The Culture War - Tim Pool - SCOTUS DEFIES Trump, May UPHOLD Illegal Alien Birthright Citizenship
Aired: 2026-04-01
Duration: 30:36


=== Trump Joins Supreme Court Arguments (15:15) ===

[00:00:00]  For the first time, a president has joined oral arguments at the Supreme Court.
[00:00:06]  Donald Trump listened in as attorneys argued before our highest court as to whether or not we should allow illegal immigrants to have children in this country and grant them citizenship.
[00:00:18]  And oh boy, was it contentious.
[00:00:21]  Now, many people are saying it may fall six to three.
[00:00:24]  It was really bad for Trump's side, for our side.
[00:00:28]  The argument coming from Roberts is.
[00:00:31]  The country may have changed, the world may have changed, but the Constitution remains the same, which presents many moral philosophical challenges for our nation.
[00:00:43]  The argument, I suppose, from John Roberts is that though a country may face an existential crisis, if the structure of such a country permits its own destruction, it must be destroyed.
[00:00:58]  I didn't say that explicitly, but that is the philosophy behind the arguments.
[00:01:03]  From a conservative judge who says, let the country be damned.
[00:01:09]  Now, of course, everyone's favorite Supreme Court justices, Thomas and Alito, seemed very much to agree or may lean more towards birthright citizenship was never supposed to extend to birth tourism companies or illegal immigrants.
[00:01:25]  The principal argument from the government is this even in Wong Kim Ark, which set the precedent that if you're born here, you're a citizen, they said you must be domiciled here.
[00:01:35]  What does that mean?
[00:01:36]  It means you live here, you have legal permanent residence, and the intention to stay.
[00:01:42]  Ergo, if you are here illegally, you are not domiciled here, you are not going to be granted citizenship.
[00:01:49]  The liberals, of course, we know exactly which direction they're going.
[00:01:53]  They're basically sitting there going, destroy America.
[00:01:57]  I'm kidding, guys, it's a joke.
[00:01:59]  And as much as Katanji Brown Jackson gets ragged on and people insult her arguments, I'm actually going to give her some defense.
[00:02:07]  She made a comment about being in Japan and owing temporary allegiance to the Japanese.
[00:02:14]  And thus, if allegiance is a requirement for birthright citizenship, then you're going to get it.
[00:02:22]  Your children will be citizens because you are temporarily allegiant to this country.
[00:02:27]  But the big issue with her argument that I'll push back on, of course, is that the times they are a change in, and allegiance as viewed back then is substantively different to what allegiance is today.
[00:02:40]  If we are going purely on the shape of the world today, Katanji Brown Jackson's and Roberts' arguments clash and don't quite make sense.
[00:02:49]  Roberts' argument is the Constitution remains the same even if the times change.
[00:02:55]  Katanji Brown Jackson's arguments are no, because the times changed, we will apply the Constitution differently.
[00:03:03]  Oh boy.
[00:03:04]  The end result is this, my friends the Supreme Court seems largely skeptical of ending birthright citizenship, but.
[00:03:12]  It's still possible to get a five to four ruling under the assumption that Roberts actually sides with the liberals.
[00:03:19]  And thus, if that is the case, I will reiterate it would appear the moral philosophy of John Roberts is as such a nation that structurally allows its own destruction must be destroyed.
[00:03:34]  It would appear to me, based on listening to these arguments, that Chief Justice Roberts is basically saying this country must be ended.
[00:03:42]  Because think about it logically.
[00:03:45]  If your nation allows Chinese birth tourism, and this is the principal crux of the argument, they allow people to fly to Guam, give birth, and fly back, and there's an estimated over 1 million Chinese nationals in China.
[00:04:00]  That are eligible to be president of the United States.
[00:04:04]  And Robert's argument is so what?
[00:04:08]  The Constitution allows it.
[00:04:11]  Well, there's a simple logic there.
[00:04:13]  I mean, they're an adversary.
