Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

July 26, 2024 - Fresh & Fit

01:21:17

Trump Assassination, Congressional Hearings w/ ‪Destiny‬ & Castle Club Members

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Don't go in.
	Don't do this particular thing.
	Stop this now or go home instead of, again, waiting and capitalizing on the violence by making phone calls to people.
	Remember, when McCarthy called him, Donald Trump literally said, sounds like these people are a hell of a lot more mad than you are about this.
	Like, this is a man who is taking advantage of the violence every step of the way.
	You can't possibly look at this guy and think, man, he really wanted them to be peaceful when he's taking advantage of the violence the whole time and doing nothing to stop it when it's easily within his power to do so.
	So, since you say then that, you know, he essentially all but called for the insurrection by, you know, choosing his words carefully or, you know, however you want to say it, that my counter question to that would be, how could someone in his position want to peacefully protest The results of the election without you then saying it was an insurrection,
	being that it was the people at the site who ended up being violent, not because he called for it, it just turned into that.
	So how could Trump have otherwise called for a peaceful protest without you saying it was an insurrection?
	Well, one is sending them to the place where the vote was being certified is already a huge red flag, number one.
	Number two is you've spent really months getting all these people to believe that the election was stolen with no evidence.
	Number three is you've used multiple parts of your government to engage in lies over and over again about there being evidence of voter fraud, which there wasn't, and he knowingly lied about all of these things.
	And four, there's probably never an appropriate way to protest the certification of the vote.
	Because at that point, you're not protesting voter fraud.
	You're not protesting a court's decision.
	You're literally protesting the certification of the election.
	The electors already voted on the 14th of December.
	The election itself was already held on the 3rd of November.
	At that point, what are you protesting?
	You're just protesting the certification of the vote, the peaceful transfer of power.
	Okay.
	All right, who's up next?
	And then I'll go to my topic that I was going to ask you guys because I just want to shift the conversation a little bit, make it more interesting.
	James McFarlane, go ahead.
	And we're back up on YouTube.
	Myron, I do have tonight, I do have a hard out at 11.
	Oh shit, Eastern Standard Time or Central?
	Yep, Eastern Time, yep.
	Oh shit, so you got 10 minutes left.
	Yep.
	Okay, no worries, man.
	That's fine.
	We'll just finish answering these questions and we'll try to speed through as many of them as we can.
	Alright, y'all call me while I'm taking a dump, but fuck it.
	Alright, so just to give...
	I'm gonna do a little statement and a question.
	But my statement is...
	I gotta admit, I personally, like, I fuck with both Destiny and Andrew as far as both ends of the aisle reign, like, debating-wise in the U2 sphere.
	I typically think Destiny has more intellectual, valid points, but throughout this little conversation y'all had, I think Andrew bodied you, and that's because of, like, I mean, that hippie statement, bro...
	If people are out all protesting, they're billing every four of your things...
	Best and worst dinner for your waistline.
	Sweet potatoes...
	Sorry about that, guys.
	Continue on.
	I don't know.
	As far as those four points are, if they're all protesting for weed, you're considering that an insurrection?
	It's like, if that's your definition, then an insurrection, alright, who gives a fuck about who's having an insurrection?
	That shit is not as serious as you're trying to make it, if it's as simple as something like that.
	I mean, maybe you don't think an insurrection is a big deal.
	That's fine.
	But people probably shouldn't be gathering to violently try to overturn laws in this country.
	We've got a process for it.
	I knew that was going to be a rebuttal.
	But so why are you trying to equate that with a group of people smoking weed against a weed law?
	Like...
	I'm not equating.
	Don't make both of those insurrections.
	I never made both of them the same, but an insurrection is an insurrection.
	I can show you examples of rape that are far more atrocious than other examples of rape.
	That doesn't make one not rape.
	Any crime can be done with more severity than another crime.
	That doesn't make it not a crime.
	It doesn't make it not a thing.
	And a bunch of people smoking weed against a weed law doesn't make them trying to overthrow the government.
	I agree.
	I don't think it does, a bunch of people.
	But would you agree that if a bunch of people smoked weed and they all decided they were going to show up and break into Congress to try to prevent them from passing some new law?
	That was the argument you made, though.
	The argument he made was if a bunch of hippies did all four of those arguments you made, and the one thing against the law that they were suppressing, because I was going to say this, too.
	Andrew's argument against the suppression versus doing illegal activities, doing a riot, that was his stupid fault for his argument as well.
	Wait, hold on.
	To be clear, wait.
	Andrew didn't say they were just smoking.
	Andrew said they were setting for us on fire.
	No, no, no.
	I'm not talking about that in general.
	I'm talking about Andrew was talking about, like, oh, they're committing crimes during their riot or whatever, and you were saying that's not them going against a law.
	Like, I'm agreeing with both of you in both of what you're saying, but...
	In his specific argument when he said those people are trying to smoke weed, I'm a little drunk right now, too, so my words are as coherent.
	But when he's saying they were going against smoking weed and there's a bunch of hippies getting together and smoking weed, you can't equate that to people overthrowing the government and say, yeah, that's insurrection if that's going with my definition.
	Yeah, smoking weed wouldn't be an insurrection.
	A crowd of people smoking weed wouldn't be an insurrection.
	Even if it covers all four of your bases that you were saying?
	One of them is by force or intimidation in order to overturn a law.
	So they'd have to be rioting.
	They'd have to be causing violence in order to get people to overturn a law.
	So if they were doing that while smoking weed and their reason was smoking weed, that's an insurrection?
	If a bunch of people showed up at Capitol Hill and they said that we're going to engage in violent conduct...
	It doesn't have to be Capitol Hill.
	Why does it have to be Capitol Hill?
	I mean, it doesn't necessarily...
	I'm just giving an example.
	It could be anywhere.
	And I'm more of your fan.
	I'm just...
	Sure.
	I mean, I guess it could be anywhere.
	If they engaged somewhere and they wanted to go and do a whole...
	Maybe it could be a state...
	I don't know.
	Maybe it could be a fucking neighborhood of, like, anti-pot smokers or whatever.
	And they're like, we're going to go here, and we're going to start rioting and burning houses down because we want to have the fucking weed laws changed.
	It is bullshit that these motherfuckers, like, took weed from us, and they engaged in that behavior.
	I'd say, yeah, that's an insurrection.
	You've got an assembly of people that are trying to use violence, and then you're trying to change the laws, you know, that are affecting publicly everybody.
	Like, yeah, that's an insurrection.
	You're insurrecting the government.
	That's not the process by which we change the laws.
	Would you agree that insurrection is not that serious in that case then?
	No, I think insurrection is incredibly serious.
	You don't want people thinking that they can get laws changed in the country by doing violent riots.
	That's horrible.
	So you don't think the definition of that should be changed or the words should be changed for an overthrowing of the government based off of your definition?
	Like your definition of crossing the cross, many boundaries.
	Yeah, no.
	No.
	If you've got a bunch of people, even if they smoke weed, if they're committing acts of violence as a big group in order to pressure people to change laws, no, I don't think that's like a not serious thing.
	I think it's a really serious thing.
	You think a bunch of people gathering together smoking weed.
	If police come to try to control that situation, they start protesting against it as a part of groupthink.
	Like, this is common psychology.
	Like, it takes one person to go against police for a bunch of people to do that.
	You think those people are equivalent to people trying to overthrow government?
	No, I don't think so.
	No, but I don't know if that would even count as an insurrection.
	It was just a bunch of people that got together and they're smoking weed or whatever, and is it bringing in a riot?
	No, I don't think that that would necessarily be an insurrection.
	But they got together against that law against weed.
	They've gotten violent or threatening, the way you said.
	It's crossing every...
	Four points in here.
	Okay, hold on.
	You know what?
	This is the argument I would make, also.
	And if any other caller wants to say this, I'm going to flip this on them.
	If somebody wants to give a different positive definition, then fine, go for it.
	But, like, I'm not going to sit here and play through every single of, like, the most absurd hypotheticals you can give me.
	If you want to argue against me, you're arguing against the historical and judicial record in the United States.
	If you want to give another definition of insurrection, that's fine.
	But it can't just be, what if two people go into the forest and they say, fuck the government, and they kick a federally-owned tree as hard as possible in order to...
	Like, it's...
	Yeah, I mean, we can probably find definitions around the edges that are like, well, I don't know.
	I mean, I guess technically this would be an insurrection, maybe it wouldn't qualify, but I'm not going to—yeah, if you want to give an alternate positive definition for it, then we can critique that one.
	I mean, that's my main point.
	This is the one that exists in the historical record.
	My main point was you could technically say a bunch of things was an insurrection, so let's not—like, if that's the case, then an insurrection, the word insurrection is not that serious.
	It's very serious just because there's a name for this.
	I don't know if it's the continuum fallacy or what, but just because you can't concretely define it every single edge of a particular thing doesn't mean that you can say, well, that thing doesn't exist or it's not very serious.
	That's just not true.
	We can imagine a ton of crimes that are very serious and not serious that are the same crime.
	Yeah, so I can say there are some insurrections that are probably really bad, and historically in the United States, there are some insurrections that probably weren't that bad.
	I think that whiskey rebellion was over fucking tax stamps.
	I think the biggest deal was that it was a big one, and it had to do with the first time the National Army had been mobilized for anything.
	But it probably wasn't that big of a deal.
	Every insurrection isn't the worst type of insurrection.
	I think this particular insurrection was really bad, but we can't even agree on what the definition of insurrection is.
	And the reason why is because Andrew knows if he gives any definition of an insurrection, it's either going to exclude everything from being an insurrection or it'll easily include January 6th.
	All right.
	Was there somebody else next?
	This is...
	You've got to go, right?
	Yeah, I do.
	I do have to go.
	Don't worry about it.
	But I did want to thank Destiny for having this debate with me.
	It was a lot of fun.
	And thank you again to Fresh and Fit for hosting.
	My name is Andrew Wilson, the host of The Crucible's fastest growing debate channel on YouTube.
	You can find our back catalog at thecrucible.video.
	Thank you guys very much.
	I really appreciate it.
	Sorry, I only had three hours allocated to this.
	We kind of went a little over, but...
	And if your people want to continue to watch the stream, they can come on over to either Fresh or Fit or Destiny.
	Are you on YouTube right now?
	Yeah, we're live back on YouTube.
	Yeah, I'm going to set up a raid so that they can come on over, okay, if you're going to do an after show or something.
	Yeah, yeah.
	I think me and Destiny, we're just going to have a conversation.
	Because I was going to talk to Destiny about some stuff, too, and then the Cast Club members can chime in.
	But yeah, we're live back on YouTube and everything.
