All Episodes
Previous Next
March 25, 2025 - Louder with Crowder
01:01:44
"Top Secret" War Texts Exposed & The AIPAC Question Addressed
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Bad BATBANK!
VJUNK! VJUNK!
VJUNK! I understand.
Nobody ever knows.
And here I thought you could talk to me.
I understand.
I understand.
Welcome, Vince viewers.
I go with one name, like Cher.
Or Madonna.
But he's a man.
So, glad to have you.
You are watching the lineup exclusively here on Rumble from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m.
Eastern. No need to switch that dial if you have a dial and you live in, I guess, 1988.
The last time we had a dial on a TV.
Download the Rumble app and follow us there.
So that way you get notifications whenever we are live.
If you are not a Rumble Premium member, you just get to keep on watching.
It goes from show to show to show.
It's the next evolution.
In live streaming, Rumble, we own live, YouTube is dead, Rumble did it.
Before we get to the intro here, I want to let you know, today we'll be discussing the major screw-up of the Signal app debacle, but maybe not as big as the left is making it out to be.
We'll go into some claims, truths, ins and outs.
And, look, hold your fire here, because all of you will be equally upset.
We are going to be asking and answering some of the APAC questions.
Not the Jews!
But APEC, I know there's been a rash of actual anti-Semitism out there lately, and there's also been a rash of false accusations of anti-Semitism to anyone who is critical of some policies where, you know, some criticism may be warranted.
We are going to go through all of that and more.
Stay with us.
It'll be a reasonable discussion, hopefully, but you don't know it's the internet.
This is Ladder with Crudder.
*music*
Rumble is reimagining the video platform.
YouTube is dead.
Rumble did it.
Watch the new lineup exclusively on Rumble Live, including Ladder with Crowder at our new time, 11 a.m.
Eastern. Hey, Josh.
You want to come to my office for a second?
Yeah, sure.
Excellent. Please, sit down.
What's up, Sam?
Nothing much.
I just figured we could, you know, kibitz a little bit, you know, as they say, der Menschentachen, Gott lachen, you know, that kind of thing.
Yeah, it's cool to kick back and relax a little bit, sure, sure.
Definitely. Do you like the Eschlik for lunch?
Oh, yeah.
It was great, man.
A little spicy for my taste, but I ate it all, yeah.
I want to ask you, my people, they came from Kletsk.
Where your people originate?
What do you mean?
Where your people from Zzankoya, Sopotkon, Vitebsk, Eretz Israel?
Seattle. Oh.
Yeah. Wait.
Sam, I'm not Jewish.
But Josh Feierstein.
No, it's Feierstein.
It's Mums.
Yeah. Oh.
With an eye.
Oh. Yeah.
Okay. Get out.
You really are a d**k.
You can leave.
Get out.
F**k you.
Mumsers, get out!
Tweed-ware d**k.
Get up, Hudson.
Get up, Hudson.
You are now watching the lineup on Rumble Live, exclusively the official home of Louder with Crowder, and you can stream the entire lineup from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m.
Monday through Friday.
YouTube is officially dead.
Rumble did it.
it. Rumble did it.
I've been drinking too many hot beverages this morning.
You've got to cut me off.
Cut me off like YouTube is cut off.
Glad to be with you.
Rumble exclusive now.
This is the lineup like we discussed.
No more live streaming to YouTube.
They're done and still been number one in every time slot on Rumble for, I mean, a week and a half at this point.
Thank you so much.
All your support.
Share. Like.
We appreciate it.
It's a live show weekdays, 11 a.m.
Eastern. We see you here Monday through Friday.
My question of the day before we get to news.
Who is the last person you would accidentally Or you would want to accidentally add to a group text.
Your mother notwithstanding, we all know.
H.R. Sam.
Especially if it involves the ladies.
In your case, guys.
I was about to say Goyim.
Why? We're going to be talking about the Jewish stuff a lot today.
Call me names.
Captain Morgan, CEO.
Glad to have you here.
Hi. Josh Firestein.
Not underscore Firestein on X. But then Josh underscore Firestein on Instagram because he's not banned.
Not underscore Jewish either.
It's not a brag.
It's just a fact.
Letting you know.
Sorry, Hollywood.
We're going to piss everybody off today.
It's okay.
We are going to be talking about AIPAC.
We're going to be talking about the Signal app.
We're going to be talking about the left, Jon Stewart, who now says that people on the right don't like and don't support free speech.
We'll go through some claim truths.
You can hit the rundown there.
I know I already did it, but there you go.
And Cain Velasquez, sentenced for shooting at the molester of his son.
This is a hot-button issue.
Just so you know, I'm not afraid to take him.
The risky positions on this show as it relates to punishing or executing pedophiles.
I'm pro.
You can comment your grievance for it.
I mean, even without trial sometimes.
It's just, you know, if the evidence is strong enough.
Yeah, like Russia.
They do it right there.
That's one thing.
They stab themselves 36 times in the back and they put themselves in shallow grief.
Yes. And the judge says, okay.
Oh, good enough for me.
So yesterday, the former UFC champion, Cain Velasquez, He was sentenced, including, by the way, some time served for a 2022 shooting incident that involved people in the car.
Now he shot someone who was driving the car, not the alleged child molester who had been systematically molesting his son at a daycare for a long period of time.
And so Cain Velasquez did what most self-respecting fathers would do.
He tried to pew-pew him.
Five years.
That's the sentence for former UFC champion Cain Velasquez after the fighter pleaded no contest to attempted murder and other charges.
His lawyer asked the judge to release him on probation, but now expects Velasquez will ultimately serve one year in prison after getting credit for time served in jail and in home confinement.
I believe that in some ways justice was served today, despite feeling disappointed that he is back in custody.
Now, to be clear, the prosecuting attorney wanted 30 years.
What? 30 years.
Velasquez shot at people in a car, included the man Harry Goulart, or Harry Goulart, I have not heard it pronounced, only read it, who allegedly was sexually assaulting his son, and by the way, multiple other children.
And the reason that we have to say alleged is because the child molester allegedly in question still hasn't been sentenced, still hasn't gone to court.
And so this does beg the question, look, our justice system.
Yeah, I get it.
We can't have vigilante justice.
I understand that.
But when a man who shoots, who's never been a danger to society whatsoever, shoots someone who, with his verifiable proof from what he claims, molested his son and the so-called molester is still going through the process, at what point do we say, hey, our justice system maybe has a problem?
And the judge said this when he actually announced the sentence.