[00:04:14]  Are we really going to let them come in?
[00:04:17]  So be it.
[00:04:18]  Let's jump right in, and I'll present to you the latest updates on where this is all going.
[00:04:22]  It's not a done deal, my friends, but interesting nonetheless.
[00:04:27]  Before we get started, of course, head over to timcast.com and join now.
[00:04:33]  Get in our Discord community.
[00:04:35]  Tens of thousands of people hanging out every day.
[00:04:37]  It is not what you know, it's who you know.
[00:04:41]  And if you're trying to build a new system, maybe start a business, make a comic, write a song, fix a car, this is a network of people that will help you move in the right direction.
[00:04:51]  The sad thing to me is that I hear many Gen Z say that they can't figure out where to meet people or how to build community or get involved.
[00:04:58]  Hey, it's not perfect, but there are like minded individuals who, and maybe some people might argue with you.
[00:05:04]  They're all in this Discord, and it's a great place to start.
[00:05:07]  But most importantly, you're supporting the work we do.
[00:05:09]  Without you as members, we would not be able to do this, and that's a fact.
[00:05:13]  So all that matters is if you think this video is important and you like the work that I do, join us at timcast.com.
[00:05:21]  Here's the updates from CNN Supreme Court skeptical of Trump's birthright citizenship order.
[00:05:28]  Several justices, including those Trump appointed, aggressively question the president's effort to reimagine.
[00:05:35]  Birthright citizenship.
[00:05:36]  Now, CNN, I love what you're doing.
[00:05:38]  You're not news.
[00:05:40]  This is not a reimagining.
[00:05:41]  It's an argument.
[00:05:43]  That's it.
[00:05:44]  An argument made that we are not actually upholding the Constitution.
[00:05:49]  And an argument made by the ACLU, the others, that we are.
[00:05:53]  That's it.
[00:05:54]  It's not a reimagining.
[00:05:55]  It's a hey, guys, you're doing it wrong.
[00:05:57]  Well, CNN reports Supreme Court justices expressed skepticism during oral arguments over President Donald Trump's executive order that attempts to end automatic birthright citizenship.
[00:06:08]  The case puts the admin's aggressive approach to immigration front and center before the court.
[00:06:12]  The president attended the arguments for about 90 minutes, the first sitting president to do so.
[00:06:18]  Arguments have focused on the history and meaning of the 14th Amendment, which states that all persons born or naturalized in the U.S. and subject to the jurisdiction thereof are citizens of the U.S.
[00:06:28]  Now, what does that really mean?
[00:06:30]  It's simple.
[00:06:31]  The intention at the time, and I think this is the reasonable approach, is that we had a bunch of slaves, the war had ended, slavery was done.
[00:06:39]  There were even people who were brought here illegally who didn't want to be here but did live here now.
[00:06:44]  And so he said, guys, all of the people that were born here or naturalized, they're citizens, okay?
[00:06:49]  All right?
[00:06:49]  It was descriptive, not prescriptive.
[00:06:53]  They said, actually, the senator who wrote the amendment, this will not, of course, apply to foreigners, aliens, the children of diplomats or foreign ministers.
[00:07:03]  Yet here we are.
[00:07:05]  Here we are.
[00:07:06]  You get 50 some odd years or 40 or so years later, Wong Kim Ark.
[00:07:12]  Chinese immigrants who were here legally domiciled in the US had a kid and they said, Is that kid a citizen?
[00:07:17]  They went, Yeah, okay.
[00:07:19]  But how does that mean that someone can run across the border illegally, give birth, and then that kid gets to be president in 35 years?
[00:07:27]  Like they're eligible to be president.
[00:07:29]  But we have naturalized citizens who came here, studied, and believe in the American dream who can't even be president.
[00:07:35]  But that Chinese kid whose parents flew to Guam, gave birth, and flew back to China, that's legal?
[00:07:43]  Does any sane person think the founding fathers wanted this to be the case?
