All Episodes
Previous Next
June 16, 2025 - Louder with Crowder
01:14:04
🔴 Trump vs. Tucker: Is Israel Dragging the US into War vs. Iran 2025-06-16 18:08
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
You'll get that.
You'll get this.
You're not expected to work.
You're not expected to be sexually responsible.
You are not expected.
No expectations.
Free stuff.
That's why they break the law.
Yeah.
And so here's the video of, I think, one of the angles.
It's not the overhead angle of the trucker.
We have two.
So this is the close-up first.
Yeah.
This is during the summer of love?
Yeah.
So there's a car.
He's coming.
He's slowing down.
Honking, slowing down, hitting the brakes, hitting the brakes.
Not hitting anybody, by the way.
And they mob him.
Oh my god, what just happened?
What just happened?
Well, a car was on the highway.
Yeah.
A truck that can't stop on a dime.
Exactly.
Did stop and did a pretty good job of it.
You said you have the aerial shot now?
Yeah, here's the overhead angle.
Alright, here you go.
Alright, it's pulling out.
It's like, okay, stop, stop, stop, stop, stop, stop, stop, stop.
And they were getting out of the way, by the way.
You know what I mean?
So I was like, I would have just kept going.
At that point, maybe thousands is wrong, but that looks like thousands to me.
That is absolutely thousands.
How many swarm?
Right now it's dozens, probably soon to be hundreds.
Didn't they beat the piss out of them?
I don't remember.
I know that happened to at least one truck driver.
You see stuff coming out.
I don't know if that's throwing rocks at it or whatever.
Yeah, throwing something for sure.
They're throwing stuff at the truck.
He didn't do anything.
He was just doing his job driving.
I think he may have gone around a barrier earlier.
Car is kind of trying to block it.
But now they're on his car and he's like, I got to get out of here.
Like they're trying to break in.
Now you hit the accelerator.
You got to start shooting.
It's them or you.
It's them or you.
Well, and here's what's going to happen.
And I, you know, I think it's 100% wrong to block a highway or road to protest.
100%.
I have no, no, but people are going to do this thinking, well, I can get away with this because we've done this before.
And a driver who has seen.
Stuff like this happened where people get pulled out of their cars and beaten half to death or threatened in their kids.
They're just going to go, I'm going to drive right now.
And now you've got fatalities from this happening.
Right.
Because it's not good on either side.
One, the protesters need to know, like, if you block a highway, the cops should have been doing, like, mace.
They should have been doing like whatever chemical agents from our Marvin the Martian the other day.
Whatever it takes to clear that highway because I want them to know you can't ever do this because you might die.
Even if you have the most peaceful aims, you can't block roadways.
There's a reason.
And I want motorists to know I'm never going to be faced with the decision of deciding whether I or my family die or some people that I've never met and I have no idea what their intentions are.
It's really this simple.
It's not a decision to me.
No.
No, exactly.
Well, here's why.
Here's exactly why.
Because the left has no sense.
Who has the duty there?
You're a pedestrian.
You have a duty to not block freeways.
You have a duty to not block major highways.
That's your duty.
You have to get off of the road.
As a driver driving on a freeway or on a highway with a speed limit of 60, 70, 80, wherever you are, you do not have a duty to stop randomly at non-intersections.
That's not something you're taught.
In other words, when you're taught in drivers as a pedestrian, look both ways, you're taught.
It's your job to get out of the way.
You're taught right of way at an intersection, sure, but you are never taught.
Oh, and by the way, on a freeway, at any given moment, you have to be ready to stop on a dime in case there are throngs of people who decide to swarm your car.
You're never taught that.
So one side is wrong because they have no semblance of duty or responsibility.
That's how you solve the problem.
You instill the duty in the people who disregard it.
That's it.
Josh, I think the only decision that I was even referring to, because I agree with you, it's not a decision, is basically if I'm in the car alone and I've got this situation, am I going to be charged with vehicular homicide?
Right.
Right.
Am I going to be charged with a crime because I'm basically trying to defend my life by not stopping and getting mobbed?
Oh, wait.
Right now, breaking.
FBI gives update on the Minnesota shooting.
Should we go to that?
Yeah.
Let's see what they say.
Senator Hoffman had a security camera.
I've seen the footage from that camera and it is chilling.
Belter knocked on Senator Hoffman's front door and repeatedly shouted, this is the police, open the door.
Senator Hoffman and his wife Yvette came to the door.
When they opened the door, Belter shined the flashlight in their faces and said there had been a shooting reported in the house.
Belter asked if they had any weapons.
When Belter lowered his flashlight, which he had shined in their face, they realized that he was not a police officer.
They shouted out, you're not a cop.
You're not a police officer.
So right there, what I hear is the first thing that a shooter asked when going to a house.
He was expressing his concern, do you have any weapons?
Because that changes the playing field.
And stop him from entering his home.
Belter shot him repeatedly.
Belter then shot Ms. Hoffman repeatedly.
Belter fled the scene, and the Hoffman's daughter called 911.
Unfortunately, the Hoffman survived.
Although they remain hospitalized.
That was a bad wording.
Unfortunately, they survived.
I think you can say, unfortunately, they are hospitalized.
...to the home of another Minnesota State Representative in Maple Grove, Minnesota.
Video surveillance showed that Belter I'm curious to see if they address the manifesto, because obviously the FBI would have it.
Approximately 2.24 a.m.
on Friday night.
Wearing a tactical vest and body armor, carrying a handgun and a flashlight, and wearing that same hyper-realistic silicon mask.
Again, the images, as you can see on the screen, are haunting.
Now, fortunately, the state representative was not home.
She and her family were gone on vacation, and so Belter left.
Belter then traveled to the home of a Minnesota state senator who lived in New Hope, Minnesota.
He parked in the street in that same town.
I will say this is information that we already know that is out there.
So, okay, they're presenting it, but they should be giving this update because there are a lot of questions that are unanswered.
So there's a responsibility from the FBI right now.
If there's been circulation, if there's a manifesto and only snippets taken out of context, this is where the FBI can serve a purpose, not put together a timeline that we've already put together for you and people on social media have.
Okay, what about the questions that remain unanswered?
And that's what we did not get.
And then we found out it was actively being suppressed by authorities and three-letter agencies as it related to Nashville, if not for our inside source.
So I really hope that he takes some questions or gets to that and gives some new information.
Otherwise, it just seems like a charade.
According to the officer, he just sat there and stared straight ahead.
So the New Hope police officer, who had been dispatched to the scene, proceeded to the state senator's home, and she waited for other law enforcement to arrive.
When they did, by the time they did, Belter had left the scene.
So they sent a female cop, she waited for real cops, and he left before the real cops got there?
Yeah, seems like it.
In other words, it seems like he very much avoided any people who he knew had guns.
SUV with the police license plates.
Belter approached Representative Hortman's home, again dressed as a police officer, wearing the tactical vest and body armor, and wearing that hyper-realistic mask.
He was armed and carrying a flashlight.
Unless there's some video that I haven't seen.
Hyper-realistic is kind of generous when describing this mask.
Yeah.
It sort of looks like the Michael Myers mask in Halloween 4 after it's been put through the ringer.
I don't really know.
Takes the teeth out of the word hyper.
Yeah, it does.
Come on, that's from Spencer's.
...in the driveway with the emergency lights flashing...
Several feet from the door.
When Belter saw the officers get out of the car, he drew his weapon and began firing.
He rushed into the house, through the front door, firing into it.
He repeatedly fired into the house, and when he entered, he murdered Representative Hortman and her husband, Mark.
The Brooklyn Park police officers fired at Belter as he...
Officers recovered Belter's 9mm Beretta, along with the body armor and the mask, behind the home, along his path of flight when he fled on foot.
They later searched Belter's car, where they found five more firearms, including Astault-style rifles and a large quantity of ammunition.
Belter also had in his car notebooks containing a list of more than 45 Minnesota state and federal elected officials, including Representative Portman.
Now, Belter planned his attack carefully.
He researched his victims and their families.
He used the Internet and other tools to find their addresses and names, the names of their family members.
He conducted surveillance of their homes and took notes about the location of their homes.
