Timcast IRL - Timcast IRL #749 Trump Arrives In NYC To SURRENDER, Second Indictment COMING w/Charlie Kirk

Episode Date: April 4, 2023

Tim, Ian, Libby Emmons (The Post Millennial), & Serge join Charlie Kirk to discuss Donald Trump arriving in NYC in order to surrender after indictment, NYPD continuing to order full mobilization for its officers, the misuse of charitable funds by BLM, a new report that Trump's secret service agents will testify against him, & a new leak reporting Trump will be charged with 34 felonies. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Donald Trump has arrived in New York City preparing to surrender for his arraignment. And, you know, we got to, Charlie Kirk is hanging out and we were talking earlier. So I think, I think Charlie might disagree, but I was saying this earlier on my morning show that if you want to explain to people just how close we are to societal collapse or the precipice, just tell them, ask them, what happens if Donald Trump doesn't surrender? 34 counts. What happens if Donald Trump just says no? Okay, well, we know he's going to New York. We know he's going to do it. Okay, here's the other scenario. What happens if a judge says we remand Donald Trump to the custody of the New York criminal court system,

meaning he's going to jail and they're not going to let him out until the case is resolved? What do you think happens to this country? The front runner for the Republican Party, a former president for the first time in history, that's the precipice because I could not imagine a peaceful resolution if either of those things occurs. And that's what we're dealing with right now. And it's not just the indictment in New York. We now have news that the Secret Service is scheduled to testify against Donald Trump in Washington, D.C. This is pertaining to classified documents. They're not going to stop. That's how close we are. Confidence is about to break down. So we're going to talk about

a lot of that. Plus, we do have some silly social issues, I guess, because Elon Musk changed the Twitter logo to Doge and then Doge spiked like 40% or whatever. In one day? In one day. I tried to call, as soon as I saw it, I said, how much is Doge up? 30%. In one day. It's better than oil today. I think oil was up 7% today.

What did it close at? Yeah. So before we get into all that, head over to timcast.com, click the Join Us button to become a member if you want to support our work directly, and as a member, if you join at the $10 level, after six months, you will get access to the VIP chat in our Discord server, which allows you to call into the Uncensored After Show and ask questions. As a member, you'll get access to the Discord where you can hang out, talk with people and communicate. And we use that sort of as a chat. The chat will appear on the Uncensored Show live stream. But

if you're a member for at least six months, you get that auto upgrade or sign up now at 25 bucks and instantly join the VIP channel where you can call into the show. We screen everybody. So we only do a few questions per night. I don't want to get expectations too high. We try to get as many people as possible,

but we're really excited for the community building aspect of the Discord. And we did just launched castbrew.com, our coffee company. So things are going really, really well. Thanks to all of you. So also, smash that like button, subscribe to this channel, share the show with your friends. And as I already mentioned, as you already heard,

Charlie Kirk is hanging out tonight. Hello. And Libby Emmons is here. She is. But we'll go in order. You want to introduce yourself? Hi, everybody. I'm Charlie Kirk. I host a radio show and podcast and run Turning Point USA. I'm a big fan of what Tim's doing here. Appreciate it, man.

And Libby Emmons, of course. I'm Libby Emmons. I'm the editor-in-chief at the Postmillennial and Human Events. Glad to be here with you, Charlie. Oh, my gosh. I'm Ian Crossland. Charlie, good to see you, man. I'm a big Ian.

I love you, dude. That's why I came. We haven't seen since AM Fest. Wasn't that great? That was so fun. We had Steve Bannon. I mean, it was awesome. Steve Bannon swore more than any person in the history of Tim Kass in a short period of time.

It was great. Thanks for having us. That was so awesome. It was really sweet. I just want to point out that Charlie's wearing a button-up shirt collared with a tie. Libby's wearing a button-up shirt slightly more relaxed. I'm wearing a button-up shirt completely unbuttoned. And Ian is wearing, I guess, a lavender.

What is that? It's velvet. Purple velvet, baby. Purple velvet. Purple velvet, yeah. Everyone dressed as you would expect. Exactly. Maybe we'll talk about religion today, man.

I want to. Absolutely. It's holy week. It is holy week. What is it? What holy? The passion. Let's get into it.

That little bit, that'll be the tease. We'll do that later. Because we got to talk about Trump getting arrested and all that. We got Serge pressing buns. Yo, let's just roll. All right, here we go. Here's the story from the AP. Trump returns to New York to face historic criminal charges so as i stated in the opening of the show if donald trump made the decision not to surrender i think this country

would get ripped apart new york would be complaining he's criminally wanted we want florida return him as with any criminal florida r DeSantis would be like, I'm not getting involved in this. I'm not going to do it. The feds probably wouldn't move in. But Donald Trump, I believe, cares about this country. And so I think he realizes what would happen if he does defy this this indictment. I also think he sees a tremendous benefit as his polling has skyrocketed, his fundraising has skyrocketed. So he's saying, you know what, I'll give you exactly what you want and you will regret it. So the latest story is President Trump returned to New York from his Florida estate Monday to face historic booking and arraignment on hush money charges. They say that, but it's 34 counts, so it could be more.

They say already months into a third campaign to reclaim the White House, Trump and his advisors seem to relish the attention. Cable networks followed his plane at airports in Florida and New York with video from there. I mean, I view this as a complete backlash, a complete backfiring for Democrats.

He's raised he raised five million bucks, four million bucks in a day, five million over two days. He's his polling is up 30 points, 33 points. Ron DeSantis has completely collapsed against him

in the GOP primary. Trump could not have asked for something better to help his campaign. Except for the fact he might go to jail. Besides that, it's great. Well, here's a question I have for you. Do you think Democrat jurors in New York will acquit Donald Trump? No. So he's going to jail.

Well, no, not necessarily. I mean, first of all, there's a lot of legal uncertainty here. It could be a judge could say this is a misdemeanor, not a felony. It is a New York judge. So that might not happen. There could be a long process of jury selection. 34 counts can get reduced down to five or six. There's also sentencing, right?

So, I mean, God forbid Donald Trump actually gets convicted. But if that ends up happening, you have someone who's never been convicted of a crime before. So you could plea in front of the judge like, hey, this is a should be a misdemeanor that you call a felony. The president in New York is saying that if you lob Molotov cocktails at police cars, you don't get serious jail time. We give $21,000 to BLM rioters. My client should get community service, which I think would be hilarious to have Donald Trump do community service. But as kind of- Everyone would love him. Right? No, I mean, like, go clean up the Brooklyn Bridge. It would be the most watched live stream community service ever. Go clean up East Palestine.

20 years ago, if someone like Donald Trump was charged and convicted with a misdemeanor, and then the sentence was going to be community service, the lawyer would say, perhaps our client can make a large contribution to various charities in the community in lieu of community service. And they would say, yes, being Donald Trump, I don't think they would do that. And your point about BLM, while correct, I don't think applies to people in New York City. No, I'm just saying there's a broader question legally. I get that. Of the whole trend is relaxed on crime. But come on.

There's an equal protection. There's a 14th Amendment claim that can be made. Good luck. No, I agree with you. I'm as cynical as you are, Tim. But at some point, you're going to run into some backstop that could at least slow this down. Maybe. And then also, Tim, before you go to jail, you get an appeal.

And the appeal courts, the appellate courts, are a lot saner than the original criminal courts. So Trump is not allowed to leave the state. Okay, that's a potential. Do you think that's going to happen? So I cannot imagine a circumstance where New York jurors acquit Donald Trump. No, I can't imagine that either. I cannot imagine a circumstance. Well, it takes one.

It just takes one. Yeah, but then it's just a mistrial. And then it's... Well, then, so we're dealing with time, right? And so they'll say, I do not... Right now, Donald Trump has gone to New York voluntarily. He's going to surrender. I'm glad he did.

I don't believe there's a strong probability a judge remands him into custody because of the fear of what would happen if they do. But it would be just they don't do that in New York anymore. But that's what we're talking about. Donald Trump. But outside of that, the political ramifications, I don't think it will happen. However, I do think there's a possibility the judge says, Mr. Trump, you own several high end properties in New York City where you can easily reside.

Do not leave the state for the duration of this trial. He will not be able to campaign. And that is going to say whether or not you campaign for president is not our fault. You are being criminally charged. That would be that's a possibility. Right. And I got to be honest, when it comes to the Molotov cocktail thing, I even envision a possibility where when Trump's lawyer politely argues to the judge, New York City's laws

are very lax in terms of crimes committed. This is not a violent offender. And then if they reference just recently, two young people were firebombing police vehicles and were given an opportunity the judge will say how dare you question the motives of people challenging the white supremacy of this nation donald trump is a white i would not be surprised you're more cynical than i am did you see what eric new york city judge i don't i'm just not as i'm not as like forthright and just thinking the whole legal system will collapse.

Here's why I think you might be wrong, Tim, just to play devil's advocate, is that the room for error here is very limited. Every comma is going to be dissected by the legal community here. People could get disbarred. This is not some sort of fringe case in Ithaca, New York. Everybody involved in this is going to be examined on the appellate level. They could lose their law license. There could be complaints filed against them. You might be right. The whole system might be so corroded and might be so poisoned. However, I think that because of the, I think, I think this is my prediction.

They're going to just blink and just keep their head down and act as if this is a regular crime and not do anything too unusual and say, this is the law and we follow it and this is precedent. Fine. You can go out. No bail. But that means jail. 34 counts? Hold on. Not necessarily. They're misdemeanors, though. Yeah, they're misdemeanors. And there's at least one felony. 34 counts doesn't mean you go to jail, by the way. I mean, it's just you could have one action that you have 34 different points. For example, you could get charged for fraud and you make 34 phone calls and it's all on the U.S. attorney or on the charging documents of the prosecutor to determine how many counts there are. There are U.S. attorney's offices in America that are well known. They're notorious for 99 count indictments just to do it.

So why? So let's look at it this way. Why would they indict Donald Trump in the first place? I have a theory as to why. It's revenge. Revenge for winning the presidency? No, it's more than that. It's revenge for stealing the Kravitz Center from them. Explain that. We know this in the psychological literature.

Trauma is a very, very powerful thing. These people were traumatized and humiliated that night. They thought that was going to be a wedding ceremony. Think of it. They wore their best clothes. They thought they were going to be- The glass ceiling? Yeah, no, literally.

So for people to understand, this is Hillary Clinton's party. Yes. And it's a literal glass ceiling. Correct. Is it Kravitz or Javits? Javits. I get all messed up. Javits.

Thank you for correcting me. Shout out to Javits. For a second, I was like, wait, what are you talking about? Oh, yeah. Yeah, Javits, Kravitz. Kravitz is in Palm Beach. So the Javits. I get all messed up. Javits. Thank you for correcting me. Shout out to Javits. For a second, I was like, wait, what are you talking about? Oh. Yeah, Javits, Kravitz. Kravitz is in Palm Beach. So the Javits Center. And they thought they were going to a wedding and they went to a funeral.

And that does massive psychological damage and trauma. And they swore a blood oath that night. Do not mistake the pettiness in New York political elite. I was rewatching the debates, 2016, Trump-Hillary. And when he's like, she's like, you guys better be glad that someone with Donald Trump's temperament isn't in charge of the law in this country. And he's like, because you'd be in jail. And then he just looked at her and they looked at each other. And I'm like, that's why they're going after him. It's petty. It's pathological. It's personal. And so Donald Trump psychologically scorned these people. And they said, we're going to get you

back. And now they look, when he's arraigned tomorrow, there will be a population of New York that says it took us seven years, but you stole that night from us. And you might have got Amy Coney Barrett. You might have got Kavanaugh. You might have got all these different people on the Supreme Court. But now we got you. But that implies this is the end of it. I don't believe that. No, no, no.

Well, they have additional charges. I mean, the DOJ, as you said, the DOJ is now looking at obstruction charges. The Secret Service is going to testify against them in D.C. No, it's not the end. No, no. But if we're talking about New York politics, we're talking about who is in Alvin Bragg's ear, the New York City elite, primary Hillary Clinton, that is very petty, very personal, very political. This is about revenge. And there's other games to be played here with Jack Smith at the DOJ and the woman in Fulton County because of the phone call Trump made, which was perfectly fine. So then there's another theory that they're doing this

to try to take Trump off the chessboard. I'm not as convinced of that one. This one just seems to be revenge politics. Perhaps, but I just don't see a circumstance where they can set this chain of events in motion and then appease their constituents by backing down. No, I think that's right. And therefore, the room for error is almost nothing. And when you overcharge and create a crime with a, quote, exotic legal theory, as Maggie Haberman said on television, you might let a lot of people down. Again, the legal system in America is designed to allow people that are overcharged that have good legal representation to fight it. Now, you might be as cynical about New York as possible.

I do not have faith in the pattern of behavior we've seen in the New York legal system, but everything will be examined. Every single charging sentence and syllable is going to be hyper-criticized. So there's a potential, I imagine, of this going to an appeals court. Correct. Or even being escalated to U.S. appellate federal courts. Supreme Court, potentially. Supreme Court. I think I think there's a decent percentage chance that actually happens. But in the meantime, I think we're going to see hyper partisan politicized law enforcement and judiciary because too much of what I see is the what I refer to as the freedom faction, which consists of disaffected liberals,

libertarians, conservatives, believing, well, there's rules and the rules say it must be done this way. And then it's like, dude, they firebombed a car and then got let go. No, I'm not even making that argument. I'm just saying that there's a lot of, there's a plenty of room for error

for these people that think that Trump is 100% going to prison, that a lot can go wrong, that they're overcharging, they're creating a crime that doesn't exist, they're upgrading a misdemeanor to a felony. Also, Michael Cohen is going to be your star witness. I mean, the only way I see this going in Trump's favor is if after a conviction, it goes to an appellate court with a Trump-appointed judge, and that gives the Democrats an out of his own appointee, just freedom. They're going to force him to recuse himself, yeah. Well, that's their out.

