Trump Admin Declares Mass Migration An EXISTENTIAL THREAT | Across The Pond
On this installation of Across The Pond, Tate and Connor break down the State Department's stunning move to label mass migration as an existential threat and human rights violation, and what it reveals about the direction of American foreign policy. They also expose the media's latest attempt to smear the entire Right as "groypers", using guilt-by-association to delegitimize anyone who pushes back on the narrative. BUY CAST BREW COFFEE TO SUPPORT THE SHOW - https://castbrew.com/ Become A Member And Protect Our Work at http://www.timcast.com Host(s): Tate Brown @realTateBrown (everywhere) Connor Tomlinson @Con_Tomlinson (X) My Second Channel - https://www.youtube.com/timcastnews Podcast Channel - https://www.youtube.com/TimcastIRL
I'm very keen on Donald Trump to basically make Kiss Darma look like a total invalid, an NPC, someone who has no charisma, no legitimacy, and just to mock him relentlessly.
I'm glad that your mother has so many alt accounts so that she can basically manufacture consent for Tim to give us a show.
I also really like that you either look like you're occupying Patrick Bateman's office or you look like you've been called into the boss's office in a Silicon Valley tech firm to be told you're being replaced by H-1B Indian.
It's taking me back to my times in corporate America getting yanked into the HR office because my joke was so funny that HR wanted to hear it in person.
So yeah, there's something with the, I think it's the blinds I think really amplify the sort of wage cage aesthetic, which is what I'm going for because that's where I truly feel most at home.
I love nothing more than like a Keurig, cup of coffee, heading to the water cooler, you know, debating on whether or not your coworker's pregnant with the other co-workers.
Like, there's really something about that.
Like really looking forward to doing like a Chili's lunch.
But it's crazy hearing that from the State Department.
So I'm just going to jump right in.
I'm going to read the tweet here from the State Department.
Sorry, the post from the State Department.
Mass migration poses a existential threat to Western civilization and undermines the stability of key American allies.
So true.
Today, the State Department instructed U.S. embassies to report on the human rights implications and public safety impacts of mass migration.
Mass migration is a human rights concern.
Western nations have endured crime waves, terror attacks, sexual assaults, and the displacement of communities.
U.S. officials will urge governments to take bold action and defend citizens against the threats posed by mass migration.
I'll keep reading.
Officials will also report policies that punish citizens who object to continued mass migration and document crimes and human rights abuses committed by people of a migration background.
These issues have plagued citizens of Western nations for years.
In the United Kingdom, thousands of girls have been victimized in Rotherham, Oxford, and Newcastle by grooming gangs involving migrant men.
Many girls were left to suffer unspeakable abuse for years before authorities stepped in.
In Sweden, an Eritrean migrant convicted of R wording, a 16-year-old girl, was allowed to remain in the country after a judge ruled that the incident was not a, quote, exceptionally serious crime and did not warrant deportation.
And they give you one more example here.
In Germany, nine men, several of whom were migrants, were convicted for the gang grape of a 15-year-old girl.
A German woman who insulted one of the grapists online was given a harsher sentence than the perpetrators themselves.
U.S. officials will now scrutinize policies in Western nations that give leniency to migrant crime and human rights abuses or that create two-tiered systems that prioritize migrants at the expense of their own citizens.
The United States, here's how they finish off here.
The United States supports the sovereignty of our allies and calls on governments to constructively engage with the growing number of citizens concerned about mass migration.
The United States stands ready to assist and our allies in solving the global crisis of mass migration.
Connor, do my eyes deceive me?
Is this a statement from the Department of State of the United States of America?
Yeah, Patriots and Posters in control, it turns out.
The most wild thing was in, I mean, there's a lot to break down here, but is in the second tweet where it notes the migrant crimes, including terror attacks, assaults, and it lists among the equivalent immoral actions to those violent crimes, the displacement of communities.
So white flight replacement migration is officially, according to U.S. State Department policy, a human rights abuse akin to murder and sexual assault.
Like, thank you.
That is what we wanted to hear because we are being systematically pushed out of our historic homelands, our towns and cities.
And until, you know, posters have been in control in the Trump administration and look, there's plenty to chimp out about.
They need to do better, etc.
But until our guys entered the State Department and were issuing edicts like this and actually changing what the ambassadors in our respective countries need to report and putting pressure on governments, until that, the only thing that we heard from so-called conservatives from the states was, well, if you can't afford to move because we've imported a million Indians into your city, maybe you should just buy homes elsewhere.
Or in the UK, we had Peter Hitchens post the other day, as we discussed last week, well, if you're a young Briton, get out while you still can.
Meanwhile, bring back terrorist Shemai Ma Begum from a camp in the middle of Syria to repopulate Britain with ISIS brides.
So it's actually very encouraging that they've said, no, like pressuring people out of their neighborhoods, the places that their ancestors built, and as JD Vance said, want to be laid to rest in the family plot one day.
That is a human rights abuse according to the definition of human rights they're using, which is an even more interesting one to go on.
Because the Washington Post have a meltdown about this.
They have been very upset that the US State Department had the temerity to read your Declaration of Independence and Constitution and find among the penumbras that said rights are God-given and they are inalienable for the innocent human person.
They are not universalist international legal fictions that allow North African sex offenders to break into a country and stay there at my expense.
And so they are infuriated that they dare evoke Christianity in this.
So the understanding of this is that rather than believing that we're all blank slates and so the criminal is actually the victim because some form of inequality caused him to commit a crime in your society and taking the side of the migrant criminal, instead, it is taking the side of the innocent white European men, women, and children who have been pushed out of their communities and preyed upon by men who never need to be in the country in the first place.
I don't need to elaborate on how big of a reorientation this was, not just from the Biden State Department, but from like every State Department for the last 60 years, which have given a rubber stamp to mass migration.
They've been encouraging it.
They've been participating in these UN panels where they sit there and struggle session over the fact that like white people do seem to, for whatever reason, create some not terrible societies.
I mean, there's something to be said about that.
I also found the, yeah, the statement about the displacement of communities remarkable to see that included, because I mean, I was reading this, I was already hyped.
I was like, this is a great statement.
And then I see they issue a warning about the displacement of communities.
Fantastic.
Something else that was interesting in here, we can drill down more on specifically why the displacement of communities is such a horrific thing to be occurring.
I liked that they're really weaponizing.
I mean, human rights law has been weaponized against Westerners for a very long time, against Western countries.
It's again, it's been this kind of thing that is just used to browbeat specifically the United States on the international scene here where they're using human rights, kind of what you're supposed to be using them for.