He also prepared in other ways.
He concealed himself as a police officer, outfitting his black SUV with police lights and a police license plate, wearing a black tactical vest and body armor, carrying a police flashlight and a handgun.
And of course he wore that hyper-realistic silicone mask.
That's going to give ammo to conspiracy theorists.
Because I've already seen people saying there's no way.
They've seen pictures of the guy where he's fat and it doesn't look like this guy.
They're going to say this is a false flag.
Him continuing to say hyper-realistic doesn't do them any favors.
Because it's not.
I know that murder's not funny, and I'm not trying to say that's funny, but I really was hoping that he had the mask.
And then he's going to hold it up and then put it on.
Like an OJ glove?
Yes, and this is what it would have looked like.
See?
I look like your uncle.
I look like your Uncle Tom.
You could fool anybody.
Count one charges in with stalking Representative Melissa Hortman using interstate facilities.
And that's Title 18, United States Code 2261.
The statutory penalties there are life in prison.
Count two similarly is a charge of his one with stalking State Senator John Hoffman using interstate facilities.
The statutory, the maximum penalty of that count is 20 years in prison.
Your state needs capital punishment.
Also, he needs to either address and say, we don't know the why, or the motivation at this point, or he needs to address it, because that's the question that everyone is asking at this point.
And that's really kind of what the FBI does, right?
If their job is to prevent this in the future, You know, that's why Islam is so concerning, because 158 million people across the world who are Muslim believe that violence is justified against non-Muslims.
So it does matter.
That's the role of these intelligence agencies, is to find out the, not just the how, but the why.
And their lack of transparency often is what leads to the clickbait farming.
Over the past 48 hours, federal, state, and local law enforcement from throughout the state of Minnesota have worked together to carry out the largest manhunt in Minnesota history.
Now, a lot has been said about law enforcement in recent weeks, but make no mistake, the men and women of our federal, state, and local law enforcement put their lives at risk and on the line.
on the line to keep Minnesota safe.
They work tirelessly, day and night, to make sure that the tragic events of Friday night end it without further violence or bloodshed.
Again, Senator.
Doesn't anyone else find it odd that he was able to run through the house, get out back, shed a bulletproof vest and his mask and his gun before the cops had a chance to catch up to him?
Doesn't that seem like there's a pretty long delay?
I mean, yeah, unless they thought maybe he was still in the house at the time.
Yeah, but they know he's going into the house where people already was able to murder them, isn't it?
In other words, if they're putting their lives in harm's way, shouldn't their number one priority be making sure, oh wait, he's in the house, now it's go time to make sure he doesn't kill anybody in there?
Yeah, I understand what you're thinking, but think about like you run into a house, you have no idea where this guy could be in the house.
Sure.
You don't want to just run in haphazardly.
you do have to move in kind of Josh.
You can probably speak to this more than obviously I could, but like there's some kind of a tactical manner that you're going to enter the house and try to clear rooms to understand where this person is.
While they said it was the largest manhunt, it was afterwards.
They talked about the female officer that found him and was there and then had to wait for backup to do anything and then he left.
Made it all the way through the house.
Made it out.
Shed his hyper-realism.
I don't think they had enough officers to set up what we call a cordon.
To make sure nobody exits.
It is dark.
It's night.
It is a civilian's house.
They don't know what's going on.
It sucks.
Yeah.
Well, they know he was already shooting at officers.
I think it was two officers is what they said were outside.
Yeah.
In other words, he was shooting at the officers.
They're shooting at him.
And he runs through the house.
And they know that he's shooting in the house.
So they know someone's being shot.
I know.
I'm not a police officer.
But let's see what this guy is saying.
To apprehend the individual responsible, but to understand the full scope of the threat.
That work continues.
This case became the largest coordinated manhunt in Minnesota's history.
We are proud to stand shoulder to shoulder with our law enforcement partners across the state.
No single agency could have done this alone.
And because of that unified effort, a dangerous individual was taken into custody.
Let me say this clearly.
I'll allow it.
Political violence has no place in this country.
The FBI, alongside our partners, will remain focused on the work ahead and on ensuring justice is served.
And with that, I'll hand it over to Drew.
What does that mean, political?
That they were politicians?
Thank you with those comments, and we're thankful today to see these charges filed.
Early on with our partners from the Federal Bureau of Investigation and other federal partners from the ATF, United States Marshal Service, and others, they provided assistance to the team of local investigators from the Brooklyn Park Police Department, Hennepin County Sheriff's Office, and the BCA.
Can you guys bring up the tip line for people?
If there's anyone there in any Minnesota law enforcement agencies who has any information, particularly on the manifesto, guys need proof of product?
The person who got us Nashville is as snug as a bug in a rug.
The FBI, we had threats that we were going to be sued by the mayor of Nashville.
The FBI was going to get involved.
Nothing.
Nothing ever came of it because we were right.
We protected our source.
If you have anything out there, lwctipsatprotonmail.com, we will go to jail to protect our sources.
If you have any information that you think shines a light on this or missing pieces of the puzzle, please send it to lwctipsatprotonmail.com and I'll have someone from undercover reach out.
I wonder if this is the most egregious murder-manhunt in Minnesota history, or if it was the largest manhunt because of the fact that they were elected officials of a select party.
Yeah, I don't know.
I don't know about the selected party, but just officials, I think it would have happened if Republicans were in office.
Sure.
For their state, yeah.
I really do, especially if they...
I wonder if they put these resources to work if it's not an elected official that's being affected.
Maybe not.
Because political violence will not be tolerated, as opposed to non-political violence, which will be fully tolerated.
Sometimes encouraged.
across Minnesota and the United States, that political violence is never okay.
We as a country...
So condemn Black Lives Matter?
Are formed on the basis that we have political discourse and that we have debates ongoing on what we do and that we elect people day in, day out.
right?
Minneapolis, Was that the actual city where Kyle Rittenhouse?
Wisconsin.
Yeah, Kenosha, Wisconsin.
Oh, that was Wisconsin.
But there were big Minneapolis riots, obviously, is where it started, and then it spread to Kenosha, Wisconsin.
Minnesota is where, in Minneapolis, I think, suburbs, is where the police went through the streets telling people to get back on their porches.
Yeah, with paintball guns.
Started shooting at them with paintball guns.
Or not back on their porches, get back in their house.
Get off their porches.
Why is there not a terrorism charge is the question.
You know, we brought the charges that we think are appropriate right now.
Obviously, these crimes are...
I can't comment as to what other charges may or may not be brought in the future.
Will you seek the death penalty?
Will you seek the death penalty?
Oh, they do have one.
Thank you for the question.
Will we seek the death penalty?
It's too early to tell.
That is one of the options for several of the charges.
I think it should be.
Absolutely.
100%.
have any assistance?
Absolutely.
Looking into whether he may have had assistance.
And if he did, what are the potential consequences for anybody who may have assisted him either before or after these tragic shootings?
Our investigation remains ongoing in several areas, including whether or not we had anyone helping him.
I want to know what law enforcement was saying at the start of Minneapolis.
Mission Control, could you bring that up?
Because I remember them initially talking about, oh, okay, understanding it.
And I think there in Minnesota, too, they were kneeling with some protesters.
So political violence is never acceptable.
Minneapolis alone had many, many hundreds of millions of dollars of damages.
That was over $2 billion, and we stopped counting after that.
So I'm just curious if they've been very consistent with that.
I don't know the answer to that.
That was good timing.
That was a great timing.
The charges concurrent with the federal charges, how does that all work?
Does this, you know, make null the state charges or take precedence over the state?
It does not nullify the state charges.
They remain in place.
Today, he was brought into federal custody.
He'll make his initial court appearance in federal court over in St. Paul at 1.30 Central Time this afternoon.
And my expectation, based on prior cases, is the federal case, the federal charges will be litigated first.
But the state charges won't necessarily go anywhere.
Can you speak to him why investigators believe he carried out this attack and for how long have you been planning these attacks?
Well, it's pretty clear from the evidence that he's been planning these attacks for quite some time.
There's voluminous writings, as you've seen in the reporting, that were found both in his car and his house, about his planning, lists of names and individuals.
