Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

March 8, 2019 - Louder with Crowder

01:13:31

#442 AOC CAUGHT IN DIRTY MONEY SCAM! | Alex Jones Guests | Louder With Crowder

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Louder with Crowder Studios.
	protected exclusively by Walter and Hopper.
	♪♪♪ DefendGavin.com
	What's it all about?
	Now, I want you to remember that no bastard ever beat the SPLC being all Peely Wally and eating Jammie Dodgers on the couch.
	He succeeded by getting off his arse while those Peely Wallies ate Jammie Dodgers on the couch.
	Big man, all this stuff you've heard about the Southern Poverty Law Centre is a load of absolute shite.
	Americans, for this reason, are buzzing for free speech.
	All real Americans are mad with saying what they think, even when their patter is rotten.
	When yous were wains.
	When you all admired the controversial comedians.
	The Billy Connollys.
	The outspoken class clown.
	The old man if he'd done the road he wouldn't have taken his shite like Rob Bloody Nesbitt or even Jack and Victor.
	Americans love free speech and they're not going to tolerate a load of pure shite dafties taking it away.
	Now.
	I would never say aud your wish to a man whose bum was out the windy.
	That's why Americans have never lost and never will lose free speech.
	Because the very thought of having no right is hateful to Americans.
	The perverted Peter Puffers who wrote that stuff about Ma Wayne don't know anything more about the real free speech battle than they know about getting their haul.
	And I've got a strong feeling these Jessies haven't even winched a bird.
	Now, we have the best spirit and the best innovators in the world.
	You know, by God, I actually pity those lazy crybaby bastards we're going up against.
	By God, I do.
	And we're not all just going to fight the SPLC.
	We're going to sue them and use their jobbies to grease the wheels of freedom.
	We're going to beat those bastards one lawsuit at a time.
	Now, some of you boys and girls and Z's, however made up pronouns you have, I know some of yous are wondering or not, I'll chicken you out of fire.
	Don't worry about it.
	I can assure you I'll do my duty.
	The SPLC and their ilk are the enemy and I'll set about them.
	I'll give them the Glasgow kiss and have them spend their spondoolies on lawyers.
	We're going to grab the SPLC by the dick and we're going to kick them in the ass.
	We're going to kick the hell out of them all the time and we're going to fight through them like crap through a gush!
	It's going to be a square go and there are going to be guys scattered!
	Now, there's one thing we'll be able to say after this fight, and you may thank God or me for it.
	Thirty years from the new, when you're sitting around the fireside with your grand Wayne on your knee, and he asks you, here you, what did you do about free speech?
	You won't have to say, well I sat around and watched it all come crashing down.
	Alright now you sons of b****es.
	You know how I feel.
	I may be out my nut but I'm game and that's what matters.
	And I will be bloody proud to lead you people into this legal battle anytime, anywhere, nae danger!
	Defend Gavin.com That's all
	Defend Gavin.com Defend Gavin.com
	You're a strange animal, that's what I know You're too strange animal, I come to follow
	I'm a misogynist That's called the I'm Not Sick
	Because I am sick.
	I'm sure as many of you can imagine if you've listened to that.
	Do you have AIDS?
	I very well might.
	I have no idea.
	By the way, we have Alex Jones on the show today, controversial figure.
	Fair warning, it was a pre-tape because I didn't know if my voice would hold up.
	Don't try to imagine.
	But we have an extended web edition that will be available exclusively for Mug Club members.
	And we have Quarterback here.
	Show him your... What's up, man?
	That's absolutely terrible.
	We have, hey, in third chair, you know him, you love him, Mahmood Al Mahmood, ISIS communications director.
	Communications director extraordinaire.
	Good to see you again, Stephen.
	Thank you for having me.
	It's surprising that we have your revisits.
	Yes, you know, I try.
	I try.
	I appreciate your trust in us.
	And we also have G. Morgan Jr.
	What's the wine of the day?
	The wine of the day is Eight Years in the Desert Zinfandel.
	Eight Years in the Desert Zinfandel.
	All right.
	I don't know anything about that, but that sounds anti-Semitic.
	That sounds right up my alley.
	That's totally not.
	I don't know why it would sound up your alley.
	No, I don't do wine.
	What does wine taste like?
	It's illegal.
	I thought it was... Wait, it's 8 years in the desert?
	It's called 8 years in the desert.
	Not quite 40, but 8 years in the desert.
	Yeah, I know.
	They got their little murky in the math.
	But the principle's the same!
	By the way, what do you think was the highlight this week for Democrats?
	Farrakhan endorsing Omar?
	Representative James Clyburn implying that Omar had it worse than your average Holocaust survivor?
	Let us know in the comments below.
	We're going to get to Cortez's potential campaign finance violations in a little bit.
	We actually will have Cortez on the show!
	We are going to have Cortez on the show.
	What would you say there, Mahmoud, this week is the highlight for Democrats?
	Oh, anything with Ilhan Omar, man.
	Their party from another party, yeah.
	Did she come up through your ranks?
	Did you have any relationship with her?
	No, I never crossed paths with her, but maybe one day.
	She had already married your brother.
	It was too late for him.
	Bleeding the news before that.
	Google, you guys read about this?
	Google attempted to address wage equity.
	Good, finally.
	Turns out, They're paying men way less than women.
	This comes from the New York Times.
	A survey of salaries reached the surprising conclusion men were being underpaid, but the company acknowledged that the analysis did not address broader issues of gender inequity.
	To swiftly resolve the gap, Google immediately executed all men by way of crucifixion.
	Yeah, that's a man in question reached for comment.
	Couldn't answer until a woman said they could, so they actually didn't hear from them a whole lot.
	That's a quality crucifixion.
	Wow.
	That's good.
	As somebody who's done it many times, you're like, ah, nice handiwork.
	I wonder who their guy is.
	Wow.
	What would you say with your organization?
	Is it comfortable to Google for a guy?
	Is it easier to get a head?
	Oh, definitely.
	Definitely.
	The guy's definitely better at getting a head.
	Even two heads.
	Sometimes three heads.
	For people listening to Terrestrial, that is not a sexual reference.
	Merely murder.
	I love the last part of that.
	The broader issues of gender inequity.
	I'm like, OK, so you guys have been feeding us this gender pay gap line forever, despite facts to the contrary.
	And you finally do a study on it, and you're like, oh, but there's broader issues of inequity.
	We have to pivot real quick.
	Yes, there are broader issues.
	What's that?
	Maybe we have too many Asians?
	I think it's almost like Brown.
	Like, there's a scary lot.
	There's a lot.
	It's scary!
	It's going to turn, and when it does, it's not going to be pretty.
	Turning to, I guess we'll call this next story science fiction.
	An ex-transgender man now wants to live life as a sexless alien.
	Also, he's had his nipples removed.
	We'll get to that in a second.
	This comes from The Mirror.
	Unsullied.
	What did he steal?
	Jareth.
	Okay, before I continue this, who else here, when you read this story, read, okay, sexless alien, removed nipples, named Jareth, knew immediately, show of hands, it was named after David Bowie from Labyrinth.
	No.
	No?
	No?
	It was me.
	Yeah, immediately.
	So Jareth, named after David Bowie's character in Labyrinth, says thank you for clarifying, Mere, just wants people to accept who he is and admit that he would rather be called a thing or it.
	He's not looking for full-blown acceptance.
	He's just looking for tolerance.
	What was this?
	I said it, like the clown.
	Yeah, pretty much.
	By the way, in the spirit of fairness, it is important to acknowledge, okay, not all trans aliens are a monolith, as seen by Z's colleagues, their stern rebuke at today's press conference.
	As president of the Space Alien Trannies of America, and one who's worked tirelessly for intergalactic Z's rights, I feel it's imperative to note that Jareth is not representative of our community.
	You call this a c**t?
	Talk about a hatchet job.
	laughter And we're back.
	We're back.
	Don't worry.
	Half-Asian Bill Richman already fixed it.
	Oh, good.
	We're good.
	Oh, thank god.
	We're good again.
	It's a close one.
	And the trainee just killed itself.
	A lot of developments can happen in the show.
	Demonetized.
	This is one of those issues where we're not supposed to talk about the instability.
	This is a person who cut off their nipples, wants to name themselves after not even a very good film, by the way.
	Not a great film.
	That's a very niche name.
	And then wants the rest of us to go along with this delusion.
	Look, I don't know what you have to steal to have your nipples cut off.
	This is a new country for me.
	But I will say this.
	I tried to, during the clip, look this up.
	Turn safe search on.
	If you're watching at this, don't ask me how I know.
	You remind me of the space tranny.
	Who?
	The space tranny with the power of fillet.
	The power to fillet your cock inward and invert it and then reopen it as a wound.
	I don't know this.
	Come back, Sarah, before it's too late.
	That's terrible.
	Look, by the way, I lay this completely at the foot of the Dems.
	You guys own this.
	You're the ones that said, let's just do LGBT stuff.
	LG, I think, initially, or LGB, whatever it was.
	Jack Dorsey, on the Joe Rogan show, just recently said, LGBTQA.
