In this installment, Dan and Jordan tune in for Alex's most recent interview with The Most Important Man In The World, which touches on important issues like how white people aren't racist enough and how the US should have stayed out of World War II.
They're sitting in the front seat of a convertible that has fallen out of a plane and there's a parachute, a giant parachute, so they're like floating to the ground.
So MacGyver has to break into his casino, find out where the diamonds are.
And once he does find out they're in the guy's private suite, he concocts an elaborate system where he pours the diamonds down a rain gutter and then they all go into the trunk of this car.
But beside you is the actual King Arthur, the guy who's going to become the king, the guy who's going on that whole hero's journey to defeat this guy and yada yada yada.
And you're over here and your story intersects with that one.
Like it comes in and out, you know?
It's always around you, but you're on this different quest entirely.
So it's like, well, I'm just, I'm going from room to room in this house, basically.
Each room is like a new encounter, right?
But the way it makes me feel like I'm twisting and turning on the ocean is because that other guy is just running by me going like, ah, and then he's gone.
The Supreme Court once again officially refused to hear an appeal of Alex's defamation cases where he lost by default judgment.
In terms of the court, there are no more moves for him to make.
And for the most part, Alex is just kind of waiting for the other shoe to fall so he can get on with it.
In the current status quo, he has to keep Infowars running for two reasons.
One, if he just abandoned the company and moved on to his new fake businesses, it would destroy the idea that he's operating in good faith in the bankruptcy court, and it could lead the courts to consider treating the new businesses, these fake businesses, as extensions of InfoWars, and thus they might end up becoming subject to the bankruptcy.
Two, the audience needs to see him be forced out of InfoWars, which is to say that he can't leave on his own.
His entire life has been a build-up to being Colonel Travis at the Alamo, and this is basically his only shot to capture those optics.
Alex can't afford to blow this spectacle, and he knows that his audience would feel pretty let down if he voluntarily left the studio, so someone needs to drag him out.
Interestingly, the worst thing that could happen to Alex right now is for this to go on longer.
Every day he has to keep Infowars open is a day he's losing some amount of money on the crew and the overhead of that dumb studio, so he has to be really hoping that people come to seize his shit soon.
As I've said a bunch, the primary mission for Alex right now is customer migration and making sure that most people possible go to this new app and his new website.
If he can get a relatively close number of customers to make that jump with him, he'll be able to continue doing the same kind of bullshit he's been doing, but with the huge expenses that InfoWars brought with it limited because he'll just be doing a podcast.
And thus, it wasn't too surprising to see that Alex was out of studio earlier this week.
He has more important tasks than his own show right now, between the legal stuff and the need to drum up attention for the new site.
As Alex has become entirely untethered to any pretense of caring about his precious constitution, I'm sure the audience has noticed that I've had a little bit less interest in him too.
He's only a compelling figure so long as he's presenting a perspective that you can disagree with, but you have to accept as rooted in some sincere belief.
Once that grounding is taken away, then there's no standard to judge a person by.
Everything Alex says is a lie, not because it's all lies, but because if circumstances require it, anything he said can be disowned, and it doesn't matter.
During the first Trump term, Alex probably wanted Trump to do a lot of the shit that he's doing now, but the difference is he is doing it now.
In the abstract, with someone like Alex, it's hard to take his shit talk too seriously.
He sold shirts that said lock her up, but you kind of got the sense that if Trump legit arrested Hillary, Alex might have thought that was going too far.
January 6th is a perfect embodiment of this tension, where he spent months leading Stop the Steel protests and screaming about how the election was stolen.
But when the rubber hit the road and people were storming the Capitol, he was on a bullhorn trying to stop them.
The business always came first, and having a tyrant in office was bad for business.
Overthrowing the 2020 election and killing Democratic senators in a riot at the Capitol, that would have been bad for business.
And I think this is part of what's fundamentally changed.
Trump just is the business now.
This is it.
As I've been losing my interest in Alex, I've simultaneously been picking up much more interest in Tucker Carlson, who's clearly decided that he wants to be the next Alex.
He's been attacked by a demon.
