All Episodes
Previous Next
Sept. 25, 2025 - Louder with Crowder
54:01
🔴 They Are Lying Because They Are Losing: ICE Shooter, White People, & ... Bees? 2025-09-25 18:11
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
At your political enemies with the eye of the government is wrong.
When I mean nothing could be more hypocritical.
I mean, no, I was gonna get to that.
After all of the trumped up charges that we had against the president and trying to essentially put him in jail so that he could not run.
He was the presumptive nominee at the time and likely winner.
We knew that.
We knew that he was probably going to win or at least be favored by some margin to win, whether or not that panned out, or I think a lot of people still thought he was going to win.
And they were trying to put him in jail to keep him from essentially being able to run.
Like how is that not interference?
And it was it's one of these crimes where you can look at it and go, clearly, you had business leaders on both sides of the aisle come out and say, in New York City, like we we've done this stuff all the time.
Nobody's ever been like charged for stuff like this.
Plus there was no victim in the crime.
The bank actually approved the loan and did their due diligence.
Everybody was fine until you guys came in and started trying to do this to to stop him from running.
And it seemed like this was just charge a charge, charge, charge, see what sticks.
Right.
We did the undercover reporting, stacking charges to see if they could make a case.
Um I understand that we could say that, but I I think listen, I think there's some merit in in being true to the principles of our side, even in the face of that.
Now, some people are like, You're weak, man, you're gonna have to go after them.
Listen, I do want to go after them when they've clearly broken the law, because I feel like things like this come up as political kind of footballs and then go away.
And what we don't see is that they're never really gonna get anything out of this.
And so I I am not for political theater.
I am for putting the fear of God in people to make sure that they know if they commit a crime like this, then they will be prosecuted.
But I think that really only happens when you get a conviction.
Am I wrong?
I I think you're right.
I think the the the reality is that folks will get, you know, you'll get some airtime over having brought an indictment, but if you can't follow it through, it does start to hurt your credibility.
And that's and and that's a big concern.
Folks on the right who are saying, look, if you're gonna shoot, don't miss, right?
So let's let's go and do it.
And that was the same argument that was made on the other side.
I know that you're a gun guy, but I mean, you know, legally is what he's talking about.
My goodness.
This is a good point.
Thank you too.
Yeah.
Um But but the but the point still stands here.
Actually, shoot.
Let's not have our use of our resources and going here.
And and one argument I would say is good a fair point on the left right now is why did you wait this long?
Yeah.
Right.
So what's the difference between a month ago, three months ago, eight months ago?
It's not like new evidence came out, at least that we know of.
It was reported in July by um Tulsi Gabbard.
So I know they probably had it prior to that.
They came out with it.
Maybe they were putting a case together, doing more due diligence to try to put stuff together.
But it doesn't seem like it's that far down the chain.
Yeah.
Right.
And maybe making a political calculation, like a weighing of, hey, can we get actually get anything out of this?
Right.
And it may also be, hey, we've got to preserve it, we've got to get it done by the statutory limitations.
And that's unfortunate.
The longer you wait to make this happen, the more it's gonna look like.
So now let's say that the indictment is brought, right?
An entitlement is returned on a true bill, it goes forward, and then a month from now they realize, hey, you know what, the evidence isn't that clear.
It's gonna immediately be a chalk up win on the left.
Of course.
Right.
And that will not whether it is a chalk-up win or not is not going to change the underlying facts.
What did he say?
What did he know, etc.?
So it's unfortunate, but it is a question of are we gonna be a country that follows the rule of law and push it forward?
I agree.
Um and in these instances and being consistent.
Yeah.
Well, and I know you're gonna stay with us for for chat, so if you guys have any questions for uh half white bill, I w I have one more question unless it's related to this.
No, it's just timely.
Okay, we can go to CNN real quick.
So you can see uh go, go, go.
Go.
If you're a democrat listening to him going on and on and about it, I wanted you to see this lady who is uh me in glasses and a wig.