	Twice, unironically.
	I'm like, this is why you can't enforce the rules equally, because you don't even realize you have a blonde spot.
	LGBTQA.
	Are you going to add the A-A-I-P and a silent F?
	I mean, you have to do the bit.
	And Two Spirit.
	Don't forget Two Spirit.
	If you have a question, it sounds like Mahmood.
	They added to it?
	Yes.
	You guys have been trying to subtract from it for a long time by throwing them on buildings.
	I get it.
	They add to it, and the good ISIS taketh away.
	There's the circle of life.
	Equilibrium.
	Equilibrium.
	Keep everything balanced.
	Also a horrible film, Equilibrium.
	An international news.
	A UK school.
	just stopped LGBT lessons after Muslim parents protested.
	This comes from The Guardian.
	About 600 Muslim children were withdrawn from the school for the day, and the school confirmed the lessons would resume only after a full consultation with every single parent.
	The story gets a little bit confusing, because both Muslims, as you well know, and LGBTQAIP, in a silent number, too, are protected classes on the left.
	So here to make sense of it all, we actually turn to this week's Louder With Crowder marginalization rankings.
	It is man!
	Oh my God!
	Thank you, Steven.
	As you can see, the rankings have seen quite a shake-up this week, with marginalized status changing at a blistering pace.
	As previously mentioned, due to their upset victory at the Birmingham School, we see Muslims jump over gays faster than I jump up for seconds at an all-you-can-eat feline buffet.
	Elsewhere in the rankings, rumors of a Democrat resolution condemning anti-Semitism this week made it appear the Jews might be rising themselves.
	But after Linda Sarsour attacked Nancy Pelosi, some Democrats are now demanding an anti-Islamophobia resolution, leaving the current resolution in doubt.
	So Muslims have officially regained the number one spot.
	I'd hate to be a goat in Fallujah tonight.
	Most surprising is the shocking debut, Steven, of the transgalactic space peep.
	I haven't seen anything this surprising since the look on Willy's face when he caught me with his daughter.
	That's all for this week, Steven.
	Now if you'll excuse me, I have Lucky resting in the slow cooker.
	We spare no expense getting Al-Fan Retainer.
	Never good to be a goat in Fallujah.
	Never good.
	There's never a good weekend.
	Well, does that surprise you that the left has embraced your people, Muslims?
	That's the number one... That's why I'm here, Stephen.
	I want the embraces.
	You know, we want you to see the softer side of ISIS.
	Yeah, this is all good news.
	Yeah, feel the jihadi softness.
	Yes, of course, of course!
	What's not to like?
	Downy.
	Well, same thing, actually, ironically, because when I shake your hand, I'm effectively squeezing the Charmin.
	Finally, it looks like, look it up, it's ethnically accurate.
	You'll get it.
	It's amazing to me, like, you've heard this argument, they say Muslims created the modern numerical systems.
	Okay, hold on, I'm not necessarily sure that you're correct about that.
	Also, how about just using paper?
	Why wipe the ass with the hand?
	I tell you what, it is quite a luxury.
	I will say this.
	I like it here in America.
	You like it, yeah.
	It's pretty cool.
	Two things that you like.
	Toilet paper and raisin bran crunch.
	Also, have you had cotton candy?
	Yeah.
	That's pretty cool.
	It is pretty cool.
	No, it's just, yeah, it is cotton-headed candy.
	So finally it looks like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez might be in hot water.
	A federal election commission complaint actually says that her chief of staff Could have funneled nearly one million dollars in donations.
	This comes, uh, to where we have the overlay.
	It's been suggested the congresswoman and her team could be facing major fines, potentially even jail time.
	Uh, to be fair, campaign finance law complaints can sometimes just be political, of course.
	Uh, so here to actually give her side of the story, everyone be quiet, we don't want to give her the respect she deserves, is, uh, Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.
	Miss Cortez, are you there?
	Thank you for being with us.
	Yeah, okay, there is no violation, Stephen.
	Okay?
	There is, like, No violation.
	All I said was welcome to the show.
	That's really all I said.
	Yeah, but you were thinking it, Steven.
	You just can't stand the thought of me, a Latinx of color, being as powerful as you.
	A man.
	So you're making things up.
	No, I just wanted to ask you about the FEC complaint that actually seems to say that you... That's hate speech!
	The complaint?
	Yes.
	How exactly?
	Because I hate that they're questioning me.
	Okay, no, it's actually a complaint that's been filed against your chief of... Oh my gosh, Steven, this is so tired.
	I'm over it.
	Okay, first you're gonna try and call out my supposed campaign finance violations, then you'll call me a socialist, which I am, then you'll call me anti-Semitic, which won't check out because your researcher will clearly say that I get bagels from Slo Mo's in the Bronx every day.
	I'm over it!
	Okay, oh...
	Congresswoman, are you okay?
	Of course!
	Why wouldn't I be okay?
	Don't patronize me, Stephen!
	Don't man-tronize me!
	Okay, Congresswoman, I think you're avoiding the question about the FEC... You never said that to a man!
	You're attacking me because I'm a powerful woman.
	Okay, admit it.
	You're man-tacking me.
	No, no, it's entirely because you're avoiding the question.
	Oh, okay.
	You're man-voiding my question now.
	Wait.
	Wait, what question?
	You didn't ask a question.
	I asked a question.
	Did you have a question?
	Don't you dare man-terrogate me!
	Okay, all right, this is going nowhere.
	Congresswoman Cortez, everybody, I appreciate it.
	Rude!
	Don't you man up on me!
	Don't man up on me!
	Yeah, that's never gonna go anywhere well.
	I was getting concerned about the ad.
	No, you guys were muted, though.
	I appreciate you being nice.
	Hey, by the way, this week, not this week, the winner of last week's trivia contest is Sarah, is it Bethards?
	I am so sweaty right now, even though it's cold.
	It's really cold in here.
	It's cold and I'm sweating because I'm very ill.
	Anyways, the Twitter handle is sarahbeth for correctly answering that the stars were from
	Cobra Kai that they appeared on the show.
	So you're going to get a nice shirt.
	Yes, by the way, I'm wearing, I am so sweaty right now even though it's cold.
	Oh my gosh, yeah.
	It's really cold in here.
	It's cold and I'm sweating because I'm very, very ill.
	It's like 40 degrees.
	No, this is not good.
	It's not 40.
	Okay, so I actually do want to get into this.
	Ocasio-Cortez is kind of the, uh, this, I guess, sort of, we'll call it the dark money scheme.
	Here's the context.
	Recent complaint to the FEC.
	They allege that the campaign moved almost a million dollars, okay?
	Contributions from a political, you know, PACs, political action committees.
	They, by the way, here's what's important.
	They established, funneling it to private companies, that they also controlled.
	Former FEC Commissioner Brad Smith actually said that the scheme has opened Cortez up to, quote, massive reporting violations, probably at least some illegal contributions violations, exceeding the lawful limits.
	Also, it looks like a lot of the money could have gone to her boyfriend.
	Oh, nice, nice.
	That's a bad move.
	Yeah, that's good.
	That's not going to look good on the resume.
	And here's the thing.
	I know that we can say this has been going on for a very long time.
	And you guys feel free to jump in here at any point.
	You can say this has been going on in politics for a long time.
	And you know what?
	You'd be correct.
	Except for the fact that a huge part of Nina Pinto Santa Maria Cortez's appeal has been her support.
	Sorry, I'm very, very sorry.
	It's really hard for me to talk right now.
	I don't know if you can hear me.
	She railed against these exact kind of practices.
	That's what's important to note.
	If you don't believe me, here's actually a video.
	I think it's the most watched political video on Twitter ever, with 40 million views, in which she rails, which was a cornerstone of her campaign, against what she called dark money in politics, screaming about how PACs and politicians can work together to currently move money for their own gain.
	This is her.
	This is straight from the googly's mouth.
	And I want to get away with as much bad things as possible, ideally to enrich myself and advance my interests, even if that means putting my interests ahead of the American people.
	So, if I want to run a campaign that is entirely funded by corporate political action committees, is there anything that legally prevents me from doing that?
	Turns out she's just taking notes here.
	No.
	So let's say I'm a really, really bad guy.
	And let's say I have some skeletons in my closet that I need to cover up so that I can get elected.
	Would you agree with the statement?
	Disagree?
	Strongly disagree?
	Let's put that aside.
	Should steer clear of that one.
	She's just taking notes when you look back.
	She thought she was being facetious.
	She's like, I'm asking for a friend of a friend.
	Because this congressman's friend, whose best friend's girlfriend's sister's boyfriend
	knows this guy who saw Bernie Sanders pass out at 31 Flavors last night.
	She's like, does this qualify as legal advice that I can depend on in the next campaign?
	Yes.
	How would you go about doing so?
	So it's really interesting that the reason that this is important is that there is a lot of reporting that happens when you have a campaign that gets money, right?
	They have to spend it, they have to report all of that.
	PACs have the same kind of issue.
	The companies I was just expressing my love for AOC.
