we're even doing something like, hey, dollars follow students. Oh, my gosh, you hate public school and you hate public teachers or public school teachers. Or I just recognize that everywhere else in the marketplace, when people have genuine choices and they can go and find the services that work best for them, you actually get better quality at lower prices and more accessibility. What do you think about a voucher system for schools? I think there's a couple different ways you can do it. I think the idea of dollars following students,

whether you want to call it a voucher, whether you want to make it an education savings account, I think it would be a vast improvement on what we currently have. What's funny is that the left immediately comes back and goes, you can't spend public tax dollars for a private service provider. Oh, you mean like with WIC or EBT or road construction or jet fighter construction or, I don't know, lodging in per diem, the politicians use it at private, yeah, Section 8 housing. Like we do it all the time. It's like, you know, you don't want it here because you want politicians to actually control the education of my child.

And I don't understand why, because half the time I'm hearing we need to get politics out of the classroom. I know a way to do it. Actually give poor parents an opportunity to be able to do what rich liberals do with their kids and send them to private school. I can't tell you how funny it is when I will talk to some liberal and say, they say Republicans are banning math and history. And I say, well, they're banning praxis. They're banning critical race praxis, the practice of these theories. And they say, yeah, but that's important context in history. And I was like, dude,

if you want ideologies in schools, we can start with the Bible. Because if you think your ideology should be there, why couldn't a teacher teach any ideology they wanted? How about if you don't want religion in public schools, we then say you can't have other ideological practice in those schools all the same. Or we just do this, right? I don't want to tell the person that has an EBT card, you're only allowed to shop at the government grocery store. I have assigned you based off of your address. There wouldn't be any food there. So how about we do this?

You want your kid to learn that? You really think that's the best learning outcome for your kid? Okay, I might disagree. But I am not going to use the power of the state to compel you to educate your child the way I think is best. I'm going to let you make that decision. And if public dollars are falling, you can come up with some, okay, hey, they got to take one test a year or there's got to be some criteria

like you can't take them to a school that's teaching them violence against other people, whatever, that's fine. But you educate your child in the way you think is best, I will do the same. This goes right back to the whole socialism point I made earlier. It's not good enough for them

that they'd be free to do what they want. They must compel me to do what they want. I make no such requirement of them. So which one of us, which ideology is the peaceful, tolerant one that actually appreciates diversity? The problem is the right has been tolerant and peaceful, and the left then took over the institutions while they were being tolerant and peaceful. Well, yeah, I mean, the right is obsessed with human respect and being perceived as one of the good ones by their enemies, which is completely suicidal and stupid.

I'll also add that whenever you have these left wingers who fire back at you for supporting vouchers by saying you hate public schools, they are admitting that parents would send their children anywhere else but public school if they had the option. Corey DeAngelis makes that point beautifully daily on Twitter. Like, oh, he's fantastic. Why would the money go away from public schools if there was an option? They're so good. Aren't those public schools incredible? Aren't they good for kids? But at bottom, what they're saying is, okay, yes, parents would choose to send their kids elsewhere, but we can't allow them to have that choice because I decide how other people's children get educated, not them.

There's some value to that, to having uniformity in education in that, like math, for instance. If one school teaches the kids 2 plus 2 equals 5 because 2.4 plus 2.4 is – and the other half of the schools teach 2 plus 2 equals 4. And then all these people come out of the schooling systems and they can't agree on basic ideas like math then we're in a really improv like a challenging social place so so two parts of that one you're starting to see that now within the public school system exactly they're doing it they're the ones going two plus two equals four is racist right the other thing i would say is this how many parents are going to send their kids to a school right within a marketplace of education opportunity how many parents are going to send their kids to the school that's teaching them two plus two equal five maybe some would do we think it's

going to be a majority do we think it's going to be enough to actually cause a problem if that if that is such a concern with education why is it not the same concern with respect to food or with respect to where you buy your vehicle or with respect to where you buy your vehicle or with respect to where you buy your health care. Because quite frankly, all of those are really important decisions as well. And here's what we find is that within the marketplace, when people have options, the best way to ensure quality is by giving people choice, not by putting a government board in charge of it, right? Like, I don't want the government misinformation board deciding what math looks like, because they're probably not going to come up with a good one.

So yeah, in a perfect world, it would be great if everyone, you know, could learn math the same way. They don't, right? So being able to have different options for students, hopefully to come to the, you know, a logical and rational conclusion at the end of it. But the idea that the government taking over that process is more likely to get us a good product, I don't see it. I mean, we've seen the exact opposite, right? Every year since the Department of Education was founded, test results have absolutely not improved, but funding adjusted for inflation has improved. And so I think to your point, yeah, we really didn't see this kind of bizarre two plus two equals five thinking creep its way into public schools until long after

the government had complete control over them and frankly if you were to go back to a time where schooling was more a product of the community and someone walked into the little red schoolhouse and said hey let's teach our kids two plus two is five they'd get laughed out of the room no one would be willing to do it you see thomas massey's proposal yes the department of education will will terminate on december 31st 2020 or whatever. Yeah. That's one sentence. The best troll move he ever made, and I love Thomas Massey. The best troll move he ever did, though, is when Betsy DeVos was put in charge of Department of Education of the Trump administration. Massey put out this massive thing going, do you really want this woman in charge of your child's education?

Support HB. And it was the same thing. Right, right, right. And he had all these lefties retweeting him. in charge of your child's education support hb you know and it was the same thing right right and he had all these lefties retweeting him so yeah we need to get behind this bill to give because i don't want betsy devos in charge but that was he was making a solid point you're right you don't want this person to charge your child's education so let's get rid of the mechanism that they use to try to control it and put you back in charge well so one point that the right and that libertarians will make when we're arguing with the left is you guys should want to abolish this particular state

institution because it might be the case that eventually someone who's more sympathetic to our views will be in charge of it as opposed to someone who's sympathetic to your worldview the reason i think that criticism never works and won't work and won't persuade them is because as a conservative or as a conservative or as a more right-leaning person, a more traditionally minded person, you know that on the local level, your solutions are generally things that most people support and would be willing to buy into. And I think the left knows that in order to get their agenda across, they need a gigantic bureaucratic state that's forcing these things onto everyone. So the risk of a

conservative being periodically in charge of it is worth it to them because the only way they can have any success is if it's forced onto everyone from some institution of that sort. I think that's right. I think they've realized that, you know, the old adage

came out of what it was that, you know, conservatives come in and end up conserving things that the liberals did 20 years earlier. Yep. And you saw that within the UK with the National Health Service.

