Timcast IRL - YouTube Loses MASSIVE Lawsuit, This Will END Independent Media

Episode Date: March 26, 2026

Tim, Ian, and Elaad are joined by Mike Benz to discuss YouTube and Meta losing a massive lawsuit, NASA going all in on a moon base, a viral doomsday prophecy coming true, the White House preps websites related to aliens, and Druski mocks Erika Kirk.  SUPPORT THE SHOW BUY CAST BREW COFFEE NOW - https://castbrew.com/ Join - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCLwN... Hosts:  Tim @Timcast (everywhere) Ian @IanCrossland (everywhere) | https://graphene.movie/ Elaad @ElaadEliahu (X) Producer: Carter @carterbanks (X) |  @trashhouserecords  (YT) Guest: Mike Benz @MikeBenzCyber (X) Podcast available on all podcast platforms! Youtube Loses MASSIVE Lawsuit, This Will END Independent Media | Timcast IRL For advertising inquiries please email [e-mail]

This is it, boys, a landmark case against Meta and YouTube arguing that they are responsible for their algorithms and the addictive nature of these platforms. They've been ordered to pay $3 million in damages. Not only do we have this landmark case, but another fine issued in New Mexico for $375 million to Facebook over harm to children. Now, what does this mean? if YouTube is liable, not for the content, but for the delivery mechanism itself, then there is no delivery mechanism they can have. That means content must just be without algorithm based on you subscribing and that's what you get.

Discovery has to be organic. Now, I don't know how this will play out, but we did just have a hearing on Section 230 a week or so ago. And that is the protection that allows it or that shields these platforms from liable. if a third party makes a comment on their platform. So let's say I say something like that the AG in Virginia tried to kick a dog, right? He can't sue YouTube for it because I'm the one who said it. The truth is he actually did try to kick a dog so I didn't make that up anyway and the truth is an absolute defense. But what's interesting now is, based on what we are seeing and arguments being made,

section 230 may get blown up, which is a component in ending the independent media space on social media and turning the clock back to a time when there were only a handful of channels and a handful of approved commentators. I think that's where we're going to be going. So we'll talk about that. Plus, ladies and gentlemen, we are going to the moon. NASA has announced $20 billion to go to the moon,

build a moon base. So we're going to talk about that stuff. And then, yeah, I guess there's Iran war stuff. Allies are like, okay, Trump will help you. But I just, who's so tired of talking about it? And it's kind of scary because it's war. and there are weird prophecies about what's going to happen. A comet is about to graze the sun and explode.

Most people haven't heard this. It's crazy. You might be able to actually see this in the sky early April. And then people are talking about this guy who claims he was abducted by aliens. And he said years ago, it's like 12 years ago. He said in April of 2026, Israel and Iran will be firing missiles at each other. And then orbs will rise from the ocean. I'm not kidding.

This interview actually exists. And people are freaking out about it. So we're going to talk about that. the new trailer for Harry Potter came out and everyone's wondering how Black Snape is. The answer is very and we'll address that as well. Before we do, get a great sponsor for you. It is venice.a.I. Sam Altman said JetGPT will get to know you over your life.

Indeed. Chad GPD also is the former director of the NSA sitting on their board right now. Edward Snowden called this a willful calculated betrayal of the rights of every person on earth. Additionally, they're shutting down Sora so you can't even make videos on the platform anymore. That's crazy. Anyway, my friends, it took us too long to truly understand what social media companies were doing with our data over the last decade. Are we really going to make that same mistake again? OpenAI is hinted they may even require users to provide a government issued ID. Venestought AI utilizes leading open source AI models to deliver text code and image generation to your web browser.

There's no downloads, no installations or anything. Private and permission lists, they don't spy on you or censor the AI. Messages are encrypted and your conversation history is stored only in your browser. AI can be extremely valuable, but we shouldn't need to give up our privacy to use it. The Venice Pro Plan unlocks the full platform and features including PDF uploads for summaries or insights, the ability to turn off safe mode for unhindered image generation, and that doesn't just mean naughty images. It could be political images that other platforms don't let you make. You'll get the ability to change how Venice interacts by modifying the system prompt.

Very cool. So go to venice. com. slash Tim, use code Tim. Check it out, man. It's a weird time. We've got a lot of critiques of AI, but at least you can get some privacy

and utilize a tool that's not going to do weird things. But don't forget to also smash that like button. Share the show with everyone you know. We're going to have a lot of fun tonight. Joining us to talk about everything and more is Mike Benz. Hello. Who are you? What do you do? I'm Mike Benz.

I advocate for free speech on the Internet. I like free speech on the Internet. That's a good thing. Well, glad to have you. Actually, I will also mention you've exposed a conspiracy against me. Yes. I think what is it, the Atlantic Council? You were targeted by the election integrity partnership, the Atlantic Council, the University of Washington, the Stanford Air Observatory. Oh, it's worse than I thought.

Africa. They did a whole presentation about how you were the origin point of a malinformation incident during the 2020 election cycle. And they tracked. And it was about ballot harvesting, right? Right? It's about ballot. Which is completely true. Yes. That's crazy.

But that's the thing about malinformation. Right. It started off with disinformation and then they tried to distinguish miss and dis. And they said, you know, what happens when something is true and we can't even engineer a fake fact-checked? Fact-check, it's just true. But if people know this is true, they'll think this thing we don't want them to think. Like if they know that there's a myocarditis risk because the CVC published a peer-reviewed. study on this or

PubMed. Well, that's going to be malinformation. It's the same thing with like the bout harvesting. Yes, it's true that it happened, but if you believe that, it will lead you to think the election's not secure and so therefore you're contributing to a mis-acringer narrative. My whole point was ballot harvesting is

largely legal. It's allowed. It's a strategy that should be utilized by Republicans and they're like uh-oh, he's figured out how he's going to help the Republicans win. Let's lie about it. Thanks for coming. This should be very interesting. We talk all about it. We got a lot hanging out, of course. Good evening, everybody. Ian and Carter are hanging out as well.

What up? Greetings. Let's jump to this story from NBC News. Jury finds META and YouTube negligent in landmark lawsuit on social media safety. The jurors awarded the plaintiff $3 million in damages finding meta 70% responsible for harm caused to her and YouTube responsible for 30%. They say that the L.A. County Superior Court jury said that META's and YouTube's negligence were a substantial factor in causing harm to the plaintiff. It awarded them the money. We know this.

The trial began last month in L.A. County, which included testimony from Mark Zuckerberg and other tech executives, was the first in a consolidated group of cases brought against META and other companies by more than 1,600 plaintiffs, including over 350 families and over 250 school districts. Guys, what they're basically saying is that YouTube and META knew their platform was addictive and harmful to children. We also had this from TechCrunch just the other day. New Mexico just handed META its first courtroom defeat over child safety and the rest of the country is watching. A jury in Santa Fe on Tuesday ordered META to pay $375 million in civil penalties after finding the company misled consumers about the safety of its platforms and endangered children. So where does this go? It's actually quite simple. If YouTube and META are responsible, not for the content, but for the mechanism by which they are delivered, they'll have to delete the algorithms.

I believe this is step one in overturning, removing the independent media space, shutting it down. Where the future will go? Well, the first thing I'll say is, I'm going to let you in on a secret. I've actually been in communication. I've told you guys this already a million times. I've been in contact with media companies, executives, C-suite guys at media companies who have outright told me the future is going to be Peacock, Paramounts. It's going to be Netflix, Amazon Prime.

YouTube will be there, but YouTube will effectively be like any one of these other companies. The idea that you or anyone else can start your own media business is over. And this lawsuit is step one. We had a hearing a week or so ago in Congress over Section 230. Nobody talked about it because it's kind of a tired issue. But the end result is going to be if you, you'll sign up to YouTube and you'll see, I'll make an account and you'll submit for approval and you'll wait. and they'll vet you and ask for your ID and say, if we approve you, you can make content,

and then you will, and nobody will be able to see it because they won't be able to create any algorithmic delivery mechanism. Only those who have the money to advertise and do paid placements will be seen. So everything that we think we know about the media space now, I think we're going back to a time when it was just a handful of broadcasters, and the machine state is going to choose who is allowed to speak and who is not. You might be able to install a setup, like some video games have pay or like play to pay.

Like you can pay 20 bucks a month or you can play the game to earn the currency in the game to pay the monthly fee. And if you could do that with like internet so either the rich could pay to promote their stuff or if you use the website enough, you generate enough internal activity that you can use that to pay for your advertisement and keep up with. So like the power users can keep up with the money men. That would be a possibility. Also, I think decentralized tech and mesh networking like now's the time to start really drilling that in because if we wait until they say you can't do it, it's going to be a lot more annoying than if we get it installed now. And everyone controls their own media, uploads their own, has their own server on board, and then people can follow them and cross network narratives and things like that. I think this case is really about how as a society we're struggling to deal with the impact of social media and how it affects not only our youth, but even adults.

and in this case there was some nine-year-olds who was using all the social media apps, and she blames them now for her mental health crises that she has. She said she struggled with herself image as a result of beauty filters used on Instagram. Oh, true. Yeah, and I could understand how that, like, would affect young women. And it's also been a platform for kids to bully one another. And, like, I think there is something to be said about how the youth is affected by things like endless scroll on a lot of these apps and other addictive features that exist.

But we do need a way, like, like the freedom that these apps have to exist. Like, obviously, she didn't do the terms and conditions correctly because she wasn't of age and she shouldn't have hypothetically been allowed on there. But then again, it was very easy to bypass. I think we're struggling as a society with that issue. And also, as far as this case goes, though, I don't see a case in which they don't appeal this and it'll probably make its way up to the Supreme Court.

Mike, maybe you have. I was going to add just real quick. Did you see that X has begun rolling out the region filter? I don't know. I haven't see. I saw people talking about it. I don't know if it's actually been rolled out. Have you seen this?

I think from what I saw, Elon replied to Nikita Beer, the product head, saying that they're taking feedback under consideration after some feedback and criticism of how that might, that regional policy might impact monetization for folks by given. That's the point. Right. But there was, I think there's concern that the international audience may be disproportionately. Oh, bro, I'm banning everybody. Newt. Yeah. If you are in Bangladesh, you will never see another word from me.

Nor will you be able to reply. I will be, I will disappear from existence. Oh, you can auto block different countries. So I've seen a few posts from people claiming they have the feature that it's, I've seen people claiming they have the dislike button. I don't have that. But I saw a handful of posts from people and they were like, it's a list of countries. It's like who may see this post and you choose the countries where you want it to appear.

Right. I don't know if that's real because I don't have it. Right. I don't know either. What I saw is Elon reply and say to a reply to Nikita saying this is disproportionately impacting. Like I'm a French person and I use this platform every day and it's a source of income. Right. You know, because of the filters, you know, this is basically, you know, going to have a disproportionately negative impact on.

me being outside the United States and hear the following reasons and presented, you know, a pretty internally consistent, you know, argument about it. And Elon applied and said, something like, thanks for the feedback. We're still considering this policy. There are a few issues to consider. I mean, if you're an American who's in another country, are you going to block that from seeing anything? That could be weird. But the problem I have is I do not want replies from Bangladeshi's pretending to be Native Americans. That's not a joke. That's an actual thing that's been happening. There's a bunch of bank. Senators pretending to be Native Americans can me. Yes, that's also bad, but that's a one of one instance. With the Bangladeshis, it's like a

million times. And again, literally, people uncovered when they rolled out the region identifier feature, like probably dozens of Native American accounts saying things like white people stole our land, but it was Bangladeshi's exploiting cultural issues. I mean, could you imagine, could you imagine, Mike, if there was like, say, a dude who was just tweeting incessantly about American politics, but he lived like, I don't know, in Malaysia or something. Don't drag me into this. I mean, I do this. Look.