	She's got some great ideas.
	and they don't have to say anything about what they do with the money.
	So it's incredibly important that, and she just said, what if you have some skeletons
	in your closet?
	That's exactly why you do what she did.
	Because maybe you do have some skeletons in your closet.
	Something else that, were you about to say something Mahmoud?
	Oh no, I was just expressing my love for AOC.
	She's got some great ideas, you guys should totally enact them.
	Somehow that seems self-serving.
	And by the way, this whole idea of a living wage, we're going to do a segment on this
	next week, mainly because she tweeted me this week, and so we're hoping to have her on the
	show.
	Talking about systemic discrimination.
	You know, the whole living wage that she's only paying her top staffers $80,000.
	Right.
	It's actually below the cutoff where they would have to disclose this.
	Basically, it would be below the cutoff of transparency laws.
	So effectively, she doesn't have to disclose these people if they're only making $80,000.
	I don't know what the cutoff is.
	126.
	Is that what it is?
	126.
	It is 126.
	Chief of Staff would be making more and he's the guy who is in a little bit of hot water right now.
	Right.
	And they don't have to disclose outside sources of income as well.
	So it's brilliant.
	Honestly, I will say, I have thought that she isn't the brightest bulb, but this is brilliantly orchestrated.
	It could just be by our campaign manager.
	By the way, speaking of brilliantly orchestrated, you know you've seen the Oscars livestream now.
	Four strikes, we fought them.
	Hit the notification bell if you're subscribed because that may not mean a whole lot.
	And also bookmark this page.
	Come back to it, because notifications may not mean a whole lot in the future, but join MugClub and subscribe on iTunes for the audio version.
	There are some exclusives on there.
	Alright, so here's another point that I think we want to get to.
	As far as I know, and I don't want to speak completely in the affirmative here, no attention from MSNBC, CNN, the left-wing outlets, certainly not on Huffington Post or CNN.
	As a matter of fact, the one story that I think I did see in Huffington Post was, conservatives are trying to tarnish AOC's corporation.
	That's exactly what you see.
	It gets turned around every single time.
	When the right does it, this isn't just a whiteaboutism, but, okay, do you remember Dinesh D'Souza?
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	A lot of people are like, oh, Dinesh D'Souza violated campaign finance.
	Here's what actually happened.
	He wanted to donate more than $5,000 to a campaign, okay?
	Yeah.
	And it was a friend of his who was running, I believe in California, didn't win.
	So he asked his wife and two friends to do so on his behalf, and he would pay them back later.
	We're just talking about three $5,000 checks.
	That's it.
	He was imprisoned in a halfway house.
	Thank God a halfway house, because he would not fare well in a penitentiary.
	Almost a year and fined $30,000.
	With Cortez, we're actually dealing with close to at least seven figures.
	Potentially.
	And by the way, we're not talking about a one-time offense in giving money to a friend, running for office, or didn't even win.
	We're talking about systemic, remember that word, Cortez?
	A systemic problem in that the money was transferred in huge lump sums.
	To the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars for vague services like strategic consulting, as far as services rendered.
	We literally have no way of knowing what this money was used for or who ended up using it.
	Again, this is important only because of the whole... We've talked about this before.
	Jack Dorsey talked about this.
	I think we'll talk about this with Alex Jones.
	They're not pushing for transparency anymore in the realm of free speech.
	But they've tried to transition and say, we're the ones pushing for transparency as it relates to election finance laws, campaign finance laws.
	They're not!
	No, not at all.
	And they had to jump through an exceedingly difficult number of hoops to make this happen.
	Right.
	So this wasn't something that they were like, Oh, we're just going to set this up.
	Like he had to set up two different companies.
	The big issue that I think right now is that it's nobody can really understand.
	There were two FEC people that were interviewed to say, Hey, what do you think of this?
	Former FEC people.
	And they're like, they're in, they're probably in some trouble here.
	Like this is, there's definitely smoke here.
	It's going to be hard to prove, but you only do this if you're trying to hide something.
	The explanation that was given though is so convoluted.
	They're like, I'm a legal expert.
	I don't know what they just said.
	It's very difficult to follow, so we'll see how this goes.
	Seems like an honest mistake.
	It seems like racketeering may have been an honest mistake, too, for the drug kingpin.
	Hold on!
	Cover for me!
	I have to cough!
	Cough!
	Cough!
	Oh my gosh.
	But either way, it's highly, highly illegal.
	Thank God the audience couldn't hear me.
	That was a wet one.
	They have no idea.
	That was a gross cough.
	You may want to check your sleeve.
	You know, when she filed to run, I think you might be giving them a little bit too much credit, because when they filed to run, they filed in the wrong district, and then they had to refile to run in the current district that she represents.
	Is it possible That the people, the same people, who filed in the wrong district, tripped up on some campaign finance money.
	And went out of their way to hide it, but didn't know that was bad.
	I was thinking you were going to zig when I expected you to zag, and you just zagged.
	I'm not a rocket doctor.
	I don't know how this works.
	No, and here's something that's important.
	You know, you talk to Bernie, and they talk about PACs, and they talk about corruption in politics, taking big money out of politics.
	I get it that people are remarkably inconsistent, okay?
	But here's something that really, we've done a whole, I think we've done a whole segment if you search our channel, Citizens United, okay?
	They bring up Citizens United a whole lot, you know, Bernie Sanders, and it's, we have to overturn Citizens United, get big donors out of politics.
	You know, hold on a second.
	Hold on, one second here.
	Citizens United, for people who don't know, it was initially about an anti-Clinton film that the Clinton campaign tried to suppress, okay?
	That's what people don't understand about Citizens United.
	And the case was about the fact that this media production company, the company basically making this anti-Hillary Clinton film, documentary, had First Amendment protection even though they were a company.
	Right, even though they were a corporation.
	So, what it was about, the Clintons trying to suppress an anti-Clinton film, and the court said they have the right to do this under the guise of the First Amendment.
	Now, that being said, that set a precedent.
	This is what the case was about.
	It set a precedent that allowed corporations to funnel money into PACs.
	That's a little bit of a simplification, absolutely, but it's more accurate than what the left has told you about Citizens United, that it was just about PACs going in, wanting to give super donors over to our reptilian overlords.
	Yeah, exactly.
	And doesn't that remind you of something?
	Dinesh D'Souza, when he had his issues, was when he released his movie, when he was going so hard after Obama to try to show America, like, this is not the way that we want to go.
	And all of a sudden, this random rule that nobody ever gets in trouble for.
	Didn't Rosie O'Donnell do something?
	No, people do get in trouble.
	People do get in trouble.
	They don't get put in jail.
	They don't get the same kind of punishment.
	Right.
	And didn't Rosie O'Donnell do something way, way, way, way, way, way worse than just Rosie O'Donnell?
	Yeah, she had almost no consequences at all.
	Yeah, this kind of stuff happens all the time.
	It's not about the law, it's about the law being applied equally.
	Right.
	And that's something that's really important.
	And especially when you're talking about government being used as an arm to prosecute people.
	Listen, I don't want Donald Trump prosecuting people who disagree with him.
	No.
	That's why any time he gets into expanding libel laws with the media, I go, hold on a second, I'm really uncomfortable with this.
	I do think consistency is important.
	And if you look at the way the laws are applied, they haven't been applied equally.
	He did it, don't get me wrong, Dinesh Jasrutha did it.
	Yeah, he did.
	He's been on the show with it.
	I'm like, well, you did it.
	You did do the crime.
	It's been weaponized, though.
	It has been weaponized.
	And I don't think that Cortez is, as far as I know right now, at the time of this video, facing any jail time or fines.
	But the hypocrisy here, it's truly breathtaking.
	I don't even know how to set up this next clip.
	But she continued, just let's watch it.
	Green light for hush money.
	I can do all sorts of terrible things.
	It's totally legal right now for me to pay people off.
	So I use my special interest, dark money funded campaign to pay off folks that I need to pay off and get elected.
	So now I'm elected and I've got the power to draft, lobby, and shape the laws that govern the United States of America.
	Who is describing themselves for $700, Mr. Trebek?
	By the way, heart goes out to Trebek, the pancreatic cancer.
	That's really rough, but I do like the guy.
	The guy's an American, basically an American institution.
	Oh man, I just stepped on my own joke and now everyone's going to feel bad.
	Oh, no!
	You like that joke.
	She is describing herself.
	She's like that girl basically who can just walk up.
	She might as well just walked up behind everyone that's hearing, put her hands in front of their eyes and go, guess who?
	Guess who I'm describing?
	Is it you?
	Is it you?
	It's not even facetious.
	I'm actually just trying to get intel.
	She went to her chief of staff and said, will you write down what we did so that I can save this as the bad example?
	Yes, she used, by her standards, dark money to get elected.
	And yes, now she is shaping our laws.
	Is this really the kind of person that you want in power?
	One who can rail against dark money one sec in the PACs?
	This is not a new concept, while knowing, though, that she is doing exactly that.
	Look at that!
	And I know people talk about Donald Trump lying, and I think we can all agree he's done that in the past.