He said, punishment comes in many ways, and one of the worst is forcing a father to not be present in his child's life.
This is a tragic case.
Mr. Danger is, Mr. Velasquez is not a danger to public safety.
Mr. Danger was his amateur fighter name.
That's before he made the UFC.
So it's really sad.
I mean, here's the thing.
I kind of get it, but look, what are we doing here?
This man has never been a danger to anyone else.
He doesn't have any kind of a violent criminal record.
He exclusively shot at someone.
Now, he missed.
That was his problem.
Who he believed molested his son.
So he's really only a danger to people who are molesting children.
This guy doesn't need to be rehabilitated.
Doesn't need prison for that.
And then it comes down to what degree of punishment?
How much do we want to punish people who shoot pedophiles?
I don't know.
I'm conflicted.
I would say time served.
Good enough for me.
Don't go shooting any more pedophiles that are on this logbook right here.
I wouldn't even say that.
Be a Gary Ploush.
Yeah, exactly.
And it's kind of funny, actually, if this judge says he's not a danger to society, it's actually better than normal because this guy's job was beating people up for a living.
And he's not a danger to society.
Most of those guys are.
Yeah, but not society, just other people he had to face.
That's what I mean.
It's like, hey, he's controlling it.
This guy found a creative outlet instead of being a serial killer.
Fantastic! Which, by the way, if you're that child molester, I mean, you deserve every consequence that's coming at you just for the fact that you're a moron.
Or manifest destiny should take care of you because you molested a UFC...
Champion's son?
Yeah. What a retard.
Yeah, exactly.
I would agree.
The left would be more offended at the use of retard than the man who molested a son.
And to be clear, you know what?
Maybe he's perverted.
Maybe that's part of the thrill.
It's the danger.
It's the risk.
Oh, he's Mr. Danger.
Hold on.
This is all a big ploy by Kane to get even with this guy.
So the judge sentenced him, wink, wink, right?
To put him in the same prison that that guy's going to end up in and justice will take care of himself.
Oh, dear Lord, I hope so.
I mean, Kane's like, you're going to get me?
Fine, that's fantastic.
Hey, Harry, meet your new cellmate.
Just... Brown pride!
Oh, my God.
And he's very American, though.
What's funny is...
I don't like the brown pride tattoo.
It reads racist because you know what it is.
But... That's neither here nor there.
This is my issue.
We do live in a culture where we've had catch and release, no cash bail.
We have violent criminals who are a danger to society, who walk free amongst us.
And the left says, we have mass incarceration problems.
We need rehabilitation.
Not just punishment.
I think we need both, by the way.
And then in this instance, if you read some of the headlines and certainly reactions on social media, they seem to be all of a sudden back to law and order.
Well, why doesn't that apply?
To all these other violent criminals.
Why does it only apply when someone is exacting justice on a pedophile?
Which, again, you look at the sympathies and where they lie with the left with child-attracted people, was it minor-attracted people, maps.
And the statistics show that when a pedophile is rehabbed in prison, they do it again.
Yeah, that's true.
Here's the thing.
You said, though, maybe it's a part of the plan.
You'll be in the same prison, yada, yada.
Well, here's a more realistic thing.
Is Cain's going to get out in a year and a half, whatever it is, after time served.
This child molester is going to go to jail for...
Almost no time.
Yeah. And he's going to have Cain Velasquez on his ass.
Yeah, I hope so.
For the rest of his life.
Yep. Now, don't use a gun next time.
You're Cain Velasquez.
Make him feel it.
A little ground and pound.
Work him a little bit.
Grass knuckles.
Soften him up.
Maybe we're in a locked vehicle.
I mean, he's not the Hulk.
Even bring someone with an air horn so you set rounds just so you sit him down for a while and stare him down so he knows more is coming.
Yeah, give him an IV.
It's a win.
Just prop him up, sit him down here.
Yeah, you got 24 hours before the fight.
So here's a press reaction from, I think this is San Francisco Gate.
It says, former UFC heavyweight champ gets five-year sentence for vigilante justice shooting case.
From time, former UFC champion Cain Velasquez sentenced to five years in prison for vigilante shooting spree.
Shooting spree?
Well, at the same time, many of these leftist publications either allowed...
Advocated for or were understanding of catch-and-release policies, not only for violent felons in our major cities, but even at the borders.
So I guess they like brown people, just not if they're American shooting pedophiles.
That's the key thing, shooting pedophiles.
Yep. They don't want you to shoot pedophiles.
Why? Seems pretty cut and dry because they like them.
They are one.
Yep. The Democrat Party, just remember that.
When you think Democrats, think pedophiles.
And by the way, I tell you what, there are no, I tell you what, pedophilia, because we're not afraid to go against the grain.
Pedophilia is, by the way, is strongly condemned.
But we're outsiders.
Here at Rumble, and if you are not a member, Rumble Premium, $99 annually or $9.99 a month.
You can get $20 off today.
Use the promo code RUMBLELIVE.
Mug Club is Rumble Premium.
Rumble Premium is Mug Club.
You get us.
You get 100% more show.
You get Dr. Disrespect.
You get Nick DiPaolo.
You get Donald Trump Jr.
You get everything ad-free and more.
And with this show, you only get one sponsor spot in a show because we forego many, many, many millions to be beholden to you.
Let's go on.
And if not, continue watching for free.
You watch Tim Pool.
You can watch for free or you can support.
Choice is yours.
We hope we make it worth your while.
Let's go to the Trump administration and the big story right now.
They're talking about it with Rogue on CNN.
Okay, so for those of you who don't know this story, if you haven't been following it, It's not good.
Okay? This doesn't reflect well upon this administration in the sense that someone needs to be fired.
Hint, hint.
Mike Waltz.
He should be fired.
Right? We get it.
But there are a lot of claims that are simply not true out there.
There's a lot of misinformation surrounding the story.
And so that's what happens.
You take a kernel of truth on which we can all agree, okay, national security is important.
We understand it.
And then people start embellishing and adding lies to it when it's not really necessary.
So... We'll go through some of that, so hopefully you can make sense of it.
Links in the description.
As always, the references every single show.
The Atlantic editor, I guess editor-in-chief, Jeffrey Goldberg.
Not to be confused with Jonah Goldberg.
A lot of people are getting that wrong.
He released that he was...
And by the way, this guy is garbage.
So that is important.
Just Jeffrey Goldberg is garbage to begin with.
Start there.
He didn't do anything necessarily wrong here.
He was added to the Signal Chat.
