Timcast IRL - Timcast IRL #562 - Ocasio Cortez Asked About 2024 Run, Says INSANE Civil War Nonsense On TV w/Royce White

Episode Date: June 30, 2022

Tim, Ian, Seamus of FreedomToons, and Lydia host basketball player, commentator, and politician Royce White to discuss Stephen Colbert asking AOC if she'll run for president in 2024, her absolute buffoonery about Civil War history, the trends showing Democrats losing after Roe v Wade, the GOP winning on running moderate policies, and Democrats trying to get red states to abort their children. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Discover the magic of BetMGM Casino, where the excitement is always on deck. Pull up a seat and check out a wide variety of table games with a live dealer. From roulette to blackjack, watch as a dealer hosts your table game and live chat with them throughout your experience to feel like you're actually at the casino. The excitement doesn't stop there. With over 3,000 games to choose from, including fan favorites like Cash Eruption, UFC Gold Blitz, and more. Make deposits instantly to jump in on the fun.

And make same-day withdrawals if you win. Download the BetMGM Ontario app today. You don't want to miss out. Visit BetMGM.com for terms and conditions. 19 plus to wager. Ontario only. Please gamble responsibly. If you have questions or concerns about your gambling or someone close to you, please contact Connex Ontario at 1-866-531-2600 to speak to an advisor free of charge.

BetMGM operates pursuant to an operating agreement with iGaming Ontario. So we were going to lead with the story about J6, that woman who got caught lying again. It's funny because you have conservative papers that hate Trump and you have Democrats. They're all like, this is the bombshell testimony. And then a bunch of people come out and they're like, yeah, I will swear on earth she's lying, but they believe it anyway. And then we thought, you know what? It's just so boring. Can we make fun of Ocasio-Cortez instead? Because Colbert asked her to run for president or ask if she was going to run for president. And she didn't say no. And she was like, yeah, well, you know, and then she also,

it's really amazing because, you know, please, someone would someone help this country. AOC goes on on primetime television to millions of people. And she strung a bunch of words about the civil war together that made literally no sense. And everyone's clapping for it. And I'm just like, she does. It's amazing. It's she made comments about Abraham Lincoln, the Supreme Court, why Joe Biden should take certain action.

And it's like she just made it all up. It's absolutely amazing. Her timeline is wrong. Her history is wrong. The actions taken were wrong. And I'm sitting there watching, and Colbert is like, you should be president. And I'm like, oh, man. That's actually pretty Chad.

You know, just go on television in front of a bunch of people who can fact check you and start making stuff up like yeah no he should do this because that's what abe lincoln did and you're like do you have a source like i made it up yeah no i mean that happened six years she's like abraham lincoln you know dred scott was issued so abraham lincoln issued the emancipation proclamation and it's like aoc that was six years before she said six years she said the confederates packed the supreme court or she said the confederates packed the supreme court or she said the confederates got their people into the supreme court it's like what are you talking about you know okay so so we it's going to be fun roasting all that but there's some other funny

news too in iowa but after roe v wade's repeal republicans gained in the polls so they can come out and i'll tell you this too the democrats were funding trump supporting candidates thinking it was going to help them and then in colorado the moderate one so they wasted all of that money and just propped up and expanded trump's message these people are not smart people in aoc she really really does prove it every single day so we're going to talk about that plus we'll talk about what's going on with january 6th but my friends don't forget head over to timcast.com and become a member to help support our work as a member. You'll get access to exclusive segments from this show Monday through Thursday at 11 p.m., the uncensored

after-hours show where we swear a lot. And you don't want your kids listening to that one, but it is a whole lot of fun, and it's often very funny. You'll also be supporting our journalists and our infrastructure. We use Rumble so we can help build an ecosystem that is more resilient to censorship for everybody. So don't forget to smash that like button, subscribe to this channel, share the show with your friends, and joining us today to discuss all of this, we got Royce White.

Thanks for having me. Who are you? What do you do? Well, I guess the most important thing I'm doing right now is running for United States Congress against Ilhan Omar in Minnesota's 5th Congressional District, and're in the the dead heat of that campaign i got a primary august 9th against a a rhino uniparty globalist uh who who said that abortion was red meat politics for the base at our convention wow and when roe v wade passed she she celebrated it because i mean you don't have to keep account of the things you said yesterday.

When it got overturned. Yeah, yeah. She acted like it was a big deal. She acted like she was on board. So, yeah, running for Congress, also playing in the Big Three. Our season started two weeks ago, and I got that going on as well and still training mixed martial arts every day in preparation for whenever the election is over to try and fight again. Rod Allman, thanks for hanging out.

We also got Shim Sham. Yeah, before I introduce myself, I just wanted to make a comment here you mentioned the republicans becoming more popular uh after banning abortion there's this talking point we kept hearing about roe v wade and if it's overturned people will turn against republicans it'll hurt them in the polls like yeah you know what's going to make republicans really unpopular if they accomplish something for once ever. That would be so bad for them. Doing what the Republicans ask the politicians to do is bad.

For 50 years, they finally did the thing, finally accomplished it. It's a bad look, I know. I am Seamus Coghlan. I run a YouTube channel called Freedom Tunes. And this, unfortunately, is going to be my last show for a while. So they've made me a cake, which I very much appreciate. Lids decorated this. What's the five for? Because for just five bucks a month, you can become a member at freedomtunes.com. So I know that I'm going to be leaving the show for a while here, folks, but you can still get your dose of Seamus. Go to freedomtunes.com.

Become a member. You'll get an extra cartoon each week. You'll be helping us get independent from YouTube. I love you all, and I think this is going to be a great show. It says we'll miss you on the cake. It says we'll miss you. I know you won't. We're not about fake news on this show, so I've got to fact check that.

But hold on. It says we'll miss you. It's not necessarily – that's not indicative of a consensus, right? At least two people here will miss me. Oh, that's true. At least two. At least two. At least two people.

Fair point. Technically correct. Happy birthday, Seamus. But not morally accurate. Thank you. But not morally correct. What's up, everybody? Ian Crossland up in the house.

Nothing to shout out yet, so let's just get going. Let's move it along. I'm excited. We always have a great time with Royce. I am shout out yet, so let's just get going. Let's move it along. I'm excited. We always have a great time with Royce. I am the one who did the lettering on that cake. It is not my finest work, but I did it in about 10 minutes. I think I should have said Irish you already. That was Brett's idea, which I know.

I was like, why were you not here 10 minutes earlier? But oh well, we will miss Seamus. All right, everybody, let's jump into this first story. We got it from the Huffington Post. You know how much we love the Huffington Post. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has pithy reply when asked if she'll run for president. The popular progressive House member had just watched Cassidy Hutchinson's testimony at the January 6th hearing when Colbert popped the question. That's right.

They're getting married. Colbert and AOC. I'm kidding. So he asks her. He's like, this is really, really he roasted joe biden at the same time so uh respect for that uh they don't actually oh they don't actually show what he said about colbert that's funny he said no matter how many times people ask joe biden if he's going to run for re-election and he says yes they ignore what he says and then ask other people to run so the

new york times actually ran this article check this out. Biden irked by Democrats who won't take yes for an answer on 2024. Yo, it's not about taking yes for an answer. It's about how even if you say yes, they're like, dude's brain doesn't work. So they don't think he's going to run anyway. So here's the best part. Colbert is like, I know someone who's going to turn 35 right before the election. Ha ha. Could it be you? And then she said, listen, we need to keep we to focus on keeping democracy for anybody to be president the next couple of years. She replied. My central focus is helping the people of this country right now.

So it's possible. I don't know about that. Well, I don't think she's actually going to run. But the fact that I'm primetime TV, Stephen Colbert is asking her if she will. I think what we're seeing, you had CNN say, Hillary, it's her time now. Did you see that article from Chris Eliza and then everyone made fun of her? This is hilarious. One of her former campaign strategists came out and said her polling is actually, her

numbers or ratings are worse than Trump's. So he's like, no, no, no, no, no, no, Hillary. No, she's not coming back. I think the Democrats and the corporate press, they're desperate to try and find someone. I think the goal of asking AOC is so that they drop the stone in the water to see where the ripples go. They make the statement and now they want to see how the press handles it and what the reaction from the public is. They never said she's going to run. But what happens if all of a sudden people start saying, yeah, AOC should run and there's big fervor and fire under it?

Then they'll be like, oh, yeah, okay. So they're testing the waters, trying to see who they can get. And I got to be honest. When I heard that they asked, that Colbert asked if she'd run, I'm like, out of all the Democrats that are available, she'd beat them all. Save Michelle Obama maybe. But Gavin Newsom, AOC would do better. Well, I think there's an important point here. So if the Democrats know anything, they're starting to realize that they don't have that

much of a shot in 2024 if trends continue. There's not much hope for their party right now. And so it could be possible that what they would plan on doing is putting up some throwaway candidate in 2024 who's anti-establishment and actually relatively popular with their base so that next time an election comes along when a democrat actually does stand a chance of winning they can go we tried this anti-establishment person the people weren't interested they lost we're not going to run them or they can use this as an opportunity to raise aoc's profile that right, she's just a popular House member. She's not a senator. She's not that big. A presidential campaign run where they expect to lose can push her up to a very prominent

public space at the national level. Am I in this conversation already? Absolutely. Yeah, jump in. Okay, good. We got to debunk this right now. I can't stand it. This whole facade that AOC is anti-establishment.

Fair enough, fair enough. Is a complete scam. They want to run her as anti-establishment fair enough fair enough it's a complete scam they want to run her as anti-establishment exactly i want to say that exactly the ploy that they're running is that when you say you're socialist then you're anti-corporate but when you plan to expand socialism to the global scale it's the ultimate form of corporatism yeah i would agree and also there's nothing aoc believes that our public education system has not been set up to brainwash children into believing so i know i totally agree with i mean she eats out of the palm of the establishment but she's viewed as an outsider but if they don't and i wanted to say if they if they don't win in 2024 it's over because the young america first populist movement that's on the rise is going to go in and crush the old narrative that allowed an AOC to pose as anti-corporate.

And it's all mostly predicated on one, the story of blacks historically in the country. That's kind of the linchpin of grievance politics and anti-establishment, but also the young people who are indoctrinated at schools. And if the conservatives win in the midterms in 2024, we've got to go back and take those schools. Discover the magic of Bad MGM Casino, where the excitement is always on deck. Pull up a seat and check out a wide variety of table games with a live dealer. From roulette to blackjack, watch as a dealer hosts your table game and live chat with them throughout your experience

to feel like you're actually at the casino. The excitement doesn't stop there. With over 3,000 games to choose from, including fan favorites like Cash Eruption, UFC Gold Blitz, and more, make deposits instantly to jump in on the fun and make same-day withdrawals if you win. Download the BetMGM Ontario app today. You don't want to miss out. Visit BetMGM.com for terms and conditions. 19 plus to wager. Ontario only. Please gamble responsibly. If you have questions or concerns about your gambling or someone close to you,

please contact Connex Ontario at 1-866-531-2600 to speak to an advisor free of charge. BetMGM operates pursuant to an operating agreement with iGaming Ontario. I think we're headed towards a, there's a strong possibility of hyper-racialization happening in the next several years. There was a viral thread where this dude said, you know, there are young white men in school being told that they're the oppressors. Then they see that most people in college are female. Then they see that, like, you know, when they apply for a job, they're like, we're not hiring any white men.

And so this is a big thread where they explain that maybe it applies to older white men. Because when those older white men were younger, they were the majority and they controlled a lot of the space. But now that it's inverted, younger white men are growing up being told that they're the evil oppressors, but they're getting held back and they're getting restrained. So they're getting angry and they're forming racial identitarian groups, or they're starting to coalesce around race. So the left in pushing this stuff, I think is hyper-racializing everything. 100%. 100%. What they're banking on is that white people are always going to self-flagellate every single time a discussion on racial issues comes up because that's sort of been the status quo. But ultimately, at some point, white guilt runs out.

So it's generational. It's generational memory. What people don't understand when it comes to politics, they talk about like the pay gap, right? Yeah, but for which demographic? The pay gap exists for sure among boomers. The pay gap exists among millennials, but it's inverted. Millennial women make more money than millennial men. Millennial women are more likely to graduate college than millennial men.

Yet they keep pushing a narrative as if it's the younger generation suffering what the older generation went through. And that's going to cause a serious problem. Because in these stories, whether it's about leftist racial identitarianism, creating more white identitarianism, or social issues that were relevant 50 years ago not being relevant today and then punishing young people today based on the grievances of the past. You are going to raise a generation with an inverted system which causes oppression, which causes anger and animosity. The only difference is right now they're telling the young majority, white males, that they're evil and oppressors and then restricting them.

But these young men don't know anything about the civil rights movement. They didn't experience that. They weren't part of it. They don't know anything about slavery, Jim Crow. They weren't a part of it. They don't know anything about the Klan. They're not alive during a time of the Klan and they weren't a part of it. But they're still the majority.

So what happens when you raise the majority and tell them that they're evil oppressors and you take from them, you make it harder for them? Yo, they're going to come out in force. They're going to vote in force. And then it's really going to flip. This pendulum is going to swing hard in the other direction.

A bunch of kids that believe they're evil oppressors grow up to become evil oppressors. No, that's not what I'm saying. Well, that's also going to happen. I'm saying that it's possible. A lot of them do. It's that this 17-year-old white kid is like, you said there's a pay gap? Why do all the women make more money?

You said that men are privileged. How come I can't get a job? You said that men are privileged. How come the women are the ones who are graduating from college? How is it me? Because they do not live in the generations past. This thing where people are telling us one thing, but it's not right,

like that the economy is doing great when you have the speaker. It's driving people crazy. It's driving me crazy. It's got to be driving young people crazy because they don't have the context I have, at least the outlet I have for the most part. Not that all of them don't,

but I mean, it's got to be driving people insane. That's dangerous. My concern about the entire race conversation that I've been thinking about more recently is the concept of white itself. I don't like it. Totally agree. What do you mean by that?