	You can send your people over to us or Destiny, whichever you prefer.
	Thank you.
	You guys have a great one.
	All right, bro.
	I'll see you soon for Haas.
	Real quick, Destiny.
	I guess we'll shift this a little bit, right, from the January 6th stuff.
	And then I'll, you know, obviously after we have our discussion, we can turn it back to the Cow's Club members.
	Shout out to all you guys at Cow'sClub.tv.
	Obviously, the attempted assassination attempt has, you know, created a whole bunch of news.
	You know, it's been like this probably been one of the most turbulent weeks or two weeks that I've ever seen, like, in history.
	Damn near.
	You know, you got Joe Biden stepping down.
	You got the president almost was assassinated.
	You see Kamala Harris is more than likely going to be the Democratic Party's nominee.
	The DNC is coming up.
	You have just so much crap going on.
	Right.
	The congressional hearings right now with the FBI.
	I know the FBI director went ahead and testified yesterday.
	I was reacting to it.
	And then before him was a state police from Pennsylvania.
	And then before him was Kimberly Cheadle, who resigned from the Secret Service director.
	Things have been going crazy.
	Obviously you were going viral on Twitter for having some contrarian views, I'll just put it that way.
	What are your views?
	What's your thoughts on everything, bro?
	How are you doing?
	How are you holding up?
	Obviously, I know some people had said some things about you that, you know, I'm not going to repeat here.
	You know, we don't have to disagree on everything to still get along.
	But yeah, bro, what's your just thoughts on everything?
	There's been a bunch of crazy shit going on.
	I mean, there's a bunch of crazy shit.
	It's the U.S. news cycle.
	Every couple days something happens that resets like everything else.
	It feels like right now the assassination attempt is becoming a distant view because of all the crazy shit that's happening recently.
	I don't think people even mentioned.
	And there's so much big news that people didn't even talk about.
	I know that that Secret Service director stepped down today.
	We had the culmination of the...
	Of the Alec Baldwin case that I don't think anybody even paid attention to for more than five minutes.
	No, yeah, because...
	That ended in a crazy fashion, yeah.
	Yeah, well, yeah, because I've been following the assassination closely.
	Like, that's a good point, because even myself, I didn't follow the...
	Like, the Baldwin thing, I guess to his benefit, the assassination attempt happened, and then you had the RNC and stuff, and, like, that's just what plagued the news.
	Like, no one gave a shit about...
	The Baldwin trial.
	What ended up happening with him?
	Did he get acquitted or what happened?
	I think it was a Brady violation from the prosecution.
	They had some evidence that was turned over to them that they probably should have made available to the defense and they didn't.
	And the defense wanted to question them about it.
	And the DA, the prosecutor, she decided to take the stand because she wanted to defend their conduct.
	And then after she did it, she got cross-examined.
	No, it wouldn't be cross-examined.
	She just got questioned and it was a disaster.
	Yeah.
	Oh my god.
	And for those that are unaware, like, if you got Brady violations of your investigation or your case, kiss your case goodbye, man.
	Whenever you don't comply with Discovery, that creates, like, really big issues.
	I mean, you could get disbarred for that shit, guys.
	Yeah.
	And then the case was ultimately dismissed with prejudice, so they can't bring it back.
	It's, like, done now.
	Yeah, it was pretty wacky, yeah.
	Holy shit, he got the OJ treatment pretty much.
	We all know he did it, but he walked away.
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	Holy crap.
	Literally just like the OJ case, you know, with Furman and everything else that happened where he was able to walk because, you know, just sloppy handling of evidence.
	And in this case, you got sloppy prosecutorial, you know, member people.
	So that fucks it up.
	What are your thoughts on the assassination, bro?
	You know, there's a lot of speculation that there was a second shooter involved.
	A lot of people don't believe as though crooks acted alone.
	You know, obviously this, you know, you look at JFK, Oswald, people don't believe that narrative either.
	What's your thoughts on that?
	Did you think he operated alone?
	I mean, I don't see any evidence that there was any broader conspiracy involved.
	I think that if anybody really was trying to do a conspiracy to get Trump, I don't think it would have been some 20-year-old retarded dipshit that's prone on a...
	misses those shots.
	But I mean, people will, now where conservatives have put us in the media landscape, literally nothing will ever happen again that doesn't have a conspiracy behind it, whether that means space lasers causing fires in Hawaii or bioweapons labs in Ukraine or whatever the fuck else anywhere else.
	Like, yeah, every single thing is going to be something or a coup in the DNC or, yeah.
	Yeah, for me looking at the evidence, to me it looks, right now, and of course my mind is open to be changed, But right now, it strikes me as a single shooter...
	The FBI testified yesterday that right now it looks like a single shooter.
	And for those that are wondering, oh, it's a cover-up, it's a cover-up.
	Guys, trust me, with a case that has this type of media coverage, the FBI would love nothing more than to be able to say, we identified co-conspirators and we're going to go make an arrest.
	Like, that actually helps them.
	It doesn't benefit them to say it's a solo shooter.
	So, you know, because at the end of the day, these federal law enforcement agencies do want status, they do want recognition, they do want praise, and most importantly, that leads to funding from Capitol Hill.
	So a lot of times they want to be able to say, we did XYZ, do the press release, and, you know, walk the perp, etc.
	So I think that in itself defeats a lot of these, you know, insider, oh, conspiracy theories, whatever.
	You know, am I skeptical about...
	Official narratives like, you know, Oswald, etc.
	Do I believe the Warren Commission?
	Fuck no.
	I think that's bullshit too.
	But in this case, I just haven't seen like damning evidence yet that there was a second shooter.
	And for those that are saying, oh, well, why did Crooks miss?
	You know, he obviously knows how to use AR-15.
	He had done some practice.
	Well, what people don't know, and this kind of came out during the testimony, was right before he shot...
	One of the police officers climbed the ledge to try to confront him and Crooks saw him, pointed the gun at him.
	The guy said, oh shit!
	And he like fell off because someone like, you know, hoisted him up.
	So he hoists him up, gives him a boost.
	Guy gets over, gets his head over the roof, sees Crooks.
	Crooks sees him.
	He points his raffle.
	The guy's like, oh shit!
	He just literally drops off and hurts himself.
	And seconds after that, Crook starts taking the shots at Trump.
	And mind you, there was people yelling, he's on the roof, he's got a gun, he's got a gun.
	So, you know, you can only imagine the amount of adrenaline that this guy has because he didn't anticipate that people would find him so quickly.
	So he whiffed a bunch of the shots, which makes sense.
	But yeah, it's just wild that he was able to get in that position.
	He flew a drone.
	He had explosives in his vehicle, which I could see why people think that there was someone else because it's like How does this fucking 20 year old that doesn't have Knowledge on making bombs presumably because they haven't found anything in his in on his on his devices Do this alone?
	So that's kind of where I think you know whenever there's questions that are being asked like this People are always gonna assume that there's more people it opens it flourishes.
	It allows the conspiracy theories to flourish We're sure Yeah, I mean, I agree, but everybody's going to conspiracy theory everything.
	Literally any piece of evidence could have been released and people would have just said the opposite.
	If he had conversations with his friends saying, I'm going to go and get Donald Trump on my own, people would be saying, well, why didn't the friends say anything about it?
	Why didn't they turn him in?
	It's because they were in on it.
	This was a conspiracy.
	Or if he would have not said anything to anybody but was talking about going somewhere else, people will always insert...
	if you have a conspiracy in mind, you can take any collection of facts and make them fit anything.
	If there's smoking gun evidence that comes out, then I would say, okay, yeah, maybe there's some crazy shit here, or anything that points in that direction, but there's not.
	So, I mean, why the fuck would I assume otherwise?
	What do you think about Cheadle stepping down as director of Secret Service?
	I don't know enough about the operational procedures or the management structure of the Secret Service.
	It seems to me that it's so funny because I don't know if you've ever thought of this, but I've always thought when I'm watching movies, when I'm looking at the president making a speech, I'm like, damn, how do they secure entire cities?
	Couldn't anybody from a fucking random window shoot at this president, dude?
	That seems crazy.
	That's a big reason why they try not to do inner-city meetups in public.
	Yeah, I've heard somebody say that, but I don't know if that's real or if it was just like a Trump hater headline, but I think somebody had said that the Secret Service had been telling Trump, like, hey, we can't do events outside.
	It's not good.
	And Trump was like, I like outside.
	It's fun.
	I don't know if that's true or not, but yeah, I guess it's kind of crazy.
	I mean, realistically, I don't— What's true is that Trump doesn't like the nuance of people.
	He doesn't like the image that people can't come up to him and shake his hand.
	Of course.
	He wants to be able to interact with the people, so he tries to keep Secret Service fairly far away from him.
	That's why they weren't as quick to respond to him, because he purposely tells him, hey, he doesn't want to give the image that he's weak, which I understand.
	But yeah, continue on.
	Sorry.
	No, yeah, I mean, yeah, I agree with you.
	I haven't dug into this that much because I haven't heard any crazy smoking gun things, but I guess, like, the weirdest thing to me is, I don't know, is it true, if you've watched this, is it true that the Secret Service, like, marksman had him, like, cited for minutes before he actually shot?
	That's what they're saying.
	We don't really know yet.
	When they brought Cheadle on, she didn't really give concrete answers to that.
	And, you know, some people didn't like that I said this, but I told people, like, Cheadle isn't the person you want to bring on if you want to get questions answered, because the issue...
	And I'll go through this very quickly, is that when you're going to subpoena people to come in and answer questions, the director is probably one of the worst people that you can bring in.
	Well, that might be true.
	The one problem that I had, and I understand they're congressional hearings, so it's all for show and media, whatever.
	It's 100% for show.
	Yeah, but they asked her over and over again, like, who would be responsible?
	Now, maybe she doesn't want to throw anybody under the bus.
	Yeah.
	But she was very evasive, right?
	Where she was saying, like, oh, well, you know, there's a lot of people in charge and there's multiple, like, layers to these operations.
	But, like, unless the Secret Service literally operates differently than every single thing I've ever seen in my life, and, I mean, you can tell me, you know, you work for a federal body, like, for any operation, for any given thing, there's always going to be, ultimately, one person who's accountable.
	Otherwise, how the fuck can anybody make any final decisions or, you You know, who do you talk to when things are fucked up?
	Like, there should be somebody you can go to who ultimately signs off on things.
	Even if it is just like a rubber stamp, like they don't actually go over it.
	There should be somebody at the end of the day who's responsible.
	And the fact that nobody was ever named, I think, is...
	But maybe she just didn't want to throw someone under the bus, or maybe people just weren't being diligent enough.