In terms of the why, it's unclear.
Is it cooperating with you?
Interaction with the New Hope police.
What had law enforcement been told at that point?
Were they aware to be on the lookout for a dark SUV?
Here's my problem.
We have heard from the manifesto the why that he was targeting, right, pro-choice legislators or providers, meaning they were very specific in including the quote.
They released that quote from the manifesto saying he was going after pro-abortion people.
So that circulated.
So, If we were to take that and just sort of say, okay, that's indicative of the entire manifesto, then it's clear.
This is a right-wing extremist.
That's what gives me pause.
They go, the why is unclear.
But what you did release, as far as snippets, created allegedly a clear picture.
This was a radical right-wing Christian extremist.
So how is it unclear?
And if it is completely unclear, why would you release a snippet?
Didn't we recently learn that voluminous writings in multiple places does not constitute a manifesto?
Right.
They changed the definition of manifesto live while we were on air, and that's entirely because of you, Mug Club Rumble Premium.
Well, this FBI guy did not say manifesto just now.
He said writings.
He did not.
He said writings left behind in his vehicle and his house.
Right.
But the local law enforcement officially said manifesto.
That's what it is.
So they say manifesto when it is about shooting abortion providers or advocates.
And it's only a quote.
But when it's all of the writings, the totality, like, you know, the Nashville shooter with all the plans and the motivation behind it, it's no longer a manifesto.
It's just a collection of writings.
Is it just me?
And again, I tried to go what people on the right are saying.
Here's their case for it.
I don't know.
But what I observe is this pattern of behavior from intelligence agencies.
There's something there that's making them uncomfortable.
And what is there is certainly not the fact that this guy was killing pro-abortion people because they released that quote.
Well, if we could definitely draw a link, that is definitely a clue.
And there was a third, a third target that was not home.
They were on vacation.
He's not.
He didn't do that much research if he didn't know that they were on vacation.
He did about as much research as the wet bandits.
Yeah, he just looked up their addresses online, which I think is publicly available for public officials.
Yes, it's not.
Who was, I can't remember the name.
He just gave a name, you have someone else.
Because if there's a link between that person and the other two victims.
What did he just say?
He talked about the other targets that he had.
Can we kind of aggregate those?
But again, the question is, why is it unclear?
The quote you released made it pretty clear.
It's the fodder that the left is using to say this guy was a right-wing extremist.
Now you just said there are a lot of writings and it's unclear.
Which would tell me that there's at least something that counterbalances the idea that he was just targeting Democrats.
Otherwise, there's no reason for lack of clarity.
That's a lot of names, too.
I don't know how many state legislators they have in Minnesota, but they said, you know, the initial report I saw earlier was 70. This guy just said 35 to 40 or something like that.
Other names.
Are there that many Democratic legislators in the state of Minnesota alone?
Yeah, there definitely are.
Definitely lean through.
At the state level.
At the state level, there are that many?
At the state level.
So that's what he was talking about.
So he wasn't saying the list was less than 70. Because it might be one of those things where he's just, like we said earlier, he's self-absorbed.
He's in his own world.
He's disgruntled.
He's something.
He just hates the system.
Maybe he's going after everybody.
Could be he worked for the state and he hates the way the state is run.
Right.
It is a democratically run state, so it would make sense that those are the top targets.
Right.
What were we about to say, Joe?
I was just about to say, there are a lot of things about this guy that we need to understand as the public so that we can form kind of an accurate picture of, okay, this is the kind of guy who did this.
By the way, they should be talking about, what do you do if a police officer, quote unquote, shows up at your house at 3.30 in the morning banging on the door?
Right.
Like, what is a good way to handle that situation?
Yeah.
You know?
Opening the door?
I'm sorry.
That's just not the first thing that I think of.
Y 'all gotta get cameras.
Talk to them through the ring camera.
Y 'all gotta get cameras.
Cameras or yell through the door.
Hey, can I see a badge?
You have to get cameras.
Something like that.
And by the way, these other guys, they saw the Hortmans, I think, if that's the name.
Sorry, I'm forgetting it right now.
The ones who were killed in the last altercation.
Yeah, Hortman.
Did they have a gun?
By chance?
I can tell you the last time I greeted a police officer at the door, I do have an alarm system that, by the way, notifies them right away, and we have the glass breaker stuff, and I told you we have two separate air units, and so the one bedroom door will suck shut if it's on and the other one isn't.
And you guys who work in HVAC, you know it's a positive pressure environment, negative pressure.
Anyway, sometimes that'll slam so loudly that it's been at least two or three times that the actual alarm goes off.
And this one time, it was in a matter of a minute.
Police at the door.
And I saw him.
I opened the door and, you know, did what I've told you.
I wedged it against my knee with my foot.
And I did have a firearm on my side because at this point I didn't know.
It was kind of chaos.
And he was at the door.
And I'm pretty sure he probably knew.
I said, yeah.
He said, hi, I'm just checking.
I said, well, usually you guys call.
He said, oh, yeah, you know what?
I'm sorry.
I said, I literally was down the block.
He goes, so I was right here.
So, yep, sorry.
Is everything okay?
I said, yeah, it's the glass breaker thing.
I don't know if we've had an issue with that.
He said, okay, thank you.
He wasn't upset at all that I didn't open it up for him.
He wasn't upset.
I think he got it.
I just happened to be right up the block.
I was literally right there.
I wanted to check on it.
Let me ask you this.
How far away from the door was he standing?
Probably about four feet.
Okay, yeah.
Because I've had the police come to my door for multiple reasons before.
Nothing my fault.
And every time they do, they always give themselves a little bit of distance.
I think it's maybe a safety thing.
I don't know if it's a policy thing, but it seems like it would be a thing for their safety to kind of step back and have a nice view.
But they're always at least a few feet away from the door.
He was an appropriate distance from the door.
Like if you have steps on your porch, they usually be standing on the step.
They'll knock and they'll stand back, put your hands on their belt or whatever.
Well, I literally saw him and I could see the police car with the name of the municipality.
In other words, I could identify what I always...
It wasn't just some lights on top of a 4Runner.
It was what appeared to be the local BDL stock.
Well, I think what this guy did, I think he put those...
Yeah.
Where they have the lights in the windshield?
Yeah.
That's what it sounds like he had, because I don't think he had it on top.
And I don't fully understand that because I thought that there were laws, and I think it depends on the state of situation, unmarked vehicles.
And I don't think unmarked vehicles are- Yeah.
Some states.
So basically, the contents of the hit list have been released.
Okay.
So this is the typed version that was distributed to law enforcement, not the original copy, apparently.
Okay.
And it apparently includes more than 60 Democrat leaders along with abortion clinics.
So I don't know that it gives us.
Is this all Democrats?
That seems to be the implication.
Or include 60 among...
I don't have that.
So, yeah.
So, Mission Control, if you guys want to...
Really quickly, here's just the article.
So the Minneapolis mayor talking about the George Floyd incident.
Oh, okay.
Because political violence is never, ever, ever acceptable.
Let's go back in time.
Well, this is not a video.
This is just a quote.
Oh, Minneapolis mayor saying, the anger is not only understandable, it's right.
What do you think that makes people think?
Ah, okay, as the riots were taking place.
Ah, got it.
Okay.
Mixed signals.
Let's see what they're saying right now.
We're recovered, but we're going to leave that to some of the prosecution as we work this out.
So we're not going to comment on all of it, as this is still continuing to be part of the active investigation.
We need to figure out exactly what all of this means in relation to this.
They're all dim.
Who's that guy?
DA, maybe?
Sam, confirm.
There will be an initial appearance in federal court over in St. Paul, Minnesota at 1.30 Central Time this afternoon.
I do not anticipate there will be an appearance in state court today.
Just one more question on the...
Was there more than 45?
There's lots of, I mean, go ahead.
I think it can help.
I mean, just there's a lot of names that we're working together right now.
So the FBI, there are some, and we've mentioned this, that there are some other names that are from out of state.
They have been working through our Fusion Center network across the United States, and then our partners at the FBI are helping coordinate with that in that process.
The question is a good one.
Part of what we're looking through, the names, the numbers that you're referencing, they are, was names in multiple notebooks.