Right now, there's not a single conservative candidate that's going to run on the idea of like look this has been a colossal failure on a number of levels maybe we need to privatize more no it's always put us in charge of it and we'll we'll run it more efficiently and more effectively and so yeah i think they i think they've made the the deal here and they realize that the more bureaucracy they get eventually they they push the overton window in the direction they want and they end up controlling it. I want to jump to a totally unrelated story because it's Friday and we haven't talked about this all week. Alec Baldwin could go to prison. Criminal charges still possible in rust shooting, Sheriff says.

And I just want to highlight that Alec Baldwin, my understanding is that he told the police he knows the difference between dummy rounds and live rounds, but that he did not check the gun himself. We then saw the footage that got released because everyone was wondering like, hey, they filmed Alec Baldwin doing this. Where's the footage? And you can see that Alec Baldwin lied. He said, my finger was not on the trigger. And you can see in this footage, they released his fingers on the trigger every time. That doesn't mean his fingers on the trigger the time he actually fired it. But come on, if I'm going to have to make a bet, his finger was on the trigger. Here's the best part about all this. When people point out that Alec Baldwin, Jack Buscella said this, he's like, Alec Baldwin should not be talking to these cops without lawyers because he basically admitted to doing it. People are like, yeah, but he's an actor. This is what I hear from every single

person on the left. For some reason, when I defend Alec Baldwin. He was on set doing what he's supposed to do. It's not his fault. Please pull up the manslaughter provision. And I think what was it, New Mexico? Show me where it says actors get a special exemption from involuntary manslaughter. It doesn't exist. If you are handed a gun and you point it at a person and you pull the hammer back of a single action revolver and it fires. That's involuntary manslaughter. Textbook. Yeah.

Also, what an unbelievably stupid excuse. You know, if someone's filming you and you point a gun at someone and pull the trigger, I guess you can't be prosecuted because you're an actor. I'm making a movie. Could you imagine there's like a serial killer and he's got a camera guy with him the whole time? Exactly. We're just making a movie.

We're just making a movie. We're just making a movie. He's filming a prank show where they go around and stab people to death. They go, it was a prank, bro. So just for fun, I'm going to go against every instinct I have. And I'm going to argue the other side of this. So you're in a position where you're handed a gun. And that gun is supposed to be loaded with blanks for the scene because obviously it wouldn't be loaded. Dummies.

Sorry, dummies. Because it wouldn't be loaded with live rounds. There's no reasonable expectation that we'd be loaded with live rounds. And this is a scene that you've done. This is something you've done before. And so you do it this time and this time, oh my gosh, there's a live round in it. And that's where it goes into the involuntary

manslaughter point. It's like, okay, you've got, obviously we're not talking about necessarily premeditated murder or anything like that. There's a part of me that can understand like okay i i this is a part of my job this is what i do this is how it works and i did it this way and something tragic happened i'm more concerned about again how did a life round get into that and then why did why did she get even with a dummy round because here's the other here's the other part that i think a lot of people don't understand about this. They think, oh, I'm firing a blank.

Okay, well, there's differences between firing a blank. I mean, there have been Hollywood stars that have died because of a blank because of the wadding. Yeah, was it Brandon Lee? Brandon Lee. There were two people. And that other guy in the 80s who pointed the blank to his head and killed himself. Yeah, and they don't understand how some of this works. Now, Alec Baldwin's been doing this for a while.

40 years? And he should understand how it works. And that's the part where a little bit more culpability for me creeps into this. I don't care who you are. If you are handed a gun and then you point it at somebody and kill them, you're in trouble. No. No question. So Alec Baldwin, trying to use this actor excuse where it's like, well, someone else was handling the gun.

I don't care and people are like I tweeted about this and they're like here's someone who's never been on set before and I'm like dude all you're telling me is that the people on set are idiots yeah they are they were in that movie Gutierrez Reed Hannah the arm what was she the Hannah Gutierrez Reed yeah she's the basically not the arms

master but in charge of the weapons she's not the one that handed the gun to Alec I'm pretty sure she wasn't even on set there's video of her from the day if you guys haven't seen this video it's basically not the arms master, but in charge of the weapons. She's not the one that handed the gun to Alec. I'm pretty sure she wasn't even on set. There's video of her from the day. If you guys haven't seen this video, it's all over the place now. There's all this video right after the shooting. And she's like, they tell Hannah that Alec fired the weapon. She's like, Alec Baldwin?

Alec Baldwin had the gun? Yeah. Oh, my God. She had no idea what was going on. Someone basically, in my estimation, there were a bunch of people that quit, walked off the set. They said it's unsafe.

Someone loaded that gun knowing that Alec was going to pull it out, not check because he's a lazy whatever, and that's exactly what happened. I think someone put that in there so that he would do the killing. Let me clarify something. I'm not saying that he's not criminally liable.

What I'm saying is that when I first heard about this, I'm like, okay, an actor did something stupid with a gun, not a shock. Is there any sort of reasonable, from a legal perspective, is there any sort of reasonable argument to be made that, hey, I was supposed to get a gun to do this,

I was supposed to point and pull the trigger and do this, I did that, and then something happened that I did not intend. Now, the other side of this is, going back to your point, someone hands you a gun, the way I grew up, what I was taught is you are now responsible for everything that gun does, and you don't get to say, well, this person handed it to me.

