Timcast IRL - Timcast IRL #683 Kari Lake Trial CONCLUDES, BOMBSHELL Evidence Could Change Everything w/Blake Masters

Episode Date: December 23, 2022

Tim, Ian, Luke, & Serge join Blake Masters to discuss Fox News lying about the Kari Lake trial, the internal rift within the GOP, Republicans revolting against Kevin McCarthy for speaker, new evidence emerging that intel communities have infiltrated Google, Facebook, & Twitter, Blake Masters' plan as CEO of Twitter, & American's pushback against 45 billion dollars promised to Ukraine. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Oh yeah, we're live. How's it going, everybody? We're still here at Turning Point USA. Thanks for tuning in. We got some big news on this, which will be our last show of the year 2022. And what a year it was. I don't know about you guys, but I was glued to the Kerry Lake trial all day. And it was rough because I'm just sitting there. I got to work, but I can't stop watching because the testimony is riveting. And I believe that there was once again bombshell evidence provided this time from the People's Pundit, big data polling, Richard Barris, very, very interesting testimony. And then we got to the closing arguments, which in my opinion, I'm not going to mince words. I think the defense had a good argument and the plaintiff, this is Kerlick's lawyers, I think did not hit the nail

on the head with a hammer. But we will see. This really just depends on whether or not the judge is willing to adhere, I suppose. Well, I got to be careful. There's a lot of arguments to be made. I think based on what we've seen already, there's reason to believe there were significant errors this is witness testimony this is uh and data but it's going to depend on whether or not the judge agrees it was intentionally done to hurt kerry lake which is let's be honest very very difficult if not impossible to prove but it does seem that the plaintiff kerry lake's team did provide evidence that there was intent at the very least whether or not it was intent to actually subvert the election. We don't have that. And that may be where the judge comes back and says, nope, Carrie Lake, you're out. So we'll

talk about that. Plus, this one's crazy. Sam Bankman Freed somehow got his bail paid for $250 million. It may have been a 10% bond or something, but it's the biggest bond apparently in history. And it was paid for and he's being released. We got to talk about that. Plus, this one I think is big. A new story exclusive. I believe this is Daily Mail exclusive. Facebook, Google, and Twitter, it's not just Twitter, are riddled with former intelligence employees. When I say former, I think only on paper. So we'll get into all that stuff. Before we get started, my friends, head over to TimCast.com, become a member, click that join us button, and you will get access to exclusive segments from the TimCast IRL podcast, as well

as Cast Castle Vlog, Tales from the Inverted World. And with your support as members, we will continue to do the things that we do, like coming down here to Arizona to hang out with Turning Point USA, do these shows on set, but also we're building cafes, we're building physical locations, we're launching new shows. We're going to keep doing whatever it is we can to build a cultural movement and actually have a major impact. So don't forget to smash that like button, subscribe to this channel, share the show with your friends, become a member at TimCast.com. Joining us today to talk about this, and boy, is it perfect, we got Blake Masters. What's up? Great to be with you here. Thanks. Who are you? Well, I ran for Senate here in Arizona in 2022. Came up a little bit short. We'll talk about that, right? I obviously watched this Cary Lake trial today with keen interest, and Cary, of course, is a good friend of mine. And, you know, before that, I worked in technology. I ran Peter Thiel's family office, uh, in San Francisco and then Los Angeles.

And so, uh, so I've had one foot in the tech investing world and one foot in the political world for the past couple of years. And, um, and potentially the new CEO of Twitter right here. Is that the rumor?

We, we, we will see almost certainly not. And, uh, anyone who wishes that for me wishes a lot of pain for me. We wished it for the show. Like how cool would that be?

If like Thursday comes around, it just so happens. It's like master CEO of Twitter. Oh, but you're right. It's a curse. It's a curse. It'd be pretty cool. And I do think from a product direction, like there's all these interesting things we could do. I think you could actually make Twitter quite profitable in five years. I'm not sure the balance sheet has five years of that, right? Elon, I think he says he said it's on the path to bankruptcy in what? A couple months. He said it was a plane with the engines on fire, the controls aren't working. But he did say he thinks he can get it cash flow even by next year, which is a good sign.

So we'll see. I think he should keep running it, by the way. I agree. That's when people say, Blake, you should go run Twitter. It's like, I think Elon can do a better job of it than I can. So why wouldn't we just want him to run it? He's shown he can run multiple mult-billion dollar companies at once. I agree.

Thanks for joining us. We also got Luke hanging out. Hey guys, very simple message for you guys here today. Two plus two equals five. The truth is whatever the government wants it to be. Just don't believe the evidence

of your eyes and ears. And you could be a trendy slave by representing your larger compliance with this shirt on thebestpoliticalshirts.com because you guys buy the shirts. That's why I'm here. That's the best way to support me, thebestpoliticalshirts.com,

because you do. That's why I'm here. You should write books like George Orwell. You're good at that kind of thing. I think so. Hi, everybody. Ian Crossland here from iancrossland.net. Happy to be here.

Happy to talk to you, Blake, about tech. And then, of course, we'll talk about politics, too. But let's just get down to it. Let's jump into this first story, man. It's the last it's the last show of the year. So we're going to talk about Carrie Lake. And, uh, I, I was watching this trial all day. I got to pull up this story from Fox news because this is just, it's, it's absolutely insane. Fox news publishes this story. Carrie Lake's opening salvo and election fraud case appears to fall short. It's not a fraud case. Carrie Lake's trial right now is about invalid ballots.

Lake's fraud allegations didn't appear to explain her 17,000 vote loss to Katie Hobbs. She did not make a fraud allegation. They explicitly said they are not making a fraud allegation. It's crazy to me, not so surprising, when even Fox News is not telling the story correctly. So I'll give you the gist of what we saw yesterday and where we're at today. So yesterday, what do we hear? One witness testified that he was given a sample of certain ballots and he found that in all of the samplings, there were 19 inch images printed on 20 inch paper, which we know from both the defense and the plaintiff would,

the machines would reject that. We, he then testified the ballots were then duplicated, but the originals were not stored along with them breaking chain of custody. And that's the one that's crazy to me. Like, is anybody talking about that? Like if you fill out a ballot and they told you to put it in box three and you did because it didn't count, they would duplicate it and run the duplicate through the machine. And then they lost the original. So how do we compare these two and know they're actually the same? That should have been brought up. We then heard from one witness that two hundred ninety eight thousand ballots had no chain of custody. This one simple. The judge should have just said to the defense, can you produce the chain of custody document in question? They didn't have it. They didn't produce it. I don't understand how we're at this point.

Today we heard from the People's Pundit, Richard Barris. He said that exit polling returns for Election Day were substantially lower than anything he's ever seen ever. I think he said something like 72% when he normally looks for around 95% to 98% returns. And he believes this is because people did not, people were not able to vote. So thus they did not come back. Now this was challenged, but he basically said due to the

errors, they talked to voters. Voters said that there were long lines and there were tabulation machine problems. And because of that, he believes people did experience issues. People reported issues and thus a substantial amount of voters were disenfranchised. They argued against this today, but I think it's particularly compelling, But keep in mind, it's not definitive proof, it's circumstantial evidence. Ultimately, what we end up getting in the closing arguments, and this was really good for the defense, they said it, Your Honor, you instructed in your ruling that the plaintiff would have to prove intentional misconduct with the intent to, to basically subvert the election or flip it in another direction. And they have not proven

that that's, that's important because the judge is going to be like, you're right. You can't prove an individual acted intentionally in an effort to hurt Carrie Lake. Therefore, even if the ballots are invalid or otherwise doesn't matter. That makes no sense to me because if I trip and fall and accidentally subvert an election, that election got subverted. So it would be no good. You'd have to do a new one. It doesn't matter what my intentions were. But the, but I guess as per the law, the judge, the judge ruled, if you can prove that someone intentionally acted to alter the outcome of the election, then they would be, that's what they, that was the stipulation for what they needed to win.

And it appears the only evidence they presented was that, yes, at, I think it was like six locations they tested, they found the ballot tabulators were misconfigured. The only way the misconfiguration could happen is if someone intentionally altered the printer settings. It was not an accident. And then the defense contends, okay,

and even if someone intentionally did that, you can't prove the person who did it to hurt Carrie Lake, therefore we win. Oh, I mean, that is a leap. If you intentionally do something that subverts an election, it doesn't matter if it was about

Carrie is not even, it doesn't make sense. If they intentionally changed it to a 19-inch ballot, then that was intent. Blake, what do you make of this court hearing? What's your assessment on what you're seeing? Well, I think the standard that the judge is requiring is even higher, right?

It's actually, Kerry's team had to show intent plus a different result. They had to show. They had to intend and the result would have been different but for all of these changes. A tangible number. It's They had to show. They had to intend and the result would have been different but for all of these changes. A tangible number. And that's really hard to prove. We'll see what the judge rules tomorrow, right?

But what's indisputable is that Carrie and her legal team have shown. They've just put out in front of everybody all these, call them, whether it's mistakes or active malfeasance, the election was really messed up. It was really messed up. Like people went to go vote on election day

and the machines didn't work. The printers did not work. How does that happen? Third world is what it is. One of the witnesses said 132 voting locations there were issues. Yeah, it's like 30% of the voting locations. It's really crazy. And Abe

Hamaday, the Attorney General, right? His election was certified as a loss by like 500 votes. And I know he's in litigation too and they're doing a recount, but 500 general, right? His election was certified as a loss by like 500 votes. And I know he's in litigation too, and they're doing a recount, but 500 votes and everybody of good conscience knows. And we sued on election day to try to get the polls to stay open for a couple more hours. That was rejected. Had the polls stayed open one more hour, Abe would be going into his recount, probably up a few thousand votes because those votes on election day were breaking heavily for Republicans. So Abe's was super close. And I think that obviously swung it carries at 17,000. I think she has a

good claim that like, Hey, if the printers worked and people could actually vote when they showed up that she'd be the governor of Arizona. Let's, let's, let's, let's argue, uh, for the sake of argument, let's say the voter tabulation problems and all that didn't exist. A witness testified that 298,000 ballots had no chain of custody. How do, how can you verify where those ballots come from? And then you actually, I'm pretty sure the defense, uh, the defense's own witness, uh, I'm not sure if it was Jarrett testified like, well, yeah, we, we, we didn't track that, but by law they have to. So, okay, hold on there a minute. If I was a judge and someone came to me and said the margin 17,000 and these 290,000 have no chain of custody,

I'd say, well, okay, that's against the law, new election, end of story. I bet the judge won't do that because the law doesn't say, hey, new election, right? And I think we need to change the state law. I think the state legislature should say, hey, if you can't prove chain of custody, you can't assume that's a fair election. But it appears that the burden of proof right now is on the Cary Lake team. The judge is going to say, well, hey, okay, chain of custody, that was broken. That's technically a violation of the law. But what's the remedy, right? You haven't shown me that they injected new ballots, and that's probably impossible to prove. Maybe it didn't happen, right? What happens to this state if the judge

comes out and says, yeah, you know, it's against the law to not have chain of custody, but too bad. I mean, what are the people, I have to imagine half of this state, and let alone how the elections impact the rest of the country. But I mean, if I lived here and I was a voter, and I was told in the press by the judge and by everyone, these ballots have no chain of custody, so we can't verify them, but we're going to count them anyway. How could I have faith in that system? It'd be really hard to. And that's unfortunate, right? Like whether Republicans win or not, like I want everybody to know that their vote counted. I want everyone to know that we have a first world election system. And the truth is that as soon as you criticize our elections,

people call you an election denier, right? Well, we have better elections than some countries and we have worse elections than almost every Western democracy, right? And the truth is somewhere in the middle. And apparently what we're learning in Maricopa is you can botch an election. You can just botch it. And if no one can prove that you did it with the purpose of putting your thumb on the scale and that it actually mathematically changed the result, you can get away with it. How about this? It was Maricopa County testified. I believe it was Maricopa County. Correct me if I'm wrong, please double check all this. I'm watching the trial and there's a lot that has to be parsed through, but they initially testified that 19 inch ballots could not appear on 20 inch paper. Then when the plaintiff's witness came up

and said, actually, yeah, we have it. And they published images of this. They come back today and go, oh, actually we knew about that problem. It affected three other elections. And it's like, Ooh, hold on. And he's like, now we're doing a root cause analysis of that. So, but you said the other day it couldn't happen. Now you're saying, oh yeah, we knew about that. Okay. So you knew that was a problem. It's been a problem. You didn't fix it. To me, it's insane that what we're basically hearing is the election was improperly done in two ways. The ballot tabulators were improperly configured. They knew it was improperly configured. They're trying to figure out how.

And there was lost chain of custody on these ballots. And they would just be like, yeah, well, you know, the crazy thing to me is this is the will of the people, the utmost of the utmost importance for our nation, for each state, for each jurisdiction to know that we are governed with the consent of the people, but that they would come out and the judge would be like, yeah, these, these call into question the integrity of the election, but we're going to roll with it anyway. I mean, I think people are going to lose their minds if that ends up being the ruling. And I'll tell you, there's already a lot of appetite for more election integrity in Arizona, right? It's Kerry's whole platform was I'm going to go in and clean this up. Whether you're Republican or Democrat, I'm going to bring more transparency

to the system, right? We're going to reform all this stuff. And now if we don't get that opportunity, it's my heart breaks for people in Arizona. It's like, why would anyone trust it? So Blake, you ran for the Senate. You did not win. What's, what's different about your election? How did it go? You know, what was it? The margin is different. You know, I think I was, I lost by about 125,000 votes was the official difference between Mark Kelly and me. And, uh, you know, I think I drew a tougher opponent and he's an astronaut and man, he nuked me with like 30 or $40 million. Right. And, and, uh, you know, we, I drew a tougher opponent and he's an astronaut. And, man, he nuked me with like 30 or 40 million dollars. Right. And and, you know, we thought about suing. And was this you know, was this the right thing to do? And ultimately, with all our analysis, like, no, it wasn't because it's messed up as this election in Maricopa was.

You can't make up one hundred and twenty five thousand votes. Like, I don't think I won the election right now. I have to have enough integrity to say that I can't sell false hope to my people. Like I said, Abe Hamadeh, 500 votes. This stuff in Maricopa County absolutely swung 500 votes. Now, Kerry has the interesting in-between, right? 17,000, and that's what her trial was. And she's trying to prove that but for this incompetence, call it incompetence at best, malfeasance at worst, but for this incompetence, I would have won 17,000 votes.

We'll see. Let uh hammer that one down let's say that carrie lake's initial argument was i understand that it was one big misunderstanding by everybody nobody intended to do this improperly but clearly we can see that the vote margin could be different if not for all these tabulators being wrong the law could not remedy that that's right the law requires intent it requires intent and it's not could be different it was different it would have been different and that's that's a really hard bar it's a really hard bar oh that's that's insane that that's not real governance real governance is saying okay what do we know and let's apply remedy on the facts they're saying regardless of the facts

there's a high standard that must be met meaning they could the system in place right now would actually put a person in power who didn't win i'm saying hypothetically just because the standard is too high to to to to change it i think it's insane because if i were to do something like destroy someone's property but i didn't do it to hurt them, that wasn't my intention. My intention was just like, oh, I didn't have an intention. I just actually destroyed your house, but I didn't intend to hurt you. No crime. Yeah.