	The difference, we were just talking about this before the show, is Donald Trump He's right about some things, even if he doesn't understand why he's right.
	You know, he might say, no, listen, listen, you guys screw up the housing market, excuse me, okay, excuse me, listen, no, Freddie, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, okay, fake news, you're wrong.
	And you're like, I don't think he understands what he's talking about there, but he is right.
	Yeah, exactly, nobody understands.
	He's got people that know what he's talking about.
	Whereas Cortez doesn't understand what she's talking about, and she's incorrect.
	She's incredibly, incredibly dangerous.
	She has zero clue.
	No, don't say that, because they're gonna hold that out as a badge of honor, like, I'm a dangerous woman!
	No, but that's what I'm...
	That poses problems in our system of government and I guarantee you that she thinks all of the fans that she has right now, the people that are following her or kind of whatever on social media, are actually there because she has good ideas.
	We're there because it's a dumpster fire lady, okay?
	We're waiting for you to do something stupid.
	Next, you're providing material every single We'll get to that right before we go to Alex Jones.
	No, but it's fun to watch, Gerald.
	I mean, it's fun, she's angry, I like the jacket.
	It's everything about it!
	It's great TV!
	Well, if you want the demise of the United States as you purportedly do... I mean, let's be honest, okay?
	She looks like she picked that jacket out of a lineup from the Leaving Neverland cast.
	Anyone who watched Leaving Neverland, that is funny, go watch it.
	It was very disturbing.
	Here's the thing that really bothers me about Cortez, okay?
	The sort of praise you hear of her, even from conservatives as well, and you've heard this about Bernie, at least she's genuine.
	At least Cortez is authentic.
	She's authentic.
	She believes what she claims.
	Who cares?
	Who cares?
	I don't care if Bernie's authentic.
	I don't even think he's inauthentic because he has three houses.
	I really don't.
	I bring it up because I think it's hypocritical, but I think he probably believes what he espouses.
	But it doesn't matter.
	She and he, they're just genuinely selfish.
	Socialism is an inherently selfish worldview.
	She acts like taking other people's money is altruistic, right?
	Okay, me saying that I don't want to take money.
	I'm not, I don't have a right to take money from millionaires or billionaires, even though they make money, more money than me.
	I am not amongst them.
	I'm sure they are shocked to find out that this program does not place me amongst their ranks.
	I don't want to take their money.
	That's the opposite of selfish.
	Them saying that they want to take your money is.
	Wanting to keep money that you've earned?
	Reasonable.
	Wanting to take someone's money that you haven't?
	Selfish.
	And they don't even run their campaigns any differently.
	They redistribute wealth however they like.
	And I'm just, I have this frog in my throat here, and it's unbelievable.
	Somebody help me!
	Somebody help me while I grab a sip of water!
	I can't, I feel, I'm like the Charlie in the box, right?
	No one, no one wants to listen to a Cortez in the box!
	Well, the solution is to get rid of all the billionaires, but the solution's also to take all the billionaires' money, so it's difficult.
	You have to do one or the other, I think.
	It really is a selfish ideology.
	And Bernie and Cortez, they're just overgrown, selfish children who just happen to have gotten older.
	She's running her entire campaign with this world view.
	You didn't owe him that money.
	So?
	I want it.
	I want it.
	Well, hold on a second.
	That's a baby.
	Yeah, but I don't want it.
	Can I kill it?
	Apparently so.
	She's like a bald eagle stuck in an oil spill.
	Can I kill it?
	Can I kill it?
	You're cleaning them off with Dawn.
	By your own admission here, hold on a second.
	It says that you're unwilling to work.
	So what?
	I still want a monthly paycheck.
	I want it.
	But you're unwilling to work.
	But can I have more money?
	No.
	That's not how this works.
	This is what it ultimately comes down to, the progressive worldview.
	And for some reason, we've accepted this myth, or society at large has accepted this.
	I don't want to even say this myth, but this false narrative, and I know that sounds so pedestrian and overplayed, but it really is a false narrative that it is somehow compassionate, that it is somehow selfless to spend somebody else's money.
	No.
	Right now, if anyone in this room tried to take someone else's money and spend it, they would be immediately fired.
	Because I'm compassionate, and he's a dick.
	He's done that before, multiple times.
	Five times.
	You knew that there was more money in your check than is usually allotted and you took it anyway!
	It was supposed to go to me.
	I did.
	Yeah, it was supposed to go to you.
	I said thank you.
	That's it.
	That's a power move right there.
	It's the absolute worst thing to do is to take other people's money.
	It has had the worst results.
	It's not the worst thing to do.
	No, it is.
	Economically speaking, it'll have the worst results.
	The world has lost countless millions of people.
	Countries ruined and thrown in the trash bin of history.
	And yet these people try to go back to those policies and say, this is compassionate.
	No, it's not compassionate when millions of your citizens kill each other for food!
	It hasn't been tried right.
	It apparently hasn't.
	It hasn't been tried right except for nearly everywhere outside of the United States.
	And even some tried to drive here!
	And they tried it, then they reversed it, and then they went back.
	And it's just, listen, it's just absolutely, by the way, something else.
	Congresswoman Cortez actually did respond to me on Twitter regarding, actually today,
	about systemic discrimination.
	So I asked, could you give me, yeah, I'll keep this up here.
	Could you give me any examples of systemic discrimination?
	And here's the thing.
	People, I want you to comment, let her know at AOC.
	Be respectful, because I do think that a dialogue engaging will be productive here.
	But she brought up, and notice she doesn't bring up a source.
	She goes, just last week, the Washington Post reported on a $23 billion racial funding
	gap in K through 12 education.
	And then the other examples of systemic discrimination she uses, mass incarceration, banks targeting black
	Americans.
	You can take that off the screen.
	Banks apparently targeting black Americans This is one.
	I don't want to go through them, right?
	I don't want to parse those right now because I would like Congresswoman Nina Pinto Santa Maria Cortez to come on this show we can talk about it, but I was surprised that she picked those three examples that I was quite shocking it was Quite shocking, yes.
	My cousin actually is American.
	He's working here at the bank and he just got the job.
	He's actually doing the black targeting trading today.
	Oh really?
	Incidentally.
	It's like a three-day thing that you have to do.
	We'll talk about it later, but the idea of predatory lending.
	It's like the fact that they targeted black Americans.
	So banks said, Hey, kid, come over here.
	Listen, I got a deal for you.
	The racket was, would you like some money that you have no realistic possibility of paying back?
	Here you go.
	I'm going to make it rain, kid.
	Why does that work?
	How can someone be targeting black people?
	Again, this just comes down to a selfish worldview.
	When you look back at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, you look back at the housing bubble.
	It's like, OK, you're going to have to give money to people who have no business being at home.
	And it disproportionately affected black people.
	Again, this is the law of unintended consequences here, right?
	Good intentions from the left.
	Look at what happened with the housing bubble.
	It's like, oh, OK, you're going to have to lend.
	But there's no, how about, any credit?
	No credit.
	How about, what's the FICO score?
	No FICO score.
	All right, well, then how about money down?
	No money down.
	Well, then I guess it's going to be a crazy interest rate, like 12%?
	2%.
	Well, how about?
	Ten.
	Two percent!
	Because the government just tells you that that's what you're going to do, and then you see a housing bubble.
	And you know who it hurts?
	The black people.
	Disproportionately, it affects black people who saved, who have business being in those homes.
	They have a right to be in those homes because then they have money down, and they should actually be taking out that loan.
	But guess what?
	They can't get in there because someone else, now the government has determined, is a victim of their own socioeconomic status, and the bank can't foreclose upon them because they bought three homes that they couldn't afford.
	Again, these are the unintended consequences that nobody thinks about, because it's an inherently selfish worldview, and an inherently selfish worldview, just like a five-year-old who wants more cotton candy, is selfish.
	It thinks very short-term.
	Alright, we have to go.
	Alex Jones after this, and thank you so much to Mahmood for being in this week.
	Thank you.
	What do you need besides a miracle?
	Guns.
	Lots of them.
	I'm Trinity.
	No, you're Pantelis.
	Cut!
	No, in this film he is playing Trinity.
	You're Trinity.
	Is that all you need?
	Yeah, this is the new Walther All Steel Frame Q5 Match.
	Red dot ready.
	It is all I need.
	The All Steel Walther Q5 Match.
	It has good balance and a 5.6 pound trigger pull.
	steel walter q5 match it has good balance and a 5.6 pound trigger pull try the walter
	uh greetings america Hopper here.
	I just wanted to tell you that on my eBay profile for sale right now is one doggo Argentino puppy named Betty and for the price of the current offer zero dollars.
	I will pay shipping.
	alright glad to have our next guest.
	Always there, you can turn it down there, Abby.
	We were just talking during the break and he was saying, you know, you can have me on the show as often as you want.
	I want you to be on the show.
	You know him from InfoWars.com, creator, owner, host of the Alex Jones Show on InfoWars.
	Been making the rounds here recently on Joe Rogan.
	Mr. Jones, how are you, sir?