That's the part where the culpability creeps back in. Every time I've done a handoff for any weapon, the same thing occurs. The magazine is taken out, You clear it, make sure there's nothing in it. Then you lock the bolt back, the hammer or whatever, and then you hand it pointed down. You follow all the rules. And I don't even consider myself a gun expert. I just have guns. So I'm like, it's not even an issue of proper protocol. It's like, I'm going to check my firearms and I'm going to make sure it's clearly visible that there's nothing in it. I'm handing it to you and it will still be treated as if it's loaded, even with the magazine removed. Alec

Baldwin, when they're on movie sets, and people are acting like it's normal to be handed a weapon that's sealed, potentially loaded, and you're going to be like, I trust them. The weapon from the people on set, I'm told, they're supposed to open it show you the rounds take them out explain what they are put them back close it and then hand it to you with all safety protocols happening before your eyes yeah alec baldwin was supposed to go through that check then have the weapon and that's why he would not open the weapon up and check alec baldwin claimed he's like if i were to open it up and mess with it they would stop the shoot because that would be tampering with a weapon and I'm not allowed to do it. Only the armorer is.

Yes, but the armorer is supposed to go up to you, show you the mechanism, show you the safety, open it up, let you know. They'll take out the magazine, clear it and say everything's here. It's unloaded. I've showed it to you. Now you're responsible for it. They didn't do that. So Alec Baldwin received a weapon, did not check. He's responsible. Oh, no, he's checked. I would also argue that the person that was didn't do that. So Alec Baldwin received a weapon, did not check. He's responsible.

Oh, no, he's checked. And I would also argue that the person that was responsible for doing that. So for instance, if someone handed him a weapon and said, here's your weapon for the set and he did it, he's still responsible because he didn't follow the protocol. They're also responsible because they didn't follow the protocol. I don't know. So this assistant director, I guess, is the guy who handed him the gun. But they're on set. He's got a gun. He says it's for Alec. It's not his job to check it.

That's true. So I don't actually know if that guy would have any responsibility. The responsibility is if Alec Baldwin knows he's receiving a weapon, that guy isn't the one who pointed it and pulled the trigger. No, no, no. I'm not arguing with that. So Alec Baldwin, involuntary manslaughter, prison. He's also the producer of the movie. So there's another layer of culpability.

He should have been overseeing the safety mechanisms. The armor should have been there if they're handling live rounds. When I was in the military, we would go to the range. We'd do our thing. Then we'd also go to what we called shoot houses. And within our shoot houses, we're practicing close quarters battle. So you're doing high intensity explosives, hostage rescue, the whole deal. You'd go from, you'd do live rounds at some point. You'd also do what we call sim rounds.

So sim rounds had a different barrel for your M4 and your M9. And they fired paint rounds. You would shoot each other with the paint rounds. Now, again, you weren't shooting a live round through those sim barrels. But we went through so many checks and processes when you were transitioning from doing sim rounds to live rounds. You did so many processes to do that. And if you screwed up, it was on you. Because at the end of the day, you're still responsible for what's going on at that range.

You can point to a range safety officer, and they might get in trouble as well, but ultimately you're still responsible for what happens with the firearm in your hands. Yeah, that's the way it's got to be moving forward. Unless you're an actor. Well, yeah. No, you're still responsible as an actor. No, I know that. He killed that woman, man. Vladimir Putin's filming a movie.

Oh, in Ukraine? Is that why he's there right now? Yeah, he was just filming a movie. With Russian troops? The troops just it's set crew, man. It's all for the there right now? Yeah, he was just filming a movie. With Russian troops? Right, the troops just... It's set crew, man. It's all for the entertainment. All set crew, they're just there to film a war flick. And all of the civilians and all the destruction, well, I mean... You can't blame Putin, it's a movie!

With Alec, it's not even that I hate the guy, I just feel like justice has to be served. It'd be the same if it was my brother that did it. What? What's that? Is had been my brother in his position and he killed somebody i'd same thing he's got to serve justice like that you can't just let people get away with that or they're going to do it again and again you got to stop it in its tracks yeah everyone's been predicting that he's going to pay some settlement to the family and nothing's going to happen. Probably. Why should he get in trouble? Because he killed somebody.

Well, I know that, but I mean like in their mind. They're thinking like, well, you know. I love the conspiracy theories, though, that the woman was like an investigative reporter and whenever something weird happens, you get the conspiracy theories, you're tied all into like this grand Hollywood conspiracy. Be careful that it's not like an Alex Jones,

what do they call it, Sandy Hook thing where someone's like, she's a this and that and then the family comes after you with, try with a civil suit. Yeah, don't talk crap about people when they're dead.

Unless you know. you shouldn't talk crap about private citizens with things that aren't true. Yeah, especially when there's emotional, emotions involved like death.

The truth shall set you free. You know, Alex Jones' issue was that he said things that weren't true about private individuals that had been killed. That was a big part of it. No, it was the families issue was that he said things that weren't true about private individuals. That had been killed. That was a big part of it.

No, it was the families he was talking about. He was making fun of people who were still alive. Oh, yeah. Not making fun of them. He was making statements about them.

So I just say, you know, in these circumstances, you always want to have the truth. You always want to have your facts. He also shot a dude in the shoulder. He killed a girl

and then wounded another guy. Oh, yeah, right. The director. You watch the video. It's crazy. have your facts he also shot a dude in the shoulder he killed a girl and then wounded another guy oh yeah the director you watch the video it's crazy he's i don't know man it's crazy someone set him up that is nasty i i don't i don't know if i agree i all those people that hated him on that set and then all of a sudden there's a bullet shows up in the gun he's using like and maybe he put it there maybe maybe but i didn't seem realistic i just think that you have to make assumptions to assume it wasn't him. Yeah, I do. You're right.

There's no way to know. It's the simpler solution, albeit sounds crazy, that Alec put the bullet in there. Either way, it's an assumption. Alec was holding a gun, and the gun went off and killed someone. That's the only thing we need to know. Where the bullet came from, as far as I'm concerned, Alec Baldwin is responsible for it. When you see his finger on the trigger, when he's pulling the gun in practice, in rehearsal, he's got his finger on the trigger, and then he's like, my finger wasn't on the trigger.