	Yeah, there's a multitude of reasons why.
	Like, she didn't want...
	Yeah, she didn't want to throw people under the bus, etc.
	You know, that's one thing, right?
	Which I will commend her for that.
	But...
	The problem with the director, and I'll speak, for your audience that might not be familiar with me, guys, I was a special agent with Homeland Security Investigations for seven years, three years as an intern, so I'm very familiar with how Secret Service works.
	I've done Secret Service details before, etc.
	I know the agency in and out.
	All that said, the director of any federal law enforcement agency typically is more of a politician than a law enforcement officer.
	These guys sometimes aren't even agents.
	For example, Ray, the director of the FBI, was an AUSA. He never carried a badge and a gun in his life or did an investigation, but he's director of the FBI. And it's a political position.
	You're going out politicking with people.
	You're the face of the agency.
	You're going around shaking hands, kissing babies, etc.
	A lot of the times you don't know what's going on on the ground.
	Now, why do I say this?
	I say that because directors are so, they're like 10 chains above the people on the ground that actually are going to have the intimate knowledge that these hearings require.
	So the real person that they should have subpoenaed, they should have subpoenaed a few people.
	And I did a whole tweet about this, but I'll summarize it quickly.
	For the criminal investigation, you need to subpoena the FBI. And more accurately so, you need to subpoena the case agent from the FBI Pittsburgh office because he's the one that's running the actual investigation and making the decisions and dealing with the AUSAs.
	And then you can go ahead and bring his special agent in charge.
	Those two individuals are going to answer every single question that you have on the criminal investigation because they're the ones actually on the ground doing it.
	That's for the criminal investigation.
	I will say real quick on that though, people have to, and people have a really hard time understanding this, it is possible, especially in law enforcement, that you can fuck up your job really hardcore and be completely fuck for and get fired or whatever.
	It doesn't necessarily mean there was criminal wrongdoing, right?
	Of course, variety of like reasons they just didn't they were lazy they saw something fucked up yeah and they and that comes out to be proven but it doesn't mean there's necessarily a criminal charge because the person wasn't like criminally liable for what happened
	of course of course um now as far as like figuring out what went down on that date with the particular secret service detail chito might have some answers as a director but the real person you want to bring in and actually mentioned this to one of the congresswomen yesterday on the twitter space uh is that you want to bring in the head of Trump's Secret Service detail who's probably going to be a GS 14 or 15.
	Typically that's going to be a supervisor or second line supervisor.
	Why do I say that?
	Because for them to do that protection detail, they had to do something called an operation plan.
	And an operation plan in law enforcement is something that you have to put out every single time you're doing some form of enforcement action, whether it's a search warrant, an arrest warrant, anything that you're serving.
	And the reason why I say it is because the person that signed off on the operation plan is A, on the ground, that's one.
	Two, knows where people were supposed to be staged, call signs, radio equipment, who carried which guns, etc.
	And he will be able to specifically identify, down to the name, who was supposed to be at that building and where they're supposed to be located.
	So they asked a lot of really detailed questions that...
	You know, Chito might not necessarily know because she's too high up, right?
	Now, of course, people are going to say to me, well, Myron, she could have went ahead and spoken with these people and got these answers.
	Yeah, that's true, but nothing is as good from getting it from the source because anytime you answer a question, what comes next?
	They want a more specific answer on the follow-up, and she's not going to be able to provide that.
	So what they should have done was brought in the supervisors that were on the scene that day because, you know, I know the Secret Service tried to blame the local cops, But at the end of the day, it's on Secret Service because they're the ones that use the local cops and other agencies to augment their security details.
	Yeah, but while that's true, there's no shot that that hearing would ever happen in a public forum.
	Where you're talking about very specific details for how the Secret Service does security, that would always be a closed hearing, right?
	No, yeah.
	But at least they would be able to get the answers that they want.
	But again, I genuinely believe that that bringing Cheadle in was just a dog and pony show and clip farming.
	Like if you look, some of the people were super rude to her for no reason, saying she's bullshitting blah, blah, blah, all this, which I get it.
	There's outrage and you needed a whipping boy.
	But she's not going to have the answers.
	And then the other thing they asked her too, which I thought was very interesting, they asked her about a lot of internal matters as far as like people being fired, etc., Well, she's not going to be the right person to ask because if you want to go ahead and get into that type of stuff like what you were talking about before, gross negligence, all these things, well, some of these things are administrative violations and then some of these things could potentially even rise to criminal.
	Well, the only two agencies that are going to do that, it's not going to be her.
	It's going to be something called the Office of Inspector General, DHS OIG, and then it's going to be Secret Service Office of Professional Responsibility.
	I know people are saying, Mara, what the fuck is the difference between the two?
	Secret Service OPR is going to be handling the administrative stuff.
	They're going to make sure that the guy that shot the fucking dude was using the proper weapon, it's within Secret Service guidelines, it's a service weapon, he was using the right ammunition, admin shit.
	Then OIG is going to investigate anything that's potentially criminal.
	Whether someone lied on a forum or anything else like that.
	So those guys are going to be the ones that are going to be privy to anyone being fired because they're going to have to do their own independent investigation, which Cheadle doesn't have access to, by the way, guys, for a multitude of reasons, right?
	Because it would be a conflict of interest if she had access to that.
	There are outside investigative agencies that investigates them, so she wouldn't even have access to or have the answers for those internal questions that Congress is asking.
	And then also another thing I noticed when they were...
	that weren't even pertinent to the assassination.
	A lot of it was to push their own agenda.
	Oh, we need to ban AR assault rifles and all this other shit.
	It's like, bro, you got this fucking guy here.
	Ask him the question about the case.
	Why are you talking about gun laws and shit like that?
	That doesn't have to do with the topic at hand.
	So a lot of these people are trying to get reelected and do a dog and pony show, which obviously I get what it is, but it's like, bro, the American people deserve better.
	Ask real pertinent questions to the actual assassination, which is why this guy's fucking here.
	Same thing with Cheadle.
	They're asking about the FBI, DEI, and all this other stuff that's not relevant, which I thought was ridiculous.
	I don't know if you had seen any of the hearings.
	I watched a little bit of her, of them asking her questions about, like, who was ultimately responsible for the plan, but that was it, yeah.
	The open congressional hearings are kind of boring to me, but usually, like you said, it's just people are literally farming for TikTok clips.
	Like, that's it, yeah.
	Yeah, yeah, like AOC and all these people, Mace, like, they were just looking to, with Cheeto especially, bro, like, they were just trying to cook her, you need to resign and all this other shit, you know, and there were, like, 200,000 people watching.
	You could see it on the YouTube chat, people were like, woo, like, cheering it on and shit.
	So, you know, it's human nature to want to watch things crash in slow motion, right?
	So that's what it is.
	So, uh, how you been dealing with the backlash, bro?
	How you holding up?
	Obviously, people have been fucking getting mad at you on Twitter and shit like that, so...
	Um, yeah, it's all good.
	I usually piss people off on the internet.
	We were some Muslims a month ago.
	Before that, it was...
	I don't even know who it was before that.
	Yeah, I was fine, everybody.
	Yeah, fuck it.
	When you get back on kick, man...
	I got banned in like four or five days, I think.
	I've been there for...
	Bro, one thing I've noticed about them, dude, is they say they banned someone, but it never sticks.
	Ever.
	They banned, I think, Zirka.
	Aren't Zirka and Keel Mike gone forever?
	Uh, I don't know.
	Are they back?
	Well, I don't know.
	Maybe someone could double check.
	But, like, dude, it's like every other week they're banning, like, Neon or Jack Doherty or one of these guys.
	Then they're back, like, within a few days.
	Sure.
	I mean, Twitch does it, too, with streamers who get banned, like, 20 times for sexual outfits and shit.
	So, yeah, you know.
	Yeah, you know, I'm happy.
	Twitch let, uh, I know you and Sneeko don't get along, but, like, they let Sneeko back on, which I was stoked for.
	Like, I didn't realize that you can come back on Twitch even after you've been banned.
	Like, do they have some, like, kind of policy or something like that?
	Do they have a, what'd you say, a policy?
	Yeah, do they have like a policy where like after a certain amount of time you can come back?
	Well, I mean, you're technically never permanently banned.
	It's only indefinitely, so you can apply for an appeal every six months and then that's it.
	But yeah, I mean, they've rejected for mine, so who knows?
	Maybe someday.
	We'll see.
	It happens, man.
	What's your thoughts on the whole Mr.
	Beast and his...
	Is this guy's friend or something?
	Assistant?
	I don't even know what that is.
	Ava, I don't give a fuck.
	People obsess so much over the inappropriate jokes and shit online.
	I don't care.
	If they actually were doing weird, creepy shit in DMs with a minor or trading news or trying to fuck them in real life, I think that's really bad and that should be called out.
	But otherwise, I don't give a fuck.
	I don't know.
	Back in the day, on the internet, we did some wild shit.
	And if nobody can actually show any wrongdoing or any smoking guns, I don't really care that much.
	Yeah, I think the reason why there's so much outrage with it is because they went after Dr.
	Disrespect hard.
	Okay, but that's because Dr.
	Disrespect, I'm pretty sure, is accused of trying to arrange a meeting with a minor that he was trying to fuck in DMs and having multiple inappropriate conversations with.
	Well, nobody knows because no one saw the chats.
	Yeah, but those can't be leaked, right?
	Yeah, and I think the bigger thing here, which I think is the weirder thing, is that Twitch had this information from 2017.
	And they only leaked it once Dr.
	Disrespect started to be critical of a certain agenda.
	I don't know about that, but also keep in mind, Twitch didn't leak it.
	It was just some ex-employee from Twitch.
	I think, wasn't it Cody Connors or something?
	Yeah, but the point is that it had been there for years and it didn't get leaked until he started criticizing a certain agenda, which I thought was, you know, impeccable timing.
	I don't know if that's true now, but...
	No, it's true, bro.
	No one had known about this until...
	I mean, you could say it's a coincidence, but the fact is that he made these comments and then two, three days later, next thing you know, people were saying that he had texted a minor on Twitch.
	And Twitch knew about this because remember that he got kicked off Twitch for a bit and then they settled out of court or whatever and he came back.
	And it was because of this matter.
	Well, he never came back to Twitch, right?
	No, I think he did.
	No, definitely not.
	Absolutely not.
	When he got banned last time, trust me.
	Was this four years ago?
	I don't remember how many years ago, but when he got banned, he was gone.
	I don't know, someone in the chat confirmed for us or whatever, but I know there was some kind of settlement out of court.