I mean, they lead off this statement by saying this undermine, mass migration undermines the stability of key American allies.
And that's absolutely the case.
And so I'm relieved to see human rights will actually be really deployed in the way that it should be, which is, yeah, I kind of have the right to live somewhere that my ancestors invested in, sort of anticipating that it would be passed down to me.
I do actually kind of have the right to that.
You know, many in the sphere have disagreed with that consensus.
But no, that is the right.
And so it's very good to see the State Department drilling down on that.
I mean, look, obviously the crime waves, terror attacks, sexual assaults, that alone gives them the justification to sort of reorient the State Department in this way.
But whoever it was in the State Department, or probably a good majority of people in the State Department that insisted that displacement of communities is a human rights violation, is excellent.
It illustrates that patriots are indeed in control.
And, you know, not to kind of go off on this tangent, because full disclosure, we will be having John Doyle as a guest later on today.
And I'm sure he's going to want to elaborate on this much more.
But there is something to be said about we had a week of everybody dooming and blackpilling over the Trump administration, a lot of people chimping, et cetera, et cetera.
And then the State Department comes out with something like this, where this alone would be the most right-wing, just isolated from everything else would be the most right-wing action a government has taken since, I don't know, maybe Nixon.
I mean, this is really, this is really, really tremendous stuff.
They go on to explain, again, this is the State Department addressing an international situation.
They're addressing what is affecting our allies.
I think that's also really remarkable.
And they go in, they explain here in the United Kingdom, obviously they're referring to these grooming gang scandals that have been occurring all across the UK.
I don't know about you guys.
You know, it did seem like from the state side, people were kind of vaguely aware of what was going on, but it didn't really seem like it was causing, it wasn't dominating headlines over here, because kind of one of those things that you had to be pretty politically active to be aware of.
You know, I mean, Elon and others had amplified it, but for the most part, it was not something that was sort of, you know, being discussed at the kitchen table of the United States for, you know, this side or the other.
The Department of State has now addressed this, and this was the first example they cited as a human rights violation that is destabilizing an ally.
What does that say about sort of the Trump administration's view of Western countries?
Because that was kind of the concern for the longest time is that the liberal media will be like, oh, well, you know, he's trying to screw over our allies.
He's America only.
Like he's an isolationist, this, that, and the other.
This to me seems like he's a friend of other sort of patriots all across the West that are looking to save their countries as well.
I mean, this seems like a really encouraging sign if you were a Brit or even a Swede or German, really just anyone of a Western background.
Well, I'm increasingly seeing isolationists being used as a slur by people who are frustrated that President Trump and members of MAGA are not interested in hunting for the next George Washington in the foothills of Afghanistan or turning Ukraine into a vessel for gay race communism and are instead actually interested in building relationships with friendly allied nations, not just in the sort of liberal pluralist, you know, you're for gay race communism.
We're one big bloc imposing our views on Dilapidated deserts in the Middle East, but instead, hey, we kind of like each other.
We have a positive cultural exchange.
We like actually visiting each other's countries.
And so, this is why the US is getting closer with Japan, its actual greatest ally, and it's getting closer with the motherland, the UK, despite its treacherous government ruling over the beleaguered patriotic British majority.
They still see that they have a constituency there, thanks very much to the visual representation of the United Kingdom rallies, where up to a million people turned out in a largely peaceful and patriotic demonstration that Elon Musk spoke at via video link.
And lots of figures on the British right also addressed the crowds there.
And they were demonized, black and blue, but it turns out that they are more numerous than the governments who have now had to erect massive fences around the houses of parliament for the first time because they know how hated they are.
And so, what this says is: one, there is a poster-to-policy pipeline because it's not just Elon Musk amplifying the awareness of the grooming gang scandal that's been going on for decades and was deliberately covered up by politicians, social workers, police officers, some of whom were members of the gangs and the media.
But, and I'll be careful what I say here, in some small way, I may have contributed to this because I've been reporting on this for some time and I know that there are guys in the administration who follow my coverage of my country to know what's going on on my side of the pond.
That's kind of one of the reasons for this show, so we can keep adding that exchange to our respective audiences.
And so, this has been brought to their attention in granular detail.
They are aware that the UK government has been imprisoning people for complaining about mass migration, that there has been a two-tier justice system.
That is why it's embedded there.
It's an accusation which particularly stings for Kier Starmer because Elon Musk, I don't know if he coined the term, but he certainly popularized the nickname two-tier kier.
And it was so bad that during the post-Southport murders protests, the Department for Digital Media, Culture, and Sport and the Department of Science and Technology were emailing X, TikTok, etc., and asking them to take down reels and posts that had mentioned two-tier care, two-tier justice, and narratives about fighting age male asylum seekers committing crimes.
You know, all things that are true.
So, it's not just the posts that are getting to the policy on your side of the Atlantic, but posts are getting to the politicians in my country and making them realize how hated they are.
So, the moral of this story is: keep posting.
Like, seriously, guys, even though we last week discussed whether or not, you know, people saying MAGA was over, it's time to black pill, it's time to break away.
There is still a potential to leverage pressure both on people that hate you and people that are amenable to your concerns if you do keep posting in a way which is artful, articulate, and not just low impulse control and low brow.
As far as the grooming gangs themselves go, again, it's worth putting on the radar of Americans that the Labour government has acquiesced to a national inquiry after a report came out that said, Wow, the overwhelming number of these perpetrators are Pakistani.
Wow, the previous reports have tried to actually bury the ethnicity data and have covered it up.
Turns out there are guys that are coming across on small boats and then joining the grooming gangs of predominantly Pakistani men, many of whom are born in this country and are using existing drug gangs and even police forces to traffic the girls and drug them.
So, when that came out and the national outcry reached a fever pitch, the Labour government went, Well, okay, we've been calling it a dog whistle and a far-right bandwagon, but I guess it's time to do a full-stage inquiry now.
They then scaled it back, so it's not a national inquiry, it's local inquiries, and they still haven't appointed the chair.
And in the meantime, the former home secretary who was going to appoint the chair has been swapped out with Shabana Mahmoud, a Pakistani woman who says her Sunni Muslim faith is the reason she's in public life.
So, excuse me if I don't think that they're going to carry this out as is required.
And then the final thing to mention as well, relating to migration and censorship and the grooming gangs, is Labor are currently pursuing an Islamophobia definition that says any conversation about the ethnic and religious composition of the gangs is itself anti-Muslim racism.
So I am very happy that the State Department are keeping a keen and watchful eye on what's going on in Britain.