Like, dude, his finger's on the trigger. And the crazy thing, too, is one of the reasons I actually think what we're seeing now lends to the idea that Alec is guilty of just outright homicide is that the way he was holding it, he could have shot himself. No, I think he knew what was in that gun. It was in his chest holster. You pointed out you can't assume.

You shouldn't assume. Well, the thing is, there's three things that a detective looks for in this. It's method, motive, and opportunity. So we obviously know the method. And all of them. We know the opportunity I don't know what the motive is The motive was that the crew was yelling at him

And fighting with him And it was stated Viva Frye did a really good job breaking this down That Hutchins was aggravating Was very aggressive with Alec That she wasn't supposed to be directing him She was a cinematographer Alec had already explained that he was frustrated

We know he's temperamental We know that the staff on the set have been complaining and threatening to walk off he's been dealing with the whole time and now he gets this woman who's bossing him around he's pissed off he had a motive there's another guy on the set they interviewed and he's like i don't want to i don't want to throw anyone under the bus but let's just say the practices on that set were not safe and it's like he's basically what he's saying is they're shooting live rounds for fun on set. But he didn't come out and say that. He didn't name names.

But it's like he was a guy working on the movie basically saying they weren't following safety protocol. All right. We're going to go to Super Chat. So if you haven't already, smash that like button, subscribe to this channel, and share the show with your friends if you haven't already. We do those special members-only shows Monday through Thursday at 8 p.m. I always say that, 8 p.m. At 11 p.m. I don't know why I do that. The show starts at 8 p.m. That's why I say that. But for now, we will

just read some of your Super Chats. So get those Super Chats in and let's see what you got. All right. We got... Padeson says Isaac Botkin from T-Rex Arms would be awesome to have on the show discussing 2A and the wins they're getting in Tennessee. Oh yeah, what's going on

in Tennessee? Oh, they got constitutional carry. That was the new thing, right? Oh, I mean happening everywhere. Oh my gosh. I carry that bill like every year in Virginia. Virginia's not interested or what? We can't get it through the Senate. I'm actually the chair of Public Safety Committee 1, which is where all the gun

legislation goes. This is the first year I've actually been the chair of that subcommittee, and I love it. But, yeah, we can't get it through the Senate at this point. So that just basically means people in Virginia have got to go vote for some new state senators. Yes, they do. Get that constitutional carry out there. And then maybe one day we can just cross our fingers that constitutional carry makes its way to the Supreme Court, and the Supreme Court says nationwide constitutional carry. Sorry, Maryland.

All right. Murph Tri says, breaking news. Elon Musk buys McDonald's. The corporation is rumored to be destroying evidence of why the ice cream machine is always down. Do you see what Elon tweeted? Yeah. He's not a magician. He's like, I can't work miracles.

Guys, I can't do miracles. That was really, really good. All right. And that says, Tim, please read. Nick scored a perfect score on VCDL gun bills. I'm from VA and would love to meet you, Nick. Perfect score. I did.

What does that mean? Perfect score. It means I had 100% score with respect to protecting our Second Amendment rights. That's right. Thank you very much. Is it like a conflict of interest for you to suggest people that you think should be in the Senate? No, not at all.

That's awesome. Not at all. Yeah, that's easy. All right. Roberto Lara says, The Ministry of Truth will be absolutely effective as gun free zones. Ha ha. That's right.

War Wolf says, Happy Friday to the crew of Shimcast IRL. It is, once again, Graphene Friday. Ian, please enlighten us, your faithful and beautiful fans, with a graphene fun fact. And Tim, please make official Timcast beanies and then a bunch of gorillas.

They actually discovered graphene by peeling scotch tape off of graphite. I think it was in early 2000s, and they won a Nobel Prize for that. I also rolled a 73. Oh, that's a big number, Ian. I really appreciate that they shouted us out here on Shimcast. I don't know what those Timcast beanies they were talking about at the end are, though.

You know what we'll do? We won't sell Timcast beanies. We'll only sell Shimcast beanies. And they'll be green, and they'll have a gold buckle in the middle. Tie, tie, tie, tie. It's very offensive. They come with fluky charms. Very offensive.

I'm leaving. Seamus literally puts an Ireland behind him and he's from Chicago. There was a fan who gave that to me and I thought it was very well crafted. I wasn't going to not put it there. It's beautiful. Well, how many generations back was your family in Ireland? It was a while ago, man. It was a while ago.

They came over. It was great grandparents and then they all just stayed in neighborhoods on the south side of Chicago where Irish people were. Good pizza, that's why. Yeah, exactly. That's why they stayed. The Irish are connoisseurs of fine cuisine, as you know. Pizzas, specifically. They're like, look at that.

First, they were like, oh, look at the pizza there. And by the time my parents came around, they're like, look at this pizza there. It's great. This one's about five inches deep don't you know wow look how much cheese is on it huh it's a lot of cheese there i think someone's cooking a deep dish giordano's right now right now you couldn't smell it well i'm gonna eat it i'll tell you that much i can't smell it but i will taste it we'll see because every so often i'll go downstairs and someone will have made a deep dish pizza because I order – I love ordering pizza and hot dogs from Chicago.

It's true. Yeah, me too. They're good. When we get Portillo's here, it's incredible. It's really, really funny because of the conspiracy theory when they're like Obama ordered pizza and hot dogs from Chicago. So Portillo's, famous Chicago hot dogs, and then Giordano's, of course, famous Chicago pizza. I also like Lou Malnati's, but I'll order – they overnight it. You put it in the freezer and then everybody makes it's of course famous chicago pizza i also like lumo nadis but i'll order the overnight that you put in the freezer and then everybody makes it and it's it's really good

if if you like pizza well this ain't it yeah giordano's is a bucket of cheese it's it's it's a bucket it's a bucket made of bread with cheese and sauce in it and it's delicious it's like just take a bag of mozzarella put it on a plate put tomato sauce on it microwave it and you got a giordano's pizza it's like doing a shot of alcohol you do it on a plate, put tomato sauce on it, microwave it, and you've got a Giordano's pizza. It's like doing a shot of alcohol. You do the shot, but it takes like 10 or 20 minutes to start to feel it, at least for me sometimes. But it's the same with the pizza.