Some of them are redundant.
I don't have a total number of people that were in there because some of them are overlapping on multiple lists.
And again, I do want to continue to clarify.
This is not a list of people that was in a numerical order and some sort of ranking.
These are names that are being developed as we are looking at this across multiple writings in terms of that, just to be clear about it.
Was Sarah Hoffman's name even in there, though?
I believe it was.
Right now, I think he's in the custody of the United States Marshal Service over at the St. Paul Federal Court House.
Okay, guys, put some eyes on this, so if anything happens that's of note, you guys can send us a clip as it continues.
Confirm what you guys have about the list, and let's take some chats, some questions on this, because I'll say, look, if it's a list of Democrats and abortion providers, I would lean toward this seems to be someone who was maybe more radical and insane and happened to have right-leaning views.
It's rare, but of course it does happen, just speaking from what I know right now.
I don't think we have the full picture, but that would be my guess if, in fact, the list is 100% Democrats and abortion providers.
Also could be trying to, you know, trying to throw you off the scent.
We've seen that in the past, too, where I've seen the Christchurch shooters say, I was radicalized by watching Candace Owens and Ben Shapiro, right?
And this was someone who literally wanted folks to suspect them.
We don't know.
Either way, so they're basically a lot of the accounts that we listed.
And by the way, when we had that montage up that had JoJo from Jersey and Brooklyn Dad and the Krasensteins, I was like, the four people I hate the most on X, all in one, other than the economic policies of Robert Reich, midget.
Basically, yeah, exactly.
Thank you very much for that one.
Bunch of losers.
Even if, let's say that this person, and for me, it really doesn't matter.
Obviously, I want to know what motivated the killings.
Was it just purely motivated by politics?
Okay, fine.
To say that this is Trump's fault, which is what those guys were trying to do, this is Trump's America, this is Trump, like, how?
How has Donald Trump advocated for killing political opponents?
Ever.
I just don't understand it.
This isn't like federal people where he's actually gotten into spats with some different federal legislators or something like that.
This is state legislators that he's probably never even heard of, right?
So it's really hard for you to draw that line from Donald Trump's policies and position and stance on stuff to, yeah, he's supporting people violently going after politicians they disagree with.
You can't draw that line.
Especially when they're inferring the abortion.
Yeah.
Element of it.
And Trump's views on abortion famously.
No, I know.
You're right.
Very moderate.
Very, very moderate.
Yeah.
Very moderate.
Also, the amount of abortion clinics, actual attacks, shootings, bombings, you can count pretty much on, let's say, both hands, which is unbelievably rare when you understand what a charged topic that is in comparison to the left and how many casualties and murders take place over police injustice over.
Also, it's much quicker to draw the line to.
The attempted assassination on Donald Trump.
This man is an existential threat to the country.
America is over if he is re-elected.
And someone going, I have to take out the one man who they say will destroy this country.
As a Nazi.
Yeah, as a Nazi.
That's different from Donald Trump happening to be a Republican and this person shooting people who seem to be Democrats in Minnesota.
I mean, every Christian I know, by the way, every single Christian, when an abortion issue happened, and there weren't that many, like you said, they made it seem like there were a lot, and when you go back and look at it, there were not that many incidents, hated it.
It's like, that's not how you fix this.
Maybe he got radicalized in Africa.
Maybe.
Maybe.
There you go.
The Outer Republican had a good post on it.
This was a guy who was very, very...
Anywhere he could get a stage.
Anywhere he could get attention and kind of kept failing.
And this was his last ditch.
I'm interested to see what they do in this investigation with his wife.
She's caught with passports and stuff.
Maybe she's trying to get away.
She may not have the clue, but then like, I gotta leave!
How do you do all this stuff?
I mean, there's no way I could install lights, a license plate.
Trick out this car.
Get a whole outfit.
A hyper-realistic mask?
A hyper-realistic mask?
You know?
And I'm not wearing it for her.
There's no way 3.30 in the morning, I'm not at home.
There's no way.
I can't go to an open mic without her going.
When are you coming home?
Yeah.
Was he staying with his friend?
Some of the confusion was like, okay, is he living at home on his property?
Because it looked like a fairly nice property.
What is that?
But also his friend who was his roommate?
That made no sense.
Last roommate?
He said he had been texting with him with like I think 45 minutes before the shooting or was it before he left that morning?
And he was saying so he had been communicating with him that he had already met with the police officers and was talking to the press and reading out texts.
Wait a second.
So you're communicating with the shooter that day and the police didn't confiscate your phone?
Yeah, there's so much and I'm not saying I have the I'm just saying there's so much that doesn't add up here.
But we do for sure have the one quote that he was going after abortion providers.
That's one thing they were very...
Yeah, I agree.
Let's grab some, because I know we've gone a little bit late.
Let's grab some chats.
I'm imagining there's quite a few chats on this, and lwctipsatprotonmail.com, if you have any information on this or any other events like this, because we're still tracking down some leads here behind the scenes.
And look, I'll tell you, most of them lead to dead ends, but every now and then you get Nashville, you get Jay Varma, the COVID architect, you get the DOJ and Donald Trump.
Stacking charges.
Yep, that's the reason that Donald Trump was eligible.
A lot of people say, and I would say this, Scott Pressler has a very strong case that he's the reason Donald Trump was elected.
Yeah.
He's a very, very strong case.
But a lot of people say, look how many views we have, and so we helped him get it.
Well, we've done that too, but we can actually say, we released the DOJ story.
The next day, they declared that Donald Trump would be eligible to run for president, that they would put off the hearing.
So we can say definitively that you guys helped apply pressure that paved the way for Donald Trump to become president, because otherwise, that doesn't happen.
So we do appreciate it.
Let's grab some chats.
Alright, first chat from Mike A. Patterson.
Do you think Tim Walz's rhetoric is at least partially to blame for the Minnesota shootings?
I'm trying to think of his rhetoric that would lead to shootings.
No, he just called Vance weird.
And, you know, he's obviously...
He's a gossip girl.
Yeah.
I'm not so sure that he's a...
He's a far, far left guy, don't get me wrong.
If it was rhetoric from Tim Walz, I would assume it would be rhetoric that would get a Republican killed?
Yeah.
It would get, you know, A police officer?
Well, unless it was because he's just such an oaf that it motivated someone to, you know, want to shoot people like him.
Yeah.
Also, Tim Walsh is on the list, so maybe it's something against him.
Well, that's what the reporter – I shouldn't have said that because that was what was said late last night or whatever.
But he could be.
It's possible, yeah.
Tim Walsh did appoint him.
It was in his own handwriting, though, so I'm not sure.
Well, as we take check, do we want to go to CNN and see exactly how they spin this in real time?
Let's see if they right away go to...
No, that's not Timmy.
No, that's not Timmy.
Oh, I can't see my little screen.
You're looking at a tiny little monitor.
It's a different, very, very white guy.
Oh, I see not.
It's not an exaggeration to say that this is the stuff of nightmares.
This is something that this shooter was preparing for months.
There was a list of about 45 elected officials.
We learned for the first time here that it wasn't just the two houses in which he actually shot people.
There were two others that he visited.
And, you know, I'll let you take it from there, John.
But obviously, from a law enforcement perspective, read between the lines for us beyond the absolute jaw dropping shock and disgust about the way that this man was trying to take.
Or grab something in your chest.
I want to see when they go to a panel to see if it's balanced.
That's where they do their worst work, where they claim, oh, we covered it.
Well, the FBI was speaking.
And then when you bring on the panel, they weigh it down.
I think we need to avoid making the same mistake they make.
I think the case that Stephen just laid out on rhetoric causing potential harm and actually physical harm in this case of calling Donald Trump a Nazi and saying that he's a fascist and that we have to stop him by any means necessary.
I think that is a very clear, direct line to, okay, this is part of the problem.
Sure.
Saying that, you know, having rhetoric against opponents, like we don't like their ideology, we think they're crazy, we think of this, we think they're anti this, that is much more murky.
I don't want to get into that.
Because that, you can then use it for every single case out there, and if you're going to do that, it needs to be very, very clear, because we're not trying to silence people voicing their opinions about, listen, I want the left to be able to talk, too.