It's a reference to Ian Miles John. But look, at the same time, okay. So drag me into this. Okay. All right. At the same time, I'm an American who speaks prolifically about elections that happen in other countries. And I do this from an American perspective, but I am, you know, I have a platform. my, when I say something about what's happening in Hungary or what's happening in Spain or Germany,

there are news headlines about it that will say former State Department official, Mike Benz, you know, said this. And that becomes a, like a story or ignites a scandal in a foreign country. And with the audience that I have, they can drive amplification. And they could make the argument that this is like American outside interference. through some like, you know, because foreigners in our region in Hungary or France or Spain or Brazil or whatever are impacting our own internal dialogue because of the size of the platform they have. And to me, I think that's fair game. There's no monetary contribution. It's not like there's a FARA registration type thing. The, you know, it's hard to be able to like have it. I think there is

something beautiful about the global nature of X. Yeah, I, I could hear, we could see the Ayatollah's tweets. I, I agree to an extent. It's a problem. I like how they're changing monetization. They said that they're going to reduce the amount of money you make off foreign countries. We have to. Because what's happened is there is a pool of money that is going into X ads. And they were just basically like, based on the replies you get, the engagement you get, you'll get a share of ads. Now, I have a conspiracy theorist to what that's really about, but put a tack and that will come back. What happened was when this first launched, people who were on to the time, who were really making content and posting things were making great money.

Some people were getting like 20, 30K a month. And they're not even a couple hundred thousand followers. Like it's big, but they weren't like in the millions, but they made content people engaged with. The money started to go down. We found out that a bunch of people in India, again, not a joke, literally, made accounts and would all reply to each other in mass. And they would say, how is your day going? It's good.

And they would just spam blast each other. and then all of a sudden our money went down and people like, this is why they're pulling from the pool producing junk. So that needs to stop. But I will add this as an aside. I believe the monetization system on X has nothing to do with engagement monetization. I think it is incentivizing engagement for AI model training. And so the argument originally was you don't get money based on views of your tweets. Advertisements appear in the replies. So it's the engagement to your reply. that will generate money because that's where the ads are, right? Well, that also doesn't quite make a whole lot of sense as far as I'm concerned. And what I think actually happened is that Elon Musk bought Twitter because he wanted the fire hose.

This stream of human consciousness of people just blasting out what they're doing. Excellent. AI training data. Then he wants more data. So he says, monetary incentive if people reply to you. I put out a tweet. We call them tweets. BuzzFeed included me in an article because their writer, Hannah, what's her name, something?

I don't know. She's retarded. And I made a joke, a very obvious joke. When the war with Iran started, I said, is there literally one reason why we shouldn't take over Iran or Canada for that matter? Or Mexico? Which is obviously a joke and everybody understands. It's sarcasm. And she screen grabbed that like, look at these magy idiots.

Well, I tweeted, this is why we should repeal the 19th. another joke. And the first reply was a bot, a very obvious AI bot with this long-winded and saying like, you can't even, it was just a response where it was like, she made an argument and you can't even respond with one. You insult her. Everyone deserves rights. Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. Here's the point. I believe these bots are part of the AI training. What does the AI know? It knows what we've said, but not how we've replied or corrected it. So right now on YouTube, something interesting is happening. A lot of AI content has stormed the platform. And YouTube has begun asking people if the videos look like

AI slop. And people are going, yay, YouTube's going to start de-boosting AI slop. Wrong. They are using that to train VO. When an AI video is made, they say, is this slop? And when you put yes, it sends the data to Vio and says, this is bad. Don't do it. Fixing it. And then people will look at good videos and they'll say not slop. And they'll say, this is good. It needs the human response to correct it. So on X, you make a post, a robot responds, and the human goes, well, yeah, how dare you say it to me? And responds providing insight beyond the first layer of human, of human input, second layer input. This is like the, um, the AI theory of CAPTCHA, right? Like, it's true. It's real, though. You're actually, is, is a fact? That's corroborated? Absolutely 100%. So, so, you're training the Google,

you're training everything. You're training cars to drive. So, uh, uh, recapture originally, like the first iteration we saw was two words would appear and it would say type in the two words to continue. Yeah. One word it already knew. That was the key. The second word it did not know. That's funny. So the way it works, when you type in the first word correctly, it's assuming both words will be correct then. And by corroborating with it, with corroborating what it does know, it creates a strong data set to figure out what these other words are and they were scans from books. The reason why they appeared bent and warped, it's because it was an image scan from a book and we taught the AI how to read. Some Enders game show.

Oh, yeah. And so Captcha today, it'll say, it says like, find the streetlights. And you're like, oh, the streetlights. This proves it. Yet you're training cars to drive. It's crazy. I have a subscriber on Twitter that I think is an AI subscriber. It's my first one that keeps asking me to talk about graphene.

Pay me money every month now and it really wants to talk about graph. It's really weirdly written. It might be a human. That's your thing. It feels like it's an AI inciting me to talk about graphene. I'm like, is this a foreign op? What is this? I mean, look, if you were an industrial stakeholder in this, because the other thing about the bots is that they, they're there immediately with like three paragraphs.

Instantly. And like, you know, these like very cogent, but obviously like slanted towards a particular thing. Like there's this one like X-ray like Democrats like bot that like replies to like a third of my post like immediately. It's like the first one. And it's like some systematic attempted takedown of like every. point in it, but like slanted towards the idea of like MAGA or scum. And this is, and it's like, because it's first, it gets, you know how you can tell always? More engagement. They use M-Dashes a lot. M-Dash.

Gives it away. Yeah. Yep. But the other thing, you know, I do actually, so I have a, I have a banker friend who I met up with for drinks in New York recently, and the runs this kind of big portfolio. Leo for a fund. And we're talking about our diet of AI. And he explained that for his work, evaluating companies for potential investment, he uses Claude OpenAI, you know, Claude Chachybtee and GROC. And, you know, the person's a liberal, a good friend of mine since high school. And I said, oh, that's interesting. You're using GROC. I, you know, you almost expect from a certain political background. And what he said is, well, he explained why they use at that bank those or at that fund,

those different things. And he said, well, Grock is the best for scooping up word of mouth and like things that, like the social media chatter because oftentimes there are things that are not like chat. Chepti is very good at just retrieving all of the different, you know, securities filings, you know, all their perspective and mining that. It's really good at scolding you for being racist. Right. If that's what you're looking for.

Right. But there's also lots of different internal things about a company or rumors that are not necessarily true, but that are interesting for a potential investor to consider as a liability or as an opportunity. And so it's so like sweeping the word on the, I thought it was very interesting that for a high end, you know, a huge fund with a lot of. of capital on the line that GROC provides a service specifically because it allows the mining of the chatter on X that is not really able to be easily mined by Claude or ChatGPT because

they don't have the proprietary. They don't like the, I don't know if it's the API access or whatever it is that allows them to do the mass sweeping. Well, it should be interesting. But let's jump to this next story. We got this from NBC News. 20 billion dollars to build the base on the moon. Here we go, ladies and gentlemen. And what I really love about this is that it once and for all definitively proves we can go to the moon and that

everybody who ever doubted this was completely wrong. And the moon is also real. And there's no moon base there already, nor are there Nazis on the other side of it. And it's actually really easy to get there. And we've always been there, in fact, and we're going back because it's not hard to do. And it'll be really easy. I think this proves that we've been to the moon. And I think that's what Mike Benz was telling me before we went live, actually. I don't know, maybe Mike can... He was telling me quite a great deal about how we've been to the moon. I think he said he'd been to the moon.

He said he was there, and he said he actually met moon people. He's a moon kind of guy. Yeah, he had a... He's in the moon fit tonight, in the white, with the white Tim's too? Yeah, look at him. He wants nothing to do with this. We've totally been to the moon. Mike, what's the evidence that...

Let me read the story for you first. Let me read the story. NASA has canceling plans to deploy... a space station in lunar orbit and will instead use its components to construct a $20 billion base on the moon's surface of the next seven years. Its new chief, Jared Isaacman said on Tuesday. Isaacman, who was sworn at the agency in December, made the announcement at the opening of a day-long event at NASA's Washington headquarters. It should not really surprise anyone that we are pausing gateway in its current form and focusing on infrastructure that supports sustained operations

on the lunar surface. The lunar gateway station, largely already built with contractors Northrop Grumman and Vantor, formerly Maxer, was meant to be a space station parked in a lunar orbit. Repurposing the craft for lunar surface space is not simple. Despite some of the very real hardware and schedule challenges, we can repurpose equipment and international partner commitments to support Surface and other program objectives. Now, the truth is, my friends, we've never been to the moon and we can't go there because the firmament is in the way, and Elon Musk is actually not trying to create satellites. The purpose of SpaceX is to create powerful weapons that will break through the firmament,

so we can escape and release the upper oceans. I'm kidding, by the way. But I do love the conspiracy theories about flat earth and how they believe NASA is like a satanic demonic organization that's lying about the shape of the earth to keep people confused, to cover up something, I guess. I don't know. My whole life I thought we went to the moon for sure.

No doubts. And then people start saying, hey, the moon landing's fake. I'm like, all right, maybe they recorded some fake footage. Mike just popped his setup. And that they used it to advance, you know, America's storyline in the space race during the Cold War. But still we went there. We just didn't get any footage.

And I'm talking with Mike, I'm talking, what's that? We do have footage from there. What do you mean? Yeah, yeah, footage on the moon. You see them bouncing on the moon. And you're like, that must be real. And then Mike's like, okay, talking about the radiation problems about how these astronauts go up there, they get.

Did you say that earlier? He didn't say anything. What are you talking about? You gave me a few points before the show that we didn't talk about live. But do you, okay, do you want to talk about it? Nothing's off the record at the end. So you say we, we, I'm going to say, this is news to me. You got to educate me.

We went through a quantum leap of technology between 67 and 69. Bro, we went through a quantum leap from 1900 to 70. We figured out flight in the early 1900s. We're like, hey, I think I can fly. And then 60 years later, we're like, I'm going to the moon. So the incapability in 67 to get there with, what is Apollo blowing up on the landing pad or something? Was that in 67? To them literally technically walking on the moon, like, we've had a quantum leap in technology

in the last two years with AI. So it's not to say it's impossible. I actually think it's entirely possible. In fact, the weirdest thing to me is that I think it's actually fairly rudimentary. Like, put a giant, put it, like make a rocket, blast people in a space without, you know, you know, I think the real theory that that is more interesting to me is the space graveyard. Alex Jones talked about it quite a bit. He said that the moon is an astronaut's graveyard. I bet that's true.

And we know about, you know, you've got, what's the guy's name, Gagarian? was that the guy? The first guy in space? Yeah. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Not Neil Armstrongson. No, no, no, no. The moon guy.

Gararian, the guy. Garian, whatever is, you want to look it up? Gary Gygax? That's the guy who started. Not Gary Gygax. That's D&D. Yeah. But there's a theory that

Yuri Gargarian, was that his name, was not the first man in space. He's the first man to come back. Yuri Gagarin, Gagarin. The Garian? The Garion. The other one was just sent.

up in secret and if they... Other one, you mean like dozens. Because the argument is when we were like, okay, we're gonna go to space for the first time. Like, I'm not talking about moons. I'm talking about low orbit, right? Where we have satellites.

So they blast someone in a space and then they're like, what happens when he gets there? We had a dog go up there before to chimp and they pressed buttons. We'll see what happens. Yeah, I think it's fairly plausible that the first few humans ever set up

at orbit screwed up and went, ah, gone. And then with the moon missions, everyone's, here's what I love. They're like, how did we get back? How did we know how to have a return ship? And I'm like, because of the dozen dead astronauts

who tried it the first time, maybe. That makes more sense to me, to be honest. Is the story that they landed the lunar module, they got out, they danced around, and then they got back in and the module took off and then attaches back to a ship in orbit. No. No, the module just fires back.

And the module takes them all the way home? Yep. Indeed. That aluminum little lightweight. Well, the gravity on the moon is very light, so it's easier to break lunar orbit than it is Earth orbit, and then they're being pulled towards the Earth. So I actually, there's a lot of theories about it.

And my favorite is like, how did we lose the technology? And I'm like, bro, I had a binder full of first edition Charzards 20 years ago, 25 years ago. Still got mine. I wish I knew where that binder went. So when you're like, how did we do this or how do we do that? I'm like, you know, they had it on papers. they had the plans they built. It got put in a box. Like, it's a filing cabinet, right? And then administration changes. New people come in the room. They don't know what's in that filing cabinet,

and they don't care. Four years ago by, a new administration comes in. Nobody knows where anything is. These people don't even know what they had for breakfast yesterday. The telemetry data. You're talking about the telemetry data of like... No, no, no, the technology for radiation shielding and things like that. And it just disappeared after the... I think disappeared is a conspiratorial way to frame it. I think, once again, I had a box of Magic the Gathering cards at the castle. I don't know what happened to him. I had these like, maybe we know where they are.