Call me the one who basically flew everyone.
She was talking and it was like, oh my gosh, it's like looking in a messed up mirror.
It's actually Steven.
Ah it is.
That looks like C. Matheson.
That's uh that's me with glasses and a wig for sure.
Not this guy.
He should be putting him on crush more.
Anyway, they're having fun over there at CNN.
Well, they're talking, I mean, listen, Pam Bonnie doesn't have a lot of credibility left.
And this goes to the point that I was making, Bill.
Like, I'm not I'm not into political theater.
I'm really not.
Like, I understand there is a place for some of things like this, but I want actual convictions, right?
I I feel like, you know, every like Tim, like, we want people to pay for what they do, right?
Like, we're not I'm I'm not a big fan of Pam going on Fox News and saying, hey, I'm gonna go after these guys and listing a bunch of names, but then nothing ever happens.
Aaron Powell Yeah, I feel like if she doesn't make this happen, then all credibility of hers is lost.
It is.
I mean, it already is lost.
Like nobody But if there's any hope of saving anything, she's gotta actually go after people that break the law, but it needs to be really, really clear.
So if you're and it seems like the only person that has any faith in her right now is the administration, m more namely Donald Trump.
President Trump is like the only person left, I think, in America that has it was last week or earlier this week when he was saying she might go down as the greatest AG in American history.
And if she doesn't follow through with this, um, you know, well, I think that's he's gonna have a problem with it because a reoccurrence of the Epstein list.
I've got it on a good desk, it's coming out, right?
Yeah, we've got Comey dead to rights, we're gonna bring the indictment, and if it falls apart, because listen to what we're saying.
We're like, you pumped it up, so you set the expectation that it's gonna be something amazing and that it needs to happen.
Because the reality might be is that he did know we can't prove it.
Yeah, right.
He did know what was going on, and we can't prove it.
That doesn't mean he didn't do it.
Or it might be that he even admits he does it, but for some evidentiary reason, we can't get the indictment, right?
So we're so focused on these milestones and then setting these expectations, letting them get dashed, and it's a win for the other side, it's demoralizing.
And they run out into the media to to talk about these and champion like the fact that law and justice and order are being served and we're gonna get this guy, and then nothing ever happens with it.
So it they add to it, they pump it up and then it doesn't do anything.
Really quickly, last question on this case.
What could the sentence be?
Like what kind of punishment would potentially or what it what's the men and max, but what's reasonable for something like this?
Aaron Powell So there's jail time, it's a few years, it's uh my recollection is single digits and then up to 250,000 dollar fine.
So um this statute is very broad, right?
I mean, it it covers a number of things.
Uh it could be something very small related to you know, filling out forms with the government, it could be testimony on a matter of national security affecting an election.
So the statute is very broad, um, but it would be jail time and monetary fine.
I think to me, and and you know, check and chime in.
I think to a lot of people, the the more important thing isn't the jail time or the fine 250,000 dollar fine, which he can afford.
The most important thing is is for it to be out there and be like, look, we told you.
Yeah.
They found him guilty if see what they did.
Yeah, look what they did.
We were telling you, they just showed a montage on CNN, laughing, making fun of Trump because he says, uh I I don't know if they're gonna do it.
I I don't really care either way, but they have like a montage of him back to 2017 saying we got to prosecute Comey, and it'll be just uh an eye-opener for everybody.
Like, look, he wasn't crazy.
Yeah, well, let me and let me let me try and get a reasonable, like a reasonable middle ground result that it might be that we see behind the curtain, we see these underlying facts, and that this indictment is the way to bring attention to show that they knew it.
But maybe there is not a way to get to the legal hurdle of proving the mindset of Comey when he was testifying that he knew those things, he remembered them.
It is literally a defense to this that you forgot.
Yeah.
So all he has to be able to say is I forgot.
You have to prove that in the moment of the testimony on September 30th, that he knew and he chose to ignore the facts that he knew.
It's an incredibly high standard.