But this is the guy who, if he had anything that was classified, he would have released it because he fabricated stories like losers and suckers, it only cost $60,000, it's too much to bury a Mexican.
That came from this guy, okay?
So this is not the beacon of integrity that he wants you to believe.
Jeffrey Goldberg told the public that he was added to a high-level government chat on Signal where they were sharing war plans.
Listen to this.
The National Security Council is right now trying to figure out how a reporter from the Atlantic was added to a group chat discussing upcoming military strikes against Houthi rebels in Yemen.
That's right.
Atlantic reporter Jeffrey Goldberg says he was added to a small group on the messaging app Signal that included Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth.
She just repeated herself exactly.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Director of National Intelligence.
Tulsi Gabbard.
Okay, so, quick timeline.
They're on signal.
The people who were mentioned there, National Security Advisor Mike Waltz, added Goldberg.
All right.
It was a group called the Houthi PC Small Group where they discussed the attack on the Houthis and the United States bombed the Houthis.
It worked anyway.
So, at the end of the day, there wasn't anything that was particularly, I should say, poignant as far as military secrets because, of course, if this was leaked to a left-wing press, they often support our enemies and would likely give them a heads-up, especially if it's Hinkle.
It's not good, but I don't really know that there's a whole lot to come of this other than someone needs to be fired and people need to be careful.
I also understand why they would move to signal.
Doesn't mean that it's right, but I can understand the logic.
We'll get into that.
President Trump, Secretary Hegseth, they both addressed the controversy yesterday with President Trump finding out seemingly live, and it's entertaining.
I don't know anything about it.
I'm not a big fan of The Atlantic.
To me, it's a magazine that's going out of business.
I think it's not much of a magazine, but I know nothing about it.
You're saying that they had what?
They were using signal to coordinate on sensitive materials.
Having to do with what?
Having to do with what?
What were they talking about?
With the Houthis.
The Houthis?
You mean the attack on the Houthis?
Well, it couldn't have been very effective because the attack was very effective.
I can tell you that.
I don't know anything about it.
You're telling me about it for the first time.
How did you learn that a journalist was privy to the targets, the types of weapons used?
I've heard I was characterized.
Nobody was texting war plans.
And that's all I have to say about that.
Thank you.
And to be clear, it doesn't really seem like there were serious war plans that were being discussed.
And if you actually read the conversation, I will say the silver lining.
I'd like to have a beer with those guys.
They're pretty consistent.
They're tired of Europe.
They don't like terrorists.
There's nothing really damning in there.
What is damning is the act.
I wouldn't want to have a beer with Mike Walls.
No, no, neither would I. Apparently, Donald Trump will.
He's coming out and saying right now that he's not going to be fired and that this was just an accident.
That's not ideal.
Not ideal.
But I also understand, look, to be clear.
Them going to signal, I understand the presidential, was it presidential records?
Yeah, well, record preservation of record government, basically, that you can't.
And I understand they have to go through specific sort of government applications, encrypted services.
That being said, the first administration, the first term of this administration had more leaks than any administration in our lifetime.
And so if you're trying to drain the swamp and you don't know who's a friend amongst you, you discuss the official battle plans through the official channels that are required.
And then you have the contextual conversation that you know you don't want these people reading because they're likely to leak it to the press, where, you know, Pete Hexeth probably doesn't want the press knowing that he calls them a bunch of Eurofags.
I like that he does!
Doesn't make it right, but I can understand.
I mean, we've had that here, right?
We've had leaks online by accident, which is why we've moved to encrypted apps like Signal, just like this happened last week when we were planning lunch.
by accident.
by accident.
To those on audio, that makes no sense.
You should go and watch on Rumble Live.
This is not just an audio podcast where we're talking to a microphone.
There's a lot of...
Spared no expense.
So let's go through some claims and truths here just so we can clear some confusion up.
Here's a claim that you will hear made across media that top secret war plans were divulged.
Jeffrey Goldberg reporting he accidentally received top secret war plans from Defense Secretary Pete Hexeth after he was included in a group chat.
On the encrypted messaging platform, Signal.
Okay, here's the truth.
These were not top-secret war plans.
This was seemingly an informal check-in with people who seemed to be friendly, by the way, after the planning had already been done.
It's battle plans versus beer talk.
In other words, you have a meeting, let's say, at the Pentagon.
Okay, great.
We're going to set a battle plan.
Go. Hey, you guys want to go out for a couple of beers afterwards or you want to go grab lunch?
We live in an era where everything is written down and people want to weaponize something against you.
Again, Walt made a huge mistake.
Huge screw-up, but these were not...
Top secret battle plans.
And the journalist in question, Goldberg, has provided no proof whatsoever that there was anything top secret discussed.
And if there happened to be, you know he would release it because he has no conscience or moral integrity.
This is the guy who ran with stories of Donald Trump saying losers and suckers about our military.
He's actually been involved in the fabrication of stories to try and damage his administration.
If he had anything, he would have used it.
Right. So the only pushback that we have right now regarding this is from Tulsi Gabbard this morning.
Not just the only pushback, but on the record before this committee.
See, she's DNI.
She said no classified information was shared in that chat.
So it's up to Goldberg now, I guess, to show some proof.
And I don't know if he'd get in trouble for doing that.
And Waltz did say, oh, maybe there was some classified information that was shared to try and keep his story from getting out.
That seems like he's covering his own rear, and that doesn't reflect well upon him.
I think he should be fired.
Yeah, he's a national security advisor?
Yes. I had nationally advised that he'd not...
Let me advise you on the security of your job.
It's gone!
Here's another claim that's making the rounds out there.
All references available.
That the leaked chats show some discord among the ranks over there at the Trump administration.
First off, pause for a second.
It's very hard to take a journalist seriously who looks like that chick from Nightmare Before Christmas.
Yeah. No!
But let's continue with the clip.
In this chat, there was a moment where J.D. Vance questioned POTUS's judgment about this Houthi bombing.
And then he had to be talked back and ended up, you know, agreeing.
And they were all on side.
But I think it's a window into there is going to be at some point, presumably some actual opposition to the president and the way it's going on, not just foreign policy, but what's happening with the economy, tariffs, Canada.
Okay, so, discord among the Trump administration.
Okay, here's the truth.
It shows the opposite of that, actually.
It shows that these people are actually having healthy discussions, some slight disagreements, and they're...
Yeah. Yeah.
Yeah. It's pathetic.
Good! They're the people they claim to be.
They loathe Europe.
I loathe Europe.
They're just like me.