	Well, my guess is going to be that there was some type of arbitration done for his contract, because my guess is going to be that if he got signed, if he got a huge deal to operate on Twitch, there was probably a huge lump sum of cash involved, and there were probably some terms, like probably 12 or 24 months.
	And they were obviously terminating that contract early.
	And I'm sure that there were clauses for like a moral clause to terminate early for whatever reason.
	But then I'm sure that they've got arbitration clauses in there for like, well, if you want to just grant some things, Dr.
	District probably had a lot of money coming to him and he wanted to fight over it.
	And he probably had a little bit of leverage because Twitch probably doesn't want it going public.
	The big streamers they've signed have been inappropriate with minors and DMs.
	So when their settlement, I doubt it was like some legal, like it wasn't like some criminal court thing.
	They were just like probably settling the terms of his contract before he left the platform.
	Yeah.
	I mean, because I do know that he went to YouTube after.
	He might have got a deal with...
	Does YouTube do deals with people like that?
	YouTube was doing deals at the time, but I'm pretty sure the execs were communicating with each other and nobody cut deals with Dr.
	Disrespect.
	Because Dr.
	Disrespect was salty because at the time, YouTube was cutting deals with people and they explicitly did not cut a deal with him.
	Yeah, I don't even think they cut deals with people anymore, though.
	No, they don't.
	I don't think a couple years, I don't think.
	It's been a bit.
	That's not something that I think they do anymore.
	Because they're like, yo, we're just going to make money on ads anyway.
	So that's kind of what it is.
	What else to do with you, bro?
	It's been a while since we've spoken.
	Not that much.
	I've just been reading.
	How's Israel?
	Fun, good time.
	Yeah, but I've just been reading and studying and all this fucking boring shit.
	And then having boring debates about law and law.
	Are you prepared for another debate?
	Yeah, well, it's going to be all this insurrection shit, basically.
	That's going to be my big focus.
	Another one?
	You're going to do another one with somebody else instead of Andrew?
	Yeah, that's what I agreed to do with Andrew.
	My big focus for the next few months is I think Donald Trump easily tried to coup the government.
	I think that the evidence is overwhelming.
	It's not even up for debate.
	So my goal is to just have those conversations basically for the next couple months.
	Anybody in particular going to debate on it?
	Um...
	We'll see.
	We'll see who bites, basically, yeah.
	I'm still working on my documents.
	I'm making two big documents for it.
	One huge comprehensive one, and then a second one for a quick 15-minute debate.
	And then I'll go from there and see who wants to argue over it, yeah.
	So real quick, and I'm playing devil's advocate here, right?
	This is not my particular wheelhouse with January 6th.
	A lot of people feel very strongly about this.
	One of the big things that people use, and I think Andrew had mentioned this during the debate, was Trump had put out a tweet saying, hey, we need to peacefully protest, etc., and that tweet was deleted.
	This is a talking point that a lot of people use.
	Can you tell me what your rebuttal would be to that presumptive argument, and what's your viewpoint?
	Yeah, go ahead.
	Take me through your argument.
	Yeah, without diving into the details of everything, basically, there was a pretty long-term plot from right before the election to after, right up to January 6th, where Donald Trump was trying to find a way to hold onto power.
	So after they lost the election, he knew prior to the election that the votes were probably going to turn over at night.
	So he tried to end the election, like the night of.
	That's why he said stop the count.
	That's why he was saying we've won.
	That's why Pence came on afterwards and said we're going to wait until all the votes are counted against Donald Trump.
	He was upset about that.
	He's going to stop the count, what, like a day before, you say?
	Donald Trump didn't want the mail-in ballots to be counted because he knew that those were heavily going to skew democratically.
	Everybody knew this, and his own people were telling him this.
	So he wanted the vote to stop immediately.
	And other people have come out, like Bannon and I think even Barr, other people have come out saying, like, yeah, everybody was telling him this and he knew it was going to happen.
	That's why he's trying to get the vote stopped.
	So...
	After that, for about a month, they were kind of trying to explore options.
	They tried to challenge a lot of the votes in a whole bunch of different states using largely bullshit evidence.
	Georgia's the big one, right?
	If I'm not mistaken.
	Georgia's the big one, which is why he got the RICO charge, right?
	There are RICO charges in Georgia, and Georgia was a lot of the big ones.
	Georgia was probably some of the worst, the most egregious offenses.
	It was him calling Raffensperger, which was wholly inappropriate.
	It was him calling the election investigator, which was wholly inappropriate.
	And then it was him and his campaign making the same false claims over and over and over again about voter fraud against Ruby Freeman, saying that she counted the votes three times and that they brought in this mysterious ballot box filled with a whole bunch of ballots, that they started to count again after night, that all of these things, judges have gone over them on videos.
	You can watch the videos, the full videos.
	None of it is true.
	Not only is none of it true, everybody inside Trump's administration told him it wasn't true.
	And Giuliani just recently had a $148 million contract.
	I'm sorry, that he lost in court.
	And his defense was, I knowingly lied about her, but my First Amendment rights should protect me in telling a lie about her.
	So all of those claims were false and bullshit.
	Telling a lie about this voter counter woman, right?
	Yep, Ruby Friedman, yes.
	Ruby Friedman, okay.
	Yep.
	Every single one of those claims is a lie.
	Moving forward, there was a guy called Kenneth Chesbrough.
	And then through Eastman, they basically concocted this legal theory that was going to make it so that if they could have basically Pence act against the Electoral Count Act, which is supposed to say how the vice president counts the votes on January 6th, that they can use Pence to unilaterally throw the vote out which is supposed to say how the vice president counts the votes on January 6th, that they can use Pence to unilaterally throw the vote out or count the wrong votes or just give it And he refused, right?
	And he refused to do that, which is why Trump was very angry at him.
	Correct.
	He did refuse.
	Yeah.
	And in the course of setting this up.
	Do you know on what grounds he didn't want to why did he not want to do it?
	Like, what was his specific, like, I know there's probably a multitude.
	He had all of his legal team look at it, and it was wholly, wildly illegal and unconstitutional.
	There's no way that he had the authority to do what Trump was asking him, and what Eastman was demanding that he could do.
	So his legal team told him no.
	Yes, and all the legal team told him.
	The only people that were on board with this were the crazy lawyers that Trump had brought in.
	So Powell, Eastman, and Giuliani.
	Which were all indicted in the Georgia-RICO state case.
	They might be, yeah.
	Yeah, I know Juliano was indicted in it, which is ironic because he was one of the people that actually implemented RICO in the 80s.
	Okay, well, let me say, what other points did you have before?
	Because I was going to give you a follow-up question.
	Yeah, sure.
	Yeah, a couple big ones.
	Another one is...
	So a lot of people don't know this, but in the United States, citizens don't have a right to vote for president.
	The states vote for president.
	So when you go to do a vote at the ballot box, what you're actually voting for are electors.
	And when you vote for a particular candidate, you're voting for the electors that will, on December 14th, get together and actually certify their vote and transmit it to Congress for the counting on January 6th.
	What Trump did was he got his team to run to all seven states of the quote-unquote contested battleground states and have the Republican electors send in fake slates saying that, that, hey, well, here, we're just saying, by the way, Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, we actually, we did vote for Donald Trump.
	Here's our electoral votes.
	He had them send all of those votes to Congress and to NARA.
	And the goal was on January 6th to try to pressure Mike Pence to accept those votes instead of the actual votes in order to make Trump president.
	Interesting.
	Okay.
	No, that's a lot of points there.
	Let me ask you this, then.
	Given the compromising situation, and just so you guys know, Cals Club members that are in the Zoom, I'll come to you guys.
	I'm just, you know, obviously opening up a dialogue here, and then we can definitely turn it back and bring you guys involved.
	Yeah.
	Also, just as a really quick thing.
	Go ahead.
	Every single thing that I just said is super publicly verifiable.
	None of this is contested by anybody.
	Nobody denies any of this.
	Everything that I just said is super open public record stuff.
	Nothing here is like, you know, by subpoena, super criminal investigation.
	All of this is very open with tons of people, mainly Republicans, that will attest to everything that I just said having happened.
	But yeah, okay.
	Sorry, go ahead.
	All right.
	What I was going to say was, how do you think the...
	How do I say this?
	The information that recently came out on Fannie Willis and having an improper relationship with one of her attorneys, how do you think that's going to affect the prosecution?
	Was this in Georgia?
	Yeah, because she's the one that literally was the main crusader in this whole Rico case going after Trump and after going after Young Thug as well.
	She basically used the same Rico statutes on Trump that she did for Young Thug.
	I don't know enough about, like, I haven't dug into the relationships there to have a strong opinion on it, so I have no idea.
	If there's improper relationships, it's not good, and they issue to recuse themselves or get fired or whatever the fuck, but I haven't dug into any of that.
	Yeah, like, there's a whole bunch of bullshit.
	Like, I mean, for example, the judge on Young Thug's case actually had to recuse himself because he had a ex parte meeting that he wasn't supposed to have without the defense present, and it caused a lot of issues.
	Sure.
	Okay.
	Let me get your take on this then.
	And then we'll go to the people.
	And just so you guys know, we'll stay on YouTube.
	We're live on all the platforms.
	Obviously, we got a Zoom link out on Castle Club so you guys can go ahead and join in the conversation.
	Also, I think I've got to take off in like five or ten minutes, but I guess...
	What's your thoughts on them dismissing the National Defense Information case?
	The classified documents case?
	I think it's a tragedy for a variety of reasons.
	I think that Thomas' opinion...
	Because I will say this before you go into your thing.
	I think that's the strongest case that the government had against him.
	By far.
	Yeah, but so what happened was during the immunity case, which I think the Supreme Court gave a wild ruling there, but in the immunity case, Clarence Thomas wrote a concurring opinion where he just decided to opine on whether or not the special prosecutor was constitutional, and he decided to write a bunch of shit saying, I actually don't think it's constitutional.
	And then Judge Cannon...
	him a lot in her decision to say, oh, yeah, well, actually, I'm going to toss this case because I don't think the special prosecutor was ever constitutionally established.
	So that was like their way of escaping the Mar-a-Lago case.
	Yeah.
	Just they went after Jack Smith.
	Which, I mean, that's definitely going to hit the—I think it's going to go up the appellate courts into the Supreme Court for sure.
	But, I mean, since, like you just mentioned, Clarence Thomas was the one that kind of started this wheel train, I don't think that the Supreme Court will overturn her ruling down here in Florida.
	I don't know.
	I mean, it's going to depend on, unless they have to rule on the constitutionality of the choosing of particular special counsels.
	But I don't know if that's going to be a majority opinion in the court or not.
	Yeah, only time will tell.