He's building a media empire funded by bizarre, low-rung, but loyal sponsors.
And right now, he's in the middle of releasing a five-part documentary series about what really happened on 9-11.
And then now, as I predicted, it was the next move.
NATO claims that Russia is going into the zero phase or zero hour, and that NATO's now putting out propaganda the last 48 hours, that Russia has pre-positioned undercover Spetsnot special forces all over Europe, preparing terror attacks and mass casualty events, and that Russia is preparing to attack Europe proper, which, of course, is completely insane to do that offensively.
And so that fits the pattern of the preparation for false flags that will then be blamed on Russia as the pretext to invoke the articles in NATO that ranks NATO directly into war.
And then if the United States is still part of NATO, that will drag us directly into war with Russia that will quickly escalate into thermonuclear war in every major war game there is.
That's why I hear Elon Musk and Senator Lee that it's time for us to get out of NATO.
So obviously a huge part of this show is how great Russia is and how bad Ukraine is, because that's an important piece of Alex and Tucker's politics right now.
Tucker's argument is fine if you take out the part where Russia invaded Ukraine and Ukraine is our ally.
They aren't in NATO, but we and other countries in Europe have relations with them and they were invaded.
He can say that Europe has no reason to fight with Russia, but they actually do.
In order for Tucker to hold this position, he has to think that it's fine for countries to invade their neighbors and that it only makes sense to provide aid to allies if they're going to win a conflict.
Tucker just supports Russia and Putin, but he's not willing to own that position because he knows he couldn't defend many of the points he'd have to deal with if he just came out with it.
So he does bullshit like this and pretends, oh, there's no reason why they would have a problem with this invasion.
And I would say to the last point, you know, I would argue that the Taliban won.
So I think really at a certain point, it's just to like, as long as you spend a lot more money than you can realistically afford to spend trying to take over an hour of our, you know, an hour of driving space, I think you probably lost.
It was been the policy of the United States since the 50s, right through next gen, right through Reagan, right through Herbert Walker Bush, right until just the last five years or so to split China from Russia.
Of course.
And that is a very good policy.
And you have China that is actually expanding all over the South China Sea, just cut off 95% of rarest minerals to the world, including the U.S. Serious act of war, absolutely vital and everything.
We do, for folks who don't know, nothing works.
Cell phones, computers, avionics and aircraft, everything, satellites is based on those.
That's all their question.
How is China allowed to position itself for 95% plus control of rarest minerals?
That's a serious act of war.
So their expansion is taking islands in the Philippines, taking drilling rigs off the coast of Vietnam.
All that's happening.
They just put a communist government or trying to fully in South Korea.
So China is on the move, and everything should be focused on them.
It is a strategic blunder of biblical proportions to be roped into the Soros-NATO war.
But NATO and the EU unelected commission has said for years that Europe's demographics and finances are the worst of any first world nation or sector.
And so they say their business model is a 20 to 30 year war conventional with Russia that they believe.
will allow them to stay on a war economy and will finally break Russia, and then they will break Russia into five parts.
It's about how the EU countries need to enact a plan of defensive rearming in the face of Russia's invasion of Ukraine, but it doesn't say that they need a 20 to 30 year war for economic or demographic reasons.
The idea that the EU was planning a 20 to 30 year war with Russia is a big deal.
And if Alex could prove it, it would go a long way towards proving that the EU side here doesn't have pure intentions in the conflict.
So that's something that Tucker should be eager to show everyone.
You notice that he doesn't ask a follow-up about this or press Alex on it because he knows that Alex is bluffing all this shit, and it only works if you don't question it.
Because they want to destroy Christian civilization.
That's why.
This is why they got behind the first and second world wars, and it's why the lesson that they taught us in school was that it's dangerous to have a big white Christian country, which is not, actually.
And Russia is a very Christian nation, very pro-Western, and the left hates that.
And so now exactly, how do they turn over the chessboard when the Hollywood satanic globalist black rocket leader failing is you kamikaze the Russians and America and Europe into a giant climactic war while the globalists sit back and watch us all kill each other?