I'm Irish. What I mean is there's a bit of a double cross and triple cross when it comes to saying who's white. Barack Obama was white what what i mean is you know in in europe let's say for example is white sorry nobody nobody calls themselves white you're from spain you're from romania you're from uh italy you're from the uk you're irish whatever the case may be. In America, we've kind of been the driving force of creating a unified white identity that's an amalgamation of a bunch of European clans that used to oppress and kill each other. And that framework of history gets completely lost on young people. Still do, for sure.

Yeah, Russia and Ukraine. Exactly, yeah. Well, the Russians aren't even considered white in modern. They do, for sure. Russia and Ukraine. But that, exactly, yeah. Well, the Russians aren't even considered white in modern. They're Slavs, but... Yeah, yeah, Slavics are people of color,

apparently. They are people of color. Like our friend Luke. Yeah, yeah. But it just shows you that the history is something that's lost on many people

in its premise. Yeah, real quick. I want to make a point about this. But just, as you mentioned, your problem with the concept of white. I agree luke ridkowski has blonde hair and blue eyes yeah but he's slavic so they say he's a person of color and i'm just like all right you lost me dude yeah no it's completely absurd i've said this before the idea of just like one

wholesale white identity erases the different ethnic groups that actually fall under that umbrella and it's interesting how that definition has changed over time. Historically, in this country, it was basically a label that was used to exclude Catholics. It was all of the people who had white skin but were from Catholic cultures who were considered non-white. So the Irish, the Polish, the Italians. And now today, Irish people are considered white, but Irish people weren't considered white until being white meant you had to apologize for being white all the time. Well, so this is actually the left's argument.

That's what it is. Their argument is that white changes, that Italian people weren't considered white. Therefore, whiteness today doesn't really mean the color of your skin. It means like dominance, social structure. Well, the Washington Post said that I'm a far-right white nationalist. Now they're going to start calling black people. Seriously, they're going to start calling black people serious. They're going to start calling black people who are America first. Larry Elder!

You're a white nationalist. Candace Owens! Clarence Thomas! Dave Chappelle's skit has come to life. Was it Clayton Bigsby? Dave, you're a prophet. How is this real life? It's almost like he manifested it.

He made this skit thinking, I'll make something so crazy it'll never work you know the fascinating thing about that clayton bigsby segment was it showed that it was about culture and ideas more than race that in his bit the point being made was that the white supremacists were like he's such a good speaker and his ideas are so beneficial to us we gotta we gotta keep him around and then there was the scene where he sees he hears the rap music and it's three white guys and then he calls him a racial slur and they liked it because they were trying to be right they're like cool yeah like the the point was interesting it was that it was about culture not about race and i think that that actually is still true today but you know i agree with you but they want to they want to have it both ways right so the left

wants to talk about this idea of a white identity and um they'll claim that whiteness changes over time and it's an arbitrary construct but then they'll turn around and go you have white skin you are objectively white therefore i don't have to listen to your opinion exactly was also brilliant in that and when he said he made the joke that people in the lgbtq like to claim that they're minorities until it's time to be white. Like when he made the skit about the cops being called and nobody who's black and trans says, oh, well, my name is Clifford because when the cops shows up, they don't care who which one of you is Clifford.

They, you know, if you have blacks, basically he was saying that black skin is an immutable quality and gender identity is not immutable. Yeah. Well, so this is something i i used to bring this up because one argument that was always made around 10 years ago is that like oh you know the um question of homosexuality and homosexual unions and lgbtq rights is like the racial struggle of our day it's the civil rights struggle and that's completely absurd i mean first of all like there's no in the closet if you're black right like you're just

black everywhere. It's completely different. It's completely different. But because it's understood that it's a powerful rhetorical tool because Americans care a whole lot about race. If you want people to be sympathetic to a group of people, you say, look, what's happening to them is just like what happened to black people historically. They mentioned that this is like the civil rights fight of our day. They say things like, Seamus, you would have been on the side of Jim Crow and the slavers. And it's like –

It's like, no, Catholics, we're not. Yeah, and it's not just that. It's that we're effectively dissidents to the establishment. We are opposing the established order. You guys are in favor of what Walmart wants. But it's not the civil rights fight of our day because none of it makes sense. Like when Larry Elder comes out and he says, here's what I think we can do for black families, and they go, you're a white supremacist. I'm like, bro, you're a white person calling a black man a white supremacist because you don't like his politics.

It's ridiculous. You're not fighting for civil rights. You're just an egotist who doesn't like the fact that your cudgel, racism, doesn't work or make sense. The same thing with Candace Owens. Black white supremacists no neither they're neither that's that's insane they're just people with ideas you don't like well the people who they think are white supremacists aren't even white supremacists let alone the black people being white supremacists but the other the other interesting historical

piece of this that i think paints this cultural appropriation that the LGBTQ movement is doing goes all the way back to the Black Panthers and Fred Hampton. Fred Hampton was the original creator and founder of the Rainbow Coalition. And it wasn't until nine years after he died that the artist from California took the rainbow icon and use it for the LGBTQ. And what most people don't talk about when they talk Panthers or Fred Hampton or the Rainbow Coalition is that the white organization that was a part of the three organizations that made up the Rainbow Coalition were the Young Patriots. And guess what their icon was? The Confederate flag.

They were Southern sovereignists. Let me ask you something. So they decided to change the – I remember they changed the pride flag and they added a black and brown stripe. No clue what it means. Don't ask me. It's for black and brown people. No, it's not.

Well, that's what they said. Yeah. But I'm just like – if this flag is for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and trans, is it – did they add another B to it for black? So it's LGBTQBB. Why are black and brown people in the LGBT flag? What's the insinuation? Why is T in the LGBT flag? I don't understand this stuff right now.

Well, it's also, I've said this before on the show, but the design is so stupid because for the different sexual identities, they want these different colors of the rainbow to represent something abstract. And it's like, what is the brown for? It's like brown people. It was the black for black people. It's like, wait. Racist.

Why didn't they get creative colors? Why did everyone else get? They added a white triangle to it. Did they really? Yeah, they did, yeah. Learning that the rainbow. Must be for white people, I guess. The rainbow's from the Rainbow Coalition, which was a multicultural thing.

Makes a lot more sense. Well, the rainbow was. Well, the Rainbow Coalition was initially Fred Hampton, although the Black Panthers had this Marxist Leninist philosophical background, Fred Hampton was kind of an anomaly in Chicago. And he had his own, you know, version of the Black Panthers, you could say. And that was the Rainbow Coalition in which he kind of reoriented the Black Panthers focus on the working class. And he said that despite the racial issues that do exist in America, there is a greater predation happening on the working class. And he said that despite the racial issues that do exist in America, there is a greater predation happening on the working class economically.

That was the whole motif of the Rainbow Coalition was the unity of working class whites, blacks, and Latinos. So each color in the original pride flag represented some idea. And I think they actually had magic in there. And then they were like, we should get rid of the magic from this flag, if that makes sense. And then I don't understand.

The only thing I don't understand is how, like, is there a committee that decides when the flag should be changed? Because one day people were just like, hey, we added black and brown. And then everyone started making these flags with a black and brown stripe. Then they were like, okay, actually, we're going to put the trans triangle in the side. And we're going to put the black and brown in the triangle instead. And then someone was like, we should put a yellow triangle in there too and a purple circle. Now all of a sudden,

those flags are flying everywhere, but like, who decided that would be the flag? You know what I mean? It's just like, they just started making it. What is it going to look like in two years? Well, the joke is that the trans triangle

is pushing the rainbow out. Because it's gradually taking up more and more space. I got gotta give a shout out we're gonna we're gonna keep the focus on uh i guess the racial politics of the day because we have more from colbert and aoc and i'm sorry you know there's a lot of important things we can talk about but making fun of aoc is fun it's fun and um look i i i i tried to be overtly just like haha let's mock her for the sake of mocking her yo she went on stephen colbert's show to millions of people,

strung together a bunch of history words that made no sense with a straight face. And I'm just, it's laughably absurd that she would be asked if she would be president after saying something so nonsensical. But, you know, Seamus pointed out it's a Chad move to go on TV and just be like, yeah, you know, Abraham Lincoln? He was a Capricorn. yeah, you know, Abraham Lincoln? He was a Capricorn. And, you know,

Winston Churchill? They were cousins. Oh, wow. Yeah, that's crazy. It's like making... Stephen Colbert's like, will you be my president? Wow, I didn't know that. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Joan of Arc? Yeah. Yeah. That's Lincoln's mom. That's pretty cool. For sure. Let me play you this clip. No, Joan of Arc was Noah's wife. Haven't you seen Noah's wife? Yeah, yeah. I'm going to play this clip for you because it's going to. For sure. Let me play you this clip. No, Joan of Arc was Noah's wife. Haven't you seen Noah's wife? Yeah, yeah.

I'm going to play this clip for you because it's going to make you laugh. So Colbert basically answers a ton of questions for AOC on her behalf, and then she says this. What action would you like to see the Congress take? Well, I think history really informs a lot. Can you turn this up? Does it inform you? Let me start over. Can you up and big in the volume?

Well, I think history really informs a lot, and it gives us lessons here, because this is not the first time that this has happened. In the 1800s, the Supreme Court was taken over by the Confederate South and was starting to rule in ways that limited Abraham Lincoln, for example. In the Dred Scott ruling, they ruled that black Americans are not and can never be full citizens of the United States. And what did Abraham Lincoln do? He signed the Emancipation Proclamation. I thought she was going to say he packed the court.

Franklin Delano Roosevelt. Yo, she just strung a bunch of words together. All right, let me break it down for you, everybody. The Supreme Court was not taken over by the Confederacy because the Confederacy was not a part of the Union. They did not rule in ways that impeded Abraham Lincoln because Abraham Lincoln became president after secession. Dred Scott was, this is one thing she got right,

a ruling that said citizenship was not for descendants, for people of African descent. But Dred Scott happened four years before Abraham Lincoln became president. And Abraham Lincoln did not issue the Emancipation Proclamation in response to Dred Scott. The Emancipation Proclamation was issued two years after he became president, six years after Dred Scott, and has nothing to do with citizenship at all. It was the 14th Amendment that came about after the Civil War

that answered the question of citizenship. Yo, AOC went on Colbert and just said a bunch of Civil War-era words at the same time with confidence. I gotta admit, Seamus, you're right. It's Chad. Mega Chad. She's like, when Abraham Lincoln first signed Roe v. Wade into law, it was to free women

from slavery. Oh, my gosh. Because the Confederates had invaded the Supreme Court, and Abraham Lincoln had no choice but to build an ark and take two of each animal. What the heck is going on? What I think she meant was, before the Civil War, the South had people that were becoming Supreme Court justices, and they were leaning towards the Southern states and their beliefs. And then when she said, but then they challenged Abraham Lincoln.

What she meant was they challenged the ideas that Abraham Lincoln came to embody later, but she just messed it all up. I mean, if that's what she meant, which is the only thing I can imagine she meant, she's just wrong. You can imagine anything you want. What she said was a string of 1860s-related words that didn't actually fit together.

That was written by AI. That was written by AI. She wrote Roe v. Wade Civil War, and then it strung that together. I'm so impressed with the way she delivered it with the utmost confidence. Yeah, it does pretty good. And she started off with history informs. She's letting everyone know history informs, and it gives a bunch of strange histories. I was watching this, and I'm like, the Confederacy had invaded the Supreme Court and were impeding Lincoln?

I was like, how are they impeding Lincoln? He wasn't even president. Even if her point was that Southern sympathetic justices were on the court, they could not have in any way impeded Abraham Lincoln because he wasn't even president until after several states had already seceded and said that they were no longer part of the union. And there was a question before he was even president as to whether there would be military intervention to stop secession. Now, granted, fair point. Abraham Lincoln won the election, and then they were like, all right, that's it. We're out. And then several months later,

several states secede, and then Lincoln becomes president. He's like, I don't recognize any of this. And things started to escalate from there. But it had nothing to do with the Supreme Court. Granted, he did try to go after a justice. It's just, when I heard this and she was like, Dred Scott said that, you know, black people weren't citizens, so Abraham Lincoln, what did he do? He issued the Emancipation

Proclamation. I'm like, those two things are unrelated to each other. When Judge Dred Scott decided Judge Dred. These people offend me. These are the black bourgeoisie elite that are more interested in diversity, equity, and inclusion, faux politics, than they are the American people. And later in this clip, I think she said something along the lines when they asked her about running for president. I'm interested in helping the American people.

No, she's not. I mean, she's a complete puppet.'s a prop she's uh she's an actress and she doesn't need to know history because the entire mainstream media apparatus uh is is her backstop i'll tell you what she is you've got you guys got to watch the new beefs and butthead has anybody here seen the new beefs and just a clip everybody's sharing the white privilege clip, but I got a minor, minor spoiler for you guys. It's not a story spoiler. It's kind of, but I have to say it. Many of you may have seen

it, but there's a point at which Biebs and Butt-head, for some reason, can't see. And so they're just waving their arms around with their eyes pointing in the wrong directions, both of them. That's AOC. It's not a puppet. It's that she was sitting in a room one day and someone was like,

dude, Dred Scott was really bad because of the US government. These Supreme Court people were like, you're not a citizen. Yo, the Supreme Court's illegitimate. They've been illegitimate. She's like, yeah. And then someone's like,

but bro, that Emancipation Proclamation, right? And she goes, yeah. And then she sits on a couch and she goes, well, Dred Scott and the Emancipation, it's like some stoner dude just said a bunch of random stuff. Look, if she was a puppet, she'd have been given a cue card that would have said something more coherent.

You sit here. You take your seat. You explain Dred Scott. You explain Civil War. I don't know. I tend to slightly disagree. I think the new impetus towards societal control, psychological control is to see if they can get people like AOC who are conscious and know full well what they're doing to to vote for them still. And, you know, that's that's my interpretation.