I don't agree with what they have to say about these things, but I want them to be able to do it, as long as they don't violate any laws.
Well, I can tell you exactly, to change my mind, where we used to sit down, people would sit down, and most of them were very productive conversations, and then there were several instances where people said, he's a Nazi, he's this, and the crowd got out of control, and I've had people, I've been punched in the face.
on national television, someone tried to hit me over the head with a rock.
So I can tell you that when people go, he's a Nazi, I've seen it.
I've been there.
I've experienced it.
That's very different from people sitting there discussing ideas, no matter how charged it is.
I can tell you I've lived it firsthand, and Donald Trump went through the latter for his entire presidency, post-presidency, and, well, third presidential run.
Nazi, Nazi, Nazi, fascist existential threat wants to commit genocide against trans people.
I can tell you firsthand that that leads to a very different outcome than people sitting down and even airing their grievances passionately.
Let's go to the next chat.
All right.
I've got multiple people asking basically the same question, but Pedro, the Mexican 15 asks question for the crew.
Do you think the far left have gone so insane that they're committing murders in a way that looks like MAGA to damage Trump's image?
Is this the way the far left martyr themselves?
That has happened.
If people remember, if you can bring up the Christchurch shooting, that was one where it was...
That's a very bizarre list.
If I'm mistaken, let me know, but please bring it up.
I think it was the Christchurch shooting in New Zealand, if I'm not mistaken.
I think you're right.
There were a couple of examples of that.
I remember them misidentifying Dylan Roof as a radical right-wing extremist, and then I think the El Paso shooting, which turned out not to be the case.
So that's misidentifying.
Would the left do it?
Sure, I wouldn't put it past them.
Is this an example of that?
I don't know.
I would hold that as the exception, not the rule, because yes, it has happened before, but only take that as a given when you can prove it.
Because otherwise, everything to you is going to be a false flag.
And that's a very dangerous place to live, man.
Yes, it is.
And it's very difficult to prove.
Yeah, it is.
Unless it's definitive where they can cross-reference, oh.
A manifesto that flies in the face of what we actually saw through his online activity, etc.
Alright, so another chat, and let me know as that information comes in.
Next chat from Hedo420.
Didn't those shot vote against their own party, the lone Democrats to side with Republicans on a bill in the state Senate?
Well, that's what I just told you about the one representative who voted against, who voted for, I believe, the bill.
Hortman.
It was just the one, though, and you visited four homes.
Yeah, I think it was just the one.
And Mission Control, let me know, because I had read, too, that the two initial Democrats were shot were two lone holdouts, and I don't believe that that's true.
I believe it was only one.
I've only heard one now.
Yeah.
Initially, I heard the same thing.
Because there was a lot of fake news on purpose.
And she was like, you know, she was scared of her vote.
No, she obviously seemed at the time to be genuinely upset that they couldn't get the budget bill through because that comment she made at the end, we tried to get a version of this bill that didn't have that provision in it, but we couldn't get it done.
Meaning she didn't want to have the provision that illegals get booted off of, I believe it was Medicaid or Social Security or whatever it was.
Some kind of state.
So the left wants them to receive all the free stuff, and she broke with her party.
So I know Hortman was the one.
Could it be?
Sure.
If, again, assuming this is true, the totality of a bunch of abortion providers and then a bunch of legislators who are Democrats, then that wouldn't really hold water.
So let's not just cling to one piece of evidence and go, see, this clearly proves because there are people on the right who are doing that both with Iran and Israel and with this situation.
My thing right away is I go, it's not your fault for not trusting them.
I'll make that really clear.
It's not your fault for not trusting them at all.
I get it.
Neither do I. But I have just as much mistrust for a lot of people in media who have clearly...
And no one is perfect.
Everyone makes mistakes.
But when people routinely peddle false information and don't retract, don't apologize, just move on to the next one, you go, okay, all right.
Speaking of which, so this is enemy attestation, essentially.
So Taylor Lorenz actually wrote an article about this, that the shooter's manifesto was designed to troll.
So if Taylor Lorenz, you know, is writing an article saying, hey, hey, hey, guys, don't blame the right.
This was a troll because I guess this person blamed us.
Spear of the Dragon 3 and all, Spyro, whatever.
Oh, I remember Sparrow the Dragon.
And Fortnite for it as well.
So it's like, okay, well...
Yeah, guys, it wasn't me.
It was video games.
It was my parents weren't around.
It was the Jews.
It was Ben Shapiro.
Wait a minute.
It was Candace Owens.
Wait a minute, it was, you know, just, What are you looking for?
Jewels?
And how does Taylor Lorenz have access to this?
What has Taylor Lorenz seen that the public hasn't seen?
No, this is from the previous...
Oh, Christchurch.
Oh, sorry.
I thought we were talking about this.
So that was enemy attestation.
Basically, somebody who would never say that is like, hey, guys, that's a troll.
Yeah, it's clearly a troll.
Yeah.
Yeah, with Christchurch.
So I don't know if that's the case here.
Could be.
But again, when they say...
Oh, by the way, abortion clinics.
Why?
Okay.
CNN panel.
Let's see what they do here right now.
With the same amount of information, likely less, that we have.
That's right.
All the folks that he was targeting were Democrats.
This was political violence.
One of the gentlemen up there said that political violence in this country is rare.
It is not rare.
We agree on that.
We have seen this happen time and time again.
Four presidents have been assassinated.
There was obviously the attempted assassination on President Trump as he was running, Nancy Pelosi's husband, Gabby Giffords.
The list goes on and on.
Josh Shapiro more recently.
Say Gretchen Whitmer.
It was the arson situation in his residence.
So this is part of our culture.
It is part of our history.
Guy's just mad he doesn't have a chin.
And it's terrible.
I think what is different is that we do have social media.
We do have artificial intelligence.
We do have misinformation.
And quite frankly, we have a president who often laughs at political violence, right?
What?
There's a punchline oftentimes.
Someone punched in the face at a rally for swearing and being disruptive?
So that is an increase.
It's the same as assassination like this?
Didn't he laugh at Pelosi?
He laughed at Pelosi's husband.
There was like a joke about it.
That wasn't political violence that I remember.
It was crazy.
It was that they were in their underwear and it was weird and seemed like a lover's name.
We know that Minnesota, just what was happening at this time, Minnesota is a...
A divided state, without question.
And in the legislature, it was perfectly divided in the House of Representatives.
And Melissa Hortman, who lost her life, she entered into a power-sharing agreement with the Republican leaders to get things done.
But she was a very, very visible Democrat in Minnesota.
And the officials there, Joe Thompson, the acting U.S. attorney, said that this had been plotted for months.
Well, as this occurred...
Okay, I just need to interrupt because we have other big news happening as we were listening to that out of Minnesota.
Israel is identifying incoming missiles from Iran and there are sirens being activated in northern Israel.
Civilians have been advised to seek shelter and defense systems are working to intercept.
Projectiles.
That is according to the military there.
We're going to get one of our colleagues up there, Jamie, as we get this.
Just imagine being a citizen in Israel.
The constant sirens.
All right, take shelter.
Some more missiles.
One day it's Hamas.
One day it's Hezbollah.
One day it's Iran.
Just think about that.
What a way to live.
It is.
And so I want to be kind of...
They have to know that this is coming.
Of course.
They are, in my eyes, they are rightfully the aggressor in this specific round of attacks.
Sure.
I do agree with your take that they are in response to previous attacks.
It's also in response, like I said, to all of the attacks from the groups that are funded by Iran to attack Israel at all times.
I get it.
I have sympathy for them.
I have sympathy for the people of Iran having to deal with this right now, whose leadership is making terrible decisions.
The difference that I am seeing so far, and people are like, whoa, what about Gaza?
Let's put Gaza on the side burner for just a second.
Israel seems to be striking military targets or infrastructure targets or related.
So state media, potentially they could have seen that as a military target to strike the capabilities there.
I don't know exactly what the rationale is.
It seems like Iran is just like lobbing stuff into downtown Tel Aviv and just hoping they get lucky.