	I mean, I will say that it was, I was surprised.
	And it came literally like a day or two after he almost got assassinated.
	But I do think that that was, if you had a, you know, axe to grind against Trump, you know, I like Trump, so I know me and you disagree on that.
	But I do think, as a Trump supporter, that was the strongest case against him, because when it comes to national defense information, I know a lot of people always say, oh, well, he could declassify the documents.
	He could declassify the documents.
	The thing is, is that when it comes to the Espionage Act, the 18 U.S.C. 793, it doesn't have to be classified for it to still be a violation.
	It can just be national defense information.
	That's true.
	And a lot of the charges that he was catching were for obstruction as well, and not just pretension of...
	Yeah, because, you know, there was allegations that he told his assistant to move the boxes around.
	He had told a guy to delete security footage, allegedly, in the indictment.
	Because I think they came back with a superseding indictment, if I'm not mistaken.
	And they added the other guy besides Nashville.
	So it's...
	But yeah, that was I think the strongest case.
	And I think with them getting rid of that classified documents case, that effectively pretty much is destroying the Washington D.C. case because Jack Smith is prosecuting both if I'm not mistaken.
	Well, I don't think people agree with Canada's decision to toss that case.
	I think I've seen people say it's more likely that she's just going to get removed from it.
	But I mean, it's effectively stalled out until past the election, which is the only thing that matters anyway.
	Exactly.
	And that's another thing I was saying as well.
	And this was actually one of the things I said when this first came out.
	As I said, Trump needs to hold on, get in the office, and pardon himself.
	On the federal cases.
	As far as the state cases go, that would be...
	Well, now he might not have to after the immunity ruling.
	He might escape every case via that ruling.
	It's possible.
	We're going to see how that plays out.
	That's true, too.
	That's true, too.
	Do you think presidents should have immunity to be able to effectively conduct their jobs?
	That's absolutely fucking insane, no.
	I think that was one of the craziest rulings I've ever read in my entire life.
	Well, would you not say that?
	Because let's be honest here.
	We all know that, you know, the president and super high-ranking officials do fucked up shit all the time.
	I mean, for example, like, if I'm not mistaken, Obama, like, ordered a drone strike that killed a U.S. citizen, right?
	Yeah, but there's a difference here, right?
	So you know the legal process, right?
	So when Obama goes to the Office of Legal Counsel to solicit an opinion to see if he thinks that he has the legal authority to do a particular thing, and when Obama didn't say, like, when I do this decision, no court can review what I do, I think that that is meaningfully different than when a president embarks in what is really a private capacity to further entrench his own power in acts that we would clearly say are criminal acts.
	Like, I think that regardless of whether you like Obama or not, You would agree with this.
	Let's say that it came out that Obama's wife had cheated on him with this guy, and he drone-striked a dude.
	I think everybody in the US would be like, bro, what the fuck?
	Nobody would be saying, well, hold on.
	It isn't his power to drone-strike people, right?
	People are like, no, what the fuck?
	You can't do that, right?
	Whether or not you think that the president should have the ability to do that, he was probably operating as the commander-in-chief of the United States with ownership of these yachts.
	I think it's a lot different than a lot of the conduct for Trump.
	Nobody is saying that, like, well, yeah, I think that Trump was legitimately acting as the interest of the president of the United States when he was telling his attorney generals, I need you to send out fake letters to all the states saying we found voter fraud, which is what that immunity protected him from, one of the actions that Roberts declared.
	Yeah, because basically for the immunity clause, all they need to display is that the president was acting under some official capacity.
	Right?
	And he'll be immune, which you can make the argument, right?
	And I know this would be a debatable thing and you might not agree with it, but you could make the argument by him calling and saying, we need to fucking figure out if this is a legitimate election, where these votes come from, etc.
	You could make the argument that that was him acting in an official capacity because he's trying to ensure that election integrity.
	Yeah, I mean, I would say it's not a good argument, but every court will now have to.
	Yes, because now the defense is immediately going to be, well, we're presumptively immune to the power of the president.
	You need to argue why intruding on this, not only do you have to make whatever argument that there's a crime here, you have to show that intruding on this won't have a negative impact on my acts in the future, that this intrusion isn't going to inhibit my ability to operate as the executive going forward, which is, yeah.
	Yeah.
	No, for sure.
	I'll hit some of these Cast Club people quick.
	I know you're short on time.
	Yeah, don't worry.
	Yeah.
	All right.
	So let's get as many people through as we can.
	Guys, hit us with a quick question or a comment, and then I'll move on and get as many of you guys through.
	Shout out to all you guys on Cast Club.
	Go ahead.
	We got Adrian.
	Go ahead, Adrian.
	Hello.
	Can you guys hear me?
	Got you, man.
	Go ahead and hit us with your question or comment real quick.
	What's up, guys?
	I just wanted to say one quick thing here.
	Destiny.
	No matter what happened, I mean, let's go back to January 6th, first of all.
	When you have people being let in by the Capitol Police, okay, there's video footage of this, there's cameras.
	We know there were bad agents in there.
	We don't even know who Ray Epps is.
	I mean, we have to take a step back and forget about...
	Your definition, Andrew's definition of insurrection.
	These people were let in.
	Trump called for a peaceful protest.
	Sure, it was deleted, whatever.
	Trump called everyone to go back to their homes.
	They said to leave the Capitol.
	Nancy Pelosi also said that the Capitol Police should stay down, even when Trump called for the Capitol Police to come in.
	Okay?
	And also...
	I mean, this is just ridiculous.
	I mean, it was not an insurrection.
	These people were let in.
	And the only person that died was the woman who was shot by the cop.
	There was no investigation on the cop.
	And I mean, what are your thoughts on that?
	Because I don't think it was an insurrection at all.
	Yeah, just every single fact you brought up I think was incorrect.
	So when you say that we know there were bad agents, there's no proof of that at all.
	When you talk about people being led around, the first people that got into the building broke into the building.
	For people that were being led around, it was because you had like tens of thousands of protesters and then people that were starting to pour into the building and you had like, what was it, like fucking 100 cops or whatever?
	No, hold on, hold on.
	There were cops letting them inside the building.
	You guys can only stay in here.
	If you want...
	I understand.
	If you want to come on my stream, we can rewatch every single video if you want.
	You will lose this argument, okay?
	Guaranteed.
	The first people that got in broke into the building.
	There were people that were kind of led around and guided into some fucking Senate chambers and bullshit afterwards.
	Yeah, the guy with the bullhorn.
	That's because the cops didn't have the manpower to deal with everybody.
	So they were just kind of like shepherding people around to places where there weren't congressmen, where there weren't lawmakers that were trying to retreat.
	So the first people in the building indisputably broke in.
	We know that.
	And when cops were leading people around, you can literally watch one of the videos where I think it's the black cop is going up the stairs and he looks to the left and I think There are literally lawmakers down the hall, and he kind of like pushes a guy and goes to the right, because they're leading people through, which is common even when it comes to riots and stuff.
	Police will lead people down streets or down corridors to crowd them into certain areas.
	They just didn't have the manpower to deal with that event.
	When you say we know that Ray Epps was there, we know that the day before, Ray Epps shouted stupid stuff, and that's on camera for sure.
	Yeah, we call them aside also for Yeah, that's fine.
	There's no evidence of that whatsoever.
	There were a lot of people that were calling out for going into the Capitol and everything.
	Again, all the video footage is available on Rumble.
	You can see the day of, you know, there are people like Nick Fuentes, who very suspiciously didn't catch any public charges, really makes you wonder, who were shouting like, let's go in, whatever.
	You can see him on video, everybody shouting it.
	On the day of, you do not see Ray Epps anywhere calling for violence.
	Every video that I've seen of Ray Epps on the day of January 6th is usually him telling people to be chill or calm down.
	There's only one video that shows somebody breaking down a fence.
	The fence, yep, and Ray Epps.
	No, no.
	Whatever you were about to say is not true.
	Ray Epps is not saying anything.
	You can go find the video you want to rewatch it.
	I'm going through all your points.
	You said a bunch of points.
	Let me respond to them, okay?
	I've watched all these videos on stream before with an extensive detail.
	I read the Revolver article.
	I talked to the author of the article because he was in that debate with me, with Greenwald and Alex Jones, okay?
	You cannot hear Epps say anything about go and attack or go and do anything.
	You hear him whisper into a guy's ear, and then eventually somebody else comes forward and pushes over the fence.
	People say he was telling them to attack, but there's no evidence of that.
	And all the video footage you see on January 6th is telling people, chill out, calm down.
	You mentioned that Trump called for a peaceful protest with a deleted tweet.
	I don't know where this is.
	I haven't seen this before.
	I don't know where this deleted tweet is.
	I could try to pull it up for you.
	Yeah, if you can find it, that's great.
	However, while the riot was raging on, okay, while the insurrection was raging on, there were multiple people that ran to the Oval Office begging Trump.
	Trump Jr., Ivanka, I think even Meadows, I think Cipollone, like so many people went and they're like, you have to stop this riot, you have to stop this insurrection, you have to stop this violence, please tweet, please send it.
	Which is what he did.
	No, he didn't.
	Which is what he did, yeah.
	And Nancy Pelosi called back the state police.
	Hold on, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry.
	Why didn't he do it immediately when he was asked?
	Why did he wait three hours?
	There is no answer to that question.
	It was three hours.
	No, no.
	Why didn't the police not have the state Capitol Police there?
	Why didn't the police not have the Capitol Police there?
	Hold on.
	We're not at that part yet.
	The ultimate authority to deploy the National Guard there, the chain of command goes all the way up to Donald Trump because this is federal property.
	OK, so Donald Trump sat and he watched on TV for at least three hours while that protest turned into a riot, turned into an insurrection.
	And the only thing that him and Giuliani did was he made calls to lawmakers, many of which are reported.
	McCarthy, other Republicans will tell you he made calls to lawmakers telling, hey, maybe you should delay the certification of the vote.
	It wasn't until three hours after the violence started that he finally made the tweet once it was winding down saying like, OK, hey, guys, I think it's time to go home.
	So that tweet that he did where he called people to go home, this is after hours of begging by so many different people in his White House counsel and his family were begging him to tweet.
	It took hours for him to do that.
	And then at the very end, when you said Pelosi said the Capitol Police should stay down, I think Pelosi and Mayor Bowser, I think they fucked up when they didn't ask for more Capitol Police to be there.
	However, Donald Trump never—there were some.
	There just weren't very many, and most of them were doing traffic control.
	The reason why they weren't there is because people were worried that Donald Trump would try to use the National Guard or military to do some weird shit, and they were really worried about that.
	And I think in the end, obviously, that ended up not being the greatest decision.