You take a big bite of it. You eat one of those slices, and it's like 10 or 20 minutes before you feel full. That's true. It's like Elder Fred's pizza. So you can get two in really fast if you move, but then you suffer. In all seriousness, though, I just ate this, and now I'm lactose intolerant. Look at that. It's like, what, an inch of cheese?

It's got to be. Something like that. It's thick. It's huge. You know what that is? That's America right there. That's right. It's America.

Because we can. Yes. I mean, it's weird, because when you're in Chicago, you don't really eat it all that often. No. No. Probably for the best. It's something you do to remember. It's a tourist thing.

I think I ate six slices of it a couple weeks ago, but it took me four or five days to get it out of my system. Oh, yeah. It guns you up, huh? Yeah, yeah. Well, all that cheese, man. And the bread, too. The bread was doing too much. All that cheese.

All right. Nathaniel Sacrenti says, Did Elon buying Twitter cause the Overton window to shift dramatically, causing everyone to start seeing what's been hidden for so long? It could be what's causing so many people to be labeled right-wing now. I mean, it just happened this week. But I do think Elon buying Twitter shifted the Overton window dramatically. And I love how it's like a different

country now. Like, the Overton window is completely shifted. He doesn't even, like, own it yet. Yeah. Seth Rogen comes out, he's like, I'm pro-life! I've always been! That's funny. But it just goes to show you how the American people actually feel about things. As soon as they're just like gently tapped in a specific direction, they go there. It's like, yeah, no, people are on the right.

It's almost as if when you stifle speech and tell everyone that they have to parrot the left-wing narrative, as soon as they get an opportunity to just let that spring out and go to the right. They do. Oh, there's there is a lot of lefties on Twitter that realize that not everyone thinks they're wonderful and witty and beautiful. As soon as an algorithm isn't doing the heavy lifting for them. Did I know the former administration at Twitter was like that weird parent who pays people to be friends with their kid and their kid is just horrible to them. And the parent stops paying them. Like, what's going on? Why don't you like me? Because you're terrible. You've always been terrible to everybody you mean i'm not beloved all right

busy b says i am a three-time felon all from 08 to 10 today i petitioned the court in va the state i got in trouble i am proud to say i now have all my rights back including the second amendment so happy glad to hear it i do not i do not like the idea that someone gets a felony for any reason they can't have guns i think you pay your debt to society you should get your rights back but i i do agree people said you can lose your rights to due process that is true all right the one free man says not saying elon is batman but has anyone ever seen elon and batman in the same room together uh i have actually christian bale and elon were at a party once no has anyone seen iron man and elon in the same room together i want i think iron man's a better iron man's a better analogy

or more analog analogous to uh elon because batman was peak peak human condition yeah batman exercise and trained with assassins and then uses wealth for gadgets. Iron Man was a wealthy industrialist who made a powerful suit and he wasn't like physically trained or anything. So Elon's more like Iron Man. Plus, considering how Iron Man's character is

and Elon's trolling, more Iron Man than him. Yeah, definitely. All right. Sean St. George says, have any of you heard of the Indian folk metal band Bloodywood? Their track, Gadar,

has some of the best political lyrics I've heard. Quote, I see a state turning to faith. Faith turned to hate. Hate turned to vote. Votes turned into notes. As an example. Interesting. NSX says,

if you woke up in a hospital from a 10-year-long coma, read Washington Post while watching SNL you'd think you'd have brain damage and ask to be unplugged that's actually that's a very good point I almost want to steal that for a cartoon I won't, I'm too respectful was it Zuby who said I'm just a regular person from 2012

yes it's a great point can you imagine someone who woke up from a coma 10 years ago looking at the paper and going I can't believe how far right this country's gotten. Yeah. That's exactly the conclusion they'd come to. It's unbelievable.

Yeah. This is a far right nation. If someone from 2008 was in a coma and woke up in 2016, they would be like the Republicans have gone far left. Yeah. They'd be like the Republican nominee is unfurling a pride flag on stage at the RNC. What's happened to my country? Obama in, oh wait, opposed gay marriage. Hillary Clinton opposed gay marriage in 2016.

Now, this is the funniest thing. The leaked emails that came out from WikiLeaks show that Hillary Clinton, my understanding of the reporting, opposed gay marriage. She had said something about it. And Donald Trump was for it. He was like, guys, it's done. We're not going to win this one. How is it that the Republicans were to the left of the Democratic candidate on that issue that's trump was a was a liberal he was a populist

he was a liberal yeah yeah yeah that's true i think it was mostly a pop populist right yeah omega resetsu says tim remember when trump campaigned on universal reciprocity for concealed firearm licenses pepperidge farmer members that was his biggest lie. I didn't know that, but if he didn't get it done, then that's too bad. We'll call him out for it. Maybe we'll make him uphold that in term two. But did you know that? Is that something Trump promised? The universal...

Reciprocity for concealed carry? I don't remember. I honestly don't remember on that one. What we need is for the Supreme Court right now to weigh in on constitutional carry. So here's the interesting dynamic on that one. What we need is for the Supreme Court right now to weigh in on constitutional carry. So here's the interesting dynamic on that one. And here's the crazy part because that is something that legally could happen now. Now, before a liberal interpretation of the 14th Amendment, I don't think it could have

because the Second Amendment was originally a prohibition on federal power, not on state power. What was interesting is that when the liberal interpretation of the establishment doctrine essentially said that well no the bill of rights applies to all of the states then all right then i guess the second amendment applies well no no we didn't we didn't mean the second amendment no you know that's what it means and so it's interesting because once upon a time you could have made a good constitutional argument that the second amendment is only a prohibition on federal power. But you can't do that if you're going to accept substantive due process or anything else.