I don't really think they have the capabilities to anything else.
And so the one side is actually going after civilians.
Right.
And one side is not.
And people came out and made the most...
It's like, see?
Israel's using their citizens as human shields.
Where is the Iron Dome firing from?
I'm like, you mean missile systems designed to intercept missiles so that they don't get hit?
Where do you think you put them?
Do you put them in the countryside?
Yeah.
Randomly?
To protect the population.
You know, it doesn't make any sense at all.
And it's like, they're not offensive weapons.
Yeah.
Morons.
So I do have a lot of sympathy for the people in Israel right now because I think even though they knew that they had to go do this.
There's still going to be a cost.
Of course.
And so every one of them go in and think about this.
And I would also take it one step further and say, I understand.
I get what they would want to step around down quite a bit.
I understand it.
I think that there can certainly be a case to be made, and they've made a pretty good one.
I don't want them to show incoming missiles and then say, America, help us.
Yes.
And I think that's a concern that people have, and I think that's a legitimate concern.
Now, and I want to bring this up because we've actually been reaching out to Dave Smith to have him come on the show and be able to explain some of his views.
But apparently he's gone a little bit off the deep end with his views as it relates to this crisis.
What?
It was in 2007 that the Pentagon told George W. Bush that we cannot go to war with Iran because we do not have escalation dominance against them, essentially meaning that they can hit all of our bases and embassies in the region, and we are very vulnerable to them.
And we've already seen demonstrated since the Israeli attack that the Iranian missiles that they sent last year toward Israel, as many of us guessed, that wasn't really their best.
They were intentionally making an attack that wouldn't really hurt anybody, that wouldn't really lead to a war, which Iran has done over and over again.
But now we've pushed them to the point where they probably don't feel that they have the option not to respond.
Donald Trump telling them to come back to the negotiating table now is a joke.
I mean, what a what an impotent leader to be sitting there talking about coming back to the negotiating table.
It's like sitting after Pearl Harbor and telling FDR now is the time to go negotiate with the Japanese.
Negotiations are over now.
was before this.
And so, yeah, Donald Trump...
Can he pause this?
They were attempting negotiations before this, to be clear.
There were treaties.
And that's why pallets of cash were sent and billions of dollars unfrozen.
I believe that the When he says, look, and I think Dave Smith is a sharp guy, and he's writing on a lot.
Yeah, me too.
He's basically saying, like, oh, okay, this was sort of a fake-out to make you think they were playing possum.
Well, then why would there be six waves with 200 missiles on Friday and Saturday and only 35 or 40 since then?
Just two waves.
In other words, so they're doing it now?
So they launched those impotent, to use his word, attacks against Israel last, I believe, October and April.
And then they launched their real attack, you know, over 200 missiles over the course of six waves.
And now it's down to 35, 40. Are they playing possum again?
That's important because that's the point where Donald Trump goes, they probably should negotiate.
When it seems pretty clear that they've gone from 200 missiles launched to 35 in the span of a day.
You know, someone is more likely to negotiate if they're in a weakened state.
So I don't understand his...
my opinion based on what I see is the exact opposite.
We definitely don't want to go to war on that.
People like Dave Smith and I agree.
We do not want to be going to war with Iran.
Correct.
He should say nothing?
I don't understand.
If we don't want to go to war, wouldn't encouraging them to come to the negotiating table right now be most conducive to avoiding a war?
And I really could.
I could be missing something.
Maybe he sheds a light on that.
Can we continue?
Hold on.
I just want to address this because I saw Dave Smith lauding With praise, this guy who made the Pearl Harbor argument, unless I'm misunderstanding it, and listen, I'll leave some room for that, it makes no sense to me whatsoever because you're basically saying that the Israelis are the Japanese and that the United States is Iran.
And you're saying that the Japanese attacked the United States like Israel attacked Iran.
Would we have, after Pearl Harbor, said, no, no, no, let's negotiate this out?
No, we went full force and we went after Japan, right?
And we entered a war.
Did we send...
Dozens and dozens of times?
Did we support every single group around them that hated them and give them rockets and cash and training to be able to attack them?
That kind of comparison is idiotic, if that is the basis of it, and I'm not understanding some point of it.
If that's what I'm hearing as a brilliant point to bring up, No, no, I do think the United States launched 180 ballistic missiles at Japan before Pearl Harbor.
Did we?
And in two separate attacks.
Another, was it 30 cruise missiles and dozens of drones?
Obviously we didn't have drones.
But I think we did that before Pearl Harbor.
FDR also famously kept calling for the annihilation of Japan.
Yeah, we always said those Japanese.
Death to Japan, death to Manchuria.
It was like, it was kind of like the players.
Yeah, it's true.
Anyway.
That's true.
Let's continue watching.
And again, maybe there is something that I'm missing.
I want Dave to come on.
I want him to come on.
I really, yeah.
I think that Dave Smith is, I believe what I'm hearing right now is an incorrect assessment.
Right.
But I think he's a thoughtful guy.
I just want to be clear.
Because right now in the air, everyone's going like, start drama!
I don't want to say Dave Smith's a bad guy.
That's not what I'm saying.
What I'm watching is not computing with the data that I have available to me right now.
Maybe we're missing some.
Can we continue the video, please?
I supported him this last year.
I apologize for doing so.
It was a bad calculation.
At the time, it seemed like the right one.
But he should be impeached and removed for this one.
And not on some ridiculous Nancy Pelosi.
Of course, the Congress will never do it because they're all a bunch of corrupt hacks.
This is the one thing they support.
Donald Trump should be impeached and removed for this.
All of his supporters should turn on him.
It's the absolute betrayal of everything that he ran and campaigned on and everything that he stood for.
And I will say, despite the fact that Donald Trump supporters have been labeled like a cult following, and that certainly is true for a percentage of his supporters, he is going to lose his coalition over this.
Over what?
I don't just speak for myself.
So I think maybe, pause, I think maybe what Dave Smith is saying is the only acceptable response from Donald Trump, and maybe there's a case that he made, is a total and utter condemnation of Israel.
I think that might be what he's saying.
He's saying, so if I'm following all of this correctly from what I've seen, and I follow Dave Smith to try to understand where he's coming from, because I think he's a smart guy, and I think he makes some really good points, and I think he says stuff in a way that people can kind of hold on to and understand, and that's very helpful, especially if he's deconstructing an argument correctly.
In this case, I don't think he is.
He's saying that the President of the United States could have made it to where this didn't happen.
This is Israel dragging us into yet another war in the Middle East and Donald Trump is complicit and knows about it.
It isn't doing anything to stop it.
He should lose his coalition.
He's going to drag us into another Middle East war and it's going to rob us of men and fortune.
Just like it did for the last 20 odd years.
Right.
That's, I think his point right now and why he's being so forwarded.
And it was like, you're assuming a lot with that statement.
Yeah.
You're assuming that we get dragged into a full-scale war.
You're assuming there ends up being a full-scale war.
You're assuming that we don't just do a show of force, essentially, and send some ships over there like we did the last time this stuff started happening, by the way.
It's not the only time we've done this.
Right.
And we didn't end up in a war then when we were shooting down missiles for them back in October to make sure that they didn't get hit.
It wasn't a full-scale war.
It's off the deep end with him.
And other people that I'm not going to name, but you know them, they're all over the place.
And it's like, you're assuming a whole lot right now.
Now, if that does turn out to be the case, fine.
I'll come back and say you're right.
I just don't see it.
Here's the approach that I see from Donald Trump.
This is what I've seen is him saying, hey, Iran needs to, you guys got to come to the table.
You guys got to negotiate this.
He's openly, he campaigned on the Iran nuclear deal from Barack Obama being an awful, awful deal that made no sense.
He's always said that Iran must not be allowed to get a nuke, right?
This is not new.
This is not new to his supporters.
He's also largely, to use a term, I certainly wouldn't say isolationist, not even non-interventionist.
He prefers diplomatic measures and negotiation before war.
So we hold those two things out.
People know that about Donald Trump.
All the while, Israel has been saying, we need to deal with Iran because of the biggest funders of terrorism, because they have talked about wiping out Israel.