	But when Donald Trump asked for 10,000 National Guardsmen to be there, that wasn't an official request put in.
	It was a random conversation he was having with—I think it was with Milley.
	He said, maybe we need 10,000 guards there to protect my people.
	That's all he said.
	There was no official request that was put in and ignored.
	He just kind of, like, floated it as a suggestion in a private conversation, and that's it.
	That's all the points.
	Okay, you just said like 10,000 things and like times two speed, but let's just go over this one second.
	They had a committee, a January 6th committee who just reviewed everything you said.
	Hold on, Adrian, we do have a lot of people waiting, bro.
	Adrian, we do have a lot of people waiting, man.
	I want to try to, you know what I mean?
	That's fine, go ahead, go ahead.
	Take Harrison next.
	Harrison's been waiting.
	All right, Harrison, go ahead.
	And I do have the tweet here, Destiny.
	I'll pull it up on screen and show you.
	Go ahead, Harrison.
	I don't know if you can see that there.
	It says, Donald J. Trump, I'm asking everyone at the U.S. Capitol to remain peaceful, no violence.
	Remember, we are the party of law and order.
	Respect the law and are great men and women in blue.
	Thank you.
	Do you know what time that tweet was?
	That is a good question.
	Let me see if I get a timestamp.
	Oh, at 3.13.
	Yeah, wait.
	So it had already turned into a violent riot.
	It was already like rioting at that point.
	This is the one that he put in when people were begging him to tweet at people to go home.
	They were like, please tell your people to go home.
	And he ends up putting that tweet out.
	That basically just encourages them to stay there.
	Was it at 3.13pm?
	Okay.
	Okay, so who's up next?
	Is it Harrison?
	Okay, Harrison, go ahead, bro.
	And let's speed through these so I can get as many people as possible.
	I know Destiny's on some tight timeline here.
	Hey, good evening, guys.
	Can you hear me?
	Yeah, we got you, bro.
	Guys, hit us with your question and or comment.
	Hey, so I was kind of curious for Destiny.
	I had watched your interview with Pierce Morgan the other day and you had said that you did not want to disenvow the shooting of Trump.
	Are you willing to talk about that tonight?
	Because I think that was a really low thing to do considering who he is, what he's done for the country, and you're kind of just a small little person.
	It's a whole thing to get into, but just basically, conservatives don't take responsibility for literally any of the violent rhetoric or actions they've engaged in in the United States.
	So the idea that they would ask for sympathy when something happens, I think, is a little bit ridiculous.
	When you look at their rhetoric around January 6th, when you look at their rhetoric around Paul Pelosi, when you look at their rhetoric around anything else, conservatives seem to be gleefully shouting and making jokes about and making fun of and calling conspiracy on everything.
	So I don't think anybody owes them any kind of sympathy or anything if a bad event is happening to their...
	I mean, it's not good.
	You shouldn't want, like, violence or assassination attempts or anything in the United States.
	Nobody should celebrate that.
	It's not a good thing.
	We shouldn't want that.
	But, I mean, like, the conservative rhetoric is literally taking us there.
	Has taken us there.
	The shooter was a Republican.
	I mean, what do you want me to say?
	Well, you know, but also at the same time, you had Kamala Harris during the whole Black Lives Matter riots.
	Encouraging more rights, encouraging more violence.
	So in my eyes, I don't know how you would be able to even comprehend that Trump is actually inciting more violence when you have the left literally going on TV and advertising to go ahead and be disruptive to Republicans.
	Go ahead and...
	What is that?
	When we say Kamala Harris was encouraging rioting, what are we citing to there?
	Or what statements?
	So that was during the Black Lives Matter during COVID. I'm aware of Black Lives Matter and the protests during COVID, yeah.
	Correct.
	And so, you know...
	But I'm asking, what did she say?
	What were her statements where she was like inciting?
	Was she saying like, you guys need to go and blow up courthouses or you guys need to go and...
	She was encouraging the supposed quote-unquote peaceful protests, which in turn, anybody with half a brain could see that those were not peaceful.
	And all you people do is you change the definitions of things in order to make the garbage that in all reality is evil to sound less evil so that way you can feel good about it and actually incite it even more.
	The whole idea behind protesting is to do it peacefully and to change it and say that, oh, it's peaceful protest when, oh, they're mostly peaceful protests, but in the end they are violent.
	If Kamala Harris saying that, like, well, listen, you guys need to be peaceful at least, if her saying that still counts as her ordering violence, I guess, why wouldn't you say the same for Donald Trump when he tweeted out, you guys need to remain at the Capitol and be peaceful when the people had already started rioting there and all they continued to do was riot and then Ashley Babbitt died.
	But the thing is that he never did say to continue the riots.
	Kamala Harris incited it and actually encouraged it.
	Encouraged rioting?
	Yes.
	Didn't she condemn violent protests?
	No, she didn't.
	Anywhere?
	During the whole, and I'm just referring to 2020 during the COVID, Black Lives Matter for...
	So here's a question.
	So I'm seeing a quote from Kamala here saying, it's no wonder people are taken to the streets and I support them.
	We must always defend peaceful protests and peaceful protesters.
	We should not confuse them with those looting and committing acts of violence, including the shooter who was arrested for murder.
	And make no mistake, we will not let these vigilantes and extremists derail the path to justice.
	Can you find a single quote of Donald Trump criticizing any behavior ever on January 6th?
	Well, I'm obviously not equipped to go and research, because I've been listening to you guys for the past couple hours.
	Okay.
	So I'm just demonstrating.
	This was a statement of her supporting peaceful protests and condemning violent protests, but...
	I'll move on to the next, just so I can get as many people through, but thank you, brother, for chiming in.
	No, absolutely.
	Real quick, Dusty, are you going to the DNC? I don't know.
	We'll see.
	Okay, alright.
	Well, obviously I know you're not going to vote Trump.
	What are your thoughts on Kamala taking the helm and more than likely being the Democratic nominee?
	We'll see how it works in a couple weeks.
	So far, it's going better than I expected it to, but I think that conservatives are having an issue, not to sound like a woke-tart or whatever, and conservatives don't have to listen to me, but I think that conservatives are making a huge strategic error right now in being so fucking unhinged in their racism and sexism against Kamala.
	I think that they need to stick to way different kinds of attacks, and they're going mega unhinged right now, and it's probably going to hurt them if they continue it.
	So in that way, I guess Kamala was a good choice on my end, but I guess we'll see what happens.
	Are you going to vote in November?
	Yeah, for sure.
	Okay.
	I would peg you more like libertarian left-leaning.
	I mean, would you agree with that assessment?
	Maybe.
	It really depends on what particular thing we're talking about.
	Okay.
	Because to me, you strike me as more libertarian, but on the left side, whereas for me, I'm kind of the opposite.
	I'm libertarian, but more people call me far-right, whatever the fuck.
	True.
	Yeah.
	Okay.
	So obviously, you're going to vote, Kamala, I'm assuming?
	Or whoever the Dems put on the ticket.
	Hell yeah.
	Whoever the Dems put on the ticket.
	Fair enough.
	Okay.
	Who do we got here?
	We got Louis.
	Go ahead, Fernando.
	Louis.
	Yeah, Mehran, I wanted to ask, what do you think about Israel and Netanyahu having significant influence over the U.S., and why are all the presidential candidates Zionists?
	What's your opinion on that?
	Well, I will say this.
	I reacted to his speech yesterday, and they stood up 81 times and gave him a standing ovation.
	So after every sentence, they gave him an ovation.
	So that should tell you everything that you need to know there.
	What are your thoughts, Destiny?
	Did you watch the speech yesterday?
	No, I didn't.
	My tape's going to be hugely unpopular here.
	Old people like Israel because Israel's like the democracy in the Middle East, and they saw Israel as like this underdog getting bullied by all these Arab countries.
	That's why old people in the U.S. love Israel.
	That's not going to change ever until they all get old and die.
	What?
	No, the boomers absolutely support Israel, yes.
	Yeah, Israel sucks at propaganda.
	Jews suck at propaganda.
	They suck at controlling media.
	I think that that's been demonstrated, like, with extreme efficacy in the past, like, seven or eight years.
	They cannot control any media narrative to save their life.
	Nobody will believe me on that now, but that's fine.
	But I think that the people to look out for are, I would say, it's Qatar, Iran, China, and Russia, I think, for, like, controlling media narratives.
	I think those are the huge things that we have to look at going forward, but we'll see.
	And Louis, to answer your question, bro, I genuinely don't believe that you can ever, well, maybe in the future one day, but nowadays you can't be a politician in the United States of any real consequence unless you support AIPAC. That's just the reality nowadays.
	So maybe things will change later, but for now, that's just one of the realities of being any type of politician in the United States with real influence.
	Jacob, we got you next.
	And we could definitely have a discussion on that, Destiny, which I won't even get into, like, with the news and stuff, because we're on YouTube, and obviously it's a very long conversation.
	I know we're short for time here, but that could be another day.
	Jacob, what's up, bro?
	Hey, what's up?
	I just had a quick question.
	I didn't get to catch the whole screen, but this is mainly for Destiny.
	Yeah.
	Did you hear about the boiling water shooting incident?
	The blooming water shooting incident?
	The boiling water one.
	Boiling.
	Oh, yeah, I watched the video on that, yeah.
	Okay, I just wanted to see or hear, do you think it's justified or unjust as a police officer doing that?
	Okay, this is what I'll say.
	Okay.
	Fucking Christ.
	Okay.
	Myron will support me here, okay?
	Keep me saying, okay?
	Yes, sir.
	Okay.
	- Right, when you find people that are exceptionally talented, or you find people that are in incredibly dangerous situations, the Hollywood portrayal of this is that like a really good athlete, a really smart thinker, a really good cop is somebody that has like cat-like reflexes, the aim of like James Bond, the mind of Einstein, right?
	That this is what it means to be like an effective law enforcement officer, secret saver person, whatever the fuck.
	The reality is, is the people that are the most successful in life, this applies to every area of life too, okay?
	It's not the people that are able to make these lightning-fast decisions and figure out what they need to do on the fly.
	It's people that prepare themselves and put themselves in situations and environments where they can succeed, all right?
	When a police officer is dealing with, I don't even want to say a suspect, but really with anybody that they're not fully comfortable with, there are reasons why cops say, hey, Let me see your hands.
	Or if they're doing even a small detainment investigation, they'll say, like, can you come and sit over here on the sidewalk?
	Can you just, like, keep your hands on your knees?
	If they want, maybe they'll zip tight.
	Maybe they'll handcuff you.
	Like, just so I can see what's going on.