I'm glad they haven't fallen for any of the lies that Keir Starmer has told repeatedly to President Trump's face.
And as always, if they would like further information slid across their desk from Brits who have been keeping track of this sort of thing, they always know where my email is.
Dude, I mean, look, coming into this Trump administration, the discourse from our friends, not just in the UK, but broadly across Western Central Europe and Northern Europe, was, look, the Trump administration is going to take the boot off of our neck for four years.
That was sort of the appeal.
You know, that's what was in it for our friends all across the West, in addition to Japan, Australia, South Korea.
Something that I don't think people anticipated beyond taking the boot off the neck was actively playing a role in sort of pushing back some of this nonsense that's been occurring in the countries.
I mean, there's a report here from GB News.
It looks like from our friend Stephen Edgington, friend of the show.
Donald Trump urges Keir Starmer to, quote, protect Britons from mass migration as U.S. issues.
Kings warnings or grape kings.
I'll have to touch that up in post.
Again, this was obviously on the back of this State Department decree.
This isn't just the Trump administration taking the boot off of the neck of British patriots.
This is him actively participating in sort of a restoration of Britain in and of itself.
And again, we're talking about a lot of these, you know, these staffers and the admin that are, you know, have an eye on global politics, these sorts of things.
But also kind of something has to be said about Trump himself.
I mean, he's clearly a bit of an anglophile, as evident by his sort of relationship with the royal family, how much he discusses it.
Obviously, his mother was a Scottish immigrant.
But beyond that, he seems to take an interest in our allies' affairs from time to time.
I mean, obviously, he had a friendship with Shinzo Abe that everyone loves to sort of meme on.
And it was very real.
He actually did seem to be quite upset by the loss of Shinzo Abe.
And yeah, it seems like, I don't know, this seems like Trump and Starmer's relationship.
It seems to be a bit personal for Trump in many ways, that it's not with the, usually he's just like with Macrone or with, well, you name it, really, any of our fellow NATO allies.
He kind of looks down on them.
He treats them.
He kind of throws them around.
Keir Starmer, he like seems to be shaking like, dude, wake up.
Like everyone in your country has Star Wars names.
Like, wake up, wake up.
And that seems to be a departure from how he typically interacts with their allies.
I don't know if you've kind of gotten that same vibe, but it does seem like Trump has a keen interest, specifically in the UK.
Obviously, he's putting America first, et cetera, et cetera.
But I think he kind of, you know, to use the term we use all the time, like a rising tide lifts all boats.
I think he kind of feels that way about particularly Europe.
He feels like a rising America could rise Europe.
And we don't need to like patronize Europe.
We just need to like focus on our affairs and take the boot off of the neck of patriots over there.
Yeah, it's easier to have a Monroe doctrine when you don't have a Europe that has hooked itself up to the military industrial complex of the global American empire in order to expand its welfare state and give it out to migrant sex criminals.
I think that's a pretty sensible calculation to make.
Trump obviously has a long-standing emotional connection to the British Isles, given his mother was Scottish, and so he set up Turnbury, the golf course that he held court at earlier this year and mocked Starmer the entire time.
Like the Brits, I think quite justifiably, since you displaced our much better, frankly, Empire in the 40s after, you know, hooking us up to the Marshall Plan and dilapidating our economy after the Second World War.
I think the Brits are a little bit sore about being displaced as the global power by the Americans.
So if you watch, you know the film Love Actually, right?
There's a scene in it where a president, obviously who's meant to be a combination between Bill Clinton and George Bush, makes a move on an intern, and the prime minister, who's obviously meant to be Tony Blair, stands up for Britain and says how proud he is to be the nation of Paddington Bear and Harry Potter and David Beckham.
And he gets an applause by saying that, you know, we're not America's lapdog, basically.
I'm now the inverse.
I'm very keen on Donald Trump to basically make Keir Starmer look like a total invalid, an NPC, someone who has no charisma, no legitimacy, and just to mog him relentlessly.
And then the other thing to say about this as well, as you mentioned, I think it's JD Vance's animosity towards Keir Stahlma more than anything that's driving it.
Because Vance, we have mutuals who are followed by Vance.
He follows things very keenly in Britain.
And don't underestimate the extent to which those mutuals and the staffers who are working under Rubio, under Vance, are our guys.
And they are there because of Rubio and Vance.
So there's two things to focus on here.
Vance's mentor is a good friend of mine called James Orr.
James Orr met with Vance when he was over in the UK.
He sort of introduced him to a bunch of prospective politicians who are slightly better than the ones that we've got now, including the lame duck conservative leader, Kemi Badenock, who is, I mean, if she continues to stay as leader, they're going to be selling off the furniture in their club as firewood at some point.
So she's on her way out.
James is very sound, Catholic, super socially conservative, and constantly affords opportunities for young people in politics, something literally nobody else does.
So he's in charge of cultivating young talent.
Great guy.
And then over in the States, there are a bunch of young, very online Catholics who have gone into the administration.
And the reason they're focusing on human rights doctrine as a rather than being this sort of post-war straitjacket that distrusts majority populations and protects minorities, because if you act in your distinct people's interest, you're literally Hitler or something.
They realized that the human rights came out of canon law in the 13th century when the early, well, mid to early church fathers were debating what the church's doctrine on certain social issues were.
And so that is the original purpose of it.
It's inextricable from Immargo Day.
And when you decouple human rights from Christianity, you just get liberalism, gay race, communism, internationalism, and the failed doctrines of regime change.
So they're going back to roots.
They're reinstantiating as a matter of policy, Christianity in their international human rights doctrine.
And that's why as well, something that's mentioned in the full brief that they've given to their ambassadors to monitor in our respective countries at US embassies, not just a telling off of European leaders, including Keir Starmer for facilitating migrant crime, but they've told these ambassadors to monitor state-funded abortion, euthanasia, transgender surgeries, and censorship of free speech and anti-white DEI policies.
So all of these are discrimination against the innocent human person.
They are defiling God's creation.
And all of these are pertinent issues in Britain because we've got a Canada-style made bill being rushed through on Keir Starmer's promise.
We've got abortion that's just been decriminalized up to birth by a private member's bill that barely anyone knew was going on.
Totally revolutionary.
And we've got active anti-white discrimination laws in the corporate sector, in the government, and this has led to the two-tier justice system.
So all of these things being monitored and pressure being placed on our government by the State Department from an explicitly Christian perspective is encouraging and is exactly what patriots need over here.
Yeah, well, like that example you gave a blood actually where, yeah, you know, the British figurehead like white knights and that kind of defines specifically the Anglosphere, particularly Britain and Canada, the way they've sort of conducted themselves, how they frame themselves compared to the U.S. is they always want to be the anti-U.S. in many ways.