	It is good to be here with you, Mr. Crowder.
	Big fan of the broadcast, so are my kids.
	You know what?
	I'm always... I'll tell you this.
	I'm always a little worried about you being on the show because I always feel as... I'm always worried that you'll come on the show and ask me why I haven't had you on the show, and then we get into a fight.
	But we never really had a fight, so I totally get that you're doing a great job.
	I watch it all the time.
	Do lots of skits, lots of...
	You know, avenge yourself.
	You don't have a lot of guests on these days, so I'm just happy to be here and the great work you're doing over at CRTV and all the rest of it.
	Well, thank you very much.
	I'm happy to have you on.
	We've kind of changed roles here.
	I notice you're in a short sleeve, or usually you wear a suit, and usually I'm in something a little shorter sleeve, but you just had a recent surgery.
	Now, was it your bicep to your elbow or to the shoulder?
	Because that's a huge difference in the surgery.
	Yeah, the shoulder would be much, much worse.
	This is a ruptured bicep.
	They just fixed it last week.
	I shouldn't be out of the cast, but it's the miracles of modern medicine.
	It is.
	And I know sometimes people have put you in since you're more...
	They would say conspiratorial with anti-vaxxers, and I know that you're not, and I know you don't shun the miracles of modern medicine.
	Pardon me, I'm very, very sick.
	There's no way I'm pronouncing that broad from Twitter's name correctly today.
	Before we get on to the censorship issue, with you and kind of the deplatforming, first, what has the feedback been like after your latest Joe Rogan appearance?
	Because you guys were going back and forth for a bit, a lot of fighting.
	How did you two bury the hatchet so quickly?
	Well, I didn't like the fact that Jack Dorsey went on there and just spewed BS a month ago.
	Right.
	And the fact that Joe was like going over Democratic Party talking points.
	I've known Joe over 20 years.
	We've been pretty good friends.
	A lot of partying, a lot of hanging out, you know, again over two decades.
	And so I got madder and madder and madder that he says on air, I'm not going to have Alex on, but then he's going to have my enemies on.
	So I kind of got Upset with him.
	Right.
	But then, once he had me on, we had a great four hour plus podcast.
	It's the biggest podcast he's ever done.
	Something like 20 million views right now, 10 million views on YouTube, 10 million views roughly on iTunes.
	So it's one of the biggest podcasts ever.
	And he's got nothing but positive feedback, 97% positive feedback.
	Conversely, the head of Twitter goes on a month ago, he had 80 plus percent negative feedback.
	So as we were talking before we went live here, Jack and his mother, I guess her name is Vajaya God, literally it's her name, she goes on and holds his hand and says,
	We're not censoring anybody, but we did take Alex Jones off for beating a kid up.
	And there was no video.
	They didn't name the kid's name.
	You know, when you hear about a murder or a kidnapping or an assault.
	To be clear, I don't think I said you beat up a kid.
	I think they claimed that you posted a video of a kid being beaten up, which I also don't know to be true.
	But again, that would be entirely... I didn't.
	No.
	I'm pretty sure we have, by the way.
	I'll take those arrows because I'm pretty sure we have.
	You're absolutely right.
	Forbes and others said I beat up a kid and then showed the ABC, NBC video of the 10-year-old hitting the adult.
	The guy knocks him down.
	They just wouldn't pick that.
	And so then they said I was taken down for beating up a kid.
	They had to retract it.
	By the time she said it on air as a lawyer, she said, oh, well, you know, he showed a video of a kid being beat up.
	It's insane.
	So why can't I show a video and everyone else can show my point?
	Right.
	No, exactly.
	And I say that because I'm pretty sure we have, and we probably provided some... I mean, we show videos almost on a loop, like a morphine drip, of Muslim men beating their wives in Saudi Arabia all the time, just to keep it at the forefront of people's mind.
	We usually play the chicken dance to it.
	So I'll take the flak there.
	We are far more distasteful than you in the realm of domestic abuse videos, Alex.
	So I take it you watched the recent podcast with Joe and Jack Dorsey coming back and Tim Pool.
	Did you think that that was kind of a better sequel?
	Well, it took me from hating Joe to wanting to marry him.
	I mean, I'm not gay, but, you know.
	The point is, they destroyed that lawyer, Vajaya God God.
	They destroyed Jack.
	I mean, it was like a suicide mission.
	They come on there and BS that we're not censoring conservatives when we've got all their internal videos from Project Veritas and all their admissions and the incredible censorship.
	And they allow Antifa to dox people, but nobody else can.
	And so, yes.
	This just shows the disconnect and how robotic these corporate heads are.
	It was actually frightening.
	I thought it was actually a terrifying podcast.
	Well, I think there were some good questions, some pointed questions, but for me, kind of the moment where I noticed, ah, I don't think Jack's going to get it, I don't think they can fix this, is when he unironically used the term LGBTQA.
	About two times.
	And he didn't realize that, you know what, not even the gay in the LGBTQA are on board with just tacking on every single letter to that acronym.
	I don't know that they can fix that blind spot.
	That was, when I was watching it, I thought Joe and Tim did a good job of holding their feet to the fire, but it felt like a hopeless endeavor.
	I don't want to be a nihilist, but do you feel like that sometimes when you watch this, especially given your situation?
	Yeah, it frightened me because she said not just that I got in trouble for showing child endangerment, which wasn't true.
	The clip was everywhere in the country.
	I mean, I got to it late.
	They then moved on and said that I said use battle rifles on the media, but they didn't show a clip.
	They took a 38-minute podcast I did one night, but I had a few beers.
	But none of it had to do with violence.
	It was like, we don't want to be violent.
	We've got to use the criminal judicial system.
	And Antifa says they're coming to the houses of law enforcement and Congress to kill them.
	You better have your battle rifles ready.
	So they played this word salad game, you know, like the refrigerator magnets, where you change the words around.
	And she reads this statement, it's literally one word with quotes around another word, and says that, well, you know, Joe, we had to take him off.
	He was saying, kill the media.
	I would never do that.
	A, I don't believe in offensive violence.
	I'm a libertarian.
	B, I'd be arrested.
	I should be off the air if I was on air saying, get your battle rifles ready and kill the media.
	I'm the media.
	I don't want people killing me.
	I've never said that.
	And I challenged them.
	I put out a million dollar reward when they had All these different talk show hosts covering him, and they had Lester Holt, and they had Jack Dorsey on with him.
	And he's like, you know, it's pretty scary.
	He said, use battle rifles to kill the media.
	And he said, we're going to do all this.
	He goes, I know it's scary, but we got to keep him on.
	It was all just a big staged event to act like they were, you know, free speech, but they were still planning to get rid of me.
	And I offered a million dollars.
	I had lawyers send them letters.
	I called Twitter and I said, I did not say that.
	And they keep saying it.
	So I'm not the victim.
	I think Twitter is the victim of their own delusion where they tell gigantic whopper lies that have no basis in reality.
	I mean, listen, Steven Crowder.
	If I was going to accuse you of saying kill the media with battle rifles, would I not show the damn clip?
	Yeah, I will say this, and you and I disagree on quite a bit, but you are pretty good about that, about showing clips contextually.
	And we do that too.
	Do you believe this when you do your broadcasts?
	I always say, listen, this is kind of a standing order I have to everyone on my staff.
	Don't make an argument for the left.
	If they can make it for you, always show their clip and provide all context needed for us to rebut.
	And that's why we get hit with so many copyrights, because we'll just roll Seth Meyers for two minutes, or Samantha Bee, or Cortez.
	Exactly, you've got to show Cortez saying the Earth will be over in 12 years or no one will believe it.
	And then we play it and we get a copyright.
	No, she's a public figure, she said the world will be over in 12 years.
	I'm going to play the damn clip, because it's unbelievable!
	Yeah.
	Have you seen, by the way, I know you're not on YouTube now, but it seems as though there might be some retroactive changes here after listening to Dorsey and Vijaya.
	Yeah, the road to redemption.
	Right.
	And you know, one thing I will say, I know a lot of people will watch this and say, well, I'm not in with Alex Jones.
	I don't agree with him.
	But here's the thing.
	I understand where people feel that way, but they also need to look at you as a cautionary tale of the fact that it can happen to anyone.
	Let's take this example recently where you just brought up right now.
	Let's use that because you just brought it up to battle rifles.
	Now, I wasn't Fully aware of the quote or the clip, right?
	Because I didn't show it.
	And I didn't have time to fully research it.
	I immediately assumed it was allegorical if taken in context.
	And I thought, man, if they can say that this was one of the retroactive strikes we found.
	And we know you were deplatformed by everyone in the same weekend.
	So they're all looking for a reason, right?
	Give me a reason.
	I'm going, hold on a second.
	If they can remove someone for even just saying, hey, this is a call to arms metaphorically to fight back against the media, they can do it.
	To anyone, and I do think people need to take notice of that regardless of whether they agree with you or not.
	Well, that's it.
	And then people think they protect themselves when they build a straw man about me and then attack it.
	They go, oh, well, we just throw them under the bus.