	The reason why you do that is because you never want to be in a situation where an old lady has a boiling fucking pot of water that you send into the kitchen and is about to fucking throw it at you.
	You're not like, well, fuck, right?
	At the time that the lady goes to throw the boiling pot of water, am I very critical of the cop shooting her?
	I mean, she's close enough to do some fucking damage.
	She gets a whole boiling pot of water.
	At that point, I kind of get it, but there's no way that it should have gotten to that point.
	I have no fucking idea why law enforcement would allow a lady who seems fucking insane, and she has seemed insane up to that point, why would they let her walk to the kitchen unaccompanied, To turn off a boiling pot of water on a stove when they have no fucking idea what's going on.
	I think that the officers just fucked that, the handling of that situation up.
	And they put themselves in a situation where they had to make an impossible call on, like, shooting a lady who's got a huge pot of boiling water that she's trying to throw at this cop.
	And I think it was fucked in that way.
	So when people analyze the shooting, usually when cops make mistakes, it's not because they made the wrong split-second decision.
	It's usually because they weren't being careful in advance to make sure that they had the people that they needed sitting on the sidewalk, their hands cuffed in advance, to control the situation, essentially.
	That was my feeling on it, yeah.
	Am I going to agree or disagree with the general?
	I agree with some of it.
	I think it's a clean shoe, contrary to popular belief.
	I think it's a 100% clean shoe, and I'll tell you why.
	And I can tell you guys this from being former law enforcement, understanding use of force and using lethal force.
	You are not judged on 20-20 hindsight.
	You're judged on the facts that were visible to you when you decided to pull that trigger.
	So this is why, which is this happens all the time, a police officer will shoot someone that what they thought was a gun because it ends up being a toy gun.
	Why?
	Because they had no knowledge that it was a toy gun until after the person was shot, but they were operating.
	We don't judge them on 20-20 hindsight.
	What were the facts available to them when they showed up on the scene?
	In this case, It's important to note that they go to the house and the woman has this boiling water and she takes the boiling water and she doesn't follow lawful commands.
	They're telling her, hey, stop.
	Don't grab that water.
	Don't throw it on us.
	Blah, blah, blah.
	I'll shoot you.
	And she still continues to disobey the lawful orders.
	Then she ducks down and the officers can't see her.
	Now, you're in their house.
	You don't know what she has in one of these cupboards.
	You don't know if she has a weapon there, etc., So they go ahead and proceed forward to make sure they can see her hands.
	In law enforcement they always teach you, you need to see the hands at all times.
	He couldn't see her hands.
	When he sees her, she's coming back up like this and she's about to hurl the water on him and on top of that she says, Jesus rebukes you.
	Well, I don't know about you guys, but anytime someone says something like, Jesus rebukes you, something's about to come your fucking way that you're probably not gonna like.
	Sure, but the issue I think with the cops handling that is if you watch the video, this lady is wacky.
	Like, when I first saw it, I was thinking either mental health or drugs.
	Like, what didn't sound right.
	And the cops, even prior to her going to the kitchen, like, the thing that made me scary, and I... I've seen so many cop execution videos of cops getting killed.
	The thing I always get scared of is like, oh, fuck, this person's reaching into a bag and the cop's not paying attention.
	Somebody's about to die, right?
	The fact that, like, they're just in the apartment chatting and she's, like, reaching over, like, going through a bag and shit.
	I'm like, bro, why is this cop acting so comfortable on this lady that seems, like, fucking insane?
	And then she walks into the kitchen and now the cop has put himself, like, even at that, like, if...
	Law enforcement has come to your house for something, and they're not 100% comfortable with you.
	And I would give this as advice for a person.
	If an officer tells you, can you go and grab a particular thing?
	One, they shouldn't.
	They should be saying, tell me what you want to get, and I'll go get it for you.
	Or you say, okay, sure, can you come with me?
	You don't want to be disappearing into fucking rooms and then a cop hears something or whatever and now you gotta come out of the fucking darkness with like your hands up Hopefully that they don't mistake what you have for a gun like it's just to lose control of a situation like that You know again, you never want to be in a situation where you got to make like an impossible fucking split-second call because Yeah, but why would you do that?
	But destiny we're using 20/20 hindsight here, you know, no, this is what I disagree with that lady was insane She should have never been sent because we're going, we're looking at the pot of boiling water.
	She could have reached in and grabbed a knife, a gun.
	Because we know who she is.
	No, she was crazy.
	But here's the thing, bro.
	Remember, when you're a police officer, right, and you're showing up on a 911 call, a lot of the times you have limited facts that you're operating on.
	You're operating on what they tell you, the dispatcher tells you.
	Right now, we can Monday morning quarterback you all day and say, dude, this lady was crazy.
	Why'd they shoot, etc.?
	He might have not known that when he rolled up to the scenes.
	No.
	I understand what you're saying.
	I've seen enough drunk people.
	I've seen enough people on drugs.
	I've seen enough crazy people.
	And I've seen enough cops.
	I know that cop knew.
	Unless that guy was an actual, green as fuck, the most rookie motherfucker ever, who's never been in a bad neighborhood.
	That lady, and you can watch me watch the video.
	As soon as that cop answered the door, and he's like, hey, did you call 911?
	And she's like...
	Oh dear, oh dear, oh no, what's happening?
	And the guy's like, are you okay?
	And she's like, oh, I don't know.
	She's like, this lady is fun.
	This is where me and you can agree to disagree, but insanity isn't an excuse.
	Whether the person is sane-minded or not, the police officer or the law enforcement official still has the right to defend themselves regardless of the person's mental capacity.
	Because like I said before, they don't know what her mental capacity is.
	Of course you can infer, this dude's a little off, whatever it may be.
	But regardless, if someone grabs a weapon...
	And I would argue that boiling hot water is a deadly weapon.
	You can absolutely use lethal force to combat that.
	And she did try to throw water on him.
	But the cop has a right to defend himself.
	That's why I'm saying at the point of the shooting, I get it.
	But if you think a person's crazy, this is why when a cop pulls over people or groups of people, they'll say, hey, can you guys get out of the car?
	Can you sit on the street?
	Can you put your hands forward to where I can see them or whatever?
	You're doing this so that you don't end up in a Of course, of course.
	She was even on the phone with a guy who sounded like a mental health caretaker.
	She was fucking wild!
	And the idea that they just let her wander around her house, I think it was totally preventable.
	She was fucking crazy.
	And I'll tell you why.
	The thing is, when you're showing up on a 911 call, right, and you're going to someone's house, it's not really...
	Because, okay, when you're on the job, they teach you to deescalate and keep things as chill as possible.
	Going to someone's home on a 911 call and telling them what they can and can't do, though, yes, you can absolutely do that, you want to try to minimize that because at the end of the day, you don't really have much authority, right, to be telling people what they can and can't do.
	No, you got all the authority.
	If a cop is doing an investigation...
	You don't need a warrant.
	You got a 911 call.
	He was invited in the house.
	Cops can do what they want to, what they need to, to keep themselves safe in the process of performing an investigation.
	If a cop pulls me over and they feel like I'm skittish as fuck and I got these huge codes on, the cop has every right to say, listen, sir, why are you detained?
	Can you just step out of the Get in the car and take your car off.
	He has every right to ask me.
	Your home and your car are vastly different.
	There's a reason why the Castle Doctrine exists.
	There's a reason why you need way more probable cause to secure a search warrant on a home than on a car.
	They already have a problem.
	They've got an M1 call.
	That's probable cause right there.
	They can enter the house.
	They're totally within their right to do so.
	They've got to call for a burglary.
	Keep in mind, though they have the consent to go in, it could be retracted at any time.
	Sure, but then the officers would just leave.
	They would just leave.
	She'd be like, okay, can you guys get the fuck out?
	And the cops would say, yeah, they could leave.
	You don't want to escalate things if you don't have to, so you're going to be as chill as possible.
	That's why they were relaxed.
	Now, is that the best way to go?
	Everyone is different, right?
	Everyone skins a cat differently.
	But what I am saying is, based on the facts that I saw and how she went behind the counter, she grabbed the pot of water, it was boiling hot, etc.
	She wasn't following lawful commands.
	She tried to hurl it at him, and we know boiling hot water can absolutely mess you up if it lands on you.
	I think it's a good shoot.
	Some people in the chat disagree with me, and that's totally fine.
	But, you know, you guys aren't...
	I don't know, man.
	I feel like you should re-watch that video from start to finish.
	I watched it.
	I watched it.
	You should watch it.
	I agree with you.
	I agree, like, 99% of the time in these cases.
	But there are times where, like, the cop can say, like, hey, can you just, like, step out, or can you come over here, or whatever.
	Like, if a cop came into my house and asked me questions, I'm never...
	I'm never like running over into my bedroom to like grab shit or like shouting some shit at the cop because I know that like why the fuck like this guy doesn't know if I'm gonna fucking kill him he's got a fucking gun if any any escalation is gonna be one of us is dying right yeah like yeah I just I feel like that's the thing where you can call it an escalation but I mean like with the cop like assuming the only people that would get escalated on if you were to ask them like hey could you just like chill here with your hands out if they start to get irate about that well then they're probably gonna get irate if they disappear in another room as well like why risk it I Well,
	besides the shoot, and I'll just leave it, make this last point, and then move to the next person.
	I think the shoot, right?
	Obviously, he got arrested for this and everything else like that.
	I think a big reason why he was arrested, because this was a political move, because where did this happen?
	In Illinois or something like that?
	Somewhere in the Midwest.
	I think it was Illinois, yeah.
	Yeah, which is a blue state.
	Like, I think George Floyd kind of showed us that the potential for riots and for social anarchy is very real.
	And the prosecutor's office was like, you know what, dude?
	We don't want to deal with this shit.
	Let's just get this guy arrested and let a jury decide if he's innocent or not.
	I think this guy has a really good chance to go ahead and be found innocent on this.
	I know some of you guys in the chat are saying, oh, he had a DUI before.
	He's been fired from other departments, etc.
	More than likely, his defense is going to move to get that stuff, like, not brought into the trial.
	And the reason why is because they don't want to poison the jury with other stuff that might not necessarily be as relevant to the case.
	Because we want to go with the facts and circumstances that are present at that investigation.
	Chief Rocca, what's up, bro?
	And yeah, you guys could go.
	Some people will disagree with me.
	That's fine.
	We don't have to agree on that.
	This is my last one?
	Last one here, guys.
	Go ahead, Chief Rocky.
	What's your question or comment for me or Destiny?
	Hey, can you hear me?
	Yo, what's up, brother?
	No comment for Destiny.