They want to sort of posture that they're different.
They know better.
They're more enlightened.
That the Americans are kitschy and retarded or whatever.
Where now they can't get away with, like, that's easy to do when it's like a, you know, unambitious Republican government, but you can't really do that when the State Department is like breathing down your neck.
I mean, that is really impossible to do.
You also made a great point.
Yeah, with the human rights, sort of the reorientation of it, because I made this point like two months ago.
I had an Aidon, the captive dreamer, on Tim's Noon Live.
And we were kind of making this point of like, look, when you're sort of criticizing Israel, when you're critiquing Israel, there's plenty of meat on the bone there.
But when you're critiquing Israel, you shouldn't do it in a way that doesn't actually threaten the liberal world order in any way.
And I made the point that appealing to international law, that doesn't threaten the liberal world order in any way.
In many ways, it reinforces it.
And I included human rights as a part of that description of the like, oh, well, you know, they're doing this, that, and the other.
It's a human rights violation.
And it's like, yeah, because when you criticize something in that way, it's not really threatening to the liberal world order because they're the ones that have upheld this post-war definition of human rights, which, like you pointed out, have been completely severed from the classical Christian understanding of the Imago Day.
Again, this or, as you know, this stems from the Bible itself into the Middle Ages where it was really intellectualized.
With that, when you see actions like this from the State Department where they give precise examples of what an actual human rights violation looks like, that's how you recapture something like that that has been captured.
Because again, something like human rights as an institution, added to the list of things that have been completely capitulated over the last, or at least since the post-war order.
I mean, the amount of institutions that have been completely captured by the left and they wear it sort of as a skin suit when human rights enforcement properly deployed looks like this.
And I mean, look, here's an article from the Telegraph right here.
Trump could offer refugee status to Europeans who oppose migration, the subline.
U.S. president advised to prioritize those who have been, quote, targeted for peaceful expression of views online.
Obviously, there's a political angle to this, but like functionally at its core, what we can look at this is like, yeah, you have these human rights, these rights that our founders found fit to frame in the Constitution, among which was freedom of speech, freedom of expression, freedom to protest, etc.
And these are things that we see threatening Europe.
And we say, okay, we're not going to apply the Constitution to the world, but we are going to apply the Constitution for who we sort of perceive to be oppressed.
Like it's a complete separation from previous administrations where oppression purely boiled down to, are you not a white male?
That's what defined oppression.
That's why you saw these asylum cases.
Like the number one reason people would cite when applying for asylum was something along the lines of my country's economy sucks.
It's like, okay, let's not a human right.
The fact that your country is like broke and you're poor and like your whole country sucks, not a reason to apply for asylum.
If anything, it's a reason to turn you away because if you're anything like your countrymen, you're going to tank our country versus like actual, an actual definition of a human rights violation would be like, yeah, I've been completely muzzled and like my avenue to power has been cut.
My entire sphere's avenue has been cut off.
Avenue to power has been completely cut off.
And this evil, uh, evil, sort of in the nicest definition, atheistic cabal has sort of consumed all power within my country, and I'm completely removed from power.
And so it's, it has a very Christian sort of route to this reorientation.
Um, of course, the media is chastising this when the when the Trump administration put out their sort of three groups that they're prioritizing for refugee status was European dissidents, in this case, just patriots, like normal people that have a healthy view of their country and nation.
Um, the second was, uh, and then the second was what caused a lot of stir was the Afrikaners, obviously coming from South Africa.
And so, yeah, we're seeing this massive reorientation.
And again, this is not controversial stuff.
This certainly wouldn't have been controversial to anybody pre-World War II.
There's no question about that.
But there's something to be said.
I don't know.
Gauging from what I'm reading coming out of the UK is they, it feels like their outrage from the left and from this sort of liberal establishment in the UK isn't so much rage and like we should do something about this.
It's kind of like black, they're almost blackpot in some ways.
They kind of feel like they're on the back foot.
They didn't expect the US and Trump to take such an active role.
And it seems like all they're resorting to is adahaminum attacks, but they really kind of feel helpless as far as like they can't just dictate terms to the US through like guilt tripping anymore like they used to be able to.
Yeah, the liberal cognitive dissonance about this is always the accusation of undue American interference in Britain's free and fair elections and politics.
They say that Elon Musk is a foreign billionaire and so he can't meddle, pay no attention to George Soros funding our entire NGO activist network that's settled in the UK.
And they do the same with the Russians.
So we, because we're in Europe and it's a bit more proximate, even though we're separated by an ocean between us and the French, they always go, oh, Putin's going to invade Britain tomorrow.
Therefore, you know, on Ukraine endlessly, let's float the idea of conscription so you can go and die in a ditch in Kiev.
But it's funny because we're being actively invaded by men from the Orn of Africa via Calais and dinghies.
And that's foreign interference doesn't matter as soon as they set foot on our shores and are given the prerequisite paperwork and house in a hotel at my expense, I suppose.
So foreign interference is totally fine when it's from international left-wing NGOs who facilitate the passage of foreign criminals to break into our country and then establish diasporas that then lobby for their particular ethno-nepotistic and religious grievances.
But when it's Putin or Trump, you know, it's the end of the world.
They're basically the eye of Sauron sitting off in the distance and we have to form an alliance to go and knock on the black gates, I suppose.
It's frustrating.
The other remark I'll make is you're correct about framing things in terms of a critique to the right.
So this is why the Israel critiques that say Netanyahu has a warrant out for him from the International Court of Justice and we should respect that.
It's like actually the International Court of Justice is basically run by South Africa who are genociding whites and singing Kill the Boa Kill the Farmer.
I think it's actually way more compelling to say Netanyahu probably isn't on our side because he's joking about America itself being Rome and he's saying that like we have a long memory and look at the fall of Rome like he's in a soprano scene.
Like I think that's probably a bit more worthy of critique than appealing to like the United Nations and all of these other third worldist captured organizations that hate white people just as much as they hate Israel.
They think there's Israel code's white, which is the only reason they're attacking it.
Basically, if it didn't exist, they'd still be complaining about Europe and saying that we plundered their soil and somehow dug the railroads out of the dirt and deprived them of all this wealth from which they would be Wakanda if it weren't for us.
So yeah, I think always critique from the right.
And this is why the framing, the reframing that the State Department has done is encouraging.
And even though I am a big Monroe Doctrine enjoyer in better times, we work with what we've got.