	We'll be safe.
	No, you set the precedent for everybody else.
	So what they did is they could have gone back and found some real stuff I said out of context, but still some things I said later that I'm like, I shouldn't have said that.
	It didn't come off as tongue in cheek, you know, whatever.
	But but with the case of The items that you mentioned, I would never even tongue-in-cheek say, you're coming over the hill, you know, it's the Alamo, get your guns ready because they're gonna take it out of context.
	Right.
	So if one thing, the left lying 10 years ago, yeah, I'd said stuff like that allegorically.
	I'm not about to do that.
	So the point was, I'm like, we need to peacefully through the courts of the criminal justice system.
	Stand up and if Antifa attacks our homes, we need to not be offensive because, like Martin Luther King said and Gandhi and Jesus, we need to take it on the cheek because that's how we beat them.
	Violence is what they want.
	The damn 38-minute podcast was about nonviolence.
	It wasn't exactly like that, but I understand your point.
	But I said at the point, by the whole thing, I said at the point of them attacking your house, you've got to defend yourself and have your battle rifles ready.
	It was a debate about how far to go.
	The point was I did not say go attack the media.
	That is made up.
	One million dollar, one million dollar prize.
	If you can find me saying get battle rifles and go after the media, I'll pay you one million dollars.
	I'm not going to collect that check, just like the people never collected the check for the United Negroes College Fund when Andrew Breitbart offered it for anyone who could find footage of them hurling the n-word at Congressman Clyburn.
	I do think, and this is one thing that the left has admitted now, they didn't used to admit, I thought it was very telling that Jack Dorsey and uh... I'm not gonna say her name on here.
	Um... Sounds like vagina, but Jack Dorsey.
	Two p****!
	That's okay, we'll believe it.
	No, Vagina Good.
	Vagina Good.
	That's a cool name, like Vagina Good.
	That's a pretty cool name.
	I mean, what's wrong with making a joke about the name?
	Big deal, vaginas are good.
	If I were her parents, I would name her twin sister Penis Bad, so that they have to introduce them as Vagina Good, Penis Bad.
	That's what I would do, but I would be a cruel parent.
	Exactly, I came out of a vagina.
	I love vaginas.
	I've spent my whole life trying to get my face in vaginas.
	And demonetized right now.
	Immediately demonetized.
	Thank you, Alex.
	What was I talking about before?
	I was talking about something before this that I don't remember what it was.
	Oh, oh, oh, oh.
	Jack Dorsey did say it.
	Yeah, listen.
	Steven, you started it.
	I did.
	You began to start the jokes about her name, so just don't.
	I did.
	It is my fault.
	I take full responsibility.
	Stop raping her name.
	Stop raping Vagina Good.
	The name.
	Let's please.
	Are you trying to get me put in jail like you?
	The social media de-platform jail?
	Please don't do this.
	My point is with Jack Dorsey.
	Then just cut it out then.
	Jack Dorsey said, yeah, as it relates to sort of political pressures, external political pressures, I don't have the exact quote, but I remember him saying, yeah, the left wants us to do more, the left wants us to censor people more, and the right wants less.
	He admitted that, and we've talked about that on the show for a long time, I know you have, that the left demands less transparency, the left demands less truth, whereas conservatives, the right, libertarians, everyone under that umbrella, demands more.
	They used to try and deny that.
	It seems as though now they're not even concerned with it.
	No, I agree.
	So why do you think they're just openly, we're going to censor everybody?
	You know, I don't think that they're openly saying we're going to censor everybody.
	They tried to sort of obfuscate and pass it off as, well, you know, we might be a bit of an echo chamber.
	I don't know.
	No, no, no.
	They denied it for a while.
	But if you read, like, the London Guardian or even Time magazine or these articles, they're like, we want all them off.
	They mention your name.
	They go, well, we got rid of Jones.
	We want to get rid of Crowder and all that.
	Dude, they're listing your name.
	They're saying we want them off air.
	I know Twitter is more open about it.
	Excuse.
	But Facebook and YouTube are at least trying to act as though that's not the case.
	But I know Twitter is pretty open about the fact that they want to use it as an opportunity for social media.
	No, you're right.
	The future British Prime Minister is saying, you know, he wants Tommy Robinson taken off YouTube or he'll use governmental powers to shut down YouTube.
	So I agree.
	As bad as Google's been, it is not the worst.
	So let me ask you this.
	Who gets the brass ring?
	Who is the biggest censor on the internet?
	Well, you know, that's an interesting question because I was going to ask you this question immediately afterward.
	Right now, who do I think is the biggest force, do you mean?
	Who do I think has the most power?
	Is that what you're asking me?
	Well, I think Google has the most power.
	Yes, I would say I think Google, then Facebook, because they have both Google and YouTube, then probably Facebook, and Twitter is further on down that list.
	That's why when we've talked about sort of taking legal action, and we have, they're not at the front of our queue because they've pretty much admitted they want to be a tool for social change.
	But this is interesting, as you're a libertarian, I've talked with Nigel Farage about this, a few different guests, What do you think the solution is?
	As a small government libertarian, do you think that the government should step in and regulate them as public utilities?
	Because as you just talked about, right, that's a slippery slope.
	In the UK, the government wants to pressure YouTube to take Tommy Robinson off.
	But what's the solution here?
	I'm really glad you raised that nuanced point, Mr. Crowder.
	If we don't regulate the internet with the necessary evil, with a prohibition, like the Second Amendment says you will not infringe.
	The First Amendment says you will not infringe.
	It's not A government power taking something away, it's a guarantor saying that you have immunity as a citizen to defend yourself, you have immunity to have free speech, this is sacrosanct, this is what we worship, this is who we are, this is what makes us who we are.
	And so, yes, I don't like government being involved, I'm a libertarian like you,
	but then when the EU and the UK and government says, we're gonna use government power
	to censor and shut everybody down, who's a nationalist, who's a Brexiter,
	who's a conservative, who's pro-military, who's pro-family, who's a capitalist,
	then you've gotta have government come in and say, we're guaranteeing these basic rights
	like our current law does on the internet.
	It's just being ignored.
	And so the internet needs to go back to where it was, where the internet doesn't censor.
	These companies don't censor unless something's violating law clearly and they get a DMCA takedown order.
	We have a good orderly system to do this.
	They've just been ignoring that the last two and a half years since Hillary Clinton lost the election.
	They've panicked.
	They're doing this.
	So I'm not for regulation.
	But instead, when we stand down, it creates a vacuum where all these regulators come in and we let the EU and the UK and the Chinese governments praising U.S.
	companies for censoring.
	So that vacuum, because we're like, we're conservatives, Heritage Foundation, these are private companies, they'll do whatever they want.
	Well, now we just gave in to the vacuum of all these other very rapacious forces.
	Here's what I've proposed, at least as a step.
	Tell me if you agree with this or not.
	I think that what we need to do is have some transparency.
	Again, as we've talked about, conservatives, libertarians, we demand transparency.
	I think that YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, and any other social media platforms, they need to publicly declare whether they see themselves as publishers or as open platforms that they do not censor.
	If they say, hey, we're private publishers, like a BuzzFeed, like a HuffPo, then we say, okay, then You're no longer a social media platform.
	Fine.
	Let's be honest about it.
	Now we need to see some transparency.
	By the way, you show you've done your research.
	That's the federal international law.
	Right.
	Under the subsection, they have liability protection.
	A newspaper or a TV station doesn't.
	Right.
	But because they have third-party posting, they have liability protection.
	They're not supposed to be a publisher.
	So the minute they engage in publisher control, they now lose their immunity.
	Right.
	So do you think that probably the most important first step would be for them to have to formally declare whether they are a neutral platform or publisher?
	Because then we can hold them to their own standards.
	Yes, I agree.
	If they won't back off and stop being authoritarian censors, I'd rather them use the immunity as a third... I mean, it's not their fault if I'm on a telephone saying something or I'm on Facebook.
	Exactly.
	And once it's criminal, they take it down.
	So I'd rather them revert to what greater minds in the free market and those that built the internet Okay, final question here.
	I'll go in a different direction.
	We do have to get going.
	rather than back off. But yes, you're right, Steven. If they will not stop, then we have
	to strip them of their immunity.
	Okay. Final question here. I'll go in a different direction.
	We do have to get going. A lot of talk, obviously, since you were on, Joe Rogan, about the,
	you know, you mentioned the clockwork elves. And this was very entertaining once
	Eddie Bravo came in and it seemed as though there were some miscommunications.
	But it was a lot of fun to watch.
	Here's one thing that I do want to clarify.
	You talked about these sort of elven figures, let's say.
	It seemed like you were trying to stress, I noticed this, that you weren't talking about aliens, extraterrestrials, or vampires.
	But am I wrong in saying a more biblically-based interpretation of kind of demonic apparitions?
	That's what you were trying to communicate?
	Because I did find that interesting.
	I don't think a lot of people who aren't familiar with you You know, associate you with your more faith-based worldview.
	Exactly.
	If people want to find out what I really believe, Infowars.com, Newswars.com, they can hear it in this context.