To avoid going all the way down. Yeah, but it would be a state judge. It wouldn't be a Trump-appointed judge. It wouldn't be a Supreme Court judge. That's what I'm saying. It would have to only be if it goes to the federal level, having some kind of federal court intervene on constitutional grounds. How would it get to a federal level? It would be processed. having some kind of federal court intervene how would it get to a federal level it's state at this point and also the process federal federal prosecutors had already declined to prosecute

this i i i i do not see a circumstance where new york political establishment says we've decided to let trump go i just don't see it i do not see a jury of new yorkers being like you're right i don't disagree with that but i also this this ends up with Trump facing sentencing. Potentially, potentially. I just I'm not I'm not saying it's certain. There's a lot that can go wrong. This is this is in for them. I mean, and go right for those of us that believe in the Constitution. I don't I just justice. But how? I mean, I could go to the list again, right? They're overcharging. But so who's going to intervene and say this is an overcharge? The Democrat DA? The Democrat lawyers?

The Democrat population? Potentially a judge that doesn't want to get disbarred or put in front of disciplinary— Disbarred from who in New York State Court? This is interesting because you're saying nobody is going to follow the rules that exist. No New York Democrat, no New York judge is sitting there thinking, well, the Democratic establishment that controls New York state is going to disbar me.

They're thinking I will be disbarred if I don't put Trump in jail. Well, look, there's, you might be right, but considering how insane these charges are and how damaging they are, this is far from a, we're assuming what the

indictment is. We don't know exactly what's in it yet. It's far from a signed, sealed, and delivered case, right? And here's the thing. Trump's going to try to stretch out the timeline here and he will use it to his advantage. Every one of these local actors is now going to be under a national spotlight and national examination. I'll give you a couple examples. Everybody now working in the DA's office that's going to touch this case, their social media histories will now be examined. They are not going to be comfortable with conservative, freedom-loving media shining a light on them. And if they're, hey, hold on.

Kyle Rittenhouse is largely free today because of free media that was on the street, and we shined a light and we exposed them. But he was also in a, it was a Wisconsin court and Wisconsin is very strongly conservative. No, not so much. That's not totally true. I mean, Wisconsin as a Democrat governor, it's more sane than New York. I'll give you that for sure. What I'm getting at though, I think the New York political community is going to be shocked at how big of a deal this is going to be, how much their failures are going to be put on spotlight. And these people are overcharging. And we know that. Yeah, but that only matters.

But then maybe it's so what? By the rules, man. I don't think they're playing by the rules. So why would they care about overcharging? Because you're going to find a couple people that still have some shame. Shame. Who do they fear? So why would they care about overcharging? Because you're going to find a couple people that still have some shame. Shame? Who do they fear? So you live in New York.

You're a judge who lives in New York City. You know what you fear? You fear Antifa coming to your home with bricks and Molotov cocktails. Let me have a counter argument. If it's that signed, sealed, and delivered, why didn't Cyrus charge Trump on these? Why brag? I don't know. Because it's not, there's not unanimity that this is a good idea

that's why well here's what this is a risk if it was cyrus would have done it he was a way better prosecutor way better respected way more kind of white collar law firm alvin brag is like a street thug that has become a d. Who campaigned on going after Trump. Correct. One. So. And now he's doing it. But the fact that the fact that other DAs passed on this case shows that there's a risk

element here that favors Donald Trump. Or because they didn't, a new guy gets in who's escalating things. Well, that could be the case, but it's not as if Cyrus wanted to get him indicted. He would have loved nothing more. I mean, the guy was a total Trump hater. He would have been the darling of the New York City elite. But maybe this is not so much about risk as it is escalation. Well, that's a separate argument, though, right?

So is it about Trump or is it about trying to distract from the looming currency collapse and banking crisis to incite violence amongst the American right so that then they can clamp down on us and say, see, see, see, these people can't handle freedom. They can't handle liberty. We're going to try to raise the temperature in the room because the American currency is about to collapse. Do you guys think that the National Democratic Party wants this to happen? Or do you think Bragg is doing this despite them potentially not wanting it?

That's a good question, too. I mean, I think they may not want it to happen. I kind of think that, too. They may be saying, look how much money he's making. His polling is skyrocketing. You need to chill out. And this dumb local level guy is being like, I'm winning. You know, so maybe.

But to your point, I want to pull up the story. We have this from PIX11. Once again, New York PD, NYPD cops ordered to patrol in uniform, prepare for mobilization after Trump indictment. So this was just the end of the last week as it was being announced Trump was going to head to New York. But this has been a consistent story since the announcement of the looming indictment. Before it was confirmed, New York police fully mobilized.

Every officer told to be in uniform and get ready. My question is, for what? You know, what's interesting is we had a reporter. Are Trump supporters going to go around or what? We had a reporter out there last week who went out to the courthouse the night of the, like with the indictment.

I think it was Wednesday. She went out on, or maybe it was Thursday. I don't know. Anyway, she went out and she was talking to some of the cops who were stationed outside the courthouse. And they had all said they were talking to her about it. And they said that they were told that this wasn't going to happen for like another month.

And then all of a sudden they were all called up. They all were told that they had to pull doubles and they had to get out there right away. And they were all kind of pissed. They were like, we didn't think this was happening now. That's also a way to agitate people and that you're just agitating the cops and their families. That is agitating. So the way it must be looked at, it's an indictment trying to lead to incitement. This is a direct incitement campaign where they're trying to raise the temperature in

the room to try to spark a backlash that they want to be violent. Who is they? The national security state, the deep state, the regime media, because right wing violence makes the regime more powerful. I'm at the point where I just don't see how it how it matters. No one on the right, like the bifurcation of culture in this country is is complete. None of us here are swayed by any arguments about right-wing violence. We know what Antifa does.

We know that. I've experienced it. Absolutely. And for heaven's sake, conservatives don't even want to go around waving flags around peacefully. They barely want to go outside and protest at all, if anything. Some do, but mostly they don't. That's right. But the narrative among the left is they truly believe it.

So I was at a casino called Maryland Live this past weekend, and I was playing poker with the boys, as I often do and talk about. And the guy to my left said that all of the people on January 6th should be executed. Oh, my goodness. No kidding. Like he got. So someone brought up politics. This is a regular guy. He doesn't know much about politics. He's executed. Executed. Not kidding. He's he's he's like grandmas being like, oh, look at the pictures. Well, there were violent guys. There would be a lot. There'll be a lot of dead federal agents. Sure. But listen, so there is violence.

There's a riot. There's people fighting with cops. I've seen worse anti protest, but I get it to the Capitol on one side of the building. The doors are open, but the cops people are let in. And I'm talking to this guy because someone brought up the economy, which led to someone bringing up Joe Biden. And you're not supposed to talk politics at these tables because of what happens. And then I asked the guy what he thought. And he was a really funny guy. He was really cool. We were getting along, having a great time, just having fun. Some jokes were made,

some fun poker hands. And then when he got into, he got really angry and he was just like, those people, what I saw with my own eyes on Januaryuary 6th they should all be executed every single one of them that's treason against this country and i saw what happened and i said i was like well you hear about what happened on 5 29 and he says no what's that i was like when the when the leftists the far left they they tore the barricades down at the white house that fire to saint john's church firebombed the guard post and then then Trump was forced into an emergency bunker. And he goes, I don't know anything about that. And I'm like, that's it right there.

This guy was not political. He said he hated all politicians. But the messaging that reaches him is insurrectionists are traitors, and I have no idea what Antifa is. Yeah. And imagine a new wave of riots called the Trump riots. That's what they want to see bubble up. But I don't, I just, I just, I just can't see it. I can't.

Well, you were the one, Tim, that you think the country would collapse if they remanded him. But not because people on the right are going to romp around with guns. That's probably unlikely. Very unlikely. The reason I believe that if Donald Trump did not surrender, the country would collapse is because a country only exists based on confidence. It is an abstract idea that tethers people together. You look at other countries where they do not have confidence in the government, you

end up with civil war. You end up with corruption, with bribery, et cetera, and then very little power of the government other than guns. If Donald Trump stayed in Florida and announced to the nation, I do not find these charges to be legitimate. These are political. It's a political persecution and a witch hunt. So I'm going to completely ignore it. What precedent would be set nationally that New York was powerless to stop someone who committed what they say are felonies and Florida refuses to extradite? Yes. So that's two questions. So it's speculation because it's not happening, but it's interesting. First, the precedent would be you file an extradition order.

The second is Florida has to choose whether or not to honor it. And they probably would. You think they would? You think Ron DeSantis? That's the question. I don't think the governor has all that authority. I don't know how all the particulars work. He said that he wasn't going to get involved.

He was very clear on that. Not getting involved and dishonoring an interstate extradition order are two different things. Yeah, Pontius Pilate didn't get involved with Jesus Christ. Can you imagine? Again, this is all speculation, but I think it's helpful. But let's just entertain these two potential outcomes. The extradition order denied

Ron DeSantis saying we're not involved. Which I think would be a pretty ballsy and cool thing to do. I completely agree. But what does that mean for law enforcement as a country? But wait, the other scenario I wanted to mention. Sure. Imagine Ron DeSantis saying, we have no choice. I am hereby ordering state police to Mar-a-Lago to arrest and transport Trump against his will to New York. That would be insane. Exactly. But that's what would have

to happen. Hold on. We have we have a precedent of a couple of things. So the idea of a state or a locality saying that other people's laws don't apply to us is not new. California's doing it right now. California's doing it with the gender stuff. Vermont is trying to do it in South New York. Los Angeles, San Francisco, Portland, Seattle, Chicago, Boston, Philadelphia are all sanctuary cities where they defy federal law and don't work federal agents. So that's not a perfect example, but this idea of blue states and blue cities carving out their kind of own place to play, if you will. So that's one argument. The second thing is what would happen in a standoff between a former president and Florida

state troopers. It'd be impossible to know. The question would be what would be so crazy. The question would be what would be Trump's end goal, which is why Trump is going to New York. Because the reason why Trump is in New York is he sees massive upside to this, because Alvin Bragg is doing what the other DAs decided not to do. He's raising money. He's getting points in the polls.

And Donald Trump is now seeing himself, is now being positioned as the martyr of the American right. Yep. That is so wild. And being the martyr is incredibly popular. And martyrdom is a way to win popularity. And what do you think the American left is thinking about it? Depends who you're talking to. Mark Elias or your average crazy person in Brooklyn?

They're cheering for it. Well, yeah, Mark Elias is probably not cheering for it. That's a separate issue. He's much more strategic. Well, that's the question about if the National Democratic Party is pro this or not. The average Trump derangement syndrome Democrat is saying, finally. Joy Behar on The View is all into it. These people are savages, and they're never going to stop in their bloodthirsty quest for revenge. And that's my point. We have two completely bifurcated worldviews and cultures, one that is calling for injustice and one that is saying it's good that Trump turned himself into injustice.

It makes no sense. Well, no, no. I'm not saying—I see it both ways. So define the injustice. You have to have the ends in mind, right? Your final and formal cause is developed. And I don't think that would have been necessarily prudent for Trump to say, you got to go send the troopers after me.

It would have felt very like George Wallace-y, you know, 1960s or 70s. Now, having Florida stand up and have the entire Florida state troopers stand down against an extradition order, that would have been interesting. But what I think does need to happen, and the only mature response that I've called for for quite some time, is Republican DAs and Republican AGs need to start indicting and investigating members of the Democrat crime family. One that we can all agree on is fraudulent, is the BLM criminal enterprise that materially benefited with $100 million in the summer of 2020, and they've been untouched.

Wasn't ActBlue being used to facilitate donations to some of these organizations? Correct. Yeah, and ActBlue is a harder case to make, but we can say just with Black Lives Matter global network, with Patrisse Cullors, we now know there was material charitable fraud under any sort of reading. She was buying all those houses and stuff. $6 million mansion in Malibu for a content creator's thing. And the money went missing, I guess. And the money went missing. Let me pull up these sources.

Oh yeah, just to make sure. Fact check me on all of it, right? There was a bunch of that. She has a multiple real estate empire, right? She also paid her was boyfriend, now husband for security services for a healthy sum. You could fact check me on that. It was quite a lot.

Yeah, NBC News is not what i would use as your no but you know it's just buried that's why it's just gonna be taking more time to find the numbers blm leaders condemn allegations of mismanaged funds that's that's a word salad headline they're condemning their own mismanagement but it was even reported in it was even reported here's la times black lives matter leader accused of stealing $10 million from organization. Okay, there we go. Sure. That right there. So let's just pause there. And that's actually a separate one. That's not BLM Global Network.

Right. But my guess is that somebody in a red state don't. What's his name again? Is this that the Global Network Foundation? Shalamiya Bowers. Sure. Why is there not widespread investigations and indictments into the BLM charitable fraud? Now, that matters because if we want to have the promise of equal justice and the 14th Amendment,

it's like, okay, you go after Donald Trump, who has become a martyr of the conservative, right? There you go. Washington Examiner is a great site. BLM millions unaccounted for after leaders quietly jumped ship. I deal in the 501c3 world. Every dollar is audited. Every dollar, we have an audit committee. We have a CFO. I can't even sign checks. It takes two people in the organization, right? We do 990s. We deal with the IRS. Very, very high standard of financial accountability at Turning Point USA. This here is outright charitable fraud. Now, why does this matter? Because the counterargument

is, well, Charlie, that's just some charity. No, no, no, no. BLM was the kind of vehicle of choice for the activists left. So you go get Donald Trump in New York, then fine. We're going to go take BLM and put them on trial and go through the charitable fraud of how they raised $100 million and got $83 billion in pledges from corporate America. And where did the money go? They got so much money. That would be a prudent act of deterrence that would actually, I think, open up the legal conversation. And that's just one example

of 100 that I see. A few years ago, there were people telling me that what's happening today would never happen because the government would not allow it, that the government was secure, that the the deep state apparatus, whatever you want to call it, does not allow these kinds of things because it's destabilizing. What sort of things? Like Trump being arrested, like J6, like BLM Summer of Love. Who says that? This was in 2018.