Like, and I don't know about her. I don't know about AOC, but I know that some of these people such as pelosi whether elizabeth warren maybe some of the elders in the democrat party or in the establishment are fully aware of the lies that they're telling you're right you know i just you know you know what i was realizing you ever see those uh scammer emails from like a nigerian prince people always make fun of them because the grammar is really bad. That's on purpose. No, for real. So people assume if the scammers are doing a bad job because they're not speaking proper English. The reason they do that is because they don't want to waste time on smart people.

AOC is saying dumb things here on purpose to make sure that smart people don't waste their time even talking about what she's doing or engaging her seriously. But all of the dumb people will fall for it. Discover the magic of Bad MGM Casino, where the excitement is always on deck. Pull up a seat and check out a wide variety of table games with a live dealer. From roulette to blackjack, watch as a dealer hosts your table game and live chat with them throughout your experience to feel like you're actually at the casino. The excitement doesn't stop there with over 3 000 games to choose from including fan favorites like cash eruption ufc gold blitz and more make deposits instantly to jump in on the fun and make same day withdrawals if you win download the bet mgm ontario app today you don't want to miss out visit betmgm.com for terms and conditions.

19 plus to wager Ontario only. Please gamble responsibly. If you have questions or concerns about your gambling or someone close to you, please contact Connex Ontario at 1-866-531-2600 to speak to an advisor free of charge. BetMGM operates pursuant to an operating agreement with iGaming Ontario. So these old people will get an email and it'll be like, I'm a Nigerian prince, send me a check for $2,000. There's typos in it, it makes no sense.

A person of moderate intelligence says, this makes no sense, exit out. But if they sent a really well thought out message, a smart person is going to be like, I'm not sending you any money. It's the stupid people they got to go after. So they want to filter out the smart people. And slowly but surely make people dumber and dumber so that the pool is bigger. Yeah. How many people do you think now are like following this?

Because Colbert gets about 2 million viewers, mostly not in the key demographic, but many. How many people do you think sat down today and they were like, well, you know, with Dred Scott, Abraham Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation. So Biden should make a declaration, too. And then how many people do you think are going to mindlessly repeat the gobbledygook nonsense she just said? Way too many. Way too many. Well, I mean, if only we had some kind of disinformation board. If only we had fact checkers who actually cared about what our politicians said.

I know. I wonder if PolitiFact mentioned any of this stuff. Every now and again, she will get fact-checked. Keep talking. I'm looking up. Yeah, no, no. I'm looking because I'm curious to see what they'll have to say. But, I mean, obviously, this is not some minor blunder. I don't think they even did it.

Details wrong. Look, I don't even think they actually even fact-checked her. Look at this. The last thing I have is from May 9th. Thanks, PolitiFact. She just went on Colbert and said a whole bunch of nonsense that took me five minutes to debunk. Not even five. Well, to be fair, no one watches Colbert.

Two million people. Oh, wow. Two million people per night. I still have corrected. I guess he does get views. So he gets a decent – it's mostly not in the key demo, but he does get a decent key demo viewership. So, first of all, it is a little bit unfair because I've been reading a lot about the civil war. So I immediately knew

these things made no sense. No, it's not unfair that, you know, facts that she's wrong about. No, no, no. I'm saying like, I immediately caught it. Yeah. Maybe, uh, the average person would not, but journalists, if they actually cared, I'm not talking about journalists, I'm talking about regular people. It's, it's, it's unfair for me to be critical of a regular person who didn't know that and is repeating it to their friends because they trust her. But journalists should be scrutinizing all of the politicians the same. They don't. Also, I haven't read about the Civil War since middle school, but the claim that the South, the Confederacy, had infiltrated the Supreme Court.

That's literally not how the Civil War worked. They seceded before it was added. Yeah, exactly. So it's not possible. The Confederacy. Yeah, exactly. So it's not possible. Well, it's fair to say that there were Southern sympathetic justices. Yeah, but that's not the Confederacy stopping Abe Lincoln with the Supreme Court. Right. She takes like this tiny morsel of what may be factual, the perception that the Supreme Court was citing in ways that was more favorable to the South in certain instances like Dred Scott.

But then she turns it into the Confederacy had taken over the Supreme Court and was impeding Abraham Lincoln with rulings like Dred Scott, so he had to issue the Emancipation Proclamation is just psychotic garbage nonsense. It doesn't make any sense, yeah. And I want to say, I think it's funny to me to watch AOC

talk because she actually is the example of the true systemic injustice done on the American people. The real systemic injustice is to lower the bar of intelligence of bots through a variety of ways, and then give you a puppet leader like AOC that can in no way properly represent you in governance or anything else for that matter, that's real systemic injustice. And she gets to run around with the motif of systemic injustice as the hallmark of her platform. That's a double cross and triple cross for the ages. It's like a popularity contest.

I mean, that's what voting is. But do you think that we shouldn't have voting? No, we definitely should have voting. But I think what's been done to the school systems in this country or education in this country or communities just in general was not done, was not organic. It was intentionally done. It was systematically designed. We like a dumb populist. And that's why I call myself a populist politically. I'm an America first Christian sovereignist, actually, you could say, but I'm a populist. But, you know, we

do have a populist right now that's grossly undereducated and misinformed. So it makes it very hard for them to cast informed votes in our political system, which is an egregious, an egregious level of moral hazard that comes from institutions becoming corrupted. And in the West, we do place a premium on the individual, but culture does have an impact on the individual. And we have to understand both things happen simultaneously.

But when the establishment gets as corrupt as it's become now, you get 81 million people voting for a man who shouldn't be allowed to drive a car. Yeah, I think corporations becoming legally people has severely corrupted our capitalist institution to the point where now they're making, corporations are making political statements and that you can't sue them, you can't destroy the people,

sue them into oblivion. The owners, they just declare it bankrupt. So nobody fact-checked what she said. You're pissed about that. Well, the point I'm making here is any conservative politician who even says anything slightly wrong, like Ron DeSantis was fact-checked because,

I can't remember exactly what he was talking about, but he said something slightly imprecise. And they're like, false, false, false. We got him. We got him. We got him, everybody. AOC goes on primetime television with millions of people, strings together random words, and everyone's like, I'm okay with that.

You made a good point about AOC. And I think the word is almost controlled opposition in a sense, right? She's supposed to be the outsider candidate, but she really does. She does present everything that the establishment would like for people to believe. I think a huge part of the problem, and I've got on my soapbox about this a number of times on the show, but we have a culture which basically places instant gratification above everything else, and even in really intimate, important ways. So we've completely saturated our society with pornography,

and people eat gross, fatty foods all the time. And basically the idea is you shouldn't do things in line with their purposes. You should do things in line with what brings you the most pleasure, and it trains people to constantly take the path of least resistance. And when people take the path of least resistance, they're much easier to herd. It's much easier to get people to obey you when they're going to go along with what's easiest, right? Before I lose my temper, I need you to clarify what you meant by gross and fatty foods.

Okay, so basically, and I don't mean to imply that there's such a thing as anything that's less healthy than something else, right? Everyone's healthy all the time. We're all equally healthy. All foods are equally good. You're beautiful no matter what. That cake right there.

This cake is super healthy and super good for me. So do you mean gross fatty as one thing, or do you mean gross comma fatty? Gross comma fatty. Well, it's both, right? No, no, no, no. Avocados are fatty, and they're good for you. Okay, no, no, okay.

I've been doing keto. You take it back. Fat can be very good for you. I'm talking like the kind of stuff you get at McDonald's. That was my joke. And I'm talking, yeah. of stuff you get at McDonald's. It's fried. It's sugary.

It's salty. And it's okay to have sugary foods every now and again. But if every meal you eat is this gross stuff that's going to weigh you down and destroy your brain. And again, it trains you towards doing something not in line with what makes sense either for the occasion or for what you're supposed to be eating um it trains you just to pursue pleasure and so when other people and one of the things that is pleasing to us is to fit in with the crowd i don't know when other people stand up and start promoting bad ideas you're not gonna you're not gonna listen to them so so this is an argument i've heard uh i heard from left. They talk about how poor people are overweight because they have worse foods and because garbage food is cheaper. And that's not necessarily true, but it's somewhat true.

And so I was talking to a lefty friend, and here's how they explained it. And I think it's actually a decent point, but it needs to be fact-checked. Norman Borlaug was this famous scientist who figured out a way to increase crop yield so that your typical plant produced way more. So wheat would produce like four times the yield. All of a sudden, there's way more starch and sugars available for people, but the nutritional density stayed the same. That meant that poor people were buying the same kind of food at the same price, but there was like half the amount of folate or thiamine or whatever in it. So they'd have to buy even more. So what happens is in order to get the same level of nutritional density, they have to

eat a ton of this starchy food and sugary and fatty food and they gain a bunch of weight from it. I actually, that makes sense to me. I'm like, why is it that poor people are overweight? And they're like, well, the food they eat is bad. And I'm like, bro, you could buy tomatoes, lettuce, and avocado for the same price as a Big Mac meal or whatever. And then you think about it and it's like, when they're buying grains and

breads and stuff, the nutritional density being lower means they're struggling. They're eating a lot more of the same stuff. So it's like half true because I do think people could make better choices, but it still is not easy for people who don't know why what they're eating has become bad for them. Well, there's also this weird thing where we're obsessed with finding new things to turn corn into. Yeah, right. We're like, what is this food. Well, there's also this weird thing where we're obsessed with finding new things to turn corn into. Yeah, right. We're like, what is this food? Like, maybe we could make it out of corn instead.

Yeah, it's like we have plastic and it's polluting the world. What if we made corn into plastic? Subsidize. Actually a good idea. Corn subsidies. Yeah, it's like, are there other ways to do it? We have a society that's going back to earth worshiping and child sacrifices. Yep. Well, actually,

I disagree, which brings me to the next story we have from Interactive Polls on Twitter. Generic congressional ballot trends before versus after Roe v. Wade decision. Take a look at this. Republicans and Democrats. In June 21,

it was Republican plus 4. On June 27, it was Republican plus four on June 27. It was Republican plus five. Republicans gained one point after SCOTUS overturned Roe v. Wade. That's technically not true. Democrats lost a point after the Roe v. Wade decision.

So that is interesting. Why is it the Republicans were like, I'm cool with that. And Democrats were like, we're mad at democrats over this that's that's the progressive left pulling the the centrist uh moderate democrats over in the left field i saw that a lot i didn't i didn't realize until i started watching well i didn't start watching you know per se but i watched the young turks about a month ago when the whole roe v wade thing was was first breaking out when the document got leaked and anna caspette what's her name yeah yeah yeah me and her got into a huge twitter back and forth and and when i watched it i realized

that the left pundits were talking less about republicans or trumpers and they were talking more about the uh the the the disc you know contentment they had with joe biden and the establishment democrats and that's just a way for them them to pull them over into into left field. And I think when I watch Joe Biden talk now, I can see that he's not so much speaking against the right as he's trying to appease the far left. Yeah. Yeah. Well, Joe Biden is weird, right?

Because for so long, he's adopted these far left positions. And he's said things about how we need to, like, affirm children, which is just another way of saying that you should be able to push them through gender transitions that kind of thing um he's also extremely radically pro-abortion he wants to repeal the hyde amendment which prevents federal funding from uh from going towards abortions and then when the polling data starts to make it clear that these positions are unpopular he comes out of the state of the union and says defund the police no man i man, I've got to defend the police. And talking about

how we need to secure the border and basically taking Trump's platform. So the man, he doesn't stand for anything, right? And that's why he falls for everything. Exactly. Like falling off the stairs. And off of a bike that wasn't moving.

Well, his foot got caught in the clip. He tripped. So I'll give him that one. You trip easier when you're that age't moving. Well, his foot got caught in the clip. He tripped. So I'll give him that one. You trip easier when you're that age. Yeah, yeah. So what happened with the bike is that he has pedal clips, and when he stopped,

he took his left foot out, and then he leaned right as he was trying to pull his right foot out, but he didn't get it out, and so he fell over. It happens to people. It's more likely to happen to you if you're old, but it wasn't like he was just standing there

and then just fell down. You know what I mean? Yeah, I just think I'd like to see a little more proficiency in bicycle riding from the man leading the free world. And walking upstairs. Yeah, you supposedly never forget how to ride a bike, but I guess dementia is another story.

That's brutal. I think it's fair to say the dude fell down, but I want to point out his foot got stuck in a bike. I'd also like to point out he surrendered to the American military and the Taliban. But it's not like he was riding his bike and then just went and fell over. No, no, he was standing. But that's also why people are joking about it because he was like standing still when he fell over. Yeah, he should have leaned on his left foot and pulled his right foot out.

Or had some sort of cognizance to not lean into it as he started to fall but he didn't have his card that said i think you made a good point royce that the democratic party is kind of turning on itself uh and you see that in the colbert interview like they've just completely dismissed joe biden and kamala harris they're not even mentioned of those people they're they've agreed they're useless they're not going to run in 2024 it's it's hilarious no it's just biden they're not even mentioned of those people they're they've agreed they're useless they're not going to run in 2024 although it's it's hilarious go ahead no it's just biden they're all sitting around a table and they're like so who's running in 2024 and biden goes oh i'm going to run for re-election and they go yeah yeah so who else is running in 2024 like he's just sitting there like he's not in the room you know what i mean yeah i think these two were always the cutouts

i think biden kamala yeah i think they were always transit the cutouts. Biden and Kamala? Yeah. I think they were always transitory cutouts from the beginning. Sacrificial candidates. Absolutely. I mean, if you just look at their records, look at how easy it would be to dislike them over the course of their administration. It's almost like the Democratic Party is casting upon Joe Biden all of their sins. So they can have white the slave community. Sacrifice as a candidate and they can bring someone else in to fix the problem.

