Timcast IRL - White House Drops ALIENS.GOV, Saying THEY WALK AMONG US w/ Will Chamberlain

Episode Date: May 29, 2026

Tim, Ian, and Tate are joined by Will Chamberlain to discuss an Alien website going live, Justice Amy Coney Barrett swatted, a man arrested after allegedly threatening Erika Kirk, and the Pentagon puts military assets in place around Cuba.  SUPPORT THE SHOW BUY CAST BREW COFFEE NOW - https://castbrew.com/ Join - https://timcast.com/discord Hosts:  Tim @Timcast (everywhere) | https://www.shoutout.fans/timpool Ian  ⁨@IanCrossland⁩  (everywhere) | https://graphene.movie/ Tate @realTateBrown (everywhere) |  ⁨@TimcastTateBrown⁩  (YT) Producer: Carter @carterbanks (X) |  @trashhouserecords  (YT) Guest:  Will Chamberlain @willchamberlain (X)   Podcast available on all podcast platforms! White House Drops ALIENS.GOV, Saying THEY WALK AMONG US | Timcast IRL For advertising inquiries please email [e-mail]

The White House is finally published aliens.gov, declassified saying they walk among us. For 60 years, no president has done anything about the aliens in this country. And I am going to say this right off the bat. I was right. The whole time, I was right. He's talking about illegal aliens. That's right. Aliens.gov is about illegal aliens.

The whole website leads you on, dragging it out, and then finally at the bottom, it's like only Donald Trump has taken action against the aliens who are in our classrooms and in our places of work and walking among us and are now being deported back to their home countries. Yeah, aliens.gov is meant to look like space aliens and that whole thing is just illegal aliens. They were just screwing with everybody. But, that being said, there's a new movie coming out called Disclosure Day. And conspiracy theorists believe that there will be actual alien disclosure. So we can at least talk somewhat about all of that. Now, the big news today outside of this, this really was the most general interest story, to be honest.

But Amy Coney-Barratt sitting Supreme Court justice was swatted. A man was arrested for threatening to murder, Erica Kirk. And we have the active insurrection outside of the Newark Ice facility, where employees of this facility have deferred authority to the extremists, not an exaggeration. There are viral videos showing the employees asking the activists, the insurgents, and the terrorists for permission, calling them up to search the ICE vehicles before being allowed to pass. This is extremely dangerous. I'll put it like that. Extremely dangerous.

So we're going to talk about that and many, many more big stories as it's getting crazy out there. Before we do, my friends, we've got a great sponsor for you. It is venice. dot AI. Leading AI models say they don't sell your data. Do you believe them? Chad GPT is the former director of the NSA sitting on his board. Edward Snowden called this a willful calculated betrayal of the rights of every person on

earth. Leading AI companies are now openly working for the Pentagon. It's getting weird out there. This is why you guys check up venice. Venet dot AI. Think of it as like a VPN for AI. You get anonymous access to GPT, Gemini, and the Claude models, fully private access to leading open source models like GLM, Kimi and Deepseek.

Venice submits requests. on your behalf so nothing is ever tied to your identity. Your conversations are encrypted and stored only on your device. So no corporation or government can spy on you or use your data for profit. Venice Studio, now available. You see what I'm making all these skateboard videos. It's an all in one creative workspace with audio and music generation, video and image generation, latest models like Seedance 2.0 currently editing.

One subscription for all the best tools and models on the market. It's founded by Eric Voorhees, one of pioneers of Bitcoin and a privacy advocate. So go to our sponsor here, venice.a.ai slash Tim, to access the world's leading AI models privately, all in one place. Use code Tim for 20% off any plan. Don't wait to drive Venice AI. The longer you wait, the more of a profile these leading AI companies are building on you. Shout out venice.AI. But also, before we get started, guys, go to timcast.com and click join now. Why? Family. Community. The most important thing in a person's life, humans live for the human experience. Now, I'm going to remove all of the political stuff from this and give a shout to Jeremy Boring, who made an interesting point about, we're talking about veganism and environmentalism. And he was explaining that humans live for other humans. We are inspired by, we are driven to pursue endeavors that better the lives of other humans.

We fantasize about saving the lives of people we don't even know because we are here. for each other. The internet has become a, let's just call it sad place. Because of the internet, we don't know our neighbors anymore. We don't know who lives next to us. Now, I can't immediately remedy that, but what I can say is for many of you who are looking for community, go to timcast.com and join the Discord where you'll be talking with people. You may disagree with. You may agree with, but we are creating a space centered around certain values and ideas. As a member of a community, you can build things, you can change the world, and you have that support group. That's what it was always supposed to be about. We could do things like exclusive video access, and we do, but the real

value for all of you is that there is a network of people that are there for you and that you can be there for. And as members of this community, you make this show possible. So join us. Don't just sit idly by lonely, watching the show by yourself. You get in the Discord and you're hanging out with a ton of people who are talking about the show, the actual voice chats, and then you can even call in and talk to us. Plus, we've got special members-only events, newsletters. We are really trying to make this about building community. And I'll tell you why. We can do a lot of things here. And I'll get a little deep with it because this is more than just the business we operate. What are we here on this earth for? There used to be a great American vision. And we were Americans. We believed in the same

things. We viewed the world similarly. We stood side by side. But now we are becoming dejected. We are we are experiencing social discohesion. To me, the most important thing is family and community. And so that's what I've been working on, my own family and trying to build something as a business that means more than just selling a product, a place where people can hang out, share. And that's really all that matters. You know, I was thinking about it. I don't care about what people are doing in France. I don't care about what people are doing in Russia necessarily. I mean, unless they're funding wars against and stuff like this. At the end of the day, what really matters is the people we care about, the people around us and those that share our values and ideas,

and we need to have that community space. So join us at timcast.com. Don't forget to also smash the like button and share this show with everyone you know. Tell them to also join the community and have these debates, have these conversations. Joining us tonight to talk about this and So much more, of course, is Will Chamberlain. Good to be with you guys. I'm Senior Council of the Article 3 Project, but I'm not here in that capacity today because I'm wearing a campaign t-shirt, so you can't...

Yeah, you don't like Thomas Massey, huh? Wait, did he lose? Indeed, he did lose. He lost, yeah. For those that are just listening, he's wearing an Ed Garlane shirt. Well, he won, you know. So, well, it's good to have you.

We have a lot to talk about, of course. We have the boys hanging out. Was the shirt bought before the primary? No. I bought the shirt like last week. I was like, that'd be impressive for Kalshi, Cali betting purposes. No, yeah.

I have concerns about Garain though, because when I went to his farms, Instagram, there were no chickens. Oh, really? Yeah, that's suspicious. It was that easy to win your endorsement. I'm sure that somebody could be in touch. Well, you know, Massey's got chickens, you know.

7,000 eggs deposited right into your bank. He's got the clucks capacitor. He built this like automated solar powered chicken coop system that moves. I mean, it's brilliant. And, you know, I have questions. I have questions. But anyway, Ian's hanging out. Hey, guys.

That was what you said, Tim, is very true about community, ma'am. That's why I started doing YouTube in the first place. I thought, what would Jesus do with his technology? How could he help? And I got scared in the beginning. It brought people together. It does, dude. And in the beginning, I got scared about cult, forming a cult and communism

and how a cult of personality can breed a communist revolution. But community is the antidote to communism. It really is, like, a tight community of people. And the way the Internet works is you kind of vibrate towards a central focus and you meet people that are like you. Well, you find your significant other. I agree with you, but I want to clarify, the cult-like world that exists within a communist system or a cult itself,

it's because people don't have community, so they're desperate to say or do whatever it takes to feel that. So a real community where people can actually share ideas, debate each other, and be encouraged to have rational thoughts and disagreements is a remedy for cult and community. And other than that, I just want to say, Howdy, to all the cattle ranchers out there that are doing it right, thank you, God. Thank you for doing this the way you're doing it because I talk crap about industrial,

agricultural, agricultural stuff. But if you are a legitimate farmer or a rancher, thank you. Thank you. Thank you, God. Thank you for being part of this awesome. Yeah, we had a great caller last night who was a legitimate rancher and he was in the discords. You should definitely join the discord to call in for the aftershed. Bro, listen, you got these W-EF guys who are like, people shouldn't eat meat so we should get this tick that makes you allergic to meat. and I'm just like, I don't believe anything they say about meat. You know, when they're like, did you know that farmers like mercilessly beat the cows?

I'm like, I don't believe you. Because you are advocating for forcing people to develop allergies to meat. But anyway, let's get to the news. We'll get in all that stuff. Carter, of course, pressing all the buttons. We've got this, my friends, from whitehouse.gov slash aliens. In fact, you go to aliens.com. They walk among us.

I knew it. And it says declassified. And it was funny because they dropped this today. And actually the people at the White House, they reached out to our communications people like, hey, we released this. And I get a text message with the link. And I immediately say to my wife, I'm like, oh, the White House has just confirmed aliens exist. And then I wanted to know what my wife was going to say when I told her this. And she just chuckled on, oh, yeah.

Like, this was the idea that if they ever did actually announce aliens were real, no one would care. And then I said, well, they published the website, but I haven't read it yet. And then as soon as I opened it up, I was like, it's illegal aliens. But this is what we were saying before. When they first registered aliens.gov and became a big news story, we said on this show, it's either going to be just like generic UFO disclosure, but I'm willing to bet it's going to be like illegal aliens, right? That's Trump's whole thing. So they run this gag.

Take a look. They walk among us. For 60 years, the U.S. government has kept a closely guarded secret. Aliens have been walking among us, living in our neighborhoods, interacting with us in our daily lives. They've shopped in the same stores. attended the same class as our children and lived seemingly normal human existences. With one exception, they do not belong here. Millions arrived under the cover of darkness embedded themselves directly into our society.

Countless presidents, congressmen, and senior officials knew exactly what was happening. Instead of protecting American citizens, they chose to cover it up and even accelerate the invasion. Until one man finally had the courage to tell the truth. That's right. Bold, unapologetic, and unafraid, President Trump was the first to call up the real danger aliens pose to every American family. The truth is no longer out there. It is here right now. 3,130,217 encounters.

Alien arrest map live, indeed. Martinsburg, West Virginia, criminal charges, assault, burglary, damage to property, dangerous drugs, countries of origin, Afghanistan, buts. So I wonder if all of the UFO alien talk was actually just, to generate a bunch of buzz as a joke because I just want to say this doesn't help them in any meaningful way. It's not advocacy against illegal immigration. It does generate attention toward the issue. Maybe they were waiting to drop this around the time like something bad with the Iran war was happening or something. But I see this is kind of just they made a joke.

If they were really smart, they were sitting around a boardroom like, all right, we're going to we're going to put up the alien thing. Either we're going to sigh up the planet and control these people with fear. If that doesn't work, we'll just make it an illegal alien website. We're really, we are, man. Probably unironically is the strad. I mean, I think that, you know, the whole, well, I mean, Area 51, my understanding is it's actually just a military base. They don't want anybody going near. So they're like aliens. Yeah. Right. But they're like, no, actually, we just do secret things. I think they planned like the bin Laden raid there or something. They built the model of his house. That kind of, so you need places that nobody wants to go anywhere

near that are owned by the government. Right. Aliens seem like a good. And I think that whole Chinese weather balloon thing, it was so embarrassing that they need the UFOs for plausible deniability. Like, oh, we can't. We don't know what it is. One of my favorite conspiracy theories, of course, is Terra Infinity. Are you familiar with that one? So, or Greater Earth Theory, have you ever heard this one? I say that very carefully because there's crater Earth. Okay, let's have some fun with the boys. Crater. It's delusional. You know what? Do you know what Crater Earth is? Okay, the crater Earth conspiracy theory is that the moon is a reflection of Earth and that the

world as we know it exists within one of the craters on the moon that we're looking at. And there's an ice wall and all this, whatever nonsense. It's like Terra infinita is that there's this gigantic flat plane with a whole bunch of like ice walled in communities controlled by aliens or something. I don't know. Greater Earth is that there is a spherical planet. The continents that we know, it's on a round planet. But it's only a small piece of the planet and surrounded by an ice walk.

we are kept in and kept us slaves. I love this one because now it's tying into one of these Charlie Kirk conspiracy theories, which is there is a new Charlie Kirk conspiracy theory that he's actually on the island of Valhalla in Greater Earth, where our governmental elites go once they retire from office and leave, and we are all slaves trapped within the intercontinence and the ice wall. And so I saw this video where they were like, remember when Cash Patel said, I'll see you in Valhalla. And then they showed like

a Tyler Robinson image where he's looking at a computer and the computer has an image of an island with a mountain called Valhalla or whatever. And so they're saying that Charlie Kirk's actually still alive. He escaped to outside,

you know, he elevated out of the intertontinence. Now he lives in a place called Valhalla where there's regular people. And Cash is going to go there too. Yeah, like Cash dropped and he said like, see you in Valhalla and then he got pulled aside after the speech. And they're like, dude, why did you say this?

I don't know. it slipped. No one will believe it anyway. Yeah. Maybe they'll just hand wave away because of Indian. The conspiracy theories seem very inefficient. Right? Like there's a way in which, like, it's much more complicated to rule over humanity.

Right. Couldn't you just do something Matrix-like where you just put us all on a battery farm? Like if that's the plan to make a... Well, the idea is that humans revolt. So if you keep them ignorant, the saying is from Harriet Tubman, I freed many slaves. I would have freed many more if only they knew they were slaves. So the conspiracy theory is that we are the lesser slave peasant humans trapped within the intercontinent of an ice wall. Our powerful elites are, they liaise between Greater Earth and us and keep us in check.

That's why our politicians never do what we want. That's why they won't pass the Save Act. See, now you're a believer. And now he believes it. And they drop super helpful clues. just to kind of spice things up. Like the Egyptian planes are coming in. They're like, should we like, you know, not appear on the radar?