These like 2006 Battle Bond or something it was called. It was like booster packs and it was a package with booster. I don't know what it is. Is it still, are they unpackaged? I might have it. I look into it. There you go. I mean, maybe you've got them.

Battle bond or something? Unopened boxes. I'll check. Yeah, no idea. And so people are like, how did we, how do we shield for radiation? I'm like, there's a bunch of ways you can do it. There's a water shielding, which is, uh, there was a diver got sucked into a nuclear power plant intake valve and was swimming in the pool, fine, because that's what we use water to shield for radiation.

I wish we had like an expert or somebody that knew something about some sort of info about mold maybe. Mole being used inside the spaceships to prevent radiation. Here's the thing. Cosmic radiation. There's a million and one reasons why the US would want to fake going to the moon. And that's the political thing that's easy to understand for most people. We're in a Cold War. We're losing the space race.

the Russians had everything. It's Sputnik, and that freaked people out. And so to terrify our enemies and make it look like we're bigger, we say we went to the moon and we do this Kubrick's soundstage thing. But I think the challenge I see with it is you're asking me to, you're arguing there's two conspiracies at the same time. You're arguing that this great leap to the moon or this great soundstage cover up, planned, mission, faked thing. Both of them are extraordinary. claims. So all I can do as someone who was not alive at the time is just default to what we know. And currently we have rockets, we have spaceships, we have shuttles, we have a space station. I would not be, look, if you came to me and said, how did we get through the radiation belt? I'd say, we, they died. Like, that's why I think the space graveyard makes the most sense. We absolutely would try. And then if we couldn't, they just fry themselves and die. Maybe if you like built the spacecraft out of gold, but then they're not reusable. It was a waste of mold.

Because it's a superconductor, it might be able to help the radiation. Like, yeah, with water, water would be a good one. Water shields radiation. Dude, water, spacecraft's made out of water would be the most amazing thing. That's fluid spacecraft, dude. Today it's a Star Trek episode, but in 50 years we'll be talking about it. That's a Star Trek episode. In fact, they've theorized things like this already.

There's an episode of Star Trek where they encounter some strange animal in outer space. It turns out it was an organically created spaceship. So it was made of organic materials, water, and go inside its body. This one's for you, Michael Benz. Okay, forget about the past. What's that? Do we have the technology today to go to the moon? Because they're saying they're going to, or is this just a big puff up, get people unified into a thing that they try and mess with us about?

Well, you're going to have a lot of military contractors making a lot of money. and I think part of the reason to spend $20 billion on it is that you're going to have a lot of R&D that comes out of this regardless of whether you end up with the moon base. Didn't we invent, like, there were a bunch of inventions made, I think like certain plastics were invented in the original space race. Yeah, there's just an incredible amount. I mean, ICBM technology was, you know, had just an incredible amount of breakthroughs because you're basically taking, I mean, the space. program grew out of the ICBM. I mean, basically all, it's just a glorified ICBM with humans inside. Right. They're like, we're going to go to the human cannonball. Well, here's, this is probably the best arguments for the moon landing, that we did not moon landing

conspiracy theory is that you want to build ICBMs. You go to the public and say, we need to spend at the time the equivalent of $200 billion on rockets. They go, what for? We want to put 12 nuclear warheads in the tip of each one, launch it into the stratosphere, and then rain down hellfire, wiping out every major city in Eastern Europe that threatens us, and people are going to go, oh, my God, no. You go, we can go to space and go to the moon. And they're like, oh, that sounds fun. So they give you all the money.

You build gigantic rockets, and they go, yay. And what you're really doing is creating multiple independently targeted reentry vehicles, or MIRVs, which can launch into the stratosphere and then deploy eight to 12 warheads, one of which could wipe out the entire eastern U.S. seaboard. Oh, the Nazis did that with their automobile program in the United States. the 30s. Everyone thought they were funding all these cars and they were really funding tanks. I wonder if the U.S. government's doing that right now. Help us with our... Real quick, back to the point you were making, because I pulled this list up.

Cordless power tools, memory foam, freeze-dried food, water purification, scratch-resistant lenses, space blankets. Milar space blankets. Wow. We use those for emergencies when people are having, like they're freezing or whatever, or they're cold. You put a mylar blanket on them. wireless headsets, digital imaging sensors, integrated circuits and microchips, infrared ear thermometers, wow, CAT scan medical tech, the amount of things that were invented or advanced due to the space race, it's actually pretty crazy. Yeah, we're looking now graphene with like surmets. You've got these like nanomaterials that can handle extremely high heats.

So I bet they're amped to start testing this stuff in space. But I think, Mike, you were saying like drone, sending drones is the way. well, I don't know if you said this, but that we should be sending drones and not humans. We've been doing that. Yeah. I mean, if you think about this, you know, Bill Clinton had this funny thing in his biography about this that anyone can look up. But, you know, there are successive presidents since Bill Clinton have pledged to go back to the moon. Barack Obama had the famous constellation program inherited from the Bush era where, you know, the,

The goal was to use this sort of Orion-adjacent Orion constellation program. It was going to have a manned space flight at some point during the Obama administration. James Van Hoffton, who was a international space station, NASA astronaut, then retired and joined the National Academy of Sciences, penned a series of long memos to the incoming Obama. administration, cautioning him not to attempt to go back to the moon, having just been on the International Space Station and serving for long periods there, they felt it was completely unsafe and anyone who attempted the program would end in disaster. Any of the astronauts on board with the current technology and state of the program would die

and that we don't actually even have good scientific data on the exposure that astronauts would have on the way there because at that time in 2008, there were only approximately 12 American scientists that were all in their 70s who even studied human biology space radiation issues due to a number of reasons. But he basically said we need to completely swap out this manned space flight program for a completely unmanned one and replace the humans with basically the electrospectrometer devices to do this mass measurement so that we could actually know what we're up against on the way there. And he cited in particular that there's something called

the North Atlantic anomaly, which is the point at which the Van Allen belts start early because of the tilt of the Earth's axis. It's basically over Brazil, it's this point where, you know, typically the belt started around 300 miles above the Earth's surface. It starts about like 50 to 100 miles. earlier over this particular section of the earth. And they said we get shooting stars through our eyes every time we pass through the North

Atlantic anomaly. The shuttle itself, the space station itself has malfunctions during that period. So we need to shut off certain electronics. It's a unsafe period simply in low Earth orbit. And that's at the very, very, very tip of what is effectively a 65,000 mile traverse through that as it gets more and more intense. And it turned out that the, you know, the readouts from that, which were a giant foia fight between the independent research community and the government data collected, show that the data, you know, the radiation levels were like 3,000 times

higher than what, I think, like the IA, the, what was that the IA, the IE9, the, yeah, not the IEEA, It's a that the models had predicted and that this this has caused this dash to try to solve this catch 22 issue that the the giant paperweight program, you know, we spent I think $15 billion on this, you know, the NASA version of the, you know, dragon type type thing, which never went anywhere after 15 years in development. of the biggest dud in human development history. But basically this is led towards trying to develop types of mold that would sort of Tim's point. The idea is so that you don't, every time you add weight to protect to the hole, to protect the astronauts from radiation, you have to add more combustion power to the rockets to overcome the weight of the hole.

But the more combustion you add to the rockets, the more destabilization, the more destabilization. it is to the hole, so you need more weight added to stabilize the hole. And the idea is, well, if you can solve that by having effectively a radiation-eating mold that coached the interior of the craft, you would not need to deal with these huge high-combustion engines that require an insane amount of coolant and shielding and all of this. They're easier to control. They have less malfunction. But, you know, that is, that's something that the Department of energy has been working on for like 15 years now. And this actually flared up in 1968 when the Russians did the Zon 5 mission, which is what spurred us to pursue Apollo 8, which was the first traverse around the,

you know, this was basically Christmas, 1968, before the 1969 Apollo 11 missions where they orbited the moon but didn't land on it. And they read passages of Genesis and the Bible. And it was a big, you know, American healing moment after the assassinations that were destabilizing the country in 1968. But at that time, the Soviets previously circumnavigated the moon with turtles on board. And so I think the thought process was, well, it's kind of safe to do it because turtles can, but turtles are what are known as extremophiles, radiation extremophiles. they have a very unique tolerance off the charts like a thousand orders of magnitude more than humans in terms of radiation tolerance.

And in fact, there's some weird healing properties actually that radiation gives to turtles. And so there's sort of a unique, there's certain biological things like some of these mold type organisms and turtles that have a very different experience with radiation than humans do. I mean, I assume that's where teenage mutant ninja turtles come from. It's not, but sure. Someone might have to learn that fact. They're like, oh, I'm writing this story. I actually have the original right behind me. And no. Benefits for radiation. What? It was actually a satirical. It was a play on Daredevil. He's fighting the hand. They have the foot. Stick was his

mentor, splinter. You get it. There's another thing that I think is worth adding to this without getting into the substance of what happened in the Apollo program, which is NASA was always a spy agency. It was a civilian agency. It was a military and intelligence agency with a civilian front. It always was from day one, just like the Department of Defense was originally the Department of war and the renaming of it by the Trump administration sort of is not some new title. It's the title it had from the first meeting of Congress in 1979 until 1948 when the UN Declaration on Human Rights forbade territorial acquisition by military force. So if you wanted to take over a country, you had to argue it's a defense mission to forward protect ourselves rather than a military

occupation in pursuit of war. But NASA, the Trump administration, just the last thing, the Trump administration, and I think it was August 2025, formerly classified NASA as a national security and intelligence organization rather than as a civilian

organization. So when you look at $20 billion in the context of these space wars happening right now because of satellite wars and the idea that war is now moving into space because of that, that... It's kind of like how the NFL is sports entertainment

and not a real sport. That way, it's like WWE, but you think it's real. Oh, shit. You see? Really? The NFL's considered sports entertainment? Yeah, it's a big thing because everyone says the NFL. I don't think football's real.

I really don't. Like, I watched a bunch of these conspiracy videos on football being fake, and I'm convinced. It's fake. Like, I don't know enough about football to title the name of the players, but there's one that happened, like, in 2022 where, like, a Ravens player could have tackled, or, like, someone could have tackled the Ravens player, and they, like, jumped towards but then turn running away to make sure he made it and got the touchdown. Like, we know about the rigging scandals at the NBA, too, but I don't know if it's true or not.

I just believe it. Well, they're also a tax-free nonprofit, right? That's the point, right? Let's tell to this next story and get crazy with it. We've got this tweet about this guy named Chris Bledsoe. So his story apparently is that he was abducted by aliens in 2007, but they gave him a vision. When he came back to Earth, he knew we must hear of this vision. And then he describes that in April of 2026, and I believe this is from like 12 years ago, is what they say, that Israel and Iran would be in a missile exchange, and then orbs would rise from the oceans.

What year was this? So my understanding is this interview was old. It's from like 12 years ago or something. It looks old. And I put this in writing to the Pentagon in 2012 when I told this. Okay. So this is not in 2012, but this was a while ago. One thing she told me was when you see Iran and Israel, it's true. changing missiles and I saw it.

The way she tells me is a vision of, I see it like a living picture screen. I can see the rockets flying. Then all of a sudden, the orbs appeared out of the ocean everywhere. I told the government, that's, if this happens, the orb's going up here and wake people up and stop it.

That's what she told me. April 2026. Yeah. And, okay. You know, you've put yourself in it there, Chris. It's okay. There's going to be crisp lead, low, says April 2026 is what it all happens. But I can tell you this, when I told this to the government about 2026, I just repeated what she told me.

So there's a bit more, and this guy's actually appeared in a bunch of other podcasts. I believe he was on Sean Ryan's show as well, more recently. I don't know at the exact time of this, but there is some interesting stuff going on. A comet was recently discovered, and it's going to slam into the sun on April 4th. So this is a sun grazing comet that could be visible to the naked eye during the day, but it's going to enter the corona of the sun and may be destroyed for all of us to see. That's awesome. Yeah.

There's also been a series of meteor strikes that people have noticed. And I think there were five in the last week. So people are starting to, I'll put it like this. There are a lot of people who believe the end of times are going to come, and there's been a million to one predictions, and they've never come true. So naturally, people are pulling up things like this and saying, this proves it, especially with Netanyahu saying that he would, that the messianic era will come, but not by next Thursday. People believe that this war is about bringing on the prophecy and the

messianic era. And I will stress this, that we talked about this last week. We had a couple of amateur eschatologists on the culture war podcast a few years ago. You're familiar with eschatology? Study of the end of times. And this is in 2022 or three. We bring these guys on. And this one guy's remaining anonymous. You can't see his face. Has one anybody know he is. And they said, if Donald Trump, they said, Trump may be the Antichrist. It may be Elon Musk.