Why would that be far-fetched for people? This is what troubles me, and we talked about this a little bit last time. Do we think that George Soros or Klaus Schwab or these international governing bodies and these eclectic metropolitan

omnisexuals don't think four years and eight years ahead. Like, is that really tough for us to graph? It is because most people live in this sort of radical materialist everyday lifestyle where they do eat these fatty foods and they do play on their video games and they do, you know, get the immediate instant gratification from their social media likes or whatever. So it's hard for them to imagine a group of people who are effective and thinking that far ahead because they don't do it. But these people have proved that they are willing to do it and they're very effective at doing it. I think that Joe Biden was always a cut out from the very beginning.

I think that's why they undermined Bernie in the in the in the Democratic election when Joe Biden ran. I think when he resigned in 1988 when he was running against George Bush Sr. and resigned because he was found out to be a plagiarist, the entire industry gave up on him and basically turned him into a cardboard cutout. They realized he's nothing more than a cutout at this point. Maybe we'll use him at some point. He came out in 2008 to run against Obama. They put him up there as the token old white businessman.

Yeah, he was the establishment guy, right? Because Obama was too new and radical, at least in his rhetoric. At least that's what he thought. Uncle Joe. Like AOC. Just like AOC. Yeah, exactly. But Obama, right?

He was like the fringe, radical, anti-establishment guy. And people were worried. And so he goes with the most pro-establishment cardboard cutout that he could find. You're right. I do want to point out, I pulled up the RealClearPolitics average of polls because that one poll was, I think that was just Iowa, right? Iowa. So in the RealClearPolitics average, after the ruling, Republicans went up about a half point. Democrats actually made a fairly decent gain in aggregate.

They went from 41.3 to 4. So they went up one point. Republicans went up a half point. Republicans made a gain on this one. Democrats made a gain this one but republic so democrats closed the gap a little bit republicans still have a 2.5 uh point advantage in the generic ballot which is just apocalyptic we're when democrats are leading by five points they lose seats so anything short of a five point advantage from democrats that's break even right now Right now, it's just everyday looking apocalyptic for Democrats in November. It's hard to tell.

Things have changed so much about who's a Democrat and who's a Republican now that it's the people that care enough to virtue signal that they will fill out one of these polls. They tend to be Democrats in the past. But it's an aggregate poll. So this is combining all the different polls. So that's what's interesting about this. I don't take just a single poll where like Fox News says they want somebody. No, this is YouGov, Politico, NPR, PBS, Trafalgar, Rasmussen, USA Today, Fox News, and Quinnipiac. All of those different polls with different methodologies and they average it out, that's your best indicator.

But do they include Real Patriot polls from realpatriot.blogspot.loley.com? realpatriot.infowarrior.website and it's like 97% say Donald Trump is the best, 3% say Donald Trump is pretty good I got an email from Trump and I bet most of you have gotten this too

and it was like, please fill out this poll, how well do you think Donald Trump is doing? He's doing great he's doing pretty good,'s doing all right and i'm like it's only positive the only options were like he's doing good in some way gotta love it yeah i know that's trump man that's a trump my fear right now in politics is that again and to reiterate the ability for people to look ahead the establishment to to look ahead, that a lot of these Republicans are not really Republicans or they're not really conservatives. I think that a lot of the Republicans, I think it's understood that the political, the politics

in America are going to go in ebbs and flows and that right now the Republicans are on the rise and they're going to do everything they can within the Republican establishment to put people forward who may even say that they're America first, but really aren't. And I'm seeing that in my own primary, but I see it as I look even across some of the people that Joe, that Donald Trump endorsed like Oz, right? These people, these people don't really fundamentally understand the ideas of America or the foundational values of America. And if they come to power, even if it's a Republican-held House, Senate, presidency,

America could still be on a losing track with Republicans in office because the Republicans have been in on it. Oh, yeah. Well, we sort of joked about this a while ago when we were first going through this polling data, which suggests that there will likely be Russian interference. But when we were looking through this polling data, I was just kind of joking about the fact that, yeah, no, the Republicans might win in a landslide so they can not do anything.

They can just keep not doing anything. Sit on their hands and just say, slow down there, come on, you're going too fast. To be fair, though, I do rag on Mitch McConnell. He did basically get this Roe v. Wade thing. It's true. We were talking about that with Will. My issue, though, is partly the reason. I was thinking about this

like, you know, I'm still ragging on Mitch. For Republicans, he actually got this for them. For me, that wasn't a big issue for me. The issue was like, I'm more libertarian. I'm not conservative. So for me, Roe v. Wade, I'm rather dispassionate on. It goes back to the states. I'm kind of like, okay, that's federal government rescinding authority. There's probably a lot of good things in that. My answer to Democrats and the left is they should be filing lawsuits at the

state level on the same grounds at the federal level and then win in the states. What I want to see is Republicans win on policy grounds that they just don't engage on. They haven't engaged at all on the social media censorship. They just spin around in circles. They're caving on gun rights. How about for me? I just don't see anything. Auditing the Federal Reserve.

I mean, I'll take it. You let the economy flounder like this. That's the ultimate failure of a politician right now is to let the economy flounder. So you're saying that you think because the Roe v. Wade issue is, well, the Roe v. Wade issue was illegitimate in its inception. That's number one. So for Mitch McConnell to back this isn't necessarily as extreme as it seems due to the public's view of it now. But constitutionally, it's not really an extreme position as, say, him being more America first on trade or other policies. Mitch McConnell played the judge game.

Discover the magic of Bad MGM Casino, where the excitement is always on deck. Pull up a seat and check out a wide variety of table games with a live dealer. From roulette to blackjack, watch as a dealer hosts your table game and live chat with them throughout your experience to feel like you're actually at the casino. The excitement doesn't stop there. With over 3,000 games to choose from, including fan favorites like Cash Eruption, UFC Gold Blitz, and more, make deposits instantly to jump in on the fun and make same-day withdrawals if you win. Download the BetMGM Ontario app today. You don't want to miss out. Visit BetMGM.com for terms and conditions.

19 plus to wager Ontario only. Please gamble responsibly. If you have questions or concerns about your gambling or someone close to you, please contact Connex Ontario at 1-866-531-2600 to speak to an advisor free of charge. BetMGM operates pursuant to an operating agreement with iGaming Ontario.

And Republicans played the judge game and ignored the cultural issues. The cultural issues have a big impact on me, so I'm biased. For conservatives who are pro-life, they were ragging on Mitch McConnell and Republican leadership over the culture war issues, but then when they get this victory on

Roe v. Wade, they're like, oh, okay, what they did worked for us. For me, Roe v. Wade wasn't one of my issues. So I'm like, they're like, oh, okay, what they did worked for us. For me, Roe v. Wade wasn't one of my issues. So I'm like, gun rights, free speech, schools and all that stuff, what are you doing on these issues that I'm worried about? So I acknowledge that's my bias. Mitch McConnell was very effective in getting the Roe v. Wade decision for conservatives. That's a fact. Or the recent gun decision too, right?

The recent gun decision, absolutely. It's a fair point, yeah. It makes it through the courts. It doesn't go as far as I'd like it to to but i'm like okay those are those are decent victories i do think and and so credit where credit is due as much as i'm still not a big fan of the republicans because policy wise they do very little the judges did get some victories but if the republicans aren't adequately engaged in the in cultural issues and if the republican leadership won't go after joe biden they won't go after the corruption then then that's where I'm very concerned.

Congratulations, you won in the courts. Pro-lifers got their thing. Pro-gun people got their thing. What about Joe Biden being corrupt? What about the corruption from the establishment that went after Donald Trump? Why didn't the Republicans do more to stop what was happening in this system? I focus on that. They're in on it. Oh, yeah. They're in on it. They're in on it.

Oh, yeah. They're in on it. That's why. Oh, I mean, you look at Pennsylvania. The Republican establishment. You look at Robbie Starbuck. The Republican establishment does not like Trump, MAGA, and the populist Republicans. They're okay with it.

The two sides of the coin is that the left has traded. And this is a problem for most american people but you can see it very well in the political dichotomy the left has traded their freedom for materialism and the right or the republicans have traded their freedom for security both versions are an expansion of government most people have become okay with the idea that their american citizenship depends on the expansion of government. And Mitch McConnell is all for the expansion of government. This is the funny thing when AOC and Pelosi say that the Supreme Court is extremist or illegitimate.

And I see these memes where they're like, the Supreme Court has stripped the rights away. And I'm like, actually, they didn't. The Supreme Court said the federal government doesn't have this authority. It's actually anti-fascism like if you claim your antifa and you don't like authoritarianism and all that stuff the federal government being like we hereby rescind this power should be a good thing but oh no that meant states now have have control over these situations and they don't like what actual decentralization means what so when these antifa and left people and leftists come out and they're saying things like,

we shouldn't have these authoritarian systems, they're actually saying we should. Because if you were to get rid of the federal government and decentralize everything, then all of a sudden, smaller jurisdictions take authority in how they want to run things. And all of a sudden, you'll find when you get rid of the centralized authority, you're going to see white-only towns. You're going to see anti-LGBTQ towns. You're going to see no more Roe v. Wade in red states. What they really are saying is they want the federal government to enforce their ideology on everyone.

Their own politics. That's right. That's exactly right. And when you look at the Democratic Party platform and what they're pushing for with respect to abortion, I don't think it's unfair to say that the actual party platform more or less suggests that for any child, any unborn child in any part of the country to have

any kind of legal protection is a travesty. For there to be any unborn child anywhere in the country that can't be killed is a miscarriage of justice from their perspective. It's evil. It's just evil. It's just, I'm sorry, man. It's just so weird. And it's rooted, I can only say it's rooted in ignorance.

People in blue states are unaffected by the Roe v. Wade decision. In fact, the decision likely will cause Democratic politicians to expand abortion access in blue states. So that what they're basically saying is, people in places where I don't live should be allowed to get access to a procedure most of those people don't want. Exactly. Because, again, for whatever reason, any innocent, faultless, unborn child having any legal protection is abhorrent to them.

They can't stand it. They can't tolerate it. So here's the problem with the Republicans. We talked about Mitch McConnell. He got some major policy victories, and the Republican leadership did. And I'll tell you, one of the issues is – I totally lost my train of thought. What were we just talking about? Roe v. Wade.

Yeah, I lost what I was going to say. I forgot. That's because I keep thinking about it. No, I was going to say that this Roe v. Wade one is not even a judgment call in my book. Agreed. The morality of it is very clear. Okay, I remember what I was going to say. Go. I v. Wade one is not even a judgment call in my book. Agreed. The morality of it is very clear. Okay, I remember what I was going to say.

Go. I got it back. I got it back. Because I'm going to remember mine. I'm like reading these polls. Okay, I forgot again. Go ahead. Oh, no.

No, no, no. I'm kidding. I'm kidding. I'm kidding. Go ahead. We were talking about the success of the Republicans. Yeah. Republicans are running on moderate policy. Mitch McConnell may have got a victory, but I think I should make this statement.

The fact that you, Seamus, think it was a victory that half the country is allowed to murder babies shows the problem. I do think it's a victory and a step in the right direction, but it is absolutely not going far enough. It's not murder, though. It's not murder. It is, yeah. Okay, hold on. Ian, stop. Murder is a legal definition.

This is not my point. My point is, if conservatives do believe that, regardless of your opinion, Ian, they've accepted that half the country will be allowed to do it, and they're like, yay, we won this one. Instead, a real victory would have been the Supreme Court coming out and being like, all human life has constitutional protections, whether they're in the womb or out. Therefore, taking the life is a violation of the Constitution. That would have been a much better victory. Agreed. If a human has a right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness,

then the actual conservative position would be for the Supreme Court to come out and say a human unborn baby is still a human, and it would be a violation of the law and the Constitution to end its life or to grant the right to do so. Ergo, the Supreme Court would have said nationwide, it actually, and this actually makes more sense. The constitution granting protection to women to get abortions makes

less sense than the constitution granting rights to a human being not to be killed. Yeah. However, the conservative court didn't even rule that they said, leave us out of it. And the left is saying the Republicans are extremists. No, the left are the extremists. The Republicans are happy to accept a moderate victory, meaning we'll take what we can get in our red states and you do your thing. Whereas the left says we want total domination nationwide.

That's what I was saying to begin with, that Roe v. Wade in its inception was illegitimate and that they're making it seem like it being overturned as a far right, a far right policy position when really it's the lukewarm moderate position. Agreed. And so therefore Mitch McConnell actually shouldn't get the same credit that that that he may get in our view.

But the the the the point that I think needs to be driven home about abortion is that when a society loses the sanctity of life you can't have a precept of human rights and civil rights legitimately totally agree here's i don't know our whole society is based on slaughter of the native population they're all humans they were all humans but they didn't act like they were true no and that and that was a that was a that was Protestant Christians taking the Lord's name in vain. It's not an indictment of God and it's not an indictment of America. It's an indictment of those few men who chose to use the Lord's name in that way at that time. But it still doesn't change the universal truth about life, whether it be native, whether it be American unborn today, or whether it be

blacks during slavery. The precept of human rights and civil rights has to be dependent on a sanctity of life. If you don't have the sanctity of life, it doesn't only allow you to justify killing a human fetus, which is an info war of biblical proportions, but it also allows you to kill faceless people by double taptap drone strikes in Afghanistan. Yeah, so I want to jump on that, but first I want to respond to what Tim said, because I think you make a great point. I'm going to respond. Well, hold on.

So I don't think that's entirely fair. I agree with your assessment completely that the conservative pro-life position is and should be that abortion must be illegal nationwide i still think it's perfectly reasonable to say thank goodness that it can be restricted in some places now we haven't gone all the way with it this is not the end goal i understand yeah and my point is just republicans consistently fight for the moderate exactly form yeah the compromise yeah and i would agree with that i think that leaving it up to the states is ultimately the moderate position, and I don't think it makes a whole lot of sense. I have a question for you and for conservatives. When do you think – at what point does a person gain constitutional rights?

I would say the moment of fertilization. Yeah, you're a human being at that point. What do you think? Yeah, I would say the moment of conception. What do you you're a human being at that point. What do you think? Yeah, I would say the moment of conception. What do you think, Ian? When they get a birth certificate. Why? Because that's American citizens have American human rights.