And they're like, no, this is like giving a little, you know, give them a little taste here, but we're up to. Yeah, like that. Drop a little. Is the ice wall like an extrapolation of the firmament? Is that where this all, because I hear a lot about ice walls and different conspiracy theories. Well, there's a, there's a somewhat of an ideological relation, but they're different things. Yeah.

They're like liquid, I think. Because the ice wall isn't just part of one worldview, right? Flat Earthers think the ocean. think the oceans are held in by a great wall of ice and the governments of the world are stopping you from going there or whatever. Maybe back in the day, after the flood, there was a great ice age. Like we're at the tail end of an ice age right now in an interglacial period, but maybe they're literally, they were literally walled in by ice by like 15,000 years ago or something. And they, so now they just, that story's persisted. Like in North, the North Atlantic,

frozen all the way down and they couldn't get out of Europe. You know, I mean, if you were government doing that, you just stopped funding like, travel, right? Wouldn't use... That's the conspiracy theory. There is no space travel. There is no space travel. All private companies, satellites, everything. It's all fake. I'll keep you guessing. Gosh, it's weird. Yeah, again, very...

Elon Musk, the whole thing, you know, it's just... They made it up. There's a... Stars. Why, they let the Republicans win. They could have screwed over Elon and, I mean... Because they're all in on it. That's why they named him Trump. Yeah, that's why they won't pass the Save Act. Right, right. they're like, no, we can't do this.

I feel like there's a simpler explanation for why the SAVE Act isn't passing. What is it? Filibuster? The funny thing is they wouldn't actually need to do or not do anything. They could pass any law they want. If there was truly absolute conspiratorial control of everything, they just tell you whatever you wanted to hear. Do we want to talk about why the SAVE Act is not passing?

Is it actually a big thing? What's up? Okay. I mean, obviously it's the filibuster, right? Yeah, but the question is why don't they get rid of the filibuster? Exactly. Right. And the reason is actually pretty simple, even among like sort of more conservative Republicans in the Senate. And this is coming from talking to senior officials who basically say, if you got rid of the filibuster, you'd be more likely to get a broad amnesty than you would be to get the SAVE Act passed, meaning you do not have 53 votes for the SAVE Act even in a world where you do it. But you know what you have 53 or 54 votes for? Open borders. Right. And that's, you mean, in a world. But the argument is if you pass the SAVAC Act, now you prevent them from taking power.

And if they take power, they're going to grant amnesty anyway. Well, I mean, I guess my point is like the conservative, you know, the filibuster effectively insulates. I mean, there's a lot of reasons why the filibuster stays in place, mainly because, you know, we worry that Democrats will obviously get rid of the filibuster first thing. Maybe they will, maybe they won't. After talking to people, I'm not so sure they will because I think there are a decent number of moderate senators on the Democrat side who are scared about what Republicans will end up doing with the filibuster. It'll just like lead to this ping ponging of policy back and forth.

But it's, you know, that's, that's a core reason. There are not 60 votes and that, and there's, there's, I think, they polled the Republican Senate caucus on getting rid of the filibuster, like, informally. And my understanding was that poll showed that they got maybe one and four. Yes, to get rid of the filibuster, a good three quarters of the caucus. I've heard a lot of people speculate that part of the reason the Save Act is getting held up is because it's something that a lot more establishment candidates will utilize some sort of maybe more nefarious, shady election tactics to push through primaries? I mean, it's really there are just a fewer, the squishier Republicans don't want to do it.

Like Mitch McConnell has made trying to keep the federal government out of state elections a big part of his project for a long time because previously it was Democrats trying to interfere in Republican elections to make them more favor. I'm, I'm, I really don't care about the Save Act at this point because I think we're beyond this as a country. I think we are beyond the point where procedural victories matter. Well, here is actually, I have a thesis about this. I think that here's the reason not to do it just for the Save Act.

If you get rid of the filibuster, it would be a very big one-time event that we have the, where Republicans have the chance to do a whole bunch and put in place a huge program with a 50-seat majority, right? Like, finally, we've gotten rid of the 60-vote rule in the Senate. We can do a whole bunch of stuff. Why would we just do one thing? And if we're only ready to do just one. What I'm saying is when you look at the funding, the DNC is $3 million in debt. They got 14 million cash on hand and 17 million in debt.

Republicans have $200 million and big Democrat donors are not funding the party as a whole. They're either targeting specific races or they're funding activism, NGOs, and extremism. I think that many of the high-profile Democrat-aligned donors have realized institutional paths to victory are gone. Republicans, Republicans are going for institutional victories. They're going for redistricting. They're financing races and the Republican Party itself. And Democrats are funding Cuba trips and Antifa and violence. When you take a look at what's going out with Newark, where you get federal employees deferring their authority to the extremists.

It looks like the strategy among the elites on the liberal side are saying, we need to go hot in terms of winning power. and Republicans are saying, we are going to win legitimate institutional authority. So this is why I say, I don't know that the Save Act matters as much right now because Democrats are not putting their resources into those races. I think, I mean, I don't know that the Save Act would, I mean, how would the Save Act affect resources? The Save Act is the Save Act is all about. No, no, no. The question is, what are the Democrats applying their, what are they focused on in order to win power? It's not electoral victories.

I mean, no, I think not, certainly I think the institutional Democratic Party and Democratic donors are. I think the donor problem is actually a, they're split. Well, there's two classes of donors. There's the activist donors, the Neville-Singham types. They're not really donating the Democrat Party because they'd rather, you know, fund communism. Communism. And then there's the sort of classic institutional democratic donors, many of whom are Jews and are really not happy about the way things have been going in the Democratic Party and are not opening their checkbooks. centrally, the Democrats are not as a party raising money. The donors are not interested in a centralized institutional democratic power anymore. So if we're breaking this down, Republicans are basically all saying, give the party money, give Trump money, we're going to win. We're going to win the midterms. Democrats are split where some are saying, let's make sure this one guy wins.

The others are saying, let's have Antifa march of the streets and bash skulls. So my point ultimately is the strategy of Democrats. Democrats right now for the midterms is not we are going to get out the vote. It's terrorize, vandalize. And the Republicans are going procedural. That's why I say I don't know the Save Act matters as much right now. The Republicans, I think, honestly, I think with Virginia, so Trump shutters USAID cuts off funding for a lot of this circuitous, you know, NGO, illicit funding. Democrats, deep stat, I should call it, are routed, go to Virginia, try to short their defenses, get crushed again. And I think they've basically

resign themselves to we are not going to beat Trump at this game. I don't know if you saw the Trump won that lawsuit or not that he won the lawsuit, but the judge cited with Trump on the executive order over the post office. You saw this? Over the post office? Is this the, you mean the citizenship question on the census? No, no, no, Trump signed the executive order instructing the post office not to deliver mail-in ballots to people who are ineligible to vote. Okay. Creating a de facto, voter list. Was this like yesterday? Was this the thing? I think, two days ago, I believe. Was it two days ago?

It was this week. I thought it was yesterday or today. I would be, I wouldn't read too much into that. I think he just denied it because it was not a, what's the, no, no, no, it's amazing. It's a ripeness issue, right? He said, the judge said, there is no relief to be provided because Trump hasn't done anything yet. Right, that's rightness. That's what that's.

You know, you know why that's retarded and hilarious at the same time? Because that was the basic argument used against Trump in 2020 when Republican groups and the Trump's sphere were suing over the changes to the electoral system. These judges kept saying They haven't done anything yet So how do we remedy no damages? And it's funny because the Republicans are like They changed the rules illicitly And it's going to have an impact on the election

And the judges would go Well, if it does, we can then provide relief After the fact. And then what happened when it did have an impact And the Republican sued? What did the judges say then? And it was moot because it was too late to do anything about it. Yes, it already happened. We can't do anything about it now.

This is insanity. A legal evolution where you can have a preemptive, what did you call it? A preemptive, what do you call this thing? A remedy? A preemptive remedy that triggers when. Well, there's, you can get an injunction, right? You can stop somebody from doing something. You can get declaratory relief, which is where the judge declares some legal state of affairs.

Like, declares your statement, not defamatory. So why are they not going for injunctions when they were trying to get rid of? Well, I mean, I think they were trying to go for an injunction. They just didn't get an injunction on this, on this. because the judge said the dispute was not right. So here's the analogy that I give. So there's two little boys. There's Jimmy and Johnny.

And Jimmy's got the hammer cracked back. And he's looking at the guy. And Johnny says, dad, take the hammer from him before he hits me. And the dad goes, well, he didn't hit you yet. So I can't just take his hammer away. Then Jimmy cracks Johnny over there with the hammer. And Johnny goes, dad, help. He hit me with the hammer.

And he goes, well, he already hits you. I mean, there's no point taking the hammer now, right? That's what the courts were doing in 2020. Now, the funny thing is, Trump signs the executive order saying to the post office, do not deliver mail-in votes to people, mail-in ballots, two people ineligible to vote. They, this liberal group sued saying that would create de facto voter lists. It's a violation of privacy rights. And the judge said, I can't grant relief to something that hasn't happened yet. Bye.

Now, here's the problem. When it comes time to deliver those mail-in, mail-in votes. votes about a month out from the election, they'll go out, have to collect the evidence of damages or of something having occurred, then file a suit. It's going to take too long. And then once the election's done, the courts then go, what already happened? So is the, I didn't read the decision. I wish I had before. So is the, basically the, what is the harm being alleged to the, the voters? The harm is like a, a, a privacy violation. And the judge said two things. First, The government already has this information available to them.

Aggregating it into one location is not a violation of your rights. However, it doesn't matter anyway because Trump hasn't done anything yet. He gave an instruction. There has not been any visible damages. When the Trump administration takes this action and something tangibly occurs, then we can have a discussion about potential. That's actually right. Because, I mean, from the judge's perspective, I think, I mean, you have articulated

the way that rightness and mootness can be abused, right? Like the idea that holding the hammer, maybe you could say the dispute's not right, the guy hits you in the head, maybe you could say the dispute's moot, but then there's no relief, which seems unjust. That's what they do. But if in a world where the harm alleged

is this privacy violation potential from your data being collected and aggregated, the aggregation of your data, as you say, is not an abuse in and of itself, if they actually come into court and say, look, our data has been aggregated and the government is now planning to do X, Y, Z with this data, then you're a little more in the realm of ripeness where the dispute is actually. The threat itself, not a ripeness, doesn't make it ripe?

Well, they're not just going to consider, like, the court's not going to operate on like a hypothetical. Basically what you're saying is right now it's a hypothetical problem. Here's a better way. So the way I described it with the guy having the hammer clearly about to strike the other kid. I would have been punished for it, by the way, as a kid. Indeed. holding the hammer and threatening someone. And this is the idea of 2020 when the Republicans sued saying,

hey, they changed the rules of the election unconstitutionally. This will cause damages, and they're correct. But let's try another analogy. Jimmy is holding a hammer and he's hammering a nail making a little birdhouse. Johnny sees the hammer and says, dad, take his hammer from him before he hits me. And the dad says, he's not threatening you at all. He's just hammering a nail into a birdhouse. That's a different situation.

What if Johnny? There's no perceived threat. You don't know there'll be damage. That's the honest approach to it's ripeness. Ripness is the name of this. What if the hammer wielder says, you know, he's hammering the nail. He's like, you know, Johnny, one day I'm going to hit you with this hammer. Then does that create a, you know, he's not posturing?

And this is where it's interpretation of the judge. And in 2020, this is what we were dealing with. The judges were like, well, I mean, they've done, they haven't damaged you yet. And the Republicans were like, the changing of the rules. Then after the election happened and they filed a lawsuit, the judges, a lot of the these courts and these judges said, well, the election's already over. What will you'll be to do about it? It's insane. It's just pure insane. Yeah, that was, that's an abuse of rightness and mootness.

Let's, uh, let's do this. Civil War, my friends. Let's jump to the story from NBC News. We got a hard seat. Supreme Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett's home targeted in apparent swatting incident. What was really crazy about this is the story broke earlier today and no one picked it up for like 12 hours. So I had, I tweeted this, uh, I tweeted out this, this, this video showing the 911 call where someone was like Amy Coney Barrett was just swatted. And then I saw Nick Soder tweeted out the same thing. And I said, do we have any other source on this? Like, no disrespect to the dude who broke the story. But I like to have three confirmations. Nick Soder posting the same video as me is not a confirmation. I want to see, you know,

NBC or some other outlet, not that I think they're trustworthy, but at least they'll be like, we contacted police in Fairfonte, Fairfax County, Virginia, who confirmed this. They say officers immediately coordinated with the Supreme Court police personnel assigned to the residents to determine the report was. fictitious. This is the state of this country. In Newark, far left extremists are outside an ice facility, and the employees of the ice facility are asking them for permission. This should not be tolerated. Have you seen the video? There's like a security guy. New Jersey. I mean, not the most recent. So a video from a few days ago, I don't know if he's a security contractor, a direct employee of DHS,

but a vehicle is coming out. He walks up to the crowd, and he points at him in fans, her over and she comes over to search the vehicle. Then when she confirms the vehicle doesn't have illegal immigrants in it, she clear, she tells everybody to clear out of the way. It's insanity that a federal employee or contractor would defer his authority to the far left extremists in front of the building. I warn you guys, government is confidence. I have talked about this quite a bit when regular people start to feel that the true authority lies with the insurrectionists and the terrorists, this is when you get civil war. The question people have asked, since the conversation of civil wars come up, is who are the factions, who will be fighting? That's ridiculous. And when I would say

something like, well, you've got the far left, you know, and you've got Trump supporters, they'd say, you know, and literally, I was told this by this DC like political consultant guy, lobby guy. He's like, dude, activists fighting each other in the street is not a civil war. what happens when federal law enforcement defer the authority to that group? What happens one day when these leftists buy uniforms? What happens if one day a leftist shows up at your house, knocks on the door, in what a button up shirt and khakis with a badge? And they say, DSA guard, I have a warrant to inspect to search your home.