	I've never seen aliens.
	I'm not into UFOs.
	I don't go to UFO conferences.
	I'm not that guy.
	I never really covered the lizard people.
	I've had David Icahn.
	Studying globalists and studying what they're into, they are into the occult, just like every major ancient religion thought they were conjuring creatures.
	They were getting data from beyond the veil.
	And so when you read the Bible about one world government, Mark of the Beast, and there'll be humans conjuring demons, and demons will be set loose on the earth, and then you study San Francisco and the liberals, they're taking DMT, they're taking ayahuasca, and they're having group events with 20, 30, 50, 100 people.
	And by the way, Joe Rogan said this on air, we never got there fully, but we had an hour and a half conversation before we went live, and he says, listen, you're thinking about Clockwork Elves, he goes, I take DMT all the time.
	He goes, we have group, basically group experiences.
	We're talking to these aliens and they look like little elves.
	And I'm like, well, listen, I'm not going to take that.
	Cause that scares me.
	Okay.
	All I know is the Bible describes it.
	You can look at black magic books written a thousand years ago.
	And it shows the, the, the, the, the magician conjures a little thing.
	It looks like a little gray alien.
	So yes, the demons that we hear about in modern culture, uh, or, or, or the aliens we hear about modern culture are the demons.
	And so it fits in perfectly.
	Like the Aztecs would sacrifice thousands of people a day sometimes because they believed it opened up a portal
	for gods to tell them things.
	So it's like chumming the ocean for sharks to come.
	These lower entities, these demons want blood of children, historically, whether they're real or not,
	I'm saying the elites are obsessed with it.
	Yes, it's far out.
	Yes, it's crazy.
	But this is what they believe.
	And they believe killing innocents or doing horrible things brings in these entities
	that then give them knowledge.
	Hey, Alex, since this is a pre-tape, because I'm so sick, can you pause real quick, and we'll do this as an after the bell, and upload this as another segment, because I'd like to get into this deeper, but we do have to hit the clock here.
	Sure, I'll go as long as you want.
	I love being on the show.
	Infowars.com, uh, please, uh, yeah, did I say Infowars.com?
	What was the other, what was the other, uh, I don't know.
	Newswars.com.
	Newswars.com.
	All right, all these places.
	They don't censor Newswars as much.
	We will be back after this to close the show and this will be uploaded at a later date because Alex and I are going to go into a little bit of a rabbit hole here.
	Hold on, we'll be right back.
	Thank you, Alex.
	Oh If you don't join Mug Club, Maddie will die.
	you Where you go for news.
	The largest online news show in the world.
	Real talk, real facts.
	Hosted by Anna Kasparian and Cenk Wein.
	The Young Turks.
	Live on weekdays, 6 to 8 p.m.
	Eastern.
	If you're not tuning in, you're missing out.
	Mahmoud Al-Mahmoud here to tell you about the new club you should totally join.
	ISIS.
	ISIS is a great club to do.
	That's the last time we bring you into the show.
	I think I want Uncle Sam next.
	You realize you can get us deployed?
	We have Alex Jones on this show and you doing that.
	They're going to say that we're recruiting for ISIS.
	You do not speak for me.
	You get the free vest.
	You don't talk anymore.
	But I do have some Walthers for you, actually, before you leave, so I think that'll be nice.
	LathropCutter.com slash MugClub, and of course our wonderful sponsor, Walther.
	If you cannot join at MugClub, you know we've been hit with four, five, six copyright strikes this last week, and we need to feed the half-Asian kraken, so Kraken, I don't know how to pronounce it.
	I'm sick, so my A's sound like Axe.
	Join my club.
	This is a video of me playing the game.
	I'm not a pro at this game.
	I'm just a guy who's playing it for fun.
	I'm not a pro at this game.
	I'm just a guy who's playing it for fun.
	I'm not a pro at this game.
	I'm just a guy who's playing it for fun.
	I'm not a pro at this game.
	I'm just a guy who's playing it for fun.
	I'm not a pro at this game.
	I'm just a guy who's playing it for fun.
	I'm not a pro at this game.
	I'm just a guy who's playing it for fun.
	I'm not a pro at this game.
	I'm just a guy who's playing it for fun.
	You ever go on swimming when you have a cold?
	It's just the worst, because then you have all the stuff in your nose, and then the cold water rushes up.
	It gets in your nasal passages, and it's all burned.
	And you feel like, oh, I feel really hot.
	I just got to get into something cold.
	And then you're immediately cold afterward.
	Instant grit.
	It is just the worst.
	Alex Jones, thank you so much for being on the show.
	Again, that was a pre-tape.
	We did that yesterday, because I wasn't sure if I'd be able to get through this whole program today.
	We have a long extended version available exclusively for Mug Club members.
	You did, though.
	You made it.
	I made it through.
	You made it.
	I made it through the mucus.
	I'm disgusted with myself for even doing that.
	Next week, we have some great guests lined up.
	And for the first time, I think we're actually going to have I believe it's Yara from the Change My Mind from this week.
	She was tweeting us and has been actually very respectful and I'm hoping that we'll have her on the show and it'll be an interesting look back because usually people don't want to come on the show afterward.
	Never.
	Let alone someone who was very open about the fact that she'd had an abortion herself.
	Listen, here's one thing that I think is important as it relates to that.
	If you watched that right there, I couldn't have been more straightforward about my point of view.
	She has had an abortion.
	She is pro-choice.
	I didn't say, well, let's just find common ground.
	I said, no, I think you ended a life.
	I think you killed somebody.
	And let me tell you what it is that you ended.
	And we still left it after that able to at least part amicably, as amicably as you can.
	So the point is, you don't necessarily have to find common ground under a lie to be civil.
	And you don't have to necessarily be civil to find common ground under a lie, under the guise of a lie.
	I just reversed it there.
	I notice Cortez does that a lot.
	And this does not necessarily mean that, and that does not necessarily mean that.
	Obviously we would equate that it would go in reverse sequencing.
	All right, hold on a second.
	Cover for me there, Garrett.
	Talk about something, Quarter Black.
	Something.
	What's up?
	How's it going?
	DMX, black people things.
	Yeah, it's okay.
	All right, that's enough.
	This is why people don't believe that you are any parts black.
	I know.
	I told you that was 0.1% sub... Yeah.
	So you're part of my brethren.
	I think sub-Saharan African.
	It's very broad, so it might not mean... But I'm technically more African American than a lot of black Americans.
	You know the struggle.
	You don't look black at all.
	I know.
	It really is...
	Concerning.
	It's all below the tricaster.
	Because I don't know how to, I don't, I feel like I'm pretty good at filing people according to, you know, race, gender.
	I'm pretty good at identity politics.
	And I can't do that with you.
	You've made it exceedingly difficult.
	Here's something I wanted to talk with you guys about.
	Let's talk about toxic masculinity.
	I think this is something that's been tossed around quite a bit, and Cortez has talked about this, so it seems fitting.
	I was at the vet this week, and I'm hoping, this is one thing, the vet stuff always, I think Joe Rogan and Kevin Smith were talking about this, the dog stuff always gets me, so hopefully I'm not going to be too emotional.
	I was at the vet this week, everything's kind of okay, but it's been rough with the chemo treatment.
	Again, I appreciate the kind words of support.
	But I was there at this emergency vet on Saturday, And while I was waiting there in the waiting room, there was this 15-year-old girl who was crying.
	And it's one of those things I will genuinely never forget this girl's face.
	I actually, I feel things really deeply, but I'm socially very awkward.
	People who've probably met me, sometimes they're surprised, like when we do a change of my mind or we do the show, it's like, I would have thought this deal would be a little bit more outgoing.
	Whereas my dad was with me, and he knows the right thing to say.
	So this girl was crying, she was very upset, and I said, hey, yeah, what's going on?
	She said, I brought in my 14-year-old dog, and she had a seizure, and she was crying, just tears streaming down her face.
	I said, oh, yeah, you know, that's kind of tough, and talked about what we were kind of going through with Hopper and the cancer treatment, and I didn't know what to say.
	I kind of just...
	Just fizzled out.
	And my dad saved it and said, like, hey, do you want some water?
	He took some water from the fridge there and he said, hey, I'm buying because it's free water.
	And she kind of laughed.
	She was wearing a sweater that said Canada on it.
	I think it's one of those Roots sweaters as a company.
	And so we asked her if she was from Canada.
	She was from upstate New York.
	And she forgot about it for a little bit.
	She stopped crying for a little bit.
	She was very awkward, this girl, too.
	Frizzy hair.
	Probably someone who was very, very close with her dog.
	Probably the kind of person who maybe had a deeper connection with her dog than most people.
	I know I had deeper connections with animals as a kid, sometimes I did with people, because I didn't know how to relate to them.
	And...
	So I'm trying to find a way to get into this again.
	I'm trying to keep my emotions in check.
	When we were leaving, we were okay.
	And as I was to kind of give you an idea what this looks like, I'm trying to see if you can see scope.
	There's a wall divide and there's a glass door.