[00:07:48]  Well, apparently, John Roberts, as I already stated, has outright looked into the eyes of the Solicitor General saying, Your country shall burn.
[00:07:56]  I know I'm a little heated on this one, but when you hear this, it is shockingly offensive, in my opinion.
[00:08:02]  They go on to say, Trump has continued slamming this.
[00:08:05]  He says, We are the only country in the world stupid enough to allow birthright citizenship.
[00:08:11]  About 30 other countries also allow birthright citizenship.
[00:08:15]  That is a lie.
[00:08:18]  You see what CNN does?
[00:08:19]  We call this factual but not truthful.
[00:08:23]  The United States is the only country where you can enter illegally and give birth.
[00:08:30]  Sure, 30 other countries have birthright citizenship, but there are requirements that must be upheld.
[00:08:36]  And this is actually what the Solicitor General is asking for.
[00:08:39]  Meaning, if you're on a tourism visa and you give birth, that kid would be a citizen in some circumstances, I would argue.
[00:08:47]  So there are countries that allow birthright citizenship, but it's basically because your parents are citizens and you're born here, you're a citizen.
[00:08:55]  That's not how it works in the United States.
[00:08:57]  Here's where it gets downright crazy.
[00:09:02]  Listen to this insanity.
[00:09:05]  Based on Chinese media reports, there are 500.
[00:09:09]  500 birth tourism companies in the People's Republic of China whose business is to bring people here to give birth and return to that nation.
[00:09:19]  Having said all that, you do agree that that has no impact on the legal analysis before us?
[00:09:25]  I think it's, I quote what Justice Scalia said in his Hamdan dissent, where their interpretation has these implications that could not possibly have been approved by the 19th century framers of this amendment.
[00:09:38]  I think that shows that their interpretation has made a mess of the provision.
[00:09:42]  Well, it certainly wasn't a problem in the 19th century.
[00:09:46]  No, but of course, we're in a new world now, as Justice Alito pointed out, where 8 billion people are one plane ride away from having a child who's a U.S. citizen.
[00:09:54]  Well, it's a new world.
[00:09:55]  It's the same Constitution.
[00:09:58]  It is.
[00:09:59]  And as Justice Scalia said, I think in the case that Justice Alito was referring to, you've got a constitutional provision that addresses certain evils, and it should be extended to reasonably comparable evils.
[00:10:09]  He said that about statutory interpretation.
[00:10:10]  I think the same principle applies here, and I think we quote that in our brief.
[00:10:13]  Thank you.
[00:10:14]  Absolutely incredible.
[00:10:16]  Let me read through the quotes again.
[00:10:17]  The Solicitor General for the United States says China has 500 birth tourism companies to bring people here to give birth and return.
[00:10:25]  Most famously, they fly to Guam.
[00:10:28]  It's cheap.
[00:10:28]  They land, give birth, head back.
[00:10:31]  Then, 30 years later, that Chinese individual serving the Chinese Communist Party, allegiant only to communism, can come to the United States and be like, I'm an American.
[00:10:40]  Yep.
[00:10:41]  That's psychotic.
[00:10:43]  And what is Robert's response?
[00:10:45]  That has no impact on the legal analysis.
[00:10:48]  It actually does.
[00:10:50]  And I think Sauer's correct.
[00:10:52]  When you go back to the 19th century, this was not a component of the discussion they had.
[00:10:59]  Certainly, they could not address that issue.
[00:11:01]  Therefore, it must be addressed now.
[00:11:05]  I'd make a similar argument for the Second Amendment.
[00:11:07]  The only difference, first, as liberals come on and say, oh, yeah, then make that argument for the Second Amendment.
[00:11:15]  The issue of the Second Amendment is not an issue of the conquering of a nation and the collapse of the system therein.
[00:11:21]  Whether or not an individual can own a machine gun has no bearing on whether or not our government functions.
[00:11:29]  If our enemies can bring their children here and take over our system of governance, we don't exist.