Now, we all watching this would be like, what? DSA guard is not a real law enforcement agency. You can't come to my house. how many regular people would just not know and be like, oh, you have a war? Okay, I guess. And just let them come in and do whatever they want. Now, that's an extreme scenario, of course. But I stress this.

We're already at the point where we saw a video of a worker at the ICE facility allowing far left extremists to search the vehicles leaving the property. This is where it begins. If the question asked by the general population, who controls the threat of violence against me? If it is no longer the federal government, then they don't care what the federal government says. And if it is Antifa, then Antifa becomes the government. I noticed, I think it was Harmeet Dillon? Somebody, they're issuing, no, it wasn't Dylan.

Somebody was, I don't think it was, issuing like the government to go track people's ex-accounts now, a couple people that have indicated that they're going to be threatening or had said threatening things or done threatening things. So it's like, it seems like the government's getting ready to crack down if something, like that were to happen and groups of terrorist, you know, angry mobs were masking up or arming up or uniforming up that they're going to go snatch people out of houses one night. Well, they already got

the foreign terror designation and that gives, you know, that gives the DOJ massive tools, in their toolbox to really target people. I think I'm confident in DOJ doing this. I mean, I was disappointed recently. I don't know if you followed this, but you remember Kat Abu Ghazaleh. Sorry, do you remember

Kat Abu Ghazale? Yeah, Abu Ghazela. If you ran for office? I think, I don't know. Right, so she was indicted. Boo-go-gaboo. It was like a slur. She was indicted for, uh, she was like a Chicago house can't. She's like a TikToker.

She was like a Chicago candidate. She got, she obstructed that vehicle and got hit by it. She got hit by it. No, she didn't get, well, that was, she didn't get it. No, she got shoved. She got shoved. But there was a different time where she was like banging on the hood. Yeah, got indicted for it.

That just got dropped because there was misconduct by some of the lines. attorneys in that U.S. Attorney's Office. I'm not, girl. I'm so. That's so infuriating. But that said, I hate to bring that. I'm just still bothered by it. They're, like, I'll finish your point. I'm sorry. But like, I guess my point is, you know, the, I'm confident that, you know, the Trump DOJ is actually is taking all this stuff seriously. I mean, if you've, since Blanche took power, took over the amount of action there's been as substantial. It's fair. I'll, I'll, uh, I'll, I'll keep some of the hope alive, but I got to be honest.

I'm not the only one who feels this way. They've gotten, look, there's been tremendous victories. I don't want to downplay everything. Shuddering USAID was massive. But holy crap, you can't get a slap on the wrist even for some chick banging on a federal vehicle? What is going on, man? It was just some line attorney who was really a Democrat.

I think after she left the office, she went and worked for Dick Durbin or something. I mean, DOJ is just fixing DOJ across the entire kind of. country is just this massive problem. It's like it's a giant slow moving steam. Because you're like, we got good people at the top now. We just don't have any brutal guys. I'm sorry. Like Trump is not a brutal guy. He's just not. Like that's what this is very true. That's why the joke is Lord give me the Trump that Democrats claim he is because he's not. He's he's he's a bragger. He blowviates a bit, but he's actually just kind of moderate. He's stronger than the Republicans we've seen for a long time. But he is not the iron fist guy. Democrats.

Now, these people are tough. And it's funny because anybody who wants to say, oh, Democrats are pussy's bull. Bro, they locked up J-6ers in solitary. They tortured people. They will crush your nuts in a vice. That's what they are willing to do for power. Donald Trump and the Republicans, either they're unwilling or unable. They're doing like a hunger strike at the ice facility, which is like the funniest thing.

Because they wanted tacos. Well, they can just go home. They have the key to the deal. It's not a joke. You literally can just go home. It's like we're trying to send them the Taco Land. Right, not about it. Like, you can just go home.

The detainees at the ice facility are upset because they want ethnic food from where they come from, which is not just tacos, but one of the things requested was literally tacos. And was it, Mark Wayne Mullen was like, we want them to go home and they can enjoy all of that food in their home country. Yeah, it's like so true. White people food's horrible. You would hate it. You should probably go, I think so. I saw there was a really heartwarming story about a Denver illegal alien mother who turned herself in to be self-deported.

or to be deported by ICE because she was sitting around and her partner had been deported the breadwinner and she was like well we're broken miserable we don't have any money we got to go home so can you give us the free flight and we'll all go home and I thought oh perfect that's exactly how the system should work

you called it a sad story that sounds like no I said heartwarming I said oh heartwarming heartwarming it's a wholesome story right because that should be the incentive structure right like if you're an illegal alienly in this country you should be broken miserable and I was thinking this is my new idea broken miserable.

And but like here's the other side of it. I want, I'm, you know, and this is maybe the more controversial take is that I think that the self-deportation process should be unbelievably pleasant. It should just be like,

you sign up for CBB home. Oh, would you like a three-star hotel for a few days? You know, like, would you like, you know, Kevin R with that taco. A nice concierge to come by and help you pack your things.

Give them a Trump bathroom. Well, no, because it's true, because it's like, you know, people will retract when they hear that and they go, but it's like,

when you realize how much money it costs, How much money you cost? These people, et cetera, et cetera, like a couple grand. That's way, and he's on the dollar. I figured it out. We got Hollywood all wrong. You know how they're making these movies where, like, white people are all bad and, like, always the villains?

They're doing that so that people around the world don't want to come here. Oh, it's true. It's horrible. There's, like, Klansmen everywhere. I mean, it is. That's what we got to do. We got to make a movie where it's, like, about, like, the hero is some, like, you know, five foot six, you know, portly, like, landscaper, illegal immigrant.

but just like everywhere he goes, like everyone is in the clan. And it's just, you know, it's a struggle every day. And his dream is to escape America and go back to Taco Land. Yeah. Yeah. You'd have to have him really want to be here for like three-fourths of the movie. And then at the end of the movie, he finally decides he's got to get out. And then he steps.

And that's like a heroic journey. And the concierge, I mean, look, the people have been talking about fear is, oh, we need to build a patronage network for conservatives. You know, the liberals, they have all these patronage networks for their people. we could provide these people with my pillows you know that'd be really nice like on your flight back

we'll do a my pillow neck braid like a neck pillow I think that's a win there's a lot of I mean there's a perfectly it's a perfectly reasonable way to spend money it's cheaper than enforcement

right no like trying to pull somebody out of their house is cheap is more expensive getting them to turn themselves in and the court there's only we gotta make the propaganda and like not to sound like you know super gay lip tart here

but it's like to be fair these people came in with the door wide open that the red carpet rolled out. It's like you can make them, I mean, it doesn't have to be like completely brutal. I mean, I know that's what people want, but it's like,

that's how you can guarantee the heat gets cranked up. It should be brutal if we have to come find you. Exactly. That's how you get a million of regos, and Trump has explained this. Tom Homan has explained this. They've all explained like, look, if you want mass deportations,

the better it goes, the more comfortable everyone is, the more people you can get out. It's when it gets violent and brutal, which it's like sometimes you have to go there, but that's how you create a million of breakers. You get wedges shift or wotations. I know how we can solve this problem overnight. We make cilantro illegal.

And they just leave. They're like, I ain't going to live the country. It hasn't lost a lot. My mother-in-law would love that. She hates a lot. Me too. That's what I'm saying. Slauntra exemplifies the demographic change in this country because, hear me out. Hear me out. This is true. This is this is etymology 101. Is if you ask anyone who's like over, I don't know, 70 and also if you ask any British person, they'll call it coriander. Indeed. And then as soon as a lot of Mexicans came here and they use it heavily in their cuisine, people that were maybe under 60 were introduced to it for the first time. Like, what's called? Oh, it's called cilantro.

Yes, but what's this coriander in? But I believe that coriander includes the stem or something like that. Something like that, but like if you ask it, like a British person, they're like, I don't know what cilantro is. And then they're like, oh, coriander, yeah. Oh. The seeds and the leaves, the coriander's the seeds. What we need is brutality. And I'm not saying like dudes to go beat people. I'm saying we need

strong, like we need brutal political leaders that, you know, the Democrats recently called Stephen Miller like an ugly, what do they call him like an ugly ass bitch or something like that? An ugly F? Yeah, something like that. And I'm like, that's not brutality. That's just cringe.

Brutality is like, I'll tell you what brutal is. Did you guys see this viral video where there's this like really big jacked guy and he walks around supermarket parking lots? And he grabs some guy leaves a shopping cart in the wrong area. So he grabs it and walks over and puts it behind the car and then just walks out of the driver's seat and he's all jacked. And the guy's like an out of the car does not go there. And he's like, oh, I'm sorry, man. I'll put it back. Like, he didn't have to do anything other than just say it was in the wrong spot,

but he looks like I will punch you in the mouth. We need leaders that just act that way. We need Donald Trump to be a little bit more serious. He insults people. We find it funny. We like that he pushes back. We need a DOJ that just arrests and charges people and gets the job done. Stern called you are going to deal.

And with respect to Blanche, he has done a pretty good job for the short amount of time he's been in. And that's thing with Blanche, too, is, like, no one really knows much about him. And that's kind of what you want from your DOJ guy. You kind of want him to be a bit mysterious, have a bit of aura to him. Because Pam Bondi, she was talking to it. She was out in the open a lot. And she was, like, everyone knew all these narratives about her and everyone had their mind made up. You kind of want this, like, back room kind of guy who's just, you know, settling scores, getting business on by means.

I don't think I could even, I mean, I've heard Todd Blanche speak, but I can't tell you that much about the guy. And it's like, well, yeah, because he kind of understands part of the DOJ is you got to have. It was just a practicing lawyer. Yeah, you got to have a bit of, you know, there's got to be a separation between you and the people to conduct some mystery. Also, we just got to ban social media. Have you guys seen that there's a viral video? I can't remember who posted it,

but they said something like social media influencer should be arrested. And they posted a video of this black dude walking into like a burrito store. And he's going like this and like dancing. And there's like 12 cameras around and he's just dancing. And then he gets the burrito and he makes a crazy face. And then he bites it. And like, you see this video and you're like, I just, I think we need to mercilessly beat social media influences.

I'm joking, calm down YouTube. But the thing about social media that I think, aside from like the AlsaGate degree of stuff, that's like the algorithmic brain melting, you know, I'm sitting there on, I like to scroll Instagram, just see like what's being recommended and stuff. You guys ever go to like experimental comedy shows by chance? I used to. Dada. I was all into that. So you like, you go to these open mic comedy shows.

And what a lot of these comedians do is they're trying new material and they want a crowd that's warmed up. And they try to do weird things that sometimes, like most of them aren't even funny. Yeah. They just want to experiment and see what works. So, you know, in L.A., I remember, I can't remember what the, I'm not a big into comedy, but I was talking to some friends who did comedy. And they're like, oh, yeah, when you go to that, you know, venue where they do open mics, it's never funny. You'll go in and sit down, you'll get a drink and you'll hang out. And it's people experimenting.

And I was like, do people just say ridiculously offensive things? And they're like, yeah, like a guy will show up and just throwing racial slurs around. And it's like not even a joke. He'll just start insulting the audience. They're trying to see, does this work? Will it work with the crowd? That's what's happening on social media right now. There's a whole bunch. So I already described the problem of imitation where everybody makes the same video. But there's a bunch of influencers that are trying to do random and weird things to see what works. Yeah. And there are some people that are doing legitimate high quality. beneficial things. That's the problem with like banning social media or bringing the hammer down on influencers as a monolith. And a mall. Lock them up. I thought about like if you, I think about the brutality thing because like 20 years ago, 30 years ago before the internet, you could like go into St. Louis send the feds in there and rack it up. But like now with all these cell phones, you'd have to knock out the power supply of a city, maybe shut off their water and do like an EMP blast over the city. You'd have to maintain an EMP thing. But then they're still going to smuggle video. you'd have to shut off their electronics in order to do this.

I'm not literally suggesting we ban the internet. I'm just insulting influencers and modern culture. I just the whole story about like brutality, I feel like it wouldn't work because the communist revolution needs a brutal enemy. They need Trump to be brutal in order for the people to rally. As long as he's moderate, they won't. No, I would argue that the people are starving because the leader is negligent. That was the message of animal farm.

The farmer Jones wasn't doing his job to make sure the, the citizens of the farm were being taken care of. So when people see far-left extremists getting away with bloody murder, they don't turn to Trump and say, save me. They say, there's no confidence in that system. And it breaks apart. This is the point that I'm, this is the point I'm warning about. If Donald Trump's administration, if the perceived brutal guy can't solve the problem of the extremism, regular people stop having fear or confidence in that system. I would hope that the president would be like, arm yourself. You need to protect yourself if there's going to be a riot outside. Unfortunately, you go to jail when you do that. If the president, well, that's a problem.

If you live in Newark, New Jersey, you will go to prison. But if the president brings the hammer down, we're toast. What does that mean? What does that mean? It'll be an uprising, a communist uprising in the country. You're wrong. You know many people are waiting for Trump. They want him to be brutal. Why was, why was Sarnecichaelus and his family overthrown? Because the- Was he a brutal dictator? No, he was a nobody. He was negligent and not, it agreed. He sat inside. He was not. He was not. He was not. He was not doing the job to keep the people safe. Trump's definitely not invisible. He's not like a nobody.

Okay, so to the point you were making where you made the argument, if Trump was brutal, you'd get a communist uprising. Communist uprisings emerge when there is no strong leadership. But we have a strong leader. He's just not brutal. No, we don't. He's definitely strong. He's definitely strong. He's immensely strong. He's not. Venezuela. He's about to take Cuba.