Were you reading like cue boards or something? No. Wait, what? These were mainstream conservatives. I've never heard that, but sure. You've never heard people say that the country can't collapse? No, I'm saying that Trump can't be indicted. Like I don't, I haven't heard that, but sure. You've never heard people say that the country can't collapse? No, I'm saying that Trump can't be indicted. Like, I don't, I haven't heard that.

Yeah, so in 2018, the idea that Donald Trump would actually be impeached, they were like, they won't allow something like that to happen. Okay, well, impeachment is different than indictment, but sure, continue. Yeah. Well, but indictment wasn't even on the table. There wasn't even a criminal charges that were... Okay, I think I misunderstood what you were saying. In 2018, when I was talking about how we are heading towards a collapse or civil war, and again, I stress, I didn't make the idea. A Princeton professor was talking about the Cold

Civil War. Numerous outlets were talking about it. I see what you're saying. People were saying that can never happen. The government is an entity in and of itself, the deep state. It will not lose control in that matter. It doesn't care about the left, doesn't care about the right. Got it. And now what are we seeing? As the years go on, the federal government is being bifurcated into mostly an establishment left and more new. There's no right.

There's no opposition. There's no opposition. There is just the hyper-partisan, hyper-polarization of federal government. And so what we end up seeing today is Donald Trump just flew to New York to surrender on bogus criminal charges. There will be no opposition to that. This will get worse as the years go on. There is no reason to believe that these people in power are going to decide to pull things back.

They don't have to. Why would they? What is the mechanism by which they will say, hey, let's slow down here? So the only way they stop is if we stop them. And so I agree. If the current trajectory continues, everything you just said will happen.

I'm a big believer in free will and agency and the ability to do something. So I'm going to use my platform to call on what the only thing I think that could stop it, which is deterrence, which is to get DAs and AGs to indict Democrat crime member families. If we don't do that, everything you're saying is true. But so my issue there is this country is so bifurcated. What you're describing would just be the exact same thing to them as it is to us.

Of course it is. It's equal and opposite reaction. You punch us, we punch you. And then it escalates to further destabilization. So the question is this. What escalation is better than being pummeled? Well, I... Depends on how you escalate.

If you're escalating it to end the problem, like to quell the violence. My heart is trying to calm down the temperature. My heart is saying, we're not going to stop until you stop. And the issue is true. If you have a friend that smacks you a lot and you're like, if you do that again, I'm going to smack you back.

But they do it again and you smack it back. They stop. That's deterrence. But this is not. No, I completely disagree with that. It's fair warning. You're like, what you're doing is wrong. I'm with Ian.

There's no friends. I completely disagree. There's numerous examples throughout history where the pushback just led to an escalation until war broke out and people all killed each other. We had a civil war in this country. They didn't just say, whoa, this violence has grown too much. Guys, let's agree to stuff. That's a good counter argument. No, a counter argument is good. And Sherman decided to march to the sea. Rather savagely. And savage is an understatement. Yeah, it is. He said, I got an idea. I'm so sick sick of these people i'm going to burn their cities to the ground kill children and destroy farmland all the way down so they

starve and die just watch it was it was the advent of scorched earth warfare so then no no no not the advent it was just first time the united states did it right there you go it was it was when i believe they coined scorched scorched earth so let me just frame it, though, because I hate to reduce things to binaries, but the American right has a choice. Option one, keep doing what we are doing, which is to send strongly worded press releases and op-eds and hope things get better. Choice two. Indict. Indict, use political power and hope it gets better. They're both bad options.

I agree. I completely agree. I like the whole forgiveness arc for Donald. Like, if you're really pummeled and beaten down by society so hard and you still stand up and forgive people for it, that's a message that will resonate for thousands of years. I think that's powerful. Not going to happen. It could.

I think they're lying in the polls, too. They're trying to make the argument that they want Trump to be the nominee so they can beat him in 2024. But they didn't beat him last time. Well, I mean, they did beat him last time. They beat him last time,

but they don't have anything right now. There's no one. Biden can't do it. Biden didn't campaign. He hid in his basement. There was a lockdown where mail-in ballots

were sent to everyone's home. I totally agree. They don't have any of these tools. So unless H5N1 hits and then they do another lockdown. Like a swine flu 2.0 or something. Biden is done. Do you remember the town halls with people in their cars?

Right, right. Yes. That was so stupid. The Jeeps in front of the stage. Yes. Biden is a proven failure. The country is in shambles. That guy I mentioned who talked about executing J6ers also said it's Biden's fault the economy

is bad. So my point is just they can't try this game twice. And I do believe they're going to try. They're putting up polls where it's like if an election was held today, Biden would win. DeSantis would beat Trump. But Biden, they're saying that DeSantis would beat Biden, and Trump would lose to Biden, and they're trying to make the case that we should support DeSantis for the primary. I think they are lying once again in the polls.

So can I validate what you're saying? Yeah. Can you go to a website? It's number 270TOWin.com. This is not- 270TOWin. Yeah. Every 10 years, we do a census as mandated by the constitution

most people don't know this but the map has slightly changed in trump and the republican favor for the first time for 2024 so the maps are good for three cycles and then you redo them good for three cycles actually two cycles redo them well what do you mean right right here it's saying let me show you okay so let's make let's let's saying... Let me show you. Okay. So let's assume Texas goes red. Is that fair enough to say? Oh, easily. And Florida. Yep.

Okay. Let's assume Pennsylvania goes blue, please. And then New Hampshire goes blue. And then all of Maine goes blue. Really? Yeah. Let me show you. Michigan goes blue.

I know what I'm doing here. And Minnesota goes blue. And Minnesota goes blue. And then Nevada goes blue. And Nevada goes blue. Iowa goes red. Iowa goes blue. And Ohio goes red. And Ohio goes blue. And then Nevada goes blue. And Nevada goes blue. Iowa goes red. Iowa goes blue. And Ohio goes red.

And Ohio goes red. And North Carolina goes red. And that's, okay. So what you have right here is why they fear Trump. All Trump has to do is win Arizona, Georgia, and Wisconsin, and he's the president of the United States. Three states he won in 2016. Three states that received Zuckerberg money.

Three states that have elected statewide Republicans. and three states that have more, well, two states that have more Republicans registered than Democrats in Georgia and Arizona, and one state that's 50-50. This is why the Democrats are indicting Trump. The map has changed. This was not the map in 20s, what I'm telling you. It's a different map. Are we going to say, so Nebraska had that one district. I turned it red. Well, no, even if you don't, it goes 271.

Right. It's 271 without it. With it, it's 272. Yeah. And so 270 to win is all you need. So the Democrats know this. So therefore, Donald Trump can't, not only can he win the presidency, this map heavily favors the Republican to win the presidency. This is interesting. So the only real consideration, I think,

I don't even know if Arizona is necessarily, I'm not as worried about Arizona. I live in Arizona. Right. It's a challenge. You think so? Okay. It's a 50-50 state. Sinema is going to be a formidable Senate candidate if she runs as an independent. But that's good for Republicans. It's good. I think Arizona, with the proper get-out-the-vote ballot-chasing operation, which we can talk about, is going to be fine. My philosophy, my hypothesis is the entire United States election comes down to three states, comes down to seven counties, and this is why they fear Trump so much. This is not a national election. Mind you, Pennsylvania is blue. You're right. You're right. In 2016, Trump won with, I think, 88,000 votes across three states. But he needed a Michigan or a Pennsylvania in addition to a Wisconsin because the census map

favored the Democrats. Because of the Sunbelt surge, because Florida has gained population so significantly. It's a red state. Because Texas has, and New York and California and Illinois have lost population. The stars have aligned where the Republican is now in a much easier spot to win the White House than ever before. You better believe Mark Elias knows this. That's why Elias and the National Democrats are not thrilled about this indictment. They're just saying, what are you doing to win those three states? What do you want to do to win those three states? And this is helping him there. Oh, yeah. His polls have gone up. Oh, not only that, but upper middle class white suburban voters are not thrilled about the idea of over-prosecution because they kind of get what that means. That resonates. That's a Democrat-based thing.

Let me tell you, the funny thing is this guy I'm talking to who said execute the J6ers, which is insane to me, also said this country over-prosecutes. Well, so there you go. And this is an interesting thing. He sounds like a walking contradiction, aka a swing voter. Absolutely. He was a PA swing voter. Well, and so you look at it because people say, how do we win Michigan? How do we win Nevada? How do we win Pennsylvania? You don't need to. And so you look at the map, you then focus

very precisely. There's not just a path. There is a great probability Trump becomes president. So let me pull up this story. We got this from Newsweek. Donald Trump's Secret Service agents set to testify against him report. A number of Secret Service agents are set to testify as part of a federal investigation into Trump's handling of classified documents. Brett Baier said on Tuesday. The grand jury appearances are related to special counsel Jack Smith probe into the handling of classified documents at Mar-a-Lago. So yes, for those that are just tuning in or missed the last segment, what Charlie is saying is that actually, what is it? You said Georgia, Arizona, Wisconsin, that's it. Arizona, Wisconsin, Georgia. With the four

givens, which is Iowa, Ohio, North Carolina, Florida, which I feel comfortable all will be in the Republican category. It's looking very good for Donald Trump to win in 2024. Not only do we have the indictment in New York, but it looks like federally they're gearing up for some kind of indictment as well. And that one could be trickier for ballot access. The New York one will not prohibit from actually becoming a candidate. Being a convicted federal felon is an open question. Really? Yes.

But I thought that wasn't the case. I thought the talking point was even if he gets charged federally. It depends on what you're tried with. If you're tried with insurrection. Well, they can't try him with insurrection. But the classified documents bar you from running for office. Correct. Yes. Then how could Joe Biden run again? Well, because they won't charge him.

Yeah. They've already defended what he did and criticized what Trump did. It's ridiculous. But the insurrection one is interesting. I don't think they're going to charge. It's such a ridiculous claim. But just for a thought experiment, because that's what we're doing, that's what they try to get Marjorie Taylor Greene on in Georgia. And Madison Cawthorn? Correct. Because a lot of these Southern states actually have criminal code provisions. You can't be on the ballot if you were charged with insurrection. It's a Civil War era law. And that's the Civil War thing, yeah. Exactly. That's being misapplied. Or convicted of it, I believe.

Yeah, that's right. Convicted, not charged with. You're correct. So what are the chances they try and charge Trump with the most minor of minor J6-related quote-unquote insurrections, like how they're getting people on trespassing, calling them insurrectionists?

What happens if they say misdemeanor, what do they call it, like menacing? What if they say menacing in relation to January 6th? It's unclear legally, but here's the greater concern. Remember that strange argument we had of whether or not California can tell you you have to be on the ballot based on your tax returns? Yeah. Democrat primary states are going to use these charges as a way for ballot access in these states that Trump would otherwise do very well in, like New York. What do you mean? How so? Don't be surprised if New York, you're going to find out if the Democrat Party wants Trump or does not want Trump to be the nominee very soon. And I think they do not want him to be because he brings out a different voter no one else can bring out.

If the New York State Assembly gathers and they say, if you are charged with a felony, you're not allowed to be on a primary ballot in the state of New York. Now, what would that mean? Now, they might lose. It might be a silly argument. If they're successful, well, Trump would then not be able to even compete for the primary delegates for the Republican nomination in the state of New York. Interesting. Does that just mean don't even try? It means that if they did that, then whoever the second place person would be would just be on the ballot, right? DeSantis? Yeah, or whomever. He still hasn't announced. He hasn't announced, but he's probably going to run. But we're in speculation world here.

And I think it's somewhat helpful because we're now building out kind of a universe of all the different dimensions of how they're attacking Trump. Contingencies. I actually think this is really healthy. It's kind of how a war room talks in the best possible way.

But I'm going to just say it again. Arizona, Georgia, Wisconsin, it's less about messaging. It's less about the person. It's about the machinery, not the Dominion machines, but ballot chasing. Are you have early voting? Look at John Fetterman. John Fetterman is a United States Senator, not because of his charisma. Yeah, I mean, and I say he's coming back to work April 17th. Yeah, the full force of John Fetterman. How could anyone watching any of this not be like WTF mate? Yeah, I think it is that. In what world is a Democrat like, I'm totally fine with whatever it is with John Fetterman?

And yeah, the level of cognitive dissonance with John Fetterman is insane. He's a walking, brain-dead Frankenstein who can't understand anything that is said to him. Libby, have a little empathy for the guy. Look, I feel bad for him. I am saddened by his story. It was his dream. He wanted to make it to the Senate. He had a stroke.

I wouldn't wish that on anybody. What we need to do right now is in our heart of hearts, have empathy for this man. And just let him vaguely represent the people of Pennsylvania. And take him out of this stressful, stressful position and give him comfort. I would, I believe that Republicans in this country should pledge right now $1 million towards the retirement of John Fetterman to relax peacefully and carry out his medical treatment at home and then have somebody else be the senator. Granted, I know the reality there is that it's his wife, and so we don't really want that either. Giselle. She seems to really want to be the senator. She seemed to want that after he had that stroke and everything.

My point is simply, in all seriousness, I do feel bad for the guy because he really wanted to be a senator and then he had a stroke. And it's got to be like, that's the worst thing in the world, man. I mean, that's a bummer. But I don't, it's insane that they would put him in office. Who voted for him? Well, what was really insane, too, was when it turned out that he couldn't understand anything that was said to him and that everything needed to be on a on a computer screen translated so that he could read it

and when we mentioned all of us mentioned that this was perhaps going to make being in senate remarkably difficult everyone accused us of uh ableism and saying that his disability you know was some issue ableism works if it's like someone was born paraplegic or something and we want a wheelchair ramp to help them right not when like a senator who has to debate make decisions is having his brain is a problem like this isn't stephen hawking over here you know what i mean yep but there are people who are like i would prefer that and so that's why i call it cynical or whatever i just i do not see a mending of the bifurcated culture in this country i think it's got to start somewhere at the top and i last night i was thinking like if trump and biden could get together and just be

like you know what we're americans first high five a little bit that's all it doesn't seem like much for them but like the world will be like, oh, America is the greatest. I think that's naive. I think that would never happen. Well, you can think that. But I do think that you're right, that the culture is remarkably divided.