Apparently when it comes to the, you apply that to the political landscape, it's not a crime. That makes no sense. I mean, intention is irrelevant when you're talking about disrupting and destroying things. Well, like if you kill someone, you're right. Somewhat. Somewhat. If somebody dies and destroying things. Well, like if you kill someone. You're right, somewhat, somewhat. If somebody dies and has no intent, it's manslaughter.

It's like if you're reckless or whatever. If you intend to do it, now it's murder. But it's still a crime. It is still a crime. Potentially, you could be driving in your car and you could hit somebody and it could be totally accidental and you don't go to jail for it.

So the difference here is that person still lost their life. We still acknowledge they lost their life. You may be still held liable civilly. We're talking about an end process where one person will be the executive in government. Meaning there is a very simple remedy. If we can see that something lacks integrity in the election,

we hold a new election because we're trying to get the will of the people done right. And Carrie Lake's opponent, Katie Hobbs, was what was her secretary of state of Arizona during the election, her own election. I think even California has a law that bans that, right? You shouldn't be able to oversee an election that you yourself are running in. That's just even if you didn't do anything wrong, that's just the appearance of impropriety,

which is corrosive to our politics. So obviously, Katie Hobbs never should have been allowed to be secretary of state and preside over this election. Well, obviously, the Republicans should have spoken out more about Brian Kemp in Georgia for a similar reason. Well, it's also important to note that I think the Republicans were very divided this upcoming midterm election. We saw a lot of money that was sent in many different places. And I think very surprisingly, it was a lot of Democratic super PACs that were supporting a lot of the Trump-backed candidates. But there's also an article here by Political that's describing how Trump was splitting donations with you, Blake, 99 to 1. Was that the truth?

Because you were well overspent, because your opponent spent way more money than you. Can you just quickly tell us how much your opponent spent and how much you spent on this upcoming midterm election? And where was their resistance? Because it seemed like a lot of old Republicans didn't want to give you money. I have to correct that a little. It's a misleading headline. It's true in so far as it goes. But actually, you know, on that list share, President Trump was was sending out emails saying it done on my behalf. We were getting those emails. It was helping me grow my email list. So the benefit wasn't financial in the immediate term so much as that long-term list building, right? He rarely does that for candidates. So it was actually a big net benefit to me. The press sees that and they're like, oh, Trump is

screwing Blake. No, that wasn't true. So when someone donated a hundred dollars, he got 99, you got a dollar, but you also got the emails from that. Yep. And that's a common practice, but the media was just looking to be unfair to Trump on that. But so are you saying that the emails he was sending out was intended to fundraise for himself but he included you on it or was it intended to fundraise for you and he took the lion's share but it still benefited you more the former more the former and you'd have to look at the exact email copy or whatever but like it was a common practice and they seize on it right and then yeah so it's like is that half inaccurate technically but it's misleading by by lack of context the journalists um they pounced.

They pounced. But, uh, but your opponent over here spent so much more money than you did. Oh man, a lot. So I, I, I worked my tail off, right? And I raised a 10 million bucks, which is hard to do when the limits are $5,800. We're raising money, you know, phone calls, a couple hundred bucks at a time, a couple thousand bucks at a time adds up to 10 million. Uh, Mark Kelly raised about 70 million hard dollars. So it was about seven to one. That's on the hard dollar side. And that's the. And a lot of it came from

McConnell and the GOP establishment, I'd imagine, huh? I'm half kidding, by the way. I don't think they definitely didn't help me, but but they you know, they sat out. What's your response to the story of Democratic super PACs financing a lot of the more populist candidates, a lot of the more Trump backed candidates this midterm election, because this was one of their strategies. And some people are saying it actually worked in their favor. And there was major Democratic organizations donating to those specific individuals. I'm not sure that happened in Arizona. You know, people thought people thought that was happening. I've heard that alleged. I haven't really seen it with my own eyes. We saw it, I think, in Maryland. And in New Hampshire as well. And it was explicit and overt.

Just because they wanted to run against Baldock or something? Yeah, exactly. They thought it would be easier to get moderates if they pushed someone that was more conservative or further right. What did you spend the $10 million on? Is that public?

I think it's public, yeah. Mostly. Um, I mean, mostly, you know, TV staff, obviously you got to cover your costs and, and, uh, mostly we had volunteer door knockers and it was a grassroots lean operation, but, uh, but staff and then mostly TV and advertising, right? TV, radio, digital, you got to get the message out. Did you advertise on social media? What did Mark spend 70 million on? Same stuff? TV. He nuked. I mean, just so August and September, as soon as I won the primary, I won the primary August

2nd, went by 12 points, wasn't particularly close. August 3rd, the Democrat spigot just turns on, right? And everybody is, every third commercial is just, Blake Masters is a monster. Mark Kelly is this great guy. Blake Masters is a monster. Where he shows you in black and white. Yeah, exactly. Exactly.

All these. And you know, I know we're tempted to think like this stuff doesn't work. This stuff doesn't work. Right. People can see through it. And it's like, well, if you if you go four months and you deploy like 50 million dollars against somebody telling people that they're a monster, they might actually believe it on the margin.

Right. Which, you know, I want to do. We were unable to overcome. I would love to run a commercial like it's too late now, but maybe I'll consider it in the future where it's just like one of those campaign ads where it's black and white and it'll be like, Mark Kelly went to outer space. How do we know an alien didn't replace him?

And then like, did he go to space? Blake Masters is a good, is a boy scout who helps a church. And then it, you know. That's basically the formula and it's cut and paste and you do that enough. And, uh, and the ballot harvesting, right? If you, if you, and then it that's basically the formula and it's cut and paste and you do that enough and uh yeah and the ballot harvesting right if you if you and then they go together right because i think people are really paying attention people who have a a political opinion they're not going to be i think sold by those ads but if if someone just has in their subconscious while they're trying to watch some entertainment right blake masters is this horrible guy because i've seen it 36 times in the last two weeks then someone knocks knocks on the door and says, hey, have you filled out that ballot yet?

No, I haven't. I might not. Oh, no. Hey, have you heard Blake? And all of a sudden, there's a vote in the system by a low propensity voter. I just want to ask you just advertising is quite effective. I just want to ask you one question just going along with this conversation. What did you learn from this election?

And what would you be doing differently if you could go back and change anything? Going back, I think we'd have to focus more on early voting, right? Harvesting is technically illegal, but there's nothing illegal about tracking ballots and actually raising money to go. It's almost a bigger project than one campaign could do, but certainly as a party, we need to get better at understanding we got to be banking votes early. I think Carrie Lake and I, you know, we were working hard. We would fill gymnasiums, 500 people, 1,000 people night after night. We were winning hearts and minds. We had the enthusiasm. We were chasing votes. And the Dems had turned it into a

mathematical ballot chasing operation. And it bested very, very early. And, you know, as soon as voting opened up in October, I think they were able to open up a lead. And so we've got to get much more quantitative and mathematical about it early on. So our reporter, Shane Cashman, he's covering the Cary Lake trial right now very heavily. He had to sit down with Cary Lake, but he also had to sit down with Ye, Kanye West. And he told me, he's like, hey, man, Ye's taking ballot harvesting really, really seriously. And I was like, that's the one thing I told him. And I told him before the show started, that's the one thing I told him. And I told him, uh, before the show started, he asked me, how do I become president? I was like,

I, he asked me three times and he kept getting mad that I wasn't answering him. And I was like, cause I'm not a political consultant, but I was like, okay, fine. Uh, ballot harvesting. And he was like, what's that? And I was like, knock on doors, tell people to fill out the ballot, have someone fill out the form to properly return the ballot for them. Then it doesn't matter what message you have. You don't need to go to anybody and say, here's what I'm going to do. All that matters is you knock on their door and say, just fill it out. Who cares? And they'll do it. And I'm like, especially if you're, if you're Kanye West, you're not going to say Trump, Biden, Kanye West, people are going to say Kanye West celebrity. So some States ballot harvesting is legal. Some it's not in 39 States. It's illegal. And it's not in Arizona. It's not technique.

It's illegal in Arizona, but here's how, here's, here's it's not in Arizona? It's not. It's illegal in Arizona. But here's what is legal, right? If you have $15 million, and the Dems do this, and Republicans didn't, right, to our great detriment. But if you have $15 million, you hire 1,000 people. You assign each person. Here's 500 ballots, right? People, their names. And you can go to their door and knock, hey, have you voted?

We know you got a mail-in ballot. And that person probably wouldn't have turned it in. But you can just keep bothering them. Keep showing up. Be polite, but show up at the door. Hey, have you voted? We know you've got a mail-in ballot. And that person probably wouldn't have turned it in. But you can just keep bothering them. Keep showing up. Be polite, but show up at the door. Hey, have you voted? No. Hey, you want me to stop coming to your door?

Vote right now. Open it up. Let me walk you to your mailbox. That's legal. What you can't do is just collect it physically and turn it in. So this is every state. In 39 states, you can actually knock on the door and be like, I'll take it for you. I think it's 12 states have certain stipulations. Like you have to sign a form as a, as a caregiver

or something, but there are many states where you're allowed to knock on the door and be like, I'll take that right for you to the mailbox. And then you end up seeing people coming in and dropping off tons of ballots. But, but I I'll simplify it for you. Someone knocks on the door in a city and they say, Hey, I see you got your mail-in ballot and they go yeah and it goes why don't you fill it out and they go all right i guess who am i voting for just just democrat okay and then what do i do not just drop it back in the mailbox right there at the front of your door and the mailman will come take and they go okay you're allowed to tell them to vote democrat these people are not politicians who are going back on your door these are these are

activists non-profits who are just being like as a regular old person here's what you should do that sounds like the government telling twitter to censor for them like if just because they're not politicians they're hired by politicians to do it i i disagree look if i'm a regular person and i knock on someone's door and say i want you to vote for blake masters that's just me as an individual but if you've been hired by the masters campaign to do it that's very very different but these are non-profits these are not these are not the candidates uh necessarily doing it to a certain degree they probably do it. It's different. That's very, very different. But these are nonprofits. These are not, these are not the candidates necessarily doing it. To a certain degree, they probably do it

to the legal extent they can. But what ends up happening is, I think, I think one thing I want to stress is that a lot of Republicans didn't understand how Biden could have gotten so many votes.

They didn't understand this going into 2022 even. And so we end up seeing what should have been a red wave come in substantially less. But it's not so much that the votes didn't come in. It's that Democrats got a ton of votes through ballot harvesting and grassroots efforts, which is totally above board and legal, except because of universal mail in voting laws and because of absentee voter lists, which persist after the first time you sign up. It makes it extremely easy for urban centers to get out the vote and very difficult for rural voters. You were mentioning that the rural vote didn't turn out. Is that what happened? Not not how we needed it to in Arizona.

Yeah. So think about you driving out to a rural area where every house is a football field away from each other. You knock on the door, you wait a few minutes and you get in your car, you drive down the football field, you park, you get out, you knock on the door, you wait a few minutes, someone answers, they say, sorry, I'm not interested. You get in your car in a major urban center where you've got one big housing unit with 100 apartments. You knock on the door, no answer. You turn around physically and knock on a door and you get an answer. A major advantage to Democrats because they tend to be living in urban areas. You could argue it's like 1300 percent more effective or like 1700 percent more effective because the amount of time it takes in a in a apartment complex to go to like 190 people you it takes you you probably get to like seven

houses in the country or like nine twelve houses in the country exactly like a 14 to one ratio that's a lot of time and gas money uh man you know we got to be self-critical some of this was self-inflicted like republicans you know know, we're very into voting in person on election day this cycle, right? The good old fashioned way. And like, I'm sympathetic to that. I think, you know, more people should vote on election. Like that seems like a good thing to do, right?

This crazy extension of mail-in voting that we saw in COVID. So, you know, and what's the left-wing wishlist? It's just automatic voter registration. Let's mail a ballot to everybody. 16-year-old voters. 16-year-old voters, Pretty soon, they'll say, well, let's just presume that you voted the same way that you did last time and that you have to opt out. I mean, look for that to be on the discourse in the next five years. But as long as we have this mail-in voting regime,

we need to use it. We can't just say, hey, let the Dems bank votes and then we'll all show up on election day. Well, on election day, the printers might not work, right? And We can't just say, hey, don't, don't, let the Dems bank votes and then we'll all show up on election day. Well, on election day, the printers might not work, right? And you can't leave yourself in this vulnerable position. I got to ask you the tough question, tough question for me. When I hear that you did not get support from the Republican establishment, I can't say I'm surprised. It's the establishment, but they're not giving you the support. Meanwhile, the Democrats are giving all of their support to Mark Kelly. That plays a role in your defeat, does it not? Oh, huge. Absolutely huge. So my question then is when they say we got to get Kevin McCarthy to speaker of the House and, you know,

look, I got I got I'm not a Republican Republican not a big fan of the Republican Party uh more like honestly left libertarian but I feel like the modern left is a weird cult so I'm looking for whatever I can get tends to be more so libertarian or republican then they come out even Marjorie Taylor Greene who I like says support Kevin McCarthy and I'm like first of all I'm not in Congress I know they're going to vote on it but I'll tell you this I actively oppose these people maintaining their positions as Republican leadership. When you look at your campaign as the as the best example, they could have done more at the very least. They could have done anything to support you. They don't. In my opinion, I think they actively are working against candidates like you and others.

And then they think I'm going to walk up as someone who's never been a traditional Republican and throw my weight behind establishment candidates for their, no, I'd rather, look, simply put, if Hakeem Jeffries wins as Speaker of the House, because, you know, a lot of the Republicans in the House, the Freedom Caucus or otherwise, don't want to support the establishment, I don't care. I view it as all very much the same. I don't know what your thoughts are, but that's where I'm at. I care. I think Hakeem would be way worse than McCarthy, but I think we need new leadership. I agree. Both those are true. I understand where you're coming from. I'm not, I do think he'd be worse, but I just kind of feel like unless there's a reckoning for the Republican establishment and there's a clean, you know what? Fine.

Let Hakeem Jeffries be speaker. If it means the current iteration of the GOP establishment disappears or is gutted. And then there's a backlash among the donors. And everybody says this was a huge mistake. Right now, the problem is they're saying the mistake is to support you. The mistake was to support Kerry Lake when it's actually the inverse. The mistake is to support people like McCarthy. And if we all do, it'll be the same garbage all over again. Twenty four, twenty four will come around. They'll flub everything. If Hakeem Jeffries does win, because a lot of people like me just say, I don't care about those people. Maybe then the donor class, maybe then a lot of the you know, a lot more establishment Republicans might be like,

OK, we don't we were gutted and we don't exist as a reckoning for their failures. Look, I want the reckoning,, but it might not happen, right? Maybe Hakeem becomes Speaker and then the establishment in the GOP side doesn't fade away. And then you have the worst of all worlds, right? And so it's an age-old thing in politics. What's the lesser of two evils? Or if you do that, don't you just get evil? But that's the situation, the lesser of two evils.