There is strength in that, but Donald Trump domestically, as it pertains to the far left, rampaging around, rioting. They couldn't even get Abu Ghazela in jail. If you're too strong, you become brittle. You need a balance of strength. Okay, but once again, we've already made the point that communist uprising is happening

when the leaders are weak. I don't think he's weak. I do agree that he's not brutal. Okay, again, Tsar Nicholas was not taking care of his country in a way. The people of Russia did not feel that they had, look, right now, mid-grade gas is five bucks a gallon. I think what happened is Lenin in Russia became more popular than the Tsar Nicholas. There's nobody more popular than Donald Trump right now.

Well, I will give you this. there is no one on earth who has the degree of political influence of Trump. It is insane. Look at this man's shirt. The Edgal Raine shirt. I still think you're trolling. Massey is one of the most, this is important. Massey is one of the most popular members of Congress, period. Nationally, internationally, he is very well known.

Million and a half followers? Yeah, big. He had 10 million, he had like 15 million of his own, right? And Donald Trump and his circle made a decision and Massey lost. The problem is when Trump's out of office. office, there might be someone that's more popular than the next president because Mark Rubio ain't it. I mean, I like him, but he's not that popular. I think we have already seen the lessons of leadership over the past 10 years when Democrats ran rough shot over this country,

arrested Trump's lawyers, put J-6th and solitary. No one rose up against them. Well, we stood up for those people. We voted. I mean, we talked about it. We got a new administration in and now all those people are getting investigated down in Florida. I think I think you're overstating how weak President Trump is. I mean, there's, part of this is systemic, right? We, we, the, the way our constitution is structured is it gives the president an enormous amount of authority in foreign affairs and very limited and constrained authority domestically, right? That's just the nature of how our, how our government is structured. Let me, let me, let me just say real quick like this. They are, they, they, they, they, they, they, they, they, they're investigating the person

who, who made that, yeah, for, for perjury, for perjury. Alex Jones, his company was on tax charges, you know, they don't get me wrong, like, I got to be, like, I got to honest with you guys, if Donald Trump intervened to help save Alex Jones, Jones would be diehard Trump the rest of his life. And so you end, I will say that- I don't think you have the legal authority to. Did the Democrats have the legal authority to accuse him of fraud, to accuse him of falsifying business records, to charge him with felonies that didn't exist with no underlying crime? I mean, this is insanity. You have, I mean, do, that doesn't quite work because, I mean, theoretically, I guess, is there some crime he could

go after the people who brought a civil suit against him? Right? That, do you want Donald Trump to prosecute the, the plaintiffs? My point is this. Do you think the civil fraud charges against Trump were legitimate? No, of course not. Do you think the felony charges were legitimate?

No, of course not. So we have a president who is incapable of acting outside of legitimacy against an enemy who acts outside of legitimacy. How do you win a game of monopoly against someone who's actively cheating? I mean, you know, I would, I think the first answer to that is that the reason And I speak for someone, as someone who worked for the DeSantis campaign, a big reason Donald Trump is president is because they tried all that stuff in 2023, 2024.

What, like, who tried what stuff? Left with, you know, four indictments in four different jurisdictions. They tried the whole law fair campaign. I actually, I disagree. I think the reason that Trump ended up winning is because Biden was whacked out of his mind. That's a big part of it, too. And when, when that debate happened, regular people right now are concerned about the price of gas. Okay.

It's the economy stupid, right? It tends to be these things. The gas was sky high on Election Day, 2024. Indeed. And right now, mid-grade is $4.442 for low-grade. Mid-grade's $4,092. And a premium is $5.31. That is, that's apocalyptic.

However. Apocalyptic's a little much. $5 gas. I mean, we have short memories. We weren't alive in the 70s, right? I was. No, no, of course. Of course.

But it's all about it. You know, pundixtus. The burden. It's the tail end. I understand, but it's all relative, right? Like, I was talking to my friend who was complaining about the economy, and I was like, well, put it in perspective, man, the GDP here is still five times that of like any country in South America or most of the world. And the poorest person in America today is living better than some of the wealthiest 200 years ago. You can get a cheeseburger whenever you want.

It's all relative, but people are still unhappy because it's relativity. So if, so the advantage that Trump has is that if he gets the price of gas down, it will, people will feel the immediate relief and they'll love him for it before the midterms. But I do believe that Trump's strategy right now, and I'll give you this, because I like what Trump is doing largely. And it is easy to complain, right? I'm not in the administration. I'm not doing this job.

But what I will say is it seems like the strategy they have moving forward is win the midterms with whatever procedural efforts they have or can. So redistricting is massive. giving Republicans a major advantage. The executive order on the post office is a massive procedural advantage. And I don't know that they actually need the Save Act to win at this point.

It seems absurd to me that people are making bets on Kalshi for the Democrats to win the Senate. Because they'd have to flip either Texas or Alaska, which is just insane. They'd have to win every toss-up and flip a state. What's up? Wouldn't they have to flip both Texas and Alaska? They have to win every toss-up and flip one

of those states. They got to win Ohio, too, right? Yep. Yep. What is it? North Carolina? line in Maine, Ohio, Michigan, I think. These are states that Trump won by 10 or more. Susan Collins is free money. And Susan, yeah, Susan, I think I'd like Susan. And those are the toss-ups.

So let's say Democrats win every toss-up. It's still 50-50 at that point, and J.D. Vance is the tiebreaker. They'd have to flip a Republican state. That's insanity. So I wonder, you know, Trump recently said, I don't care about the midterms. I wonder if Trump's general idea is just, we're going to win this through policy and procedure. Well, what Trump's, I mean, when Trump said that about the midterms, he was referring to the Iran deal.

And, I mean, he's trying, because you have to understand what The negotiation in Iran, this is a game of chicken, right? It's who basically the Iranians are trying to see, the Iranian's pressure point is Hormuz and the pressure on the global economy via closing Hormuz. And our pressure point is our blockade, which is preventing Iran from shipping any of its oil and creating problems for the oil infrastructure. And it's sort of this game of chicken as to who's going to give up first.

And so obviously Trump, knowing that that's a negotiation is not going to say, yeah, I really am going to have to give this up because obviously oil prices are killing us. So that's where that's coming from, right? he's trying to be tough in negotiations. And you made the point earlier regarding the filibuster. I mean, this is the one thing that is holding Trump back to some degree. And so far as people are saying, why doesn't you just cross the Rubicon already? It's like, look at his team.

I mean, it's like this isn't Michael Jordan and like four, this is like if Michael Jordan had four like JV. Why people don't think about the knock on the consequences of that? Why couldn't Bongino? Like, why did Bongino leave? What, what happened there? What could he not do? Why are people disappointed? It's a good question.

I think he, I mean, he was frustrated with Pam. I know that. I think it was over the handling of the Epstein files. The funny thing is on substance, I think Pam and Dan were in the same page about what actually the files meant. There wasn't really any meaningful disagreement. But I think Dan thought Pam was being too kind of opaque.

And that was sort of... Why did he leave, though? I mean, part of it is also, I think he was... I can speak to this as someone who... If you have... Once you have a platform and you do this, you would hate working in government, bro. You would hate it.

I also want to... Look, to go from... I have a general idea of how much Dan Bongino makes from working in the industry. It's just your voice. Beyond that, that Bonino went from pretty much generally liked by everyone. So now he's like this galvanizing figure purely because he was in the admin. And it's like,

I want to stress something. To repute him. We do have a story to talk about in a second with Peter Thiel moving to Argentina. When you have a certain degree of wealth, you don't need to have stress. You don't need to. So Bongino going into the FBI. was basically like, imagine walking into a room where there's 10 people standing around you screaming the top of their lungs 24-7.

He probably walked into that and said, wow, why did I do this? He gave up his free speech, too. I'm just saying like, no, no, no, my point is this. My point is, if Dan Bongino quit, shut everything down, he could go play golf for the rest of his life and just drink pinocaladas. Instead, he shut everything down and then walked into a room where people were screaming in his face, 24-7. To be fair, I mean, Bonino came out of the NYPD. I mean, he probably has a bit more bandwidth in these regards than most commentators.

I think, I mean, although it's hard work, obviously, being deputy director of the FBI. But I think, you know, this is my experience. In the Giuliani years. I mean, that was a hell. Once you have a big platform and you're speaking to people on a daily basis and then you have to shut up, which is, I want to. That really sucks. Let's get to the Civil War stuff. Let's jump to the story.

We got this from K-Sat. Man arrested for threats to kill Erica Kirk ahead of Turning Point USA event in San Antonio, affidavit says. Jacob Wenske 26 faces two felony charges of making a terroristic threat. They say that San Antonio Police Investigator said Wenski replied to an April social media post about the group's three-day women's leader summit by writing, I know exactly where to bomb. In a separate post in the same threat, he wrote, I can't wait to be the valet for her escort. A warrant for his arrest states. An email from an account registered to Wenski stated,

death to Erica Kirk and every speaker there, America will live on without the scum of this earth. every Christian national shall perish in the bombing that will take place at every single turning point rally and event. You know, after seeing all of this stuff and just like, you know, Tucker and Candace and all that, I'm at the point where I'm like, it's all on purpose. I just, I cannot believe for a second, this is accidentally happening, being allowed to happen, and that Tucker, who's friends with Trump all of a sudden just doesn't like him as inverted his opinions, or Candace Owens, she has to do this show with Anna Casparian and Hunter Biden,

like she's rallying the Democratic Party now. This is not an accident, okay? These people don't do these things on accident. Donald Trump doesn't all of a sudden have Joe Kent and Tulsi Gabbard resigning on accident. I don't believe it for two seconds. I think it's all on purpose. I just don't believe this stuff anymore. I'm sorry.

I mean, what do you mean? What don't you believe about that? With this story, I think the guy did this and he got arrested. Okay. I'm saying that, like, the Candace, like, I predicted this. Candice's rhetoric and the show that she was doing and the accusations she was making would rally people to try or threaten to kill Erica Kirk. Yes. And my fear is that there will be an attempt on Erica Kirk's life because of how insane these largely female liberals have become over that issue.

Yeah, I don't. YouTube is not accidentally promoting Candace Owens to a wide audience. They're not accidentally allowing her to break all of the rules with impunity. And the Trump administration is not accidentally sitting back as she attacked. them and attacks turning point USA, which helped Trump win in 2024. That would, that's, it's just too great elite for me to believe. So sorry if it's conspiratorial. I can't believe for two seconds.

The Trump admin's like, oh no, for some reason Tucker and Candace have turned on us and are destroying our base. They do say don't attribute to malice. I mean, you think that Tucker, it could be attributed to negligence. You mean, so you think the Trump administration is like, you know, in cahoots or causing it? What's your, what's your claim? I don't understand how, as I'm writing.

in a car with Tucker Carlson and Trump calls him on the phone and they're giggling with each other. A year later, they're mad at each other. Like, Tucker was just at the White House. He's meeting with Trump. He's meeting with premieres of foreign governments. And all of a sudden, his positions invert, short, like, very rapidly. That's Tucker's ego. Tucker's got an ego size of Montana.

And I think Tucker, yeah, and I think Tucker has like a bit of like residual PTSD from being, like, stumping for the Iraq war. And he's, it's very typical of this generation. It's almost like you almost feel bad for the guy to some. He's like, Iran's unfolding. I don't want to be on the wrong side of this again, so I'm going to go hard. And I could, I could resign myself to like, wow, he changed his opinion if it was just him. But tons of high profile prominent personalities flipping just doesn't make sense.

I mean, it makes sense to me. But I think Tucker's taking a different line than most of the other like retard right people. Like where Tucker is still saying some crazy things, but you can kind of sense that he's at least has something vaguely coherent. It's like a very douganous kind of like multipolar world. kind of philosophy where like the candace stuff is just straight up schizophrenic babble. Tucker's been apologizing for a lot of stuff lately because his positions are an inversion of long held positions. It's not just to say that Tucker is like on this one issue I've changed my mind. It's Tucker going for 20 years. I said this one thing and now I'm going to say the inverse.

And he's done. And he said and I apologize for this. But he went from neocon chumming up with Rachel, you know, Rachel Maddow to like populist, you know, firebrand. And then this is just, as I understand it, the third iteration of Tucker. But like, this is kind of tracks, I would say. Even when he was pro-Trump on Fox News, he was critical of Iran and warning about it, a nuclear Iran. The audience was different. You can't, I mean, I think somebody made this point. And if you're talking about, like, you know, we have these theseses to try and explain the sort of transition of these weird, of how the independent podcasters have moved.

It's the globalization of their audience. And members of Congress. Right. Well, Massey, too, has now. And Marjorie Taylor Green. Yeah. all of it, I mean, at least for the pod, I'll start with the podcasters. Massey and Green are their own weird problem.

The podcasters, I mean, they've now, I mean, Tucker Carlson Network put out that post where he was talking about how much his foreign audience has grown, right? Like, the thing is, once you go, he started on Fox News, which is an American conservative audience, and he went to YouTube, which is the globe. Yeah. And your numbers, you know, there's 1.5 million, billion Muslims in the world. There's 20 million views. and not near, so I think I've noticed that it's true of everybody, I think, and it's not necessarily

even sort of intentional or cynical, but people get pulled where their audience, you know, there's a feedback effect there. So I think that's part of it. I think Tucker also, he's lost any sort of constraints that he had on his show. I mean, when you think, I've tweeted out a few times that we thought we liked Tucker, but in reality we liked Blegnev and Gregory and Alex Feiffer and his staffers. The people who wrote the monologues for him every day. The people who wrote. Now we see what Tucker actually does on constrained, and it's a lot. It's an important thing people need to understand that the opening monologue that everyone love from Tucker's show, you know, the past the few years we've on Fox News, those were written for him. And to the, I mean, he obviously had editing control, but then there's also constraint feedback on his monologues, right?

He might try and put some stuff that's crazy in and get pushed back on by his staff and by senior. Why is YouTube allowing Candace to just break the rules every day? I mean, YouTube still has a bunch of leftists, and I think leftists are perfectly happy to see the right eat at some. Did Tucker do the Jimmy Door thing on YouTube? Because they're hardcore anti-vax in that episode. I mean, all these people, I have no time for any moral preening from anybody who indulges Candice Owens. None at all. I don't know, maybe he didn't.