And I'm glad that our friends in the State Department are considerate cousins from over the other side of the Atlantic, care about what's happening in my country and are willing to use their international pressure to speak on behalf of the patriots who are under siege here.
Yeah, it's what an alliance is actually supposed to conduct of versus just sort of dragging each other.
Well, primarily the U.S. dragging the UK into our grand ideas in the Middle East.
Yeah, it's refreshing to see like sort of a relationship that actually benefits the UK here in this instance.
So, all right, well, with that, it's a little on topic.
Look, ever since this Tucker Fuentes debacle, right, this story hasn't gone away.
And I don't think it's Grouper's really pushing this, or even really people on the more extremities of the right pushing this story.
It seems to be this, I guess you would call them setter-right.
There's not really a great, they're neocons, effectively.
It's this contingent that seems to be going on and on and on and on about this Tucker Nick interview.
And I think we're unlocking.
I think it's kind of becoming clear.
I made this point in the previous show that there's a, there's a ploy right now to sort of rehash what they did in 2016, where they paint everyone to the right of Bobby Jindal as alt-right.
They're trying the same playbook again.
Anyone to the right of Ted Cruz is a Groiper.
That is the attempt that's happening here.
And this is why this story is staying around.
They need this story.
The neocons that are trying to wrestle control of the GOP away from MAGA, they need a play like this.
I mean, we saw, we were seeing the headlines.
Ted Cruz is eyeing up a 2028 run.
The cogs are already turning.
The Bushes, there's an article.
The Bushes are looking to jump back into Republican politics.
So the play is on.
I think Max Abrams gave away the game here.
I'm going to read a tweet.
This is from Max Abrams.
I am not a fan of carefully parsing the definition of Grouper.
I see more analytical value from being a lumper than a splitter when it comes to the Grouper category.
He spends all his time making up super dumb conspiracy theories about Jews in Israel and whines and dines and boosts and hugs the Grouper founder.
Is the president of Heritage Grouper?
I'd say yeah.
He attacked American Jews as quote venomous for voicing concerns that his pal Tucker is on a mission to mainstream Nazism in America and refused to condemn that.
I don't think all Groipers by definition must be incels living in mom's basement.
Max Abrams is why I don't believe in Jewish conspiracies because if they were competent enough to orchestrate all world politics, they would shut this guy up very quickly.
And the thing is, and we're all scoffing at this, we're all laughing at this.
I mean, and Max Abrams is, I mean, he's a big, big player, but he's not.
He's like, he can't throw his weight around per se.
But this is like the guy giving the game away.
But this game is already in motion.
You are seeing this from a lot of figures in the GOP.
A lot of those people don't post.
That's the difference.
People get really frustrated with inaction from the Trump administration.
And I often point to senior officials, the consulting groups, these sorts of people, these sorts of institutions that are at play that slow things down, that gum up the system a bit.
People say, how is that possible?
Because a lot of those people don't post.
A lot of people are older.
They've been around for a while.
They're apparatchiks.
They're not on Twitter.
They're not like engaging in the fight.
You just see a few of them, like your James Lindsay types.
But there's a lot more of those people than you would think.
They're just all in the beltway.
They're not on Twitter.
But I think Max Abrams specifically, because he's so on the nose, that's why it makes this particularly useful.
This is the play in action.
Is Tucker a Groyper?
Like, I don't even think most people that, I don't even think most Jewish people would even agree with that assessment.
I want to set up an anon, start like a series of anon accounts as like Tucker Carlson fly fishing and being encountered by a random reporter, Groiper, Ted Cruz getting caught accidentally watching pornography while running president Groiper.
Anyone that doesn't go along with the sort of neocon recapture consensus of the GOP is a Groyper.
They give it away.
I want to read some commentary here that Carl Hollywood at Woke Capital provided.
He shared this picture, or this screenshot rather, of Vivek Ramaswamy reacting to a clip of Funtes saying the left has to give up immigration, the right has to give up on the free market to be like for this populist coalition that he's referring to.
I don't know if I really agree with that sort of uniparty populist coalition sort of manifesting.
But Carl Hollywood, he provides this commentator because Vivek Ramaswamy quoted that Funtes video and said, a National Socialist American Workers' Party built around a shared ethnic identity.
What could possibly go wrong?
So here's what Carl Hollywood said.
One more time, they're giving away the op.
The grift right, neocons, center-left, Jews temporarily spooked by October 7th are amplifying Nick and boosting his platform in order to tar any criticism of ethno-narcissists, bad actors, or immigration as Nazism.
They are making him our face as to cut us out and reassert control over the GOP.
They're framing a false dichotomy between the center-left uniparty slow communism business as usual.
And he cites Barry Weiss, Vivek Ramaswamy, and a dissident, Christian, National Socialist, fascism, a name, only leftism, a fascist again, kind of a dirt left guy.
So this is like literally what it is.
This playbook has worked for them before, obviously.
This is what hamstringed the first Trump administration was.
A lot of really good guys were removed from consideration for positions quite early on.
And they used the alt-right framing as a way to sort of parse out people that would have been entering the admin or that would have been in advisor roles, these sorts of things.
It was used as a friend-enemy distinction.
And yeah, I think Carl Hollywood points it out well here.
They are trying to make Nick the face again of anyone to their right of Ted Cruz as a way to cut out and reassert control over the GOP.
I think this needs to be amplified more because, look, there's a lot of people that have a lot of problems with Nick Funtes that are on the right.
They're firmly on the right.
And I would even make the argument that they would be more authentic.
They would have more authentically right-wing thought than Fuentes in many ways.
And they were very upset with Tucker's interview.
They were very upset.
But with that, I think you have to take a step back, look at the bigger picture and realize what's going on here.
There's an op at play.
You don't have to go and defend every single thing Fuentes said to acknowledge what's going on here, acknowledge that there is an op.
There is an op at play.
There's a dragnet that's being laid across the right right now to ostracize you from power.
So you have to completely reject the framing.
I think that's why Kevin Roberts' statement initially was so particularly useful, because he was sort of like making that distinction, you know, in a fairly explicit way.
And it was completely eviscerated, obviously.
People got fired.
And now we're just seeing this civil war break out.
We're seeing this civil war.
You know, they're trying to turn this.
They're trying to turn this into a broad category.
They're trying to turn this into alt-right 2.0.
And I think it's disgusting.
And I think, again, the reason this is occurring is because they do not want JD Vance to be the presidential nominee in 2028.
They see this as their chance to finally turn MAGA into a temporary thing.
It was just this, you know, moment that the GOP needed.
They're going to come up with a way to like retcon it.