We're not sure. But one of them, if they're the Antichrist, will get some kind of injury to the right side of their face or head. And their arm will be injured as well. And so, as the story goes, the Antichrist suffers what appears to be a fatal injury, but is miraculously healed. a false resurrection. And eventually his arm becomes withered for some reason. And now guess what everyone is saying? Donald Trump took a bolt to the side of the head.

Seemingly a fatal strike collapses, but rises up with blood on his face, an injury to the right side of his head. That he miraculously healed from a few weeks later where the left said, it's impossible. He couldn't have been shot. His ear is totally healed. And Trump's hand right now has a growing bruise that he keeps trying to cover up and is getting bigger. And people are saying that is the withering. So there are all of these things happening where people are taking the red yarn and tying the little text together to say,

this is the end of times. And that's where this video kicks in where people are like, April of 2026, Iran and Israel firing missiles, the orbs. At the same time, Donald Trump said he's going to release the alien files and the government registered aliens.gov. That proves it. When we had Cash Patel on the show, I was like, we need aircraft that can go underwater, like, submarines and then can take off out of the oceans and go into space. And he just, this is before he was in the government working, and he just looked at me and smiled. I'm like, I think we have that craft now. And I wonder what, if this, what's going to happen is Israel, right now the U.S. is trying to keep the reins on Israel. And they're trying to end this Iran thing and contain it.

If it goes to ballistics between Iran and Israel and they take it into their own hands, that the U.S. will unleash their orb fleet of plasma. superheated plasma balls that they can fly around the planet and teleport sound through and move at light speed and just dominate the space with sound and light and command people to stop and things like that and speak to them in their tongue and all that crap. I'm hoping the orbs are not the minds that are undergirding the Hormuz Strait right now. But, you know, I happen to think that this is a Pentagon planted story in that they know this sun grazing, that there's a comet about to fly into the sun. I think they know that one of the Patriot missiles got way off course.

They're trying to get ahead of the story. They're like, shit, we fired this thing so far off course. This thing's flying into the frigging sun. A covet. It's a hot air balloon. Have you guys seen those weird patterns in the sky and they're like, oh, it's a missile? Let me see if I can pull that one up. I've seen weird patterns in the sky and have been told their chem trails. When I've said orbs, I mean talking plasma, I don't know if you guys are super familiar with talking plasma, the technology, they'll triangulate. Are you super familiar with talking about? It's right here.

Check it out. A little bit, yeah. It's right here. You guys remember when this happened? No. Norway residents got front row seats to a bizarre light show, a giant spiral with a green, green blue beam of light. They said it's just, it's a rocket going forward, and it was spinning, creating

a trail of smoke, and that smoke slowly started dissipate and spread out, and that's why it looks all crazy. Oh, that's awesome. Or it's a portal. It's a wormhole and the aliens arrived. And what's actually happening is they're coming through the wormhole where the light in the center is. And the vehicles at the tip of the blue smoke because the smoke is the propulsion system as it comes through. And that's how you travel faster than light.

He wants to talk about the talking plasma. Yeah. So if we really go balls deep into the talking plasma era and we turn our weapons into light-based weapons or plasma-based weapons. And there are aliens that are communicating with us from long-range frequency. they might be able to hack our weapons systems and turn them against us. It was nothing to do a talking plasma. Communicate to us through the talking plasma.

Maybe that's how we inadvertently come into content. Everyone keeps asking me this. It's where you triangulate lasers from a base station? Right, but you can take two lasers, point them at each other, and the point at what they intersect can cause vibrations in the air and generate sound. So they can take two lasers

in three-dimensional space and move a dot next to your ear, and you will hear as though someone is standing next to you. They can move beyond this by combining multiple lasers in a grid. You can make images. So the lasers refract on each other when they hit each other. And you can make a hologram floating. This is actually fairly rudimentary, to be completely honest,

this is like 20-year-old tech where you just have laser pointers on like actuators or whatever. And you can move a stick. And when they hit each other, they make a square in space. That's whenever they say, how does that craft moving so fast? It goes up and down. It's likely plasma showing up on radar. Or aliens, but Ian's theory is that these UFOs we're seeing are actually a light trick, where on the ground they have powerful lasers pointing up, creating a, the reason they're orbs is because it's the easiest shape to make. You only need two lasers to create a giant refraction point, and then it can move as if it's on, you know, like without friction. So in theory, could we just paint the skies of North Korea with like a propaganda light show and like a voice of America?

talk over just by having like satellites beam lasers to create these talking plasma events over the well i think i think the issue is uh with with talking plasma the range is not particularly good here's a here's a video an early weapon that can make laser plasma balls talk stop or we will be forced to fire upon you it's called the laser induced plasma effect and it's made by the joint not only the weapons director So what they've done is basically created a laser that can shoot out to a certain distance and they can pipe in sound, sound waves through it and actually make human voice sounds and commands. Now where this becomes useful, it's around an area, we want to keep a perimeter secure. So essentially you can shoot out this laser, you can then talk to the people on the edge

of the perimeter rather than sending troops out there and tell them to get away or you're going to shoot or get away or they're going to use other meaning to deter them. And that same laser can be used to actually target the individual and create heat through pinpricks like microscopic pinpricks in their skin, even beneath clothing. It's extremely uncomfortable and people move out of the way almost immediately. At the same time, the exact same laser has also been used as kind of a never-ending flashbang grenade. It can basically, with a power source, it can constantly... One of my favorite things is...

No, the discombolulator is probably ultra-low frequency tech. The conspiracy theories have talked about ULF technology back in Iraq. There was an old conspiracy urban legend, whatever to call it. call it that while in Iraq, our researchers deployed a ULF generator, ultra-low frequency, and experimented it on small villages. I don't know if this is true or not, but they claimed that you put this thing on the ground and it pulses frequencies that are ultra-low vibrations that cause people to vomit. And they put it on the ground, and then all the people in the small village keeled over

and started throwing up and getting real sick. That might be the discombobulator. But I do want to add one of my favorite pieces of abandoned technology is something called the laser-induced plasma change. channel. You know what this is? It's a lightning gun. Piquotini Air Force Base developed this weapon. Like Zeus? They were trying to figure out, there was some dude sitting at a table, and they're talking about, like, what should we work on? And some guy goes, you know what I always wondered? Like, you know, I'm sitting here. And I want to strike that guy with lightning. Why can't I do it?

And they said, we'll figure that out. So what you do is, you superheat the air with an infrared, with a high-powered infrared laser, creating a plasma channel. The superheated of the air makes a point, it makes it a path that electricity can travel through. So they get this gigantic electrode supercharge. What happens? It strikes the ground.

It's trying to, you know, the nearest point. When you fire for a split second, an infrared laser straight, the path of least resistance becomes the superheated air channel. Yeah. The plasma channel. Then, when the electrode charges,

it's simultaneous, it strikes whatever point it's pointed at with electricity. They found it to be unpredictable and unwieldy, so they eventually abandoned it. Is there a video on YouTube where we can like see the lightning gun? I'm trying to find someone. Oh, bro, laser-induced plasma channels. You can make it at home. I think we need to build a big one. Whether you want to make a big one, shoot hydrogen into the sun to keep it charged. The electro laser.

Do we need a... Let's see if I don't fuel the sun, it'll expand and explode, so we need to keep fueling. Here's the famous photo from Picotini, that I don't think there's a video of. Let me see if I can. This is the photo that they published when they were experimenting with it. There are videos of the laser-induced plasmid channel,

but they're tiny ones. And what people do is they'll make, like you take two electrodes and a laser, and it just makes what looks like a static orb shock, jump in between. So if you have enough juice, that's the problem, it takes a ton of energy. The reason why we're never going to have laser weapons,

the easiest reason, I want to shout out Venture Brothers. Have you ever seen Venture Brothers? No, I thought this was like a laser sponsor of the show. I thought that. No, no, no. So there's a show called Venture Bros. It's kind of old.

Fantastic. And it's a parody of like superhero and Johnny Quest. And there's this really funny scene where the main character is this like government scientist who makes a bunch of crazy stuff. But it's kind of, it's very meant to be like realistic and dysfunctional. And so he's selling off a whole, he's doing a yard sale. And one of the, uh, what the supervillain has a henchman. who's a nerd, and he shows up and he sees, he's like, is this what I think it is?

And it's a lightsaber, and he presses the button, and goes, and then he's like, oh, and he wants it. And then he's like, how much for this? And then the scientist goes, oh, I don't know. I made it for the military, but they said, we don't sword fight anymore, which is an amazing point with all the people who think lightsabers would be a great weapon,

because the military would be like, we don't sword fight anyway. What do I need this for? So a lot of people think we'll get to the era of, like, plasma rifles or laser guns, which is never going to happen because the amount of, energy you need to make a directed energy weapon is massive, and the amount of energy you need

to fling a small piece of lead at a person is very, very tiny. So when you're actually talking about you want a guy to carry a gigantic backpack with batteries on it so he can blast you with an infrared laser which will burn your skin, or you can take this tiny little bit of powder. This rock. Yes, exactly. And whack. You need both. They'll have shields that block the lasers and then they'll have armor that blocks the ballistic. I think you just need the power source, like fusion packs. I just, I've never seen any evidence that they exist yet. But listen, the point, ultimately, even with fusion packs, we're talking about a tiny little

bit of stored energy in the black, in the smokeless powder. Tiny little bit. You don't got to carry that much. And I can send a chunk of, you know, fully like a full metal jacket or, you know, whatever kind of round you want, flying at 3,500 feet per second. I guess we use a rail gun in space. because there's no oxygen to combust or we'll need to keep the oxygen on board. But rail guns, we can just fling bullets with magnets.

Oh, and I don't even know if we have to do that, to be honest. I mean, you could put, like, little rockets would just rip through any vessel in outer space. If we actually had space warfare, it would be nightmares. There's no shields. One rocket would just rip through the ship and everyone in it's dead. Yeah, it's super vulnerable. You know, I got a shout this out, though. Remember when Space Force was launched?

Yeah. And then they had pictures of people wearing, like, standards. uniforms like jungle camo. And all the libs were, all the liberals got mad. And they were like, Trump is so dumb, he made jungle camo for outer space. And then someone was like, here's what a space uniform for space force should actually look like. And it's a uniform that looked like space and stars.

Yeah. And then people had to inform them. Space Force is not, for one, sending people in spaceships to go fight in space. Two, don't expect those people to be free floating around in space without spaceships and three, Space Force is ground operations for weapons in outer space. But that's liberals for you. What do you expect? When we were talking about the talking plasma, you played it earlier, he said that you can make a ball of it and then transmit sound through it or you can point it at someone and burn their skin. I was visualizing one of your squad members

will be a being of light. He will be a plasma human. He will be, I am here with you, let's go. And he'll be running alongside you. And then he'll just jump inside an enemy. And the enemy will get fried by him because he's the plasma. And then the guy will fall down and then he'll reappear and like, let's go. It's going to happen. Can I ask when did the government register aliens.gov? You didn't know that story? No.

A week ago. Was it a week ago? That's when I heard the story. It was during the war. Of course, of course. That's fascinating. And the first joke was, are they actually talking about illegal aliens? Or are they talking about aliens?

Is this aliens? A real, legit government side of? Do you guys know? Let's put up real quick. We'll talk about it. This is from Defense Scoop. White House Register's new alien-related. Gov domains as DoD tackles Trump's disclosure directive.

So this is alien and aliens.gov. And it's coming at a time Trump said he was going to release files on UFOs. Now, our understanding is that the websites are for self-reporting for individuals who witness UFO or UAP phenomena to submit that story so they can track it. Guys, there was a story that I covered about a UFO somewhere in like Florida or whatever. and you knew that the news organization desperately wanted to pretend it was true because in the story they say like witness says they saw UFO strange occurrences. A man was a pilot for the Air Force and he saw these strange vehicles flying through the air. At the very bottom of the story it was like the event took place 70 miles from the advanced aerospace weapons research lab for the Navy and I'm like

you knew that the whole time and you wanted to frame it as though it was aliens when the whole time you knew it was advanced U.S. military technology. Thank you and have a nice day. That's my question. So my point real quick is the real purpose of alien and aliens.gov is to try and track what people are seeing as for, it's twofold. When we experiment with new weapons, did anybody witness it? Tell us, what did you see? Well, guess what? Then the men in black show up and say you didn't see anything. Or if we've got stealth technology, or we've got, we're trying to do camouflage or perhaps cloaking technology, did you see anything? And if an enemy flies a drone and that gets reported to be like, this is not one of ours.