I don't know when he had Jimmy Dorr on the show. I just saw the posts on a... Did he put it up on YouTube? I don't know. Point, I mean, like Tucker's... Very anti-vax, like outright saying vaccines and autism and all that stuff. And to your point, I mean, Tucker's built up so much. much goodwill or I can understand why a lot of people are still following us. But the Candace thing,

it's like what she went from like very normy like borderline, you know, neocon, certainly like a, you know, a party shell, like what goodwill is built up. Like she didn't have anything interesting to say for 10 years. Like I can very confidently say as someone that would have been a target audience, I was, uh, I was 14 when Trump came down the escalator. I've never once. I remember it's instant that she came on the radar. I was like, oh, here's the token black woman that they found so she can say the base things. But then boomers watching it can be like, see, there's black people that agree with us. This is great. That was her whole career. So I just don't understand like, I guess what I'm trying to say is her audience she has now is a completely

separate audience from what she had. Oh, it's Libb. It's just, yeah, it's like lives, board wine moms. It's mostly women and women like love this kind of stuff. How many non-Americans is it? Do you guys have the analytics? To be fair, I do want to say like I think Tucker, Candace, etc. I think their audiences are a bit more American than people think. And my evidence for this is primarily anecdotal. But I meet a lot of people that are really into it. And especially older people, I think people don't realize how old Tucker's audiences. Indeed. Tucker is one of the oldest. And Bongino. Bonino too, but Tucker, they've actually Mac like, like, it's the opposite of what you would think. The Daily Wire is a really young audience

relative to conservative media. It's like 35 is young. And then Tucker as a very old audience. And the majority of people that I've heard that have like had their minds blown by Tucker are like baby boomers. Like they have followed him from Fox. This is a Tucker and they love this kind of stage maxing. Need to understand is that, you know, I hear a lot of people talk. about like Dan Bongino. It's like, how does he have such a big audience? I don't know anybody who listens to him. It's like, yeah, they're all like 60. 65. Bongino was a host on Fox News, built up a big audience, started a show. The ideas that, and the values that he espouses are attractive to the boomer audience, and he's got a big audience. Yeah, and he was a guest

on Hannity like every week. Of course. And Candice is targeting 35-year-old woman. That's why she has the Stanley mug, you know, and she does like true crime drama, dating. Yeah, she turned Erica Kirk's life into a true crime drama. That's basically what she did. And Candace is also like roped in people that wouldn't typically be super politically involved. So yes, women, but also like she has a very large like Hispanic and black audience. Like she's really has a very big coalition, so to speak, of viewers that would never be interested in like conservative. I saw this video on Instagram and it was like an English teacher saying, tell me when you stop understanding.

There's a bunch of these videos, by the way, but it's like, tell me when you are unable to understand what I'm telling you. And then he says like the first sentence and it's just like, the dog fell and got hurt. The next sentence is, the dog was running, fell down and injured himself. And then the next sentence is like on a, you know, on a voyage through a desiccant field and like and it gets more and more verbose. And the thing is like, you know, a show like this, we don't try to to dumb things down. we'll use esoteric or, you know, verbose language. Yeah, I wouldn't do that.

Canis Owen's intention. I think Kenneth Owen says debacle intentionally. I do. You know, Ben Shapiro made fun of her because she was saying like Claire Flapel. Yeah, she's a comedian. She's a comedian. No, no, no, no, no, it's the Bush effect. No, it's the Bush effect.

Bush was very well known. George W. Bush talked like he was dumb and he got made fun of for it by, by, no, he's certainly not dumb. He was mid-intelligence. He got the job because daddy put him there. You are wrong. Wasp, Dale guy. He let Dick Cheney run the show.

Ian. Kidding me? Ian. Homie. So do you know? So in sales, rapport is the most important thing you can do. He was charismatic as hell. George W. Bush is not stupid.

I didn't say it was stupid. He's highly intelligent. He wasn't super intelligent. Yes, he is. Very smart guy. Very smart. He went to like Yale when Yale was like still a very objective. They got on the job.

It's just, it's, it's, you know, I saw this viral clip that, you know, because Jubilee did this like, you know, Charlie Kirk update thing. I actually love to interview in George, by the way. Charlie Kirk has asked, do you think that Donald Trump is a good businessman? He says, well, he's a multi-billionaire, so I think so. And then this woman goes, but he had 10 bankruptcies. That's what you're doing right now. No.

Bankruptcy can be a very good tactic. Indeed. George W. Bush couldn't communicate properly because he was like nervous and- Speaking down is how you are attractive to the lowest common denominator. That's the point I'm literally making about Candace Owens. She says debacle on purpose to sound dumb so that she can attract the lowest common denominator. That's the point. That's how you build. That's what Hillary does. Exactly. It's what all the politicians do.

So intentionally having a show where we use overly verbose and pretentious language, sometimes intentionally, is unattractive to a regular person who can't comprehend the words we're using. Yeah, I can't Candice bit debatable otherwise, but her verbal IQ is quite high. Anyone that's that successful in the idea, yeah, they know how to handle a camera. I got this audio clip, George Bushisms. pull up some of Bush's stupidest statements. There's just statement after statement after statement. And he's a president at the point of that.

You understand that's on purpose? There's no, you pull it up and tell me that it's on purpose. You'll be shocked. Watch a Bush cabinet meeting versus a stump speech. And a stump speech. He's like, how old you all? I'm from Texas. And then in a cabinet meeting is like, okay, so what are we? We're one of those more, or watch a more recent interview with George's

It's not even that. Listen, it is a sales 101 fact. The first step towards in charisma towards sales and persuasion is rapport. If you're trying to talk to the average person, you cannot be over-leave-erbose. You will lose them. It's like in that movie, the Adjustment Bureau, where Matt Damon's character, he's like running for Congress, and then he has like a moment of clarity where he's like, listen, you know, he's giving his speech when he loses the race.

And he goes, look, I've consulted to tell me what to. wear and how to wear it. They tell me that a blue tie looks too pretentious, but a red tie looks too aggressive, so maybe yellow might work. They tell me to wear nice shoes, so it looks like I'm a professional, but they can't be too clean because it looks pretentious. So I got to scuff him up a little bit. So I seem like maybe I'm working class. This is what the whole game is. George W. Bush is not stupid. He is intentionally speaking down to be attractive to the widest array of people. I think he was average intelligence, high charisma. Also, but George Bush, like, like, not to get super nerdy here,

but there's so many indicators that he, and I'm like, I'm not a George Bush fan at all. I'm just saying he was flying fighter jets. Like they're not going to let someone at the midling IQ for the fighter jets. Be president then if you're so smart. Yeah, these are like top.

You're smarter than he was. Be president then. Prove it. You need more than intelligence to be president. Man, his dad was George Bush. So what? So he got him the job. His name was George Bush.

Again, you're just proving the point. What do you think? Jeff Bush was able to run for office. His daddy. Go to anybody who's got success and well. who has built a company, and they will tell you the same thing. The first mistake so many people make is the assumption that it could only be accomplished through money. When it is a scientific fact, perseverance is the only prerequisite to success. That's a fact. These are like genetic markers

too. Do you think LeBron James Jr. is an NBA because of his dad? It's like, well, no, it's because his dad had really good genetics, and that makes him a good basketball player or Ken Griffey Jr. It's the same thing in politics. I have. She has a huge. He has a genetic makeup that allows him to be an intelligent person, but also exceptionally good education, politics, etc. Maybe you could say George Bush has like a 68 intelligence out of 100, above average. That's probably like 95. Dude, I lived through it, bro. I watched it every day. It drove me insane. He let Cheney run the thing, dude. He wasn't good at his job. He was just a charismatic figurehead. I don't understand how you can't grasp this concept.

You're saying he's intelligent, but you don't have to be intelligent to be in Congress. To be a politician, you need to be charisma. You just need to trick people and get them to laugh and, I mean, fool me once, shame on me on you, fool me twice. He's just a dumb idiot who is accidentally president. Well, just to prove that like I'm very consistent on, I mean, like, Joe Biden is obviously a very intelligent person. Yes, he was. Rock Obama, clearly an intelligent person.

So it's like, no, like we can, again, I perceive Biden as a dumb person because of his policy actions, but he was president. He had a very successful career. Yeah, Bush was very, very smart. Yeah, Bush is brilliant, right? Donald Trump, these people are all. genius level intellect. Trump's very smart.

Not every president is genius. Does Trump talk like a smart person all the time? Does he use complicated words? It's like a construction worker. Yeah, but he's the smart guy. He's super intelligent. Bush? Bush.

I mean, if you guys were talking about George Bush Jr., I just don't know. I just trying to appeal. You have an emotional bias, Ian. I watch the guy for like five years. You can understand how sales works and how politics works. It's charisma. You even mentioned it like five minutes or eight minutes ago. Hillary Clinton was on camera in the 2016 campaign speaking with the Southern

Droll. Because she didn't understand social media. What did she say? I've longed hard or something like that. Something like that. She talked about how she had hot sauce in her purse. Do we really believe that woman carries hot sauce in her purse? No, she was lying to get black votes through black media.

She's highly intelligent. So is Bill. George W. Bush spoke that way to be attractive to regular people. I'll even say the most unpopular. I think Jasmine Crockett's actually probably pretty smart. Of course she is. When you listen to her before she was in office and she's clear and articulate and normal, and then she does the ghetto trash thing to get votes.

Yeah. Okay, let's pick some congressmen. We'll just pick some random congressmen. I mean, there's certainly a few that I'm like, okay, they're actually probably are middling. Yeah. I'll talk about 435 people, some of whom, you know, like, I think Steve Coe would have to be wanted.

So you can admit you don't have to be intelligent to be in politics. Well, to be president is much different than like winning an election with a couple hundred years. Just taking you step by step. What if your dad's the president before you? Let's clarify this. Let me, let's clarify this. You, in almost all circumstances,

because I reserve their, you know, absolutes would be silly in physical systems. You need to have an above average intelligence to be in politics. You can't be an idiot to be a president. No, no, no, no, to be in politics. Sure. Above average. Minimum 65, 60, something like that, yeah. Well, if we're talking about... If 50's average.

If 50 is the middle of the bell curve, then, yeah, 60 to 70 is usually the bottom of to be in some kind of office. But there are anomalies. Sometimes stupid people get through because they run on a pose or something like this. but to be a president. So again, Candace Owens is not accidentally hosting a massive show. Tucker Carlson is not accidentally hosting a massive show. And, you know, I've been massively obsessed with the recitation problem in AI for a while, which I don't know if we brought up yesterday on the show, but I'll ask you this question, Will.

You got an IQ test for you. All right, you're ready? We're going to put you on the spot and embarrass you. Okay. Here's your question. You walk into a casino and, you know, you're looking around. you want to find a game to play and you see there's a roulette table. And dealer's a little tired looking.

There's a few open seats. So you decide, you know, I'll go play this game. You take a seat and you decide to watch some spins before you make any bets. Out of the last 30 spins, 17 come up red. So you decide I'm going to make a color bet. Which color should you bet on? Which is the smarter bet? Well, I think the, in the sort of if we're talking, if you're talking, if you

you know, if we're talking like the platonic ideal of a roulette table, then it doesn't matter. If 17 have come up red and you have some, there's some possibility that the table is physically biased and flawed, then maybe it makes more sense to bet red. Which is the correct answer. Yeah. So I bring this up because there are people, go look at my Twitter, and they can't comprehend this. Right. They cannot understand that math doesn't, in the physical reality, math doesn't exist in the abstract.

So they genuinely believe it doesn't matter. It will never matter when in fact, the likelihood that a roulette wheel is perfectly balanced is zero. The probability that a roulette wheel is bounced is zero. The likelihood that a dealer is perfect is zero. But there are people who can't comprehend this and they get angry about it. And I have to tell these people, but they don't understand. They can't understand.

I mean, the answer is there's no way, whatever hypothetical increase in probability, I mean, there is, for Red, doesn't overcome the house edge, obviously, so you shouldn't bet. You don't know that. And that's the point. You always bet towards... Well, I mean, but like, from a Bayesian person, like, you don't know that, but, like, as a Bayesian just going into a random casino, you assume that the edge trumps whatever, the increase in probability that...

I think it's always fair to assume the house is trying to make money. However, that's why casinos poll dealers. It's why they added deflectors, and it's why they tell Croupiers to change their spin. Because sometimes there's a thing in Roulette called sector betting where I've done this. A dealer will begin to spin the ball the same way every time at the same time every time. So some dealers might actually wait till double zero lines up with their hand and they'll flick it. And what ends up happening is the ball keeps landing in the same quadrant of the wheel. So like 10 times in a row, you're like it hit the same quarter of the wheel.

It's called sector betting. And professional gamblers exploit this. They look for an advantage play in roulette when this happens. If the – so then what happens is they'll go up and they'll make a massive bet in that sector. and then win a few grand, then the pit boss comes over and goes to the dealer and says, change your spin, because these things do happen. My point ultimately is this. When I asked this question, and I did a poll, 70% of people got it wrong.

They said it doesn't matter. If I was trying to sell as many gym memberships or beers or whatever to a group of people, would I want them to feel smart or stupid? Smart. You want to make them feel good. Rappore is number one. So knowing that 70% of people will get the question wrong, you set them up intentionally to make it feel like they are smart and they got the question right. Knowing that 70% will answer, it doesn't matter, I would set up a situation in which they would get a positive emotion out of the experience and then say, wow, you're really smart.

You should buy this product from me. You're the perfect kind of person. If I go to them and say, wow, most of you are stupid, how could you be so dumb, not even so aggressive? If I said, hey, you got this question wrong. Many of them get mad, rejected outright. My point ultimately is. I should have said Bush was smart so that he'd come on the show. I got your point.