That right there makes it seem like they wanted that to get out.
Yeah, exactly.
They're like, oh, I want to say this so bad, but if only we had somebody else say it for us.
Yeah. Maybe these Europeans have a false sense of confidence, especially if Germany knew how we felt about them.
And Germany's really like, what?
Oh, nein!
What did you say about me?
I thought we were friends.
It also made it seem like he's one of the most pro, like, America-first people out there, where he's like, hey, 3% of our shipping goes through there?
What do we care about this?
It's really Europe's problem.
If we do, we gotta get something out of it.
Right. Like, hey, pay for it.
This is gonna cost us men and materiel, potentially.
It does seem like an indirect way to tell Europe, hey, you're welcome.
Yeah, exactly.
Grateful bastards.
It's like accidentally, like, you have a gift receipt, but accidentally including the real receipt when you buy an expensive gift.
Oh, no!
How did that get in there?
What was that?
What was it that Pete got you?
It was only 200?
It's not a competition.
I'm such an airhead.
So the question is, look, why was any of this communicated over a commercial app?
Well, okay, because it's encrypted, right?
That's a reason.
And because I would bet that they are mistrustful of people who may have access to the official government channels.
I get it, especially considering the leaks of the first administration.
And when we're talking about the channels that exist and when we're talking about the safeguards that exist as far as protecting information and how it should be treated, The law isn't applied equally.
See Hillary Clinton, by the way, who tweeted out, who posted on X, are you kidding me?
No, are you kidding me, you crazy bitch?
Really? You feel the right to come in?
So if it's not applied equally, it just means that it can be weaponized.
I'm willing to bet they were afraid of their private conversations being weaponized, and so they took it to an app.
Makes sense.
Not saying that it means it's right.
And then the screw-up is...
Why Goldberg?
How does that happen?
Just an accident?
Well, there's some information about this that Goldberg was being added by the administration, I think is what it is.
So there's something right here.
So it appears his number was added to a contact card by one of the Trump administration staffers.
They say that Goldberg really hasn't had any coordination or conversations with Waltz or anything like that.
So they don't have any kind of history together.
But going back to the Signal app...
You had Ratcliffe, the CIA head, is basically saying, hey, this Signal app is pre-installed on my machine.
And many other, if not all, of the officers.
It's everywhere.
Well, it is an app where people buy cocaine.
I'm sure it's useful in that way, too.
And that's not whataboutism.
That's just saying, hey, this isn't like the Trump administration decided to move to Signal.
It seems like Signal was a part of the administrative process.
People in the administration using it to coordinate and talk to other people within the administration.
Guaranteed Donald Trump didn't order Signal.
He was absolutely confounded that his son could turn on.
Turn on the laptop.
You turned it on so fast.
Wow. Whoa, you're a wizard.
I'll give you the signal.
We're a signal family in this household.
No telegram, no WhatsApp.
It's signal or bust.
No. It's clearly something like it makes sense.
They're using an encrypted app.
What's going on, Gerald?
I hear you.
No, no, no.
It's good.
It's good.
Okay. The other thing, too, is waltz.
All right.
If he did add Goldberg, whoever added Goldberg.
Look, if Goldberg had classified information that would be damning on this administration, you know that you would have heard of it.
This is the guy who was at the center of the suckers and losers story.
Remember, he called our military suckers and losers.
The Vanessa Gillen story where she said that Trump said it doesn't cost $60,000 to bury an effing Mexican.
No. I would also be surprised if it cost $60,000 to bury a Mexican.
The Mexicans would be surprised.
They would too, yes.
They'd have to spend time converting the currency.
Well, if the Mexicans are doing it, it's like $100.
Yeah, pretty much.
Is there anything new?
No, no, no.
That was just the update so far.
But we'll see if anything else comes from the hearing.
This wasn't about this, by the way.
They just happened to have these people in front of them today.
So you guys can comment below your thoughts if you think that Waltz needs to be fired.
I think that this is a mistake that could be handled well.
Waltz is probably going to have to be laid off.
And if they don't, then it's going to snowball into a bigger.
Somebody's got to take the fall for it.
I'm sorry.
It is a mistake.
It's going to haunt you for the next four years.
I mean, we've got to think about that.
We're just now two months in.
Yeah. That's going to haunt you if you don't fire him.
And don't be careless out there.
Just really be careful.
All right.
Because they're always watching.
Who's they?
Al Jazeera.
Let's get to the APAC question.
Now. Okay, this is something that I've, and just, please, give me a moment to explain some context here.
I don't like seeing this division that you see on the right, and I think that you have this identity politics, this kind of class warfare going on, really, on what used to be the far left, which is the actual party of anti-Semitism, and then they've sort of connected with the far right in being anti-Semitic.
There are actual people out there to whom the Jews are at the center of the...
All problems in the world.
And then you have people who just like accusing you of racism, homophobia, transphobia, they use anti-Semitic to try and silence any legitimate criticism.
Let me be clear about my stance.
I hope that Israel wipes Hamas off the face of the earth.
When people get mad, for example, at Christians or Jews, Blaspheming against Islam, right?
When Muslims get mad, you can't paint Muhammad.
Well, guess what?
Your entire religion is effectively based on blasphemy because you're claiming that Jesus Christ isn't the person who he said he is and who we believe him to be.
But we don't blow you up over it.
I'm not a big fan of radical Islamism or Islamism, 150 million plus people who believe that violence is justified against infidels.
I want to be clear about that.
Now, with that being said, And as a Christian, I do believe that Israel has a right to exist.
You need to separate your personal faith and your personal beliefs, sometimes from your duty as an American.
And I do have a problem specifically with AIPAC as an organization.
Let me put a finer point in it.
I dislike AIPAC for the same reason I dislike ActBlue and the SEIU.
Because they give huge sums of cash to far-left, anti-American candidates.
The only caveat with AIPAC is if they support Israel.
I have no problem with someone who supports Israel.
I have a problem with someone who's anti-First Amendment, anti-Second Amendment, who's pro-abortion, but goes, oh, I passed the litmus test, pro-Israel.
And so you see APEC supporting...
You cannot support, you cannot give money to a far-left Democrat in 2025 and claim that you love America.
I'm a Christian.
I believe in charity.
We all do.
At least one-tenth goes to the church, right?
A tithe.
I also understand that as an American, I shouldn't be voting...
For the United States to be the charity of the world, because that's not my role.
It's a system of government.
I should personally be charitable.