[00:11:37]  Now you may say, but Tim, if regular old people can get machine guns, they can take over government too.
[00:11:44]  Well, the issue there is the government always has bigger machine guns, isn't it?
[00:11:48]  And I actually don't think that that argument is applicable.
[00:11:52]  Whether or not citizens allegiant to a country can be armed has no bearing on whether or not there is a capability to defend that nation from an armed population.
[00:12:01]  Sounds like it's a legislative issue.
[00:12:03]  The issue where our country constitutionally allows our enemies to bring their children here, give birth, and then in 30 years, those people will be lording over the people of this country.
[00:12:16]  That is psychotic and it will be the end of the United States.
[00:12:21]  Now, I don't know for sure that John Roberts actually will ultimately side against this argument.
[00:12:30]  We will see.
[00:12:31]  But it certainly does seem that to be the case.
[00:12:34]  Now, Katanji Brown Jackson made some interesting points.
[00:12:37]  I actually respect this a little bit.
[00:12:38]  And I'm going to break this down for you.
[00:12:39]  One of the more interesting points made in the structure of the argument from the government is actually quite simple.
[00:12:44]  Wong Kim Ark, the famous 1800s ruling by the Supreme Court, it was like 1898, I think, stated that a child born to Chinese immigrants who are legally here, who are domiciled here, I should say, I believe they may have overstayed their visa, but they were here and domiciled under a legitimate process, that this individual who was born would be an American citizen because they were here.
[00:13:05]  Under our, they were alleged to this country, domiciled.
[00:13:09]  And it specifically states several times in Won Kimark, domiciled, which the government is arguing means you must be here legally, living here with the intention to stay here.
[00:13:20]  I think that makes sense.
[00:13:21]  That means if there is a Chinese couple, they get American visas, they come here, and they are here living legally, maybe it's a two year visa, and have a kid, that kid's a citizen.
[00:13:31]  Now, that does still mean people can come and exploit the law, but it dramatically reduces people coming here as tourists.
[00:13:40]  For birth.
[00:13:41]  Now, that being said, as I already said, some instances tourism would still be allowed to have kids become citizens.
[00:13:46]  It would just eliminate birth tourism.
[00:13:47]  It would give leeway to the government to say no to certain things.
[00:13:50]  But there are some people who come here on a tourism visa and they may come here and then begin a process where they seek to be permanently domiciled and make an argument that they're going to stay, they're going to apply for advances, something like that.
[00:14:04]  Rare and not necessarily the point, but possible.
[00:14:07]  Now, Katanji Brown Jackson brings up the issue of allegiance, what it means to be domiciled.
[00:14:12]  And she's getting mocked for this, but.
[00:14:15]  Guys, let me play.
[00:14:17]  I was thinking about this, and I think there are various sources that say this that you can have, you obviously have permanent allegiance based on being born in whatever country you're from.
[00:14:30]  So the argument here is if you are not allegiant to a country, can you be granted citizenship?
[00:14:35]  This is the question in the Fourth Amendment pertaining to jurisdiction of, meaning if you are born or naturalized and subject to the jurisdiction thereof.
[00:14:44]  Subject to the jurisdiction means you have allegiance to that nation and no one else.
[00:14:48]  Well, Here's an interesting argument.
[00:14:50]  That's what everybody recognizes.
[00:14:52]  But you also have local allegiance when you are on the soil of this other sovereign.
[00:14:59]  And I was thinking, you know, I, a U.S. citizen, am visiting Japan.
[00:15:04]  And what it means is that, you know, if I steal someone's wallet in Japan, the Japanese authorities can arrest me and prosecute me.

=== Immigrant Children and Democratic Votes (07:13) ===

[00:15:16]  It's allegiance, meaning can they control you?
[00:15:20]  As a matter of law, I can also rely on them if my wallet is stolen to, you know, under Japanese law, go and prosecute the person who has stolen it.