Slaves didn't have birth certificates. Yeah, they didn't have those same human rights. They were granted it under the 14th Amendment. Well, eventually they got them. After the 14th Amendment. There's no amendment that says that an unborn fetus has human rights. But that, but, I don't know if that's relevant.

So you're asking me what, I think, morally it should be, not legally? Yeah, he's asking for your, like, priesthood. Well, no, no, that's fine. That's fine. I accept your answer.

When they get a birth certificate. When they're born, basically. So my question is just, like, why when they're born? You know, like, why is that the case? Because, yeah, why when they're born?

When they're, that's when they start contributing to society. I don't think so. Yeah, that's a right season. The problem with it, with that viewpoint, is it's a radical, materialist mentality. And what you're basically saying is that your only value as a human being is your contribution to society. And that is a predicate for the fourth industrial revolution,

whether people want to consider it or not. This whole abortion argument is really a predicate for the fourth industrial revolution to be able to other human beings based on their level of productivity and justify killing them by food, whether it be big pharma, maybe a pandemic, whatever, nuclear war, health, freedom, climate, whatever it is, the ability to judge and rule somebody based on what they contribute to society solely as the anchor of their human rights or the fundamental claim of human rights is just about as anti-human as you can get.

I don't know, because what if they start tapping people's brains with neural net, reading minds, doing pre-thought crime, and they do it to babies in the womb, and they're like, that baby had an illegal thought when it was two months old. It's now arrested. There'll be no neural net if I'm in Congress. That's a heresy to begin with. Let me pull up this story we have from TimCast.com. Anna Navarro doubles down on comments about aborting special needs babies.

She went on to say that she has a, she says, quote, I have a brother who's 57 and has the mental and motor skills of a one-year-old. And I know what that means financially, emotionally, physically for a family. I have a step-granddaughter who was born with Down syndrome. And you know what? It's very difficult in Florida to get services. It is not as easy as it sounds on paper. And I've got another. I've got a step grandson who was very autistic. This was her example for why there needs to be abortion. Effectively saying that all of these

people should be dead. All people who have disabilities. That's a psychotic thing to say. So, so Ian, just a moment ago, you mentioned that, you know, when a person is born is when they gain constitutional rights. My question is, does the 57-year-old man with the motor skills of a one-year-old have constitutional rights? Yeah. You think he does? Yeah. What about a baby born with no brain?

Yeah. Does have constitutional rights. Still has a name and a birth certificate. But a baby with a full functioning brain that functions more so than a born baby that has no brain. The unborn... Like, so, let's say there's two women and they're both sitting there

both equally as pregnant as each other. And one baby is born and the other was not. But they were fertilized at the exact same time. The one still in the womb has a fully functioning brain

and the one outside of the womb has no brain. Just a cerebellum so it's basic motor functions. You think the one without a brain does have constitutional rights and the one in the womb does not. So then killing the one in the womb is fine. It's more ethical than killing the living human.

Yeah. I accept your answer, but I don't understand it. No, I do. And I don't say this to be disparaging at all because you're my boy. I like you. Here it comes. No, my boy. I like you. Here it comes. No, I do. I like you.

But this is that whole Sapiens, Noah, Yuval, Harari school of thought is that reality can only be measured by suffering. Right. And like that's the ultimate form of measurement of reality. Yeah. And like that's the ultimate form of measurement of reality. And so the suffering argument is whatever we can do to eliminate suffering, to have to confront suffering, to have to confront anxiety and despair, whatever we can do to eliminate having to go through that process that is painful. We'll do that. And then we can justify doing it to kids because most likely if they're born into some patriarchal white supremacy society, then they'll suffer. And my point is that,

who do we think actually ends up dead in those scenarios from these white, yuppie, snowflake, milk toast, uniparty, globalist establishment politicians? Black people, brown people, the numbers suggest that. I have a thought experiment for you, Ian. So, all right, let's say right here. You've got two women. They both had a baby conceived in them at the exact same moments.

One baby has no brain and is born. And the other baby has a brain, totally functioning, completely average, unborn, and you said that you think the one that was born but doesn't have a brain has more constitutional rights or does have constitutional rights than the one unborn doesn't, right? Yeah, I think, I don't know what the law is about like a brain-dead person being born if the parent has the right to kill it, pull it off the machine. I'm just saying, you believe that the baby that was born, even with no brain, has constitutional rights and the unborn has no rights.

It's like one's born prematurely with no brain? No, they're both nine months gestation, but one was born and the other wasn was born even with no brain has constitutional rights and the unborn has no rights. It's like one's born prematurely with no brain? No, they're both nine months gestation but one was born and the other wasn't born yet because there's variation. So you're saying

you give the rights to the born person. Okay. So thought experiment. A mad scientist comes in the room and goes, and he fires a growth ray

at the other woman. Now she's 70 feet tall but the baby stayed the same size. Her womb is now a giant open room and they bring in a TV and a table and the baby's still there and then someone raises the baby but still in the womb the baby learns to read and write does it still does it have constitutional rights yet

no not by modern day law but by your by your opinion should it with growth rays um no we're gonna have to rewrite the law my point is i'm trying to understand why you don't think that baby has any rights. If the womb became as big as a skyscraper due to a mad scientist, an alien blasts them, it's like, ah, and she turns into a building. And the baby is still technically in the womb, but it's massive now. And people walk inside and they're teaching it math and reading, and it's aging and eating food. It has no rights.

It's still in the womb. I mean, this is interesting. But the womb is bigger. Because if you can neural net a baby no rights? Still in the womb. I mean, this is interesting. But the womb is bigger. Because if you can neural net a baby and track its thoughts in the womb, it'll be a revolution of what a baby is. Is it a human? Is it alive? Does it have rights?

Yeah, it will at that point because we're able to communicate with it. But if you can't communicate with it, it doesn't have, for all intents and purposes, rights yet. I don't know, man. Sometimes we have difficulty communicating, but I think we're both people. The point I'm trying to make just is I do not understand the logic behind why a baby at nine months with a thin layer of flesh between its face and everyone else does not have any rights.

Because it's attached to the mom. But the baby that was born is still attached to the mom too. Well, yeah, I guess, but it's about to be removed. No, I didn't say it was decided okay let's say it's not in the cord no they don't cut the cord it stays has no rights well eventually you got to cut the cord sure sure sure but for in that moment it has no rights i don't know what the process is could you abort a baby that was born as long as you don't cut the umbilical cord god in some places but i don't

think that would be legal i just don't understand why a baby at nine months with a fully functioning brain that can understand music that can kick and moves around, and is literally no different physically than a baby at the exact same time of gestation, but is outside the womb. They're identical in every way. I don't understand why the separation of rights happens. Let's forget the rights for a second because I don't like the rights argument because the left doesn't believe in the Constitution. Good point. First of all, they believe the constitution is always in flux and our constitution is amendable in some ways but they believe in a completely relativistic view

of the constitution and even claim that the constitution itself is illegitimate in its inception due to slavery the natives and white supremacy so i don't like the rights discussion let's just make it more basic who are the most vulnerable people in the world? Young children. Unborn children. Babies. What scenario in a movie makes us the most angry?

When a dog gets hit by a car. Yeah. For the liberal yuppie vegan cokeheads, for sure. But for me when i'm watching a movie the characters that we just but that that we despise the most traditionally are characters that kill a woman who has who is pregnant or has her children with her um you know in some gruesome fashion and there's a reason for that. And people don't want to give it its proper credit,

but Abrahamic faith changed the trajectory of our society away from a barbaric child-sacrificing culture. That's the story of Abraham. He goes up into the mountain, and before Abraham, child sacrifice was a common practice in barbaric pagan societies. But how else are you going to get the grain to grow? That's right. But that's exactly what they're doing.

They're sacrificing babies for economic growth. That's their whole argument. There's not enough resources for them. The harvest? What was that? What was that? It was a book. I think I know what you're talking about.

Yeah, like the springtime, and then they would sacrifice the young woman or whatever. But my point is that this whole abortion thing is not about rights and it's not about Republicans and Democrats. This is an informational war waged on women. This is a spiritual war waged on women. And to attack men and the significance of legacy and lineage and procreation, which is one of the most miraculous gifts that that any species has, human or not. But ours is certainly special, given how special humans have proven themselves to be scientifically speaking, even take away the faith in the divinity. But this is not about any of the politics, really.

This is an attack on women to try and convince women that their soul political power is anchored on their ability to kill their children. And there is nothing more anti-human, anti-American and satanic than to tell women all of your political standing should be dependent on this one right to kill the most important thing in function you can do as a woman. And their argument is that the primary function of being a woman shouldn't be bearing a child. That, you know, if there can be no women's rights without abortion rights. And it's strange to me that people don't see how anti-human that really is. Having a child is one of the most amazing things that ever happened to me. I have four, but most women say that about childbearing. And for us to have reverse psychology convinced an entire generation of women that their rights, their political power is anchored on the right to kill an unborn child is

completely absurd. It's a bit unfair. The real issue is that everyone knows humans die if they don't have sex, like eating. So the women have no choice. They have no choice but to have sex without protection and then get pregnant. So if they're going to succeed in the workplace, they need to be able to terminate their pregnancies.

Or they can, in all seriousness, just use a condom, an IUD, birth control. Or what about... Or abstain. Well, yeah. There's many choices. Why is the application of science so relative? Right?

Because you're never hearing these arguments about abortion or sex or family planning. Don't we have reasonable methods to measure ovulation? We do. Yep, we do. I mean measure ovulation? We do. Yep, we do. I mean, not down to a science. There are exceptions, but the ovulation scheduling is pretty thorough and pretty surefire in most cases. And that's never even mentioned that we should use science in that way.

They go immediately to let's kill unborn children, not let's use the advancement of science to regulate or track ovulation. I've got a potential hypothesis here. Why is it that the left that is more likely to abort their kids, less likely to even get pregnant, more likely to get vasectomies, more likely to get their tubes tied, why are they so adamant

about there being abortion access in red states? Why are they so adamant about there being abortion access in red states? Why are they so adamant about teaching LGBTQ issues to children? I think these people recognize a very important thing. They don't have kids. They need Republicans to abort their babies. Otherwise, in 20 years, the future is conservative. If the left is more likely to be LGBTQIA2 plus, BB, or whatever it is, those people are less likely to have children. If they are already more likely to get abortions if they do get pregnant or more likely to use prophylactics and get vasectomies, they're going to have substantially less kids. Over time, conservatives having kids means this country will be conservative. That's why they need to advocate for red states to allow abortion

so they can try and stop Republicans from having kids. And they can advocate for young conservative women to, don't ruin your life. You've got your whole future out if you have a child later. Get the abortion now. That was an info award that the Catholic Church is somewhat responsible for too. Christianity. This whole child out of wedlock thing, don't like it you know i'm a

christian i'm a cat i think that the entire cultural motif of shunning or or bastardizing child children that were born out of wedlock was a predicate for abortion well so i definitely think that we should not be shaming pregnancy we should should be shaming adultery. For sure. The adultery was the part that was wrong. The getting pregnant part is not wrong, right? But culturally, humans may, you know. That's how you knew if someone was having adultery. Yes, they looked at the child born out of wedlock as another.

Exactly. They didn't separate the sin of the parents from the divinity of the childbirth. Very sad. And that's how you have an avalanche of cultural decay and misinformation that ends up being, well, you know, and even conservatives, Christians, Catholics, you know, well, you had that child out of wedlock anyway. Go ahead and abort the kid. That's very sad. I think in the next 30 years, this country is going to be Christian conservative.

So it's an example I've given before but for the context I'll say it again in the early 2000s a survey was done and found that liberals were having I think 1.54 kids or something like that on average and conservatives were having 2.01 that meant that conservatives were at replacement levels and liberals weren't

20 years later we get this poll that shows, or about 20 years later, we get this poll that shows, or about 20 years later, 18 years, that Gen Z is slightly more conservative than millennials, but only slightly. They're very, very similar. And a lot of people assumed that meant that Gen Z was based, that they were waking up,

that the culture war message was getting to them, but that's not reality. The reality is conservatives just had more kids, ergo, more conservative Gen Z. That's it. Simple math. So what we see from the left is an attempt to indoctrinate kids because leftists don't have children, they have yours. Now we're seeing them attempt to get red states to enact an abortion, abortion rights, because they want Republicans to abort their kids. Otherwise, what you get right now today, the left is substantially more likely to not have kids.

I was looking at a graph, and it's plummeted. But conservatives are actually fairly stable, though it has gone down. Just give it 18 more years, 18 years from today. It's going to be 2040. We're all going to still be middle-aged, and we're going to be seeing a substantially more conservative country. Yeah, but I don't think it's going to be Christian conservative. Yeah, it will. I doubt it, dude.

Ancient religions are on their way out. Hand that rocks the cradle rules the world, bud. That's right. Yeah, but since nonsense also fades away. Okay, maybe Muslim. It doesn't have to be. Well, it's been here for 2,000 years. I know.

It's time for something new, man. Well, nonsense fades away. 43 years. Nonsense fades away. It's been 2,000 years. What's going on? It got rewritten like five times. When and by who? When, by who, and what did they change?

The Cathars, the Lollards, the King Henry. What did they change? The Byzantines, dude. Ian is proving Seamus' point. You've just literally proven him correct. About what statement? He didn't even say his statement. He says it persists and nonsense fades away.

But it also became the Orthodox Church. It's obvious that the Romans are the patriarchy. The Roman Catholic Church was created to suppress and control people. You were saying about marriage. It demonizes children born out of wedlock. You've proved Seamus' point. He wasn't making a point. We were just having a conversation.

He made a point. I said because Christians are having children more than the left, the future will be Christian conservative. Yeah, but that's a one plus one equals two argument. That's not how humans work. Seamus said the hand that cradle rocks the world and you disagreed and said it's fading away.