It's not the United States' duty to effectively spend themselves into oblivion, into greater debt, in order to help Zambia, Ghana.
Same thing.
I personally support Israel's right to exist, and of course, their war against Hamas right now.
That doesn't mean that our policy should at any point place allegiance to Israel, Or some kind of lobbying group above that of the United States.
Does that make sense?
Yeah. I'm a Christian first, and then I'm an American.
But as it relates to our system of government, my duty is as an American first.
And I understand you can be Jewish and American.
But as an American, it is your duty when you vote, and we discuss politics, to place this country first.
The founders were very, very clear about that.
So, getting into this, there are a lot of claims out there, some of which are true.
Some of which aren't.
And claims from both sides regarding AIPAC.
So I'm going to go through some claims, both from the attack angle and the defense angle, and hopefully make sense of this.
All references are available.
Link in the description.
Just, if you disagree, I expect hate to come from all sides here.
And I think that most people out there probably line up with this line of thinking more than the people who scream the loudest on social media.
You can comment at the end of this segment.
What is AIPAC?
They're the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee, and of course you've heard a whole lot about them in the news recently.
A big part of the conversation is a particular lobby group called the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee, or AIPAC.
There's also this lobby AIPAC, which is a very, very powerful lobby.
It's all about the Benjamins, maybe.
In response to this tweet, would love to know who Representative Ilhan thinks is paying American politicians to be pro-Israel.
Omar tweeted again.
AIPAC. Ostensibly, it's a group of Americans who lobby on behalf of Israel.
A lot of the big money lobbies that are corrupting a lot of our politics.
Big Oil, the NRA, AIPAC.
I mean, it's pretty obvious why AIPAC would be investing in getting pro-Israeli politicians into the government.
If you stand up, you're going to find that AIPAC and other billionaire funded super PACs are going to go to war against you.
Putting huge amounts of money in a primary in your general election.
All right, a lot to unpack there, as the kiddos say.
So it's time for some claim truth.
Now, here's the first claim I'm going to address, and this will get me sideways with conservative nonprofits who support Israel no matter what at every single point, including AIPAC, that AIPAC is a very conservative organization.
APEC's election war chest financed by major donors, including several Republican billionaires and key GOP funders, has started imposing expensive consequences for lawmakers who express criticism of the U.S.'s unwavering support for Israel.
Okay, here's the truth.
APEC donates significantly more to Democrats than Republicans.
They do donate a lot to Republicans.
Again, their only qualifier is...
Do you support Israel?
Period. That is not an American ideal as far as policy.
They give more to Democrats.
So in 2024, Democrat candidates received from APEC, to give you an idea, $19.1 million.
I believe this is a total of Congressional and Senate candidates.
Republicans, $15.7 million.
The average contribution on a candidate-by-candidate basis for Democrats, $117,000.
For Republicans, $66,000.
So almost twice given to individual Democrats.
To be clear.
Let me give you some examples, by the way.
And this is, look, I'm a Christian and I sat in an evangelical church where, yeah, it was always support Israel.
And by the way, of course, as Christians, we do believe that they have the right to exist to that land.
Fine, but I'm separating that here.
I didn't realize just how corrosive it was to have such a large organization supporting awful people who seek the destruction of your country.
And here's the thing.
That has nothing to do with Jews.
For example, AIPAC gave $866,000 to Hakeem Jeffries.
$519,000 to Debbie Wasserman Schultz.
Kirsten Gillibrand, $480,000.
Nancy Pelosi, only $8,000, but she doesn't need it.
She has insider trading to fall back on.
They gave her money in other ways.
Yeah. So this is the issue here.
You have people on the evangelical right who believe that...
Israel's our greatest ally?
That certainly is likely the case, can be argued.
That doesn't mean that AIPAC is if they're giving to Debbie Wasserman Schultz and Hakeem Jeffries and they brag about how 98% of their candidates are elected.
Well, hold on a second.
Let me ask you.
Am I supposed to be on board with AIPAC?
Does it make me anti-Semitic if I don't abandon my pro-First Amendment principles, my pro-Second Amendment principles, my pro-life principles?
Why would I abandon all those principles just because your only qualifier is supporting Israel?
I do support Israel.
I don't support those candidates.
And I don't support a giant organization giving those candidates.
Money! Because you're actively fighting against the United States of America.
Their primary goal, AIPAC, is to get pro-Israel candidates elected.
That's it.
That does seem to me perhaps anti-American.
This is from its own website.
They spent $70 million in 2024 to support pro-Israel candidates, and 90-something percent of the candidates won.
They even brag that they helped defeat...
Huge Second Amendment advocate, Brandon Herrera, in his primary because he was not pro-Israel enough.
It's like those people who say, I've been a Republican, but I can't vote for Donald Trump.
It's a matter of principle.
Okay, so the alternative?
You abandon all your principles to vote for Kamala Harris because you don't like Donald Trump?
He may not be pro-life enough for you.
When we're talking about the state-issue Supreme Court.
Okay, fine, fine, fine.
The choice is a candidate who supports abortion all the way up until including birth, period, and violating your right to self-preservation?
And transitioning minors?
Why do you not have a problem with abandoning all of those principles?
Why are conservatives expected to abandon all these principles?
Because they're afraid of being accused of anti-Semitism if they have a problem with AIPAC supporting Hakeem Jeffries, Wasserman Schultz, Pelosi, Gillibrand.
The only qualifier of AIPAC, and this is what I believe people have a problem with, it's a legitimate gripe.
The only qualifier is, do you support Israel regardless of any?
Other constitutional stances.
And that's the only thing that this group cares about.
Lobbying American representatives as they advocate for American policy.
And they're giving you money.
Okay, Mr. Candidate, where do you stand on the Constitution?
It's an antiquated doctrine that's in need of a few updates.
Uh-huh.
And your stance on the First Amendment?
Scrap it.
Got it.
How about the Second Amendment?
I'd take the axe to that.
And where do you line up on Israel?
Pro. Pro-Israel.
Here you go.
That is documentary footage.
That was easy.
By the way, it's incredibly responsible to be pro-Israel and also be pissed off at some of the things that Israel does, right?
Sure. Jesus was exactly this, incredibly pro-Israel, but stood in the temple and basically lambasted them for what they were doing and got really annoyed by them as well.
I'll just have you sometimes like, ah, how long do I have to put up with these people?
Oh, if Jesus went to AIPAC headquarters, he'd at least flip a table.
At one or two.
Yeah, yeah, absolutely.
You can do both.
He'd probably curse some of their fig trees.