So you can see from this clip that the conversation that they're interested in having is one about white Christian identity, not anything about geopolitics.
So let's just dispense with that illusion.
As for why the U.S. might be sending Tomahawk missiles to Ukraine, that's a question for Tucker and Alex's chosen leader.
Biden didn't do that.
The globalists didn't do that.
Their daddy is the one who's talking about that, which is weird, considering that he had that whole PR spectacle like six months ago where he yelled at and humiliated Zelensky in the White House.
Seems like this Trump guy is inconsistent and dangerous.
Because it would be like, hey, listen, you'd have to be an idiot looking at the history of humanity and not think, well, we're going to give an idiot too much power, right?
That happens 100% of the time in all historic governments.
We're going to give an idiot too much power.
So what we got to do is we got to build into our system a system that will correct for when that idiot gets into power.
We'll just have it there.
If it needs to be declared, I'm sure people will have the backbone necessary to declare it.
Why would the U.S. government continue to recognize Zelensky, who's an unelected dictator who's worked for years to destroy Christianity in Ukraine, which is a Christian country and has always been?
Why would he be invited to the White House this week?
I don't understand.
He does not have a democratic mandate.
He's not an elected leader.
He's a murderer.
They've sold our weapons to some of the worst terror groups in the world.
And just what, a few weeks ago, three weeks ago, he was back at the White House and Trump then posted through his social.
And I love Trump overall, but Trump started doing a 180 from saying we need to get out of this and saying, well, we're out of it, but we'll sell whatever weapons to Europe you want.
And I feel like Ukraine's going to win and maybe not just get back its territory, but get more territory, meaning Russia, which is an extremely provocative and escalatory statement to Russia.
Like, if Trump didn't want to recognize Zelensky as the leader of Ukraine, he could just do that tomorrow.
It's pretty clear that he can just do whatever he wants, and then the government has to play catch-up to decide if the things that he did were legal.
And then that's mostly just paperwork for posterity.
I guess the question I would ask Tucker is, if Zelensky isn't the president of Ukraine, who is?
Is there another person there who claims to be the leader or is the head of the opposition party who wants to be recognized?
Or do people actually support Zelensky?
There are a ton of political parties in Ukraine, and Zelensky has gotten some heat for banning 19 of them.
It's debatable whether or not this is appropriate, and under ideal circumstances, you wouldn't want to do this.
But these were parties that had ties to Putin and Russia who were in the middle of invading Ukraine.
The other accusation about him being anti-democratic is that the planned election in 2024 was canceled.
Pretty much every leader in Ukraine, pro-Zelensky or not, agrees that in a wartime condition like the one they're in, it would be impossible to hold a free and fair election.
A poll conducted by sociological centrist Sosis in February 2025 found that 63% of Ukrainians did not want to hold an election until the war was over.
You can say that not having an election is undemocratic, but there's also an argument that in this position, it's the most democratic thing you can do.
I mean, the idea of trying to hold an election while another country is actively inside your country would suggest that they could probably do some serious damage to the accuracy of your vote count.
In terms of being anti-Christian, that's also not true.
In 2024, Zelensky's government passed a bill that outlawed organizations that maintain ties with Moscow and Putin.
This included religious organizations, most notably the Ukrainian Orthodox Church.
Members of the UOC have been charged with storing weapons for Russian troops and churches and revealing Ukrainian troop movements in sermons.
Certainly, the Ukrainian Orthodox Church is a large entity, and not all of their members are covertly supporting an invading country.
So this tension between the UOC and Ukraine's government is probably larger than it needs to be.
At the core of the issue is that the UOC has removed their connection to the Russian Orthodox Church from their charter, but the Russian Orthodox Church hasn't removed them from what they consider to be their constellation of churches.
Ukraine considers them to be an offshoot of the Russian Orthodox Church unless that status is removed and the UOC believes that they've done everything that they need to do on their part.
So this isn't as simple as Tucker wants it to be, like with pretending that Zelensky is anti-Christian, but it also would be unfair to say that Zelensky's move here doesn't deserve some criticism.
Sure.
It's always a dicey move to have a state oppose a church from a just purely strategic standpoint.