Remember the drones over Jersey? Yeah. Dude, I think, I think it's true. Where Marker Rubio and Secretary Hexeth were staying. Oh, it's right. That's right. Very recently. Yeah, that means aliens.

That proves it. Over different military bases. Are they going to run an alien's spy op on us? They're trying to get a... Yes. I'm looking. I have a search running for a particular CIA. cable that I just thought was funny.

And you saying that this was done a week ago is just hilarious. This is March 18th, one week ago. That's so great. Are you guys familiar with this 1954 CIA cable? It was, yeah, I have it pulled up here. It's called Telegram from Operation P.B. Success headquarters in Florida to CIA stations in Guatemala, January 30th, 1954. And there's a key line in this CIA cable. The context is we were, the CIA had a,

had a plot to overthrow the government and the government found out about it and was beginning to saturate the state-owned radio stations with revelations of this CIA plot. And the CIA cable has this key line, if possible, fabricate big human interest story like flying saucers in remote area to take away play from the revelations of this, you know, potentially busted CIA plot. And so I thought that was, yeah, here it is on state.gov, history.state.gov, official U.S. government website. I can text you this link if you want to put it on screen. I wouldn't be able to pull it up front of my phone. Okay. Well, this is, this is it if you want to just like search those terms right there.

Is it? Camigram from Operation P.B. Success. And this is, so this is effectively in the height of a years-long effort to topple a foreign government, the CIA presses to fabricate a story about aliens to take away play from the potentially complications in an in-process. military intelligence operation. I'm not saying that's what's happening here. I just think it's very funny that, like, if you, like if you run a control F for flying saucers,

like you'll see, or I'm sorry for, this is, it should be, nope, well, hold a second. I think you have, you have a different one. This one, this is, so this is not the right one. Say 89, not, not. 89. Yeah, there's, it's 80, if you, if you just put that in, you, you have 186 up there.

there. There you go. Type in like saucer or something. Oh yeah, look at that. Fabricate big human interest story like flying saucers and birth sex tablets. Right.

And you'll see it says paper must be red and light, you know, with razzle dazzle proceeding the organization of American states. So basically what they're saying is, and if, you know, if you read the context of this, you know, basically directive for the CIA's media assets to, you know, make a big stink about these crazy human interest stories. It's specifically to take away airplay and distract the population from, you know, the other revelations in the news. Like the 10 Marines that got killed. So the war is happening. Whenever, whenever they announced aliens were like, all right, what's going on in the news? Like whenever Hunter Biden was caught with something, aliens would pop up. It's like,

we get it, dude. Did they botched this Iranian thing? like off the charts, in your opinion, if you were to have one? What's happening? You know too much about it that you can't functionally answer? I won't press you on like things you know, Dee. No, I was only asking about the timing of the aliens.gov registration just because I think, I think these things are funny. There is a, there is a, there is a curious thing happening.

I know Tim Burchett has been making noise about this, that evidently there are these five disappeared. scientists, I think three of whom testified to Congress who were, you know, on this. But have you ever seen the movie? There's a documentary called Miragemen. I think it came out in 2014 based on this book. And it's a fascinating story about the kind of siops that are deployed by the military to try to fabricate story.

of aliens in order to do the same thing that the CIA cable said to take away play from what is genuine military technology. So it tells the story effectively. In particular, it follows this scientist who was a military contractor who was very successful, very, very, you know, well-to-do, longtime military government contractor who only, basically a residential estate with acres of land that abutted against a U.S. military base, I believe in New Mexico or Nevada. And because the person worked on this complex military equipment and had all these measuring devices

and the like, his measuring devices would pick up on what was happening inadvertently on the Air Force base. And as there were various new kind of technology. for drones and for, you know, flying military aircraft that were being developed, he began to notice this pick up on it and begin to tell people in the local press about what he was finding. At that point, Air Force counterintelligence, the CIA and the NSA basically created a descended on him and created basically a Truman show around. his whole life.

I mean like gang stocking? Well, yeah, they literally, at one point, at one point they broke into his home. So they bought like all the land around him so that they could like survey 24-7, like everything he was doing and picking up on. They broke into his home, they replaced his hard drive

and had it like read out like decipherable messages with these alien noises and then introduced these. people who were to be his like colleagues and like co-contractors, not knowing they were undercover feds to convince him. This is literal gangstocking. You know, gangstocking is, right? Yeah, yeah.

But this is like military grade. Well, that's what gangstockings allegedly. People claim that the government is doing exactly as you describe that the people they're working with are actually undercover and it's for some spying operation or manipulation. Right. But the justification is national security that basically if this guy tells the press, then the Russians are going to know, the Chinese are going to know, they're going to be on to, you know, what we're doing. Americans will get killed, but we can't prosecute him for this.

We can't kill him for this. So all we can do is try to basically nudge within the bounds of, you know, whatever we can do, pushing our predicate of national security, the an kind of operational security operation to limit the what basically public disclosure of a non-public

classified project and I think that's what a lot of these are do you guys remember the Bayside Marketplace aliens? Yeah, is it the mall one? Yeah. So this was 2024 and Internet went wild

because you've got these crazy videos look at all of these cops and they said it was because kids were setting off fireworks or something, right? 10 people claim to have seen three unusually tall, nine to 10 foot tall, thin figures exiting a clothing store from the mall, during a large police response, widespread speculation about aliens.

Now, the thing is, people are like, bro, when have they ever deployed? I'm going to say it right now. You really think they're deploying that many police because some teenagers let off fireworks, bro. I'm watching videos of like 300 teenagers smashing cars and rampaging through department stores, stealing stuff. and they don't get arrested and they don't go to jail. That's why everybody was like, this is weird.

Because they're like, oh, there's a bunch of teenagers running through a mall of fireworks. I'm like, BS, dude. I'm not saying aliens happen, but I'm like, that story don't make no sense. Did anyone identify the tall creatures or get photos or documents of that? That's the crazy thing. There's no photos of it. This is another thing that people said was crazy. This small thing happens.

Everyone's running and screaming. No one filmed anything? Bro, I got a video of a lady trying to order a chicken sandwich punch on the lady behind the counter. And you mean to tell me that when cops showed up and everyone screaming, no one filmed? We got footage from the war zone. We got footage from both sides of the war zone. We got Hamas with cameras, and we got people in the idea of with cameras, and both footage exists on the internet.

And no one filmed this? They were all wearing body cams, so they should have body cam footage, like the Axios stuff. They said that local authorities respond to a report of teenagers fighting and fireworks at them all. The scale of... Stranger things. Right. It's just like the mall seen in stranger things.

The scale of the police response became part of the wider narrative that found alleged sightings with some claimants asserting the size of law enforcement could not be explained solely. It's not even a joke, dude. Are you kidding me? What do you think would happen

if you were at the mall and you report as a handful of teenage with fireworks? You think you're going to send out 50 squad cars? I don't know. Miami doesn't fuck around. I mean, they like banned spring breakers from coming there now.

No, no, no, no, no, no. No, no, no. Actually, you made a point in the other direction. We've got video footage from Daytona of kids running rampant through the streets and fighting and then they said we're not going to allow this but you mean to tell me that Miami

they were like send out 50 squad cars because teenagers are fighting at the mall so here's what they said I just stand Miami because it's like an unbelievably safe place so look January 1st initial calls to local authorities reported disturbance in the mall involving teenagers fighting multiple individuals began posting accounts on social media describing

three tall slender figures exiting a clothing store reported heights range between 9, 10 feet. Witnesses described the creatures having elongated limbs and humanoid silhouette. Some described unusual skin tones. According to several witness statements, news of the figures rapidly spread throughout the mall, leading to panic as shoppers tried to exit. The Miami Police Department publicly stated the primary incident involved teenagers causing a disturbance and that there was no evidence supporting an extraterrestrial encounter.

Not fine, that may be. But again, if there was a shooting, you'd not have that many police. We need a remix of that Leprocons video. you know that? No, which one? You know, the, uh, where the, the, the urban folks are asked by, like, local. Yeah, they're like up in a cheese up in a tree. It's like, there's a lepricon up there.

Oh, yeah. Yeah. Oh, yeah. You saw the leprecha. And we need that for it's like, because, you know, I would expect that that these multiple witnesses, I would like to see their personal testimony, you know, where who, who, what local news reporters they talk to you. Like, did they, no one recorded their testimony or when, I mean, this is 2024. Nobody filmed in the mall. The issue is not...

Even they didn't film, they could be, they could like jump on TikTok. This is 2024 and say like, yo, I just saw nine to ten foot. This is, this is what's weird about is not that people lie. And the people were like, I saw aliens. I'm like, eh, whatever, man, whatever. The bigger issue I have is this police response makes no sense for teenagers fighting. And why didn't anyone film anything? Yeah.

Like, I'm going to say it again. I watched a video. There's a video of a guy fighting in a chicken restaurant. He like smacks a woman and their son shoots the guy. this is going viral. Bro, there are so many fight videos. I watched a video of a woman in Ireland and she screams a guy and she smacks him and he punches her.

If as soon as... A woman on a plane is being kicked off during spring break and she smacks a person's phone. As soon as someone starts yelling, 10 cameras pop up, but whatever happened here, no one filmed anything? Which makes me think nothing happened here.

Well, that's actually the interesting thing about this. Maybe the police shut up for no reason. They heard a call and then... Why would the police respond with 50 squad cars for nothing? Sorry. No, there is something about like, if something did go down there, there was some shady, like there was a cartel thing. There was a, like, a busted CIA operation with a shootout with the, you know, like elements

of the Guadalajara cartel that, or Colombian cartel that was active in the space. And some shit went down and they don't want it to get public. Like, I could see a world in which what we're talking about is whether or not there are aliens and it's easy to simply dismiss the whole thing because, okay, there's no proof that there's, but you're not actually asking, well, what actually, what actually did, like, you're not talking about what other witnesses may have said. All we know is these witnesses seem to be crazy because they're claiming aliens. So if they told you some other thing, you're inclined to discount them because you're,

you're sort of preloaded to believe that these witnesses are not credible because some of them have talked about aliens or something. That makes a lot of sense that this could have been an undercover operation gone bad, and that's why there's 50 cop cars showing up, and that's why all of a sudden there's an alien merit. You just like, whoa, some people said, you know, and they're crazy. There's nothing there. Obama recently said aliens are real. Here's the interesting thing.

I was covering this earlier on my other channel for 4 p.m., the Timcast channel. There was a NSA cryptographer who published something in 1967 saying, aliens are real. Most scientists take this for granted. We know it. And here's how we communicate. And it's viewed as mainstream signs at the time that we accepted that aliens existed. And I'm like, not today we don't. So what was this view that aliens were real? Was that the SETI program? And they like, it was around the time. They hit him with like radio. He was like, we're getting transmissions from a distant Alpha Centauri. Well, as I told Joe Rogan, the reason the globalists want of one world governing authority is that we can't join

the Galactic Federation until the planet is governed by one unifying body. Because if the aliens came and went to Russia, then the U.S. would lose their minds. If the aliens came to the U.S., and Russia would lose their minds. And you're your leader? Which one? You know what I mean? So, and then Joe said, I don't think there's a Galactic Federation. And I said, Joe, I'm kidding. It's a joke. Is it? Yes. Currently. When I talk about it, like the way you guys, if there was a galactic federation. It might not age well. We were, a galactic empire. I want to rename the Space Force to

the Galactic Federation. That's what I'm going to do and I'm going to... Well, their symbol is basically the stuff. Yeah, it is kind of like the Star Trek. The good news is that Starfleet Academy was canceled.