We don't watch the same TV shows. There's no common culture that we have. Our religions, our collective religions are in decline. There's nothing that unites us i mean when i was a kid we'd all watch the same tv shows on thursday night i could even probably give you the lineup you know what i mean it was like the cosby show and and that's why i don't think it comes from the top it comes from the bottom i do not believe what's causing the divide in this country is leadership i believe it is algorithms on social media that manipulated young people creating. So as I've

explained numerous times, 10-year-olds get on Facebook in 2008 or whatever and are immediately shuffled into two different realities. They are now growing up. There was never a point where someone just like decided, you know what? I am a conservative. I am a liberal. What was happening was young kids were being fed two different versions of reality by facebook now they're a voting age there is no bringing those people together because they live in different realities they don't even understand reality in the same way exactly or the same language they don't have the same goals for a world view or anything like that right so how do you if someone's entire being their brain their body was built on this country is nothing but white supremacy and someone

else is built on america is a great freedom fighting nation civil rights etc you are not going to reverse 18 years of mental development yeah not overnight but but not even in a few years well maybe 10 years decline in critical thinking in education too that's an issue as well like i'm thinking the long game. If there's a lot of people that will mindlessly follow Donald Trump and Joe Biden and do what they say, which for better or worse, that's how people are built sometimes.

And if they see them being kind to each other and promoting like forgiveness, they'll just mindlessly do it. And that's like the beginning. And then their kids will actually realize why it's valuable. And in 20 years, Donald Trump Jr. will be president or something like that.

Like, it doesn't have to be all Donald Trump Sr. today, right now, or nothing. Like, it's, we're kind of creating the environment. I never saw a presidential campaign. I've never seen, like, candidates go at each other until 2016. I've never seen them hate each other until 2016. It was very out of character for the United States. You know, I think you're onto something with that, too, because prior to that, it did seem like Republicans and Democrats at least had the same goals for the country.

You're right. Like blowing up kids overseas, funding the military-industrial complex. Exactly. They had the same goals. I'm with Tim on this. I'm not saying they had good goals, but they at least had the same goals. Yeah, it was the Uniparty. Yeah. So two thoughts on this, because we're having a conversation of how to heal the land.

That's kind of the summary of what we just talked about here. The first is I don't think Donald Trump caused the division. He revealed it. He revealed 50 years of neoliberalism, of a fake currency, and endless global wars, and invading the world and inviting the world and re-domiciling American industry overseas. He just exposed it and he did it in a very blunt, sometimes clumsy, but awfully direct way who gave the American population a prognosis that was honest. Like, you guys got tumors everywhere and I'm going to remove them.

And then all of a sudden he's the problem for even mentioning that we have these tumors. And yeah, we are really divided. I think we've been divided for quite some time. And I think there's a couple of reasons for that. There's an interesting theory that we can explore, which is can a large republic sustain itself? Meaning, is this just inevitable when you have 330 million people and almost 4,000 miles of landmass, 3,000 miles of landmass? Is it just unsustainable? The founders were concerned about this. I always hate that question because I love this country and I love all of our-

You love the size. I love the whole thing. You're like Jefferson. You want to go from ocean to ocean, sea to shining sea, right? I do. And yet, Jefferson being a completely walking contradiction was the one that wrote in the anti-federalist papers, he was afraid that large Republican governments can't work. And then he bought Louisiana.

And then he bought, so again, we're all walking contradictions in some sense, which should give you comfort that even our heroes were contradictions in some ways. But how do we heal a land? This is really the question of the statesman. It's a question of someone that is able to identify the problem cogently and then be able to come up with some form of a prudent and healthy and realistic solution. And so Abraham Lincoln called it the crisis of the house divided, right? That's similar to what we're living through now, but I actually think we're even more divided in some

ways than we even were leading into the American Civil War. At least there was a Christian country back then. Now we have different metaphysics and we have all sorts of different types of views. But we have some things working in our favor, which is the great hope is that we can de-escalate the national politics and go back into hyper local community and just say, I don't like the person in Portland. I don't like the person in Wichita, but I'm not going to try to imperialize their life. Until we get to that, the project is going to fall apart. Absolutely. I was thinking about the word democracy and how it comes from demos, which means the people. And it's basically-

I hate the word democracy. Yeah. It allows the mob to make decisions for the whole. I'm not a fan of democracy it's it's pretty brute it's pretty like kind of rudimentary and if we could evolve into like a technocratic republic where we have technology like apps where we can govern ourselves locally i can hear me out this look and he's like hear me out because we can always go back if the power goes out we're still democratic republic but we can upgrade and govern locally because what you just mentioned is local governance if we could somehow send our tax dollars around locally through a local app that's free software,

you can watch the code. Nothing's tracking it. And if the power goes out, you can still send your representative to the central location to govern the whole from there because that's the least worst of a bad government system. But I think we need to evolve our republic. What I think you're hitting is interesting in the sense that there are different forms of government that might be different for different people. If you leave the federal government out of this equation, people can then have a structure that might better fit their values. The Amish are going to be a lot different than the secular nihilists in Brooklyn, where the American Republic has gone wrong is we have an imperialist government that is invading the communities and invading the lives with an ever

urgent pattern of behavior that is telling people what to do. And that is really the incitement. And then the one symbol of that, Donald Trump, is being martyred. We also have a problem where- I got to respond to what you were just saying, because while I do agree, we shouldn't just assume the founding fathers hit the nail on the head perfectly in every aspect. I think it was the best ever, but yes. I think it was the best even now,

the structure and form of it- Without a doubt. The best. And we could talk about why, I'd love to, but yes. And I'll simplify it. You've got a council of elders, Supreme Court. You've got a group gathering, a communal gathering of Congress.

And then you have the executive, the monarch, all of these different forms of government they had seen. They were like, let's do all of them and have them challenge each other and create this network style system.

It was brilliant. But what I'm saying is as time changes and technology changes, there's probably ways to improve. However, my challenge to you, Ian, on the idea of technocracy is, or technocratic government, whatever you want to call it, we look at how we created these algorithms on YouTube with

the intent of creating more Game of Thrones. YouTube said, 10-minute long content, high watch time, that's what we want. Instead of getting Game of Thrones, what we got were weird videos of Elsa being chased by the Joker and Spider-Man with no English because more people could watch it if there was no language because it crossed language barriers. It had multiple keyword

generating figures in it. If we go the technocratic route, the only actual outcome is either a human being is in control of the system that we think is technocratic or we create a mechanism by which the technology aids us and then it runs haywire because it's impossible to predict. You could put in stopdaps like you need your face, your social security number to use the app. It's public data so you can see who's posting what. And then someone would have to have supreme control over that system to correct errors

and maintain the system. It would be open source. So the whole community would be policing the software. That seems like Wikipedia, like a total disaster. And right. What will happen is you will then get 51% attack or whatever. It's going to be a network system where Democrats are going to register a bunch of people. They're going to say, hey, download this app on your phone, which will then make, they're

going to say, this is called SwingVote. And if everyone signs up, we can control the system. I'm thinking more of something like Public Square, where you can, it's just resource distribution. I love Public Square. Yeah. So like a government app that's like open source free software that is resource distribution for local governments.

And then someone gets in government and says, that Ian Crossland guy, take him off the app. No, no, no. It would be, we would have our own local app. So like every city would have its own version or every locality could have its own version. And they could interoperate. You have a great heart. This is never going to happen. But I love the heart that you have for trying to build this.

It's just the problem is the power of having an app that control all will be corrupted by a person. It's all going to get corrupt. Like the voting database has been corrupted. No, I agree. Yeah. It's just when you have power, it will corrupt absolutely as Lord Acton would say. So we're looking for something that is the least corrupted of a corruptible system. Like nothing's incorruptible.

Right. But if you think the technology will smooth out the inherent corruption in men, I don't think so. It does because writing is a form of technology. And before it, it was just barbarism. And now we have an organization and structure. Do people still lie with their pen? True.

Yeah, exactly. I imagine it was much worse before 3000 BC violence. I think there was just a lot. I mean, we keep having less and less violence. You know, videos, it helps you see yourself so you can judge your own heart. Video? Video. Being able to it helps you see yourself so you can judge your own heart. Video? Video.

Being able to watch yourself and see yourself speak, you immediately know what you're doing wrong. I hate watching myself. That's the why, because you're seeing the faults. I don't think that's why. I would challenge Ian, because I think there's a deeper philosophical point that I think Tim was hovering over. The reason why the Constitution and the Declaration are just as applicable today is because it's built on eternal truths, things that are always true. What is a human being? What is our purpose here generally? Are we naturally good? Are we naturally bad? I don't think a piece of technology, in fact, I think technology amplifies the worst

aspects of human behavior. I think it certainly is right now. Here's a couple of problems that I think that piece of tech we were just talking about won't solve, is that our republic has become out of control in that there's 700 representatives, 700 people, 600 people in Congress. 535. 350 million. So there's like 700,000 people are trying to be represented by one guy. Totally.

You can barely, you represent yourself, essentially. That's interesting. At first, I was like, get rid of the House of Representatives. And people were like, no, that's too extreme. Mike Gravel, who is a senator from Alaska, unfortunately has passed because the man was amazing and I love him, created this idea of national initiative, creating a fourth branch of government where we would set up a system where the American people can pass laws into Congress as well as the republic. That's a terrible idea. That's a terrible idea, too. Well, it would be like 50 representatives, one from each state,

and they could come together whenever it can be. We don't need more laws. That's why. I'm not a more law guy. But having the monopoly of law in the hands of 600 people is— But let me tell you how the founders thought it would be. Until the 17th Amendment, the state legislatures used to pick the senators. So that used to be your through line.

17th Amendment. Yeah, we went people, state reps, senator. Now you say, well, the people pick the senators. But now we know they're just pseudo celebrities and they raise a bunch of money. And these elections have become just corrupt contests. But the founders' design, which I would love to repeal the 17th Amendment. I think that'd be amazing. Agreed. So the senators

are appointed? The senators would be appointed by the state. That's how it worked until Woodrow Wilson, 1917, I think it was passed. And it was way better because then all of a sudden, you're right. One senator for 800, let's say, one senator for 7 million people? No, no, no. You went to your state rep

to complain about your senator because they could recall the senator at a moment's notice. That was the original design. And you know your state senator because there's many more of them and they're at the local level. Precisely. And these senators at any time could be called for hearings or called for recall by the state legislature. You're not representing West Virginia. What are you doing? You know, that actually does make a lot of sense because we don't have a way to hold our senators accountable other than to just not vote for them. They can't be recalled. So get this.

If we still had the 17th Amendment, Republicans would have 58 seats in the U.S. If we didn't have the 17th Amendment. That's what I mean. If we got rid of 17th Amendment. I want to say something as to what Ian was bringing up with 775,000 people per representative. So there's something I refer to as the scaling problem

that people who are fans of the show have heard me say a billion times, but for the sake of those who don't, please bear with me. If 100 celebrities were gifted a brand new iPhone Xtreme and 1% of those phones were defective, that's one celebrity going on Instagram saying, my phone's broken.

Well, no one cares. They're going to be like, that sucks for you, bro. Like your phone broke. That happens. A phone broke? Let's say they give up 100 million phones with a 1% margin of error. Now you have 1 million people posting on social media about how their phone broke and everyone's going, dude, what happened? All these phones are broken. Same margin of failure. Considering that, now consider politics. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez represents 775,000 people. About 24 or 20 percent of her district are conservative. These people get zero representation, but 200 and some odd thousand people in that district can take over whatever they wanted. The amount of police that are in New York would not be enough, no matter what, if every single conservative individual said,

no taxation without representation. We are not getting representation by Ocasio-Cortez. She rejects our values, so we reject her. Now you all of a sudden have 200,000 people marching through the streets of New York, and the police have no way to control that. Same percentage of dissent, but hundreds of thousands of people not getting any representation is cause for chaos and concern. Big time. So I'd like the idea of people representing themselves directly. I don't like

direct democracy because the mob is dangerous. The mob is very dangerous. The collective is interesting. The collective can move together pretty well if they have good organizations. That's interesting. I don't agree with that. You think collectives are not good? I think that collectives could be, as Madison wrote in, I think, the 51st or 54th Federalist, prone to madness.

I think that's about right. The couple of times that I was involved in arts collectives, I wanted to tear my hair out and run screaming from the building, which eventually I did run screaming from the building. He wrote specifically about the urban areas of America at the time, which have only gone worse. He said they have a proclivity to the insane and a posture to the—the word is beautifully poetically put, but he said that the mobs will descend into madness quickly. And I think that's true. I mean, for example, there's a great book by Douglas Murray called

The Madness of Crowds. I believe that's the name of the title, right? I think so, yeah. Madness of Crowds. You could fact check me on that. Because the collective can make bad decisions very quickly. I agree that mobs and crowds, crowds become mobs, mobs are dangerous. But collective communication and open source database like GitHub, that's a collective movement. I see. So you're talking more about a small D democratized system where people can input data and allow the information to win. Look at Wikipedia. Good luck. Ideally, it's just local. Ideally, you're right. But look at Wikipedia.

It bends towards tyranny. It sure does. I don't know about Wikipedia. It's not open source. It's like, I'm pretty sure Wikipedia is open source. I don't think it is. Wikipedia is open source. The promise of Wikipedia was that anyone could become an editor and the internet will edit itself.

The reality of Wikipedia is that only people in the club become editors and the people in charge can remove or edit anything they want. You read Tim Pool's Wikipedia, which I would not do, or mine. Mine's a horror show. Mine's actually not that bad. Okay. Mine's a horror show.