You know, it was this moment the GOP needed to oust, you know, Obama or something like that.
And now we can return to sensible professional conservatism, you know, the way it was supposed to be.
Vance would obviously be that continuation.
Trump in many ways seems to have anointed him as the successor of MAGA in many ways.
And so they're trying to set this up to poison the well for JD Vance, I would presume, for many reasons.
One being which JD Vance actually is a departure from a lot of these GOP apparatchiks.
For one, he's not obsessed with Israel.
B, he is firmly aware of the threat that mass migration poses to the United States.
That State Department statement echoed a lot of things that JD Vance has been saying.
I mean, famously said at NATCON, it was about a year ago.
He said, America is actually not an idea.
It's a distinct people in a place with a shared history, heritage, et cetera, et cetera.
That's very valuable, and that's a huge departure from pretty much what anyone else in the GOP that's name has been considered for 2028 offers.
So it's fantastic stuff.
Connor, I don't know, what's your outsider perspective kind of looking in?
Do you see this as like a play, a ploy, or do you think there's maybe something else going on here?
Well, first of all, I must note that if Vivek Ramaswamy objects to a national socialist workers' party built around a shared ethnic identity, he should probably go and speak to Prime Minister Modi in India and tell him to knock it off with the Hindu nationalism.
But of course, that's not going to happen because Vivek is a blood and soil nationalist for somewhere, just not America.
In America, you know, he can dress up as a cowboy and consider himself one of the founding fathers along with Martin Luther King, who, much like Vivek, plagiarized a hell of a lot.
As far as Nick's attempt to build a working class, like disaffected left and right coalition, I mean, he's mentioned this before with the ability to work with Muslims in a recent stream.
He even said that he would be willing to work with Zoran Mandani.
And the problem he's got with that is I understand the impulse to want to make concessions on populist economics with the left in order to get sort of like border control and a breakaway from foreign interventionism and Israeli influence over your politics done.
Like that's a completely valid ambition.
But the problem he's got is I think he underestimates the extent to which anti-whiteness and mass migration, like full-on third world replacement, we're going to steal your stuff.
We're basically brown Bane is endemic as a pillar to the left party platform.
Like not just the Democrat Party, but the broader left, because they genuinely believe in the blank slate.
This is why they're still wedded up to gender ideology.
It's why they still see minorities as essentially poor, hapless infants who need all of your possessions and who are just the victims of history.
And so getting them to part with that, to build a broad enough coalition that is larger than MAGA winning the popular vote and all of the branches of government, unlikely.
And also, in regard to building one's own coalition, as you've mentioned, like Nick's fallen out with people on our side, but I don't know Nick.
I don't think I've ever had any interactions with him.
Other than when I went to the inauguration party and he responded to a photo of me and Ayan Hercy Ali, and then a bunch of the grippers photoshopped me as Jewish, which was absolutely hilarious.
Like, I've never had a larger nose put onto me in my life.
But he may need to rebuild some burned bridges with some people in MAGA in order to do that.
Some of the people that we've spoken to before.
And I think that would actually be a very positive thing for the right more broadly, because he mentioned in the aftermath of Charlie's murder, he pulled up Matt Walsh, Matt Wolf saying, look, look, I'm going to put petty squabbles aside with anyone on my right that I disagree with to my right so that we can crack down on Antifa because we're getting killed out here and that's more important than debates over foreign policy or whatever.
And Nick actually agreed.
And I think that would actually be a very constructive thing to do to try and break bread and have a bit more civil dialogue, no matter what you think about what Nick said about this group or that group.
As far as this being an op, obviously, like Woke Right was an op.
It was abandoned because James Lindsay couldn't constrain his schizophrenia long enough to not accuse people of summoning the demon Ahriman in some ritual by saying St. Michael's prayer.
Like he was chewing the padding on the walls of his cell.
It has been for a very long time.
And then he just admitted that it was just a strategy to ostracize people in the same way that Dinesh did with Sam Francis and Bill Buckley did from National Review.
It's a tale as old as time.
This time now, when they're trying to use Grieper to attack JD Vance by proxy, the problem that they've got is that Nick hasn't supported JD Vance.
Like he's been very, I think, unduly disparaging about Usha, who seems to be a nice woman and doesn't seem to have dragged Vance leftward at any point.
He didn't vote for Trump.
He was partially jokingly, I think, but amplifying Kamala's brat op.
He then suggested Gavin Newsom might provide enough of a threat from the Democrat Party to whip the Republicans into shape over the issue of Israel.
And then he promoted Kanye's presidential bid, which I don't know how his UN speech will go down if he wears a balaclava and starts citing speeches from the 1930s again.
So I don't think the op is actually going to work in smearing Vance, but it is actually a sign for encouragement, I think, that the likes of Ted Cruz and that the faction that involves neoconservatives ideologically like Lindsey Graham,
the kind of Christian Zionist dispensationalists like Mike Huckabee, and the just Jewish identitarians who want the ability to play identity politics, but then deny identity politics for heritage Americans or white Englishmen and think that that contradiction will last without any backlash, which is absolutely delusional.
It's encouraging that they feel so desperate that this is the op, that they have broadened the target to the extent of where they're not just going after Nick for some of the insulting things he said about Jews in Israel.
They're now going after Tucker Coulson, who has one of the biggest podcasts in America, and after JD Vance, who is the heir apparent to MAGA, which Trump has already coronated, who is by far and away the most competent and well-liked candidate in the GOP.
And their alternative is Ted Cruz.
Like, for all that money given to Israel for its military memorandum, you'd think that they would have better weaponry than the Cruise missile again.
It's kind of a hit against this sort of speculation that Jews are like this unstoppable, all-encompassing force because they can't seem to like draft a decent candidate if their life depended on it.
Yeah, beyond that, I mean, like, something you hit on is this, it's a fool's errand, and neocons will do this as well.
So this isn't isolated to sort of this, I don't know what you would call it like this kind of populist right-wing insurgent that Funtes certainly belongs to, but they have this tendency, obviously, they want to see, they have their priority as like bucking Israeli influence and sort of reorienting the economic order to be sort of more serving to the population.
And they look at people like Zorod as a potential ally.
And obviously that's going to fall apart every single time because, okay, you can hit on their issues and you can help get Zoron's issues across the finish line.
But when it comes to reciprocation, where now you expect these Zoron, really just this third world coalition to go to bat for you on immigration, it's not going to happen in a million years.
And so that's what kind of worries me about that coalition, their insistence on, you know, breaking bread with Islamists and these sorts of things is because they're never going to reciprocate.
And if anything, you're just going to help them get into power.