[00:15:30]  So there's this relationship based on, even though I'm a temporary traveler, I'm just on vacation in Japan, I'm still locally owing allegiance in that sense.
[00:15:43]  She's not wrong.
[00:15:45]  She's not wrong.
[00:15:46]  The issue is that times have changed.
[00:15:49]  And if you go back to the 1800s, Native Americans, Mexicans, Canadians, Would move through the United States and they would not be allegiant.
[00:15:59]  They could be coming through as bandidos.
[00:16:02]  Imagine a guy on horseback from Mexico storming into Texas, firing a gun, bang, bang, and then he shoots a guy, but he's subject to our laws.
[00:16:09]  Yeah, we're going to stop him.
[00:16:11]  Well, that means he's allegiant and now his kids are citizens.
[00:16:15]  What?
[00:16:16]  Okay, here's the ultimate point.
[00:16:18]  Katanji Brown Jackson isn't wrong with the definition of allegiance in the law dictionary.
[00:16:23]  Allegiance is meant to the obligation of fidelity and obedience which the individual owes to the government under which he lives or to his sovereign in return for the protection he receives.
[00:16:33]  It may be an absolute and permanent obligation, or it may be qualified and temporary.
[00:16:38]  The citizen or subject owes an absolute and permanent allegiance to his government or sovereign, or at least until by some open and distinct act he renounces it.
[00:16:45]  They go on to mention this is from Carlisle v. U.S., and aliens, while domiciled in the country, owe temporary allegiance.
[00:16:51]  Now, I want to defend Katanji Brown Jackson because I'm a nice guy.
[00:16:56]  And she does make an apt point about temporary allegiance and how we recognize that in law.
[00:17:01]  The only problem is that's literally the argument of the government and the Solicitor General.
[00:17:06]  That people who come here legally and are domiciled here legally are allegiant because we have an agreement, a relationship.
[00:17:14]  But if you come here illegally, you are clearly stating your intent of no allegiance to our laws and government.
[00:17:22]  You have entered the country violating our laws.
[00:17:26]  We are now going to remove you.
[00:17:27]  There's a great point made by Alito when he said if an illegal immigrant is subject to removal at any time, they are certainly not domiciled here.
[00:17:37]  Therefore, their children would not be.
[00:17:40]  Citizens.
[00:17:42]  Indeed.
[00:17:43]  Katanji Brown Jackson masterfully making the point for the Solicitor General and the United States.
[00:17:49]  We all agree.
[00:17:51]  If you have a functional legal relationship where my country and your country say we'll provide protection to certain degrees for our citizens and uphold those laws, you are allegiant based on the agreement you made when you applied for your visa or through a visa waiver program.
[00:18:10]  The problem is.
[00:18:12]  She's still only arguing for birth tourism, and her argument would still eliminate illegal immigrants having kids in this country.
[00:18:22]  Getting citizenship, I should say.
[00:18:24]  My friends, we are truly living in some of the dumbest times.
[00:18:28]  I'm going to tell you about the darkness now.
[00:18:31]  The darkness, the reason why the Democrats want this, it is impossible for this nation to survive should we continue to allow birthright citizenship, and we have already seen the ill effects of this for some time.
[00:18:42]  When Roberts stands up on a pedestal and says, The rules of this country, though they may permit its own destruction, shall be upheld to the destruction of this country.
[00:18:52]  That's fascinating.
[00:18:53]  Yeah.
[00:18:54]  Well, sooner or later, a generation will say no.
[00:18:57]  And I think you will find Gen Z saying no more and more.
[00:19:02]  And they will say, I don't care what you've written down.
[00:19:04]  I don't.
[00:19:06]  And that's true for anything.
[00:19:08]  Leftists might say the same thing for the Ninth and Tenth Amendments.
[00:19:12]  The federal government will take over and control the states.
[00:19:14]  It will be one nation ruled by us because sooner or later the system breaks.
[00:19:20]  It is a fact.