	I've been wanting to say this since that screen with D.L. Saint for that Leo guy, the one that called the Russian dude.
	If he does not, you need to apply on clearinghouse.
	If you have the driver's license in the States, his driver's license will be in that system and it will show him if his pilot's license are cleared and he's good to go again.
	And they have the option for him to take the class.
	You know, Chief Rocker, I'm sorry, bro, but your mic is really bad, dude.
	Like, you're kind of coming in and out.
	It sounds awful.
	It sounds like you're echoing.
	So I'll just move to Ray J for the sake of time.
	RJ. RJ, sorry.
	RJ, go ahead.
	You'll be the last one.
	Oh, sweet.
	All right.
	Yeah, just two quick comments.
	I mean, you know...
	You know, what that dude said earlier, you know, about definitions and shit like that, like, I mean, the Oxford, like, I always go by dictionary definitions.
	Are we back to the introduction?
	You said what?
	Yeah, yeah.
	I don't mean to, you know, beat a dead horse or anything like that, but I mean, you got two different definitions here.
	You got Oxford languages, a violent uprising against an authority or government, and then you got an act or instance of revolting against civil authority or an established government.
	Like, my thing is, is that, like, You know, like, people just aren't accurate enough nowadays.
	And, like, I mean, I understand, like, where Andrew Wilson was coming from.
	He's like, you know, hey, listen, like, the difference in between a square and a rhombus, like, listen, just because there's violence over here doesn't mean that it's, you know, insurrection.
	Now, I mean, that's not my own personal take.
	You know, I think January 6th was, you know, insurrection according to these definitions, right?
	Okay, so you agree with Destiny?
	Yeah, and the other comment that I was going to make was, you know, I mean, dude, that cop, I'm not letting somebody throw some fucking boiled water on me.
	You crazy?
	Yeah, dude.
	Like, I know, whenever I was, like, 12 years old, like, my dad, I saw this guy, you know, we were watching the news, this guy, he, like, shoots this guy, like, comes at him, right?
	You know, pulls the gun, whips it out, bam, right?
	Yeah.
	And my kid ass was like, well, dad, I would wrestle him.
	You know, I'd put him on the ground.
	You know, I'd show him.
	And my dad was like, he just looked at me with that sideways look.
	You know, he was like, dude, you have no clue what you would have done.
	And like, the older I get, like, the more accurate that becomes.
	So like, those were just the two comments I wanted to make.
	You know, people just...
	No worries, man.
	Cool.
	Destiny, we should do this more, bro.
	Where we just fucking yap on current events.
	Because we have different viewpoints on shit, but we're obviously able to articulate our points and let the audience decide what they agree with and what they don't agree with.
	Yeah, especially copper law-related shit.
	We could definitely do this periodically.
	Give me ones in the chat if you guys would like that.
	Me and Destiny chopping it up every now and then, talking about current events and giving different perspectives on shit.
	But no, I think Destiny, you guys, is going to go to sleep.
	I'm going to end the stream here, too.
	We'll be back live tomorrow at 7.30, and we'll probably do a Zoom call after that, and then we'll have an after hours for you guys.
	Destiny, where can the people find you, bro?
	YouTube or kick.com slash destiny, yeah.
	Boom.
	And, dude, obviously, I know you're getting a lot of fucking heat right now and everything else like that.
	Like I said, even though me and you don't agree on everything, I respect you as a colleague, and I don't wish anything bad happened to you and, you know, for these weirdos that are trying to make threats against your life, whatever, fuck them, bro.
	So just be safe, okay?
	Yeah, good luck.
	Good luck on the new podcast and everything, too.
	I appreciate that, man.
	I appreciate that, brother.
	I'll see you, man.
	I'll text you.
	We'll set something up in the future.
	Sure thing.
	Alright.
	Alright, man.
	Peace.
	For the rest of you guys here, that is Destiny.
	Shout out to him.
	And guys, that right there is, you know, that's how you go ahead and do conversations or have conversations with people that you're diametrically opposed to.
	As you guys know, me and Destiny disagree on pretty much a lot of things.
	But, you know, we're able to have really good civil conversations and kind of let you guys pick and choose what you agree with and what you don't agree with.
	So, you know, despite people's personal feelings towards him, I like the guy.
	I get along with him.
	So I'm not going to publicly badmouth him because he's never really done wrong by me.
	So, anyway, show tomorrow, guys, 7.30 p.m.
	Go check my ex.
	I have a trailer on there, which I don't think I... Should we play it?
	Not on YouTube.
	We do it on Rumble?
	Yeah, like cut the YouTube and then play the thing?
	We can do that for them.
	Yeah, we'll do it.
	So, guys, if you're watching this on YouTube, do me a quick favor.
	Go ahead, Izzy, you're good.
	Do me a quick favor.
	Move on over to Rumble real quick.
	I'm going to show you guys a preview of a project that I got coming very soon with some certain individuals.
	We're only going to play it on Rumble.
	And you guys are going to see why we're playing on the Rumble once I play it.
	If you could pull up my ex here, Bills.
	Got something real fucking cool with you guys.
	I want to get your feedback.
	We'll end the show on that.
	Before we pull up your ex.
	Yeah, before we pull up my ex, what do you want to say?
	No, you know, make sure we switch.
	Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah.
	Oh, yeah, we're getting out of the Zoom call.
	Sorry.
	Before we pull up your ex, everyone come to the Rumble right now.
	Come to the Rumble real quick, guys.
	Or Castle Club.
	Or Castle Club.
	So, look at this dude just spamming L-Destiny, bro.
	Who is this dude, bro?
	Like, bro, I'll have a conversation with anyone even if I disagree with them, bro.
	Like, whatever.
	I think that's the beauty.
	Like, I don't want to be in an echo chamber.
	I want to be able to talk to other intelligent people that have differing viewpoints for myself.
	That's how I become sharper.
	So, I'm willing to have these conversations with other people, man.
	Come on over to Rumble, guys.
	We're going to show you guys this preview, which I'm really fucking excited to show you guys.
	It's a new project that I got.
	Are we fired up, Bills?
	Hold on one second.
	Almost done.
	Okay.
	We're going to show you guys this here in a second.
	Bear with us.
	But take this time to come on over.
	Well, we're going to have this live on X and on Rumble.
	But we're going to...
	Give us one second here, guys.
	Bills is pulling it up for you guys.
	Yeah, I just want to make it proper.
	I want people to...
	Oh, you're formatting it and shit?
	Yeah.
	Oh, you're getting rid of the stuff so it doesn't get blocked.
	Oh, okay.
	Smart, smart.
	Shout out to Bills for that.
	Guys, it's not easy, by the way, like, doing the stuff behind the scenes, you know, which I apologize for, that we accidentally turned the stream off before.
	I'm going to take accountability on that.
	Like, I didn't clearly explain that to the team, that, hey, stay on YouTube and rumble the whole time.
	Nah.
	I had mentioned it, but I didn't want to hear about it.
	No, no, no.
	It was our fault, yeah.
	We wasn't sure, because we were like, our protocol, you know, switch to locals now.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah.
	I want to stay on YouTube and rumble as long as I can.
	It ain't your fault, man.
	We should have thought, I'm like, yo, Andrew and Destiny was on their YouTube.
	Yeah.
	Because that's what we...
	Yeah, we should have thought.
	That's our fault.
	We was all...
	Nah, that's cool, man.
	I should have...
	We was on autopilot.
	Yeah, I should have told y'all.
	Don't take the fall for that.
	You ain't gonna take the rap.
	You ain't gonna take the rap for that, bro.
	Are we ready for the video?
	Yep.
	All right, guys.
	So we got the video ready to play.
	Let's go ahead and roll the clip.
	Make me smaller so they can get the full screen effect.
	I was gonna hide.
	Oh, you guys remove me?
	All right, that works.
	All right, niggas.
	I hope you guys are ready.
	This is the beginning of a revolution.
	Let's pull up the Rumble chat too.
	I want to see their expressions on this.
	We're going to show the Rumble chat.
	No, we're not on YouTube.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah.
	We're not on YouTube.
	Do we got the...
	What's it called?
	We're definitely only on Rumble, right?
	We're definitely on Rumble.
	Okay, cool.
	We're only on Rumble right now, so we're going to show the Rumble chat for y'all niggas.
	Give us one second.
	We can put the YouTube chat up too.
	Oh, put it separate?
	No, just the Rumble Chat, actually, because everyone's moving over.
	Yeah, my bad, actually.
	Alright.
	Alright, guys, here's the clip.
	I hope you guys enjoy.
	Let's fucking go.
	I was working all night on this shit with Red 5.
	Let's go.
	Oh, it's muted.
	It's muted?
	No, it isn't.
	Yeah, I can't hear it.
	You can't hear it?
	Hold on, let me see.
	No, I'm on Firefox.
	You sure?
	Yeah, I can't hear it.
	Jack, can you guys hear it, then?
	Oh, let me see.
	No.
	Am I tripping?
	You know what?
	Oh, the tab might be muted.
	Oh, the tab's probably muted.
	Yep, yep, yep.
	I already see it.
	Alright.
	Sorry about that, guys.
	Alright, we got y'all niggas.
	Alright, now you guys are going to be able to hear it.
	Roll the clip!
	The German nation does not wish its interests to be determined and controlled by any foreign nation.
	France to the French, England to the English, America to the Americans, Americans, Americans, Americans.
	I'm living in that 21st century, doing something mean to it.
	Do it better than anybody you've ever seen.
	Do it.
	Screens from the haters.
	Got a nice ring to it.
	I guess it is.
	Fuck you!
	I'm not going anywhere.
	I'm going to say what the fuck I want to say, and I'm going to fuck what anybody got to say.
	I cannot be bought!
	I have nothing else to lose.
	I don't get any brand deals.
	I don't get any collabs with the industry people.
	They do not want me.
	They do not accept me.
	They alienate me.
	So fuck it.
	What about the fucking Supreme Court spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to try to fight for free speech?
	Fuck you.
	What are you doing?
	You're not doing shit.
	Politics is not about the what.
	It's not about the how.
	It's not about the why or the when.
	It's about who.
	No one man should have all that power.
	The clock's ticking, I just count the hours.
	Stop chipping, I'm chipping off the power.
	Teal in fuck at the world's hours.
	And with that, my friends, we're going to end the show.
	music Hope you guys enjoyed that fucking trailer.
	Coming soon.
	Give me some fucking flame emojis in there.
	We're gonna fucking take over the conservative space.
	Control Chaos coming soon, guys.
	Love ya.
	I'll see you guys tomorrow at 7.30pm.
	Let's fucking go, man.
	I ran.
	I ran so far away.
	I just ran.

▲