You're not going to be able to get the church, get rid of it.
No, what's funny about it is that it's the inverse of what we were told.
Okay, so Russia's doing in Iraq right now, essentially, right?
And we're hearing about Iraq from places that aren't the United States.
So we're not used to that, right?
But essentially, like there's no difference between that thought of like, oh, they're going to meet us as meet us as liberators, right?
Okay.
So if you feel like you've got an unelected government that's taking over and fighting a war with the warriors of the other team in your house, join them and get rid of your government.
And like, I think it would be a lot more compelling for Tucker to have this kind of position that could be a little bit out of step with the Trump administration if he didn't share the stage with half of the administration at Charlie Kirk's funeral memorial service thing.
Like if he didn't call Trump daddy on the campaign trail, like all this bullshit.
And we know that Putin agreed, actually, to the framework of what Trump wanted, but Zelensky and NATO have refused.
And so we have to ask the calculus of why the president, who's, you know, Mr. Peace Prize, has done a great job helping in seven other conflicts, which I totally support.
In professional media circles, this is what's known as a strategic commercial break.
Tucker is not on TV or radio, so he doesn't have to cut to hard breaks.
It's entirely at his own discretion.
He chose to go to a commercial there because Alex just asked a direct question that implicates Tucker's inside knowledge of how the administration is justifying supporting Ukraine.
And Tucker doesn't want to answer that question.
He doesn't want the connective tissue of whatever he says next and that question.
And when you come back, you can pick up wherever you want.
You can just jump to an entirely different part of the conversation or you can play Tucker's answer, knowing that the audience will have largely forgotten what Alex asked because they were just sold beef tallow.
So we come back from commercial and here's what Tucker's answer to that question appears to be.
Yeah, it felt a little bit like we were in a car following another car and then that car crossed over some train tracks and then the train crossed over and it's like we're just stuck there waiting to see what happens.
I don't know where we're going to find this car again, but we're not going to find it where it's supposed to be.
And I think that if Tucker didn't have a long and documented history of editing things that are inconvenient for the message that he wants to put out, I'd be less suspicious of that very suspicious commercial.
If you really study 9-11, and at the end of the day, it was an alliance of Israeli neocons and U.S. neocons that bare minimum used an attack to build a larger attack around it for the Project for New American Century to take us into the Pax Americana war in the Middle East.
And that's where we, you know, $10 trillion later or whatever it is, I think it's $11 trillion or more are in this.
If Tucker was sharing office space with the Project for New American Century and he can vouch that they were plotting 9-11 as a false flag in order to justify a wider war because he was there and he knew these guys, then Tucker's actions supporting the Iraq war aren't really an error in judgment anymore.
If what Tucker is saying is true here, then he was a witting and fully aware conspirator acting in the media to convince the public that 9-11 was a real attack and that it justified going to war in Afghanistan and Iraq.
In order for Tucker to present himself as an authority in this space, he unfortunately will need to confess to some much bigger sins than he's willing to take on at this point.
If you're sitting across the table from someone who's saying stuff like this and you've already said that Tucker has been in the CIA for his entire life, you should probably be concerned about what he's trying to sell you.
I know that it feels cool for Alex to be like, oh, Tucker wants to pay attention to me.
But by Alex's own telling of the story, he's a lifelong CIA agent, second generation.
Yep.
Somebody who is now saying that he was around and hanging out with the guys who did 9-11.
Yeah, if that were even remotely true, or even kind of like if you put yourself into the headspace of somebody who in reality was there while they planned 9-11, did nothing about it, then actively helped create a narrative around 9-11 that caused the further deaths of millions upon millions of people, I would kill myself.
Yeah, if this is even, yeah, if even this, if this is even like an iota of truth in this, this man is worse than any serial killer you've ever watched a TV show about.
But, you know, they call it neocons or you talk about neocons that's anti-Semitic.
Well, yeah, about half the neocons were Jewish.
But the fact is they're crazy warmongers that believe the end justifies the mean.
And when we get further back, Trotsky got kicked out by Stalin and he ran to Mexico.
Stalin had him hunted down and killed by an assassin with an ice axe.