You're going to help push them across the finish line.
And that'll destroy us even quicker than the current neocon sort of consensus or the previous neocon consensus that's sort of sorting to trying to wrangle power back.
We've seen these people multiple times try to like ally with a preeminent Muslim activist.
And then the inevitable falling out occurs as soon as you like suggest any sort of immigration restriction.
It's a total disaster.
And neocons do this too for the record.
This is actually the bigger problem is not necessarily breaking bread with Muslims, but they always appeal to the left, hoping that like maybe if I make this one extra consensus, then the editorial board of the New York Times won't call me a Nazi anymore.
It's like the David French style of thinking where it's like, how can I still consider myself a conservative?
But how many concessions do I need to make before these people finally like me?
And they view me as a really smart intellectual instead of this like kitschy conservative from middle America.
That insecurity from neocons has driven most of the destruction in this country, actually, I would say.
Certainly in the last 30 to 40 years.
I mean, the entire Bush administration was characterized, really the entire post-Bush, post-Reagan GOP has been categorized epitomized by the insecurity, driven by the insecurity of the fact that leftist intellectuals don't like them very much and they view them as stupid.
And that's really hurtful because I want to write my New York Times column and be perceived as on the in-group.
I want to be seen as smart and cool.
And it's like, the reality is, look, these people view themselves as like part of this international coalition that's like stretching across boards.
We're so enlightened.
We're so smart.
We've evolved past nationalism.
And if you're on the right, no matter how right-wing or centrist you are, to a certain degree, you have sort of fallen into that category because you believe that there is something particularly special about your country.
And if you're an internationalist, that just does not mesh with that at all.
So again, I was hitting on the fun sense, but I think that's actually kind of driving to the bigger thing is giving quarter to the left, appealing, insecurity, et cetera.
Trying to find an ally that is outside of your group is always going to burn you because ultimately when it comes to immigration, that's fundamentally the biggest issue facing our country.
I mean, even the State Department has hit on this.
And you're not going to find any allies outside of the right, like the actual right wing, when it comes to immigration restriction.
You're not going to find them in populist, you know, third worldists.
You're not going to find it in an international liberal elite.
You're not going to find it anywhere.
You're not going to find these allies anywhere.
All you can do is consolidate as much power as you possibly can on the right.
And that's why Trump is so valuable.
This is why this rift has occurred, why people are so frustrated with sort of the populist.
And this is like, you know, your MTGs, your Masseys, these people that have these goals they want to accomplish.
And maybe these goals are aligned with the right wing broadly, but they want to like, they're fed up with Trump.
They want to move past Trump.
And they're trying to maybe find an alliance elsewhere.
Trump is your vehicle.
Trump is the best chance you have.
And he's doing a decent job, I'd say.
I'd say the second term has been a big success so far.
And we're only a year in.
That is your only viable alternative.
So what you have to do is you have to consolidate power within the right wing.
Because like I illustrated already, you're not going to find allies in the international left.
You're not going to find allies in the third world.
Consolidate power.
And guess what?
The president is from your coalition, the president and his administration have emerged from the right wing.
So consolidate around that.
Let's push the football down the field.
Is it going to be perfect?
No.
If perfection is the standard, you're always going to be let down.
There's no question about that.
But yeah, it's all part of this quest to consolidate power.
No alliances, no quarter to the left, no quarter to the third world.
Well, if one of our chiefest complaints about Conservative Inc, sort of embodied in the avatar of Ben Shapiro, is that he once tweeted, and for the record, I don't give a G damn about the Browning of America and just accompanied his defense of his indefensible statement telling, you know, Heritage Americans to move out of their historic homelands, their towns and cities, because they can't afford it, with a defense of the H-1B visa.
If that's our chief complaint, then, you know, who isn't going to stop that?
It's Zoro Mamdani, who's basically an avatar of the political consequences of the Browning of America.
Like, I'm sorry, it's just not, it's not a viable platform when their entire raison d'être politically is to flood you full of third worlders and steal your stuff.
So that's, that's, yeah, that's not going to work.
Though I will say, and again, this will just get me in trouble, but I mean, hey, guys, if you need to launch the woke right and the Grieper ops in order to tank your opposition, it's because organically, you know, you're losing.
There is, I think, undue influence by the Israeli government over the current Trump administration.
Now, I think Vance will be a lot better in this regard.
I think he'll do a lot less.
But one of the stories that you flagged to me that I've been peripherally following was Mike Huckabee meeting while he was in Israel in a meeting that wasn't on his calendar as an official diplomat with a convicted spy who was leaking a six by six by ten trough of documents to the Israeli government.
And when he landed in Israel, you know, Netanyahu embraced him and treated him as a hero.
And what?
Are we just meeting with people who sell out the U.S.'s secrets to, again, the greatest ally now?
Like, I don't think that's a reciprocal relationship.
I think that's exploitation.
And I don't think you should stand for that.
And I think Trump should basically look Netanyahu in the eye and say, if you keep screwing us over like this, the memorandum goes away.
If you keep screwing us over like this, actually, we're not going to intervene on your behalf in Iran and bomb it with a bunker buster.
Like, it's not to our interest for you to feel like that people can exploit our secrets and conduct criminal subterfuge in the United States on your country's behalf.
And then you can expect us to do you favors.
That's not the case.
And I think ultimately, it's right to point all of that out, to criticize it, to condemn it, and to say no more of this.
But then to say that Vance is going to continue it.
I actually don't think that's going to be the case.
I think the reason Trump's doing this is because he has Jewish family members and he, therefore, much like the historically backed colleges and being a boomer wanting to be liked by black people, he has this emotional affinity for Israel and so is willing to give them more grace than Israel's politicians have earned.
And I don't think Vance has the same thing.
I think Vance treats Israel like pretty much any other country.
I think he's got a sort of like Nalen Haley approach to it where he's like, all foreign interference is bad.
All foreign aid is bad.
Yeah, it turns out Israel takes a lot more foreign aid and has a lot more foreign interference than a lot of countries, but we can put them in the pile of, we're just going to get rid of all of that and be America first.
I mean, like you're saying, Trump, Trump is a boomer.
He's a baby boomer.
So they're all kind of have this baked in Zionism that just as naturally occurred because they grew up shortly after World War II.
They grew up in the, you know, the dust, the ashes settling from, you know, the Holocaust and these sorts of things.
And they were there as Israel was establishing itself and finding its footing.
And they were there as the alliance sort of formed between the United States and Israel.
So while they extend a lot of grace to Israel, I also extend grace to boomers because it's really hard for them to shake that versus JD Vance, obviously coming from a generation that I would say the millennials are probably at best ambivalent about Israel.