[00:19:21]  The founding fathers did not intend for a system where our adversaries and foreigners would come to this country, have kids, and those kids would be able to hold government, positions of government.
[00:19:29]  That our adversaries could infiltrate and have no allegiance, resisting arrest, resisting the law.
[00:19:37]  I think the fact remains this to Kataji Brown Jackson's argument individuals who come here and evade law enforcement certainly have expressed no allegiance to our system or country.
[00:19:50]  Simple as that.
[00:19:51]  Now, you might argue that people who come here on legitimate visas to have kids, well, at least they've completely abided by the rules in the system.
[00:20:00]  She's at a halfway point.
[00:20:02]  Well, our country will not exist if this persists.
[00:20:04]  That's the truth.
[00:20:06]  The United States will not exist.
[00:20:09]  Foreign born, first generation immigrants who naturalize tend to vote Democrat.
[00:20:14]  Pre 2024 polling often showed them favoring Democrats.
[00:20:17]  Children of immigrants tend to mean Democrat.
[00:20:20]  Third generation often moderate towards the center or right.
[00:20:23]  This is the point.
[00:20:24]  It's not about illegal immigrants voting, it's about bringing in illegal immigrants who have kids.
[00:20:29]  Those kids then entertain the policies set before them.
[00:20:33]  Those of the noble American tradition tend to be Republican, where they say, My grandfather built this town with his bare hands so that we could all live better.
[00:20:44]  And I will not give that away.
[00:20:46]  And the Democrats look to the child of immigrants and say, Hey, what about your parents?
[00:20:51]  They want free stuff too, right?
[00:20:53]  Vote for me.
[00:20:54]  And it's exactly what happened in California after amnesty.
[00:20:57]  Fascinating thing happened that turned California from a reliable Republican state into a Democrat state.
[00:21:02]  And that is, my friends.
[00:21:05]  Reagan's all like, we got to give amnesty.
[00:21:09]  And then he does.
[00:21:10]  Then you get a bunch of young people whose parents and grandparents are illegal immigrants.
[00:21:15]  And so then, in the early 90s, a vote is held.
[00:21:19]  Shall we remove access to public resources from illegal immigrants?
[00:21:24]  And these children who receive naturalization go, no, because my mom wants free stuff.
[00:21:32]  Plain and simple.
[00:21:33]  And so these children voted Democrats.
[00:21:37]  Because Democrats promised to give away the American dream.
[00:21:40]  And that's what's happened for Gen Z.
[00:21:42]  Now, unfortunately, the lefty wackaloons think the American dream is being curtailed by wealthy individuals who own businesses, which, don't get me wrong, they have their faults indeed, but that's not the real reason.
[00:21:54]  We are looking at in New York, hotels being propped up for illegal immigrants.
[00:21:59]  We are looking at housing programs and free medical care for illegal immigrants in California.
[00:22:04]  In Illinois, they've set up camps for illegal immigrants.
[00:22:08]  Meanwhile, young people are left homeless.
[00:22:11]  Without jobs or opportunities, and they are struggling.
[00:22:14]  Indeed, my friends, the American dream is being given away to non citizens because it guarantees Democrats win power.
[00:22:21]  So they will burn the whole thing down if they can but extract a little bit of wealth while they do it.
[00:22:28]  And people like John Roberts will sit there and say, So what?

=== Fraudulent Daycare Lawsuits Exposed (02:32) ===

[00:22:32]  Those are the rules.
[00:22:34]  Okay.
[00:22:35]  By all means, you do you.
[00:22:38]  But be warned, if the rules are as such, Sooner or later, the people come with torches and pitchforks.
[00:22:44]  And that's something we desperately do not want.
[00:22:48]  Unfortunately, what do we see?
[00:22:52]  Feeding our future defendant, sentenced to over one year in prison.
[00:22:55]  CBS says the case that started it all.
[00:22:58]  The COVID era $250 million scheme.