Yeah. Never producing again.
Blow out a menorah?
Yeah, how do you feel about that?
Enjoy your huckin' Jeffries!
So, here's another claim that I'm going to go through, and now this is going to anger, unfortunately, the actual anti-Semites of the audience.
And it's a very, very rare thing, but if you believe that Jews are the cause of all problems in the world, okay.
I just ask that you apply your outrage equally.
Alright? And I'm applying it equally here.
I have the same problem with APEC that I have of ActBlue.
Or I have with whatever elect Hillary PAC today.
I don't like them because they don't like our point of view.
They hate America.
It's that simple.
But this claim that is being made is that AIPAC is the single most influential lobbying group in D.C. They control everything.
Well, AIPAC is one of the two most powerful lobbies in the United States.
Not just the most powerful pro-Israel lobbies, but most powerful lobby, maybe on par with the National Rifle Association.
Okay. Here's the truth.
No, it's not.
So, if you look at 2024 lobbying, we're sort of separating this here, APEC ranked 191st behind groups like the National Association of Realtors, Chamber of Commerce, and Meta.
So, if you think the Jews are behind it, a lot of...
A lot of Pinterest moms with part-time realtors.
Yeah, there's more money from Botox faces.
Yes, exactly.
This is just big botulism.
Now, if you look at 2023 to 2024, specifically their direct contributions, AIPAC ranked 18th behind groups like ActBlue, WinRed, Future Forward USA, just to be clear.
That's where they ranked here.
So, again, you can be upset about their influence because they may be advocating for another nation above.
The United States, but to say that they are the most influential is simply not...
What's that, Josh?
Snack time.
Are you eating out of a stop box?
Yeah, it's a great spot to hide my snacks from.
You know who?
No, I don't know who.
I don't know.
Don't stop.
And by the way, it's not for...
It's for firearms.
It's not for Cap'n Crunch.
Cap'n Crunch?
I don't have Cap'n Crunch money.
Dude, this is Colonel Munch.
Money bags.
Okay, stop talking.
Can you please stop talking?
Look, this is...
What? This is how you use a stop box right here, okay?
You put your fire...
What's this?
That looks like Captain Crunch.
That's a rich man's cereal.
No, it looks a lot like Colonel Munch to me.
No, I don't think so.
I don't eat Captain Crunch or Colonel Munch.
You know what?
You're about to be interested in Senior Punch, okay?
Well, maybe you should change your password.
Not make it so easy to get into.
I will change my password.
This is for firearms, which, by the way, you can use to conceal and prevent unintended access to your firearm.
It's easy.
You don't have to worry about a biometric safe like I once had and then couldn't get at 3 in the morning with a man and a loaded rifle and a balaclava at the foot of my bed at 3 in the morning.
The battery ran out?
The battery ran out.
And then it wouldn't accept the fast current charger, so I just spent time charging it.
Turns out it was a cat, and I couldn't shoot it.
We're going to stopboxusa.com slash Crowder, and it's made in the USA.
We have them all around.
They're great.
It's not that heavy, but it works, and it keeps your fire.
No, it's fantastic.
It's also free for a car and stuff like that.
Can you toss me that other piece of cereal?
No, I'm not going to toss you the other piece of cereal.
That's enough.
I think that's the takeaway, is that you have Captain Crunch money over there.
I do have Captain Crunch money.
Stopboxusa.com slash Crowder.
Let's go to the next claim of APEC.
Claim! AIPAC works, and they're the only organization that work on behalf of and lobby for a foreign nation.
The only ones.
Have you ever wondered how we got to this point, where one of the biggest lobbying groups in America can openly brag that they are representing a foreign country?
This is from AIPAC's website, but somehow they don't have to register under the FARA Act as someone acting on behalf of a foreign actor.
Now, here's the truth.
Well, they should have to register under Farah, and they do advocate on behalf of a foreign nation.
That all is true.
And by the way, these are valid points.
But they're not the only PAC to do so.
They're not the only organization.
That part is the lie that you will hear out there.
So the National Iranian American Council advocates for the Islamic Republic of Iran.
Republic, we're using that term a little loosely.
Which we should probably be against.
Multiple states.
Other PACs that advocate here for the Islamic Republic.
It's a legitimate criticism, but if you only blame APAC.
Mm-hmm.
Okay, then it begs the question why I think, just to be clear, all of these groups should have to register with FARA.
Yeah. All of them!
Okay, candidate number two, it says here you support the LGBTQ plus movement.
That's right.
Uh-huh.
You also support transitioning of minors?
More than adults.
Oh, boy.
Well, what about your stance on Israel?
Oh, I love them.
I can't get enough of them.
I've heard enough.
That's documentary footage.
Now, I'm asking you if this makes sense.
All of them should register with Farrah.
I hate all of the groups that give hundreds and hundreds of thousands to anti-American radical Democrats, whether APAC or ActBlue or the Teachers Union.
I believe that that is remarkably consistent, and I think it's an important delineator.
There are some people with whom the Jews can do no right, and some people with whom the Jews can do no wrong.
Neither one is even close to correct, and this is not some false representation as a moderate.
Nope, I'm not a moderate.
I just think that this whole issue has been convoluted because people are inherently dishonest on this one.
Yeah, and I think that when you're talking about FAR, you should understand, and I'm...
100% with you on this.
They should absolutely have to register, but so should all of these other organizations that are advocating on behalf of other foreign governments.
Look, Farah has specific rules, though, Ian, and everybody else making this.
You have to say, we need to change these rules, because technically people can slide in under those rules and not have to do it.
So change the rules so that nobody else can do it, period.
Don't just focus on Israel.
Focus on the entire thing.
It'll take care of the problem.
Yep. I agree.
I think that's a good point.
You can comment below if you agree, if you disagree.
I'm sure that the...
Comments will be lit.
They'll be ablaze.
You know, they killed JFK so that they didn't have to register.
Whoa! That's part of the deal.
Oh, yeah, that makes perfect sense.
Something, something Jews.
My landlord's Jewish.
I knew this one guy who had sideburns.
I don't know if he was a Jew, but I didn't like him.
That is a big-nosed guy.
He could have been Iranian, but...
Could have had a good Roman nose, in which case I like him.
Or it could have been a Jew nose, in which case I hate him.
Let's go to the next claim that is made, and you will see this again from people on the right.
And people on the right who sell something wholesale and not acknowledge criticism, guess what?
That foments more conspiracy theories and, frankly, disdain.