It's like a drive-by shooter. Everyone's going to go look at it. And it's terrible. Kelly J. Keens, she's a women's rights campaigner in the UK. Hers basically says that she's a Nazi. Yes, that's right. And New Zealand politicians believed that and advocated for protesters to go out and protest

her Let Women Speak event, and they nearly, you know, they went nuts. You guys are right. Wikipedia is open source. One of the funniest things ever was when I had a journalist ask me questions, and they were some, they wanted to do an interview with me, and I said, you know, please have your journalists do their homework

on me before coming. And when they came, they asked a bunch of fake questions based on nonsense from Wikipedia. Like, when did you invent the Zeppelins? Which is the fake, like, yeah, because the meme is for like five, six years, Wikipedia claimed that I built a Zeppelin. And I was like, I did not. Like the thing in the sky? I did not do this thing.

Yeah, like it. They claimed that I built a Zeppelin drone modification for aerial broadcasting, which I never did. And then journalists would ask me about it because it was on Wikipedia and it was made up. It was insane. And you couldn't get it removed. I once went in there and said, guys, I am Tim Pool.

I never did this. They said, you are not a reliable source. You're not a reliable source for whether or not you invented a Zeppelin? You are not allowed to be a source for yourself because bias. So Wikipedia, of course course is completely broken in that concept now to be fair like a year ago we did build a zeppelin to retroactively make it true and then they wouldn't put it back so there's a difference between open open areas where you can go do stuff on and open source software code so like you might have an open place where people

can go and be, but you're patrolling it and policing it in a way that people don't like. But I think that like, so like that would be Wikipedia, for instance, is a place where people they read it. Sure. Yeah. So but if the code is available, so that I could spin up my own Wikipedia tomorrow, and I have my local Wikipedia, and it's like, yo, this is what we believe in this area, man. I mean, this is just how we see the world. That I, is a lot better than trying to just focus all the data into one big open platform. And we could maybe do the same with government, because I feel right now Congress is Wikipedia.

They're deciding what is getting passed into the Senate. They're deciding what's getting said no to. And it's too much control of information. That's an interesting question. We all agree Congress is broken. The question can be why. And I think there's multiple answers. The 17th Amendment, I think, solves the Senate question. There's other answers, I think, that are important. I think campaign finance absolutely plays a role. And I say that as a conservative. I think it's corroded American politics. The nationalization of politics is a big problem for us.

And the example I like to give is when you'll see a local, someone running for Congress at the federal level say, I'm going to clean this town up. Send me to D.C. and say, wait, wait, wait, wait. You got nothing to do either. Yeah, when we send you to D.C., you're going to talk about war and stuff and federal budgets representing our district. You're not going to clean this town up you have nothing to do the only way to clean up the town is for them to get a bunch of money and for them to get a bunch

of money no but like let's say you have a congressman going to something yeah you have to like you have to pack a bill with pork for your district that's how you yeah i guess that's what they do that's what you do what is it about the national initiative that you guys were turned off or at first were you not interested in? Are you familiar? I brought it up earlier Mike Revell's idea to create a fourth branch of government Well, first of all, we already have a fourth branch of government. That's the bureaucracies and they're unchecked unelected and they do great damage So this would be a fifth branch. The fourth branch is the DOJ IRS EPA Permanent government someone told me the corporate media was the fourth branch earlier. So maybe we have six branches. Seven, yeah.

The media is what, the fourth estate? Supposed to be keeping a check on power. The fourth branch to give, quote unquote, the power to the people would only be duplicative of what the legislative branch and the executive, which are directly supposed to be direct sovereign to the people. So instead of creating a fourth branch of government where you could pass laws, why don't we restore the promise of smaller Republican government, which is say the federal government should not be doing this,

and you send it back to the states. One of the reasons why Congress is so broken is that they meet too often. Neoliberalism has empowered Washington, D.C. beyond our wildest imagination. And the original project, and this is why I think we're at in 2023, states created the federal government. The federal government did not create the states. And we're in a place now where everybody thinks the federal government created the states, and that is not true.

People also think the federal government gave us our rights, which is also not true. Correct. And so I don't want to get too far into the example because I haven't thoroughly read it or heard the arguments or counterpoints, but my initial reaction is that it's a bad idea. Restoring states' rights and putting power back to localities, I think, can de-escalate our tension, can de-radicalize our politics, can get us back to live and let live and leave me alone and can hopefully restore liberty. I see no other path to salvation.

I somewhat agree. I somewhat disagree. The challenge, I suppose, is what we saw with the Civil War when you had the attempted expansion of slavery and you ended up with bleeding Kansas. So let's try and apply states divisions to a modern era. If we have a people say people tell me all the time, federalism is the answer. A weaker federal government, more power to the states. And it's like, okay, then someone from Texas will be in a relationship with a woman who will get pregnant. She will get mad eight months in and say, I'm going to flee to Colorado to terminate the life

of this baby. The guy in Texas is going to be like, that's illegal under Texas law. But, and she'll say, then I'll go to Colorado and you can't stop me. Now you're going to have a question of what do either state do? Colorado will say the woman can terminate a baby at eight and a half months, and Texas will be like, that's kidnapping and murder. Is Texas going to send troops into Colorado to save the life of this man's son because this woman wants an abortion? The Democrats will view that as insane if the woman can get an abortion if she wants, no matter what age the baby is. But we're already there. We're already at that. Well, exactly. That crisis is looming right now.

That's what I'm saying. So the federal government being stronger and preventing extra, like, there's no, what I'm trying to say is I don't see a solution. Let's imagine a strong federal government takes the woman from Colorado and says, you can't kill the baby. You're a Texas resident. Texas law says this. This is kidnapping and brings her back.

Now the left goes insane saying women are being forced to give birth. Let's say the federal government stops Texas and says, the woman is free to live where she wants and she's getting abortion. Let's say there's no federal government. You're going to get a dude. Let's step outside the abortion debate and let's talk about the trans kids thing. Which is for real in California. And let's say a man and a wife have a kid she decides to the kid is trans and takes him to california without the the man's permission and the federal government says

we will not get involved the question is at what point does some father say i will not sit back and wait for my son to be castrated and then get a posse and bring him to California. Like the conflict will happen with people fleeing other states in this way. Well, you know what's interesting about this? There's some breaking news you should look at, by the way. What's going on? Just apparently the DA just leaked the indictment. Oh, good.

The indictment. All 33 points. I didn't mean to interrupt that conversation, by the way. No, no, no, let's get it. Good interruption. Since we're live. I'm on Trump's Telegram channel. Where can we find it? Twitter? I'll search for it let me read can i read trump's statement is that okay yeah

okay wow district attorney brag just illegally leaked the various points and complete information on the pathetic indictment against me oh keep reading keep reading okay all right great i know the reporter and so unfortunately does he this means that he must be immediately indicted so he's calling for an indictment of Bragg. Now, if he really wants to clean up his reputation, he will do the honorable thing and, as district attorney, indict himself. Well, where is the leak? Well, I don't think he links to the leak, but I'm sure it's on Twitter somewhere. He will go down in judicial history, and his Trump-hating wife will be, I'm sure, very proud of him.

DA Bragg just illegally leaked the 33 point indictment there are no changes or surprises from those he leaked days ago out of the grand jury no crime by trump what a mess brag should resign now this says 34 felony counts for falsification of business records felonies for yeah 34 felonies none of these accounts are misdemeanors. But they upgraded these to... And they upgraded it due to the, what was it, like election stuff. The campaign finance regulation. Campaign finance, right. So they applied a federal law to a state statute.

What I think is really funny, too... These are legal calisthenics. This whole thing is so dumb. Yeah, and what I think is funny, too, is that it would be a campaign contribution... For a federal race. Right. Which is governed by the Federal Election commission not the new york not the new york da but also the idea that uh president trump's campaign would have been adversely affected by him allegedly having had a relationship with a porn star is also ridiculous

i don't think anyone would have cared about that like i don't think that suppressing that information was necessarily there's so many attack vectors here that are just so silly. Yeah, there are a lot of them. The 34 felony. So it was class E felonies, which is the lowest level of felonies in New York State. I'm just going to challenge everyone. Do not fall for this 34 count garbage. That's what I'm saying.

So it's like if there was one financial crime and then they sent out a mass email to 34 people. Yes, exactly. They could be like, oh, that's 34. The 34 thing is a total PR move to try to get you to believe that this is a much harsher more serious crime i'll give you an example let's think of a crime that and there's going to be no handcuffs and no let me think of a crime that we all know of that i could give you a really good example of okay uh oj simpson okay let's he did it but that's a separate issue but you could have a 400 count indictment for fleeing the police and running a red light.

And he was in the Dodge Durango. Remember that white Dodge Durango or whatever he was in? Yeah, the Bronco. Right? Yeah, the Bronco. Bronco. I'm sorry. Thank you for the fact check.

Sorry, fact check. That would be a 400-count indictment, right? But it's really centered on one or two events. Does that make sense? Oh, yeah. So you can extend an indictment. Again, this is why prosecutorial overreach

is so incredibly severe and such a danger to our society is that this 34 count thing is a PR masterpiece. Because if Donald Trump was indicted on one count, but 34 sounds serious, did he break in?

Did he embezzle money? Did he also do wire money? Did he also do wire fraud? And remember, a lot of the statutes in the way the criminal code is written is not about the actual crime itself. Usually it's about all the supporting different criminal codes they can get that you tripped the wire in the process of committing the crime, right? So the old adage is that they got Al Capone on taxes. That's a bad example. The better one is that they've overwritten the criminal code. They've deepened it to such an extent. Wire fraud, check fraud, falsification of records, lying under oath, obstruction of justice,

that eventually it creates these counts that can give the prosecutor an advantage. Does that make sense? Yeah, absolutely. It's like having your bank account go to negative and then every day you make a payment and you just keep getting these negative charges over and over and over again. But it's really only because that one... You can say it was done unjustly. Yeah, that's right. That's a good example. And so this 33-34 count thing is brilliant. Have we found the leaked indictment or is Trump just... I think it was Jesse Waters who was reporting on it. I haven't found anything on Twitter.

Why would he leak it to Jesse Waters? Well, I don't know. There's a post going around of Jesse Waters. Not that he's showing it, that he's saying it happened. He may be just referring to what Trump said. So I've not seen anything on Twitter. I searched for it, didn't find any. Searched Google, Twitter, I didn't find anything.

So, you know, maybe it's circulating among journalists. But you see what I mean. You saw the statement he wrote. Right. Yeah. Jesse Waters apparently, I think, was just quoting Trump, perhaps saying that there's more evidence that Bragg committed a felony than Trump. OK, well, Trump seems pretty forceful in this statement. And Waters was on air two hours ago. So I don't think that's right. I think that Trump just got a heads up from a reporter that this indictment's about to drop in a store. Or a reporter emailed his team saying, we've got the indictment. I know the reporter, and unfortunately, it's Maggie Haberman. I can almost guarantee it.

There's only so many reporters he knows that he would say he knows. I will put money. It's Maggie Haberman. If I'm wrong, I will finish this glass of water. Would Bragg have just given a reporter the indictment? A tough bet, Charlie. Think about it. How many reporters has proximity to the DA's office on this beat that works the New York circuit and also knows Trump? That narrows it down to Maggie Haberman.

Unless, I mean, there's other reporters too, but smart money's on Maggie Haberman about to drop a story. So I would keep your eye on her Twitter feed. Yeah. I could be wrong. I could be wrong. It could be the worst takeover, but that's just based on his statement. He probably got an email to his press office. Hi, this is Maggie Haberman with the New York Times. Just wondering if you have any last minute comment here. You know, we just received the indictment in full and then he's trying to preempt it with his statement. That's my guess.

Is that, that he says it's a felony to leak an indictment? I have no idea. I mean, the New York Times, via Haberman, remember, received Donald Trump's tax returns in October 2020 illegally and was never held criminally accountable for that. The same thing they went after James O'Keefe for, remember? They raided James O'Keefe's apartment for allegedly receiving a document, a diary, which is not even... They said it was stolen. Yeah, stolen, even though government tax returns

are a much higher privacy threshold than a private diary that you obviously didn't care enough about to get out of a halfway house. It was a halfway house she was in? It was like a recovery home. It was some roommate or whatever. Yeah, I don't mean to slander her, but yeah, I mean, some sort of thing.

So we'll see. But my guess is you're going to see a story drop here rather momentarily. That's me reading between the lines. From Haberman. I don't know. see but my guess is you're going to see a story drop here rather momentarily that's me reading between the lines from haberman i don't know that's my guess i could be totally wrong stuff right it could be cnn by the way they were leaking to cnn previously too so but my guess is that trump says i know him remember maggie got several oval office interviews with trump and that's one of his you know that's one of his uh you know, and by the way, we have to remember that if the foundational crime allegation against Trump falls apart, all of the 33 charges crumble.

So if you're able to get to the essence of the charge, which is did Donald Trump break finance campaign finance law by administering $130,000 payments? Let's go through the fact. Can I go through the facts surrounding this, Tim? Is that helpful? Yeah, let's go. Okay. First of all, he did not So let's go through the fact. Can I go through the facts surrounding this, Tim? Is that helpful? Yeah, yeah, let's go. Okay. First of all, he did not write the check. Michael Cohen did. Michael Cohen is not a trustworthy witness.

Oh, it's Michael Isikoff. Isikoff from the Washington Post? Drink the water. I got to drink this water. I was wrong. That was your bet. You know, if you drink more than four ounces

of water at a time, it makes you feel like you have to- But I was right about the fact that a reporter was about to drop it. It's with Yahoo News. Yahoo News? Yeah, they get the scoop.

No, no, no. Exclusive Trump to be charged Tuesday with 34 felony counts, but spared handcuffs and mugshot. That doesn't sound like an exclusive. No, wait, wait, wait. Spared mugshot. The mugshot would have made him so much money. When was that published?

That was published an hour ago. Yeah, just a little bit ago. But are you sure this is where they actually got the leak? This doesn't look like... A source told Yahoo News. This is from... This just came out at 8-12. This is not...

You don't think that's the thing? Because they have his statement in here. I could be wrong. I want a copy. I want like a... Yeah, yeah, yeah. I want a DocuCloud upload. Right, right.