You don't really see this like huge anti-Israel coalition like you see among Zoomers with millennials.
Insofar as you do see it, typically it's from leftists, which is why a lot of older people are like, being anti-Israel is like means you're on the left because they're used to engaging with millennials versus Zoomers, who it's like kind of across the board in many ways.
You're very hard pressed to find a super vehemently pro-Israel Zoomer, right or left.
Dude, he is like the last guy, the last man standing.
You almost like want to see what he can cook up next because he's like a baby boomer in a young man's body.
It's very fascinating to watch.
My question, like, beyond, I mean, this is going to be unpacked at length, but like, what reason could Mike Huckby even possibly have to meet with Jonathan Pollard?
That question is why we should be generally skeptical of what is Israel actually offering the U.S. in 2025.
This is why Israel and pro-Israel contingent are losing control of the framing in the United States.
This is why they feel the need to launch this Groiper op where they describe anyone because most people to the right of Ted Cruz are kind of growing a little bit tired of our relationship with Israel.
And the impetus isn't on the pro-Israel kind of theory smart.
They wouldn't be launching ops to try and like trick people into thinking that any critique of immigration and a relationship with Israel makes you like a far-right extremist.
If they were smart, they would just articulate why they think we should be deepening our ties to Israel.
And they can't do that.
And I hate to say it to get you in trouble, but I don't hate to say it, but I just think it'd get you in trouble.
The reason for that is because there's not really that many good reasons to deepen our ties with Israel right now.
They're not really offering us much.
From my view, if we're bankrolling the existence of a country, they should be our client state in every way.
There's a lot of countries in Europe that understand this very well is that, look, if the Americans are paying for everything, then yeah, you kind of just do whatever they tell you to do.
Versus it seems like a lot of our foreign policy in the Middle East didn't really benefit us very much, but it was extremely beneficial to Israel.
Again, this isn't like a, oh, there's this overarching Cabal controlling everything because a lot of the support in Israel is driven by baby boomers and was driven by dispensationalists.
And they made up the good chunk of the voting base for the longest time.
But that voting base is shrinking.
The boomers, this is their first year now where they are going to be, their life expectancy has hit the oldest baby boomer.
So 46, the year Trump was born.
That is life expectancy.
If you're born in 1946, you're hitting your life expectancy right now.
So the boomers are now dropping off.
And dispensationalist theology is dropping off because that was very permeant with evangelical boomers.
Not really prevalent with Zoomers.
And there's a lot of evangelical Zoomers.
And it's obviously not prevalent within Catholics, which there's a huge insurgent of Catholics with Zoomers.
So yeah, if you're pro-Israel, maybe stop trying to run ops and again, like trick people into thinking there's something wrong with being critical of Israel.
And instead, I don't know, maybe try to come up with a solution, maybe push Israel to conduct their relationship with the United States slightly differently, come up with some better messaging for why people should support the country.
Because most of us are sitting here like, I don't get it.
I don't, whatever the baby boomers are seeing, I'm not really seeing.
And I can kind of just take the JD Vance approach, which is like trying to general ambivalence, right?
Like they're their own country.
They can handle their own affairs.
What's in it for us?
With that, we burned through an hour quick, man.
We fly through this.
It's in the new studio.
I think Timcast viewers will like to hear this.
This is a little trivia.
So, we've set up the Across the Pond/slash Tatecast studio in a trailer.
You probably can't tell from the background.
This is the trailer that the Joe Rogan Timcast IRL episode was shot in.
So, there's some history here in this trailer.
So, we got this set up to give us like a permanent space.
Everyone was complaining about the Inverted World Live studio because of the camera, which is set for Shane's vibe.
I mean, the aesthetic over there is pretty sick.
Didn't really work for the across the pond thing, but we're set up here.
Actually, put in a special request that you be put in the trailer outside the main studio so it makes it easier for Mossad to drone strike you after this episode.
I will, I will say that so people were questioning actually a little while ago why I took an Israel trip, and it's because I wanted insight into this particular problem because I have zero connection to this place.
And also, you know, as a Catholic, I wanted to see the holy sites before one side or the other bombs them to rubble.
And when I was asking them out there about the special memorandum and whether or not they realized that people want the aid cart, like there were a bunch of them that were saying, Yeah, we realize it kind of costs a shadow of doubt over whether or not we're a legitimate state, so we're kind of up for this.
Yeah, we want like a 10-year phasing out, and maybe we should move the money to a mutual investment pot.
And I was like, Number one, moronic idea: Americans just don't want to give you money, man, and they shouldn't.
But number two, they then still wanted like the unquestionable support from Americans without necessarily providing much back.
They just lent back on the sort of post-war liberal international tropes, or they were saying Israel is the soil in which Western civilization grew.
And if you're a Christian, you should therefore support the Jewish state.
And they continue to, I would say, contort theology in order to win the support of Christians.
And the reason I'm saying all this is because, as you say, if they want a continued relationship with the United States, it needs to be reciprocal and between friendly partners and not one based on exploitation or taking each other for granted.
And I just don't think they understand that.
And so I don't think that's going to happen.
I think I'm with Tim on this.
I think within a generation, support for Israel just goes extinct because whether from the third world or from a right-wing America first or British people first perspective, we're just not going to care about this strip of land in the Middle East.
We're going to care about our own countries being demographically swamped and impoverished and ruined by years of foreign adventurism.
As far as Beyond Final Thoughts, you can follow me at Con underscore Tomlinson on X. I'm on Connor Tomlinson on Substack and on YouTube.
And you guys can look forward to our upcoming episodes with special guest panelists that will be out tomorrow at the time that you're watching this and the following week.
I am receiving the call here, so I'm going to put my phone on silent, but we do need to wrap up so I can answer the call.
We're going to see what they want.
It's not necessarily Israel.
It could be a lot of countries.
I've put this out there.
I would lobby.
I think it'd be fun to lobby for kind of like a little more low-key country.
Like, I don't know, if I just get on here one day and I'm just really emphasizing the importance of like Tajikistan, I think that could be kind of fun.
So if you're from like a third rate country, kind of like a country without aura, hit my line.
Hit my lineup.
My DMs are open.
I'm willing to listen to offers.
The current standing offer is $7,000.
So you're going to have to either price map that or offer a bit more.
But hey, I'm a bit of a geopolitical whore.
I'll say it that way.
So with that, you can follow me on X and Instagram at RealTate Brown.
We will be back tomorrow with an episode with Charlie Downs, the Charlie Downs.