But that doesn't have to be the win.
If we're if enough people look at what he had in his files and the attention is on it, and you look and it discredits Comey and it discredits that administration, that's a real win because it allows America to go, okay, James Comey, not the best source.
Yeah.
Right.
There was this nefarious things that were happening.
So I want to manage those expectations to say you may not get that checkbox, the judgment, the liability, the jail time, but you might still prove the point that bad actors were doing bad things.
Yeah.
Well, look, I think at the end of the day, we want to make sure that our politicians are held accountable.
And unfortunately, in the age of Hillary Clinton and all of these other people that we have been talking about, there have been real crimes committed and no accountability whatsoever.
Right.
Uh, and that's a real problem for us because that let puts us in a very strange space here where let's just say that Hillary Clinton was tried and convicted of deleting or having classified information on her remote server or all the stuff that was on her computer, the bleach bit and everything else, and that she deleted evidence and that she was spoliation or whatever it's called.
Let's say that that happened and she just she served six months or she was just fined.
But at least there's a conviction, you did something wrong, you paid a penalty for it, right?
We could at least point back to that and go, okay, they're at least they're getting into this.
They're actually holding people accountable.
Right now, I think people f feel so much like nobody is being held accountable on either side, and Epstein, even though it seems like they knew all along what was going on.
James O'Keefe just dropped a story about Epstein potentially being a CIA asset and working for Massad uh in some ways.
Like there was there's a whole lot there, and we've all thought maybe that's a potential reality, but this was the first time I think somebody from the administration had said that that potentially could have had that information.
Go make of it what you will, but check it out.
I mean, people are so frustrated, they're like, you gotta convict somebody now.
You know, for rushing to do it.
So here's the thing.
Here's the here's what I would say is listen a question to everyone here, even to chat, is if you knew that the Clintons were immune for every crime that they've ever been alleged to have done and the ones that they actually did, right?
Yeah.
But they blew the whistle on everyone else.
On themselves.
They admitted everything, right?
They brought the receipts, they proved it.
They did it all.
Was that justice or was it not?
Because I would say in the short term, you've given up to the criminals, but you've smashed the conspiracy, right?
You've pulled back the curtain on the machine.
So is it justice that they got away, that they're not gonna live on an island and have billions of dollars or whatever it is they do with Soros?
Well, whatever, right?
But how what is the short-term win and what is a long-term win?
And I would say with Comey, whether there's an indictment or not, if you can pull back the curtain and show the lies and the conspiracy and the work and the active undermining of our president and our government and the system, that's a longer term.
That's a that's a huge win.
And look, when it comes to Bill and Hillary Clinton, I think the appropriate punishment is that Bill has to live with Hillary Clinton and have sex at least once a week for the rest of his life.
I wouldn't wish that on my worst.
So I think that is enough to make it.
I wouldn't even wish that on you, Gerald.
Well, thank you, Bill.
I appreciate that.
Um let me let me do this, and then we're gonna take chat.
I just want to spend a couple of minutes on this.
Hillary Clinton actually went on uh what was it, uh morning Joe uh yesterday and had some interesting things to say about the Constitution.
I think the story, our story is all the more glorious.
I agree, Joe.
Look at where we came from, what we fought through.
I mean, even Abraham Lincoln's life, even Abraham Lincoln's own words, even Abraham Lincoln's own evolution.
You can't look at this American story and not be proud because of that progress.
Well, I wish you would record that and literally go play it outside the White House and the Congress 24-7 because I love my country and I love it, you know, more than all the people who are.
And I'm proud of the fact you've got to be a good thing.
Your love is shown in a work in progress.
You know, we haven't gotten to the more perfect union, and we fought a civil war over part of it.
And people have been protesting, you know, for hundreds of years uh that you know things were not as they should be, given our ideals and how we should be uh uh uh moving toward them.
So that's what makes us so special as a country.
And the idea that you could turn the clock back and try to recreate a world that never was dominated by, you know, let's say it, white men, uh a certain persuasion, uh certain religion, uh certain point of view, a certain ideology.