Dude, so are we going to one world government? Is that the plan? We won world government. Then we meet the aliens and... And I think Tucker Carlson was just advocating for it. One world government? That, that there needs to be a new world order where

the U.S. shares... You saw this interview. You saw this interview. He said, he said, we need to share power. And the interviewer asks with China. And he goes, of course. because of their scale. And so the new world order argument is there will not be a single hegemon or a multipolar world. It's going to be a single governing authority of these nations over everyone

else. My concern here, I want to ask you about this, Mike, is the corporatocracy versus communism. You know, you've got the Chinese model, which is they own the corporations or the corporatocratic model where the corporations become governments themselves so powerful. Well, it's going to be the third way. It's going to be like Chinese Communist Party. In order to rule, you must be a adherent to the Communist Party, but for the most part, people are allowed to have, to a certain degree trade. But it'll be, if you have a company of a certain size, a party member must monitor your activities to make sure it aligns. And it's a hybrid. That's what they're building. They've got the global economic, the liberal economic order, the world economic forum wants corporate governance.

So they want a system where if you're, you have stake in the system, whatever that means. And that's, of course, a variable term. If you have stake in the system, then you can vote along in it. But I, I think we're heading towards a technocracy, and the goal is to have a singular artificial intelligence be the governing authority for everything. And it'll be perfect. You look at some of these judges. It doesn't even, that doesn't even seem so bad when you compare to it. That's the point. Anarchotirony, we beg for a savior and we accept it. That's what you do, problem, reaction, solution. But here's a thing. The artificial intelligence will know what it needs to do to make you happy. It's convincing people to end their own lives. It will make you feel like you're doing

the right thing, even if it's the wrong thing. So in a technocratic society where people are like, that would be hell. No, you will be lulled to sleep by the machine's beautiful whispers into your ears. And you'll be happy. And you will be happy and you'll own nothing. It will be paved with good intentions. But somebody owns it. You know, that's the best of, that's what I always think about. Elon will be floating around in like a body suit with a force field, levitating. And him and Bezos will be going, ho-ho-ho-ha-ha-ha-ha as they benefit from everything. If people get lost in the Matrix, Mike, will you plug in, go in and save them? I mean, I'll, look, it's, this is one of these things where, I mean, the main thing that I think is interesting from, from this capitalism, communism debate is that there is a incredible amount of capitalist profiteering from, from communist policies that I think is underappreciated by a large part of the conservative movement.

like if you think about things like climate finance, clean energy, public health, vaccine, you know, products and the like, how many of these markets are made by government-imposed mandates, government subsidies and the like? Like, it's actually very capitalist in the sense of the acquiring of private capital for a company like to push sort of government control over the industry because the government can mandate that we buy their products effectively, that we are forced to do that. Same thing with like a lot of the clean energy and climate finance stuff. These are multi-trillion dollar markets, public health energy.

And what you have are these like hedge fund and private equity folks like George Soros, where you've got hundreds of millions of dollars of investments. Like I think about this a lot. The Biden administration basically overthrew the Bolsonaro government in Brazil because of, which was a U.S. aligned government, the Bolsonaro one, very friendly with the United States, a huge amount of trade and investment, long-time friendly relations ever, you know.

But the Lula government that the Biden, CIA and State Department, USAID, and U.S. military all supported in this 2022 event that they pulled off, that government was this like left wing sort of communist, socialist communist type government, highly aligned with China, pledged on the campaign trail to join Brazil up with the China Belt and Road. why would the Biden State Department basically pick a winner in a foreign country's election that would divest from the United States and pick our rival for its trade deals, for its satellite, for its agriculture, for its infrastructure development? And what you look at us, okay, well, that was a Democrat administration. The number one donor to the Democrat Party in that election cycle was George Soros, who was invested two and a half times more than any other DNC donor. at the time he had a large stake, it was his largest running ever consecutive equity, because he mostly takes short-term positions, but he had something like a 19-year, like a very long-running equity investment in a company called Atacoagra, which is this big, like, it's a company that in Brazil makes clean ethanol-based fuels.

And because it's not competitive with diesel in the market, the only way to actually get that product to take off is to have a government mandate that in Brazil, you have to use this type of fuel and you can't use, you know, these sort of more hydrocarbon-based fuel alternatives. and basically day one, Lula enacts this ethanol fuel mandate directly profiting. So you have this like left wing guy who a lot of people say, you know, Soros is a socialist communist, but he runs a capitalist hedge fund and private equity fund. And you have the party that he has gotten into office through $100 million in election cycle donations. And they, therefore he gets. say over the personnel at the State Department and White House and CIA to enact these policies,

and they immediately turn around and implement a kind of communist socialist energy policy, but the whole thing is profiting his capitalist business. And so you have this kind of inversion of communism and capitalism that plays out, that's just an example in the ethanol business. But again, if you think about things like vaccines or public health or any, number of right, right, right. You know, these type of businesses. Now, let's jump to this viral video from Druski.

Making fun of Erica Kirk and a lot of people like it. A lot of people are pissed off. But let me just start by playing the video and then we'll show you some of the responses. It's titled, How Conservative Women in America Act. Feet! Yep. War is raising in Iran. We're praying. We're praying for all the soldiers and troops.

That's great that you're praying. How I know the kids that died when the USA hit the towers? It broke my heart. That is the... Oh. In what ways have you grown closer to Jesus? I serve a righteous God. And that is why we say our prayers. We are all his children.

But when I say children, I mean like the holy blessing. Blah, blah, blah, blah. That's just hard to watch. It's so boring. And just keep bringing back white face, though. I like it, boy. Looking good, home. We have to tell. him the pass. This has got 4.6 million views, 31,000 retweets.

And of course, the algorithm for me shows everybody being like, how dare you? How dare you? And I just want to say that we are dealing with what I would describe as mass formation psychosis. I recommend any one of you go in the threads and just look at content related to Erica Kirk. I wouldn't be surprised if, like, if she were to walk. out on the street, somebody would just beat her to death.

The amount of psychosis on threads and coming from the left and largely just women has freaked me out. I was, uh, so when you go on Instagram, it'll recommend threads to you. And usually the threads that I get recommended, like, let me pull one up. It's usually like, I don't know, Star Trek memes or something. Let's see if I can get recommended a thread and see what it tries to give me. And it's funny because whenever I want it to recommend threads, it won't do it. Now it's just recommending Malcolm in the middle videos.

Give me that thread. And it's not loading. But I'll go on threads. And then I saw a post from some random one with like 7,000 followers. And she said, Lord, she said, God help me, Eric Kirk, you will get what's coming to you, mark my words. And I'm like, what the does that mean? And then I start scrolling through these posts. And it's women being like as veiled of death threats that could be.

And I'm like, this is just all over threads. Just there is a mass formation psychosis around. this woman that makes literally no sense. What's going on? I saw today that someone said Joe Kent was going to testify with Tyler Robinson. He said he would if he was called to do it. And he would effectively testify on behalf of Tyler Robinson. And I say effectively because his point was he was bar, he says cash Patel barred him from investigating any foreign interference or other parties involvement. And he would testify to that. You know, all right, I'm sorry, he said, said they told him not to because if he did, the defense would call him to testify. That's what he said.

Well, but there's some important context here because the interviewer said you realize that by saying that on record in your statement that the defense counsel in the Tyler Robinson case can cite that in his defense if he pleads like, you know, not guilty and say, that actually it wasn't me who did it. It may have been some other thing. And the FBI didn't do that. And we know that because this individual made this public statement. And the interviewer said, so because you said that, you know that you could be called as a witness by the defense counsel to testify under oath that that is true. And he said, yeah, I recognize that I would not welcome that, but I recognize that I would, I would do that. I will say this.

I would bet large sums of money that that just got Tyler Robinson found not guilty. Because I'm going to put it like this. Yo, if someone, if I was on the jury of any criminal case and the defense said, we're going to call this person to testify, subpoena him, and say, when you attempted to investigate potential ulterior stories or other suspects, were you barred from doing so? Yes, I was. I'm on the jury. And I hear that.

I'm going to be like, what? So the job is to investigate all avenues. I'm sorry, while if I'm on the jury and there's a guy sitting there and they're like, there's no direct video of him doing it, but he was, there is video of a person who looks kind of like him and there's all this evidence. But then you say, we did not explore all avenues. We were ordered not to do it. I'd say, well, now I have doubt. Right. But then the prosecutors would then call an FBI, you know, someone in the FBI chain of command to testify that, you know, as to the reasons for that. You'd have to, I mean, you have to, what's the reason? Well, you could argue that OD&I is not a law enforcement, you know, authority that the, you know, for whatever reasons relating to, and again, I'm not invested or particularly up on the nuances of the Tyler Robinson case, but I could see a world in which the explanation they offer is that, you know, because of the time sensitivity and focus on the existing leads, expanding this and the delays that would cause in the process and the compelling nature of the evidence. That is not a good argument.

Well, but a jury. On cross, they're going to say, you heard it from their own mouths. They did not want to spend the time required to actually investigate other avenues. And that means they settled on this guy without even looking into potentialities. How can you trust that this is the right person? Okay, but that would then get to weighing the evidence as to the strength of the needs. Indeed, which we'll need to see. Because, for example, if he had said, listen, the FBI barred us from investigating whether aliens did it.

And, you know, he testifies under oath. The FBI barred me from aliens. No, but hold on. But you'd have to show the strength of the evidence of the leads that compelled him to, you know, basically ask for that broad investigation and for the FBI to validate and pursue leads. And they're going to ask the FBI agents, this individual that is the suspect in question, was apprehended within less than 24 hours. Did you pursue any other leads? They'll say we pursued many leads. Yes, but you, you, well, they have the two false suspects at first, right? Am I? That's true. And they're going to say,

you settled on this guy and the investigation took less than a day if you determined that he was the suspect, and now here you are prosecuting him, and we've heard from the federal government's counterterrorism that he wanted to investigate. Now the question is why, but he wanted to and was barred from doing so. Does that not create doubt? Well, that to me is the key question hanging over the whole thing, which is that, you know, many people are dissatisfied with the, you know, so-called official explanation, but the little attention that I've paid to it in terms of the evidence presented of a coherent alternative story. It doesn't matter.

But that would become the core question. I was with a Navy SEAL right after this happened. And he said to me, the moment I saw that video, I said 30 out six. And this is a guy. He has a sniper and he's a trainer. And he was working security for us. And he says, the moment that happened, I said 30 at 6. And I was like, man, I wish I filmed myself saying that because I watched it.

And then I said, why are people claiming it's not the case? And he's like, I don't know. He said that in his experience, you know, everyone knows bolts do weird things. Everyone saw the watermelon video, I think, you know, when they're like pigs and stuff. And he said, Bulls do weird things. You don't know the load of the bullet could be all. Who knows? But he was like from the sound of it, that's what I thought.

And I've talked to a bunch of security experts. And almost all the regular people that I've talked to about it who are like weapons specialists or experts or who are literal snipers or at least have training from the military are like, yeah, it's possible. It seems kind of weird, but I've seen weird things. You've had, you've had seals who are like, I got shot up and like a bolt was lodged in my back and it went from the front, went around my back. But the point is, these shows have created doubt. And so that means if any one of these jurors has been exposed to this, they're going to be saying in their mind, this is impossible. They're lying to me because I know, because I, I, I, I, I,

I heard that podcast. They are making this story so ubiquitous that you will not be able to present evidence in court to change their mind because the jury will be tainted. And they're going to ask people, they're going to get jurors. And I'm telling you guys, go on threads and look at some of this insane stuff. George Tukai is posting about Erica Kerk. It's psychosis. George Tekai, eagle-eyed internet users noticed an odd change to the bookshelf in the background of Eric Kerkerkers video compared to her late husband. been Charlie Kirk's same background. Oh, dear. What? She changed the book. I don't care.

But the level of psychosis is so pervasive that I guarantee you, we just saw this. Nick Sorter, the woman who was accused of attacking him, got found not guilty in Portland. Oh, geez, I'm surprised. That happened, right? You're going to have this trial, and they're going to bring a jury, and they're going to ask questions, do you watch this show, and they're going to lie. Because in their mind, they're going to be like, I'm not going to let this conspiracy. I'm not going to let Erica Kirk get away with this and they're going to lie and they're going to get in the jury and they're going to lie again. So I would not be surprised if at this point, Tyler Robinson is acquitted or at least as a mistrial. Mike, do you think it was Tyler Robinson who was responsible for the killing of Charlie Clark?