And then all of his top people came to the U.S., became the neocons, and said, we're going to take over the Republican Party and we're going to go to war with Russia to get back control of what's ours because Trotsky was supposed to replace Lenin when he died, but instead he got kicked out.
And so it is a fact, historical fact, even the Wall Street Journal 20 years ago wrote about it that when you look at the Weekly Standard and you look at the neocons, they are literal Trotskyite communist Russian derivation that set up a neoconism.
And then you had Cheney and Rumsfeld and others that weren't Jewish, but were large parts of the neocon system.
And so that's why Netanyahu plugged into that so nicely because he came out of the neocons in the 1970s and 80s.
So it's not always anti-Semitic to call someone a neocon, but it is used as a code in some circles.
It's the same thing as globalist.
Some people use these words sincerely, and some people have found that they're very useful ways to hide what they're actually saying.
And so getting into an argument about whether or not calling someone a neocon is bigoted or anti-Semitic, it's counterproductive.
Neoconservatives weren't just the students of Trotsky who decided to come to the United States and take over so they could reclaim Russia.
That's fucking stupid.
In reality, they were mostly disaffected liberal types in the 60s who hated the anti-war protests and the counterculture that was being embraced by the left.
They were the Dave Rubens of their time, the like why I left the left crowd.
During the Reagan administration, there was a split between the neoconservatives and the paleoconservatives as the neocons began to rise in power and the old guard lost some of it.
Figures like Pat Buchanan and all of Alex's ideological heroes were on the losing side of this exchange.
So a lot of their ideology took shape around the idea that there was a conspiracy to usurp them and that the neocons were secret leftists.
A lot of Alex's ideological heroes were also super anti-Semitic.
So a lot of this gets jumbled up in a way that's really difficult to unpack.
I guess Tucker was a secret Trotskyite CIA agent who was promoting war on TV, wearing a silly bow tie for most of his career, though, based on what he's saying.
Back in 2015, the Congress of the United States repealed something called the Country of Origin Labeling Act.
Now, why is this relevant to you?
Well, it means, among other things, that when you buy beef at the supermarket that says made in the USA, it may not actually be.
In fact, it could be, likely is, from a foreign country.
It means that repackaging foreign meat can be enough to get the made in the USA designation.
It's a lie.
It's an absolute lie.
Most people don't even know what's happening.
So how can you be sure that the meat you're eating is from the United States and has been raised with the highest quality standards and is the tastiest?
It's truly made here.
Well, it's simple.
You can go to our friends at Meriwether Farms.
Meriwether Farms is an American small business.
It's based in Riverton, Wyoming.
We know the people who run it and they're great people.
And they have greatest quality meat raised free from growth hormones.
Of course, the first, second world wars were that.
That was it.
That's not pro-Hitler.
I'm anti-Hitler, just for the record.
Very anti-Hitler.
But the effect was the most beautiful civilization ever created by far in history, all history.
And this is the final blow.
It seems very, very obvious, very obvious to me, and we should be aware of that as we proceed.
When gold crosses 4,000, I don't understand why that's not like front page news.
Because to me, that may be, you're better at this than I'm, but that means that the cumulative effect of everything we're discussing has been to destroy the U.S. dollar.
It's a little jarring to listen to this show and them talk about like how evil wants to destroy Christianity, then cut to a beef commercial and then cut to Tucker mid-sentence talking about how evil want the World War I and he doesn't like Hitler, but they very anti-Hitler.
Yeah, but evil forces wanted to destroy Christian society.
Way that the number of times you told me it was real, it was from the United States, and that it wasn't made of some sort of fucking horrifying mutation thing makes me convinced that it is one of those three.
But I just think that there's something to this, like the triviality of this, like, buy my beef, and then also, like, World War I and two were meant to destroy God.
I also like the idea that the way you're selling it is like, you don't want any of this foreign beef, and not like, buddy, you probably shouldn't have meat traveling around the world.
I think that's probably a bad idea, even if it's from like your town, but then it travels around the world one time before it gets to you.