[00:23:01]  The group claimed to work with restaurants and caterers to distribute meals to schools and other groups, but instead submitted fake meal counts.
[00:23:07]  My, oh my.
[00:23:09]  Early on, Minnesota officials questioned some of the group's filings and slowed approvals of reimbursements.
[00:23:15]  Prompting Feeding Our Future to file a lawsuit.
[00:23:18]  The state's auditor office found that the threat of legal consequence and negative media tension affected the state's decision-making process.
[00:23:24]  What federal prosecutors called the largest pandemic-era fraud in the United States is just the tip of the very iceberg, of a very large iceberg.
[00:23:30]  Here's the fraud in the housing program, autism program fraud, fraud claims against daycares.
[00:23:36]  YouTuber Nick Shirley drew tens of millions of views in late December when he posted a video that showed him visiting federally supported child care centers around Minneapolis and finding no children present.
[00:23:45]  He alleged nearly a dozen daycare centers were not actually providing any service and suggested owners were pocketing taxpayer funds.
[00:23:52]  CBS conducted its own analysis and visited several of the daycare centers.
[00:23:56]  All but two have active licenses, according to state records.
[00:24:00]  One was subjected to an unannounced inspection.
[00:24:02]  Our review found dozens of citations related to safety, cleanliness, equipment, staff training.
[00:24:07]  Another daycare shared security footage of people dropping off young children the same day that Shirley arrived and claimed the daycare was empty.
[00:24:13]  Minnesota's Office of Inspector General carried out on site compliance checks at the time.
[00:24:17]  Eight of the centers had children present, and one had not opened yet when it was inspected.
[00:24:23]  Shirley's viral video prompted the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to freeze funding to these daycares.
[00:24:31]  Trump has largely blamed the Somali community.
[00:24:34]  Tim Waltz has drawn widespread scrutiny for his handling of the fraud in the state.
[00:24:38]  What we know is this I have no problem saying that not everything Shirley showed was proven to be fraud.
[00:24:44]  That's fine.
[00:24:45]  But he found empty medical facilities, buildings where it's like, here we provide medical care, and the buildings are all empty, no clients, nothing.
[00:24:52]  He's repeated this in California.
[00:24:55]  The issue?
[00:24:56]  We know that Somalis are funneling huge amounts of cash out of the state and back to Somalia.

=== Racial Tensions and Community Fear (05:23) ===

[00:25:01]  They have no allegiance to this country.
[00:25:03]  Many of them are here through fraud, not all of them.
[00:25:06]  Ilhan Omar has been accused of using immigration fraud to get her brother access to the United States, which would subject her to denaturalization, according to the INA.
[00:25:15]  When you bring in people who are not allegiant to this country in the true sense of the word, meaning they don't care, they will extract from you and they will burn your country down.
[00:25:25]  There are people who came here from Nigeria.
[00:25:27]  They worked really hard.
[00:25:28]  They filed their paperwork.
[00:25:29]  They bought plane tickets.
[00:25:31]  They flew in, were greeted with a smile.
[00:25:33]  They shook hands with the people when they arrived, with the administrators, and they said, Welcome to America.
[00:25:38]  Did you know that these people make over $100,000 a year?
[00:25:41]  Nigerians.
[00:25:42]  There's a really funny video that went viral.
[00:25:45]  It's a black man, and he's sitting with a white kid and then like a Pakistani dude, like a pale, lighter skinned South Asian.
[00:25:54]  And they're doing a chat roulette with a young black guy.
[00:25:58]  And the young black guy says, You gotta give me your black card because you're sitting here with two white boys.
[00:26:03]  And then the Middle Eastern, like South Asian guy goes, There's only one white dude here.
[00:26:08]  And then the black dude says, I'm not one of you street kids.
[00:26:12]  I'm Congolese.
[00:26:14]  None of this.
[00:26:15]  And then he speaks Congolese or whatever the language is to the black kid and he calls him a racial slur.
[00:26:22]  The point is this not to get into like the racial drama, whatever.