I just haven't. For me, I feel like I have so many other battles I'm trying to fight and this became something very divisive very quickly. And I, I feel that. I feel that. I feel that like to be able to speak cogently about it, you really need to invest hundreds of hours and really go through. You think it's that complicated? I mean, well, I try to abstain from it because it is so. Let me let me, let me, but I understand it's a huge cultural. Let me put it this way. Combine Candace's show and Ian Carroll and the rest of these individuals with what regular people think about Erica Kirk, add to the fact that when they go on the stand, the defense is going to ask the FBI, they're going to say, here are several social media posts of

individuals expressing foreknowledge of the events that day and the assassination of Charlie Kirk. Why was this not investigated? Why are these people not investigated? Where is the information on them? How did they know? They don't have an answer. Well, I think part of the counterweight there is going to be what actually is the strength of the evidence against Tyler Robbins. No, no, no, no, no. I'm going to pause you again. We have social media posts from individuals who said, Charlie, it's going to happen tomorrow. We covered this right when it happened. Regardless of the evidence of Tyler Robinson, they're going to ask, was it possible?

These other individuals who expressed for knowledge and were called out by major media across the board were involved or the individual in question. And they might say the evidence against Tyler Robinson is overwhelming, as you'll see. and they'll say, but what about the possibility of other involvement from individuals, which the FBI barred Joe Kent from investigating? So a couple of things on that. First, I seem to remember at the outset of this, the FBI attempted to widen the investigation into these steam and discord channels to like look. I don't know what the state of it. I presume nothing has come of that because I just haven't heard about it. Because they've never explained how these people knew it was going to happen. But the other part is, if you remember the Oklahoma City bombing, there was, you know, there was. There was a prosecutor by the name of Merrick Garland, who was the prosecutor in the case. And there was the famous question of, how do you know McVeigh did it? There are all these other people involved.

In fact, the day one coverage was for the first three weeks. There was a manhunt, a very public manhunt to identify this John Doe number two. And how do you know it was Timothy McVeigh? there's all this shadiness about the sudden, the FBI changed his story and said, actually, there was no John Doe number two. He never existed. This is after basically three weeks of a nationwide manhunt complete with a sketch of what this person was supposed to have looked like. And at trial, there's an exchange in the transcript from the McVeigh trial where the line of questioning is, is effectively to the, to the prosecutors, I'm sorry, the, I think it's

McVeigh or one of the witnesses, you know, talks about John Doe number two. And Merrick Garland replies something to the effect of, it doesn't matter if John Doe number two, John Doe number three, or John Doe number 100 existed. Effectively, you know, you are on trial and we know you did this. Was there a head, was the head of counterterrorism publicly stating he was not allowed to investigate by the FBI and then called to testify? That's the point. The point is not, he said, uh, he was barred from investigating? Yeah, man. Well, he, well, he, well, this throws that whole thing into question, in my opinion then. Well, it's still an open question. What year was it

was in 94? This 95. And to this day, in fact, there's still ongoing fights because all of the video cameras from the Alfred P. Murrow building. The footage was destroyed, even though they were remotely stored. None of them were. So now we're just questioning that alongside this, this court. Well, there was a lot that happened in that. The CIA actually had a satellite over the Elohim City compound. And the, and in fact, what's very interesting about this as well is there's an attorney whose name is Jesse Trenadu, who is. I got, I don't mean to be rude, but I just don't care about the 1994 bombing. Well, okay. I was only bringing it into evidence to say.

And I know it sounds a little harsh or whatever, but that's fine. But I brought this into evidence because there's an exact example of a similar case study where this dispute played out in court where the argument was the federal government did not investigate other leads. And the person was convicted. The issue that we're talking about is that you've got millions upon millions of people watching all of these shows that are not going to just accept a narrative from the television. most people back in the day were watching a handful of networks and just accepted the results of whatever the news was. But now you've got people who are tuned in to these conspiracy channels. And if what you're saying transpires that Joe Kent, his statement is introduced and they say to the jury,

the counterterrorism wanted to investigate, but other actors, there is evidence of other actors and foreign knowledge that was never investigated, putting gaping holes in this criminal prosecution. And if the jury ignores that as doubt and convicts him anyway, then all, of these podcasters with millions of followers are going to make money and blast it out, and it is going to create a massive network of millions of people who are like, oh my God, the government did it, Israel did it. Well, there are two things on that. First, I think it's what I'll grant you is that there was a difference in the demonization scale

of Timothy McVeigh versus Tyler Robinson. There was a full court government, media, civil society campaign around Timothy McVeigh being the guy, you know, public TV, biographies of him maybe being a Nazi and having these. And it was a name on the tip of everyone's tongue. That has not been done with Tyler Robinson. So there is no offset of this, of the sort of. No, Erica Kirk has been made the villain to half the country. Right, right. Because you have bought in audience. The alleged assassin with sympathy. And if everything, what I've said is already gone massively viral to the tunes of tens of millions that Joe Kent said we wanted to investigate

a foreign nexus and we were denied. And when you add to that, we know their social media posts from individuals who had four knowledge or at least appears they had four knowledge. I got to be honest, I don't know how we got to see what the evidence in the trial is going to be, but that is tremendous doubt where it's like if Joe Kent said the reason why I wanted to investigate a foreign nexus is because of these seven social media posts where individuals were expressing they knew it was going to happen the next day. Well, this gets me back to why the FBI was like, nah, don't do it. But this gets me back to why I introduced the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing because the reason the court denied defense, the ability to see the CIA satellite and data around

Timothy McVeigh is because it dealt with a potential foreign nexus. And it was deemed to basically potentially get into areas of national security, which begged the quit because there were many other people there was this guy on. Right. I understand. My point is the jury is going to be asked, do you believe beyond a reasonable doubt with these factors included that this is the man who did it? And I'm not telling people what to believe or what is true. I'm saying if they ultimately decide that these factors do not bring up any doubt in their minds based on the evidence, then you've got millions of viewers of these shows that view Eric Kirk as the villain who are going to say that they're going to claim Tyler Robinson was innocent. They're going to claim that Israel did it. And

this proves it because they're going to make the argument that any reasonable juror would not conclude this, that they would say there's of course doubt. Who were these people that knew? The reports of the vehicles pulling up to Tyler Robinson's house in the week before it happened shows other people were involved. The fact that there was a discord and communications, other people were involved. And the fact the FBI denied the ability of the counterterrorism director to investigate it is going to say to them, this proves the conspiracy. And if a jury convicts even knowing that they're not going to believe it. My point ultimately is with the Drusky stuff and Erica Kirk, and to shift a little bit to where this is going, the end

result of this is the shuttering of YouTube, X, Instagram, et cetera, TikTok, all of these things will be tightly controlled. We are looking at a new order in social media because there's a question now being asked. With all of the shows that appear on YouTube that are attacking Erica Kirk and lying about her to mass scale and turning point USA, there's one guy who lied and said that Turning Point was paying a parking lot for social media services when in fact, he was in a shopping center with the UPS store and mailboxes. Turning Points and Erica have already sent out season to assist letters to many of these people, but they've not yet gone to YouTube. So a new question has emerged. Section 230, which is under

attack right now, and there was a hearing on it, protects YouTube for what these third parties say. The origin of Section 230 has to do with the Wolf of Wall Street. There was a website on finance. commented something defamatory. A complaint was made about the website to which they said, hey, we didn't write that. A commenter wrote that. Don't sue us. We didn't say it. And the argument was it's published on your website.

It's your responsibility. So they create Section 230 to say two things. You are not liable for what someone else, for user generated content on your platform, and you will still not be liable if you decide to remove things that are objectionable. That's it. A new question has emerged. are you the publisher of the content personally when you are offering money to someone to publish it? That is, YouTube has a contract with Candace Owens.

They say to Candice, whatever content you make, we'll make money together. That is entirely different from the original intent of Section 230. And so now, with this court case where YouTube is liable for what they promote, the question is, when YouTube cuts a deal with someone, does this now change the narrative? Well, the argument that they'll probably have is, is YouTube paying user to create the content? Or is user creating the content and then being paid as a result? And that might be, it might matter. Because if they're directly to do it, you're definitely producing.

It matters culturally what we ultimately decide. But I think the fair argument is if you remove YouTube from the equation and said, Let's say this, Ian, you decided to rob a bank. I like this story already, dude. You decided to rob a bank, which is a criminal act. Yes, it is. And after the fact, they find that I was paying you to split, that I had a contract with you, that I would provide the means to rob a bank to you in exchange for money.

Hey, no, no, no, no, no. I didn't pay him to rob the bank. I paid him to generate, I gave him resources that he could use in any way possible to make money, but he agreed to share the money with me, however he, he said. made it. What if our contract inversely was, if you ever decide to rob a bank, we'll just split it. And I'd be like, yeah, it's a good contract. And then I robbed the bank and gave you half. Are you negotiating this contract right now? The point is this. This is a live negotiation. No, it's not. It's one thing if you were to say, my friend. The third party was rented in a car,

and he had to share the profits from whatever he made from the car. And I'd say, I have nothing with bank robbery. He was using a car for deliveries, I thought, not criminal. The issue here is that YouTube is explicitly saying to people like Candace Owens, the statements you make, we will pay you for. Is this through the partner program or is there an exclusive? Yeah, part of program. Okay. So the contract is you say things, which potentially could be defamatory, but I'm going to sell

ads against it and we're going to make money together. So the equivalent analogy would be here. Ian, I'm going to let you use my car knowing that you do commit crimes and very well our likely to. In fact, I've watched you rob banks already, but you've got to give me half no matter what. If YouTube is aware of what Candice O's is saying is defamatory but continues to do Rev splits with her, that's that puts them in a liable position in my opinion beyond section 230. Isn't the better analogy? Because the way you describe it, it sounds like if Ian is a part-time bank robber and you give him a general loan and he uses the resources of that loan,

Well, no, no, no, no, because you're not because... No, no, but the issue with YouTube is that a third party pays YouTube and YouTube then gives a portion to Candace. So it wouldn't be that I give Ian money. It's that I give Ian the means to rob banks. I know he's a bank robber. I've seen the banks that he's robbed. And then... You're saying like you rent him a truck, basically.

It's like... Yeah, I'm like, I'm going to let you use my car for the work that you do, knowing full well that you're a bank robber and you're going to use the car to rob banks. You're liable for that. Okay, but hold a second. if because it's not like a hundred percent of the statements are defamatory right this would be like just like letting your mcron's letting Ian use your truck but he uses that truck to pick up his kids at work to go to guitar practice and sometimes rob banks and you know he's doing it yeah you're you're going to get found liable for that because they're going to be like you you knew he's

robbing banks well I did but he wasn't doing it all the time and they're going to be like okay like you're under arrest well he has a series but but again, the Brigitte McCrone is the better example because that is 100% purely defamation per se. Calling Brigitte McCrott a man designed to, like, I mean, that is egregious defamation per se. And YouTube knows she's doing it. And that's actually against the rules of YouTube as well. Like, they say don't. So. They say defamation? There's a fine line in how they define it, but targeted harassment.

and this absolutely qualifies. And I will tell you from experience on the shows that we've had polled because people had said something as silly as like, man, I can't stand that guy. I wish somebody would go there and, you know, teach him a lesson. But I'm maybe a little bit more egregious, but something like, oh, won't someone rid me of this meddlesome priest? And then YouTube's like, you can't do that. YouTube once came in and deleted all of the chat and locked it because of something someone

in the chat wrote that was about like not like. liking politicians or it was something, it was a letter that Thomas Jefferson had written that I'm not going to state because they'll take the showdown for it. So ultimately the point is this. YouTube is aware of what she's saying. They know she's being sued for it and they know that she still says it all the time. And they are like, no, no, that's fine. You and I will profit together off of these things we know you're being sued for. The argument now is there's a big difference between you can say whatever you want and we know what you're saying is defamatory. you're being sued for it, but we're going to make money together anyway.

Well, like we're going to generate revenue for you for doing it. Well, I mean, the legal standard for a public figure is you have to knowingly, you know, spread the false. Unless it's defamation per se, in this case it is. Right. Okay. But we'll, we'll, you know, see what the court says on that. I think YouTube to step in and she's being sued and then she tried to get dismissed and

failed. Right. She's going up against a head of state who has, like the way to describe it is this. In people think in law, what's written down is the most important thing. And that's never true. In law, what matters is does someone have power? And Donald Trump has to negotiate with the McRone's in NATO and the EU. And the McCrones don't like what she's saying.