It's just doing such damage to what we should be aiming for.
And we were on the path toward that.
I mean, imperfectly, lots of you know, bumps along the way, but I agree with you, we were on the right trajectory.
I'm sorry, you um turn it back to a time that never was, where this country was dominated by let's just say it, white men.
You mean the founding of this country and a very large part of the history?
And I'm not listening I'm not saying it only takes white men to make these kinds of things happen.
I'm just saying that this country was founded by white men and made amazing by white men.
We try to make it better.
That's why it's a constant forming of a more perfect everyday union, and we have ups and downs, but hopefully the trajectory is up and to the right, even in some of the dips, we we we recover.
A time that never was.
What do you think we're trying to do?
Look at the country that we have today, and in Hillary Clinton's eyes, we were on the right track when it comes to, you know, my husband, Bill Clinton and Barack Obama, and maybe even as much as I didn't like old C now Joe, he was a little bit more my cup of tea.
That's the right track.
Look at the culture of this country.
It's not that people are out there saying white, black, Hispanic, Asian.
We're saying there's no difference between male and female anymore.
You want to trans children?
You want to make a free market society into a socialist top-down government-controlled society?
You want to limit speech and people's rights to defend themselves?
That is not this country.
And I've come to the conclusion that they never wanted it to be this country.
Their more perfect union is the complete opposite of the perfect union.
That is what they want.
They want the opposite of what our founders set out to create.
Warts and all means you understand that freedoms come with responsibilities, and it also comes with duties that people have to be able to have a voice in this country and vote.
That's a conversation that we have just lost.
I just I don't understand people like Hillary Clinton coming in and saying like we were getting better when everybody out there that is in any way remotely close to the center, Democrats or Republicans, and everybody on the right was saying, look at what we've done.
My God, you have people out there claiming right now that we fought on the wrong side of World War II because of the state of our culture.
Does that really sound like we're heading in the right direction to you?
How could we be so far apart?
That's right.
That's right.
You want to create a system where the elites tell everybody else what to do.
And not bring everybody up so that people can succeed based on their own merit, but bring everybody down so that everybody has just enough food for the day, maybe, if we allow it.
That's the kind of perfect union I think Hillary Clinton and her ilk want.
And listen, I for a long time have said, oh no, no, no.
It's just, you know, they have a different idea of how to get to prosperity.
And some of them do.
Not the Clintons.
Not people like her.
People like her need to go away.
People like her should have been put in jail for some of the stuff that she did.
At the very least, right now, people like her need to be ignored.
Because that kind of crap just does not sit.
On the voting thing, really quickly, do you think it would be a great idea to, I don't know, open up the border to, let's say, a hundred million Muslims and let them come in and vote.
Do you think they're gonna keep what we have, or do you think they're gonna vote for something else?
Because they have no idea what freedom looks like.
Coming from, say, Indonesia or Saudi Arabia.
It doesn't make any sense at all.
Probably gonna bring a woman president.
Ah.
You know how those are.
I don't have a problem.
I don't have a problem with people immigrating and becoming American.
I don't have a problem with male I don't have a problem with women voting.
I'm not an idiot, but this country used to have a problem with people who had no s no stake in this country voting.
Or a loyalty higher than the United States.
Catholics, I'm looking at you.
They had a real problem thinking maybe they're gonna take orders from the Pope before they're gonna take orders from the president.
So maybe we shouldn't let these people vote.
I don't understand what what time she's referencing.
Uh the Indians.
The Native Americans.
I think it's fantastic, no wheels.
I think what she meant was uh we were on the right track until I lost a primary the uh to a white guy, so they let me run for president, I lost that, and now we're here.
Yeah.
I just I'm sorry I saw that.
We have some gosh.
We have some breaking.
Uh you know, breaking this news.
And then we'll we'll do Chat Thursday in just a minute, but let's go ahead and do the breaking.
Um yeah, so the Turkish uh president, is that right?