So I think that there's something really interesting about Alex's position, even as he's not interesting and he becomes like this sort of organ that has outlived its usefulness.
There's still something very interesting about the fact that he's able to take things that I would in some other circumstances totally agree with and make me like, I don't want your help with this.
And we have now these attorney generals winning court cases in Texas and other places where BlackRock tried to come in and say, we're not going to have any investment in your state if you don't get rid of fossil fuels.
And then Texas sued Kim Paxton and said, this is racketeering.
Texas, through Ken Paxton, did sue BlackRock along with State Street and Vanguard over accusations that they engaged in monopolistic practices.
However, Alex is saying that the case involved BlackRock saying that they wouldn't invest in anything in Texas if they didn't get rid of fossil fuels, which is inaccurate.
The claim is that these three investment firms acquired a large amount of shares in nine large coal-producing companies with ownership stakes ranging from about 8% to 34%.
It's alleged that all three of these investment firms have agreed that they're not going to invest in coal companies that have plans to expand production.
So the idea is that these firms have gathered influence in these coal companies and are restricting the production of coal, which is anti-competitive and subject to antitrust laws.
Recently, BlackRock, State Street, and Vanguard asked the court to dismiss the case on the grounds that there isn't a serious accusation being made, essentially arguing that even if everything the case claimed was true, there still isn't any crime or wrongdoing.
The court didn't rule on the merits of this case, but Alex is lying and pretending that they did.
He's also lying about what these firms did, claiming that they said that they wouldn't invest in anything in the state if they didn't get rid of fossil fuels.
This is such a great illustration of Alex's worthlessness.
It may very well be the case that these investment firms are engaged in some monopolistic practices that should be stopped, but he can't help but lie about the situation in order to make his job easier and make his argument more exciting.
If you're actually opposed to the monopolistic practices, the idea of that, that BlackRock could be engaged in this, Alex is going to ruin your ability to push back against it because he's going to make you look like an idiot.
So there's a fight between: do you want the 1984 civilization or do you want the 1776 civilization?
1776 isn't going back.
It's back to the future.
It was the flower of the Renaissance and the greatest expression of hundreds and hundreds of years of the Great Awakening and of the Enlightenment.
And so it's a continuation of that.
We have to get back to the future, back to the avant-garde, back to what produces the most freedom, the most wealth.
Classical liberalism of Thomas Jefferson.
Now, modern liberalism is totalitarian, anti-family, anti-speech, anti-self-defense, anti-private property.
Modern liberalism is a totalitarian, death cult, transhumanist poison to sabotage human civilization.
It's a depopulation program.
1776 is the ultimate most successful push of humans to produce the very best atmosphere of liberty and freedom and competition and empowerment.
The problem is in the cycle, as you know, hard times make strong men, strong men make good times, good times make weak men, weak men make bad times.
The problem is, is that, are we good enough?
It was Benjamin Franklin, right if they finally, you know, years later after the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, you know, finally got the Bill of Rights done.
And he was walking out, the newspaper reporter said, Mr. Franklin, you know, do we now finally have our nation?
And he said, yes, you have your republic if you can keep it.
Like, at the very least, you'd think if there was one world government, sure, maybe they're oppressive and shit like that, but you can get from one place to another because there's nobody in the way.
So there are moments in life where someone sounds really fucking stupid to the point where if you're talking to them, you should feel embarrassed that you're not stopping them.
Yeah.
And I think that this is one of those moments where Alex starts explaining the Podesta plan to Tucker, and he has to do the open mouth like, oh, my God.
And they say, if he wins, we will say it's illegitimate.
We will have blue states first secede and that they're going to be sanctuary cities for the illegals.
Then when there's civil unrest, which they'll furnish, Trump will send the National Guard and then there'll be a massacre of the migrants.
And then we will kick off a civil war.
Then all the blue cities across the country will secede.
Then New York, Massachusetts, and others will secede.
And we'll form what we call the Western Alliance.
And we will then, the U.S. military will be with us because they control the generals, people that don't think otherwise that was Trump's big mistake.
He found out.
Most of them are globalists at the top, not your enlisted.
They're great people.