Right, right. All right. Ben says, I was in middle school when Obama was elected. Michelle made school lunches so bad it was incredible. From three or four options in grade school to one or sometimes two inedible meal choices. We used to have this thing when I was in grade school called a super donut. And it was so good.

What was it? It was a donut. But super. It was in a piece of plastic and they would heat it up. Oh, yeah. And everyone got really excited when they had super donuts. Another problem with school is the food. You know, maybe Michelle needed to do something. Maybe we needed that. Hospitals, too. They serve such junk in hospitals.

Can we just have Cookout Burger take over all of it? We had gray and blue hot dogs. Dude. Oh, yeah, yeah. Did you guys ever have those? Oh, yeah. Kind of like sitting in a big pot of boiling water and whatnot. They'd be like gray or grayish blue.

Yeah. And people would just be like, what is this? Is that because they sat out for a while? No, I have no idea. I don't know if I ever ate one of those though yeah gross yep unacceptable all right let's read some more trevor cameron says the sky is opaque daylight retracts through our nitrogen rich atmosphere making it blue and at night we see the stars through an opaque sky we'll see what jana has to say about that.

I think that's not true. They refract through an antigen-rich atmosphere, but I don't believe opaque is the word you are looking for. Well, I'm certainly not going to listen to it until the Department of Information from the Department of Homeland Security tells me whether or not it's opaque. With that logic, nothing is any color, because you're only

seeing the bouncing light off of the thing. You're not actually looking at the thing. I learned from the Young Turks that the sky at night is actually pinholes punched through so that the light of heaven can come through. Is that true? Is that something people used to say? Is that an argument that was made? I'm not sure. Like at some point.

I mean, that is what happens. I don't know. That is what's happening. That is what the sky is. Yeah, the vibration is vibrating the Higgs field, and when it hits a certain frequency, cracks open as light. So maybe those are the pinholes you're talking about. There's a rant from Cenk where he's yelling about religion,

and he's like, these people think the sky at night was pinholes punched out so that the light of heaven would shine through. Well, yeah, that was, that was the, that was the big, that was the big push in 2007 to teach that in public schools. Don't you guys remember when the religious rights said, let's teach kids that there are pinholes.

You hate, you know, what's actually happening. So like, you know, what's actually happening. Weird, sexually perverted teachers trying to have secret conversations with children

about sexuality. Like that's a real thing that's happening instead of Jenks, weird, imaginary persecution complex-fueled ideas about the religious right. Well, the only reason you're concerned about that is because you hate gay people. That's right. You're right. Man, getting right to the center of it.

I love when people know what I'm thinking better than I do so that they can tell me, because it's always a surprise. In public school, that's what it's all about. I think it's more funny that someone's like, I would like it if teachers weren't having secret conversations with my kids about sex. And they went, why do you hate gay people? It's like, how can you take this from them?

What are you implying about gay people? Yeah. It's just what I can't stand about, you know, people have said the trans agenda or the gay agenda. And I'm like, dude, Dave Rubin opposes this. He's gay. Yeah. Right. There are many gay people like it's wrong. And then there are many trans people who are like it's wrong

it's a bunch of weirdo cultists who believe weirdo things i don't know if there's many trans people that say it's wrong because i don't know that there's many trans people a pretty small community there it is a small community but i just mean like there are prominent individuals i'm being facetious as well but i think when we've talked about this it's more or less how those groups operate as a political force rather than what every individual identifies with it. I also find it a little bit contradictory that the same hyper-crunchy, college-educated mom that will not feed her child an Oreo because it has chemicals in it is saying, but here's some puberty blockers and maybe we cut some things off if you feel like wearing high heels today. I think that's a little bit contradictory.

Nyland Hynek says to quote Sidney Watson govern me harder daddy. That's a good one. All right. Agamemnon's gym bag says saw a panel. Wow.

With a Mycenaean quote right there. I'm going to take Troy. Saw a panel on Fox making fun of her and saying that she isn't the person for the position. The person in the position is just a distraction. We need to fight the creation of a ministry of truth. Absolutely. Dragon lays as I was in a discussion about liberty and lockout lockouts

on Facebook when somebody said Americans are too addicted to liberty. He got a lot of agreement. They were lefties. Did you guess addicted to liberty what's the alternative should we just like live in concrete blocks where big brother tells us what to do and when to do it yes obviously tim that's the whole thing you have to obey whatever the left tells i mean we're not saying that you should live in concrete blocks and listen to big brother but if the science says that's what you should if we decide at some point down the line we just want to make sure you are going to listen. Wait, did science say that?

Science hasn't spoken much lately. I get nervous when science doesn't show up. You guys want to play science says? Yeah. Science is out of the news cycle for some time. Yeah. Science says. Let's play science says.

Oh, science didn't say that. That's a good one. Actually, I'm just going to go home and care for my family, not pay attention to the media. Science didn't say. That's a freedom tune. Thank you. You know what? It will be. I was going to do one called Fauci

says, but then he fell out of the... I want to do something nice for all the leftists who might find themselves watching this show. You know, you may be sad. You may be scared because you haven't heard from the science in some time. Well, we can't get you the science, but we can't get you the next best thing.

Don't worry. Just put on a couple of masks and Rand Paul will go away. Now, that wasn't perfect, but I'm sure many people, it calmed you down. You got your little fix there. That was good. I overdo it for sure. As a connoisseur of accents, that was pretty damn good. Rand Paul. He talks funny, right?

He does, I would say. Thinks funny, too. All right, let's grab some more super chats. Saro says, 13% income tax. That's adorable. Currently in our 40% band here in the UK, not even our top. Wow. Yeah, it sucks to be ruled by a king.