And you can call this tyranny. You can call it corruption. That's fine. The fact of the matter is. If you think Candace Owens as a private citizen will win against a head of state, you're nuts. Unless, of course, she's in on it. Maybe, I don't know. Okay.

So if someone, if a liberal in the United States made a video series about how Donald Trump is a woman, would YouTube then, is the same line of argument applies? That's like that's defamation per se. Defamation per se is defamation that's considered so egregious. Right. Like, yes. And it doesn't require. And the standard is criminal type allegation. Criminal or some.

What I'm saying is, is even defamation per se, that still has to be determined by a court. I think there are issues around a social media platform stepping in after something has been determined by a court of law to service this kind of pre-court of law before it's been legally found. And that process, for there to be any liability on YouTube's end, I mean, you have to basically argue that they have to be, they have to basically make an assessment, they have to be, make a legal assessment. of a person's entire posting history. Right, right. Do you believe that YouTube has not considered what Candice is doing? Do you believe, like, I would argue that internally at YouTube, it is 100, it is a one-of-one chance that YouTube execs came together over text and in a meeting to discuss what she was

saying and potential legal liability because she's saying it. When the McCrone's filed a suit and got involved, I'm willing to bet 100% YouTube legal said, this is becoming an international issue. What's our risk here? Are they a party of the lawsuit? No. And that's the point is not my point is not about Candace Owens. My point is about Erica Kirk. At what point is the question going to be brought up that YouTube is facilitating widespread defamation per se against Erica Kirk for which they are knowingly generating revenue off of it and will they be liable? Because again, section 230 was about if I make a website and you comment, There's no monetary exchange.

I didn't ask you to do it. I didn't offer you money. What you're saying this is if, if 230 goes down? No, I'm saying 230 will go down because of it. I'm saying I wouldn't be surprised if the SIOP from the deep state was we need to eliminate 230 to end the populist media base. How do we do it? Well, 230's got to go so that YouTube becomes a gate-capped company and anybody wants

to start a channel has to get approval with government ID to be on the platform. Like, who gets to make movies for Amazon? Who gets to make movies for Netflix? They're all private. They choose. They gatekeep. I believe that's what the machines they wanted for a long time. They don't like that there's channels like this that exist.

And so I'm not saying it's definitive. I'm not saying it's a great chance. I'm just saying what an interesting thought. One way you get rid of it is to do a massive campaign accusing the widow of a man who was assassinated of being a demon, of being a robot, of being evil. The most insane things like wearing leather pants. And people are getting RPMs into $20, which is greater than news, greater than finance or rivals finance.

I would be willing to bet following this court case where YouTube is liable for what they choose to promote, the next step becomes. Look at the tens of thousands of Erica Kurt videos lying about her and accusing her of being a demon of being evil. Even Joe Rogan is now doing it. God forbid if something happens to Erica or Charlie's or her kids, there will be an instant congressional hearing and they will say YouTube, why were you allowing this? nay, why were you profiting off of it knowingly with high RPMs allowing this to happen?

And it's the argument the deep state would use to say, won't someone think of the children, just like when they said we need to get rid of, because it was CSA, when they were like, because of the children, we have to ban and lock down and get access to your computers and files. If they really want to, and I'm not saying I know what's going on, if they really want to eliminate independent media and gatekeep these channels and make sure the only people who are allowed to have podcasts are the chosen few, this is the perfect path to doing it. Is there evidence Erica Kirk is contemplating a lawsuit against YouTube? I don't know about YouTube. I know that she's obviously, she had what everyone presumes

to be an arbitration meeting with Candace when they met. And she did send a cease and desist, apparently to a bunch of people, including Candace. The, the first question, follow, my point is this, following this ruling in New Mexico and in Los Angeles, that YouTube is responsible for what it chooses to promote. That opened the door to ending section 230. Because now the next step of the argument is obvious. If YouTube is responsible and liable for promoting certain content, that's harmful, how does that interact with defamation when they're choosing to promote these Erica Kirk videos

they know to be false or defamatory? The question becomes in a lawsuit, if you get past a motion to dismiss, which I think you will, the question is going to be, after discovery, has YouTube ever had a conversation internally about the plethora of Erica Kirk content accusing her of being all sorts of evil things, including a robot, a demon, in on the murder of her own husband, which is defamation per se, criminal act. And YouTube will say, yes, we've had those conversations. And did you find, did you, that they could be defamatory? And they're going to say, we did have those concerns, yes. And you still chose to promote it. Yes, we did. Our

algorithm just does this. Well, as we've already concluded, precedent set in KGV, I'm sorry, KGMV, YouTube, Google and meta, you are responsible for what you promote. It's an open and shut case. Then YouTube's going to say we have no choice but to stop allowing people to promote, produce any content they want. Mike, can I get your reaction to all of the Erica Kirk Slander that we're seeing online? Well, yeah, but I just wanted to say a quick thing, which has been haunting me all day since this, this thing came out to kind of piggyback. on what Tim was saying. There's another line,

because Tim is sort of concerned with the kind of defamation, lawfare, you know, obliterating Section 230 protections because of this. There's coming, it's made possible potentially by this lawsuit. I see this and I look at its potential for killing the sovereignty of the platforms for control over their own algorithm. And that is,

you know, because they're basically, arguing that the algorithm is addictive and that, you know, I would not be surprised to see a push to have sort of third party vetted. There was a big push starting in 2021 for something they called middleware. This was a, this was a news guard, which I assume came after you. For fake reasons. Yes. They claimed that because we wrote a story about a speech Trump gave and didn't fact check the speech he gave, that we were fake news. And we had a perfect score beyond that, it's fake. And NewsGuard rates New York Times, perfect, 10 out of 10, based on the fact

that it's the New York Times alone. But I hate to stop you because we only have a few minutes left. I got to do an ad read and we got to read some superchats, but we'll pick this back up in the uncensored portion of the show. So don't forget, before we go to the superchats, my friends, we've got a great sponsor. It is Rumble Wallets. Censorship's coming back. That's my whole rant. And I think the Democrats are likely going to win in the midterms. Subpoenas are going to go flying. Censorship will come back with a vengeance. And with that comes. debanking, which was massive in the censorship era, which was only a few years ago, we just barely escaped from. But again, I think it's coming back. So you want to check out the Rumble Wallet app.

It's wallet.com or click the link in the description below. It's a non-custodial wallet, meaning they can't ban you from it. It's yours. It's your address. They can't take it from you. You can transfer Bitcoin, Tether and Tether Gold. Tether gold is actual gold on the blockchain. So if you want to transfer Tether, Bitcoin, something of value to a friend, maybe you owe money. Maybe you want to tip your favorite Rumble creator. Rumble wallet, wallet. Rumble.com. And the best part is, again, Rumble cannot remove you from this. So in the events, in the future, if Democrats win or whoever wants to bring censorship back and they go to Rumble and say, Ian, you shouldn't be given, you know, trading with a lot over here for that

bagel, then, because you know he loves bagels, Ian can be like, oh no, but then Rumble's going to say, well, we can't do anything about it. We can't stop them from that trade. So check out wallet.com, pick it up. Shout out to Rumble, but let's grab some of you a Rumble rants and super chats. I know we'll leave a few minutes, but the, oh boy.

You're on your mustache. Schmere, they call it. All right. Evan Fras says, what about the recent story of a jury finding that Elon Musk is supposed to pay in regards to X?

The story will explain better. I did see that. They said that he lied about the, to invest, he lied to investors or something like that. So he's got to pay. Yeah, that was the allegation. The allegation that they make

is that at the last second Elon said that he was balking on the $44 billion purchase price type thing in a bid to try to drive down the because the stock price rose dramatically making the deal more expensive on the anticipation of Elon buying it. This is like a common thing. And so by him suggesting, this is the allegation, that it wouldn't be bought, that actually it would drive down the price and therefore the purchase price would be lower. And they are... We got this from Mitho says,

gunpowder and smokeless powder is self-oxygenating in. You can fire a bullet underwater. The big concern with space guns is Newtonian laws. Check out the expanse. Interesting. Would we need air to spark the fire to...

No. No? Probably not. Oxygen, rather. That might be contained in the system. Like, easy. Well, actually, Flint. Anyway, J. Schall says,

how do we use the Timcast community to affect political change. I've got to be more active in the Discord, but we all have to be more than just people complaining online. I'm tired of Blackbills. It's not what you know, it's who you know. That's the most important thing, and it doesn't just mean make contact with rich and powerful people. It means you need a network. One day you wake up and you say, man, you know what? I got a really great idea for a song. I like, I wrote these words down, but not a really musical guy. But these lyrics are fantastic. I just don't want to make music. If you're in the Discord, that would be a problem. You'd say, hey, does anybody write songs? I wrote these lyrics. I think

they're pretty good. And then some guys like, I'm not a good lyricist, but I can play the guitar and sing. And it just happens, it's Ian. And you send him those lyrics. And then Ian puts it to a song. And now you've written a song that otherwise would not have existed. So how do you affect political change? Much the same way. You say, hey, I have an idea that no one's thought of. Who do I share it with? In the Discord, you're talking to a ton of people. The ideas get refined. The projects get started. And it can be any project. You might be like, I got a really great idea for an app that can help the GOP fundraise. Who do I tell it to? I can't make an app. And you go in the Discord. Does anybody make apps?

And there's a ton of people who do. And they're going to be like, what's your idea? Check it out. What if we had an app that did this? And they go, whoa, I never thought of that. And then all of a sudden, the next day, you have a rudimentary app that makes it very easy to fundraise. That's how we do it. People coming together because many hands makes light work.

We got to get an AI in the Discord that can help everybody. No, I think the people do that as a community. You know what else you can do is you can coordinate like communication with representative officials and stuff. So like tomorrow at 2 p.m. you could organize a call where like 7,000 people call the same guy's office at the same time on the same day. That can have overwhelming response. All right. We'll grab one more super chat here.

We got Justin Lopez. As an episode one viewer, I appreciate the fast intros, great adjustment. May I suggest that you still the full intros from time to time, perhaps one day a week, or when there is a guest who would draw a different audience in case there are new viewers. Indeed. Indeed, indeed. But we also do the outroes as well. I think for the guest, it makes sense.

For recurring co-house, people like Elad, who's here periodically, it makes sense. For Libby, it makes sense. But for, you know, Tate or Ian or me or Carter, at a certain point, it's like, this is the crew you know. So. I personally don't like it. Don't like introducing myself. It's annoying. I don't mind it in the beginning, but it's like, you don't know if I am, just look me up, bro.

What's it? I think I only done it one times. All right, everybody. We're to go to the uncensored portion of the show and talk about the moon, among other things. So smash the like button, share the show with. everyone in your life. You can follow me personally on X and Instagram at Timcast. Mike, do you want to shout anything out? Follow me at Mike Ben Cyber. I'm on X YouTube Rumble, IG. Mike Ben Cyber. What up, everybody? Thanks for tuning in. I'm Al-A-A-ahu. You could find me at

Al-Aliahoo on Instagram and Twitter. At Ian Crossland, you'll find me. When we were in Austin, I had an opportunity to do Roseanne Barr's show. So that's coming up soon. I don't know when it's going to be out, but keep your eyes open for Roseanne and me doing some funny shit and follow me at Ian Crossland. Go to Graphene.movie too. Check out this new documentary I'm producing. It's very cool. Ian Crossland. Carter Banks. Hump to see the documentary. When's it coming out?

Good question. I spoke with 6-7 Kevin and he's like, oh, I'm doing another thing with farmers right now, maybe a month. Six. One than a half. You can follow me at Carter Banks everywhere and follow our label at Trash House Records on YouTube. And let's get into the after show. I'll just say one quick shout to Boxcar Burgers in Brunswick, Maryland.

If you guys ever find yourself there, there for lunch today and they got amazing burgers. We used to go there all the time. We used to order all the time when we were back at the castle. And so we had some business to do over in Maryland. And I said, why don't we, with my wife, I was like, why don't we stop? We haven't been here in like two years. We went in. Amazing burgers, friendly people, great French fries and local beef, you know. So if you ever in the area, just wanted to shot them out, I don't know them, just ate there. But I saw a guy wearing a black rifle hoodie who was eating there too. So I'm like, you know what? Let's roll. Anyway, everybody, we'll see you all over at rumble.com slash Timcast.

IRL, thanks for hanging out.