You know what I'm talking about, Tim? Exactly. But here's the other facts, okay? That Michael Cohen administered the payment, okay? Michael Cohen wrote in an official letter to the FEC, the Federal Election Commission, that this payment was on his own behalf and Donald Trump never reimbursed him. So the question will be, do they have a record of Donald Trump reimbursing Michael Cohen for a sum or a like sum that could convince a jury that Michael Cohen lied to the FEC. He lies all the time. The third thing, there's nothing

illegal about administering an NDA. There's nothing illegal to it. Bill Clinton did all the time. CEOs did all the time. Rappers do it all the time, right? It's done quite frequently. Half of the companies. So it might be the Isikoff story, would be strange but he's saying that uh they're class e felonies so falsifying business records up to four years in prison the uh new york law enforcement says it is extremely unlikely a first-time offender would see jail time there will be no arrest there will be no cuffs there will be there will be no uh mugshot are there going to be cameras in the courtroom the attorney asked today to not have cameras in the courtroom yeah trump's saying he doesn't want it yeah and remember issacoff was one of the original steel dossier leak stories remember so he has an in to that's right law enforcement and intel agencies

but anyway the whole the crux of the argument with trump will come down to intent and also the quality of their witnesses i don't know who alvin Bragg is going to bring, you know, call to testify. Other than like Cohen? Yeah, Michael Cohen, who's a convicted liar, went to jail for lying in front of Congress. And so, you know,

this thing, if they can, if the elemental charge, which is falsification of business records, right, is the whole ballgame here. Regarding did he pay Cohen back

for it, I saw a check a year later paid for 35 grand. It for $35,000. It was a $130,000 payment. Trump paid Cohen $35,000. And he was doing other business with Cohen. So how can you draw a one-to-one? It's all on Cohen's testimony. And remember, Cohen's own lawyer, Costello or something, this guy went on Tucker, he was very persuasive, said Cohen's a liar. And Cohen's such a liar that he goes and signs away his attorney-client privilege

so that his lawyer then is able to go on television and say, yeah, everything he told us under attorney-client seal, let me just tell you, this guy's a complete liar. They added the statement

after the story dropped. Oh, is that right? This is likely the story. They probably reached out to Trump's team and said... Okay, it's Michael Isikoff, so it's not Maggie Haberman. Stand corrected.

Chief Gorseman. It was a good guess, though. Maggie was a good guess. A spokesman for Trump's legal team has not seen the indictment or been briefed on the details. Yeah, I don't know if they actually have a copy of the indictment, though. If they did... That seems really weird. Why would you not be able to... Why does he work for Yahoo News?

Yeah, well... They must pay well. I guess. I thought they were just an aggregator. Yeah, well. But why would you... They must pay well. I guess. I thought they were just an aggregator. No, I guess they're doing their own stuff now. Well, yeah, no, they got a scoop, apparently. I don't think it's really a scoop. Chief, it doesn't...

There's nothing new here. Yeah, Jack Posobiec has a tweet. He said that we've, you know, I'll paraphrase. The country is irrevocably damaged. There's no coming back from this. Yeah, I think that's right. I don't agree with that. It's just we've seen how damaged it's been over the last 70 years by the banking federal reservists you know that the way they made the federal reserve is scandalous the

way that they went to that island and had congress signed it over christmas of jekyll island yeah and speaking about what's going on today we've never seen anything like this happen to a former president and there's no question it's political, unless, of course, you gain from it politically. I think that confirms my argument. Democrat politicos are going to say it's not political because they benefit from it. End of story.

When people see like, oh, look how horrible this country has become, for instance, with this banking scandal, where our country looks like it's on its way to bankruptcy you got to ask yourself do you want to maintain this country now and and i think that what helps is perspective because i was just watching about north korea last night and you know it's very possible that auto warm beer story he came back all comatose they think they just the north korean government just poisoned him and sent him back so that he couldn't talk. They just killed him in prison.

They poisoned him. Bioweapons. That's the other side of the coin if we lose this republic. Well, and what was it? The North Korean leader, Kim Jong-un? Which one is that? Is that who it is? Yeah, Yoon.

His daughter wore a Dior, like a whole Dior ensemble to watch a missile test recently. Gotta love it. That's communism. There it is. Terrifyingly concerning, you know, when cult of personality goes out of control and one person gets control of a small... And she gets Dior outfits

and everybody else is starving. So, you know, rule of law, law and order. It's not just law. It's law and order. If your law produces chaos, then it's a bad law. So if the country is irrevocably damaged, if there's no coming back from it, then what? We need to create something new. There's no going back.

What people need to do is make money, have families. Do virtuous things repeatedly. Do virtuous things. Repeatedly and daily and be disciplined and anchored to things that are beautiful. Self-sufficiency. Being as self-sufficient as possible, and then find someone who's legally allowed to give you financial advice and have conversations about what do we do in these trying times.

So I was thinking about the question we were talking about with Colorado or the trans kids in California, and really these are not legal questions. I mean, we can pass all kinds of laws, we can pass all kinds of laws we can enforce all kinds of laws but this is a problem that exists in people's hearts you know yes like that's my point about the civil war yeah that's a big issue here like if you have a woman who to use your first example is going to spite a man that she once loved by murdering their eight-month-old child before it's born but this happens all the time there was a story just recently this is right but what i'm saying is that's a problem in someone's heart that's not that's not something

a law can fix that's something that's about the decline of morality the decline of values the decline of love you know here you go i just i just i just look at the decline of literally of life literally just google searched what you said va mom who killed daughters and plot to exact revenge on husband then called to tell him gets 78 years. She shot them in their beds. She drugged them and shot them in their beds. This story, I saw this story. A couple weeks ago. Horrifying.

Five days ago. Yes. Five, six days ago. So when we're talking about states that allow the killing of children and states that don't. My fear is that you will get a father who will say something as simply as, she has no right to take my son and kill him. I'm going to get the boys together and we're going to go and stop her from doing it.

They're not going to, I'm not saying, I'm not saying they're going to come out and get guns and be like, it's time to ride boys. I'm saying they're going to be like, let's go find out where she is and stop her from killing my kid. And that's going to ride, boys. I'm saying they're going to be like, let's go find out where she is and stop her from killing my kid. And that's going to escalate from there.

The state's going to be like, she's allowed to kill your kid. Too bad. Even if, and I'm talking about a point at which the child is viable and can survive outside the womb. And the husband's saying, just let's, instead of killing it, let's just deliver it. And then I'll take the baby. And she says, nope, it's going to die now. This woman goes to prison because the babies were, were. fifteen five and fifteen oh my gosh that's but that's a

human baby that is viable of living on its own can be killed in these states i am not arguing the morality of abortion what for those that are listening i am arguing simply that there will be i agree with your vocabulary though you're using the proper wording. Well, but if a baby can survive on its own, then it's being killed. That's correct. I agree, Tim. If you have a father who says, I want the baby to live,

and a woman who says, no, don't care, the state lets me do it, you've got a very serious moral crisis on your hands that's not going to be solved by a court order. Yes, that's correct. Every law can be passed. Every judge can bang their gavel. And the father might still say,

you will not kill my son. Yes. And there will be a multitude of these issues that are going to come to the front. And the question will be, is the Constitution still the law of the land? And it's crumbling in front of our eyes. I think it is.

It's terrifying. The Constitution is the greatest political document ever written, and we are in a post-constitutional moment. It's brilliant. The Founding Fathers, man. Yeah. Because they built it on eternal wisdom. And they knew central banks were so dangerous. Yes, they did. Well, even the National Bank was not technically a central bank, so you're correct. Even Hamilton's idea of a central bank would be different than our idea of a central bank. Were they like, they run it out of Switzerland, some foreign bank for international settlements? No, no meaning they didn't.

Well, downtown Manhattan. Well, no, they didn't. It's subservient to the Bank for International Settlements in Switzerland. Hamilton's idea of a national bank would have had actual checks and balances by Congress, not a separately chartered federal reserve that is basically public-private. But you're right, even Hamilton would have found this current banking system objectionable. I understand that there is a value of cohesion

in having a unified currency as a country. It gives us national identity. We can all identify with the dollar, but we're in a society where you can create your own currency very easily with crypto. So maybe we just need to, the whole Congress handles money.

Obviously they don't the banking scandals offshore svb welcome we've got sam bankman free yeah laundering money through it allegedly through his company and now like so maybe we should be able to all create our own currencies i know it creates dissolution in some way nationally you know cohesively bitcoin is the decentralized store of value that people are already using. Look at how sound of them, but there's thousands. And you can create them on the fly. Right.

It's going to be messy for a while. The dollar is necessary, though, right now. You think we're divided now? Wait until we have our, everyone has their own currency. Yeah, it would be madness. No, no, no. Wait until Brazil and China have already cut a deal. Saudi Arabia and Iran are cutting a deal.

China's brokering deals to end the petrodollar. Americans are in for a very, very rude awakening. It would impoverish this country. Impoverish is an understatement. Where do you get your plastics? I don't know how you would go beyond impoverishing. I'm concerned about that. Decimate.

Apocalypse. How about that? Economic apocalypse. Although apocalypse isn't necessarily bad. It just means like the great awakening, the great uncovering. Well, it means starvation. You know, apocalypse. In Greek?

I think it means the- I'm not talking about Greek. I'm talking about- Apoco? Disclosure. Disclosure. I'm talking about the- Revelation.

What could happen if we lose the- It is apocalypse. If we lose that. Yeah. This is apocalypse. We now have the- We mean it in modern English terms, which is suffering. They take a negative connotation maybe because it's near the end of the story in the Bible.

Is that why? Probably. But in reality, now we're just, it's becoming disclosed. The curtain has been lifted. We see the chaos. We know what the Federal Reserve is now, that they formed it behind the scenes in 1913. Not everyone knows, but you do.

It's being revealed daily to new people. Trump was part of that. Steve Bannon's great at talking about, but yeah. And like loose change, Luke Rudkowski,annon's great at talking about, but yeah, and like lose change. Luke Krakowski, these people have been talking about it for 20 years. So it is a form of apocalypse, not necessarily a bad thing.

What do we do with disclosure? Don't let your mind go crazy. Don't, don't go crazy. I understand why you may want to, because like people are going to lose their jobs and they're not going to have any food or way to feed their children. And that's going to be a problem as a result of what,

as a result of the complete collapse of the petrodollar. We don't make things. We don't. Well, we make some things. We make some things. Let me make the, can I make the counter argument to all the doomsdayers? We make IPOs that don't actually have any products.

Well, that is true. There's a lot of truth there. So China only represents about 5% of our imports, less than people, not imports, not imports, that's not correct, our total economic output. So China only represents about 5% of our imports, less than people, not imports, not imports, that's not correct, our total economic output. So we could survive without China. But thankfully, the only benefit of this stupid proxy war in Ukraine is that we're actually on okay terms with Germany, even though Germany hates us right now, they're going to be fine with us. Germany is a very productive country. They make stuff. Germany makes stuff. And Germany is basically a proxy sister economy of America,

right? They use the dollars, the world reserve currency, the euros backed by the dollar. Japan, they make stuff. Japan and America are inseparable, especially with their Chinese skepticism. South Korea, they make stuff. They're inseparable. The open question is, what is India going to do? That should be the whole focus, quite honestly, of this current government is to make sure India does not fall into the good graces of Russia or China. They're natural adversaries of China. Shouldn't be a hard problem. They hate the Chinese. They've never liked each other. There's natural built-in tension there. And there's a massive developing market in Southeast Asia that hates China. They hate the CCP. They want to use the dollar. Indonesia is a fast-growing

country. The Philippines, you have Vietnam, you have Cambodia. You have Laos. These are fast-developing countries with very industrious people, with ever-increasing private property rights, which is a prerequisite to wealth creation. And be careful what you ask for. The yuan is manipulated. China's economy is largely built on a Potemkin village. You're right. We don't make stuff. But this idea that China has this beast waiting to go economically, they're a house of cards too. But it's not just about China. It's about the fact that we have been giving away our manufacturing for a long time, even Mexico. No, of course. I totally agree with that. But I think we can onshore that a lot quicker because we have the natural production, meaning we have the natural

production capability. We have natural resources, right? So let's just say China cuts us off, okay? Let's say they say no more vitamin C. Okay. We could ramp up vitamin C production in this country in 10 months. If we wanted to, we could do it. Well, Trump had that idea of starting to bring a lot of penicillin should not be made in China. Right.

He had ideas for like Kodak factories upstate New York. That's right. You make vitamin C out of black mold of all things. Is that right? Yeah. I mean, the good stuff comes from fruit. Asorbic acid.

Unless it says naturally derived in the ingredients, from what I'm told, it comes from black mold. That's creepy. Asperilicus negro is what it's called. That's interesting. Yeah, I prefer it for my oranges. Yeah, there's no reason why we have to get that from China. But I think that this rush away from the dollar is going to flatline. We need regime change in America. Biden's got to go. Trump could fix this in a second, and he would fix this. Agreed. But there is a backstop here that I think. Brazil's a broken country. The

bulls on Brazil have been wrong for years. If you go look up Brazil's GDP, it's spiked and it's been going down with the new Lula regime. Bolsonaro just went home. Yeah, and that's going to be an open question. I love you, India, man. They're so important. And they were a British colony and we need to take them seriously. India's key to the whole program. Yeah. We're. And they were a British colony. India's the key. I feel like that's the thing, too.

India's key to the whole program. Yeah. We're going to go to Super Chats. India's the key. All right, everybody. If you haven't already, would you kindly smash that like button, subscribe to this channel, share the show with your friends, and become a member at TimCast.com. We're going to have a members-only, uncensored show on the front page of TimCast.com live

at about 10, 10 p.m. Are we going to talk about the passion? We wrap up the show. Sure. We'll talk about religion. We've got some other stories, too, that I think will lead us right into it. It's my favorite topic. And we'll get into all that. And we will be taking callers from our Discord server.