President or is Prime Minister?
Prime Minister and President uh the Turkish leader, uh President Erdogan is at the White House, and Trump said, I'd like to have him stop by oil from Russia while Russia continues its rampage against Ukraine.
So that's nice.
We have a lot of.
It sounds like George Bush.
All right, real quick.
I'd like to have him stop buying any oil from Russia while Russia continues his rampage against Ukraine.
And they've been fighting, they've lost millions of lives already, and what's graceful.
And I said let it keep going because their economy is absolutely terrible right now.
And uh I think it's I think it's a shame that they're doing that, killing a lot of people unnecessarily.
And do we have uh do we have the numbers like do we know how much oil that they're buying from Russia?
Turkey is the third uh biggest importer of Russian fossil fuels.
So that would be a big blow If we uh got them to stop.
Billions of dollars.
India thought you were a friend's EU idiots funding both sides of this war.
No, I was kidding.
I need to admonish you for that.
Both of us.
Don't you Tim?
Don't do it.
Okay.
Yeah.
Let's go really quickly and we'll we'll keep talking, but let us go to Chat Thursday.
Chat.
All right.
Chat Thursday.
I want the very best that you have chat Thursday and no just ridiculing me or playing that pony whatever thing that's going to be.
Well now I gotta search.
Now we gotta actually get different chats.
Okay.
All right.
Well, let's anything for Bill too on this legal stuff while we have an expert here.
Returning fire asks half Asian lawyer Bill, this is quarter Asian Kyle.
Quick question.
It's currently illegal to carry in Cali.
How so?
Ma uh Marbury versus Madison much?
Do I misunderstand the concept?
No.
Um so the illegality of carry one, we've got the division of state and federal, and so then we have the Constitution and its ability to say, okay, even the Bill of Rights can be relatively limited.
And so what you need is you've got to be able to have cases that are going to challenge the specific states and their limitations.
I'm not familiar with what exactly the limitations are in California, but if any of it's there, what it's got to be is it's gotta be specifically challenged, or you've got to apply your national precedent like Heller, etc.
and get those courts to go, yep, you've got to strike down this specific statute or the specific regulation.
Were you at a ball game last night?
No, I I was just like running around yelling all day yesterday.
And uh why are you running around the office yelling?
What's going on?
People need to do their shows.
Okay, that's right.
Okay, fine.
Thank you.
You gotta get those bellable hours.
Go, go, go, go.
Um yeah, okay.
Perfect.
I think I think that's reasonable.
If you have a problem in your state, uh, you know, it's gotta be challenged and uh taken up to the Supreme Court.
Yep.
Because they're not gonna vote for you.
So, you know, you gotta keep going.
That's gonna cost a little money, take a little time though.
So we need some, you know, pro pro gun groups out there to be able to do that for people to have a lot of people.
And there are a number of them.
If you're if you're not sure every specific state either has a national organization or a local chapter that's bringing these suits.
Okay, cool.
Next chat.
All right, next chat from Short Stack Attack for Bill.
Have you heard about the Hassan Piker controversy?
He seems to constantly incite political violence and support terrorism on stream.
Why does no one do anything unto this guy?
Yeah.
So the standards, oh man.
So this this tension between the First Amendment and what you're allowed to do, right?
The whole like fire in a crowded movie theater versus like fighting words, those limitations are very tight.
They're very narrow as to what is inciting violence because what someone subjectively hears and decides to go do is very different.
You also have to have someone who has standing.
So who is the person that is being activated as a result of that, right?
Let's go back and do the other side of this, right?
When folks were saying, oh, Trump sent everyone to the White House or to the Capitol building to go into the Capitol building, right?
When you're really saying that the j you know, the generic, hey, we need to stand up, we need to fight against this, etc.
Right.
What are you specifically talking about?
Was this a call to action?
Are you actually taking that specific word?
Are you taking the specific words and acting on behalf of it?
That's where it gets really, really hard.