That brought us into our current political landscape where we have a duopoly. We have one party, not two parties that are essentially ruling together on a lot of the same issues that don't represent the people. The populist movement, the people that used to represent the people were people like Bernie Sanders, were people like Donald Trump. And they have foregone a lot of their policies that would have helped people. Donald Trump right now is endorsing McCarthy. I think that's that's absolutely crazy that he's doing so, especially with what happened with the elections recently. How do you rectify all of this? And for you, what would be the solution here? How can we move forward in a way that's more concise, in a way that's actually more

reasonable, in a way that actually does represent and help solve some of the people's problems? I mean, I think my best answer is to just stay in the fight. You know, I don't know whether that means, you know, run for Senate again or run for Congress or figure out a different way to be involved. But I don't have a one-sentence answer. We just have to keep at it. You know, a lot of people in Arizona after the election was certified said, well, we should have just run boring, safe Republicans instead of Blake and instead of Kerry. And it's like, well, I got to tell you, that wouldn't work. But even if they

would have won, it's like boring and safe Republicans is sort of what's delivered us to this moment today. And the public is very disenchanted with that politics as usual, the uniparty, it doesn't work. And so we have to figure out a way forward. I think that way forward is this kind of somewhat populist America first, you know, policy platform. We just have to figure out a way to articulate it that is going to win us elections. We had Milo Yiannopoulos on the show just after the midterm, and he explained to us Trump supporters wanted revenge. The reason why they were upset, even though they did win, you know, winning the House,

it's because they want revenge. They want to feel that there's hope. They want to see a decisive victory. I'm going to be completely honest with you as to how I feel right now. When Marjorie Taylor Greene put out that Twitter thread supporting Kevin McCarthy for speaker, she made a lot of really, really excellent points that were very convincing to me that Kevin McCarthy's made some promises that there's going to be investigations. They're going to look into the southern border. They're going to look into the Twitter files. He actually came out in opposition to the omnibus. Things that are

all really, really great. But while I can reconcile that logically in my mind, I think long term, I don't trust this man. I don't trust the establishment. I believe they backstabbed the America first candidates. And, you know, I got to be completely honest. I kind of want emotional satisfaction. I want revenge. That doesn't mean I'm willing to give into illogical thought processes. I understand your point on, hey, Kevin McCarthy's he's offering us this stuff. It's better than Hakeem Jeffries. But part of me is just like, no, I think at the very least there needs to be some kind of effort among whatever this faction is of more libertarian minded individuals that they cannot play this game anymore. So you know what, if that means Hakeem Jeffries gets

beer at the house, honestly, I don't care. I don't. I'm so sick and tired of it going on. Man, since I got into politics, watching lie after lie, failure after failure, I certainly understand how Luke's feeling with like, just get rid of the government, just wash it all away. I'm at the point where it with like, just get rid of the government, just wash it all away. I'm at the point where it's like, well, you know, maybe Luke's right, but I'll take, let the establishment lose what little opportunity they had for some power. And then we can all laugh in Kevin McCarthy's face and the Republican establishment. And then we can laugh McConnell out of office and say, you know what?

We may not have gotten the power we want, but we weren't going to get it anyway. Maybe this is just the reckoning they need. And then they need us. And I'll tell you, I feel really angry because I feel like they really need me. I am not a Republican. I don't like Republicans, but I ended up voting Republican in 2020. In the past, I ended up supporting a lot of Republicans, not just voting, putting out, having a shows. And then all they do is that I feel like they backstab people like you. They backstab people like Carrie Lake. The media lies about what they're doing. And I'm like, fine, I want them now to lose. They do not deserve power. If the Republicans would stand up to Democrats like they stand up against their fellow Republicans, the political landscape would be totally different

and they would be at odds. But at the end of the day, that's not what's happening here. So how do we rectify this? How do we fix this? What do you think about voting online in addition to current laws with like a blockchain reference as backup? In theory, it works. In practice, it terrifies me, right? No, I want as little technology involved as voting as possible. I think it's crazy that we have tabulation machines where the code is closed source. You can't actually tell what's going on, right? If you have it, it should be open source, but maybe

you don't even need it at all, right? Why not get back to precinct level voting? The only technology that I really want is high definition video cameras trained on manual hands, reporting ballots and results at the precinct level. Upload that video online and let the internet have at it, right? We want more transparency

and less closed source technology. Are you concerned about an open internet voting because it, right? Like we want more transparency and less sort of closed source technology. Are you concerned about like an open, an open internet voting is because it could get hacked. I just think you probably can't get there all at once. And the intermediate steps would be, uh, extremely insecure. Ian's for a microchip, uh, voting, by the way, uh, just to clear the record here. There you go. That works as well. But I wanted to ask you, is it time for a new party? Because it does seem like the larger populist ideas, standing up for the American people, standing up for the American middle class, standing up against the people who committed the Jeffrey Epstein saga, there's a huge portion of those people on the left and right.

There's also a huge portion of people that don't vote in the United States. Is it time to move away and have a political realignment here? Is that possible? A lot of people are saying that this could possibly happen on the Democratic side. A lot of people are saying this could happen on the Republican side. Is that feasible from your expertise in politics? Is it feasible? No. Is it time for it? Yes.

I'd say it's long past time for it. We were never supposed to have this two-party system. It's literally not the government that our framers ever set up or really envisioned. I guess they did envision it. They feared it, and they warned us about it. But I think the Republican Party and the Democratic Party are probably too established to change it. Maybe it changes over time.

And it definitely seems like there's a civil war within the Republican Party, within the old rhinos and the anti-establishment. But then there looks like there might be another civil war within just the anti-establishment alone with DeSantis versus Donald Trump, with Donald Trump attacking DeSantis recently. So it's like a civil war within a civil war.

This doesn't look good and doesn't look promising, especially with the Republicans not having a lot of institutional power to change anything when it comes to ballot harvesting, when it comes to mail-in ballots. For me personally, this is my assessment. I don't know if you think I'm too pessimistic or too black-pilled here, but I don't see the Republicans winning anytime soon in, in many years to come. I'd say the saving grace is the Democrats really are that bad and they're going to, they're horrible. They're going to get worse. And so if we, I don't know, maybe we, you know, I think we can do it by 2024. We certainly have a lot of work to do. I still think the Republican party is the right vehicle. If you care about peace, if you care about prosperity and individual freedom and all the things we care about, I do think the Republican Party is the vehicle to salvage. It's the most popular

possible potential. Otherwise, you've got to create something new, and how much capital would that take? I don't think it's impossible. I don't think there's a way into political power, you know, at least right now or in the immediate future, unless you're going through the Democrats. I disagree. I think the internet video is super powerful, because right now now if we ask people

that subscribe to TimCast.com, for instance, to vote for you or to fund you in a campaign, you'd get massive worldwide publicity and money. I think that if I were to run for office and did a show where to my audience I said, vote for me, I would get substantially less votes than you think. Because a lot of people might like watching the show or might like me personally, but they're going to say, oh, come on, he's not going to win. And then what, you know, I'd rather vote for someone who's got a better chance. And Ian, who dominates the online space, right?

Who dominates TikTok? Who dominates Facebook, right? Who dominates the FBI? And who's the FBI backing right now at this particular time? The Democrats, the leftists and also the establishment candidates. So whoever plays ball in Washington, D.C., gets an unfair advantage on big tech social media. That's a reckoning that we can't underestimate because it has a huge effect on what America thinks, not just on how they vote. So until there's a larger reckoning here, I mean, Twitter is one social media that Elon Musk is putting everything behind, risking everything, essentially exposing the deep state for all the horrible things that they've been doing.

But that's one element of it. Will we have even congressional hearings that lead up to anything because of this? Well, I hope so. But I kind of doubt it. I'm going to pull up this story here. We have a story from Daily Mail. This one's big. Spooks infiltrate Silicon Valley. Facebook is riddled with ex-CIA

agents, including President's briefer who now runs harmful content team. So many ex-FBI work at Twitter. They have a Slack channel and Google is rife with ex-CIA. So there you go. The intelligence agencies run the technology sector. I guess I'll throw it to you, Blake, having been involved in the tech sector. What do you see with this? Have you personally witnessed anything like this or what are your thoughts? We have personally witnessed like Google coming down and being unfair, right? So when we were trying to build a small dollar fundraising email operation, we would find a disproportionate amount of our fundraising emails would get sent to spam and Gmail. Well, it's like that doesn't happen to the Democrats, right? It's not just anecdotal. Like we've seen the data on

this with many different conservative candidates. So it's just banal at this point to say that big tech has its thumb on the scale. Like, yeah, big tech hates conservatives. And we know that. What really got me was, you know, the media and Kerry and I were running against the media, of course, and they called me an election denier for just talking about how, you know, the media and Kerry and I were running against the media, of course, and they called me an election denier for just talking about how, you know, the Hunter Biden censorship, like, I think that did more than almost anything else to put Joe Biden in the White House. Oh, well, Blake's denying the 2020 election. And then for Elon to go by Twitter and now subsequent to this 2022 election, of course, but into the Twitter files. And now it's like the sordid details are out there. It is just demonstrable fact that people at Twitter

were censoring this information with the sole goal of helping Joe Biden win office. This is just not a conspiracy theory anymore. It's just true. Former FBI in Twitter and current FBI outside of Twitter. Yeah, Baker, and yeah. I mean, so it's really bad and we need to disentangle it. And look at how hard the media is going after Elon.

Elizabeth Warren is going after Elon, right? Deep state. This article by the Daily Mail is worth reading because what you see is agent after agent after agent after agent after agent. And you see them named and you see them in so many positions of power. But those are the ones that we know about. What about the ones that are undercover? What about the ones that we don't know about? What about the ones that are compromised at high level positions of power? So there's multiple layers to this, not just overt agents and spies working inside of these big tech social media companies been a net negative for the American people. It has led to a mental health crisis It has led to a lot of debauchery. It has led to the destruction of the family unit

It is leading towards what I believe is the great reset Which is essentially just this kind of larger ideas this larger agenda that is absolutely screwing you over and only empowering the government so They're using it. It's a psy-up. It's a psychological operation. And you are the target and you are the victim. If you could say social media is a net negative and 50 out of 100 was neutral, anything below that becomes negative.

How negative do you see it? 12%. Wow. So you think it's horrible. I mean, that's really, really a bad thing. 25%. I'd say 75, 25. 75 bad, 25 good. you think it's horrible. I mean, that's really, really a bad thing. 25%. I'd say 75-25. 75 bad, 25 good.

You think it's bad? There's some good that comes with it, but it's pretty bad. I somewhat disagree. I think it's actually slightly more good than bad, and that's evidenced by before social media, the intelligence agencies controlled media as it was. I mean, you saw that in the Church Commission, right? The planting of journalists at high-ranking positions

in media organizations. With the internet, it created cracks. And then channels like this start to pour through. Other creators, people like Stephen Crowder, start to pour through. They can't control every person who posts, though they try. So there is a net positive, in my opinion.

It is better than it was before. But overall, when we look at the larger effects, and again, my estimate, again, to answer your question, 12 to about 25 percent. Overall, when we look at how people are affected, especially how children are affected by this, when you see the mental health negative effects, when you see women harming of less interactions that people are having, the overall effect, not just politically, but socially, financially, economically, I think the overall negative, it's a negative effect, to be honest with you. Politically, there are more voices that people are able to hear, but they're squashing on those independent voices and making sure that they reach less and less people. Well, I think this will be reversed. Everything you're saying, as soon as Blake becomes CEO of Twitter, then we're going to see such a massive net positive that the world becomes an instant better. That's funny. Although I was just going to say, this is dynamic to wherever you thought it was 75, 25, 50, 50 right now, it's dynamic. And I suspect in 20 or 30 years, we'll know, will this internet and social media experience be net,

you know, liberatory? Will more people be free and happy because of it? Or will we be living in something like a techno dystopia surveillance state? I mean, look what's happened to the children. Look at modern day children. Look at attention deficit disorder. Identity disorders. Identity disorder. Look at the use of online

adult content by children. Look at those effects that will be with children rewiring their brains right now as you're speaking to have instant gratification, right? To have their trophies, to have just glamorizing them living for the world, living for the likes rather than living for their communities, living for their families, living for a future. They rather have this kind of selfie image of themselves glorifying themselves rather than having an importance on anything else around them. And let's talk about 30 or 40 years.

Blake, what do you think about Neuralink? Are you taking the chip? I'm not taking the chip. I'm pretty skeptical. I'm pretty skeptical. I like Elon as a non- Just seems like a road you don't want to go down. It's a bad idea.

Like your brain will get hacked? Yeah, for instance. Just one bad thing, I guess. Have you heard of Ghost in the Shell? Yeah. So in this anime, people's brains or eyes can be hacked. You could be walking down the street, and then all of a sudden you go blind. It seems bad, right?

Is bad. When Elon talks about how Neuralink could cure people who have like paralysis or whatever, what people don't seem to understand is that all systems are exploitable. And this could mean as well that they could do bad things to you. It's not just about the things it could fix, it's about the things that it could hurt. They could make you feel, like depending on the sophistication of a neural link chip in your brain, if it can cure depression, it could make you depressed. So you think about how bad it could get, it could get scary bad. Yeah, I mean, look at the number of children having, you know, a gender dysphoria. That's been going up as well. That number is only going to be going up from here. What if it could help people feel good about who they are? It could. And it could do really horrifying things where they put you in a

prison camp, tell you to execute the innocent children, and then you're like, I can't do it. Then they click a button on their iPad and you go, oh, this feels really good. You know, I think like social media is not bad or good, but it's powerful. If it's used for evil, that's powerful evil. And the neural links like an acceleration of that neutrality. Ian, you shouldn't be chasing what feels good. You should be chasing hard work, dedication, building something, growing something, sacrificing something in order to have something outside of yourself.

A lot of problems with our society comes down to, I need instant gratification, I need instant likes, I need instant attention right now. That's the root to a lot of our problems. But like some people are in physical pain. And that's the psychological trick that they play on us in order to have us engaged in these kind of larger black mirror devices. I got to give a shout out to Andrew Tate.

That's the guy, right? Andrew Tate? Yeah. Cobra Tate. Cobra Tate. He's got a video where he said, I just saw this viral clip. He's like, my happiness is irrelevant. When I wake up, whether or not I'm happy or not happy, it doesn't matter.

I have to do the exact same thing. And I'm like, yeah, he's absolutely right. Dude, he's so humble. He comes off so aggressive and like, I guess, hubristic. He even says that about himself. But he was just doing an interview where he was like, dude, I've been a pawn on the game for so many years. My coach would say run. I would run. I would do exactly what I was told for years of my life. Up at 4 a.m., run seven miles. I run seven miles. I do exactly what

my dad tells me. Now he's in a position where he can be himself and he is the king of his environment. Just to bring it back to the conversation we were having, his point is that your happiness doesn't matter. You have responsibilities. And so with the internet, instant gratification, with things like Neuralink that can make you feel better, these are shortcuts that ultimately, in my opinion, will actually lead to you being miserable. And so if you think about where Neuralink gets you, you've got right now like the body, the fat acceptance movement, the body positivity stuff. These are people who are suffering. These are people who are more likely to experience cancer and other health defects or health impacts due to their weight being told to accept it and be happy with who they are. But it's causing them damage in the long term.