13. 13% is for what, though? Is 13 the lowest bracket? Right? Or no, is 13 the lowest bracket, right? Or no? What's the lowest bracket for people who are poverty? They pay nothing, don't they? No, so you have to, when you take into account, this is interesting. When you take into account government transfers, which is not just what I pay in taxes, but

what I get back through different government programs and what, you have to make almost $75,000 a year before you are a net taxpayer at the federal level. Well, this is what people don't understand is that if somebody who makes 50 grand per year ends up paying 20 grand or 18 in taxes, they're actually getting a tax benefit of like 25 to 30 in all of the services that are provided to them. So that even in services like earned income credit, child credit. Oh, yeah. People don't understand that the overwhelming majority of tax revenue comes from the wealthy, and that subsidizes the poor.

So poor people actually don't pay their fair share relative to what they're getting in return. Well, we had an interesting case this last time in the General Assembly where somebody got up and said, these people pay a higher percentage of their income than these people over here. Here's the problem. She wasn't taking into account all the transfer payments. So she's saying someone making $20,000 a year is paying this much in taxes, and that's a higher percentage. When you include the transfer payments that person is getting, right, it drastically changes it. But if you don't take the transfer payments into consideration, she can come, you can give her everything she wants. And and year after year she should come back and say, these people are paying a higher percentage. Because you're not

actually counting the transfer payments. What are the transfer payments? It's like, so you pay taxes and then somebody collects maybe EBT or WIC or they get rental assistance or something like that. That's a transfer. That money went from you and your taxes to this person over here because of the income bracket they're at. But they never count it as part

of their income. As far as the way they do the measurement on who's paying a larger percentage. But look, with unemployment, right? I pay a tax. Then from that tax, they give someone their unemployment insurance, but then they have to pay a tax on that unemployment insurance. So it's double taxed. Let's say it costs $100 to send a firefighter out to your house.

That comes out of your taxes, right? Except for somebody who makes no money money let's say someone's unemployed they get those services for free now i don't have i don't have an issue with that firefighters i think should be like the the issue back in the day was that you can't have a firefighter show up to a block full of houses and be like that one doesn't get our service and the other houses then start on fire so they that we needed to find a way to deal with that. But that means that people who are paying almost no income tax are getting the equivalent of a hundred bucks for free. Well, that hundred bucks has to come from somewhere. So that means a wealthier person has to pay the equivalent of a thousand dollars for you to get your fire services. You see? And so the roads are probably a better example. When the government

fixes the roads, the amount of money that a rich person has to pay towards the roads is going to end up being millions of dollars, whereas a poor person, it's going to be pennies. Military, too, I think. Yeah, military is the stuff that I'm not a big fan of. But I think people do overestimate how much we spend, what percentage of our tax revenue goes to outright military weapons and stuff like that. I mean, we spend like around 5% of our GDP with respect to military spending. When you actually look at what the government is spending, what they have discretion over versus what is settled, like Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare, that comes off the top before you ever get to the discretionary spending.

And so that's why you'll see sometimes the left go like, oh my gosh, the military is 27% of the budget. No, it isn't. It's 5% of the overall budget. It's a larger percent of discretionary because you've already done all these programs that are eating up a huge portion of your budget. So instead of giving them money back, they'll just buy more bombs and blow them up more?

With the military? Yeah. As discretionary funds rather than give them back to the people to spend it on purpose? No, even within the discretionary, most of that is going to funds outside of defense. We have a good one here from Mike DiPietro. He says, the university should have to co-sign student loans. Goodbye, worthless degrees.

Hello, first-class liberal education. Imagine what that would be like. Agreed. Yeah. Let's at least do that. You've got to co-sign. If you want someone to come to your university and you're guaranteeing this degree is going to be right for you, then assume the responsibility on that loan. All of a sudden, these degrees like feminist interpretive dance, gone.

Just gone. Fact check true. As long as you're not giving the money directly to the students to spend how they want. That's what they do. I know. That's the problem. And I know people went hard. Because then they'll just default on the co-sign. Oh, yeah. Well, the universities aren't going to spend how they want. That's what they do. I know. That's the problem. And I know people went party. Because they have this default on the cosign.

Oh, yeah. Well, the universities aren't going to cosign. They'll learn their lesson quick, huh? Well, it used to be if you wanted to get a loan for college, you went to a private lending institution. And a private lending institution would ask questions like, how'd you do in high school? And oh, by the way, what are you going to study? Because they wanted to make sure that you were going to study something that could get

you a job that would allow you to pay back the loan. Politicians don't care. They can just forgive the loan and then be heroes on both ends of the spectrum. All right. Eric Lakey says, I'm an electrician and make good money. Didn't take any loans to get where I'm at. Sorry, I am not responsible for paying for gender studies majors debt. They made their bed and need to lay in it.

I agree with that on the principle of loans. I think one of the issues is that you want to make fun of these gender studies millennials. I'm right there with you. I get it. But if you also want these people to snap out of the communist socialist ideas and you want them to get a family, recognize why the taxes are too high, start working, being responsible for their own home. We need to clear the path for that. That's why my compromise is the interest rates on top is where people are really getting hammered down. So you take out a loan for 50 grand. Over the course of 10 years, you've paid back 50, but you still owe 50. You've already paid back the principal we gave you. Maybe there should be a small interest,

but it's static. It's not compounding. And we can get rid of the higher predatory stuff. Of course, now it's not even keeping it with the rate of inflation, which our government is also responsible for. I just think we need to end the whole system outright. How about we do this? Here's the compromise. We end the subsidization of universities, period, done, no more government guaranteed loans. And then we'll work out some kind of interest rate forgiveness rate for good forgiveness but if you if you got the money and you spend it you got to give it back tom garrett used to be in congress you've had you've had before yeah love tom to death um tom's actually in ukraine right now oh wow um yeah with his exile project so tom actually had an interesting idea when he was in congress

where he said that if you if you took out student loans he and tom was a big believer and we've got to stop what we're doing with the predatory lending and all that he goes but if you take out student loans we we will we will pay off part of the student loan but then what it is is you have to increase the number of years before you start collecting on social security and so the idea was that it balanced out and so it wasn't that we were we were shifting your responsibility for paying your loan onto somebody else what we were saying is is that we're acknowledging that look people live people live longer, they work longer, the whole deal, when Social Security was first put into effect.