And frankly, we have a tendency, which I think is a good tendency, to allow that free speech to occur.
It's when it's specific violence that's coming and specific directive.
It's the difference between saying, hey, go shoot that person and you, John, go specifically shoot Sally.
You specifically go open fire at a facility, something like that.
I think Hassan Pikers, some of his comments have been kind of over the line.
Yeah.
In the past.
I don't understand how he's the darling of the left.
And uh I just did this this this world that we live in, man.
It's it's really strange.
You know, question for you that I don't know if anybody's gonna ask.
Do we have a YouTube question for anybody?
Not not from YouTube, but on the conversation about leadership.
If you do, let's bring it up because I don't want to usurp somebody else's question.
But with Hassan Piker, um and I'm a free speech advocate, right?
I want him to be able to say what he wants.
Same thing with Destiny and those guys, unless it's across the line and actually calls for violence.
And then I don't I don't think that the first thing that you should do is just remove people from platforms.
I think there needs to be some corrective action taking like, hey, look, you you can't call for violence.
I don't I know you weren't trying to in this particular case.
Or if they really were, then you know, I think that law enforcement needs to figure that out.
Right.
Because that's a that's a problem for everybody.
Um but when the right does anything even remotely close to that, you're canceled from every single thing and all of the potential avenues for promotion and everything else completely dry up and go away.
And you lived through that with this show and kind of how it was treated for years and still is being treated that way, and yet they can spew some of the most vile crazy things and because they're on the left it seems not to matter.
But anyway, the the YouTube thing yeah let's get to that.
So you know the the the people are often they will say free speech, free speech, but it's actually remember back to even you know Adpocalypse, right?
It was the issue of what is a private company allowed to do within its own rules.
Right.
And our position had always been you can run your business how you want, you just can't engage in fraud, which is saying we allow this content to occur but then when we don't like it, we will either not not change the rules and take you off or we'll proactively change the rules retroactively right.
Right.
So we went back to two year old video that you did that now violates our rules that we just made.
Correct.
And now you're gone.
Correct.
So that that is an issue but it's also the risk that runs you being on a platform, right?
You could go to a business every day and then they go, you know what, we're not open today.
We're not open on Fridays and people will complain and you have a complaint but you don't have a legal action.
Right.
So here when we have private companies who are taking action really what they're doing is they're being biased but that bias does not mean that it's a violation of free speech.
Right.
They may be saying hey I'm gonna limit it right I'm gonna limit the kind of speech I have on this platform or just a digital town square basically saying who can and can't have a a shop to speak from it.
So when you get to Section 230, right, that's a little bit different.
It is and that's the case that never seems to come.
Yeah you know and it seems like one of the most clear cut things I know that it didn't get into the legal jargon related to it and it gets more complicated but it's like it seems like a very clear thing that the president honestly if he signed an executive order tomorrow just clarifying and saying you got to pick a lane the world would be a better place because of it.
It would absolutely change.
Absolutely would be better.
All right let's ask the the the chat question on you still seems relevant.
Uh Abraham Asmade S asks has YouTube released an official apology to Steven for the adpocalypse event and have you tracked what channels have been reinstated.
We are tracking the channels so we're going to be keeping a list of those because one of the things and Gerald and I were just talking about this earlier and also Papa Crowder and I were talking about it before the show is what is going to be the kind of uh consequences that will happen now that there's an admission related to the Biden administration's suppression of certain accounts based on viewpoint.
Is there an opportunity for uh recompense or is it just simply going to be a look we're gonna do better going forward.
And here's the thing I would say on on yeah I like recompense that means guys that means give us the money best um but you know on one hand I would also say like we know people within these organizations who had been fighting the administration and had been threatened right so on one hand you're like okay um what what should they have done at the time we can say you should have done more you should have blown the whistle on it.
Absolutely but is now our point going to be well throw them all in jail now because they cooperated with the government the one that had all the tanks right the one who said we'll yank all of your licenses we'll pressure you we'll get rid of you right um it it's a it's a thorny situation but we know they cooperated.