[00:26:28]  There are people around the world who come here legally as immigrants and they love this country and they learn English and they look for work and they are proud to have made it to taste the American dream.
[00:26:39]  And I love it.
[00:26:41]  This young man saying, I'm not a street punk like you.
[00:26:46]  Man, not to rag on that young kid or anything, but I respect the guy who says, I will be a respectable man and I will uphold the values of this country.
[00:26:55]  The immigrants who come here legally, I have such tremendous respect for them.
[00:27:00]  That's fantastic.
[00:27:02]  They come here legally, they get permanent residency, maybe citizenship.
[00:27:05]  If you're a permanent resident and you have a kid or your kid's a citizen, congratulations.
[00:27:09]  Thank you for coming legally and fighting for our values.
[00:27:13]  Now, it's not always that way.
[00:27:15]  Some come here legally and they're bad people.
[00:27:16]  I get that.
[00:27:18]  But I say, legally, what we end up with, damning breakdown of California's alleged fraud and where cash is being burned.
[00:27:29]  People who come to this country because they want to extract from it, they want to steal from us, from our goodwill.
[00:27:37]  Never again, my friends.
[00:27:39]  We can't allow this.
[00:27:40]  But I'll only say this if it is true the Supreme Court is leaning against the government on this one, I'll tell you what's going to happen.
[00:27:49]  Now, it can manifest a couple different ways, but the first thing is that young Gen Z Americans will not tolerate this, and you will probably get insurgency.
[00:27:59]  It may turn into a revolution.
[00:28:03]  Where Americans finally just say no more.
[00:28:07]  We don't care what the law says, we will not be destroyed.
[00:28:10]  I will not watch my home be given away.
[00:28:15]  It may become that the government is just filled with foreigners, the children of foreigners, immigrants to this country.
[00:28:24]  They send remittances back to their home country.
[00:28:26]  Resources get extracted.
[00:28:28]  Quality of life breaks down.
[00:28:31]  Crime escalates.
[00:28:33]  And then everyone's just generally pissed off all the time until the system breaks because there's nothing left to extract and China becomes a dominant unipolar power.
[00:28:40]  It's possible.
[00:28:41]  In that system, you may have insurgency from American restoration groups that ultimately fail.
[00:28:49]  But this seems to be the direction that we're going.
[00:28:51]  I think it's one thing that may be possible that America just becomes this de facto global citizen lump where you'll have small pockets all over the country that represent different communities like Dearborn, Michigan, or the Somali community in Minnesota.
[00:29:07]  You'll have Latinos from other countries in Miami, and the United States will just be a fractured, balkanized land.
[00:29:15]  There will not be an American people.
[00:29:17]  But the Communist Party of China will take over with the Belt and Road Initiative, and there you go.
[00:29:22]  Should that happen?
[00:29:23]  I say no.
[00:29:25]  I think Sauer is correct when he said to John Roberts that there are evils that we must stop.
[00:29:35]  That the point is if the founders and the framers did not or were not able to address this, The court must address it now.
[00:29:45]  I didn't ask a question about nuclear weapons.
[00:29:48]  I said that.
[00:29:48]  I said the Second Amendment allows for it.
[00:29:50]  It shouldn't, but it does.
[00:29:53]  So, how about we change that?
[00:29:55]  Maybe the Supreme Court could weigh in on whether nuclear arms are allowed because keeping and bearing arms is allowed.
[00:30:01]  Hey, look, people had privateers back then.
[00:30:05]  If the people are unable, if the government is unwilling, your system's going to break down.
[00:30:12]  The only thing that'll happen is that someone with power will come and make it happen.
[00:30:15]  Maybe that's Trump.
[00:30:16]  I'm going to wrap it there, my friend.
[00:30:18]  Smash the like button, share the show with everyone you know.
[00:30:22]  More segments coming up throughout the day.
[00:30:23]  Thank you so much for hanging out, and we will see you all next time.