George W. Bush, Candice Owens, they're not accidentally multi-millionaires, leaders of industry. It is not an accident. Bush is nepotism. Nepotism plays a role, but Bush was not accidentally president. No, he was intentionally put there for sure. I think, you know, I'm... Bush's old sidekick Cheney. I can only tell you this, Ian, and if you're unwilling to accept it, your life will never improve.

It's all my opinion. This is all opinion. It's fine. Well, there's a fact. The fact is, I guarantee you this. I have heard this from so many people. Well, I'm sure you've probably heard the same thing. I could do it if only I had the money.

No, you couldn't. Exactly. No, you couldn't. It's just that you absolutely cannot. I've heard it from so many people. I was on a bus in L.A. talking about a startup I was working on. And my friend was like, shh. She was like, you just blur it.

hurting out what you're working on? And I was like, are you joking? You think the people on this bus can put together an app for Facebook? Elon Friede all his... I'm not trying to be addicted to the bus, but guys, like, this is not reality. The, like, this idea of like, I have a good idea I can execute upon is not correct. This idea of I have a good idea if only I had the money can execute upon it is not correct. There is this idea that exists among the layman that if you have a good idea, you better be careful because a rich person might steal it from you. That's not true either. I guarantee you. Sometimes maybe, but usually it's your fault. And I know that you know this as well. You go to a meeting with investors and you say, I have a really great idea for this,

this judge's gavel, but I'm going to put a clock in it. Now, let's say that for some reason was a really good idea. You know the investors are going to say, how much do you need to do it? I'm $50,000 to start up. Okay, I want 30%. They're not going to say, that's a good idea. I'm going to steal it from you. Why? The person who's already envisioned it and is working on it is sitting right in front of you. If you got to spend 50 grand to make it happen, just hire the guy who's sitting in front of you who wants to do it. But there are a lot of people who don't understand this. And there's enormous reserves of capital in the world chasing good ideas and industrious founders. That's literally Silicon Valley. Like, that's, you know, the most powerful economic engine in the

world. I mean, and part of what makes Silicon Valley, Silicon Valley is that they have all these different cultural norms about how venture capitalists need to behave that are extremely pro-founder, right? If you're a VC and you exploit a founder, mistreat them. You don't get to be in on the next round with the next VC or on the next big deal. Like all these things. But so yeah, and ideas are a dime a dozen. It's like the idea combined with the person that can actually make the idea a reality. But I'll tell you this. Ideas or a diamond dozen. I don't care about ideas. I care about execution. Yeah. You find you you you find me somebody who can execute but as dumb as a box or rocks. Like they can't envision they're not creative. But if you say,

I want a, you know, I want someone to build a pyramid of bricks and I want it tomorrow morning and they're like, I can make that happen. Like, that's the person you want to hire. Higher, yes. But sometimes you want the visionary like Steve Jobs and then you get Steve Wozniak, who's the guy that executes. You get the work together so well. I actually think it's the other way around. I think Jobs is the guy who executed and Waznick was the visionary. Really? The story's told that. No, Wozniak built the computers. I want to see this and Wazniak. I'd be like, I'll build it. And then he'd go into his garage and like make the thing. Wasniak invented the technology and Steve Jobs packaged and sold it and made it palatable to the average person. Steve was in Jobs is an unbelievably hardworking person, right? Indeed. And a guy who executed like crazy.

Here you go, Ian. Steve Jobs said the iPhone should have one button. Mac computers. Oh, that would have been so annoying. That's what they do with the iPod. It was so annoying. You know why? And they did that with their original mouse.

It was ridiculous. They took away the left mouse. And do you know why they dominate the smartphone market in the United States? because they were selling to the lowest common denominator. They said it has to be, a person needs to be able to pick up the phone and just use it. Well, their mouse.

And what was, what did people say about Apple? It just works. That was it. That's the point. So ultimately, what I'm getting to is, these leftists go,

Donald Trump is an idiot. And they go on TV and they say it. And I'm just like, I don't think Jimmy Kimmel actually believes Trump's stupid when he says this stuff. I don't think Colbert actually believes it. They understand this. Those guys aren't stupid either.

Now, being smart doesn't guarantee success. Perseverance tends to. It's the one thing you actually need. But there are people out there who are smarter than anybody else but don't have either the passion or the perseverance to succeed. Additionally, depending on what you would consider success, depravity can benefit you greatly as well. For sure.

Ripping people off is huge in business. business. Taking advantage of people, cheap slaves? Being a... Less so than you'd think. Less so than you'd think. There's a little... It's not... I'm not saying that doesn't exist, but... Well, I'm saying, like, look at the podcast industry with Tucker and Candace, with massive shows, right? They're unscrupulous. Yeah.

Like, their opinions are for sale, you know? Yeah, I feel... I think the more zero-sum any environment gets, and I think that eyeballs and audience. There's just only so much time that any Americans are willing to spend listening to podcasts. Indeed. Unless we have hyped up AI numbers, which I can't tell, they're going to scale the views with the people that are born. Well, this is part of the AI apocalypse that's happening. I think Candace and Tucker are elements of this in that, you know, as more and more young people who grew up on the internet are entering the labor market or whatever version of it we have, and they don't know how to make money. They do.

what they know. They're doing social media. I see, I see more and more low level influencers that are doing cultural and political commentary. They don't necessarily have the keenest of insights, but they take up space. So it becomes harder and harder to stand out and make money. And we're actually a component of this in the earlier sense in that it used to be the television networks made a ton of money, got 20 million views, you know, CNN and Fox and all that stuff. Then with decentralization, shows like this were able to emerge where it was much, much, much cheaper. to run a show. We pulled the audience from the likes of Fox News and CNN. Now, all of these young people that are becoming influences are pulling views from us and from them and everything's diluting and

flattening out. What happens is people like Tucker and Candice need to maintain those views, and if you are unscrupulous, you'll say whatever you have to say to get the views. So, if the American audience is diluted, but you need a million views per episode because you want to maintain your lifestyle or make money, you're going to try and find the audience. Truth is, there's two billion Muslims in the world. So going anti-Jew is really easy. Why? What's the lost market share for being anti-Jew? 20 million? What's the gained market share? Two billion. That's easy math. Dude, the thing about deception. It's such a valuable tactic in business and in politics. And like I- That's why it's illegal to an extent. I want to not be deceptive. I've tried to do it.

And it's why I'm not super rich because I just, I'm trying to be honest and direct. And it like- Ian, that's not true. And you're making excuses for yourself. Are you kidding me? I mean, I could easily have a shitload of audience right now. I could blow other people's, I could blow this show up and go huge. I never do that. In the context of audience, sure, okay. In the context of if you mean you're going to like, I got to say like, I think you're lying to yourself. Well, it's easy to deceive people and to make 10x.

I mean, it's easy, dude. I just don't want. I agree to an extent because if I, like, got up here and I just started tweeting on every day, Trump's betrayed us and I started like nitpicking every single decision he makes. I'd be eight times as big right now because that's market capture where it's like I'm capturing what 80% of conservatives that are happy with Trump but then I could capture every Libtar plus 20% of conservatives that don't like that right now. And that's what Brian Tyler Cohen and David Pacman are. And that's what a lot of people in the writer doing right now is they're doing

the like sports radio where they're like you know the coach you subbed him in at the wrong time. I could I'd be way bigger right now. That's that's unfortunately where a lot of the market is. I have a joke that my if I was running a daily podcast it would be really boring because I'd be saying how great the administration's doing. Just on repeat, be like, man, they're killing it again. Another day, great day. I wake up and smile on my face. Hit like and subscribe.

You are both correct, but to an extent, right? The idea that you would be rich and massive Ian by lying, I... I used to lie to people on YouTube. I got so popular, so fast. I would just find the most popular thing and rip it apart, and everyone loved me. It was, my

shit was going, fuck it. And then I was like, you know, I I feel dirty. I felt like I was... Yes, yes, yes, but again, to clarify, like reaching the upper echelons of the podcasting rankings for which there are only, like, the top 200 is a top 200. And only, like, in the top 200, how many are actually making a ton of money? Like, the number 200 biggest podcasts in the world probably is making six figures. Yeah. And the number one is making 50 million to 200 million or more. And what you're describing is also like a really common trope actually in Hollywood where, you know, they follow a singer who, like, he was really like a family man and all his friends when he was.

asking on the street, and then he becomes all like this successful singer, and then his friends are like, hey, man, he's like, I don't know you. I'll upset my manager if I hang out with you guys. That's like the most common trope in, you know, in Hollywood, because to a degree, I guess that maybe does happen. I'm just saying that the idea of I could just do it if only is one of the biggest mistakes people make and tends to be proof that they can't do it. I agree. Do it or don't. I mean, don't talk about how you could, but I like to point out the value of deception. I used to think deception equal to evil. It doesn't. Like George Washington was a master of deception. And that's why they won that war, because he could send false orders to the enemy when he needed to and be where he

wasn't. Yeah. And Trump definitely deceives too. That's a big part of his foreign point. I view like a fundamental component of evil to be destruction for the sake of destruction or so it's, it's, you know, I hate to, I don't want to be absolute with it, but I would say that an element of evil often includes destruction for small personal benefit. So greater destruction to life and civilization and humanity for a small benefit to you. That is, you're a net negative on humanity. And you might argue that deception is a form of psychological destruction. And if you're doing it just to get a little bit of game, that's evil. But if you're doing it for a greater purpose. Yeah, that's basic Christian theology is like, okay, deception in advance of something good is not actually a sin. And so far as

Like if someone busts into a room and you're, you know, the guy they're looking for is hiding in a locker. And they say, where is he? And you say, I don't know where you went. So that way they leave. That's not like, that's not a mortal sin. You actually spared the guy's life. There is a reality to the nature of man and earth. And that is, slavery is and always will be a component of what we do.

So right now we are using microphones with components that are mined by slaves in third world countries. Peasants maybe is a nicer way to put it. There's peasants in China that. produce things for pennies on the dollar, and we live substantially better than they do. And, you know, liberal activists don't really want to acknowledge the components in their computers that they use for their environmentalism are destructive to the environment. It's the nature of reality that people need to come to terms with. That is, you see a lot of these people online, and they do sales for, like, courses.

They'll say, if you want to be successful, if you want to, you know, if you want to break the bank, and escape the matrix or whatever, give me money, and I'll explain to you how to do it. They're basically saying, listen, there are 100 million, there are 10 billion, you know, 8 billion really stupid people out there. And they could all give me a dollar and then I will live like a king. That's basically what they're saying when they do a lot of this stuff. There's a truth to that, right? You will be wealthy if you can convince a billion stupid people.

to give you a dollar. You'll be a billionaire. And that's what a lot of people do. I feel like that's the ethos of the Democratic Party for the most part. They view the world as people are really dumb and should be told what to do. And the populist movement largely with the right is to a certain degree we're going to withhold information if we think it could be detrimental. But for the most part, tell the truth and hope that people come to the right conclusions. And we have a robust, intelligent movement. And that's why I think you find many moderates shifted rightward and toward Trump.

The left just lies about everything all day. Everything about Trump is a lie. Have you guys ever read the romance of the Three Kingdoms? It's a Chinese novel, wrote in the 1400s by Lokong Zhao about this war that took place in 200 AD in China. And the honorable ethical guy, Lou Bay, is the hero, in my opinion of the book. He fails.

You know, the kingdom splits into three. There's this bandit uprising, the yellow turbans are trying to, and all these governors raise armies and fight this rebellion, and then one of the governors seizes the emperor and takes control of the country, and all the other governors have to raise standing armies, and then they form into these three kingdoms, and Lou Bay's kingdom, he's the

benevolence. He is just pure and honest in the story, and he can't beat the deceptive South South. A lot of Game of Thrones, I wouldn't be surprised. The great deceiver, the one who said, I would rather betray the world than let the world betray me, is the one who won. And that's the moral of the story. The moral

story is those that are willing to exercise power to gain more power win? Yeah, I mean, the whole thesis of Game of Thrones, right, is, you know, Ned Stark is the character, the honest, upright man who keeps making these stupid mistakes and getting killed for his trouble. And then I have a provocative thesis, which is that Tywin Lanister is actually the hero of Game of Thrones. Well, until he dies, I guess, or what? Right. That was George R.R. Martin just deciding that he, you know, his left tardism kind of coming into play, I think, honestly. You know, there's like this thing about, you know, but anyway, I could go.

Yeah, Tyler Lannister's in the person who understands actually what's going on and does the things that actually lead to peace. Let me ask you a question, Ian. You are a king of a great nation. You have 50 million loyal subjects. Or let's say you're the duly elected president. And a meteor is just been detected. It's just been detected. And they say, Mr. President, we have just detected this large media that's going to cross.

crash into the nation. It's going to kill everybody. It's not going to web out the planet, but it will kill everyone in this country. We have a way to stop it, but we need one million people to run the machinery to stay in that city so that they can prepare the counter missiles that we can launch and fire at this, this meteor and destroy it before it wipes out 50 million lives. If you tell the people that you want them to sacrifice themselves, most of them will flee, will not operate the machinery and everyone will die. What do you want to do? I leave, I don't tell them a thing. I let them run the machine. You let them all die. Well, hopefully, so they're going to die regardless, even if they succeed? So the idea is that in this, in this city, they're going to

let them die. I would sacrifice a million to save the rest. You have to. They're going to launch countermeasures, which will only destroy the meteor up to a certain size. And, and the remnants will slam right into where they are, killing one million people. It's the utilitarian. You have to. You have to sacrifice the few to preserve the many. This was the argument Democrats used during COVID. And then here's what happens. They all fire the countermeasures at the meteor. They miss. But the meteor wasn't headed towards the country. They got the math wrong. You were willing to sacrifice a bunch of people because a guy told you to trust him.