You put a neural link chip in someone's brain and then they're unhappy about something. So you click the button and then all of a sudden they're happy. They're not going to solve their problem. I'll put it this way. Pain is a good thing. If you can't feel pain, people think like, wow, there are people out there who can't experience pain.

They can't. And so a lot of people say, you're so lucky. And they go, no, I'm not. I could bite my tongue off. I stepped on a nail once and didn't realize it. Many of these people can't sweat because their body can't differentiate

between temperature. Not being able to feel pain is a bad thing. We don't like pain. Pain sucks sucks but it's an important thing that when you feel it you can correct whatever the problem being caused is if you can't feel upset anymore because the chip is just correcting the problem you're going to become lazy uh you're gonna have no goals you're gonna be laying around and you're just going to be a fat blob lying on the floor clicking the button to feel good like control those rats. It's like Soma in Brave New World or anything. Exactly.

You know, the unwillingness to feel pain, right? People that are the inability to, people think that's, oh, that's a gift. That's a gift. That's just the Midas touch. Like this is just biblical. You know, be careful what you wish for. The Midas touch is he wished that anything he touched

would turn to gold. Wouldn't that be nice? Gold, gold, gold, gold, gold. And then you give your daughter a hug and then she freezes into a golden statue, right? Oops. Yeah. Turns out it sucks. And then you give your daughter a hug and then she freezes into a golden statue, right? Oops. Yeah. Turns out it sucks.

And it turns out you're the CEO of Twitter, hypothetically. How would you make the company go profitable? I think there's a path to doing that medium term and long term. You know, Twitter is the original short form content. It's really good at it. Now it's sort of being, you know, competed away. TikTok should immediately be banned, of course, right? And Twitter should bring back Vine. So there's things to do, but I think Twitter needs to fill its feeds with longer form products. Like I think Twitter needs to buy Substack. It should have built Substack. Substack should never be an independent

business. Like obviously all these people posting on Twitter should be able to monetize newsletters right from in the platform. And I don't mean just the review feature that they had. It just was, that was kind of bolt on. Wow. You should be the and and like okay so so video right twitter sucks as a video platform and yet youtube has no inherent social sort of viral social network like twitter does right so like i think i think youtube is very lucky that no one at twitter for the past five years has cared about video yeah i think i just want to make another point here because there's a lot of different things that we could we could actually do here. I've been thinking about this as well.

One, we have super chats on YouTube. Why can't you have super chats on Twitter? Allow your comments and replies to be voted, just like Mines does. Mines does an incredible things. What is it called, Ian? Super Mines. People are able to put in a super chat.

If you answer it, you get that money that people were giving to you. That's a great thing that Mines developed. Another thing that I would recommend Twitter to do is to essentially allow the platform to run on its own without any kind of major money. Decentralize it. Let people host their own servers. Let people use the platform in their own way. So then even if you don't have any money, the platform still lives on and people get to host their content and get to communicate with people and also be able to share their content elsewhere and move it around with their history of what they posted. I think those two ideas along with your idea would be amazing. Videos long overdue,

monetize those videos, have people, I mean, when we had Periscope on YouTube, this was, I'm sorry, a Periscope on Twitter. This was a way that engaged so many different people. And then Twitter took it down because people were dominating it that they didn't like in the political ideas. So these are just some ideas that I have off the top of my head that I think Elon should listen to. Sounds good. Some people recommended that.

I don't want the responsibility to get that hot potato out of here. One problem with videos is the cost of the servers, at least is what I'm told. And it is a big deal. And so we try to decentralize it at mines like BitChute. But it was so slow and grainy trying to pull it from all these other people. I don't know. Do you know much about decentralizing video feeds?

Not technically, although it's probably going to only get better and better. And I would look to add things that people want to pay for. Like Twitter needs, it's woefully dependent on advertising. I'm not saying advertising goes away, but it needs to certainly have new revenue streams where creators are getting paid for their content. You know what I realized? I'm paying eight bucks a month for Twitter blue. I am so happy to do that right now. I pay 40 bucks a year or something on minds to have the upgraded soup minds. I'm not sure what it's called exactly. Sorry, Bill. Minds Pro. Mines Pro, to be on Mines Pro. And it's like having a Netflix. I don't have a Netflix account. I don't watch Disney. I don't have those accounts. I pay for the social networks that I love.

That's where I like to, I would pay 15 bucks a month on Twitter. For sure. For all those benefits to be able to post long videos, to be able to make you a video, like at tag Elon Musk, hey man, what's happening, bro? That access to the network. Pay DMs, I think Elon talked about. Totally. Twitter's made it really hard over the past few years for people to actually make a business on Twitter. Which is really weird. YouTube's done much better in this front. Did you see they blocked link sharing

recently and kind of backpedaled on it? Link sharing? There was like, you can't link to your whatever other social media page. Which is actually, YouTube does the same thing. I believe Twitch does the same thing i believe twitch does the same thing i believe facebook facebook blocked mines do they still block mines dude microsoft blocks mines it's very weird so elon elon announces this uh this new policy where it's like you can't use twitter to just promote other platforms and everyone loses their mind and it's like youtube's

always had that rule so like if you made a video like subscribe to my twitter account and that was the title of the video they, they'd nuke you. So here's what I'm saying. I think they mentioned paid DMs. I got a lot of people who hate me. And they'll pay a lot of money to say nasty things to me, and I will take their money. So $100, I will set my paid DMs at $100,

and then all the people who hate me can say all the nasty things in the world, and I will monetize that. And you have to respond. And then Twitter gets a small cut of it. Well, I don't know about responding. Just fill up my mailbox. Well, I mean, like people could do that now. No, they can't DM me. I've closed DMs. Okay. So if they, if he made paid direct messaging, I would say, okay, you want to direct message me and I don't follow you a hundred bucks, you know, and then you can send me whatever nasty garbage you want. You got to pay me to do it. And then a very monetize the hate but you don't have to read it you got to read it to get the money you got to open the email that's what i said i accept i accept i will read the comment

of someone saying you know pim tool is a bald fool or something like that if it's 100 bucks so what about totally worth it i brought this up before earlier like reverse only fans like a crypto token at twitter mines has aines token that's a utility token that functions on the network. You can put a token into the network to get a thousand views of publicity. Then you can buy the tokens. But I know like you were saying earlier,

like SEC violations, you got to watch out for. Like Library got raked for SEC violations. I don't know the exact, but Mines didn't. The risk with the FEC is if they don't like your politics, well, hey, that token is a security. And that's just arbitrary? Elizabeth Warren could come up with some justification for why yours is different. But the justification is she hates you and wants you crushed.

Yeah, if all it does is get you publicity on the network that it's sold on and then maybe used for fun cosmetic stuff on the network, I just don't see any security involved in that. It's all utility at that point. I think you're right. But they'll argue it anyway. Yeah. So you got to provide the other side of the FEC enforcement action. Because I think that could take the company very profitable or at least very, very, very

profitable. I mean, obviously what would happen is the Twitter token would become super valuable and it would become traded on Binance and stuff. And then they might say, hey. And then it's a security. Yeah, maybe. Yeah. Punished with your own success.

But it's interesting, though, to think how much they could raise if they did that. And that's not even, that's just the IPO or the ICO. You're talking about initial coin offering that they could raise money for.

I think then that might be a security because mines didn't do an ICO. That's a big part of it. That's right. They just make tokens and then sell them and then you use them on the network.

There's no, there's no, there's no public investment. The investment is you buy the token. What do you, what do you think of the future, man? You feeling optimistic? Not by default, but I'm not a doomer either. I really think it's contention. It matters what we do. And why wouldn't it? Human agency is really important. If you're too optimistic and like, oh, things will just work out, well, you're probably not going to work as hard in making

that happen. And then if you're just fatalistic, oh man, it sucks. Oh, I just lost my election. That sucks. Everything's doomed. No, somehow that doesn't feel quite right either. It's like scary, but we got to work hard. Your mindset and positivity does matter when it comes to your overall productivity and what you're able to do in life. But at the same time, you got to be realistic with all the problems. And I totally agree with you. You got to have a balance between the two and have a certain level of basis in reality, but also some optimism on top of that. You know, you know, it gave me a lot of optimism was the judge granting Carrie Lake's trial. I mean, because everything we've seen in the past has been dismissed, dismissed, dismissed.

These judges have been weak and just I don't want to deal with it. I'm not saying this judge is going to do the right thing in terms of well, I'm not going to say the judge is going to give us what we want. But the fact the trial happened at all, I think, was a major step forward in terms of confidence. So I'm feeling good. I think the night is always darkest before the dawn. I think what we're seeing with James Lindsay, you know, the things he's calling out and exposing with continued success, his growing prominence, calling out the groomer phenomenon. And I think Elon Musk buying Twitter, it's kind of like it's never been better,

to be completely honest. It's true, that didn't have to happen. And if he didn't do that, we never would have got the Twitter files, right? Who knows what the coming installments will be. And look, I have tremendous faith in the inherent goodness and I guess just commonsensical nature of the American people and most people just commonsensical nature of the

American people and most people worldwide. And we have a political establishment, I think left and right, that is corrupt and doesn't work. And those things don't go together. So how long is the pendulum? I don't know. Hopefully things don't have to get that much worse before they get better,

but I do think, yeah, they'll get better. And we've seen this ebb and flow in human history, right? But we've got to work hard to tighten up that. What's the technical term for the length of a pendulum? I don't know.

Whatever it is. Let's make it short. The diameter? But I think it is getting better. I think we're on the backswing. It's starting to come back. I hope so. I think with conservatives

starting to recognize the power of ballot harvesting and ballot chasing, I think 2024 is going to be a game changer. It's like you were saying. It's about raw numbers. They're going after the raw numbers.

It's not about the messaging for Democrats, it's about the raw numbers. For Republicans, it's going to be both. Because Republicans, a lot of Republican voters are higher information voters than Democrats. That's why Democrats want 16-year-old voters. They want low information. Well, Democrats will vote for John Fetterman.

You know, whereas some of our voters, God bless them, and we got to work hard to persuade them. But some of them is like, well, I read some bad things about Blake or I saw this TV commercial. You got to go for that. And it's like, well, I appreciate the individuality in our party. And we have a lot more diversity in our party, actually, in terms of diversity of thought. But the Democrats will vote for Fetterman or anything, a rock. You've got to got a D next to its name.

And that's a challenge that we have to overcome. But I think the Republicans just need to target those people these these people who are low information voters voting Democrat Aren't voting Democrat for any good reason which means Republicans could win those votes. They just aren't show up exactly need to show up What do you think about like refocusing a message? I we've talked about this for sure to like graphene or some sort of industrialization message of making the United States an industrial superpower Just just just a real quick preface that like I think the point of the conversation is that messaging is immaterial. But again, you know, your thoughts. I think it matters, though. And, you know, while we're working hard to go in a legal way, of course, you know, harvest ballots that collect

ballots. I think interesting messaging does matter for one. Like, why aren't we focusing more on nuclear power? You know, I only had so many campaign dollars and we had to talk about border and inflation, and those are the top two issues. But every, you know, stump speech, I'd try to find a way to work in nuclear power. It's like, this isn't even new technology. It's like old technology that for bizarre reasons, countries like Germany have decommissioned, right? We have about 50 nuclear power plants in the United States, nowhere near enough. Most of them are decades old.

And so if you care about climate change, if you care about carbon-free energy generation, why are we not going all in on nuclear? And when I would mention nuclear power, it was actually somewhat of an unexpected applause line in some very right-wing Republican rooms. It's like, obviously, I'm not going to get rid of oil and gas. We need to be drilling. We need to be fracking. It's like, obviously, I'm not going to get rid of oil and gas. We need to be drilling.

We need to be fracking. It's like an all-of-above kind of approach is appropriate for the next few decades. But man, 50 years from now, 80% of our power should be generated from nukes. At least if the path we're going, we'll probably have new technology like vacuum, vibrational things and fusion power, which is, they call it nuclear. It's a completely different technology than fission. So you can't really call them both nuclear. It's a misnomer.

We've got to lean into innovation. Yeah, as the broader point. It's like, we should be agnostic about what it is, but like what it isn't is, you know, some dumb subsidy for some wind thing that is not even going to work. I think what's happening, you remember the tech in Texas two years ago, or was it last year?

The deep freeze that ruined all these wind power, these wind mills or whatever they're called, wind generators. And we're headed in like a few days for another deep freeze in texas i'm told this is terrifying people died people froze to death in their houses because they had shut down coal plants leading up to this and i think that's why people are like yes nuclear yes heat yes because it gets cold if it goes down to 45 degrees in your house that nothing really matters other than some heat that's right i think i think think Americans would be here for whether it's a new party, if you could somehow bootstrap that into existence or a Republican Party that was like, hey, we're the party of competence. We're the

party of technology. We're the party of families. We're the party of sane trade deals. And, you know, the party that doesn't want to get into wars halfway around the world. I think people would be into that. I think it's like we need charisma, too. Like I used to think I was telling you earlier, like I was like, or I didn't actually mention you were saying you were a republican we were younger i was like a democrat when i was younger i like i went after charisma i was always drawn to like bill clinton because he's like howard dean no no was that the guy yeah bill clinton barack obama i like the dudes that could make you feel good and it's only later i'm realizing like oh i've been snowed this whole time man they were making me feel good to get me

to get me to pay my dollar. But I do think we need to introduce charisma. But the thing is, like, Luke, you were saying, don't vote for political parties. I don't care about the party. I don't. I thought in 2007, we don't need parties anymore, man. We just need someone that's willing to step up and do the work. You're right, but that, I don't think, takes into consideration the political reality.

That there are a lot of people who won't vote outside of the two-party system out of fear of not winning. And that has a substantial impact. The Libertarian Party does a great job of getting a lot of people of principle to vote for the Libertarian Party, but they don't move the needle. What do you think? Did you just do it enough?

And how did Abe Lincoln win? Look, the MAGA party is not the same as the Republicans, and that's why there's a Republican civil war, at least what the media calls it. The reason why I think the establishment didn't support you is because you're, you know, Blake,

you're more libertarian. You're outside the Republican party in, in a, in a literal, in a, in a, in a intangible sense, like quite literally a Republican.

But as far as the establishment Republicans are concerned, the MAGA Republicans are a different party and they're an insurgent group coming in. That's right. And we're going to get an interesting, I guess, case study here. Kyrsten Sinema, right, the other Democrat senator from Arizona, just announced, I think, a week or two ago, she's going to be an independent. Oh, yeah. I think probably because she read the polls and realized with her voting record, it'd be impossible for her to win a Democratic primary. So now she's daring the Democrat establishment to run a Dem against her.

I thought that was awesome. To split the race into a three-way race, which I actually think would favor a Republican. So we'll see how it shakes out. But can a independent actually make a real go of it, right? I mean, Bernie Sanders caucuses with the Democrats, but of course, technically he's an independent. The Dems are sort of okay.