Then you went on to say that despite all of the things that happened throughout history, the religion persisted and evolved and was changed and all of that, whether it's true or not, you're arguing that instead of fading out and dying, it was reinvigorated and re-embraced and expanded to the point where it's bigger than it's ever been throughout history. Because there was universal truth beneath the sins. There was a truth that persisted was universal truth beneath the sins. There was a truth that persisted throughout the ages beneath the sins. And in the same way, the sins of the Roman Empire are not an indictment of God. The sins of our founding fathers are not an indictment

of America. There is a difference between ideas and the application of those ideas. And then this is something that even conservatives have had trouble trying to articulate to people who don't necessarily believe in God. Many people who don't believe in God don't necessarily believe in a traditional to justify freeing the slaves. So it actually vindicates that our Constitution and our American founding values were brilliant and were inclusive in some ways and were humane. But the application of them in the early stages was certainly not. But those things aren't an indictment of the ideas themselves and certainly not an indictment of God. Well, I know a lot of people that call themselves Christian that go to church and then they get wasted.

Your body's a temple, really? That's the point? You want to say that your body... It's completely true. Christians don't need to worship Christ. You don't need to worship Jesus to be a Christian. Does it say not to drink beer in the Bible? You cannot drink

to the point of excess. You can't get drunk, which is to say you can't drink to the point where you are no longer able to make good decisions. Right, and how insane, like, come on. That's like the biggest hypocrite criticism of, like, modern culture. People call themselves Christian,

then they destroy themselves. Like, come on. Yeah, I mean, look, there have been hypocrites in the Christian faith throughout all of history. Judas is one of the first bishops, right? And he betrayed Christ. I don't know. That's all ancient text stuff, man. I don't know if it's real or not. 230 to 250 million Americans are Christian. And so I think one important point is that while the percentage may be lower than it was before, there are still substantially more Christians in the country. I'm a Christian, and I've taught God as much as anybody who comes on here probably somewhat.

But I agree with you, Ian. My point's not even to bring up religion in the first place. My point was that, as Seamus said, the hand that rocks the world. People who identify as Christian conservatives are going to be the majority to identify. But I agree with you when you say that a lot of people who say they're Christian don't necessarily follow the laws of the faith.

So yeah, just like there's a referendum on what it means to be American if we even want to have a country, and that is the referendum right now. Do we want to have a country? There's a referendum on Christianity and what it means to be American, if we even want to have a country. And that is the referendum right now. Do we want to have a country? There's a referendum on Christianity and what it means to be Christian, what it means to be Catholic. They're having that argument in the Vatican right now.

There is going to be an ongoing argument about what it means to be or identify with these institutions and these cultural beliefs. Again, that's not an indictment of the beliefs themselves. It's an indictment of the beliefs themselves. It's an indictment of man's application of belief. I think that the ideals of Christianity are impossible to embody. The argument about

religion itself is not relevant to the point I'm trying to make. The point I'm trying to make is that Christians are having children. Whether they truly believe in the Bible is totally immaterial. What matters is the left ideology will die

because they don't have kids. Therefore, they argue for red states where there are more Christians to have abortion access because that will result in more Christians having abortions

whether or not they believe in... There's going to be some young Christian girl who's like, I don't have a baby. I'm going to go do it. If it's illegal, she's going to go to her parents and say, what do I do? And they're going to say, we're going to support you. You're going to be some young Christian girl who's like I don't have a baby I'm going to go do it if it's illegal she's going to go to her parents and say what do I do and they're going to say we're going to support you

you're going to have the baby I think a big reason whether they're conscious of it or not there are probably people on the left who realize since the 2000s we have slowly been eroding the leftist movement has been eroded I mean if you look at a lot of the

left movements, it's always been about eradicating religion, but they're losing because they don't have kids. So this is why the school choice fight is so important for the Democrats. They can't allow people to take their kids out of schools and choose where they want to go. This is why they're freaking out over the Supreme Court decision in Maine that allows people to get public funding and choose whatever school they want, religious or otherwise. This is why they're freaking out over the Supreme Court decision in Maine that allows people to get public funding and choose whatever school they want, religious or otherwise. This is why they're freaking out about a coach who prayed for himself and students decided they wanted to pray with him. They said, no, he's leading them in prayer. No, he was praying. They also decided to pray. People are allowed to speak. You can't stop them or fire them from doing it. They're

losing. They're not having kids and with the internet christians christian conservatives or even hypocritical christian conservatives if they call themselves that still are expanding growing and defending their values defending their kids is also why they're so freaked out about the don't say gay lie because they're like we need to indoctrinate their kids because we don't have any and this is why they're screaming don't say pray universal laws and and the real scary part is in my opinion it's a stopgap because if the lgbtq ism indoctrination doesn't work they're going to be the ones who abandon the idea of democracy the fastest. Believe that the push for artificial intelligence and this whole automation driven transhumanism idea is the is the plan B.

You could say no pun intended. It's the plan B for if the indoctrination doesn't work. And in the automation AI world, there will be no more democracy. And that's what they plan on doing. And that's what you see many, many factions of our government doing right now and going after conservatives like Steve Bannon. It's just we're going to create a banana republic where the ideas of justice, democracy, freedom are completely relative. And we'll make them up as we go. Yeah, it feels like we are headed towards a more conservative future if we do this right.

Things have gotten way too wacky and ready for change at a drop of a hat. We need to conserve our values. But the reason I brought up that I don't think it would be a Christian conservative is because I think people are bastardizing the word Christian, calling themselves Christian on paper, going and sitting in a church, repeating words, but they don't live like it. I think you're biased. I think you're biased.

I think you have a negative view from media depictions of what a Christian is. You might be right about that. Because of the Christians we've had here, has any one of them been in any way as you've described it? Everyone's like,

no one's perfect. Yeah. Shameless drinks. Yeah, but I don't get it. Being Christian isn't predicated. And drinking is not a sin as long as you're not drinking to excess or getting drunk. Shameless, you tell me if I'm wrong, but my concept of being Christian fundamentally is, do you believe in sin or don't you? I mean, that's one of the anchors.

And so when you say that there are Christians who people who identify as Christian who are hypocrites, the distinction there is that they believe in sin and they may be sinning, but they do believe that it is a sin and that there's a metaphysical accounting that they can then be redeemed from by by having faith or by asking for repentance. And people who don't believe they don't believe in a metaphysical accounting. And it's kind of most of them believe in karma which is the same thing essentially but some people don't believe in universal accounting at all and that's dangerous I think they're obviously fake Christians there are people who claim to support

a lot of ideas they don't support there's a lot of people who are woke who say they hate racism but then they're super racist there are a lot of people who claim to be Christian and you see these videos of them screaming and spitting on people. I also think that there is a media depiction of a Christian that's just outright not true.

Of all of the religious people we've had come here, not a single one of them was as you described. Oh, I mean, we sit with people for an hour and a half. I don't know those people. What do they think about when they're alone in their room at night? I don't know. They've not screamed at you. They've not, you've not witnessed any of them be as you've described a Christian.

Christianity is held, it's a really weird thing. You're supposed to be like this benevolent, angelic thing that has no sin. You've washed away. That's not what we believe. Or you're just guilty about betraying the Catholic Church. You sit in front of Seamus all the time and you say things like, this is what it's supposed to be, but you've never bothered to actually sit down with Seamus and ask him what he

believes. Well, I mean, Seamus believes that when he drinks wine and eats bread, it's literally the body of Jesus Christ. Yeah. Well, I'm not eating wine and drinking bed in that instance,

but yeah, no, I do believe in transubstantiation. I believe in the, the Holy Eucharist. I do like that. So, but you know, one thing know one thing that's not relevant to the point i'm making the point is that it's not you cannot a piece of bread is not literally a human being the point i'm making is that seamus does believe that and he is not lying about what he believes and you

consistently depict christians as like rabid you're're saying if a dad tells his kid, hey, kid, this bread is literally a human body. The kid's going to be like, I don't believe that, dad. That's not what we're talking about. You're saying parents are going to have Christian kids. That's not how it works. When you lie to your kid and tell him something is what it's not, the kid sees through it. That's not true. So, Ian, there's a couple things here.

Kids are impressed upon by their parents and adopt their parents' values. And there's a few things I want to mention because there's something I really want to touch on here. To be Christian, there's two tiers here, right? You're sort of discussing hypocrisy, and hypocrisy is a real phenomenon. But there's a difference between being someone who makes a mistake and sins, which everyone does, and Christians acknowledge that. And we call ourselves sinner. And someone who says, I actually don't believe this is a sin. I'm going to do it anyway while calling myself Christians.

Now, you insinuated earlier that I'm a hypocrite because I drink, even though nothing in my faith prohibits drinking, as long as you're not getting drunk, because you don't know anything about my religion. You don't know what I believe because you haven't taken the time to ask me, but you were willing to make an accusation about me in front of literally tens of thousands of people. I was told by a Catholic that I'm going to hell because I don't believe Jesus is the

son of God. Does that justify any of what I just said? Well, I mean, I'm asking you about your faith. You just told me I don't know anything about your faith. I'm countering that. My point is you made an accusation towards me, which insinuated on some kind of... I don't know what your drinking is like. I've seen you get somewhat drunk.

It's not that big of a deal. I think you drink to the point where you're feeling a little bit, like, happy or bubbly, but you cannot drink to the point where you're making bad decisions. Dude, I don't even care if people drink, man. And so the point is, yeah, yeah, yeah. I care about people that are hypocrites. You brought it up, but you brought it up exactly to insinuate that I'm a hypocrite, but you never stopped to ask me about any of this or what the faith teaches.

And so I think that's really unfair because we've known each other for a long time, and especially if there is something you think I'm hypocritical on, then you have a conversation with a person instead of waiting until you're on air to try to make an accusation towards them in front of everyone. I don't want to be personal. Fair enough. But I think what matters most is you've known Christians who have said and done things to you that have hurt you.

Yeah, I think that stinks because, look, Christians are human beings, and we also make mistakes. I've seen Christians insult people. For sure, for sure. But my point is we don't become Christian because we believe other Christians are perfect. We become Christian because we believe in Jesus Christ. We believe that he's perfect. That's not enough.

But that doesn't require believing that other people are perfect. That doesn't require being a perfect person. But the whole like believing that Jesus is not what makes you anointed. It doesn't give you the power of anointing. So I gotta stop you because this conversation is not going anywhere. The point I made was Ian,

you've asserted something about Christians that has not appeared before you out of the entire time we've done this show and had numerous Christians come on talking about their faith. My question is, how could you believe in a general negative depiction of all Christians

or a large sum of them or a majority of them or a plurality when you've not encountered any of those stereotypes in any of the Christians that we've had come here and not just the people who've been on the show, but even people who work here. That's what I don't understand. I've seen Christians behave cruelly. Sure, sure.

Cruelty. Christians that are lustful. I've seen Christians that get angry, which is wrath, which is a sin. So wait, in what context is getting angry is said roth what wrath yeah so wrath does not exclude wrath does not um condemn righteous indignation there are things we should be angry about so you basically are saying that being angry at all is sinful and makes christian a hypocrite but again you don't know what christians believe about anger or wrath the the point is is just. You've made several points on several different shows

about Christians generally being this hypocritical or negative thing, even though at the very least, you could argue you've actually met more Christians who are nice and do adhere to their faith than who don't. But you still maintain the negative over the positive. I usually have good interactions with people in general because that's what I give people when I interact with them. I just feel like if 250 million people in this country identify as Christians, I don't think most of those people are hypocritical. I don't think most of them.

I don't really care how you identify them. It doesn't make you a good person. Like you can say on paper, I'm a Christian. It doesn't make you a Christian. It doesn't make you a good person. Like you can say on paper, I'm a Christian. It doesn't make you a Christian. It doesn't make you a good person. Not everyone who calls Lord, Lord will be saved. But Seamus, you would agree with this. And I think there are many Catholic theologians and devout Christians who are much, much more in alignment with their faith in their everyday life than I surely am, that would tell you, Ian, that the decay of America or the decay of society is the failure of the church.

Yeah, I totally agree. And the hypocrisy of the church and that them not being the moral shepherd that they were supposed to be in a variety of ways is partially or mostly to blame for how wayward society has gotten. So nobody who is, again, what I think what Tim is trying to say is that nobody who's really Christian who has a well-formulated worldview on Christianity is trying to abnegate the culpability of Christians in the wayward ways of the world at all.

I think most Christians, in fact, who are real Christians and not just virtue signaling like the left does, will tell you, no, Christians are actually to blame for how things have gotten. I'll put it this way. Kind of what I'm saying is I grew up Catholic. I went to church. What I saw of Christians depicted on TV didn't make sense to me. Because I did not know anybody at my church who

acted that way as the media would portray them. Ian, you've also not been to church, have you? A few times, yeah. Like you've actually... When I was younger, I went to an outdoor Catholic church once. I went to a Methodist church once. I went to a youth group for often every Sunday. I would go for

three hours. And the people there were generally like- They were just mean kids and they would play basketball. So I think that's the example of it. I see how the left depicts Christians. I see how Jordan Klepper in Comedy Central goes to events and finds people to caricaturize and mock and portray negatively. And then I think about the people I met growing up. Then I think about how I had this moment in my life where our church actually kind of slighted my family and my family stepped away from them, made me a bit angry, and it felt like these people were lying. And then I met someone who wasn't Christian who talked to me about Jesus, and I was like, oh, they were just bad people. And then I realized something as I started to travel around.

I remember being at Occupy Wall Street and seeing a conservative pro-life protest. And they were all like, oh man, we're going to go there. Be careful. We're infiltrating. That's what the left said. We showed up as a bunch of old ladies waving American flags and they were waving and smiling. And I was like, none of these people are mean. And then I hear people give general negative depictions of religious people. I'm like, I wonder if that's just a negative media portrayal stereotype. Because if 250 million people in this country identify as Christians, certainly not 250 million people are walking around angry or hypocritical. In fact, not even the majority or plurality of them are typically angry, at least when you see them in person on Twitter.