	And so there's a little bit of a cutout where, you know, you pay for your, You pay for whatever service is rendered.
	And I can see her on the other side of this wall through a glass door, a 15-year-old girl.
	And at this point, she was sobbing, but after we spoke with her, she seemed a little bit better.
	She was looking things up on her phone, a little more talkative in the waiting room.
	And I sent my dad out with the crate to our car.
	We pulled the car around.
	And I saw her mom.
	And there was no dad there.
	So I can see both sides of this dividing wall.
	And I saw her mom talking to the vet.
	And I overheard her saying, um, how does this work with a 14, 15 year old girl?
	Is she going to hold her?
	Um, and the vet said, well, you know, it depends if you think she's most comfortable doing that.
	Um, and it's one of those things where I'm in this position where I can see effectively that this girl's whole world is about to become unglued.
	Um, and I didn't sleep at all that night.
	All I could see was her face.
	All night long.
	It was unbelievably hard.
	And I gathered myself.
	I walked through the glass door.
	One of those said, hey, really love your sweater.
	God bless.
	Hope you have a good night.
	She said, oh, thank you.
	She was smiling.
	I can't remember.
	I made some kind of a joke and walked out.
	That's what toxic masculinity is.
	And let me explain what that means.
	We don't show our emotions all the time.
	We're all constantly accused of, you're not showing your emotions because of a toxically masculine culture.
	Um, it's not because we're afraid of being teased or because we're afraid of feeling.
	In that instance, uh, I walked out to my car by the way with my dad and I cried.
	Uh, it was, it was absolutely heartbreaking, but I knew that in that moment that wasn't going to help her.
	That's toxic masculinity.
	Why did I go out there, and even though it's just a laugh for 20 seconds before I know she's gonna have to hold her 14-year-old dog before they put it down, why would it matter?
	Why would I go out there and try to be strong?
	I know it sounds silly for this 15-year-old girl, because if even for 15 seconds I can protect a girl like that from pain.
	And it's the same thing with our family members, with our wives, with our daughters, with our sisters.
	This is why men act the way that we do.
	It's because we love you.
	It's because we want to protect you.
	We hate to see people in pain.
	We hate to see the people that we love in pain.
	That's toxic masculinity.
	I'll tell you this, I just, I wanted to give this girl a hug, and I know, I know I can't because, you know, of course it would be inappropriate, but, um...
	I felt so bad for her, and there was no dad present.
	Doesn't mean that there wasn't a dad.
	Doesn't mean that she doesn't have a dad.
	But it was that much more heartbreaking.
	Again, it's this carnal, this primal reaction, this visceral reaction that a man will have if there is a woman who is vulnerable, who is exposed, and there is no man there to help her.
	That's toxic masculinity.
	And you might say, that's the damsel in distress syndrome.
	Fine.
	Okay.
	I'm okay with it.
	It's in our nature to protect and to provide.
	Just as it's in your nature, women, to nurture, care for.
	We want to prevent pain for you at all costs.
	And by the way, I understand this ironically.
	Sometimes, that leads to us causing pain.
	We get so stressed out over trying to provide to protect, whether it's work, whether it's trying to be strong emotionally, that we end up lashing out at those who we live to provide for, who we live to protect.
	Just like women, ironically, end up suffocating the people they love sometimes, or spoiling them.
	With children, it's in our nature, and it needs to be bridled.
	That's toxic masculinity.
	But I don't think that it's a nature that should be condemned Just because it's a part of our genetic makeup.
	It would be emotionally selfish.
	It would be incredibly emotionally selfish.
	You know, I came back home that night, too.
	I came back to my wife, brought the dogs in, and she was obviously very worried.
	Everything was fine, but she was obviously very worried.
	And I made sure that when I came in, kind of had an even keeled temper,
	explained what went, what happened, what was, were we gonna have to give the dog antibiotics.
	And once she was settled, about 30 minutes after that, she asked me, she said, what's wrong?
	What's, what's bothering you?
	And that's when I told her what I had experienced with the 15 year old girl,
	that they were gonna put the dog down.
	And at that point in time, because I had made sure that my wife was taken care of before myself, that's toxic masculinity by the way, and that's a biblical Notion.
	The idea of esteeming others first, of treating your wives and your women as the best among you.
	By the way, that wasn't an ideal.
	When we talk about where do we get morals from, the idea of mercy, it wasn't really considered a virtue in a lot of societies until modern Christendom.
	The idea of treating your wives as the best among you, the idea of treating your wives with love, and I get it, people will say, well what about submit to your husbands?
	Okay, it talks about men loving your wives.
	That was actually kind of unique.
	When Christ came around.
	This is just me talking about my worldview once I had made sure that my wife was taken care of, that I had quelled any fears or anxiety she had.
	I told her about what had happened.
	And at that point, guess what?
	It was fine for me to be vulnerable with my wife.
	It was fine for me to shed a tear and explain something that was deeply impactful and hurtful.
	And my wife would never condemn me for it.
	And that's because we have an open, complementary relationship where we understand each other's needs and do our best to meet them as members of the opposite sex.
	That's toxic masculinity.
	This idea that men just, by the way, the idea that expressing, Jordan Peterson is talking about this, just expressing emotions is somehow inherently helpful, it's not true.
	Let me give you those examples right there.
	You know how I felt when I saw that 15 year old girl?
	I wanted to cry!
	I felt terrible.
	I wanted to go into hysterics.
	You don't think men feel that?
	Of course.
	Would it help her?
	No.
	It would be selfish.
	When I came home, it was late, I was tired, I felt this cold coming down, or flu, whatever the hell it is, Ebola czar, Ebola czars, czar, czars, whatever that is.
	Zika.
	Zika.
	Zika was a thing, swine, sexy, flu.
	You don't think I would love to come in and go, oh my gosh, you wouldn't believe the night I had.
	But that would be emotionally selfish.
	And so I ensured that I came in and said, OK, sweetheart, how are you?
	Let me explain this to you.
	Everything's OK.
	I love you.
	Are you secure?
	All right.
	Here's an emotional need that I have right now.
	When she asked, there's an appropriate time to express emotion.
	And it's not becoming of a young man to do that.
	There's nothing wrong with men crying.
	Okay?
	There's something wrong with telling boys and telling young men that they should cry for the sake of crying, or that it's inherently a virtue to cry.
	It's not!
	It's inherently a good thing to bridle your emotions To moderate your own instincts instead of just acting on them, and I would say it's an inherently good thing to teach young men to be vulnerable with the people they trust and they love, like their wives, like their families.
	That's toxic masculinity.
	There's this idea that people talk about quite a bit, as though men either have to live into this archetype of big dumb jock, or the sensitive artistic type who cries.
	Do you realize that's a very new thing?
	Look at the readings of Teddy Roosevelt or even Abraham Lincoln.
	These were people who were artistic.
	These were people who often were musically inclined.
	People who would paint.
	People who would write poetry.
	And then they were incredibly intelligent and physically robust.
	You were not considered a complete man unless all of these facets made up.
	Your masculinity.
	That's toxic masculinity.
	It broke apart, really, with modern progressive feminism.
	I hate to beat a dead horse here, but that's where we really separated people with the sexual revolution.
	And honestly, it just made it easier for scumbags to get laid.
	Let's be honest, that one's not working out really well for women.
	The original term, I've talked about this before and I'll leave you with this, was, you've heard this expression, jack of all trades, master of none.
	It was originally jack of all trades, master of one.
	Meaning you were expected to be a jack-of-all-trades, adequate, passable in all facets of life, and to be a master of one domain.
	That's what would make a truly great person.
	A truly great artist.
	Truly great at anything.
	But that's what makes a truly great man as well.
	That's when we talk about toxic masculinity and we throw the baby out with the bathwater.
	We're throwing out everything that is created.
	Modern medicine.
	This Western civilization that is served, protected.
	And provided for women throughout centuries.
	Men want to do that.
	That's toxic masculinity.
	We want to provide for you.
	We want to protect you.
	That's toxic masculinity.
	And sometimes it comes with some sh** that you don't want.
	That's what happens.
	But we condemn, and this is what worries me too, is this generation of boys that we have now going out there.
	We've talked about incels.
	That's a very small microcosm of it.
	But imagine an entire generation, now really we're going on two generations of boys who've been told that all of their instincts, all of their hardwiring is wrong and toxic.
	They're going to be afraid to be who they are.
	How do you juxtapose that?
	Where you say, hey, yeah, it's toxic masculinity.
	This idea that you don't want to cry.
	This idea that you want to be tough.
	This idea that you want to be athletic.
	This idea that you want to be great.
	This idea that you want to be competitive.
	That's toxic.
	Don't engage any of those instincts that you have.
	By the way, keep it real.
	Do you understand what kind of a conflicted message that is, to send young men?
	And I'm hoping that there are some women watching this, particularly some young feminist women who maybe haven't peered behind the curtain, who maybe haven't understood what it is that makes young men tick.
	We love, we care, and we are just as emotional, and we don't act on it because we love you.
	That's toxic masculinity.
	I don't have much else to say about it.

▲