You know, as an official position of their government, because they're developing nuclear capabilities, and then, of course, because they have attacked Israel repeatedly, where they've been saying, something's got to happen, something's got to happen, they've got to come to the table.
These are small attacks, but imagine if they have nukes.
And Donald Trump, take Israel off to the side, has been saying, Iran, you need to come to the negotiating table, period.
Then Israel responded, now.
And Donald Trump said, see?
I think it'd probably be a good idea for everybody if you come to the table.
That's how I see this playing out right now in real time.
And Donald Trump saying, we're not going to go to war, but looks like Israel has it pretty handled.
Iran, do you want to keep going down this path?
The only alternative, barring us getting into war, which I would agree with Dave Smith, hope absolutely doesn't happen.
I guess the only acceptable alternative would be for Donald Trump to condemn Israel and portray this as an out-of-the-blue attack as opposed to a response.
We're no longer friends with Israel.
They're an evil, corrupt nation.
I don't know at this point in time what Donald Trump could do right now.
It's June 16th at 1 p.m.
Eastern.
I don't know what Donald Trump could do that would be, I guess, more in line with how his voters expected him to react than...
We're not going to get involved.
Iran, don't touch our guys because you don't want what we bring.
But, seems like Iran's going to be, seems like Israel's going to be cleaning your clock, Iran.
So I would, I would probably, I'd probably pick up the phone.
Yeah, of course.
I don't get why that's an impeachable offense.
When was this video made?
This video, I believe, was from today.
Research, let me know.
10-04 AM.
Okay.
Just to make sure.
They said that Iraq didn't have nukes.
Yeah, exactly, right?
And that they're at 60%.
Dave, are you willing to take the chance?
So let's just say, what's your alternative?
I know you're completely anti-war just about in every situation, and look, I wish that I lived in a world where that was the case.
It's not.
Unfortunately, we live in a very dangerous world where war happens.
I wish it didn't.
It does.
It sucks when it does.
Are you for leaving Iran alone to potentially develop nuclear weapons with the kind of track record that that regime has?
I'm not sure that they would necessarily use it against Israel.
I think that would be target numero uno behind us, potentially.
I'm worried about how safe that material would be.
I'm worried about somebody else getting their hands on it.
I'm worried about the potential for these guys to then come to the negotiating table, just like a North Korea or a Libya.
They really don't.
They gave up their weapons.
That was a problem.
Nobody's going to do it anymore.
This does bring us to something that a lot of people don't want to acknowledge.
And is true.
And by the way, the Israeli government, I absolutely think, is incredibly corrupt in a lot of ways.
Yes.
And they have way too much influence in the United States.
They have way too much influence.
I hate AIPAC.
You guys know I hate AIPAC for the same reason that I hate Act Blue, because I get to Hakeem Jeffries.
But, let's ask a question.
Should Iran have nukes?
Okay?
Should Iran have nuclear capabilities?
No.
Is that a good thing?
I think, I would hope the answer is no.
Now, some libertarians are like, well, we have no right to say, but we always have, okay?
There have always been concerns about certain countries.
You drop the first bomb, you get to do that.
Right.
Yeah.
So, should Iran have nukes?
No.
Okay.
What's going to stop them from getting to having nuclear capabilities?
I'm choosing my words very carefully.
All right.
Negotiations haven't worked.
Sanctions haven't worked.
Inspections haven't worked.
Inspections haven't worked.
Okay.
So, how do you stop it?
Alright, that does mean there's going to at some point be an intervening force.
And this is kind of the one, and I know people say Israel is not our ally because of all their crap, and I get all that crap, but do you want that force to be the United States?
Or is there, are there some pros to that force being Israel and not the United States?
Because who else would step in?
Would it be any other of the Gulf states?
Who else is going to stop Iran from getting to nuclear capabilities?
Either the United States or Israel.
And that's a big reason why we often find ourselves allied.
Even though we don't share the same interests on a lot of issues.
But do we have the same vested interests where we say, hey, we probably don't want Iran to have nukes?
And Israel says, we really don't want Iran to have nukes?
So you have to ask, okay, That's why there's an alliance.
Not because of AIPAC, and not because of all the other reasons that you read online, and it doesn't mean that we should be allied with them, certainly on issues that relate to domestic policy.
Of course not.
Should Iran have nukes?
Do we want them to have nuclear capabilities?
No.
Okay.
Does Israel have a case to make in response to all the missiles being fired?
Okay, yeah, they do.
Right now, at this point in time, does Israel have air superiority?
Yes, they do.
Are these other nations China?
Russia, Gulf states, even Hezbollah saying, we're not coming to help you, Iran.
You're on your own.
Pretty much, from all the evidence that we have, has Donald Trump made it pretty clear, hey, Israel, wish you the best, but we're not getting in unless our guys are attacked?
Pretty much.
So that's where we find ourselves.
So, it seems like right now, these two are facing off.
Israel has the upper hand, and they have an upper hand against someone who we, ideally, would not like to have nuclear capabilities.
At that point, the President of the United States says what?
Well, what he did say was, if I were you, I'd probably start negotiating and create some stability there.
I'm going to tell you, I don't have a problem with that.
And I certainly don't think it's an impeachable offense.
Does all of that make sense?
That's me walking through the scenario, but I could be missing something.
I think the only other alternative is, Israel, stop!
But then we get back to, okay, do we want Iran to continue on the same path to developing nuclear capabilities?
So is that the request?
That he goes, Israel, enough!
We're no longer your friends.
I don't know how this...
Even for people who don't believe in intervening in foreign affairs.
I don't know if you have another update or...
Impeaching him and he's going to lose everybody over this?
We're not there.
We're just not there.
You're assuming so much, meaning Dave.
He's assuming so much.
That isn't actually happening right now.
So Netanyahu actually does.
I think a case could be made if Donald Trump said, by the way, we're putting boots on the ground and we're going in and we are going to be putting our military forces in with Israel.
That would be something unexpected from his supporters.
Right.
I don't think there's anything less expected of Donald Trump than in the face of conflict.
Practicing the art of the deal.
It's almost like he wrote a book about it.
Well, listen, last time around, he actually struck Iran by taking out one of their senior military commanders.
Like, this is not like it's outside of the...
We haven't gone as far as that.
I mean, did you write him off then?
Like, I understand if we're saying, hey, we're going to go in and, you know, like, just like we did in Iraq and just like we did in Afghanistan, we're going to send a bunch of people over there and we're going to try to bring democracy to Iran.
Okay, that's a different story.
Because it didn't work then and it won't work now.
So, yeah, I would be pissed off too.
I'd be marching in the streets if we started another war in the Middle East.
Got it.
To me, it sounds a lot like, is this what you voted for, Trump voters?
Negotiations?
Yeah, exactly.
Now, by the way, things could get very spicy because the way Netanyahu phrases this, and listen to how I phrase it, because I'll read what he wrote, what he told the reporter for ABC.
So I'm going to read the whole thing.
When asked ABC News chief Washington correspondent Jonathan Karl about reports from ABC News and other athletes, thank you, outlets that Donald Trump rejected an Israeli plan to assassinate Iran's supreme leader, concerned that it would escalate the conflict, Netanyahu said, quote, it's not going to escalate the conflict.
It's going to end the conflict.
It would have ended it.
It's not.
But he also didn't say, Donald Trump did not advocate weed.
So in other words, it sounds like Donald Trump said, probably don't assassinate the Ayatollah.
Don't do that.
And Netanyahu is saying, I think we're going to assassinate the Ayatollah.
It sounds like they're going after the Ayatollah, potentially.
And look, there's a lot you can say about this.
I don't know how this is all going to turn out.
But that doesn't make it an impeachable offense from Donald Trump.
Donald Trump said, don't do it.
I would probably suggest you don't.
And Netanyahu said, I think we're going to.
This is a very Israel bad moment.
And that's the problem that I have with a lot of these guys.
And again, I agree with Dave on a lot of stuff when it comes to Gaza and it comes to the suffering that's going on there.
Like right now as a human being, I have a big problem with it, but you haven't told me why you value Gaza suffering over Israeli suffering.
Short term.
Gaza suffering versus long-term Israeli suffering.