He forced the Democrats to keep her on as their candidate. When Sinema said she was an independent, they immediately knew they could not run anyone else and they can't primary her. They have no choice but to get behind her. Well, we'll see if they have that kind of discipline. I think Schumer wants the situation you outlined, but this other Congressman Ruben Gallego,

sort of communist guy from Phoenix, he really wants to get in. And I hope he does, right? And then, you know, grab the popcorn. Are you going to run again? If Gallego gets in, then that gives me a lot to think about. Because in the three-way race,

I will win or I would beat Gallego one-on-one. When would that be? Like four years or what? Oh, no, 2024. 2024? Yeah. Cinema's up in 2024. And so you could run for person.

Yeah, but the Dems might actually have enough discipline to keep a Dem out. I think you should run anyway. Hey, there you go. She's tough to beat. She's tough to beat. Mark Kelly was tough to beat, though. Right.

And I think some people say, oh, Blake, you lost by five. It's like Oz lost by five in Pennsylvania, and he had a way worse opponent and $30 million for Mitch McConnell. Right. So I think in a different year with a, you know, and look, I made some mistakes, too. Like I didn't run a perfect campaign, and I've been self-critical about that. And next time I do it, I will tell you this, I will be better

and I will win. I live in West Virginia. I instantly like cinema more than mansion because she, because she comes out as an independent and mansion is still playing this ridiculous game of being a Democrat in literal MAGA country. What's going to happen there? I feel like he's now he's underwater, right? I think he's going to, is he just going to switch? I think he's going to switch to being a Republican. He was asked and he said, you know, something like we'll wait till later to talk about it or something like that, which made everyone immediately be like, OK, he's mansions going to switch. This is I think West Virginia is like 86 percent Trump supporting. Yeah. You know, every county, I think, in 2020. Oh, yeah. Absurdly high. You know, I where where I live in west virginia it's right-wing nut jobs who believe every single conspiracy theory you can think of i mean these are people who are trump

trump trump hands down and then you say mansion and they go like he's supposed to be on our side and it's not even about the name of the party they feel like he's not representing them properly nut jobs a term of endearment, by the way. It is. Yeah. Like when you, when you go to West Virginia and you say, I love living on a mountain full of right wing nut jobs, they all laugh and smile because it's like, it's a taken the word back.

You know what I mean? They say, if you're sane in an insane world, you're actually, you look insane. You look like a nut job. We, we, we had, we had, we had a break in recently. I think it was targeted. But I tweeted, I was like, you got to be insane to break into a house in West Virginia, especially if it's like a political thing. And I was like, just imagine breaking into a house and there's some right-wing nut job with a Barrett M82 pointed at you yelling, yeehaw. And like all the people out here are laughing at the idea because they love it. They love it. They're like, that's us.

You know, don't come a knocking if you don't want to see what's on the other side. Do you think Blake, do you think the solution to, I don't know what, what do you, what is your end goal really with the United States or in your lifetime? How would you like to see the United States develop? I think one litmus test for, or are we on the right track is, is politics boring again? Like I think politics should be boring. It shouldn't be what people are investing all their time and emotional energy into. I would like a campaign on the slogan be boring. It shouldn't be what people are investing all their time and emotional energy into. I would like that campaign on the slogan. To me, it's more than a slogan, but it is, I think, a good political slogan.

In America, you should be able to raise a family on one single income. I think if we got back to an economy where you can actually do that, maybe it's really hard in a globalizing world. But, man, if you could just, if young people had economic opportunity and were, you know, on that choosing to get married and have kids in their twenties and we're able to buy and afford homes and people didn't have to be obsessed with politics. Right. We weren't at each other's throats all the time. I think that would be really healthy. Do you see politics as pop culture right now? Yeah. That's really messed up. Yeah. It's really messed up. What was his name? Schumer was dancing with Stephen Colbert. Did you see that video? They were, unfortunately I did see that. I'd forgotten about it. I did. You said earlier, like it's a, it's a worldwide movement. I think you mentioned that

earlier, but I've sensed like worldwide that humans want freedom. They, they, the first amendment of the United States constitution is like one of the most inspirational governmental actions ever taken on earth. And I feel like we have so many people from Australia that watch the show and England and all these great countries that unfortunately get can get arrested for standing outside of someone's house uh and i hope that maybe that they're i i kind of see like a united states of earth where we have like state rights still but we just are have like a form of kind of a sort of unified government i don't know if that's too pie you're a globalist in a way i mean i like i think inevitably we're globalizing i just want it to be done right I want it to be done so that we maintain our bill of rights. Like a republic

where the United States has sovereign borders, where we control our own government, but there is some kind of legislative system externally that can't interfere internally with the nation, but can help prevent wars. Yeah. And even Ohio still has its sovereign borders and every state still has its own rights. Like Alberta, for instance, I think there's an Albertata secession movement right now alberta becomes a state of the united states of earth and then we just keep growing from there and then everyone lives under the constitution yeah but the constitution is malleable but yes yeah i think the bill of rights for sure maybe i i think it's a good idea maybe in order to to get to that point you know some people will have to be made to understand so perhaps we could like put together a group of people with perhaps weapons that could go in and tell these people

they now live under our way of life. And we would call it like a liberation. We would send out liberation forces to other sounds horribly communist. It all goes back to Woodrow Wilson, right? The League of Nations. Exactly. Now it's the UN. And let's just have a layer on top that will help it. And it's like, well, the danger is that, you know, that layer becomes incredibly bureaucratic and powerful and it gets more power for itself. And pretty soon, I think this is where the century is trending. If we don't resist it, you get a one world totalitarian government. I like the idea of like China wants to build its version and China wants everyone to be Chinese in 100 years. And we actually, nope, we've never figured out a way to do that in a safe way.

And I think we should look towards decentralization. Absolutely. Decentralization is the key word here that a lot of people need to focus on more than ever. As there are a lot of American Western elites financing China, sending up policies in the United States that allow China to take over the world, that allow China to gobble up all the resources, that allow them to pollute as much as they can. And then everyone else is supposed to be under these climate regulations, these these these echo, you know, fascist kind of policies that limit people's ability to have energy. That's absolutely it's absolutely crazy what's happening in this ever globalizing world. But but how is it going to change? I don't know.

That's that's just a very hard question to ask. But I also wanted to kind of talk about Peter Thiel a little bit, because I know you were closely associated with him. I don't know if you still are. He's kind of a libertarian. Some people call him more of an internationalist. How would you kind of peg his political understanding? And what's kind of his response to everything that's happening right now? The New York Times calls Peter and me far-right nationalists. So it's like, are you an internationalist? Are you a far-right nationalist?

Those are kind of incompatible. Are you a libertarian or are you an authoritarian? It's so publicly confused. I think Peter, like me, started very libertarian. And to the extent we play in electoral politics, it's Republican, conservative. But I think you can't really reduce him to labels like that. Like he's actually kind of an independent thinker. Imagine that, right?

You can't just, we don't have that now. Increasingly we don't, and that's really dangerous. And one problem in electoral politics that I've seen is, man, you're supposed to really stay on script. And if, you know, and sometimes I didn't, and I paid for that, you know, and it was kind of conventionally speaking, it was a mistake. But the problem in modern politics is you're not allowed to be wrong, ever.

Because if there's two seconds of video where you say something wrong, maybe you're exploring an idea, right? But if that's wrong, and if it's cuttable and pasteable into an attack ad that Mark Kelly and the Democrat machine puts 30 million behind, well, that's a problem for you. But if you're never allowed to be wrong,

then you're never allowed to think, which is why so many politicians feel like wind-up dolls, right? Robots that just say the thing that the consultants wrote, and that's safe. And then, like, what kind of politics does that produce? The kind of politics we've had, and it fails people. It doesn't work. Outside of the tremendous amount of money he made

for the social ramifications, do you think Peter Thiel has concerns about funding Facebook? Or regrets? Or PayPal. Yeah, PayPal especially, John. Well, I think it is probably really sad to see. I mean, because PayPal, he hasn't been involved in since 2001, I think. 2002, they sold it to eBay.

And to see it become, I mean, A, this extremely profitable business, right? That's probably nice. But to see it become this woke, horrible, and PayPal is one of the worst. And I know Peter agrees with that. And so that's got to be hard to create this thing and it's your baby. And then all of a sudden it's ruined by- Watching your kid go to college

and come back with a shaved head and like pink eyebrows. Telling you how racist and bigoted you are, dad. Bidding on you, hating you. So that's gotta be horrible. Facebook, I mean, Facebook was a really good investment in 2004. He, you know, it was a good investment. And then he sort of rode the wave

and saw it become like this really charismatic company, 2008, 2012. Facebook was going to take over the world. 2014, right when we wrote this book about zero to one, monopolies kind of warning people, hey, monopolies can be good. You know, they can also be really, really bad. I think Facebook has been net very destructive

for the past five or six years. And ultimately Peter hopped off the board, right? So it's this whole life cycle. I think starting in around 2008, Facebook started getting really, really, really bad. It was the beginning of the algorithmic news feed when people started having too many friends and liking too many pages.

And so the feed was just moving too quickly. I could be wrong, but my understanding is Facebook decided to implement an algorithm where it would feed you more of what they thought you would like to see to keep you on the platform for longer. The echo chamber confirmation bias. Exactly. Then you see the transformation of the Buzzfeeds, the Huffington Posts.

They started adhering and molding themselves to the algorithm. And the best example of this is Mike.com, which when it started was pro-Ron Paul, but quickly realized the algorithm favored wokeness. And it's a really, really simple mathematical equation, right? In the beginning of the internet, or I hadn't said the beginning, but in the late 2000s, early 2010s,

the Ron Paul revolution was in full swing. It was a meme, it was viral, people believed in it. The algorithm starts becoming more prominent. And what happens is rage-inducing content gets more clicks and gets more shares. And what happens is rage inducing content gets more clicks and gets more shares. So police brutality videos start going viral. This contributes to a lot of libertarian thinking. But then something happens. If you make a video about racism, it goes viral. You make a video about police brutality, it goes viral. So that's, you know, X views and Y views.

But you make a racist police brutality video. Now it's y views it is multiplied it is bigger all of a sudden you start seeing articles from like vice where it's like you know um gay people uh gay trans people of color are the the strongest argument in favor of black lives matter to cram all of those words into one article to maximize algorithmic pressure and you end up with intersectionality and wokeness being amplified, monetized, and profitable. People hijack the really weak artificial or the machine learning algorithms. And then when they went public, Facebook went public, they started charging people money to get your own followers to see you as part of this algorithmic boost. I remember in 2011, we were working with Minds and this Facebook group called Exposing the Truth, which was hugely popular. And then as soon as they went public, man, 2011 we were working with minds and this this facebook group called um exposing the truth which

was hugely popular and then as soon as they went public man no views and everyone everything was pay pay pay-per-view what happened when facebook went public we had vivek ramaswamy on the other night and he was saying they were expected to have like a 55 public offering when they go public it's supposed to be 55 it came out like 18 bucks and then he said it was like a wealth distribution thing like intentionally they well you i think the point of the conversation was maybe that was they go public, it's supposed to be 55, it came out at like 18 bucks. And then he said it was like a wealth distribution thing, like intentionally they... Well, I think the point of the conversation was maybe that was the exit for, you know,

intelligence or other nefarious entities that wanted to get their money out of the machine somehow. Like they wanted people that were honest brokers to maybe like, oh, I'm bailing on this. And then, or just to not buy or something like that. They were dumping their connection to it. About time to dump because, I mean, Facebook stock exploded in the year subsequent to the IPO.

You did not want to sell. What is it currently? I haven't checked lately. But I want to say 2013, 2014, 2015, that stock did incredibly well. What were you doing with Peter Thiel? I know you're working with him in San Francisco. What was your role?

Just managing the family office. You know, always trying to find the next thing to invest in. So his investment company, Thiel Management? And the cool thing about Peter is while he's, I think, the world's best venture capitalist, right, or certainly top three, but I think he's the best. He's always, you know, it's like one minute you're talking about what to invest in, the next minute you're talking about China and what's going to happen in 30 years, and then peak oil and what's the deal with that? And then he's just, he's truly intellectually omnivorous.

Is he a peak oil believer? I have to ask him. I think he would have said yes 10 years ago, and now not so much. It's a very contentious idea that I believe, I don't actually believe in. But would you say his principles are more aligned with making money or sharing kind of his larger libertarian, more right-wing ideas? Because when you have so much power and influence, you're either motivated

by let's make all this money or let's promote these principles. He did support, he did have, I think, backing of Ron Paul and then went and supported Donald Trump in the last election. So I was just wondering from your perspective, and if it's too personal, you don't have to ask. No, it's not too personal. I mean, I don't want to speak for him. He'd probably come up with some cut why those were like actually, you know, not mutually exclusive and why they actually compound if you pursue both goals at the same time or something like that. Can you guys define peak oil? What is that? That's a theory that the oil is going to be running out.

There's not going to be enough oil, and therefore we need to get off oil immediately. I think it's true. I just think the question is how much oil. Obviously there's a finite amount. There's a finite earth. So the question is, is there so little oil that we might run out? Or is it that it is finite,

but there's so much human could never begin to consume all of it? Yeah, I don't believe it to be true, because a lot of the science is also backed by a lot of the people who are saying, you know, the world's going to end in a few years because of the climate. So we see a lot of the same rhetoric for the same people. We always it's a decade, it's always

a new problem, it's always a new controversy. Yeah, there's an alarmism, right, too, that never quite pans out. Exactly. AOC saying the world's going to end. Yeah, the ocean levels are going to rise. The ice is going to... And then it was the ozone layer a couple decades before that. And then what was it a couple decades before that? There was always something going on. Global cooling. Global cooling,

yeah, global warming. The ozone's not a good argument in my opinion because a bunch of regulations were put in place. Ban CFCs, the ozone is fine now. Yeah, but the sensationalism... So that actually gives them brownie points when you make that argument because they're like,

oh yeah, we banned the things causing that, we fixed it. So I say, you know, it's not one or the other. We had global cooling,

now we have global warming. That gives me pause. The ozone layer thing is an entirely different issue. Yes, I'm just talking about the kind of talking points when people are saying

the world is going to end every decade. That was one of the talking points and the parameters of what you when people are saying the world is going to end every decade. That was one of the talking points and the parameters of what you described is correct. We just got to start a new one. We got to start like, how about global tremoring? Acid rain is also another big one. Artificial intelligence, that's one.

Global tremoring. More earthquakes are going to happen because of... Fracking. Well, that's a real one. That's a real one. That's a real one, too. But I was going to say, like, the earthquake in San Andreas, the San Andreas Fault's going to go,

because insert human activity here. It's all the humans doing jump rope, jumping up and down, shaking the ground. It's going to, you know, we've got to stop. No more exercise. Stop exercising. A real one is we might get hit by meteors

if we just sit around on our hands for the next 300 years. It wiped out previous exercise. Stop exercising. A real one is we might get hit by meteors if we just sit around on our hands for the next 300 years. It wiped out previous civilizations. Solar flare. Solar flare is going to wipe out all of our electrical equipment. Hard to tie that one back to human causes, but that's why

it's always considered a conspiracy theory. It's the TV. It's all of the radio waves. We're messing with the Yeah, that's bouncing around. I submit that the two real ones, one which is more of a slow boil is China. I really do think China is an existential threat long term. Unfortunately, right? We're already in some kind of

Cold War with China and we need to make sure we win that so that we never get into a hot war with China. And then, speaking of hot war, it's nuclear power. Or nuclear war. I still think we're underpricing the risk to having the Russia-Ukraine situation escalate into an all-out nuclear war. Wait, so we are underpricing the risk to having the Russia-Ukraine situation escalate into an all-out nuclear war.