So this claim that you will hear is we actually we absolutely have to keep giving money to Israel because they are our greatest allies and it's necessary something, something, something.
Israel is a critical ally of ours.
And I think most people understand the necessity of this funding.
They're fighting for their very existence.
They're the only stable democracy in the Middle East.
Okay, here's the truth.
No, we don't.
Now, you could advocate...
That we should, and in some instances, because they are an ally, yeah, it makes sense militarily, but this idea that we simply need to send more money as a blanket statement, no, no, we actually don't.
So between 1946 and 2024, we've given Israel around $300-plus billion in aid.
Now, that's since 1946.
Now, if we contrast that with Ukraine, or sorry, with Ukraine, $183 billion committed in just three years.
In just three years.
Right? It still is a lot, though, to Israel.
And here's my perspective.
This is, you guys, let me know if you think this is unreasonable.
I dislike APEC for the same reason that I dislike ActBlue, right?
We've gone through there.
I think that they should have to register under Farah, just like I think these other nations should.
They all should have to.
How about, maybe, instead of saying we need to continue giving money to Israel as a blank check, and I understand the criticism, how about we just stop funding all sides of the war in the Middle East?
How about we stop supporting Israel's enemies at the same time, which we are?
Palestine, since 1950, sent them $6 billion in aid.
When you look at Iran, not big fans of the Jews.
The Obama administration gave them billions as part of the nuclear deal.
Unlocked at least $50 billion in assets, $400 million in cash.
Contrast that.
Donald Trump, the sanctions cost the Iranian economy $1 trillion.
Hey, that's more of a net benefit to Israel than sending them our money.
And I know we don't necessarily send money, but again, the idea of supporting or being in supportive relationships with plenty of nations who want to wipe them off the face of the map.
In other words, we say, hey, let's have a relationship with these people.
Let's send them money or let's have supportive trade with them.
Oh, and they want to wipe these people off the face of the map.
How about you just stop both?
Israel would come out with a net win.
So a good example of that?
Qatar. 2022, the Biden administration designated Qatar a major non-NATO ally.
Why? Why?
By the way, what that means is it provides foreign partners with certain benefits in areas of defense, trade, and security cooperation.
However, Qatar sends billions to Hamas, billions to Hezbollah, billions that they invest in American universities that they try and subvert.
Qatar, we'll do a whole other segment on Qatar, by the way, in the future.
They certainly are someone to watch out for.
They have a lot of oil money.
So they're modernized.
It's amazing how successful you can be when you just throw a bunch of indentured servants, I'm sorry, slaves at it.
But if we just said, you know what, let's get out of the Iranian business.
Let's get out of the Palestine business.
Let's get out of the Qatar business.
Guess what?
Israel would be better off and we wouldn't have to be sending them so much money.
I don't think it's anti-Semitic for someone to say we shouldn't be sending money to Ukraine and I don't think we should be sending so much money to Israel.
We can have a disagreement over policy, but I won't accuse them of being an anti-Semite.
And I certainly won't accuse someone of being an anti-Semite simply because they have a problem with AIPAC.
Well, let me ask you this.
They have successfully lobbied and had elected far-left Democrats who actively fight against everything you stand for.
Why don't you have a problem with AIPAC?
Can they give enough to the candidate you like that it undoes giving more to the candidates who hate you?
That's why I try not to wade into a lot of this temporary social media BS surrounding these conversations.
Because it's an outrage today that's based on maybe a half-truth or a complete mistruth, and then someone moves on tomorrow.
There's no winning with it.
I think that our perspective here has been remarkably consistent, and I think it's in line with most Americans.
The problem is that most Americans aren't represented in the era of clickbait, where one side is quick to accuse you of wholesale blanket discrimination or prejudice, and the other side is ready to accuse you of being a Jew.
I have been referred to as a Jew fag many times.
Just a regular one.
Yeah, which, you know, not gay nor Jewish.
I'd be a very large Jew, too.
Most Jews aren't quite...
You're Aryan, and I'm Aryan just with dark hair.
But even I can't escape it, even with this segment!
We will be accused of being on AIPAC's payroll.
Watch! That, to me, is where there is actual anti-Semitism and no winning.
AIPAC... No.
No. No.
No. But the only qualifier is if they, so you don't care about anything else?
Well, to me, you're not American.
For example, we had a city council member, I believe in California, who was in Washington, who was an actual cannibal.
An actual cannibal made it to city council.
And you wonder, wait, hold on a second.
This is something in the margins that people don't think of.
This actually allows radical fringe candidates to win elections.
Why? They can be socialists.
They can be pro-transitioning children.
They can be cannibals?
So long as they meet the litmus test of, but I support Israel, there's your cash.
So it says here you're an actual cannibal.
Well, cannibal's kind of a loaded word.
There's a lot of misconceptions out there.
You know, like I don't eat the whole person.
Other parts?
Yeah, you know, like a toe or...
A rib, maybe?
Alright, that's fine.
What's your stance on aid for Israel?
Love Israel.
Almost as much as I love eating people.
Katzy! Oh!
Could you...
could you get that for me?
Sure. A lot of people think APEC don't be like it is, but it do.
It do indeed.
It's not funded by the Jews or APEC or anybody else.
Or the Iranians.
It is CrowderShop.com.
The socialism is for figs shirt is back.
It's available now that we are off YouTube and they can't touch us, baby.
Go to CrowderShop.com right now and get your shirt and wear it proudly.
Don't be a fig like Josh was yesterday.
Don't say it.
When you're Aryan and you say it that angrily.
Don't be a fig!
Wow. I don't like it.
Wow. Sounds so angry.
Grab the shop!
Yeah. Dot com!
Look, I'll be a figure if I want to be one.
It's also a very poor German accent.
Yeah, I don't really have it.
You're like Joey Triviani doing the Italian accent.
I think we found a phony!
You're a big fat phony!
He's not one of us.
He looks like it, but he's not.
I could tell he wasn't one of us when I saw him counting backwards.
That's right.
I learned that in a Tarantino film.
That's correct.
Also, then I saw him changing in the shower and his captain is no longer wearing his hat.
Arrivederci. Are you Joe?
All right.
Like I said, third best.
Let's go to The Daily Show, John Storton.
This is something you're seeing on the left now.
They tell on themselves.
All the time.
When they accuse you of being anti-free speech, I know that you as a reasonable person are going, wait, the left is accusing me of being anti-free speech?
Yes, that's correct.
It's retarded.
But you need to be prepared to combat it.