And it turned out he was wrong the whole time. that could happen too you could do it a better way you could say like they have to operate a machine that will generate so much radiation they'll all fry to death but it'll save the country then they they launch the missile all get radiation poisoning the meteor missed the calculations were off no one was ever really at risk and you sacrificed a million people because of a what if from someone you trusted the first thing i thought while you were giving me the metaphor was rally my most trusted oligarchs and we'll figure this out and we're going to solve it without anyone knowing about it we learned a lot about the covid vaccine recently i don't know if you were tracking this stuff

right? None. Stanford published in December that one in 16,750 males, 30 and under got myocarditis from the vaccine. And this is, myocarditis is serious. This is not, you know, this is heart damage, it shortens your lifespan. We also had another study that came out that said that MRI vaccination, if it travels to your liver, will actually decrease your immunity.

So there is a, there is, it is considered now very likely that when people were getting the vaccines, it was not, this is a fact, we know it wasn't staying in the injection site. The presumption now based on the study published at nature.com is that many people who had the MRI vaccine travel from the injection site into their liver became more susceptible to getting COVID. The argument made the whole time was that, yes, there will be vaccine injury, but the amount of vaccine injury is substantially less than the deaths from COVID. So they argued everybody should be forced to get the vaccine to say it was many people. Now we're learning that people got heart damage from it and that people may have

had their immune systems weakened by it. And that's the challenge with this utilitarian worldview of thinking that you know what is true, deciding to pull the trigger and sacrifice a portion of your own population to save more people when you could be wrong the whole time. And the people that you would intend to sacrifice might actually be better. Like sacrificing a million brilliant people might be worse than, you know, rescuing 100 million idiots. So there's that aspect of it, too. There's none. The philosopher king may say, pains me to sacrifice a million to save a billion, but I have to.

Then he sacrifices that million, and the meteor was never a threat in the first place, and he just killed a million people for no reason. That's part of why I don't want to be president. But the thing is recoiling from power, someone else is going to take it. Correct. So Trump can choose to be. be the brutal guy and we can shift us to the Iran stuff. I think the closing of the Strait of Hormuz is the intended condition. I don't think they're trying to open it. I mean, the Strait of Hormuz was open

before the war. So it doesn't make sense that it becomes a point of contention now to end the war. It's cutting China off from 50% of its oil imports. It's constraining our enemies while converting the United States into one of the largest oil exporters in the world. So Trump, how many times now, as he said, we have a deal? Seven? Yeah. We've won the war like eight times. Indeed. It sounds more like whenever there's like a boiling point where it's like what is going on, Trump says the war is about to end and then everyone calms down.

Then nothing happens. It starts getting hot, hot. People start losing their minds. No, no. It's going to end now and it calms down. But the whole time, China's been cut off from their imports. Which is sort of, I mean, that actually makes some sense in this. I mean, it's really hard to criticize what Trump's doing on Iran from a,

logical perspective because we don't, we don't know what he's seeing, right? He takes out, let's, let's do this. We do have a story. We do have a story. We got to pull it up. Here we go. Ladies and gentlemen, from Politico, Pentagon puts building blocks in place for Cuba invasion. The Navy's presence in the Caribbean has not reduced despite the Iran war. What did Donald Trump do? He went into Venezuela, took out Maduro, got our oil as it's back, just before we went into Iran. now he's going after Hassan and these lefties for funding and financing related to Cuba. The U.S. is going to make a move on Cuba.

I do not believe Donald Trump wants the Strait of Hormuz open. I just think that the administration can't tell the American people, we got your gas to five bucks on purpose. Five dollar gas in the United States, as far as Trump is concerned, is a small price to pay to cut off half of the energy imports for China. China's the biggest threat to the United States. I mean, the problem with that calculation would be, I think they understood that if they intentionally shut down the trade of four moves, it would completely decimate the Japanese economy. Now the Japanese bond market is completely overheating, and that's screwing us over big time. Because again, that was our largest debtor, or creditor, rather, and now they're selling off all their bonds. It's destroying our bond market. Now he went from Kevin Warsh coming into cut rates. Now he's like, I might have to hike rates. The market is, you know, calculating. I don't think that changes the calculus. I think the idea is we need. We, we know. know this was bad for us. It's worse for China. Donald Trump is, he's wielding a double-edged

sword. The, the hope is that we cause more damage to our global adversaries than we do to ourselves. Point being, Trump can't come out and say, I am going to cause U.S. gas to jump to $5 to hurt China because the Americans are going to be like, what? I don't care about China. I don't think it was so much us trying to limit China's energy supply because they are able to get it from Russia on sale. I think what in that theory, I think what makes a little bit more sense is that, and we have seen some indications in the press that China was pressuring Iran to start selling oil and Yuan. And that would be a huge problem for the United States. And so some have argued, I don't necessarily know if like I, who knows, who knows what Trump's saying to your point. But like some have speculated that Trump can't actually lose this war because if Iran starts trading in the yuan, that's going to freeze out the United States from a massive energy sector. I mean, he's in a tough spot, right? Even if your theory is not right, let's say let's take the sort of, not mainstream, I don't know if that's the right word, the orthodox theory of the war.

Orthodox theory being that Donald Trump accidentally triggered a war which closed the state. I'm sorry, let me clarify. Donald Trump started a war that accidentally resulted in the closure of the Strait of Hormuz and the spiking of gas prices, and now he's been struggling for several months to cut a deal that will open the strait. That's the orthodox view, right? I think that the Orthodox view says he thought that the Orthodox view, I don't think is that harsh on Trump. I think the Orthodox view would say he did that, he thought, you know, we will be able to impose overwhelming military superiority over Iran and they will want to cut a

deal. And he was wrong. And he was wrong. And now he can't re-op. So, so again, it's Trump screwed up or it's on purpose. Which do you think it is? I think it's on purpose. I don't think, I think, I think Trump went into Venezuela to secure oil assets because he knew the straight was going to get closed. I don't, you know, I think that it's more likely that they, you know, they just misjudge the Iranians a little bit. Because I go to Venezuela then. Well, Venezuela, I mean, Venezuela is, I mean, they're thugs. They're hostile to us. I mean, these are, I mean, really it's, you know, these people are hosting the Iranians, the Russians, the Chinese. Sure, I just, I don't think it's a coincidence that the U.S. seized back the largest.

I mean, it's the largest oil producer in the world. And then I don't think that it is a, I don't think it's a coincidence. Trump was like, we're going to take the oil assets from Venezuela. And then randomly and unrelated, we're going to go to war with Iran, you know, a month later. I mean, I think that that, I mean, that obviously makes sense. I think that they certainly, I think, considered the idea that like Trump and his team did not consider the possibility of the homeroom his closure is ridiculous. I've seen people put that out there, right? They had no, the idea they had no plan for the hormone use closure.

They had no idea, like, that that might happen. And that's absurd. Obviously, they did. Like, I've talked to, I know people in Navy EOD who, like, you've had Tom Sauer on, right? Like, Tom Sauer's talked about this. Like, this is what they planned for for decades. They've, they've considered this problem. So, so the issue is, why is Trump struggling to cut a deal that would open the straight? Because it's, there's a lot of different interests. And I think the most likely explanation is that there's a lot of these different competing interests. You know, I tweeted this out a couple of days ago, which is the idea that the one foreign, you know, we talk about foreign influence.

everybody harps on Israel. The one country that always seems to get its way or has been getting its way as to Trump's actions is Saudi Arabia. Prior to the war, Saudi Arabia was asking, hey, you need to go do this. You can't let Iran make you look weak. And then now with Saudi's oil infrastructure under threat, they're like, hey, can we do diplomacy? And so that's actually like it was also causing problems in the Red Sea for which societies have a massive interest. Right. And so I think the Saudis, it's managing these sort of like key allies who are investing or have promised to invest huge amounts in the United States, right? Like something like $4 trillion between Saudi Arabia, UAE, and Qatar.

And the Abraham Accords are on the line. In the Abraham Accords, they want to expand them. So there's just, you know, it's almost like, I think people kind of, especially in our space, just have this very narrow aperture like they do. It's just tunnel vision on Israel in terms of like foreign influence and they're not understanding that actually, especially given the way that the war happened, which is, you know, there was a huge degradation of Iranian military capability and especially their ballistic missiles that can actually hit Israel thousand miles away, but they have all their

short-range missiles that can hit the Gulf. I think that was ultimately... And that was what happened. Remember we did that convoy thing, the Project Freedom thing? Yeah. And there was a Saudi, there's a Saudi commentary by the name of Iman Dean, who you should be reading if you aren't. He's really, really interesting. But, you know, there was this talk about how the Saudis requested a pause or something, or the pause was done at the request of Pakistan. And Imadine explained that what happened was, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, we're all like, yes, let's do these convoys, get the ships out of Hormuz. And then they started doing it, and Iran fired at some oil infrastructure, like at Fugaira and a few other places. And then the United States, like in a press conference, Kane was like, well, we think that's, we're not going to say that's above the threshold of a ceasefire.

Like, that's still a ceasefire. And the Saudi and the Emirates apparently were like, I'm sorry, what? They blew up our oil infrastructure. That's a ceasefire. You're not, okay, you need to stop doing this. because if you're not going to respond to our oil infrastructure being built, then we're not going to, we're not okay with this convoy project. Yeah. But brought it to a quick end.

Yeah. And as I understand it too, like obviously there's domestic pressure, not that the European allies can do too much about this, but, you know, there's been a lot of frustration from Trump that I think they anticipated going in that actually the Europeans, the Japanese, et cetera, would at least intervene and assist in some way. I do think they actually anticipated that happening and didn't happen. I think part of why and what no one's talking about is, again, like the Saudis,

the Qataris are heavily invested in a lot of European markets. Like that is very true. And again, the Europeans kind of understand that they might have not as much leverage as they quite thought. And it's just a big dance right now between Starmer trying to please his, obviously his base, but now he's screwed, but he's also got to keep the foreign investors happy. It's put them in a really bad situation. We lose if our adversaries are allowed to control our media.

and I think it is patently obvious for a long time now. Foreign interests have been manipulating our media in a variety of ways. And it seems like the U.S. has no capability to stop it. As J.D. Vance said, if we lose the AI war, we lose everything. And this is why Taiwan's such an important. They're doing like 100% of the chip fabrication. I don't know if it's literally, but some numbers I've seen thrown around. Elon's like, we, dear God, need to resure our chip manufacturing.

We need to, we're on the precipice. you know the iron lattice technology is pretty promising. I don't want to talk about it because the Chinese are listening, but what other choice do we have? You know, you put the memory in the process or you get 10 million times the F activity. We're kind of, we need to build it and that's going to take time. Yeah, well, I mean, to tie it back in. And to tie it back in and, well, I'd be curious your thoughts on this is,

I don't actually think Trump is this China Hawk that people make him out to be. And I think that was evident when he was meeting with the Chinese. And he effectively said the Taiwanese, like, that's a situation. that can be resolved later. And if he was this massive China Hawk, he wouldn't have like used that as leverage in negotiations over Iran. I think he, I think he, the Middle East is actually much more of focus for him than people realize. My point is the U.S. will not have the political willpower to stop our adversaries and win these conflicts. If the people are convinced, they're not our adversaries. Yeah. I mean, you know, you know, you know the, you know the biggest threat to

America is right now? What? According to Twitter. What? You know. Sympathy for the Iranian government? The biggest threat to the United States. You know, you know, the United States. States is China. However, if you follow the biggest podcasts in the world, which country is the biggest to America? Israel. A country the size of New Jersey that spends what, like one-20th the lobbying dollars that China does? Don't get me wrong, you're allowed to complain about Israel and their lobbying and A-PAC and all of that stuff. But I think it's really funny that when Donald Trump endorses Paxton and Cornyn is the APAC candidate, these personalities aren't coming out and cheering for the defeat of the A-PAC candidate.

I mean, yeah, but again, I want to stress this. This is because, we have foreign influence manipulating our media space. How is, I don't, I don't care about Israel at all. I literally just do not. You want to criticize their lobbying. You don't like nine. All those things are allowed. You're mad about what's happening in Gaza, absolutely allowed.

But the greatest threat to the United States, singular threat, and I don't think it's the only threat, but China is a much bigger adversary in the global stage than any other country. They spend 400 million on lobbying. They're buying farmland near military bases, taking pictures of our military installations. they flew a spy balloon over our country, taking snapshots of our missile launch sites. But there are people, despite all of this, who have been convinced that the biggest threat we face is a country the size of New Jersey in the Middle East.

This also happens to be our best ally on both AI and cybersecurity technology. Like, if I were, like, honestly, if I were China, like, if there's an American ally that I would want not to be an American ally anymore for my strategic purposes, it would be. This is exactly it. Look, Israel's imperfect, and you're allowed to criticize them, again, I say it a million times. So why is it that these Israel derangement syndrome people lie about what my argument is? Maybe it's algorithmic manipulation makes people money when they lie about Israel. And there might be an active AI army coming out of China that is botting these people, making them psychotic.

Always has been, we've been tracking it since the 2010s. Redirecting it at Israel, redirecting a lot of vitriol at Israel. They steal our IP, they attack our email index. infrastructure and our social media. TikTok was a weapon. That's why we effectively seized it. And TikTok was like super, super pro-Palestine. Yeah. But, but you know, it wasn't always. It flipped over one weekend. We tracked the data and it looked like an algorithmic, which intentionally promoted anti-Israel content. Centralization. I think that's true. But even at the media machine, I don't think the Iran war is ever going to be popular with the American. I mean,

Americans are like, yeah, sure. I'm not saying that. I'm saying if we as the American people wanted to get serious to stop an adversary who's been stealing our IP, buying up land. manipulating our politics, sending spies. We had a mayor in California who was a spy for China. We've got sitting members of Congress that are banging spies. The American people will get serious about the threat that China poses to this country. The Thousand Talents Program, bribing politicians, bribing professors, all of this stuff. Confucius institutes of the university.