Wait, wait. So you oppose giving Zelensky $45 billion? I do. Did you oppose him wearing green army fatigues when he went to the White House? Everyone was like,

people, I saw people like, he should have worn a suit. Who cares? I don't give a damn. Yeah, I don't care. Like, they're giving away, they're gutting this. First of all,

I'm going to just come out and say it. I know, guys, I went to the White House. I didn't wear a suit either. But that's not the point. The point is, I'm not concerned that a dude showed up not wearing a suit. I know a lot of people are talking about the decorum of the White House. I'm like, bro, I'm less concerned about that and more concerned that they unfurl the Ukrainian flag and then say Mitch McConnell's like the top priority for America is to support Ukraine. At least that's what Republicans think. It's like, no, that you think dude regular people are kind of like why is gas expensive when i saw

biden put his hands on uh zelensky i was like oh i pictured him thinking it said hello presidential puppet hello thank you because he's a puppet they put him up and they put him in power in 2014 when they forced a revolution in ukraine then they just installed this guy i know maybe it's not popular but i will tell you as a candidate for federal office if you oppose giving unlimited amounts of money to ukraine uh they will call you a putin puppet that's right that's like how dumb is that like putin's bad the invasion's bad i condemn it okay it's like we should look for ways to to get those two countries to the negotiating table and we all want to cease fire right but remember when rand pa Paul just stuck his neck out and said, hi, I can't block this. You know, I forget it was 40 billion at the time, but if we're going to send it, can we at least get an inspector general

assigned to it? Can we get a spreadsheet? So we know if this money is just being wasted or if it's just being stolen or what? Do you hear Zelensky's wife went on like a shopping spree or something? 40 grand or something like that? They say, if you want to see who our next enemy is, look at who we're funding right now. I keep hearing that pop up, and I'm like, wait, so is Ukraine, are the Ukrainian Nazis our next war in six years? Yep. The Azov Battalion?

When Russia, assuming, if Russia ends up winning for whatever reason, and then all those weapons are sitting there among pro-Russian factions, and they get armed and then start funding against us, I wouldn't be surprised. Well, they're not just sitting there. There's also intelligence reports detailing how there's already a very boosterous black market already in Europe right now with many of the advanced U.S. weapons being sold to, of course, criminal gangs, probably jihadists that now have surface-to-air missiles that could take down airliners and airplanes. So, you know, when we're just sending weapons down there without any transparency or accountability, that's a recipe for disaster. This is the same administration and government

that says it's too dangerous for you to have a handgun with so many rounds in it. But they're sending surface-to-air missiles on the black market to Europe right now, which is absolutely mind-boggling. Here's what I think. You know, that $45 billion? I would rather they spend it on a gigantic sign floating in outer space that says, Vladimir Putin is a very bad person. Because at least it's ours, and we're spending it as we choose, instead of just giving it away to Ukraine to fund a proxy war.

Granted, let's be real, it's not even a proxy war anymore. It's just, it's a NATO conflict with Russia. They were really overt about it. They're like, they are our allies. Here's the Ukrainian flag. I don't know if they said ally. What do you, what's your vision of, of a ceasefire and drawdown of the militants in the Ukraine right now? I mean, I think we basically know the, the contours, right? It's like, I mean, so the problem is Ukraine definitely wants Russia out of Crimea. I don't think that's

in the U S interest. I don't think U S is going U.S. interest. I don't think U.S. is going to force that, right? If Ukraine is simply not allowed to join NATO, and that's a line in the sand, but they can join the EU, let the Donbass have a plebiscite, they can figure out who's going to rule the Donbass. I mean, I think you could draw this. I'm not like an expert in this stuff, but I think you could draw a peace agreement that gives Putin some face-saving ability to get out of this thing because it hasn't worked well for him. It gives Ukraine most of what they want and it de-escalates so that we don't actually have nuclear missiles flying in six months. It just feels like Biden, I don't know, I actually don't know how with it he is, right? But it feels like he's kind of just in zombie-like fashion marching us towards nuclear war. Yeah. I still think the chances of that are very very low but of course the costs of that are so high i mean we're talking if the

missiles start flying it's like two billion people dead in 48 hours well you can't have that and so why are we even flirting with pouring more gas on the fire by sending this money in this unaccountable way it's a real problem i don't want to be cavalier about it but i fear that if you just put oxygen on it, are we actually threatening to make the problem worse? And no one has been able to give me a satisfactory explanation for no, why this is super okay. And this is, this is de-risking it. I actually think we might be adding risk to the system. It's really complex. No, we're escalating it. Every time we, we arm them, every time we do that, we stop the possibility of any kind of peace deal moving forward.

And there's a big possibility of a limited nuclear war there. I think also this conflict allows China to be stronger. It allows them to have more influence, especially with the actions that are happening because of this war affecting the poorest people in the world. China's kind of stepping in while there's a big crisis that's built in there. And I kind of wanted to ask you, do you see China or Russia as the bigger threat to the United States? Because they're also working on crazy projects with Bill Gates, with mini nuclear reactors. They're working on a lot of, you know,

technology that we're not working on here. They're, they have a lot of money, especially from Western elites. I see them as, as kind of a bigger threat myself. What about China? It's a way bigger threat. This is not debatable.

It's like Russia under Putin. I think he's bad. You know, whatever, but, but, but no, they're in commensurate right and one of the risks by the way of just Punishing Russia with so many sanctions you throw the kitchen sink at him you the West risks pushing Russia into the arms of China Right China would love that China would love to have Russia as some sort of quasi satellite State and there's new new alliance new axis against the West, right? Why would we why would we do that? That we should try to get out of this war with Russia and Ukraine, right? We should try to force

them to have a ceasefire. And then ultimately, I think it's all hands against China. That just seems indebatable. The CCP, I imagine you mean? Yeah, CCP. You can't conflate all of China with the CCP, but actually you kind of can as long as the CCP is in power because that's how totalitarianism works. It's important. I think it's important to differentiate between the Chinese people because they're under that regime as well. Sure.

Yeah, absolutely. Basically modern slaves. I look at like Eastern Ukraine. I think you mentioned the Donbass region. There's two freeways that go down into Crimea. And I wonder if there's a ceasefire and we end up, there ends up being like, what two freeways are this? This is an interesting philosophy. East 97 and East 105, those two freeways that go down into Crimea. I mean,

Russia wants a land bridge down into Crimea. You could give the Western freeway, East 95 to Ukraine and East 105 to Russia and just have some sort of peaceful alignment. I know that Zelensky is very much like Ukrainian nationalian national sovereignty we're not giving up our land and and period that's it and as long as it the united states is funding that message i don't i don't see it happening i we i think we really need an american push for a a ceasefire but to blockade russia from the black sea makes no sense like when the soviet union fell apart they gave ukraine all that land basically to neut neuter Russia to make sure it didn't become another global hegemon. But at this point, it's like, yo, it is a global hegemon. It's one of the third most powerful country in the world. Next

United States and China probably. And I think, I don't know, you make peaceful solutions. That's me from the outside looking in. I think you just solved that over there. Just in politics. I need to go to Moscow with Lex Friedman as my translator. And you, Luke. Well, you don't speak Russian right now. I don't. I'm Polish. There's a big difference between the two. And then I need to go to China with Jack Posobiec as my translator.

And then they'll have their own translators and they'll be keeping each other in check. They're going to give you the intrusive COVID test up here, you know what? Ain't happening. I would do it. I'll do it. If it means global peace, I'll put it up my butt you heard it here folks can we get that uh on a meme can somebody meme that right now happened yeah send it to me for world peace wow that's that's very brave of you thanks sir yeah you're the hero we a lot of these conversations i kind of feel like we have no idea what's really going on. That these intelligence agencies know way more about international affairs than we do.

They don't justify or explain it to us for reasons of retaining power, but also for security reasons. So we're probably sitting here saying all this stuff. They're probably sitting back in their offices going like, you have no idea. I'm sure that's right. And then also the opposite is somehow probably right. Like, you know, maybe with all their information, they actually don't know what's going on either. Yeah.

Right. Or remember WMDs, that they're in Iraq. Yeah, but... Well, were they really or were they not? Or did they just lie to us? It was a PSYOP to convince the American people to support the war, just like the Gulf of Tonkin. No, they knew there was no WMDs.

There was weapons inspectors that came out and they were silenced. They were ignored by the media. They were gagged by, of course, the federal government. There was individuals. The only chemical weapons that Iraq had was the ones that the United States sold to them when they were at war with Iran. And they were and the U.S. government was was financing both sides of that conflict, both sides of that war. And they knew. There was strategic papers out there showing specifically, you overthrow the government of Iraq, you're going to have Sunni Wahhabists take over the area, you're going to have massive sectarian violence,

you're going to have Iran's sphere of influence be expanded and growing in the region, which is not for the American strategy, which is to align themselves with Saudi Arabia and the Sunnis. So this was a recipe for disaster. And they knew this. They had it all outlined. They knew, hey, we're going to be hitting a beehive here and causing problems for the next few decades.

Ah, screw it. We're going to do it anyway. The political policy papers were all there. Everything was lined up. I was screaming about this. I was there. You know, I was saying this is absolutely crazy. This is insane.

There's no WMDs. This is just the project for a new American century realized in real life. And that's exactly what happened. So you're on the same age as me and Luke, I think. I think you might be the youngest person here. 36. What do you got? 36.

Your birthday's in August, March. And then Luke, when's your birthday? You guys all 36? Shout out to the 36-year-olds out there. But I'm bringing this up because I'm curious of, you know, back during the loose change era, the Ron Paul revolution, were you following that stuff? Oh, yeah.

I was a big Ron Paul guy in 07, 08. Yeah. And I assume, like many others, that leads you to this position right now. But I was just wondering. I mean, I'm wondering. I mean, I definitely would have preferred John McCain to Barack Obama. Really?

Oh yeah. I see quite a bit of difference between them, but zooming out, not as much difference as I would have liked. And then you had Ron Paul, who was basically like talking about this set of questions that nobody was talking about. And I forget how he did in his primaries. I mean, it wasn't, the revolution did not happen, right?

But it still galvanized a lot of people. Like you said earlier, people believed in it. And I think he actually got, did he get like 10% in New Hampshire or something? They cheated him. They cheated him in so many different ways, especially when it came to the polls,

especially when it came to the corporate media coverage of him. I remember following that. They wouldn't mention him. Yeah, they screwed him over. As John McCain was literally singing songs about bombing Iran. So, and also we over as John McCain was literally singing songs about bombing Iran. So and also we have to understand what happened with Barack Obama was a direct result because of the mistakes, not mistakes, but because of the destruction of the United States caused by George

W. Bush. George W. Bush was put in a position of power. He abused that power. He destroyed the American Constitution. He destroyed the American economy. And because of that, we had a cultural pushback, just like we did during Vietnam and the JFK assassination, where, of course, we had the leftist become more prominent, mainly because, in my opinion, according to Bush, overreaching, doing too much and becoming a totalitarian leader, which he was. I thought Obama was an example of like hoping that we can put an innocent, charismatic guy in power and hoping that he'll save us like a superhero. And like he gets in and gets co-opted like everyone else in that position, when in reality we need a ground up movement.

And he promised like, I'll be there for you. And I think had we done a ground up attempt at like some sort of Internet economic revolution that he wouldn't have said no, he would have sat by and let it happen. Like he was he was looking to do it, but he couldn't do it from the office. There's too much. That's the fascinating thing about Obama is he ran on hope and change and it's supposed to be discontinuous from Bush. Right. And then he, he effectively harnessed voters dissatisfaction and I'm, I'm something new. And, and actually his administration represented stasis and continuation and lock in and wall street got even richer and the Patriot act got even more fortified. You thought drone strikes under Bush were remarkable.

Well, Obama just, you know, just they called him pedal to the metal on that. Obama and they called him deporter in chief. Yeah, he actually deported a lot of people. That's right. I talked to the Border Patrol guys on on the campaign. They would say, you know, Trump was great, solid A. But then they'd say not to be partisan about it. Like Obama, like B, Biden F,

in terms of how these administrations supported us, right? Like Obama actually understood it. And go back to an Obama speech from 08 or 09. It's like, he sounds like a right winger on immigration. He says, well, obviously a country has borders. And if you just let anyone in, you don't know who's coming in, then you can't have a country, you know? And it's like, wow, you say that now.

And wow, you're a bigot. But that was Barack Obama in 08. I'm not sure if he believed it, but he knew the politics of the time were such that he had to say that. I would love to get just to talk to Barack in a room with no satellite phones beaming in and listening and hear like, you know, how co-opted did you get, dude?

I know that Michelle was trying to do the let's move campaign, get off sugar. It was sugar is bad for you. Let's move and cut sugar out of our diet. And then the sugar industry came in and was like, no, no, no, no. Let's make it an exercise campaign, not diet. So it was like, okay, now let's move is now an exercise campaign. Sugar industry, you're back in business.

Katie Couric does a documentary. Better than ever, right? Didn't the let's move campaign, it's like they, you know, saturated fat is bad. We're going to ban this 2% milk from schools. And instead they introduced like strawberry flavored skim milk, which is just like cancer and tons of sugar, but hey, it has no fat.

High fructose corn syrup and seed oils. Good intentions can actually backfire. Surprise. We're going to go to super chats. If you haven't already, would you kindly smash that like button, subscribe to this channel, share the show with your friends.

My friends, this is the last show of 2022 because tomorrow everyone's going to be traveling so they can be with their families on christmas eve christmas is on so christmas is on sunday and we were like well saturday is christmas eve we don't want to make people travel on christmas eve so we're gonna let people travel for those that need to travel the friday so we're basically going to wrap up and then the next week we had a couple of people interested in coming on and then we got cancellations and i was like i don't think we can fill a full week to be completely honest. Plus nobody likes working after Christmas, not to mention Monday is a travel day after Christmas. So I was just like, let's just take

the week and stop trying to swim uphill, swim upstream. And, uh, uh, you know, I don't like taking days off, but we're not going to resist. We're going to have a good vacation and we're going to see our families. But, uh, for're going to read those Super Chats. So again, smash that like button. We got Kyle who says Blake should move to Kentucky to challenge McConnell in the next election. If not, Massey should do it. I think Massey should do it. Massey's awesome.

What a national treasure that guy is. I got the chance to meet him a couple months ago. Stand-up guy. Obviously very funny on Twitter and he's a model congressman. He's really great. No comment on moving to Kentucky to challenge McConnell. Oh, jazz says, Tim,

I'm sorry to disappoint you, but I really liked the new avatar. Do you guys see the new avatar movie? Nope. Nope. Nope. Haven't. Nope.