So Jon Stewart, who, full disclosure, very funny, I just disagree with him, he claimed that President Trump and this administration are unbelievably hypocritical on free speech.
And actually, this administration and the right-wingers are pro-censorship.
Generally, you've got to search the archives for contradictions on one's stated principles, dig through policy papers to uncover private actions that are undermined by someone's public stance.
But this is so blatant.
I can't wrap my head around it.
It's not even the hypocrisy.
It's that they so fetishize free speech, this thing that they do not in any way actually practice.
Yes, we fetishize amendment number...
One. It's almost like it's important, which brings us to another installment of Claim Truth.
It's always funny to me.
You'll get like, well, why do you?
Oh, that's all you care about is free speech.
Well, it's not all I care about, but if I had to pick one thing...
It'd probably be that.
I'd start there.
That is my fetish, by the way.
The First Amendment, free speech.
I'll get in bed with my wife and I say, yes, say whatever you like.
Exactly. She says stuff like, oh yeah, Charles.
And I'm like, oh, well that's not me, but I support your right to say it.
Exactly. That's a huge fetish of mine.
I don't agree with what you say, but I will fight to the death for your right to say it.
By the way, without the First Amendment, there can be no dirty talk.
It's true.
And who's Charles?
Is that your boss?
Just like without the Second Amendment, there can be no roleplaying.
What? Not just me?
Nice. I get really into it.
I say, tonight we're going to do UK roleplaying.
Here's the knife deposit box.
Use that stop box.
Oops, all bullets.
Let's go to the claim here.
The first claim from Mr. Stewart.
And this echoes what the left is trying to get going.
As a gaslighting campaign right now.
Don't be fooled.
Check the links in the description.
President Trump, they claim, is attacking universities over speech.
Columbia University is bowing to President Trump's demands, announcing it will change a number of policies.
Among them, placing the school's Middle Eastern, South Asian, and African Studies Department under academic receivership for at least five years.
Some students protested the war in Gaza.
Suddenly a whole academic department is on double secret probation?
Here's the truth.
Speech's not the problem.
Crimes were.
Ow. Kind of like Black Lives Matter, kind of like Antifa.
It's like, ah, we don't have a problem.
You want to go out and be a dick?
It's the criminal activity.
I hope I'm crystal clear with you.
So, for example, the Students for Justice Palestine, they organized pro-Hamas rallies all across American campuses.
Cost millions.
Let me give you some examples.
At Columbia, they forcibly occupied Hamilton Hall.
They were intimidating and harassing, including physically Jewish students.
And let me add some context here.
Let's contrast that because they're trying to say, hey, you as a conservative, you're anti-free speech.
Okay. It doesn't exist in a vacuum.
Conservative speech has specifically been banned and not welcome at universities when no crimes were taking place.
Give you some examples.
So, conservative speakers.
From 1998 to now, 754 successful bannings or deplatformings by universities.
In 2017, there were the Berkeley riots over Ann Coulter and Milo Yiannopoulos going to speak.
By the way, 2018, yours truly.
I was banned from DePaul University for Change My Mind.
There are only two genders.
Change my mind.
I am...
Pro-Second Amendment.
Change my mind.
No crimes taking place.
Banned because of speech.
It's not even close.
This is stupid.
Jon Stewart knows better.
He's lying to you.
Let's go to the next claim that President Trump is now the word police because he has a list of banned words.
What exactly would an actual government-run word police organization look like?
The Trump administration is actively trying to purge the federal government of so-called woke initiatives.
Government agencies have flagged hundreds of words to limit or avoid.
Words like DEI, BIPOC, anti-racism, Latinx, Native American, black, women.
Seemingly random words like expression, at risk, political, and even mental health and sex.
Okay, here's the truth.
That was largely bullshit.
Now... There is no list of official banned words.
Individual agencies can decide how to comply with the executive order on eliminating DEI from government, to be clear.
And we'll get into the contrast there.
There are no banned words, to be clear, despite what the left actually believes.
Don't think it.
Don't say it.
Don't say it.
Don't think it.
Don't say it.
Don't think it.
Don't say it.
Don't think it.
Don't say it.
Don't think it.
Don't say it.
Don't think it.
Don't say it.
Don't think it.
Don't say it.
Don't think it.
Don't say it.
Don't say it.
Ugh. Jeez.
TDS has spared no one.
And here's the thing.
There's no list of specific banned words, but more importantly, this was about undoing the enforcement of words that came from the Biden administration.
The Biden administration said, here are the words you have to use.
With no basis in history, reality, science.
Biology. Let me give you some examples here.
Former Vice President Biden, respect the office.
In 2021, they changed the word mothers to birthing people.
Idiots. A lot of their official documents.
In 2021, they also changed alien to non-citizen.
In 2022, they actually permitted...
Gender-neutral U.S. passports.
That was an entirely new thing because chicks with dicks could no longer fit on the page.
It's actually the phrase of the day.
Whatever. It's one word.
Which one is it?
Chicks or dicks?
It's hyphenated.
It's hyphenated, Gerald.
Chicks with dicks!
So they just said, we're going to replace this.
Well, why are you changing it from women to birthing people?
I don't know.
We did a focus group.
Yeah, yeah.
We can't say aliens, but that's what it's...
Literally, that's what it's used to say on actual immigration papers.
No, no, we can't say why, because we want to buy a voting bloc.
What would gender-neutral passports...
What does that even mean?
Ah, it just means people can be whatever they want.
Well, what's the basis of that?
Voting. You want to confuse every other foreign country?
Come on.
Or be a spy?
It's true.
Easiest way to be a spy.
Oh, I just...
I'm gender-neutral.
Put X on there.
I'll be Jason Bourne or whoever.
Oh, I didn't realize we're going...
Sorry, we're going over time here.
So for those of you who are not Rumble Premium members, just continue watching.
Tim Pool is coming up next.
I'm sure he has a lot to say about this right now because he's very fast to the news of the day.
And if you want to continue watching with us for another 45 minutes to an hour, click below.
Join Rumble Premium.
We will be continuing and taking your chats.
Just click there and Rumble Live is a promo code.
You get $20 off.
The very next claim we'll move on to.
That John Stewart and people on the left are making, again, they're telling on themselves.
Just be mindful of that.
When they accuse you of something, they're accusing you of exactly what it is that they are doing, and they know it.
Their claim here now is that President Trump loves social media, not because it's an alternative to legacy media who effectively boxed him out, but because social media exclusively pushes a right-wing bias and ideology.
He loves it.
▲
Export Selection