So become a member at the $25 tier today, and you'll instantly join the VIP chat. Or sign up at $10 a month, and in six months, you will instantly be upgraded. The gate is there simply to prevent. It's a screening process. We're trying to do what we can to keep out people who are just try and you know screw with us try to get us banned or something like that all right we have vision 667 who says open carry still illegal in florida unless you are carrying a fishing pole you can open carry on your way to and or from a fishing expedition oh well that's strange but they just signed concealed carry i thought that they did

that yeah concealed carry concealed is different than open but they just signed concealed carry. I thought that they did that, yeah. Concealed carry, not open. Concealed is different than open. So permitless concealed carry, is that what it is? Yeah, that was Florida. That's amazing. Is it now? I think DeSantis just passed it. Yeah, they signed it. Yeah.

Let me, I think I... Constitutional carry should be the law of the land in all 50 states. What about in big cities? Yep. Because I was thinking actually when we did uh am fest i was sealed carry without a permit wow i think at am fest there was security or it might have even been due to the city you couldn't have guns in there and i said on stage with all of us there i would rather everyone in that audience be armed because it's my choice

to be here to speak in front of people and they i shouldn't be allowed to disarm hundreds of people now granted a, a private establishment, I think has the rights to say, we don't want guns in our premises. My point is ideologically and personally, I would never tell a crowd of people you can't defend yourselves because I'm scared of maybe one of you. Nah, I just won't go on stage if I'm ever scared, but you know what? Hey, someone might do something crazy. Welcome to the real world. It sucks. I don't like it, but I'm not going to infringe upon someone else's rights because a criminal may exist. It's just crazy to me, you know? And we must be very clear

about what is the purpose of the Second Amendment. The Second Amendment is there for individual people to prevent them to protect themselves against tyranny, against a usurptitious government. There is a price to all things. The cost of having a Second Amendment is tragically, you're going to have some numbskulls misuse that. Therefore, the prudent thing to do is to protect what you care about with armed guards, schools. Every school should have an armed guard. And people say, oh, Charlie, does that mean you want the militarization of our country? Our airports are militarized. Our banks are militarized. Our sporting events are militarized. It should be okay to protect our kids. Yes. I mean, our kids can have an armed

guard outside there. I don't think that's going to phase anybody in any sort of damaging way i think that's a silly argument so tim mentioned we should get ex-military to like totally one soldier because they need jobs yep the riz says i remember the media making fun of trump for having two scoops of ice cream at a state dinner since biden took office there have been zero ice cream related fact checks i don't i don't know if I believe that. There's that. Biden's always getting ice cream. Yeah, it's a lot of ice cream.

A lot of ice cream. Sugar, man. You do know that ice cream helps people with dementia. Not a joke. Right. Not a joke. Can you quote it, Biden? It releases dopamine and serotonin.

It's fantastic. It is wonderful. It relaxes, I think, the prefrontal cortex and makes people with dementia more present. I'm not kidding. You can fact check it. Type in ice cream dementia. All right. Joe Spinell says the judge in the Rittenhouse case is a Democrat and Democrat-appointed judge.

But was it the jury? Wasn't it the jury that returned the acquittal? Yes, but remember how fair that judge was to Kyle, Tim. Uh-huh. So it just kind of validates my point. You think the judge was fair? To Kyle Rittenhouse? Yeah.

Of course. Remember how that judge scorned the prosecution and said, you don't put this garbage in our courtroom and this is not—he almost threw the entire trial out because the prosecution was basically angling for a mistrial. All right. Remember how that guy ended up getting called Lunchbox? Yep. I mean, my concern is that there was very obvious manipulated evidence.

There was direct evidence of evidence tampering. And the video footage from the drone was clearly AI generated. And they allowed all of that. And that was shocking to me. I think that's a fair counterpoint. If I remember correctly, I'm drawing from memory, the judge also challenged a fair amount. Remember the prosecutorial questioning where they were leading the questioner and the judge says, you know better than that and you don't do that.

That was a harsh and that was public. That was publicly televised. That was a condemnation. There was a video of what was it? There was it was editing software. That's correct. On his desktop. And it's like, you know, Handbrake. i think it was called yeah something like that i can't remember the exact details so that just proves my point tim the prosecution and in that particular case crumbled when people like tim cast and posobic andrew hernandez started to do what you guys do and post millennium human events as soon as all

these different angles started to be examined it went viral and the local prosecution crumbled. I think there's an element of that. These guys are not ready for prime time at the local DA's office in New York. They're not. They're going to be sloppy in how they write indictments. They're going to be sloppy how they cover evidence. And we're going to see everything. We're going to expose it.

And they're going to be uncomfortable because the national media is going to be covering every turn. Is that going to be enough to keep Trump out of jail? Maybe. All right. Cody Griffin says, Tim, we must stop with this Trump versus DeSantis fake feud. It is designed to divide us because we fully recognize the common enemy. If Trump, DeSantis and Lake teamed up, they would be unstoppable. I agree. Yeah, I agree. I don't think there's a reason to look. I think Trump and DeSantis going head to

head could be the most beneficial thing for the republicans going forward in that they both would make each other stronger competition will will will breed that growth in my opinion there's no reason to make it dark though you know i mean it should be above board on the level desantis can be like here's why here's why i disagree with trump trump can say here's the issue with desantis and if trump does it tact it tactfully and DeSantis does as well, then both candidates become substantially more powerful. Cleaner, better, more appealing, etc. All right. What do we got here?

The Jaded Kriegsman says Republicans need to realize sometimes to fight your opponent, you have to go down in the gutter with them. We need to do to them what they do to us. I think that's what you were saying was with the indictments. Correct. Criminally charge them. Yes. And there's plenty of crimes to go around. Plenty. Start with BLM. All right. Farrell 81 says, or Farrell 81, question for Charlie. What's the current progress on organizing legal ballot harvesting? The GOP won't win in 2024 if it doesn't happen. Doesn't matter the candidates or the issues, ballot harvesting needs to be the only goal. Yeah, so ballot harvesting is not legal in the three states we need to win, but ballot

chasing is. It's a technical definition. So you can't touch a ballot. Now, the Democrats do it all the time in Arizona, Georgia, Wisconsin. So turning point action, we are building the most robust, sophisticated, and aggressive early vote operation. I have a complete philosophical change on this. I used to think everyone show up on election day. It's going to be great. We've done a 180. We did an

introspection. I'm not going to lose. We're playing to win. So what is ballot chasing? Ballot chasing is politely reminding and persuading people to go vote early. And you have a person with a thousand names and you're going to chase those ballots until they're submitted. And you have a hundred people doing that or 250 people doing that. The Democrats have perfected this. They are banking votes while we are hoping votes will happen, while doing it as securely as possible for low propensity Republican voters. And with mail-in voting, which will still be in effect to a certain degree, because once people sign up in many states, they just keep getting them. There's no reversing.

It's like a welfare check. All you do is knock on the door and say, hey, you should fill that out. That's right. And you encourage them. You can't touch the ballot, but here's what you can do. You can say, hey, you know, Sally Sue Marie, I know you're a registered Republican. Oh, I hate Biden and all that. And they'll say something like this.

What's the point in voting? The system's so broke. That's going to be the number one piece of persuasion. And so if you can convince them that it's still a moral duty to vote and be like, hey, I can walk you to the mailbox or I can drive you to the voting processing center, all of a sudden now you're actively involved in the process of banking votes. I'll give you a simple one. I call it, we'll call it Trump's wager. To somebody- Not Pascal's wager, but Trump's wager.

You knock on a door and there's a middle-aged dude. And you can see he's got a stack of mail. Hey, look at that. A universal mail-in vote was at his house. And he says, look, I hate Biden, but what's the point? It's not going to matter anyway. Then I say this. If you don't vote, and it doesn't matter, then you're fine.

If you don't vote, but it does matter, then you're helping Joe Biden. That's the best way I heard it framed. If you do vote and it doesn't matter, then nothing happens, right? If you do vote and it does matter, you are stopping Joe Biden. So based on that wager, that grid, the only action that makes sense is to vote.

Your worst case scenario is you lose 30 seconds filling out that mail-in ballot. Questions about voting, vote chasing. You can't touch the ballot. Can't. Not in those three states.

I imagine you can't put gloves on and pick up the ballot. Can you pick up the person if the ballot is in their hand? That's a good question. I don't think so. And this is Georgia, Arizona, and Wisconsin.

Can you push a wheelchair? Yeah, so you can assist somebody in the transportation of going to a voting center. So you can have somebody with their ballot get in your car and drive them there. To a secure place to submit the ballot. What about the thing on the ballot where it says, did someone help you fill this out and have them write on it too? Yeah, that's an interesting question.

I don't know the answer to that. And so I'll have to find out. Okay. I don't know the answer to that. All right, let's see. What do we we have here let me grab a super chat ma says the left fbi will pretend to be trump supporters tomorrow and start riots there will be many fake actors ready to put blame on maga i wouldn't be surprised i mean we know for a fact there were cops yelling at people to go go go keep going on the ground that's definitively reported we know that there were inform yelling at people to go go go keep going on the ground that's definitively

reported we know that there were informants that's not definitively reported then the new york times reported there was an unusual number of informants involved in the proud boys that's right and then you have the questions of what why ray epps is what was it someone tweeted i think it was marjorie taylor green or somebody that the fbi sells a picture of him as wanted right they've totally like now said he's fine took it off the website didn't i don't know something like that so whatever i guess yeah i mean look the the amount of federal involvement on january 6th remains a mystery do you think it do you think it will always remain a mystery do you think no i i think that look when something

corrupt happens there's openings and attack vectors. And there's a very easy attack vector. And I mean that in the most moral way, meaning trying to expose the lies that no one has properly exploited. The pipe bombs. Yeah, this is, you've mentioned this, Tim. The pipe bombs are the low-hanging fruit. Who planted those bombs?

Both at the RNC and the DNC. It was obviously a federal agent. The bombs never went off. They haven't arrested anybody. They don't have a suspect of interest. They used geolocation, cell phone ping technology to find grannies that took selfies in the Capitol. Yet we don't have a suspect of interest for someone that could have created a smaller version of the Oklahoma City bombing at the RNC. That's highly suspicious. And so I've always said the pipe bombs are the key to the whole thing. You uncover who planted the pipe bombs, you're going to find a whole treasure trove of answers. They use the pipe bombs to escalate charges?

Are they conflating the two? No one's been arrested. So remember, the RNC and DNC are about three blocks from Capitol Hill. And as the story goes, apparently the night, you could fact check me, but the night, you could fact check me, but the night before the morning of a suspicious character at both the RNC and the DNC drops off some bags on the outside of it that were pipe bombs and they never went off, they never detonated. But remember the sequence of events that happened that day, because it was all such a blur. But as the quote unquote Capitol was being breached, almost simultaneously after Trump was, we all got push notifications that pipe bombs were discovered at both the RNC and the DNC. And that became a very de-emphasized part of the story.

Right. Which, by the way, if those bombs would have went off, would have been the most criminal intent that happened that entire day. That's legitimate political terrorism. Yeah. Like legitimate political terrorism. Yeah. Like actual political terrorism, not someone that gets heated and gets in a shoving match outside of the Capitol Rotunda, right? Not someone that gets put into a mob frenzy.

Someone that goes through the intent of trying to create a pipe bomb and putting it outside of both the RNC and the DNC. Who does that? And not one person's been arrested. We have no suspects of interest. We haven't used the cell phone ping technology that we use to go find the grannies in the Capitol towards that. You want the answers on January 6th and the Fed's involvement? Look into the pipe bombs.

When you asked who does that, I was thinking, well, a foreigner. It's the first time I've really thought that there would be foreign involvement with January 6th, but it doesn't surprise me. If that's the case, I mean, maybe that's a foreign intelligence agency. Maybe it's a foreign actor. I have no idea. The fact the bombs didn't go off and how did they find them too? And why did they find them almost the exact same time at the RNC and the DNC? They found them like, oh, wow, just we were gardening here and there's a bomb. And what it did was it created a diversion, a pretext for the evacuation of Congress.

That's right. Congressional buildings. Antext for the evacuation of Congress. That's right. Congressional buildings. I want to cause panic amongst Congress. No, to evacuate them one hour before the Capitol was actually breached to minimize actual harm to members of Congress. So AOC told her famous story about they're here or whatever. It was just a cop. But her story took place an hour before the breach happened.

So how would she have known anyone could get to her? She just made that up. She made up a lot of the details. Either AOC had foreknowledge of what was going to happen to the Capitol or she fabricated the story. I've never, well, I mean, AOC making up a story sounds more plausible. No, of course. But I don't think they would treat her, I don't think they would trust her with deep

state secrets of Capitol penetration. She said that when the pounding came at her door, she thought that they got to her office and found her and that she was hiding in the bathroom. That's a really interesting point. I've never heard anyone make that point. Well, I've been, I was, I've been. I don't watch it every night, Tim. I'm sorry.

I can't watch your show every night. When this all went down, the Republicans all said AOC wasn't even in the Capitol building. The media responded, yes, but they're all connected by tunnels. And then I responded, except her story took place one hour before the Capitol was breached. So she would not have known the Capitol was breached. She lied and made the story up. She's a nasty person. She could be a fed. I think she's just evil. I think she just decided to make up a fake story for social media points. Did you see her allegedly burner account on Twitter?

Yeah, I don't know if I believe that either. Zaza Smoker. It would be real. And I could make an account and then respond to someone tweeting at you, Libby, saying the exact same thing, then delete it, and everyone will be like, oh, look, Libby's account. It's not proof of anything. Pure Delecto. Wasn't that the name of Mitt Romney? Yeah, that was Mitt Romney's, yeah.

But that was confirmed, wasn't it? Yeah. I'm saying it wouldn't be the first time a lawmaker had a burner account. Right, right. Yeah, it's funny when, you know, people claim that I'm running burners or whatever, like everyone's got one. But I don't even check my mentions on Twitter. These people just think that everyone cares so much about you. That's why I'm like, I don't believe that AOC is doing this. Honestly, Tim, you got me convinced. She's a total fed. And that explains her whole rise.