Because it's going to happen.
If there's a two-state thing there, if there's somebody there, they're going to be firing rockets.
They're going to be suicide attacks on them.
There's going to be stabbings.
There's going to be shootings.
There's going to be Hezbollah.
There's going to be Hamas.
There's going to be all these other organizations.
So that's okay because it takes longer, I guess, and maybe you only have 15 or 20 people dying every other month or something like that from these things versus – Maybe that's where we can all come together and say, hey, a better plan would be X. But that's the problem I have with this, because then that colors every other thing that they do, and I'm like, these are not the same things.
It's a different situation.
I hear the argument all the time.
We actually had a great relationship with the Middle Eastern world before Israel.
The same can be said for Canada.
It has nothing to do with Israel.
There was no Middle Eastern world before 1948.
Well, the Middle Eastern world before Israel was also before USSR influence.
Yes.
Chinese influence.
It's very different.
Saudi Arabian influence.
Yeah.
You could say the same thing with Cuba.
It's not just Israel existing.
There's a whole different...
I mean, did they go from bikinis to burqas in Iran because of Israel in the 70s?
No, probably not.
So it is a pretty simple...
I don't buy it.
I'm sure it doesn't help.
It doesn't help because they hate Jews, but I think that they hate Jews and they hate us.
And then if we said, hey, we also have nothing to do with the Jews, I think at this point in time in 2025, they would still hate us.
That's my opinion.
Let's grab some chats.
Unless there's an update.
No, I don't have anything right now.
Let's see.
Next chat from Friesen Dreamin.
Let's see.
Question for Crowder.
Do you think they are going to use this, I think this is going back to the Belter thing, to try and push an even more egregious assault weapons ban?
If so, how do you think they'll go and try and pass it?
I don't know what the laws are in Minnesota.
Those things tend to happen on a state level now.
Because there just isn't the stomach for it nationally.
Every year that goes by, more and more Americans own firearms.
And that's honestly just one of those issues that has been won by education.
That's why we did the gift a gun trend a long time ago.
I said, yeah, buy someone a gun for Christmas.
Have it shipped to their FFL.
Because the moment someone goes and has to purchase a firearm, they realize this idea that, oh, there's no background check, is complete horse crap.
With each new legal gun purchase or each new legal firearm owner, you now have a person who's been inoculated against the bullshit from the left on something like an assault weapons ban.
So it's just not something that's going to happen nationally.
I very much doubt it.
I don't think that this will be the catalyst for a push nationally.
I'm not super familiar.
With Minnesota gun laws on a state level and municipal level, you might have some saber rattling and you might have some people do something like a bump stock ban or a bullet button.
But he did the crime with pistols.
Right.
I mean, he had, they said, an assault style rifle.
They said he had some, but in California it would be an assault weapon because the pistol has, if it's, for example, a Glock or a Walford, more than 10. 10, okay.
Anything more than 10 in California.
Yeah, I had a CZ-75 from California when I was in Michigan, and it had all California magazines, where all they do is they hollow out a part of it and shorten the spring so that you can't use what the magazine was meant for.
They never worked either.
They jammed on a CZ of all guns.
So Minnesota law really quickly in 2023, they extended the waiting period for assault weapon purchases from federally licensed dealers from seven days to 30 days.
That was August 1st of 2023.
And then Minnesota prohibits the possession of semi-automatic.
Military-style assault weapons, which, what the hell is that?
By persons who are under 18 years of age, such person may carry or possess a semi-automatic military assault rifle.
Only, and then there are some exceptions, it looks like.
So, they're saying if you're over 18, you can buy something?
Well, but I don't know, a semi-automatic like we made the case here.
Well, I think rifles can be owned, if I'm not mistaken, by...
So, in other words, it seems like the waiting period is bullshit.
You have people who have been killed during that waiting period because they were purchasing a firearm to defend themselves, so that's terrible.
So, I don't know.
I don't want to spend so much time on this question, maybe on the state level, but I don't think nationally, no.
I think that's kind of one of the single biggest losing issues for the left along with their views on free speech.
Final chat Is it Jeremy?
No, actually...
Of Jeremy's own accord.
Oh, okay.
So, we'll be going to our friend Russell Brand.
Russell Brand.
All right.
All right.
Final chat from Carful.
For the crew, aside from a direct attack on America, I don't think enough Americans care about anyone else to go to war.
At this point, will Americans only be convinced by mob mentality?
I don't know what that means.
If by mob mentality you mean an attack on a U.S. soil, then I guess that would constitute it.
Yeah, I don't really think...
Like, that's a mob mentality.
If you mean 9-11 and people going like, holy shit, this is the deadliest attack on our soil and someone needs to pay...
I think a mob mentality when I think of, you know, a guy going like, hey, I don't think that, you know, men should play in women's sports.
And everyone goes, how dare you say this?
It's not even a man, it's a woman.
And then they go, oh, yeah, sorry, sorry.
I misgendered that.
Yeah, I was just trying to make a point.
Well, no, it's not a point because they all deserve to.
Oh, okay.
Well, then, yeah, I guess there's no problem with the trans people competing in sports.
That's mob mentality to me.
Right.
Or what happened to Lane?
Where he's like, I'm anti-fascist, and you're starting to look like fascists.
Yeah, that's right, that's right.
I'm a faggot.
Yeah, I know.
But yeah, he turned the crowd, like, he basically riled the crowd against Lane.
Yeah, and after the cameras stopped rolling, he jerked off to a portrait of Pol Pot.
No, I agree, if you mean 9-11.
But I think you're right.
I think our stomach for wars is different than it used to be.
And I think that's because...
And it's not...
I think because...
We had a whole generation of young men come home from a war that they felt...
There was no winning.
In Iraq.
Afghanistan too, yeah, it went on too long.
I get that.
But especially with Iraq.
Yeah.
We had a whole generation of men come back.
Yeah.
Going like, hey, let's not do that again.
Yeah, I think it's becoming more clear, especially as we live in a global economy.
It's like, all right.
And I'm not saying that, I'm not encouraging globalism in any way, but people are going, unless we're going in to destroy shit.
And either colonize them or turn them into a state, or these people are presenting an actual existential threat, not like Donald Trump as president, to the United States, we really shouldn't be engaging.
Because when you look at the deficit spending, when you look at the debt that we have that's, what, $40 billion trillion at this point?
And you look at it, you go, and by the way, it's not like these expenditures, if it was providing, let's say, some missiles capable of interception to help resupply the Iron Dome in Israel, it's not like that would Directly take food out of homeless shelters' mouths.
So I think that's a false equivalency too.
But I think that people are now at the point where they're tired of being guilted into helping the rest of the world when the solution at home is always more spending and government inefficiency in the name of empathy.
So I agree with you there.
I think that that's a good thing, that Americans are very, very hesitant to go to war.
I mean, think of every great...
Then you think of, you know, the Patriot.
He wasn't someone who wanted to go to war.
The war came, and then finally this was a hesitant, this was a reluctant soldier, a reluctant warrior.
That's why it's so great in the Patriot, right?
I knew you were going to go.
That reverend, where he's like, I don't want anything, and then finally they see him there, and it's that guy with a very interesting face who was on Boston Legal.
And he says, sometimes a shepherd must protect his flock.
He's probably going to get shot because this guy has no idea how to handle a musket.
But I appreciate the sentiment.
And at least at that point, you know you did all you could.
I think Americans are at the point where if we find ourselves in a war, it's easier for us to sleep at night as American citizens to say, all right, we did everything we could to try and avoid this.
This is one that came to our door.
And I believe if it comes to our door, there are times for war.
And it should be as swift.
As violent and as forceful as humanly possible.
It's the difference between a drunken bar fight where guys are posturing and punching and shoving and you getting mugged in an alley at night and doing whatever it takes to eliminate that person.
Whether it's ripping out his throat, choking him unconscious, stomping his nuts.
It's, I have to get out of this because my life has been put in imminent danger.
That's a reason for war?
Not, hey, bro, what are you going to do?
Speak up, bro.
None of the posturing.
Do it or don't, and I think that's a good thing.
We'll talk more about this tomorrow.
▲
Export Selection