Yeah, they've probably got that angst and anger. But for the most part, when you go outside and touch grass, the people you're talking to, probably Christian. And not all that mean, actually kind of nice. If you collapse in the middle of the street, in the middle of anywhere in this country, someone's going to run up and try and help you for the most part. In some places, they don't. But what I mean to say is, regardless of the religion, I just think it's absurd to

characterize and stereotype people as generally negative and hold that view of them. Hypocrites. Because people will tell me, they'll be like, dude, it doesn't matter what I do. I can do whatever I want because if I believe in Jesus, he forgives me when I die. I've never met kids growing up that were taught by their parents from the church. Like, oh, all my sins will be forgiven if I believe in Jesus. Children? Yeah, other, like friends, high school kids and whatever.

That's part of the reason why it's a sin. That's part of the reason why it's a sin and egregious to kill a baby in the womb. Because. No, no, no. Hey. That's part of the reason why it's a sin and egregious to kill a baby in the womb. Because children don't have a... What Aquinas did, what he did for Christianity, what Christianity solved was a merger between Judaism, you could say, and first principles of Greek and Aristotelian thought. And the Catholic belief, the modern Catholic belief, is that the Holy Spirit doesn't exist in and of itself necessarily, that it is embodied and perfected with the human rational mind,

and that to live and to think, to have thought, to know God is actually the height and strive of Christian and Catholic belief. And when you rob a fetus of their growth and maturity in faith, that is the ultimate sin. You've taken the innocence of a child. Also, I will say the Holy Spirit does exist external, too. Like, the Holy Spirit does exist independent of us, but yes, works through us. Independent of us, works through us. Independent of us, works through us.

Works through us, yeah. If you haven't already, would you kindly smash that like button, subscribe to this channel, and share the show with your friends. Head over to timcast.com,

sign up to be a member. We're going to have a members-only show at 11 p.m. It's the After Hours show where we swear, and it's not very family-friendly, but it is good fun.

And don't forget to follow us on Instagram, timcast.irl. You can follow me at timcast. Let's read some chats grofty says buck buck buck yes i have good news for fans of chicken city well it's sort of good news we've created an outdoor area so the chickens can get access to the mulberries it's a fenced off area it won't keep them safe at night but during the day it keeps them corralled so they can have fresh grass and there are mulberries everywhere. And I had to chase these dumb little things around today because they wouldn't go back inside.

So, yeah, good fun. But that's good news for the chickens, of which there are many. And we're also starting Cocktown. Yeah, we're going to try and figure out Cocktown. It's the roosters. Yeah, the roosters. What are you guys talking about? Come on, guys. We's a the roosters yeah the roosters what are you guys talking about come on guys we're talking about roosters each other like what's going on oh you guys have dirty

minds dirty birds the roosters can't live with the girls because they'll fight so all of the boys roosters also known as cocks need to be brought or cockereerels, to cock town. Nice. And that's cock, C-O-C-H. What? Cock. Is that how you spell rooster? Well, it's like cockerel, I think. It's C-O-C-H, isn't it? No, it's C-O-C-K-E-R-E-L.

Oh, okay. Yeah, cockerels. The inner ear is the cockerel, C-O-C-H. Isn't that right? I don't know. Cochlear. Cochlear. All right, let's see what we got.

Coke. Mr. Slytrip says, why is abortion legal the day before birth in Colorado, but under H.R. 724, it's a federal crime to intentionally stomp a toad? Is that true? That's true, yes. Oh, my gosh. It actually is.

This is so insane to me. Don't stomp a toad, man. Oh, man. Okay, okay, okay. Robert Knight says, As an independent voter in Colorado, I got both ballots. The Democrat ballot had one option per position,

whereas the Republican ballot had multiple. Interesting. All right. Khalil Rose says, if AOC becomes president, I'm moving to Canada. Oh, wait, it sucks there too. It's even worse there.

I don't know, man. Luke's always talking about Chiran in Mexico. It's the anarchic state. It's like they got no government. You just go there and live. There you go. It's one way to do it. El Salvador.

Yo. They got a place called Bitcoin Beach where a bunch of tech entrepreneurs and Bitcoin maximalists and crypto heads are buying property in El Salvador because their economy is booming. Their crime is decreasing. This is crazy. When they introduced Bitcoin into El Salvador because their economy is booming, their crime is decreasing. This is crazy.

When they introduced Bitcoin into El Salvador, apparently they banked the whole country overnight. Like all of a sudden, the entire population had access to a digital financial account. And I was told this, fact check makes sense, I don't know if it's true, that they gave everyone $30 in crypto to kickstart the Bitcoin economy. So all of a sudden, everybody started spending money like crazy, and the economy just went boom. Hey, cryptocurrency, man. I love it.

Wow. And that's one way to get past Federal Reserve. Okay. All right. Storm Huffman says, Seamus, sad to see you go. You have been critical in making me look at Catholicism in a better light. What is your biggest criticism of the church? Well, thank you very much, and I really appreciate that. That's a good question. So,

you know, I wholeheartedly believe in Catholicism and the Catholic Church. If there's a criticism I have, it's basically just going to be with the way the people in the church behave, the way all of us behave. But ultimately, that's something that's known to us based on the scriptures, right? We know that the earliest Christians, they made mistakes. We talk about Judas, and I mentioned him as the first bishop. Well, look at the first pope, Peter. I mean, he denied Christ three times before repenting, right? And so we have to—my biggest criticism of the church is me. If I was holier, if I was better,

if I followed in Christ's footsteps more effectively, I would be meriting more graces for the world. And I think ultimately, if you are Catholic, your biggest criticism of the church should be yourself. We Are Change says, is Potato Man leaving? Potato Man is indeed leaving. I saw that he said he can't take the heat. Well, let me tell you something, heat Well let me tell you something Luke

Let me tell you something Alright You and I will do a little stream of our own Where we can hash some of this out without the referee Without Tim stopping us from going to town But yes I am going to be leaving for a little while And I know you're going to miss me Luke Which is why I think you should go to freedomtunes.com

Become a member for five bucks a month Seamus is actually going on a mission To preach the good word of Freedom Tunes Not actually the religion He wants people to watch FreedomTunes.com, become a member for five bucks a month. Seamus is actually going on a mission to preach the good word of Freedom Tunes. Yes. Not actually the religion. He wants people to watch Freedom Tunes. All right, let's read some more. PP Storm says, a pile of rocks is smarter than AOC.

Sure, a picture of a pile of rocks is smarter than AOC. All right. KL Tanker says, please look into Randy Cox and the New Haven police. Another reason we need constitutional carry nationwide. Man ended up paralyzed for a possession of a handgun without a permit. Maybe more to story. I think I saw that. Was that the guy who was who was given the nickel ride?

He was there was a I don't know. There's a story where a guy was sitting in the backseat of a wagon and the police slammed the brakes on. So he flew forward and broke his neck, and it was for illegal possession of a handgun. And I read that story, and I'm like, what's illegal about possessing a handgun? Did he lose his right to possess it through due process,

or did they find a guy who didn't have a permit, so they paralyzed him? And the crazy thing is, I don't know if it's the same story, but this dude, they dragged him out. He's like, I can't move. And they're like, you're fine. And they drag him out. Yo, when you have a spinal injury, they can't move.

They're supposed to move you. The paramedics have to come in very carefully because they can make it worse. The cops just drag him out. Dude, we got problems with police. All right. I'll shout out in these circumstances, this stuff should not be happening. But what do you do? I guess the cops are just they don't tolerate it because people will lie and claim and like piss themselves and stuff like that.

But maybe what we need is one EMT with every arrest. Is that what we have to do? This guy, he's paralyzed from the chest down now. And when I saw the story, I got really mad because Ben Crump is involved and I'm like, you've lost all credibility. But regardless,

that shouldn't happen. Yeah. No, I think I said this last time, I think policing has become a byproduct of a system that is okay with whatever level of moral decay and chaos ensues, and then they throw it on the police. And not only do they throw it on them,

but they actually undertrain them and underfund them so that they can be the scapegoat. So, yeah, policing has become one of the most corrupt things that go on in the country. Michael Alio says, when Republicans win this year, they should codify into law the other rights that Dems are worried will be taken away. Miscegenation, contraception, etc. Dare Dems to oppose it as we remove their fundraising talking points? Yes. oppose it as we remove their fundraising talking points yes republicans should first of all codify miscegenation which is mixed race cohabitation and marriage and they should be like democrats

you're right we hereby propose the bill for you and then democrats will be forced to oppose it won't they or they'll sign on and have no talking point because then these things won't be taken away and contraception as well republicans can be like yeah yeah these things are fine what do you what do you think the republicans should cod taken away. And contraception as well. Republicans can be like, yeah, yeah, these things are fine. What do you think? Should Republicans codify right to contraception? No. You don't think so? No.

I don't think that's fundamentally a conservative thing to do. What about miscegenation? Because the thing is there are a number of contraceptive methods that are abortifacients too. That's true. What miscegenation do you agree with? Codifying to law the right to mixed race, marriage, and cohabitation. Oh, of course, of course. And cohabitation.

Yeah, of course. Take away their talking points. Yeah, well, also the idea that, like, Republicans would want to, like, ban interracial marriage. It's because to them everything is racist all the time, right? They're making memes where they're claiming Clarence Thomas is just trying to get an annulment from his wife. That's hilarious. They're like, he's trying to annul miscegenation ruling so that his wife, it's like, just get a divorce, dude. You know what?

I don't think abortifacients are birth control. That doesn't, I mean, they're not fertilization control, I should say. Birth control is a different thing. You want to make sure the baby isn't born, but that's kind of sickening almost. Or fertilized or conceived, right? But I think that there are a number of birth control methods that do have the capacity to be abortifacient. So there's some where it's not entirely clear if it's preventing conception or if it's just aborting immediately after the conception or preventing implantation, something like that. All right.

Jordan Z says, saw Catalina Loft won her primary up here in Northern Illinois. I saw her a couple of weeks ago at my town's parade. I told her I saw her on your show. She said you were cool. Hello, I'll keep up the good work. That's cool that you won her primary. It is a D plus 11 district. But considering the polling, it very well may flip.

So make it happen. Catalina, you got to go out there. You got to knock on doors. You got to tell everybody to vote for you. There we go. Matthew Valesquez says, John Cena parodied Trump on SNL. Zelensky parodied the presidency in Ukraine. Cena Cortez, 2024.

Why are they still having Trump on SNL? It's just so weird to me. They're hoping he'll say something that the press will report is true so that like they'll have something to talk about like trump's snl character says this i want to call out seamus real quick yeah what do you call them out do it right jason says the rainbow is the biblical symbol to noah as a covenant yeah i'd like to see the rainbow more often Seamus put the rainbow behind you Why not? If it's like an actual rainbow I mean look we need to take it back folks We need to take it back

Exactly well culturally we have Unfortunately My issue is You should never allow them to There should be nothing That says to you you can't use your own symbols I would agree with you I hate that Diversity is another one Nothing that they do that says to you you can't use your own symbols. I would agree with you. I would agree with you.

I hate that. They want to hijack. Diversity is another one. Yes. They've hijacked diversity, and it's obviously not a diversity of thought. It's a diversity of physical representation or chosen identity. But, yeah, that's another one that they've hijacked. How about we reach out to one of our awesome fans

who've done this woodworking for us and we get a rainbow that says God's covenant to Noah. Yeah, beautiful. You can put that behind you. Let's do it. I would 100%. I would 100%. It was a symbol of Christianity or Abrahamic religion

before it was a symbol of anything else. That's right. Cultural appropriation. Exactly. And what is the left able to do? All the left is able to do is steal and twist, right? They don't take other concepts. They bastardize them.

They destroy them. How about you make flags that have a rainbow on it from like edge to edge. And the ark in front of it. And it says God's covenant to Noah. Yeah. Or not even the ark. Just a little ark. A cross or something.

Because I think the arc, well, because I think if you put a cross, people would be like, oh, he's a pro-LGBTQ Christian. But I think if it's the arc, then it's clear that you're referring to the flag as a promise or the rainbow as a promise. And then if all Christians started flying that flag. Yeah. Yeah. And then just.

It's never not been a symbol. No. Of God's covenant to Noah. They stole it. Well, then. And then just... It's Chris L. Fash. Is that the new buzz phrase? It's never not been a symbol of God's covenant to no. No, they stole it. Well, then you should never have stopped using it. Well, look, I was not the one who made that decision.

And I think a lot of churches still do use it in some capacity. I do want to give an update. I am working on getting that LGBT pride video up. Oh my goodness. Yes. Yeah, so the issue is copyright.

So just trying to figure out where we can find a video that is clear of copyright. And I'm really interested to hear what these ad agencies will have to say. They're going to say that's inappropriate. I'll be like, but there are children there. Certainly you don't think Pride is inappropriate for children. Do you? There are children at the event. Say it.

Say it publicly. Let me post that email where the ad agency says, we think pride parades are inappropriate for children. I'd love to show everyone what you think. So it's a question of like, if an ad agency denies showing this ad, then people aren't going to understand because they're not going to see the ad.

All they're going to know is that a company tried putting up a video of a pride parade with children that was family friendly, and the ad agencies refused to do it. Or the ad agency can come out and say, here's why, and explain what the video was. And then people will understand why it wasn't put up. Or they can choose to put the ad up of the old fat man twerking in front of a little girl and then waving to her. And they can say, see for yourself why we didn't want to run it. But then they'll have run it. So I think it's an untenable situation.

However, we got to do it right. So I'm talking to some people. We're looking for videos that clearly depict what was going on and we have clearance on copyright issues for running it as an advertisement. They'll try and make some arguments like they're clearly going to say it's not appropriate and that's great. Just make the public statement that pride parades, pride events are not appropriate. For little kids, yeah.

For anybody. Yeah. For ad space. Yeah. Because, I mean, adults are going to see it. Is that not okay? Well, of course they won't allow it. That's the thing.