I, I, I don't want to see it. I probably will for cultural reasons. It will probably be a fine and entertaining movie, but I just really just don't like it. I hear it's very culturally appropriate. Inappropriate.

Inappropriate. Appropriative. Yeah, appropriative. And not woke enough. So that's why I won't see it. People have said it's good. It's probably good. Is it James Cameron directed it?

Yep. He says that testosterone is the toxin in the world. I mean, you can get too much tea. You gotta balance your tea. Oh, we got Raymond G. Stanley Jr. Tim, last Super chat of 2022. A positive note. My folks told me they'd never again voting Democrat

just because they're furious about porous border, billions to Ukraine, and our government not caring about its own citizens. Hey, look. It's a positive. Positive things are happening, man. The border. The southern border, man.

Jorge Ventura's down there just doing God's work. And the amount of videos and transparency he's providing for people to see these people being trafficked across the river day after day after day after day for years like what in the hell that is i've never seen anything like millions of people literally millions and then the white house press secretary says that's not how it works people don't just walk across the border and it's like no millions of people have walked across the border since january of 2021 this is why i can't believe these voters these these voters are so stupid but i guess they are like there's videos of it but people i know personally are like no that's not true and it's like can i can i can i pull up the video and show you what happened like you're lying it's a right-wing trick. Oh, okay. You're in a cult.

Sorry, dude. It's so weird. All right, here we go. Andrew Bruze says, tried sending a meme of Joe Biden walking with Zelensky with a photoshopped Hunter Biden in the background to my mate on Facebook Messenger, and I got hit with a violation and got logged out of Facebook.

Well, I mean, why were you making fun of Joe Biden, you know? Have you thought about how maybe you deserve it? Can you believe this guy trying you making fun of Joe Biden, you know? Have you thought about how maybe you deserve it? Can you believe this guy trying to make fun of Biden like that? Yeah, thank you. Call the FBI.

Call the FBI. Well, they already know because, you know, they're on Facebook. What do we got? Oh, Hi Dare says, love you guys. Thank you for helping

to keep sanity in an insane world. See you in 2023. I think our January 2nd show is going to be really, really big. I think we got a really awesome guest. Maybe. Can we say who? No. Got it. Because it might not happen. This is how it goes. Yeah. You know, like for a lot

of guests, they'll say yes, and then a week goes by and like, oh no, something came up, and then we're like, we'll find somebody else. So if we announce it, then, you know, just ends up not happening. Sagas of History says, I my i want my mtg now look at them establishment that's the way they do it they omnibus spend on the gender studies that ain't working that's the way they do it your money worth nothing and they take the kids for free oh i get it's to the tune of uh that song money for Nothing. Is that what the song's called? Dire Straits, yeah. Good one.

Sting sings on that. I want my MTG. Oh, MTG. I want my MTG. That's the way they do it. That's the way they do it. Gas Addict says, spending my birthday with you guys,

if you don't fix something that you know is broken and it breaks, that is malice, end of story. Yes, that's what it seems like. If you break it, whether or not you intended to break it, you broke it and it needs to be fixed. Matthew Hunter says the law in Arizona doesn't require intent to provide a remedy.

It requires either intent or that the number of questionable ballots put the results in doubt. The judge conflated these. I think that's right, actually. And the question is, when the judge conflated them, is that the new standard? Somehow it shouldn't be, but it's a legal ruling. I'd understood it to be you have to show malice, basically malice, or some sort of innocent mistake that was enough to change the result. The question is, have they shown either? Then it seems like, yeah. Well, the question is, the judge say they've shown either. Here's the important issue. Evidence is not proof.

Okay, so having witnesses provide circumstantial evidence is not definitive proof and the example i give to people is you come home from work your chocolate cake is destroyed it's on the kitchen floor and there's paw prints in it is that proof what do you think happened the dog ate it no that's not proof the dog ate it it's proof the dog stepped in it because then you walk over and there's the cat with chocolate cake all over its paws and the dog's got nothing on his mouth so it turns out the evidence did not prove but let's say you see the cake knocked on the ground it's a vanilla cake this time because dogs can't eat chocolate and there's a paw print in it the evidence suggests to you i'm gonna go check the dog because there's a paw print here that's

evidence and when you go to the dog he's got icing all over his face. Okay, that's the proof. The evidence brought you there. So in this instance, what we have is evidence was presented to the court, sworn testimony, affidavits, all of that stuff. More than enough, in my opinion, that the court, the judge should, the first thing the judge should have said is, okay, defense, can you produce a chain of custody documents that they say don't exist? First question you should have asked. because the answer is apparently no. But OK, at the very least, the evidence presented should result in a hard investigation from an independent process where they go in to make a hard determination on the facts so they can say we have evidence.

We followed the evidence. Here's what we found. I'm worried the judge is going to be like, you know, have a nice day. So we'll see. We will see. We will see. You know, but it is good that he granted the trial in the first place because it's more than we've seen in the past. All right. Sam Uri says, if GOP begin to harvest, Antifa and BLM will hunt the people in the ground game in the streets. We will lose 2024 the same way. We are done. Nah, I'm sorry. That's too pessimistic for me. I actually think people bring up Orange County. Republican, ballot harvesting is introduced, turns Democrat, Republicans figured out, turns Republican again. So I'm fairly optimistic, actually. I think, especially with Elon Musk,

I mean, that was a nuclear bomb dropped in the culture war. Just massive. Very good news. Let's see what we got. Joseph Flynn says, the past six years are the result of the 60 years of groundwork the political elite have laid down. We don't have 60 years to undo their work. How can we win? I like y'all, but alternatives don't work against evil. How does this not end in open violence? Open violence is the victory path for the machine, the establishment, and the left. That's why they have locked people up over January

6th for two years without a trial, because they know how to control that, because they know regular people are scared. The path to victory is confidence building and confidence breaking. That is, in a fifth generational war or conflict, you have to win hearts and minds. And with cameras on every street corner, violence doesn't work. I mean, look at all the police brutality videos that went viral. There was a period at the end of the 2000s where like every video on Facebook was police brutality. That was devastating to government. Like you ended up with a whole wave of libertarians and anarchists being like abolish the police so what what works is being being on the side of peace being on the

side of charisma influence and uh you got to win some elections and change some rules and change some laws that's what we got to do but uh i suppose there's a question of if there is no reconciliation then people get violent and that that scares me. All right. SA Federali says, Tim hit the nail on the head. Milo was right. Look at what people who care have had to deal with. I want revenge. I mean, I gotta be honest. I'm I just don't feel like whatever Kevin McCarthy says is worth anything to me. But I understand what you're saying, Blake, when you're like, he's certainly better than Jeffries. You know, Marjorie Taylor Greene has pointed out he's offering a whole lot. And I'm like, I guess if you're a Republican, that makes sense. There are certainly things he's offered that I

want, but I just don't trust them. Never, never have, never will. And at this point, I know you may not feel that way, but I'm like, I understand that most people do, but I mean, looking at how they abandoned you and at worst may have actively actively worked against you. I'm like, dude, these people do not deserve my support sorry i ain't gonna happen but i i do think you know if you're at least willing to try and uh keep a cool head about it that's that's honorable don't look at me i'm a i could be a hothead sometimes so but a lot of people i don't agree with the revenge narrative and i'd like to talk to mile about the next time i see him because i feel like that's french revolution territory where they were executing people by beheading for uh you know just i'm not talking about that

well that's what yeah that's what happens i'm talking about firing a guy you know what i mean like you're fired go home holding people up to to accountability is one thing but trying to harm them physically uh you could say that firing someone is a form of harm but i'm not talking about that kind of harm i'm talking about like when I say revenge, I'm saying fire him. And if it means the Democrat might win the speaker, I just, I don't know if that's all that much different in my opinion. Then let's, let's call it righteous accountability. How's that? And I'm talking about rights, your rights. They have rights. They have human rights. Revenge doesn't imply violent action. It just implies an emotional satisfaction of some sort has come up into a perceived slight or something. My attitude is just, these people have never represented me. I've never been a big fan

of them. And I feel like they were actively working against the people that I cared about and thought were trying to help me. I see a lot of candidates and they're like, we want to make your life better. I'm like, I really liked it. They want to make other people's life better. I really liked it. And then I see the GOP establishment being like, we're going to hurt them. And I'm like, okay, I want them fired. Just as an aside, I was listening to Mitch McConnell on a video, man, he sounds tired compared to a couple of years ago. I haven't heard from him in a couple of years. I haven't heard his voice. And it's just like, it's time to retire, man. Yeah. All right. Midas says, Luke, a government will always form in all of history.

Every community has turned into a government. It's how it is. The key is to form the best government possible. The founders made the first honest attempt. Now it's time we do it again and better. Yeah, we talked about that on the after show, and we kind of went to the same kind of conclusion. There is a kind of government, but I think the best government is decentralized government, and I think we should be pushing for that more than ever and slowly make sure that we are more personally responsible for ourselves and don't need government how big of a local police force do you think is is justifiable depends on the i mean like a community of like 100 people or a thousand people like honestly like like

a lot of it depends on culture but for me personally like, like none. Well, I mean just like how, how small communities will like police themselves. They'll be like, all right, Luke, you're the one that has the best accuracy. So you're the sheriff. And then like,

and then it scales up to a thousand people. We're like, well now we need like nine police to take care of this or 13 police. And like, like how do you keep it decentralized as the community? Militia, local militia and courts. But as communities grow, I feel like the militia grows.

And then when it's no longer centralized because the militia headquarters is three miles away. You got to think about it in terms of in the early days of this country when there was a more common morality. I'm not saying it was all good. Obviously, there were bad things. But if everyone in the neighborhood took action to protect their community community you wouldn't need police to a certain degree because if someone started doing something illegal everyone would turn and be like we have to stop them nowadays most people are like leave me out of it so then someone has to be appointed to stop them and even the cops are going leave me out of it yeah and they're watching violent crimes happening

be like i don't want to get involved you know what i like, meanwhile, the left wants to get rid of qualified immunity. Actually, we might disagree on that. Right. But like, they want to get rid of qualified immunity, which is really going to keep police on the sidelines. What does that mean?

Exactly. I mean, the cops are right now on the sidelines already, but they, but they are like, yeah. And, or,

or they're there. The good cops have already left. Yeah. Did you see what happened during black lives matter? The cops were just standing by literally. They didn't do anything. Very often. They're ordered to stand down.

Or just saying, I'm not going to take the risk. Let's not qualify immunity as that if they kill someone on the job. They're held responsible for their actions. The left wants people to be able to sue individual police officers in their individual capacity for anything that goes wrong. Well, you do that, then no cop who needs to respond. Sometimes you do need to respond to very dangerous

things with physical force. And so, if everyone's thinking, I'm going to get sued for this personally, who's going to want to be a cop? It's already a really hard job. I'm in favor of that. Really? I think we should have less cops and more guns. I agree with the more guns, maybe the number of cops is fine.

I actually think we do have a disorder problem on the street and we need more police officers and we just need to have less tolerance. But with more police officers, they're going to only be enforcing what the attorney general in that particular district wants them to enforce, and that's usually the wills of George Soros going after people in your political party. I agree that that's a disaster. But hold on, hold on. Here's a better example.

Illinois, it's illegal for someone to have a gun. If you are a law-abiding citizen in all circumstances, and they find out that you, as a father father of three terrified for your neighborhood and your family illicitly acquire a weapon, they're coming after you. If you are a gang leader surrounded by a bunch of guys strapped with a whole bunch of, I mean, modified handgun, you know, modified Glocks for fallout or whatever, they're going to stay away from you. That's right. So what happens is the cops are like, hey, I'm not going into that neighborhood. Those guys got heavy guns.

But this father, he wants a gun. So the problem ends up becoming, look, if you're a cop, I totally get it. Do you want to walk into gang territory where they're intent on killing you with high-powered weapons? Or are you just going to arrest the low-hanging fruit? So my attitude is like,

growing up in Chicago, I actually think there's a potential for accidental discharge and things like that. There always is. But what I saw, all of the criminals know they can rob you. All the criminals know there's nothing you can do about it. They don't care if they go to jail. The way they talk, because I know, I grew up with some of these guys. They say things like, I have not gone to jail yet. They expect it to happen. Me, I don't want to go to jail, I have not gone to jail yet. They expect it to happen. Me, I don't want to go to jail and I'm not going to break the law. So when these guys walk

up to you with weapons and knives and guns or whatever, they know you don't have one. I would much rather live in a society where they see me walking down the street and they can't tell what that thing is in, in, in near my waist, under my jacket. So they go, nah, not that guy, not that guy. Because it could be the end of your life or it could be permanent injury. But the problem with places like Chicago is they're like, dude's probably carrying a phone. He doesn't have a gun. Gun-free zones, right? Only law-abiding citizens respect gun-free zones. They're criminals. So I don't want to put it on the cops. I don't think it's fair to say, officer, you stand in front of me when that guy's threatening me. No, no,

don't worry. I got it. I got a second amendment. If that guy wants to threaten my life, I will protect myself. I think both are good. An armed citizenry is good. And well-trained, supported police are good. If you don't have selective enforcement, the selective enforcement is really bad, right? Yeah. Just described anarcho-tyranny. Right. Like we're not going to apply the law, but over here, but we are over here. That's what we have now. That's crazy. But actually, actually, you make a fair point. I made this point before that if if you go back in time to when there was a more unified cultural morality, you're driving down the street in a small town. You get pulled over. Sheriff's deputy gets out of the car and he goes, Blake, I told you last time not to speed. Now, I got to see your dad down at the pub tonight. What am I going to tell him? When the community was closer with each other,

when they saw each other at church, when they knew their neighbors, or he'd pull you over and bag license and registration. You hand them to go masters. Are you John masters kid? That's you. You know, I see your dad on the weekend sometimes down at the range or whatever.

And I'm going to have to tell him I pulled you over and you're going to be like, ah, geez, much more personal, much. There's much more at stake. That cop knows if I beat this kid up that his dad's going to be screaming at me. That happened to

me once in Cuyahoga Falls growing up. I think I rolled a stop and the cop pulled me over and was like, Crossland, Tim's son. I was like, yeah, he was like, get out of here. I'm not talking about getting a freebie. I'm just saying, like, I get pulled over by a cop and he goes, you were speeding. And then I was I wasn't speeding. And I was like, I'm sorry, I wasn't speeding. I was exiting off onto Belmont from Lakeshore Drive. I was like, I'm 10 under the limit. And he goes, tell it to a judge. And he throws a ticket at me.

If we were in a smaller community and this guy knew there were repercussions for lying and giving me a false ticket. And my dad was going to show up at church and be like, what are you doing? You're lying. They think twice about brutality or doing wrong. More importantly, even the criminals who come in think twice about brutality or doing wrong. More importantly, even the criminals who come in think twice because they know they'll get ostracized. But we've become this big detached blob where no one knows each other and no one cares.

So I guess my point is, you're right. You know, cops can be very, very good so long as they feel that there is something at risk if they if they go against the community. Selective enforcement arises out of the fact that cops are like, don't know you, don't care, I'll never see you again. And then it just becomes callous. All right, let's read some more. Where are we at?