I think you're onto something here. AOC's a fed. I'm half joking, which means I could be right. AOC, I'm sorry. We're going to have to see your credentials here. Are you a Fed? Are you a creation of the Deep State Security Project? Would explain why she votes for aid to Ukraine, even though she pretends she's anti-war. Right. That's true. All right. Mindfury1980 says, Ian, watch the Orville majority rule as to why a democratic technocracy is a terrifying idea. Orville majority rule. Yeah. Orville's a good show. I mean, it got kind of weird lately, but you know. I agree that a democratic technocracy would be horrific,

but so that's why I want like a technocratic republic. You know, I don't want the mob in control of anything right now. All right, Villainous Black Dragon Entertainment says, Tim and Kirk, do you think Trump is playing 5D chess by using the left's tactic and play victim? I wouldn't call it 5D chess. I would call it checkers. Like, Democrats are trying not to indict Trump.

And then this low-level dude does. And Trump goes, oh, no, better raise $5 million overnight and then go and get arraigned. His polls are skyrocketing. His revenue is skyrocketing. They're helping him. And it's funny because they're trying now, Politico had that article, don't overthink it, an indictment would be bad for Trump. He won't gain a single new voter. And I'm like, well, he just did. The polls are showing he's got a whole bunch of new donors, first-time donors. Sorry. Do I think he's playing 5D chess?

No, I think it's actually, I think I agree with you. It's more like tic-tac-toe. It's not even checkers. Yes. It's like one move, two move, three in a row. I mean, this is not that hard, right? You're going to turn me into a victim. I'll happily play the role after I've been, you know, the villain. He went from villain to victor overnight. It was such a bad move by the brag. Alvin Bragg.

If they really want to beat him in an election, why would you pariah the guy? That's the question. I mean, there is a belief out there i find it to be unsubstantiated that they want trump to be the nominee and therefore they're doing this i find that to be silly kyle bigelow says billions printed for covid ukraine and banks now arresting a man who 75 million voted for 12 days before productivity self-incrimination day just saying i don't know before Productivity Self-Incrimination Day. Just saying. I don't know what that means. Tax day is in 12 days. Oh, I see.

Productivity Self-Incrimination. I get it. Pay your taxes, everybody. That's right. Oh, damn. I got to do that. Yeah. I'm actually excited.

I think I'm going to get a refund. Are you really? I gave the government too much money. Good for you. Yeah, they should be very happy about that. My accountant retired. Oh. Oh. Well. That's kind of a bummer. the government too much money good for you yeah yeah they should be very happy about that my accountant retired oh oh well that's all right admar says what does the 17th amendment mean to me amy klobuchar and tina smith giving a generic auto reply email and i'm probably put on a list to be audited we should repeal the 17th senators should be appointed by the states that's what

the senators are supposed to represent the state's interests well Well, and Minnesota had a red legislature up until recently. So what it means for you, it means that you would have a Republican senator in Minnesota. That hasn't happened, I think. I don't think Republicans have had a senator you could fact check me in Minnesota since like 1952. Would it be the kind of thing where if a new state senator comes in that they would just recall the federal senator? Potentially, yeah.

They would be serving at the will of the state legislative body. That's nice, too, because it makes senators more accountable to their actual states and constituents than they are now. They came in for hearings. Senators used to come in for hearings. So, for example, you'd have South Carolina say, hey, what are you doing? Are you fighting for our values? You know, let's have a hearing here. Yeah.

They have private meetings. Senators should be accountable to their state. that's good that's the founders each individual so we got rid of that with the 17th amendment which was supposed to be progress when it was really i think regression yeah maniple says can libby write a zeppelin story to use as a source can i write a zeppelin story well the issue is we have the video of of us building the zeppelin and it's got it's got um you know uh let's go brandon on the side of it that was luke's flag and we're flying it around and streaming from it so that youtube video is good enough anyone could just put that on wikipedia that tim pool invented a zeppelin the issue is there was an old story

claiming it was true and then after like seven years they removed it and then i demanded they restore it now that i did in fact build a zeppelin retroactively making the article true but they remove it because the reason i did it was it's an interesting question about the article said i invented a zeppelin at the time i didn't but now i did as a live streaming zeppelin modification if the article is now factually true why would they not allow the article to be on because you're not a primary source no it's not from me it's from like it was from like uh forbes or something so the question is if the article is true now it wasn't at the time is it a legitimate source right is forbes a legitimate

source that you built a zeppelin if it wasn't my point is if a news article says charlie kirk does backflip and he never did and then five years later he does do a backflip the fact that it says charlie kirk has done a backflip is now true and correct despite it's actually still incorrect because the date on the article uh is not actually reflective of when the thing happened. But the date. So it's still fake. But I don't think the date reflects the statement made. The date reflects the time the statement was made, but the statement is now true. The statement is now true, but it wasn't true at the time.

So I guess that's the issue that I'm testing. That was the intent. How can, if there is a historical article reference saying Donald Trump never did thing, and then he later goes and does it, reference is or i'm saying if it says donald trump did a thing he didn't do and then he does do it it's now and it's now accurate the fake news becomes accurate you know what i mean i i think it wouldn't be accurate also so what do they do they rewrite the story and say update it would be the exact same terminology so and what they would do is right it's like saying that donald trump is dead he's not but eventually he will be and so you or has died but it would

say update at the time of this article it was not true but at the time of writing it now is when you publish something matters it's critical in journalism can we get social media to clip the thing where charlie just said i was right also i'm wondering about like you're referencing in the article like if it says tim pool pets dog and it shows a picture of you petting a gray dog but you're like i never did that and then 10 years later you pet a brown dog it doesn't make the because the reference of the word dog is a different dog it's a different reference i get the same word i just but but like that you're talking about a common occurrence of petting a dog and i think the issue is inventing a zeppelin is a very very very specific thing to do it It's still a lie. I get it.

The fake news story is still fake. It's just like a weird circumstance, I suppose. All right. Let's see. Let's grab some more. What do we got here? Otaku Magnet says, Federal politicians believe they are serving their districts.

This is a falsehood. They serve all Americans due to the positions they have. We need to return all power back to the states and localities. I agree. Absolutely. Gabriel Lopez says, Ian, anyone can spin up a Wikipedia right now, yet no one does it because it would be useless. I'm a 20-year

software engineer. Code does not matter. I rewrite stuff every five years. It's usually less than 5% of the cost of building the software business. Building a software business. People actually do spin up their own Wikipedias. There's a bunch of different versions of Wikipedia. There's like WikiQuote, and then there's Wikia forums where people will their own Wikipedias. There's a bunch of different versions of Wikipedia. There's like WikiQuote and then there's Wikia forums

where people will create Wikipedia like encyclopedias for everything. There's like a Wiki Star Wars thing. Yes. Simpsons Wikia and you know My Hero Academia Wikia. Dragon Ball Z.

And the funny thing about it is they always refer to fictional characters in the past tense for some reason which I don't get. Whatever. All right. Leo Malto says Congratslie just won the 2024 general election how do you fix the administrative state and handle these corrupt da's uh you repeal you immediately enact i think it's called title 50 um or whatever it is that that

allows donald trump to fire federal officials at will. Schedule F? Schedule F. That's it. You immediately put it in Schedule F. And then I, if you want, I will vote for Trump if he does one thing right now. If Donald Trump puts out a video where he's wearing a hood like the emperor, and he goes, execute Schedule

F, and then it plays the Star Wars song, and then you see a bunch of people just carrying Order 66 or whatever it's called, right? And then it's people carrying boxes out of offices, and it plays a Star Wars theme, and it's all dramatic, and then it plays the star wars song and then you see a bunch of people just carrying 66 or whatever it's called right and then it's the people carrying boxes out of offices and it plays a star wars theme and it's all dramatic and then trump goes i would be like i am voting for him and nothing will stop it at this point he needs the santas could ride a pegasus into the sunlight with a golden sword and i bet trump did the thing with the schedule f he's get my vote schedule f immediately he needs to decentralize washington dc i probed this during the first term and it was met um with total deaf ears so i hope in the new administration we could do this you need to pick you need to look at the cabinet you need to say

okay veterans affairs is going to florida department of the interior is going to colorado you know you go through one by one right health and human services you have to break up the centrality of washington dc you have to put the agencies actually into the country that they serve. This would make it harder for lobbyists to navigate. You'd get a better pool of employees. You would actually create wealth more in these states. That's a cool idea. Oh, yeah. Where should Biden's massive medical industrial complex expansion go?

New Jersey. That's fair. And then if the power goes out, they go back to the Capitol? What do you mean? Because it works decentralizing until the phone lines get shut down. But if they're operating independently, they don't necessarily need to. But they would be all over the country, right? So the vision would be you would pick states that actually make sense to the constituents

they're serving. So the Department of the Interior should be where there's the most federal lands, Nevada, Colorado, Utah, Montana, Idaho, Wyoming, right? You look at another agency, Department of Education, right? I think you should send that to a red state. So your red state that's doing things great, Arizona. Arizona has the best school choice. The point is that you reallocate these federal departments out of the kingdom of Washington, D.C., and then you actually change the personnel. And that's one of the ways that you actually change the administrative state.

And the third thing is that personnel is policy, and Trump needs to get 50 absolute stone-cold killers around him if he wins another term that are ready to go fire people immediately purge the bureaucracy of these double-minded people and just issue pink slip after pink slip after pink slip so the the they say some say he never drained the swamp others say he did drain the swamp and it exposed the swamp monsters under the water and if that's the case now he needs to come down and gently guide these folks into a nice bus where they can be driven off to comfortably retire and sit in little chairs in sunrooms. And then I wish them nothing but happiness, but away from the seats of government. Yes. And so Trump term two, he needs to govern with urgency and a vengeance against these very

people that tried to impeach him twice, people that have tried to destroy this country. And the administrative state needs to be the primary focus of Trump term two. It is out of control. It's unchecked. These people are unelected. They have unknown amounts of power. You don't even know the face to them. And I mean, just the CDC alone is worthy of just a massive purge, let alone the FBI. The vengeance thing makes me nervous because I was watching Hitler's speeches last night. And when you have an enemy and you're campaigning and you're like, the bad guy, the bad guy, you hear people in the crowd screaming stuff like, get him!

And you're like, no, no, we're not doing that to this world. It is a problem. The deep state is a big problem that they don't have term limits. But I think we could create something that helps everybody and also evolve the system so that there's less of a bloat. Let's read one more here. We got Nibiru says, the permit list carry in Florida takes effect July 1st. They finally put age to buy firearms back to 18. Got to take the win.

DeSantis for president won't happen. Also, Matt Gates for Florida governor 2027 and Bocas espresso blend for the win. DeSantis for president won't happen. Also, Matt Gaetz for Florida governor, 2027. And Bocas Espresso Blend for the win. Ah, perhaps, perhaps. Yeah, Bocas Espresso might be good. All right, everybody. If you haven't already, would you kindly smash that like button, subscribe to this channel, share the show with your friends if you really do like it, because word of mouth is the most powerful way that podcasts actually succeed.

And become a member at TimCast.com. Head over to TimCast.com, click join us, sign up for the Discord server, because in our members-only uncensored show, going live in about 10 minutes on the front page of TimCast.com, we will be taking your calls, and you can ask all of us questions. And it's good fun. It's my favorite part of the day, to be completely honest. I love getting to answer questions from the community.

And that's another thing we're doing. We're going to be launching this thing where our Friday sponsor spot, instead of doing some company, will just be one of our members. So if one of our members has a company, we will figure out how to do the proper decision making, but we'll just be like today's episode is brought to you by our members. Today's member is, you know, so-and-so who runs a company building widgets or whatever. And we're really excited for this. It was actually the community that came up with the idea, and it was brilliant. So I really do appreciate the support. So smash that like button, subscribe to this channel,

and again, become a member at timcast.com. You can follow the show at timcast IRL. You can follow me personally at timcast everywhere. Charlie, do you want to shout anything out? I do. Everybody, if you would be as kind, it's free of charge. Subscribe to our podcast, The Charlie Kirk Show Podcast. We do three podcasts a day. We're live on 140

radio stations every day, 12 to 3. We're also live on Real America's Voice, Rumble, and YouTube. But the best way to support us is you take out the phone and you open up the podcast app of your choice, Apple or Spotify are the two big ones. Type in Charlie Kirk Show and hit that subscribe button. It blesses us significantly.

Always interesting guests. Libby's on frequently, Tim, we had you on for long form. It was fabulous. Um, and so if you guys would be so kind to subscribe, it really helps us out. Right on.

So I also would like to pump memberships. We took a cue from you, Tim, actually, and we have memberships now at the post millennial and human events. And for $5 a month, you can go add free. Uh, the ads are the things that everybody hates

about the Postmillennial. Everyone loves our work. We have great contributors. We have Jack Posobiec, who's a senior editor at Human Events. Andy Ngo is also a senior editor. We have Savannah Hernandez. Charlie, of course, is a contributor

to Human Events as well. Proudly. Yeah, and so we have a lot of great work. We have a lot of great talent. And we hope that you sign up for that at thepostmillennial.com slash subscribe. So I hope that you do that. And also, I'm going to be coming up at the Minds Fest in Austin. I think you guys are all going to be there on April 15th at the Vulcan Theater in Austin.

So I'm a late addition to the lineup, but I'm glad to be there. And tickets are available at tickets.vulcanpresents.com. And I hope to see everyone out there. I'll also be there.

Always a pleasure, my man. We should do a show and talk about God. I think we're doing that next on the members only thing. We're doing that on Charlie Kirk's show someday because I could talk to him

for an hour. Okay, we're going to do a short version here. Much love, Charlie. Thanks for coming out. I'm a big Ian fan, by the way. Thanks for the data, dog. Love you. Take care of yourself. Hey, good to see you, Charlie,

as always. Good show. Please call in, guys. You should become a member. It's actually really fun to do. Let's go. We'll see you all. Go to TimCast.com right on the front page in about 10 minutes. You will see the uncensored show. You click on it. Boom, let's go. We'll see you all go to Tim cast.com right on the front page in about 10 minutes. You will see the uncensored show you click on it. Boom, you're there and we'll see you out there. Thanks for hanging out. you