And that they would then form a military alliance if Trump didn't stand down and they would march on D.C. And then they made a movie produced two years ago they released last year called Civil War that is the last act of the Podesta Plan.
That's in a two-plus-year Civil War race-based.
At the end, they go and the black female sergeant kills the Trumpian figure in the White House.
Because Alex is trying to be calm and sound like someone you should take seriously.
He's not employing all of his standard flourishes and theatrics, which makes him just sound like a delusional person who should be talking to a social worker.
This is all just half-remembered details from news stories he didn't read and a movie he didn't watch to Alex is combined into a race war fantasy.
He says in that clip that the Podesta report includes states forming a group called the Western Alliance.
But in the report, the group that comes together in one of the scenarios is called Cascadia.
Alex pretends the name is the Western Alliance, and that's used in the report because in the movie, they call it the Western Forces.
And he absolutely knows that Tucker isn't going to push back on this.
Another point is that the Civil War movie goes out of its way not to explain why the United States is in a civil war because it's a story being told through the viewpoint of conflict journalists whose job requires them to maintain a distance from the horrors that they're witnessing.
The movie is trying to force the viewer to see things through their eyes.
And if you knew why the war was happening, it would be very easy to take a side.
And that moralizing would take away from the fundamental point Alex Garland was making with the movie, which has to do with PTSD and how hard journalism is.
The idea of trying to just negotiate your way out of it, it would make more sense for the United States government to just murder everybody in California and then resettle it than it would to try and negotiate out of it.
You have the Soros NGO-funded No Kings events, like they had on the 14th of June, when the guy that worked for Tampon Tim went around reportedly, you know, killing senators and state reps there at the state level.
He later told the FBI to write letters saying, no, I did this for the Democrats as a false flag.
So that Tim Walls could play victim.
He supposedly had a bunch of accomplices, but they didn't help him.
They caught his wife and a bunch of people with passports, guns, and money, fleeing the area.
But within two hours of the attack, they had his roommate on TV saying, oh, he loved Trump and Alex Jones.
Isn't that interesting?
It's all very scripted.
But my point is, now you have the No Kings this weekend.
And we now have Schumer on Monday went on MSNBC and said, we need to have a forceful uprising.
If you really believe that widespread civil unrest preparatory to civil war is coming, if Chuck Schumer, you know, one of the senior senators is calling for it, then you really need to make sure the military is under control, that it's not politicized, that it's not, you know, that it reports to the president as politicizing the military's the key, correct?
Man, I think, yeah, if the president can just direct prosecutions, then like I don't like, I don't know what Alex could ever be mad about, like a government doing.
As soon as they kick this off, there are people that are first on the list that they're planning to come get.
Because I'm not trying to, you know, this Tucker, you're smart.
When they really launch this, and it's not going to be them knocking your door down in D.C. It's going to be a group of meth heads rolling up with Maloff cocktails.
And they've got these undercover videos in Austin and Portland and everywhere, hours of them.
And it shows inside these warehouses where they give them drugs and money and food and the NGOs.
And they're just all in there ramped up and ready with guns and weapons.
And just as soon as they give them the green light, they are going to just pile in their vans and come to kill.
Think of Helter Skelter times 10,000.
Think of the Manson family times 10,000.
They've got Manson family groups in every major city and most small towns literally that would make the cast of Chainsaw Massacre look like choir boys ready to go.
At what point when you sign a contract and at the end at the other side of that contract is somebody giving you a lot of drugs and then convincing you to start a war or something?
And then the older people who don't want to accept that they're watching Nazi propaganda will be reassured by the very sincere way Tucker's voice sounds when he gets so quiet and serious talking about white people not being tribal.
The story Alex is talking about here involves Virginia Attorney General candidate Jay Jones, who texted someone three years ago that if he had a choice between shooting Hitler, Paul Pott, and former House Speaker Todd Gilbert, quote, Gilbert gets two bullets.
He and Tucker are huge enemies of DEI, which is a term that means diversity, equity, and inclusion.
Hysteria around DAI was a big part of their sales pitch for Trump in 2024, and they promised that if he got in, he'd undo all that stuff.