Oh, Noah Sanders says, hey guys, Phoenix Ammunition is back on Twitter. That's cool. Glad to see it. Oh, I like this one. Max Reddick says, Tim, Sam Seder made a video saying Ian is an anti-Semite. It's time to call out Sam, so tired of people like him. saw did you see that i didn't see the video i watched the first

like 10 second or 30 they were just laughing so i guess they're having a good time which is good it's because you said kanye was going to save the jews baby yeah i've been thinking a lot about it was a claim i made where i was like if you don't believe in god you're not jewish and it's like well i think what happens is because it's like there's a cultural jews and there's a religious jews and there's even a conflation within judaism that if you don't believe in God, you're not Jewish. And it's like, well, I think what happens is because it's like, there's a cultural Jews and there's a religious Jews. And there's even a conflation within Judaism that if you don't believe in God, like some, the religious ones think the cultural is not enough. And I think culturally you're an Israelite. You're from this tribe of Jacob, who's Israel. Everyone is the Israelites. But if you don't believe in God, then are you, did you follow the Jewish path? If you, you know, and I want,

I want to, I think you got to talk to a rabbi. Oh, heck yeah. Let me read this one. Powder PZ says, if the judge rules the 290,000 ballots, it's 298,000 ballots, broke chain of custody and are invalid.

What happens with Blake's case since he lost by less than that? That's a good question. Although I, again, what's, what's the remedy? When the judge says it's invalid, is he going to order a new election somehow? Well,

I think, I think the judge is going, the judge is probably going to say chain of custody was broken. That's bad. The law doesn't give me a remedy. And unless you can prove that either 17,000 carries case or 125,000 in my case were changed, not doing anything. But does the law need to give him a remedy?

If I was the judge and someone said these ballots have no chain of custody, I'd say, oh, well, then they're not valid. Like the law requires actually that they have chain of custody. If they don't, I don't consider them ballots. So remove them. And so the question then becomes, if the judge just says 290,000 ballots will be removed from the total count, go through them and figure out who got what. It would throw every race into question whose margin was less than 250,000 or whatever, which is all of them. I think if it's Maricopa County, it would flip everything Republican because these are predominantly going to be Democrat votes. I don't know. We talked a little bit about this earlier. I don't know if the margin in Maricopa County, Democrat to Republican,

is enough with that number to change the results of your election if 290,000 were rejected, right? Like it was 125,000. That means it needs to be like two to one Democrat to Republican, but I don't think it was that much, right? It was closer.

We'd have to do the math. But it'd be very interesting to see what the judge rules, right? I mean, I, if someone came to me and said, do you think the judge is going to rule in favor of Carrie Lake? I would say, no, I just don't see it as possible. If I had to make a bet, I'd be like,

I'm not, I'm not going to, I wouldn't put a dollar on it. I don't trust that, you know, he's going to say what you, you're right. He's going to say, I was really messed up and sorry about that. And we should all be outraged that there's going to be no accountability.

We talked about accountability for politicians. What about the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors? Your one job was to make sure that there was a smooth election day administration and they failed to do it. Did they fail to do it on purpose? I'm willing to say, hey, for purposes of this discussion, assume that they're just incompetent. Usually when you're that incompetent, you get fired. Let's remove the politics from everything and I'll tell you where the problem is right now. A witness testified, they did not receive chain of custody documents and were told that they don't exist. Immediately. There needs to be an investigation because it's a matter of law. Will the judge make a criminal referral for an investigation to find these chain of custody documents? I think the answer is no. That's the

problem. That has nothing to do with the, overturning. I'm just saying outright is a matter of criminal law. We need to know the chain of custody documents exist. They were requested by one of the parties in the election. We're told they don't exist. What's going on? Then there's the problem of if the documents don't exist and there is a criminal referral and someone is criminally charged for not following the law, how could those votes then count? Because you certainly couldn't come out and say, now, hold on there a minute. We understand that the law was broken and we have no evidence that these ballots were legitimately cast, but we're going to count them anyway. Then the cost of winning election is just for the individual who wants to go to prison. That means in all,

if they don't solve this in any future election, an individual can be like, I'm willing to go to prison. That means in all, if they don't solve this in any future election, an individual can be like, I'm willing to go to prison. If it means half a million votes, go to my candidate. That's already the structure of the law in so many other cases in Arizona, like ballot harvesting in Arizona. It's illegal, right? I'm not allowed to go to a nursing home or assisted living facility and collect ballots and turn them in. That would be illegal. But if someone did that, even if they got caught and prosecuted, the ballots that they illegally harvested count. I mean, even if you could identify them, there are legal votes as soon as they get into the post office, which is really crazy, right? You think that an illegally harvested ballot, as soon as, if you could identify it,

wouldn't count. No, in Arizona law, it counts. You can just public, uh, this is a corruption penalize the person who did it. The founding fathers that did not intend for this to be the system of gamesmanship whoever can manipulate the numbers to the best wins no it was of for and by the people if we know definitively the will of the people is not being followed through then we have an obligation as the people to remedy that but to come out and be like well the law says there's nothing we can do. It's like you expect a government of, for, and by the people to just be not of, for, and by the people because of a statutory claim. That's insane. All right, we'll grab some more here. Brody Nevis says, love the show, guys. Bring on the Tate brothers. Also, Andrew is 36. I was watching a video from him and he was talking about, uh, dude, I think I haven't watched

a lot of Andrew Tate stuff. Um, I've known of him for a while and I watched a couple of videos, but the couple of videos I've seen, I really like he had one where he's telling people to like, sign up to his program, become a member. It costs money and all that. And that I'm like, yeah, yeah, yeah, we get it. But the whole video is actually really good. He's like, you're sitting there, a loser, eating, getting fat, playing video games when you could be winning. You could be changing your life. You could be improving. And then he says something like, the rocket ship going to the moon doesn't stop halfway and chill for a little bit.

It keeps going and it's hard. And that means you got to start working hard now and not stop. You can't give up. And I'm like, oh, yeah, he's right. Yeah, but in space, the inertia will take you there. You don't have to keep your I'm like, oh yeah, he's right. Yeah. But in space, the inertia will take you there. You don't have to keep your thrusters on the whole time. Okay. But you get the point. Oh, we're totally going to debate. Bring them on. Come on, Andrew. No, I think it was great. Like I mentioned when he did a video where he says happiness is

irrelevant. You have to, if you're happy or sad, you wake up, you do the exact same thing. You work hard. And I'm like, that dude's he's completely right. That's motivation. He's a kickboxer. We should go to Dubai and interview them. He's like a world famous. Come on, we could do that, right? I think he's a kickboxer. Press 1 if you want us to do that. I guess we have this next week.

I kind of want to spend time with family. But January 3rd. I would love to go to Dubai. It would take like a whole day to travel there. Yeah, we do it over the weekend. And then do a week in Dubai? Yeah. That's crazy great we could set it up in dubai that'd be awesome you know i wouldn't want to do it is because the the speech laws they have are not

in my opinion conducive to a show like this yeah but but it's the same like bali you know indonesia has their own laws but bali has respect for tourists and yeah if there's a well there's a way perhaps perhaps everyone pressing one in the chat but i think he also he also goes to uh europe respect for tourists. Yeah. Well, there's a way. Perhaps, perhaps. Everyone pressing one in the chat. But I think he also goes to Europe, too. Romania. Yeah, yeah. Oh, dude, I love Romania.

So let's go to Romania. I mean, I would... I was there before, too. It's a pretty awesome country. They have an awesome fast food pizza joint. I thought Romania was awesome when I went there. I enjoyed it. What are the two big cities there?

It's like Bucharest and... Bucharest. And what's the other one? I forgot. Brazov. Brazov? I don't know. I enjoyed it. What are the two big cities there? It's like Bucharest. Bucharest. And what's the other one? I forgot. Brazov. Brazov? I don't know. I loved it.

I thought it was so fantastic. Great place, by the way. Or we could be like, let's meet in the middle. Let's go to Poland. I mean, that'd be cool too. Or Budapest. I'd love to check that one out.

Damien Simmons says, Luke, today I found out about gold-backed currency that is state-based. New Hampshire, etc. What is your, for example, what is your input on cryptocurrency backed by gold and silver or a state-backed currency that is state-based, New Hampshire, et cetera. What is your, for example, what is your input on cryptocurrency

backed by gold and silver or a state-backed crypto? You know, my sentiment, always be skeptical, but when it comes to this economy, I think it's best to diversify as much as you can and not put anything in one particular basket. We don't know what's happening right now. It's an absolutely crazy market. Don't trust anyone,

and just try to have your money all over the place because you never know what's going to happen. Kalashnikov says, go watch the EPA's new diesel engine regulatory announcement. The emission requirement essentially bans them and will force you to buy the Chinese electric truck that doesn't work. Probably. It's the way things go, I guess, you know? All right, what do we got? Martin Edgar says, I saw a show that stated there was a noticeable polar shift. Then the shift changed in the opposite direction.

The culprit was identified as the massive construction in China is causing the Earth to be unbalanced. Is that true? Ian? I don't know. There are pole shifts. You can watch the way the Earth's spinning. It's kind of like a it's not spinning completely even so it's like wobbling and sometimes you'll see the pole moving in like a spiral i have no idea though to answer that question

crip dj says where are your shirts made luke um i believe south america right i don't know i got a double check if uh do you use spring uh i use a number of different companies so i have like three to four companies that i use right now we're looking to uh we used to work with a local shop in the united states uh but they're no longer active but if you have an active t-shirt store that you're printing shirts in the united states from the united states the shirts are actually made uh in south America. I think it was either Ecuador, I think. I forgot exactly which country. But if you have a store here,

hit me up. I would love to work with an American business. I did before. I want to do it again. I will say it's hard. It's expensive. Political t-shirts, right? I insisted on made in America blanks. Why not? Really hard. You find a shade of olive green that you like

good luck finding that shirt and you know like 30 bucks 30 bucks if you can get it or it might take six months to get a u.s. made blank meanwhile the stuff in Honduras the stuff in El Salvador it's just that's you can't even make meanwhile my wife open a t-shirt factory my wife does vintage shopping for our kids eight-year-olds and six-year-olds and so when you get on eBay and you get a shirt made in the 80s or 90s, invariably made in the USA, made in the USA. We've just outsourced this.

Exactly. If you want to buy American, it's really hard. Yeah, I think we should give the people the option to buy either American or from South America. So if you have an American t-shirt business, email me info at wearechange.org. And I want to do that again. All right. america is

america too yeah south america is pretty awesome too i love south america all right everybody if you have not already would you kindly smash that like button subscribe to this channel share the show with your friends become a member at timcast.com and this is it the finale the sign off for 2022 i'll tell you what our plan is. We're going to spend time with family. We're going to enjoy it. We're going to relax for a little bit and just cool off after Christmas. And then I'm going to go up to New York City because we have big Times Square billboards up right now for New Year's. And we are going to the official New Year's party

where supposedly all of the big shots in New York are going to be because we're invited and i'm going to really really enjoy that i wonder how that will turn out we'll see it'll be fun because luke will be there too and i i'm great at events i tell a lot of jokes this time luke's not uh sneaking in he's being invited in to the the den of capital city that's rare it's very i usually get you know kicked out i call it uncommon at this point. No wonder rare. It's getting more common. So, you know, the rumor is the official New Year's Eve party is going to have a lot of big shots, Democrat players and things like that.

And we're going as cordially invited guests to enjoy the buffet and watch the festivities. And I imagine that we will be calm and collected individuals, but we'll see how that goes. So I just want to say thank you all so much for your support in these past few years, and this year especially, allowing us to have that cultural dominance, that goes. So I just want to say thank you all so much for your support in these past few years, and this year especially, allowing us to have that cultural dominance, at least to the degree we do, by doing things like In Times Square. And becoming a member helps us continually do more. The next big project is we're launching a coffee shop. The building has already been purchased. We are now beginning the process of designing and planning out the coffee shop and the hangout. It's in West Virginia. First floor is going to be cafe. Second floor is going to be games and hangout. Third floor is

going to be a podcast studio where we can do Friday night special events and members can hang out on the first floor as we do the show. And then hopefully within the next year, we have four to 10 new locations and we can keep opening up these cultural spaces where people can hang out, meet each other, share ideas, and we can build that movement. So thank you all so much. You can follow the show at Timcast IRL. You can follow me personally at Tim cast Blake. Do you want to shout anything out? Thanks for having me. You guys are, uh, you guys are great and really appreciate it. You got to come to Arizona more. Maybe we'll do a joint one with me and Carrie or, well, you know, with, um, if, if turning point USA is willing to have us,

Charlie, absolutely. Yeah. This, this space they built for us is incredible. And, um, considering the amount of space they do have, if there's ever another opportunity where they can get us a temporary setup, we could definitely come down and do other things like that. We were planning on doing stuff like that, going to Miami.

We did go to Austin. We have the mobile trailer and everything. But it's like, you gotta find a place where you can hook up, get internet, and do all that stuff. Fortunately for us with Arizona, Charlie said, we could build you a studio and get your logo on the screen.

And we definitely, we definitely have to travel more. Where can people find you on Twitter? At BG masters. Blake, thank you so much for coming on. That was great. Thank you for giving us your perspective.

My website is lukeuncensored.com, which is getting the business from PayPal. As PayPal just announced that they're going to be unsubscribing everyone from my members area. Of course, we had an alternative a couple months ago, set up. Tell Peter Thiel, be like, Thiel, what are you doing? I'm just joking. He's not, he's no longer at PayPal, but they're unsubscribing everyone. We set up an alternative months ago, but there's still

some members being signed up there. They're going to be forcefully cut off. So if you're on PayPal and you're signed up to LukeUncensored.com, Go to that website, get off PayPal, sign up on our alternative. We have a third alternative that we're working on right now, LukeUncensored.com. And right before Christmas, thank you, PayPal. Really appreciate it. Still, the majority of my members were on there. So yeah, that sucks.

Thanks for coming, bro. That was hot. This was fun. Good to see you, man. Thank you. You guys, when you go see your family, I hope you have a chance to do this holiday. Spend some time listening to what they have to say.

Really just listen. And remember, if you disagree, if you start to get flushed, if you want to talk politics, whatever, that you're blessed just to be able to have the conversation and be there for them. People are waking up all over Earth. And I want to remind you about this lovable, wonderful Mr. Bocas. Keep buckling your thoughts. be there for them. You know, people are, people are waking up all over earth. And, uh, I want to remind you about this lovable,

wonderful Mr. Bocas. Keep bucko in your thoughts. I'm looking forward to seeing buckle. I'll see him on the 2nd of January. I've been, uh, I've been looking to get him stem cells,

uh, a stem cell treatment for his kidneys, which were underdeveloped for, but the, you know, congenital kidney, uh, issues.

So they say that stem cells are more for like chronic kidney issues and things. So I don't know if it's going to work. Well, he does have chronic kidney disease. Okay. So there might be, there might be a path forward here and I would love to pioneer some new

regenerative medicine and then publicize and popularize the technology and save millions of more cats and dogs and people across earth and beyond. All right. Take care of yourself. All right, everybody. Thanks for hanging out and we will see you all next year you you