So if you want to voluntarily say, I will hold off taking Social Security for these many years, well, then we can take that out of the current loan that you require, and so you can get your life started earlier. I was like, that is an interesting approach that doesn't shift the burden onto taxpayers and potentially help some of the problems that we have, too, with some of our rumors. It is. However, I would predict that what would end up happening there is that the people who had their student loans forgiven with the agreement that they would defer their collection of Social Security would end up forming a political bloc later in life saying, we should be given Social Security. And then the Democrats would say, what a travesty it is that they're not

being given social security and then they would end up getting it anyway and the cost would be deferred to everybody we got we got a good one jamie mccullough says elon musk actually talked to to tony stark and avengers about an electric spaceship so yes i have seen him in the same room as iron man but that also means elon's in the marvel cinematic universe so they could you know they could they could do some of that. All right. Sonny G says, Hey, Tim, I'm 32 and a first-generation Mexican-American. Both parents came to the U.S. legally. I graduated from high school but could not afford to attend college,

so I got a full-time job. I saved up and at 21 purchased my SoCal home. Bravo. So awesome. Well done. And they keep saying the American dream is not real. That's BS, man. Absolute BS. You come to this country and you work hard, you can

succeed. They're just lying to convince people to burn it down because they're insane. All right. Adrian Curry with an excellent statement. You got to make your own Chicago pizzas. It is so much better fresh. Would make great content. I have

tavern thin crust recipes and a deep dish that is close to tasting like Lou Malnati's I can send. I will gladly accept your pizza recipes, Adrian. And that is how Deep Dish City on YouTube was born. Deep Dish City? Well, we're talking about doing a cafe.

I think we're going to do it because I want to put it next to Starbucks and then subsidize it so that our coffee will be substantially cheaper than Starbucks and higher quality so that Starbucks will know what it feels like when they put their corporate chain subsidized by the corporation next to a mom and pop shop and runs them out of business. That's what they've been accused of doing. I knew stories when I was in Seattle. There was like a really great corner coffee shop. And then one day a Starbucks opens up right next to it. They sell their coffee for $3. The mom and pop can't afford that.

But Starbucks loses money knowing the corporation can fund and just cover the cost of this. Once the mom and pop shop is put out of business by the split customer base, Starbucks cranks their prices back up. That's what I've been told. That's what I was told. I was told that quite frankly.

Yes. Okay. So, you know, fact check that one. And if you haven't, smash that like button. Subscribe to this channel. Share the show with your friends.

I'm going to read one more here. Hugh Richard Bradshaw says, Would you accept a multi-million dollar offer from Elon to be the ceo of twitter you mentioned a random like joe rogan what if it's you since you slayed vagaya never what i would not be the ceo of twitter bro be ceo of both you know do timcast do twitter

i you know what actually it's a good point i would go in and say as ceo my first course of action is the company is now just everything's First Amendment. And they're going to be like, but that means people are going to post awful pictures. Yeah. Welcome to the Internet. Web 1.0, baby. But with billions of people.

I think. Didn't he pick a CEO? I saw that. All right, everybody. If you haven't already smashed that like button, subscribe to the channel, share the show with your friends and head over to Timcast.com. Become a member to help support our work. We just hired a new journalist.

We're doing new shows. We've become a member to help support our work. We just hired a new journalist. We're doing new shows. We've got a bunch of really fun campaigns planned. If you liked what I did with that Times Square billboard, you're going to love the next bit of culture jamming I have planned that will absolutely, oh, this one's going to rustle up some feathers quite fierce. I have more plans, and we're going to make statements. We're going to push back on the cultural establishment and let them know that we are here, and every single journalist in New York is going to be screaming and banging on their tables,

and there will be nothing they can do to stop it. So with that being said, Nick, you want to shout anything out? Just once again, it's been a pleasure hanging out with all of you. Can't think of a better way to spend my Friday. Great Friday. Thanks for coming, man. What's your Twitter? Nick4VA is my Twitter. Obviously, you know, check out making the argument with Nick Freitas. And at some point, I'm going to have to get you to actually hold the coffee mug saying Thomas Sowell is a national treasure.

He's handing it to me right now. All right. I had so many people ask me to ask you to do this. Oh, nice. He is a national treasure, by the way. And not allowed to die. Probably a global treasure. There it is.

Thomas Sowell is a national treasure and not allowed to die. Probably a global treasure. There it is. Thomas Sowell is a national treasure and not allowed to die. Fact check true. It's Nick4, F-O-R-V-A. Yeah, V-A. Not the number four. And where do they get, check your show out? YouTube or podcast, Spotify. Is there a specific day and time

that it goes live? No, we don't go live, but it's twice a week, making the argument. I'm Seamus Coughlin. I make cartoons that it goes live? No, we don't go live, but it's twice a week, making the argument. Nice. Go for it. I'm Seamus Coghlan. I make cartoons at a YouTube channel

called Freedom Tunes. Y'all should go check that out. Subscribe, hit the notification bell. We're going to have some cartoons coming out next week that I think you'll really enjoy. I love you all. Have a wonderful weekend.

That was so quality. Thank you. I can only comment on how awesome Nick and Seamus were. I love you guys. We love you. Chris, you were phenomenal tonight. Thanks a lot. Yeah, man. Thanks, Ian. I'm looking forward to working love you. Chris, you were phenomenal tonight. Thanks a lot.

Yeah, man. Thanks, Ian. I'm looking forward to working with you again in the future, maybe at some time. Thanks for covering for Lydia. Lydia, I love you. I know you're out there enjoying your honeymoon. Have a great night. Have a great weekend, everyone.

Thanks so much for hanging out. Head over to TimCast.com. Be a member. Go over to YouTube.com slash Chicken City or go to chicken city live.com because there are chickens hot a lot of babies doing chicken stuff the silkies hot chicken and uh thank you all so much for the support someone just said tim the vagina slayer appreciate it thanks for hanging out and we'll see you all next time