When you have these videos coming out of these pride events where people are fully nude and doing these things, it is people turning their faces away and saying, I'm not going anywhere near that. But what happens when someone says, I want to put it in a magazine? I want that photo in a magazine. I want a full page out in the New York Times. Then they'll all start saying, no, we don't accept it. It's like when the parents went to the hearings over schools and said,

I'm going to read from you a passage from a book you approved for my classroom. And then they shut their mics off like, no, no, you can't read that stuff in here. Hypocrisy. I think it was the Libs of TikTok that showed the video of the drag stripper show in Duluth, Minnesota, my home state, where they had the little five and six-year-olds right in the front row, and they were giving them dollars to give to the drag queen strippers. And then there's some videos where they put it in their thongs and g-strings.

Yeah. All right. Normative said, Bryson Gray is suing Spotify for censoring Pride Month. You can still find it on YouTube. Hilarious video. Interesting. I'll check it out. All right.

Julianne Boone says, I'm concerned about Ian's posture. He should sit up straight with his shoulders back. Thanks. Jordan Peterson says, yeah. You are right about that. That's my pinned tweet. I'll be fixing my posture this year. Thanks. Jordan Peterson. You are right about that. That's my pinned tweet. I'll be fixing my posture this year. Thanks for reminding me.

Monkey D. Joe says you have the best content on YouTube. Oh, we know. That's right. And that also means that Seamus doesn't. Wait, hold on a second. I mean, technically, you're right, logically, but they're just wrong. They're wrong. Fat Man says the modern pride flag is a hidden swastika divided into four parts.

I don't know if it was deliberately done by Nazis slowly influencing the takeover of the flag's design, similar to the eBay yellow or white situation, or if it's just a happy coincidence. Yeah, it's funny. Someone, they got suspended from Twitter for doing that. Yep. If you take the pride flag. You make four of them. And you have one pointing left one pointing up one pointing right and one pointing down it makes a swastika that's right that's funny scary it's like metaphysical coalescing

spirits yeah strange well there you go remember when that tarik nishid guy made a logo for his company and it was a it was a negative space swastika so it was like if you take a swastika and then color in the white portions and then white out the black portions that's what he made so it's like everyone's like bro that's a swastika he's like no it isn't they're like dude it's a swastika yeah so weird that people do this man all right cited for now excited for now says just seen that briar is retiring tomorrow instead of later this year not surprised wonder what they threatened him with no the the it's over the uh aren't they Excited for now says, just seen that Breyer is retiring tomorrow instead of later this year. Not surprised. Wonder what they threatened him with. No, it's over.

Aren't they issuing their last ruling tomorrow? They did like an extra day so they can issue the last ruling. And then the session is over. So Katonji Brown Jackson will come in. And then the session will start up again next year, I think. I don't know. But whatever. A liberal is being replaced by a far leftist so i don't think that'll change a whole lot and then when trump gets re-elected

he's going to replace many more justices and it's going to be like a seven to two conservative court or an eight to one adam brittman says maj Touré directly cited along with Dred Scott in SCOTUS ruling, all gun laws are racist. Yes, I agree. Correct. It's rooted in racism. And the left, they should be coming out and saying it's racist. A lot of drug laws are rooted in racism, too. Nixon used those marijuana laws to go after the Black Panthers and the hippie movement and stuff.

I posted a meme and it's like, this is Randy and it's a black dude. And it's like, Randy posts an innocent video with him and his son at the range. movement and stuff. I posted a meme and it's like, this is Randy and it's a black dude. And it's like, Randy posts an innocent video with him and his son at the range. This is Karen. She freaks out and reports it to the authorities. And then it's like, biased police go to a court and get a warrant for the removal of his firearms.

And then it shows three cops in armor. And it's like at 3 a.m., armed officers kick in Randy's door. His son and wife are screaming in terror and he's killed instinctively trying to defend his family. And I'm just like, if you thought stop and frisk was bad, red flag laws are

ten times worse. But for me, it's not an issue of race. For the left, it is. And so the left should be hearing that and being like, oh, you're right. Instead, they're just like, no, we don't care because they're hypocrites. I wanted to say something on behalf of Maash. Shout out to Maash. I like him. It is race racism as well, but it's they are they it is it is race uh

racism as well but it's really just anti-freedom and i think a lot of people's concept of america is flawed in this way and that we many of us today believe that the american government should secure our freedom it was never intended for the american government to secure your freedom you have the rights to secure your own freedom and in your community come together and coalesce to defend your freedom. And when you pair the Second Amendment with the independent business owner, a nation of shopkeepers, you get a safeguard against economic imperialism and tyranny. And that's what America was supposed to be.

And many black people need to understand that going forward so they can vote the right way all right jenna mind trick says ian says abortion does not meet the definition of murder murder is defined as the unlawful premeditated killing of a human by another fetuses are not alien they aren't cats they are human yeah wait what i mean it depends on the the jurisdiction i suppose whether or not it's a murder. I don't think so, based on what he's – I don't think that's the point he's making. He's making the point that if murder is defined as the unlawful premeditated killing of a human and fetuses are human – And if it's lawful to kill the fetus, then it's not a murder. That's the point. No, the law is homicide.

Murder is a noun. He just said murder is the illegal killing of a human if it's not defined as the unlawful premeditated killing of a one human by an unlawful so it's not unlawful then it's not murder so if it's not unlawful to kill a human being then it's then it's allowed but it's not murder it's still homicide right well homicide then use that word okay all right armored right. Armored Jester says, Ian, it took 20 days to get my son's birth certificate. You need to chill on the weed and look into these things before you speak in ignorance.

Yeah, whatever. First breath, when they're born. That's the first thing I said. So what if we, like, in order to protect the baby, at like six months or like four months, we stick a snorkel up in there. Almost there, Tim. We're very close.

They're going to have neural nets soon. The babies will be leading the way. But the babies are breathing when they're in the womb. I think they're in liquid. I don't know. No, they actually inhale amniotic fluid to strengthen their lungs. They inhale and exhale it. Cool.

You can't have a heartbeat if you're not breathing. I guess if you're sucking. But they're actually getting oxygen through the umbilical cord. Right. But they do exercise their lungs in the womb. MD says, if you think the pride flag is ridiculous, pull up the Brooklyn Nets pride flag. I honestly thought it was a troll. We all saw that when we brought it up.

I don't know what it is. It's just like every possible flag of any kind of sexuality mashed into one weird thing. And it's like... What is this called? The Brooklyn Nets pride flag. Pride month is a complete psyop. Well, MAGA month is coming up. It's time, yes.

Yeah, you know MAGA month? Wow, I did see this the other day. I got my profile picture ready. You got it. So on MAGA month, everyone changes their profile pictures to American flags because it's 4th of July month. It's Independence. It's Make America Great Again month.

It's not about politics. It's about just loving your country and your neighbors and grilling hot dogs and burgers and blowing stuff up in the air with fireworks. Can I give an honest criticism of Donald Trump real quick? Of course. Absolutely not. There's no such thing as an honest criticism of Donald Trump. Yeah, he's perfect in every single way. I think one of the shortcomings of Donald Trump's messaging around MAGA and not I'm not saying this to be disparaging on him, you know, in any real harsh way. But when I talk to people in my community and see five in Minneapolis, they really believe make America great again is a is a desire to take America back to a time when race relations were worse.

And it's a huge info war because in the 1970s, there was a moment where we had racial harmony coming out of the civil rights movement and the security state intentionally tried to subvert that racial harmony that existed for a moment. But Make America Great Again is also based largely on foreign policy and trade. And there was a time in this country where we had a surplus and we were the center of manufacturing. And the main message behind Make America Great Again, I think people need to understand going forward, whether you traditionally identify as Republican or Democrat, is that the sovereignty of this country is being exported to another country

that doesn't believe in human freedom at all, whether you believe in God or not, and that is China and the CCP. They don't believe in human freedom, they don't believe in human rights, and they don't believe in health care. Old people in China don't have health care. So, I mean, that's kind of an info word that I wanted to speak on. All right. Leon Cintron says,

The Constitution grants citizenship by birth, not by fertilization. The U.S. government doesn't enforce the Constitution on non-citizens until you are born in American territory or naturalized. The U.S. Constitution isn't applicable. Wrong! You are 100% wrong. The Supreme Court has already ruled the Constitution applies to non-citizens so long as they are here.

That means tourists have free speech. Tourists have 2A. Tourists have a right to be free from search and seizure and all of these unwarranted. The Constitution absolutely applies to non-citizens. That's been a rule on time and time again. Illegal aliens. Yep. They get constitutional rights.

That's right. They have free speech. They have 2A. They have all of these things. Now, with 2A, there's probably laws in many states about permitting, about a non-resident, non-resident, but not non-citizen. John Galt says, Ian, if a U.S. woman is a homesteader and has a baby at home, doesn't get a birth certificate, is homeschooled at the age of 18, on the way to town to get his birth certificate and driver's license.

He's arrested. Is he protected by U.S. rights? Yeah, I think we already covered it. It's birth that gives you the U.S. rights. But that's why I asked you, what if they're born in a test tube? What if they're in an amniotic bag, artificial bag?

On American soil? Yeah, the moment they're born into the bag i guess i don't know the bag yeah is that how that's how i imagine how that's worked it's like when would you grant them like when would you recognize their constitutional rights like an out of sight out of mind thing i think for a lot of people because if the baby's gestating in a in a glass case and you can watch it from day one of fertilization all the way through, you're going to think a lot earlier that it should deserve those rights, I bet. Theodore Hutch Stetler says, here's what it means to be Christian.

Quote, that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised him from the dead, you will be saved. Romans 10.9. Well, there you go. Saved from what? Eternal damnation. Let's grab a couple more.

We'll just do a couple more. We'll try and get as many as we can in. Wayne Martin says, to add to Royce's point, have we heard any acknowledgments of the Roe v. Wade ruling from any of the churches or huge religious leaders?

That's a good question. I know that I've heard people saying that their church, their priest gave a good homily after a row was overturned. I've also heard some people claiming that their priest or pastor was condemning the ruling. It's a mixed bag, unfortunately. Dan and S says, Given our government's history on the issue of personhood,

I find it disturbing that Ian wants to predicate human value on the government's definitions. Who else is good? What else are we going to predicate it on? Your feelings? You know, these are very difficult moral questions, I suppose. But the challenge ultimately is when does the government have the right to kill human? Whenever they want. Whenever Congress says it's the time.

I mean, that's the reality. When the government says it, they do it. Obama's not in prison. It's supposed to be Congress that decides it, but the Patriot Act's insane. Obama straight up killed American citizens without charge or trial. Yeah. No accountability. Federal government is a Frankenstein.

Alright. If you haven't already, would you kindly smash that like button, subscribe to the channel, and share the show with your friends. It's the sharing that really helps. We've actually started doing some marketing recently, and we're going to ramp it up because we've never actually done it until this past month. So that'll be fun. Over at TimCast.com, if you sign up, we're going to have an exclusive members-only show for you. So check that out. That's going to be a lot of fun.

We'll swear a lot. You can follow the show at TimCast'll swear a lot. You can follow the show at TimCastIRL on Instagram. You can follow us on Facebook, Facebook.com slash TimCastNews because we're actually launching a few channels and I think Facebook actually

took us out of the doghouse. They demonetized me for covering January 6th, but they've restored the channel, I guess. So we're going to be posting there again and you can follow me personally

at TimCast basically everywhere. Royce, do you want to shout anything out? RoyceWhite.us is our congressional website. Also started a few YouTube channels more recently. The Last Renaissance is one, covering my time in the Big Three. Also just

cultural stuff and going on with me personally, and should be trying to get a podcast channels coming up here in the next couple of weeks. So stay tuned for that as well. We'll be putting that content up on the Congress website. So right on, right on. Amazing. Seamus Coughlin. Oh man, I'm going to miss you guys. Going to miss all of you. This has been great. And I, I love y'all. If, if you haven't got enough of me yet, you can go over to freedomtunes.com, become a member for five bucks a month.

You'll get an extra cartoon. Each week you'll also get behind-the-scenes content, and I'll see you guys real soon. But it's okay. We've got another Catholic here to replace James. Dirty little Catholic. That's right. That's right.

Yep. Have a nice evening, everyone. I'm Ian Crossland. Always great to see you, man. And to see you. I guess the referee was judicious, but we need to go. Gloves off. You guys are supposed to do that two-hour conversation.

I mean, I've said before, I talk about the thing when there's elements of it that I know, but I'm not someone who's qualified to debate this publicly, in my opinion. I'll get into some arguments about it if a point comes up where i know someone's wrong but when it comes like a really in-depth dive i really want to do more reading first just to make sure i'm not saying like anything irresponsible or that misses the mark yeah speaking of which i've mentioned before you're very like moralistic as i know like a really moralistic guy and when tim asked me direct question to criticize you i said said drinking. That was kind of lazy of me. So I would love to go deeper.

I appreciate that. I mean, yeah, not to hit on the point too much. But yeah, I mean, Jesus drank. The apostles drank. It's not a sin to have alcohol. Also, they may have taken ergot. I don't agree with that. They also played disco music.

What? That's historically true. We're just making things up. We're making. I, with a straight face, have said historical inaccuracies on a primetime show because we've already determined that's a Chad movie. That's the way to go. That's correct. Yes, if you guys still like makeup.

No, I'm just kidding. There's nowhere you can go to make up stuff like that. AOC and Tim are a special class of person. Thank you very much for coming by this evening, Royce, for your big game tomorrow. Thank you, Seamus, for visiting and sharing your knowledge with us. I know you're not a theologian, but I feel like if you have a firmly held belief that you have a right and a privilege to share it with people

and to see if you can persuade them to think the way you think. Thank you. I do my best. I really do do my best. I try to be careful if that's the specific topic. I would want to know a specific thing you wanted to get into so that I could make sure I was really well read on that specific part before we dove into it. All right, man.

We'll figure that stuff out. It'll be really cool. Yeah. Head over to TimCast.com for the members-only show. Thanks for hanging out, and we'll see you all then. Bye, guys.