The thing is, a lot of DEI requirements are just about widening the recruitment pool for various jobs.
It's not about setting hiring quotas.
It's mostly about making sure that a wide variety of candidates are aware of job openings and have the opportunity to apply.
If Alex were interested in any kind of merit-based system, as opposed to one based on conspiratorial racism, he would have a much more nuanced position on DEI.
I mean, just the very simple idea of, hey, if we only let people in a certain class in a certain area who have access to certain things know about this job, we're only going to get people from a certain area, from a certain class who have awareness of this stuff.
It wasn't a religious thing that separated the Hutu and Tutsi and Rhonda.
Obviously, the story is far more complicated than being able to distill things down into one quick answer, but a large part of the conflict traced back to Belgian colonial times, where the Belgians viewed the lighter-skinned Tutsi as closer to white and thus gave them an elevated position in the colonial state.
The Belgian colonist state codified their identities as either Hutu or Tutsi.
And over time, the majority Hutu were ruled by a mostly Tutsi elite.
And this was one of the primary drivers of the genocide.
You know, Dan, sometimes when you look back at the history of colonialism and you see these non-tribal white people who are very peaceful and uninterested in taking resources from other people.
And whenever they just decide who's in government, they do a great job.
Didn't you ever notice that?
Like, if we didn't have the Brits, where would India and Pakistan be?
They'd just be what?
A group of people not trying to kill each other all the time?
When I was a kid, when I was real young, I used to read the Dragonlance novels.
And I'm sure that there will be, right now, as those words were spoken, there are people listening to this who are like shitting in their cars, just going like, I did that too.
Right.
So there was this character named Raysland Majeer, right?
And his curse was that he had hourglass pupils because all he could see was what would happen, the decay of the end of the world, right?
That's what I see whenever I look at Tucker Carlson.
I see his face like melting away and becoming a corpse.
Like in Indiana Jones and the fucking Last Crusade.
And whatever you're talking about, like the anxiety and the stress is all gone because he's fucking stupid rich and knows that he's insulated from the problems that he's exacerbating that other people have to deal with.
And the funny thing is, you know, they've been preemptively preparing us for this by doing this whole white, you're a white supremacist and, you know, you're a racist.
And when I first heard that, I was, I never met a white supremacist in my life.
I still don't know any, actually.
And I don't mirror.
There are so few racists in this country, at least in my time, 50 years ago.
Well, the reason is because they're hedging their bets.
They've lived long enough to think, well, the pendulum's going to swing back.
I don't want to have a, you know, now that we're in the future, let's look back and see all the people who fucking really went for it and go after them.
I don't know if it is, but like, the way that everything has broken, particularly, you know, over the last number of years, but especially, you know, it's accelerated.
Sure.
I don't feel like you should have any expectation that there is a normal that ever will exist again.
See, this is fun because Tucker also interviewed Ye when he was having his anti-Semitic meltdown, and he edited tons of stuff out of the interview in order to present Ye as not hating Jewish people.
He just had interesting ideas.
See, Tucker bringing up Ye is funny because he was part of trying to facilitate Ye's whole Nazi thing by editing out egregious parts of their interview so he looked more palatable to naive viewers.
And that's great that we finally get to this part where Tucker is just saying we should have stayed out of World War II.
Great.
Cool, man.
Also, the Lindbergh baby kidnapping happened in 1932.
So that seems unrelated to his anti-interventionist position in World War II.
They're talking about how we should have just stayed out of World War II and Lindbergh has been wrongly smeared as a supporter of Nazis and what have you.
And then without missing a beat, he's just like, hey, how's Ye doing?
And for Tucker to have the awareness of hindsight and still be like we should have stayed out of it means that he would have been fine with any level of industrial genocide that was being carried out then.
Yeah, the guy who's going around to all the media hits and yelling about Jews and talking about how he loves Hitler and how we're not going to be mean to Nazis anymore.
How could you ever possibly think that he would be unfit to be on air?
God, I hate it that they get to talk about shit that's real, but they do it in the exact same way that they talk about demons, but then they don't talk about demons, which would be fun.