We know they played ball and it can't go without punishment.
It needs to there needs to be punishment.
Honestly I think the I I think if I could speak for or from a creator perspective, not me, but like if I was in kind of place of the creators in general.
Yeah no one thought you were a creator.
Thank you.
To remove all doubts.
That is legal advice by the way.
I I think the creators would take recompense so like replace my lost wages because that's something that or my lost income because that's something that I can never get back and it you have to figure out how to approximate that over over time.
And also make sure that something like this never happens again.
Like can't ever happen again.
And having kind of robust kind of features measure reparations, Gerald is that what you want?
No not reparations because well I mean technically I guess so but in this case it's not like it's my great great great grandfather who didn't own any slaves at all being you know the bad guy.
So this is like hey three, four years ago can't you get over it?
What people own X and Twitter and all the other stuff.
Listen I get it but at the same time it's like how how like not everybody is Steven Crowder.
Right?
Not everybody had the opportunity to have so many of you guys.
Like right now, the live number of people is probably a little lower than we normally have.
But it's probably higher than almost every other show out there's live viewer number, except for a handful on this space.
Like it's a giant audience.
Not everybody had that.
And not everybody had that kind of support.
And it the impact is one where we'll never fully know the impact, right?
There will be creators who didn't who literally did not live long enough to see this day.
There are creators who could not survive, who are now doing other jobs, whose voices were going to be.
They had to go and do something else because they couldn't.
That that was my point.
Like we had mug club, and thank God we had you guys.
We appreciate it every single day we talk about it.
They didn't.
And so they just came and went because YouTube turned off the money.
Like creators just disappear off the face of the planet because they said something really not all that controversial, and YouTube said, Well, this is not friendly.
And we know that there are ways for YouTube to kind of segment out for advertisers so that they can make sure that some advertisers don't end up next to something they don't want to be next to.
I think as advertisers, you have a right to say, hey, there's certain content, like uh we don't want to be a part of pornographic content.
Like that that's reasonable, right?
To say that.
Or we don't want to be a part of XYZ content.
Let's just stay off of those kind of channels.
That's fine.
But saying no advertisers can advertise on the space with obviously there's plenty out there that want to, that's not fine.
And that's exactly what they've done.
So I I hope that there's some right like let's let's file for the money, Bill.
Let's go after them for some kind of like.
Well, there's gonna be as we flesh out and see more of the information behind what was said with the administration, right?
This is gonna be battles versus wars, right?
What can we do to make sure that this isn't gonna happen again?
Because I would absolutely say it's not worth paying back creators if that just means that in the future this is gonna happen again.
No, I agree.
The other part is But they have to do both in my opinion.
Well, I don't think they can go, okay, fine, like what other place we go, okay, fine, we'll never do it again.
Right.
But here now now remember, and we let's go full circle back to Comey, right?
What are the types of actions that we're taking?
What are the next things?
Oh who were the ones that were doing the pressure, who were the ones in the government, in the administration, how do we pull back the curtain on that?
Because if what we're saying is we want to make sure that private citizens and businesses don't comply with the government, right?
Really, what we should be looking at is how do we prevent government from being able to do that in the first place?
Right.
And so I think there's a multi-prong approach.
We need to get more information.
We need to take this moment and go dive in as far as possible to find out how it happened.
Who are the kinds of people on both sides of the government and the tech companies who were obeying, giving the commands, who are the ones who were obeying, reward the ones who weren't obeying, right?
That's where we go when we talk about consequences.
Stick with the rumbles and the other creators and the platforms that said we're not gonna go that way, right?
Remember Parlour.
Right.
Disappeared.
Gone.
Overnight.
Right?
Overnight.
So there were those who were fighting and maybe lost to history, right?
And there are those who stuck around and continued to back those because you knew what their values were, right?
Yeah.
Like Rumble.
Rumble is the only place that like truly has free speech.
I know X has made a lot of strides, but there's still some limitations with that.