But has the average American ever been able to articulate geopolitics at a high level anyway? I think if you polled Americans, they- On Israel, apparently. Well, even then, I would say that it's actually evidence that they have poor geopolitical instincts. And I'm not even like an Israel. I'm just making that point. But beyond that, I mean, if you did poll Americans, there's polling. They do say China is our biggest threat. But that doesn't really mean anything because ultimately, like, geopolitics is not nasty followers. I know, but I'm just saying that with the average American, they poll. It's like 60% say China's our biggest problem. My point is our adversaries want us off balance. And they're succeeding. And I don't think the Trump

administration has the sophistication to deal with this. I guess when I'm making the point is we can't the retardation of like the general public. And my point is like on the data center thing. Like everyone's like, this is clearly China trying to hamstring us on data on data centers. And I'm like, actually all this for the most part, as I'm seeing is pretty organic. This does track with the American people. I don't think that's pushed by algorithms. I think people just instinctually really hate this.

Oh, they disagree. I disagree. Because the Utah Data Center doesn't make sense that people are opposed to it. So if you're upset about a data center in Loudoun County that they're building near home, agreed. If you're upset that they're eminent. domining your land to build a data center, agreed that sentiment is legitimate. If you start making videos where you're like, they're building a data center in the desert away from human beings, now something feels weird. Yeah, but people were really angry about nuclear energy at the time.

Like, the majority of Americans hated nuclear energy at the time. And that was way before, like, the mass media market that we're in now. I think it's like Americans are really good. And sometimes it's a good thing, but oftentimes it's a bad thing, is they're really good at whipping themselves up into a frenzy over. The Chinese have a great firewall across their internet. So they go outside their firewall. They say nuclear energy bad, data center's bad. Everyone get afraid and tell your government. And so the people in the United States are like, yeah, no nuclear, no data centers.

Inside. Inside of China, they're building nuclear plants. Inside of the China, their social media is be an astronaut, join the military, fight for your country, your people are good. And in the United States, the media we get is be gay, don't have kids, and the biggest threat is one of your own allies. But China even has a problem putting a lid on a lot of social media. Like there was this, there's a video actually that was talking about the biggest post in we chat history was this young man. And it was called like the lie down culture there where it's basically he's laying out

how horrible, you know, they have the six day work week and he's like laying out how horrible, you know, the life is for the Chinese youth. And this is why Xi Jinping. He's come out multiple times and said like the biggest threat to China as he sees it is this lie down culture of like Chinese people being overworked and then they refuse to pay into the system, et cetera, et cetera. And so like I think even China has like more. domestic issues and people give them credit for because this post went everywhere. And I mean,

the Chinese, obviously, they tried to put a lid on it and that sort of thing. But I think we have this idea that China's like North Korea where everything is just like unified. All the people there are in lockstep. It's like they actually have quite a bit of domestic issues. It's just with the firewall, with the, you know, lack of journalism. And also it's such a drastic different culture that we have a tough time kind of like, you know, breaking down the specific dynamics within China. I guess that would be one point. And then my other point is I do think a lot of this stuff is, organic is domestic. I think Americans do oftentimes take wide positions just because they're popular. And I mean, I don't blame, like people, some people actually like have really thought

out coherent philosophy. I'm not going to say they're like paid by by China. I think it's just coherent with typically like a lot of conservative principles, values that people have where they're like, no, we want to like turn back the clock on. They view like social media as a huge problem. So naturally they're going to be skeptical of AI. Naturally they're going to be skeptical of data. Like I don't think that's necessarily. I'm sure it is a component, but I I think I'm not downplaying the ability for Americans to mobilize and get really upset in mass. It is, it's like a short-term fear because if you're afraid of data centers because they're going to destroy the environment and make your electricity bill go up, you might not realize

that if China gets the data centers and they decide to attack the United States homeland with drone nuclear drones, that's worse for our environment than data centers. But you can never like, but you can't articulate that to like the American people. Like that's so, that's so abstract that like no one's ever going to respond to that. kind of like my point is like even if the media machine was like yes China is the biggest I don't think it actually changes that much on the ground because like the threats that we face from China are very abstract they're not very tangible like you know they'll say oh they're going to like knock out our electric grid well people can't like comprehend what that means

because we've never experienced it we don't have that lived experience of understanding what that is we only understand conventional warfare so when they would come out with the whole Ukraine Russia thing and they say well Russia could like take over Europe people understood that instantly because they've done that before. Like people know what that is. They know what the effects are, et cetera. And so I guess that's kind of my point is like, one, I think we overrate China's unity.

And then B, I think we underrate the American people's ability to just take these positions organically. We're going to go to the uncensored. I'm sorry, we're going to go to the Rumble Rans and Super Chats before the uncensored portion of the show. You guys have the same. Smash the like button, share the show. Get Off My Lawn says the Lodge Pokeram in Austin has reopened a couple days ago.

A grand jury decided to toss out the case again. them indeed I've been following this. It's amazing news and I'm glad to see it all worked out. When you can't get a grand jury to indict, man, that case must be real bad. So they seized assets, they accused them a bunch of crimes and then a grand jury was like, yo, this is fake and tossed it out and the lodge is back in business. Shout to the lodge poker room. One of the best, if not the best and biggest poker room. And then they also rated another card club in Houston recently. Like flying drones around the building is pretty crazy. Is it early today? Ijust Lark says the alien map starts in your rough location.

It essentially shows you people who they caught and where near them. It's actually eye-opening. Very interesting. Dylan with Rumble says, Ian, we got to send the cows. Got shovel out that ish and milk them for methane. The cows will terraform Mars. If we can get it, first we got to do fish. Well, first we got to get it hot so we need to plant.

Dicon. Nah, let's just literally send like a million cows to Mars. just heat up the atmosphere? No, what do you mean? It'll explode because it's low pressure. They'll evolve to eat each other. Have you got to play terraforming Mars at the board game? Because you do it step by step.

You need to raise the temperature. You know, the problem with these board games is they're all just like very complicated. It is. Like, Katon is not particularly complicated. No, it's randomness. You roll dice. I don't like it.

It's fun. Random. And Carcasan. Remember Carcazan? We have that out in the other room. That's a good game. Similar randomness. Dude, you'll love terraforming Mars

because it's so much strategy. And you're not just trying to play it. You're just like nobody. Nobody wanted to learn how to play. That's the problem. I got all the boxes. I just pulled them out of storage. I know.

And everyone sits down and they go, it's going to take like 30 minutes to learn. Yeah. Put on your music videos a bit. Let's play pool. That's because I have high intelligence. The issue is that regular people are like, I don't want to spend my day off learning how to play a board game.

I'll play one time. You don't have to learn it once. Oh, yeah. You only learn to imagine the gathering one time. You can also get the video game on Steam. Sorry, I'm chewing almonds. Just play Mario. Get Terraforming Mars on Steam, dude.

You'll learn it real fast. It's awesome. All right, Brewmaster Monk says, if the aliens are real, then why hasn't Trump challenged them to a battle of the bands at Area 51? He could even film a reality TV show to form the American band. He's leaving money on the table. There was a, you know, this Disclosure Day movie is coming out, and Spielberg says, it's all true. And then AOL wrote an article about how people think it's predictive programming that they're releasing this movie to get people ready for aliens. And then there's this viral post on Reddit where a guy claims that he,

He's a whistleblower who worked for the U.S. government. And then he basically wrote like a sci-fi screen where he said that when life emerged and when humans evolved, aliens took early humans and brought them to a planet with alien technology to see how would humans develop with a planet of scarcity and a planet of abundance. And now bugs are coming declaring war on the Galactic Council. And I'm just like, do people just not realize all of this is fake? He's like, these are not whistleblowers. You know, Bob Lazar just made it up. It's not real. You know what I mean?

Did that guy say they're going to start a band of aliens because you should call it alien derangement syndrome? Hey, there you go. That was the first thing. The Fallen 501 says wasn't GWB a fighter pilot? He was. Indeed. Good vision. Yep.

Barry says Ian loves George Bush. I do. That's why I criticize him so heavily. I respect that. Snage Barry says Florida has gone after people saying threatening comments in social media. mainly anti-semitic comments, but nothing on people who make threatening comments to Trump, MAGA, or politicians, F this. Yep. Who'd they actually prosecuted?

I don't know. Right, exactly. Well, I mean, I'm not tracking the story. I mean, it doesn't mean, it doesn't mean, they happen. I mean, if they've made an actual two threat against a person, like, if you go out there and, like, communicate a death threat off against anybody, you're going to get prosecuted for that. I made a picture to trigger the Israel Darrangement Syndrome people. It is two white guys dragging rocks being whipped by a Chinese soldier, or one says it, it's a little. At least it's not Israel.

Dude, there's so many problems on Earth. I mean, I... It's not Israel. Religious extremism is a problem. Totalitarianism is a problem. Centralization of authority. Yeah, I kind of want to... It's like a version of that libertarian meme or something, you know, like, with, like, it's

the stone toss thing where the guy's got the gun, they've got the guns, the back of the guy said, I can't explain this meme at the top of it. Oh, I know you're saying it's like, the guns back of the head and they say, well, could you imagine if it was us on the other side? Right. Could you imagine if we were doing this, how they'd freak... All right. Raymond G. Stanley Jr. says, if disclosure day is real, does that kill God? No.

Because some people believe that the quote-unquote aliens are just demons, entities, you know? Might change the shape of God in your mind. All right. Remigy Stanley Jr. says, yes, Tim, we've all become too global caring. If we Americans solely concern ourselves with America, the world overall will improve more happy too. Indeed. So what's wrong with globalization? so long as it's American hegemonic globalization, right? Yeah, I mean, there's just like, this is the thing is like, and I'm one of these people, like, it sounds like really nice, but the problem is so convoluted, for one, like entitlement spending.

I mean, like, as long as we're going to have half our budget going towards entitlement spending, you can't, like, remove yourself from the global system. Like, we can't, like, absolve ourselves of being a global guardian. And I hate that, but, like, that's the third rail of politics. going to change that. It seems like the uniparties mentality was we're going to have a one world government through some kind of system, and America will not be on top. And Trump said, no, we'll do that, but America will be on top. Yeah. And I mean, I think people underestimate, like, if we totally retreated into ourselves, that wouldn't just mean everybody else would leave us alone and let us do

what we wanted. I mean, I've talked about this a lot, but you have to understand, I mean, China has a massive power and already has a lot of say about how other countries conduct their affairs, in a world where we totally withdrew and decided not to exert our influence or use our power meaningfully, then basically anybody we'd want to do a deal with or anybody we'd want to favor from, they'd be like, well, I have to check with China first. Yeah, the way you have the look at it is like once you've initiated the boss fight, you can't leave, you can't save the game and exit. Yeah, and which countries that have given up their empires are better off for it?

Yeah, literally. Like, how's Portugal doing? You know, how's Spain doing? How's the United Kingdom doing? Japan and Germany? Like, you know, you, now sometimes you're forced into it because you lose a war. right a major a great power war or something but uh you know the idea of voluntarily just retreating from the scene and assuming that things will be good i mean you know we we benefit enormously from

the dollar being the global reserve currency does that happen we just withdraw into ourselves like our entire economic system is like predicated on this so it's like i agree with the sentiment i wish things were that way but like in policy you have to be like very pragmatic and like unraveling that you would need like a dictator for 60 years to even begin unraveling like how common to the system is. And then to Will's point, is that even something that we even want when you like really think about it? Because again, like the British, the British basically dismantled their entire empire voluntarily and they're significantly worse off for it. And honestly, the rest of the world is worse off for it too. Like India was faring much, faring much better under British rule.

So. And the best part was they stole the food. And now we all get to enjoy chicken ticamassalla. Yeah, they didn't they, which was invented in Scotland, by the way. I also adhere to the Roman tactic of dominating outside of your borders so that they don't fire intercontinental ballistic missiles at you. Yeah, that's what we do. It's horrible. I didn't used to think like that, but it's just inevitable. I can read this here from Randy. He says, greetings from Wyoming.

In keeping with Tim Castro tradition, was that an auto-correct? We welcomed my first great grandchild early this morning. Congratulations. Wow. Let's go. Congratulations. Give it up. Welcome to the multi-generational living is the best.

You know, it's crazy is a, there's this viral photo of like, it's like seven generations of women or something, say, number. And it's just like, every, every woman had a kid when she was like 18 or 19. So it's like great, you know, there's like the baby, then the mom, then the grandma, then the great grandma, then the great, great grandma, then the great, great grandma and the great, great grandma, because they're all only like 18 years apart. So it's like great, great, great grandchild, alive there, you know, crazy. Love it. be. It's how it used to be. Maybe in the future with, you know, genetic therapy, you'll have, you'll be 190 and

you'll be hanging out with your greatest grandchild. Indeed. Or maybe you'll be hanging out in the uncensored portion of the show over at rumble.com slash Timcast IRL coming up in about a minute or so. You can follow me on X and Instagram at Timcast. Will, do you want to shout anything out? Yeah. Follow me on X at Will Chamberlain.

Yeah, follow me on X and Instagram at Real Tate Brown. And we got some interviews up on the Tate Brown, Tim, channel from this week from our daily noon live show. So make sure you go check those out as well. And I'll see you guys Monday on that show live at noon on Rumble. Follow me at Ian Crossland on Instagram where I'm putting up covers. I just did Ryan Adams. To be young. Love that song. And YouTube X at Ian Crossland. Great conversation. Let's keep going. Carter Banks. Yeah. You can follow me at Carter Banks everywhere at Carter Banks. official everywhere else and also

Dustin from Axe wanted I promised a shoutout and an update on some music stuff tonight so me and Ian are working on a few acoustic songs and also I've got one coming out and you can pre-order it now at a live or dead song.com let's go. We'll see you all over at rumble.com

slash timcastirr right now. Thanks for hanging out.