Rumble is the place, and that's why we are here fighting the good fight.
All right, next chat.
All right, next chat from Skank Hunt.
40 second of the city.
But Bill, I don't want you to forget about the money part of this, okay?
Listen, the money part's really important because your hourly rate is pretty high if we're just between friends.
Correct.
Get the money.
Okay.
All right.
Skank hunt, 40 seconds of its name.
With new scum and California Democrats putting laws in the books to find social media companies to obliterate free speech.
What can we do to get this recognized as unconstitutional ASAP?
So there's uh there are actually a number of organizations.
I'll make sure to send them afterwards so we can add them into the sources.
Uh, but a number of organizations that are documenting those specific laws and how we can go and challenge them on a First Amendment basis, right?
So the the real issue here is you've got companies that are able to do certain types of speech.
There are limitations to the First Amendment.
But what Newsom has blatantly said in other California legislatures is we don't like how you interpret the First Amendment.
We don't actually like the full extent of what the Supreme Court and the founders created around the First Amendment.
And this gets into larger issues around the shape and the nature of the country and what are important values.
But it it now, based on these laws, they're not even saying, hey, we we just kind of slightly interpret a little differently.
Some of these are going almost full second amendment, saying, well, you know, these guys didn't really know what they were talking about with their muskets, and now they're saying, well, these guys didn't really know with their wigs and their free speech.
Maybe we need to go ahead and curb that.
And that's where funding these First Amendment groups is gonna be really important.
Almost every important First Amendment case that ever came out came because of organizations that were willing to fund individuals whose speech was limited and be able to take that all the way up to the Supreme Court and get the right kind of precedent.
And as we know Precedent.
Precedent.
Okay, right.
You said as we know.
I thought there was more.
That's why there was this awkward pause.
What did you just do to the show?
Next chat.
Dead air.
All right.
Next chat from my chimp.
Crowder is demonetized on YouTube, but there are still ads in his videos.
Does Google make money off his videos?
How is that legal?
I don't know.
Bill?
Yes, terms of service.
They can run ads and not pay us.
Yeah, absolutely.
But wait a minute.
I thought they didn't run ads because none of the advertisers wanted to be in our content.
Yeah.
So it's not that none of the advertisers would be in the content.
It's that.
How do you defend that?
It's so here's the thing.
It's not illegal.
No, no, no, not the illegal part, but like the wrong part.
Like, yeah, no, no, no.
We we took you off because advertiser didn't want to.
Well that's the same thing.
Someone's gotta pay for $47 lattes in San Francisco, okay?
I mean you know, oak milk, oat milk is not fucking cheap.
Wow.
Sorry, I never said it was ill.
Whatever.
These San Franciscans have to pay for the full milk.
Fine, they can pay for it, the jerks.
All right, next chat.
Can you milk me?
Okay.
I think I know the answer.
That's a good idea.
Yeah, Bill, want to chime it?
Um, that's not a legal question except uh in our FDA segment.
Only you can prevent Gerald Milken.
Oh, please.
The USTA says that that is illegal.
That's funny.
All right.
All right.
Do we have anything for you know like the crew now?
Sure.
Bill's boring me.
Just kidding.
He's not boring me.
He's not.
He's not boring anybody, but I I feel like I have to.
I feel small, so I feel like I have to hurt people to feel better.
You knew when you said that that you weren't bored.
You're the biggest guy in every room.
It's a violation.
I said I feel small, not that I am small.
What's the matter with this guy?
All right.
Next chat from Mr. Nobody.
Question for everyone.
There you go.
Since Trump took Iran's capability to have a nuke, what do you think he would do if the same people take over a nuclear armed country?
I guess that's the same thing.
You mean Iraq Britain.
Like if Iran took over a nuclear-armed country?
Maybe.
Or I think he's referencing Muslims in general.
But who knows?
Yeah, uh I think it all has to do with the ideology of the regime.
Uh I mean that I think that was the the catalyst for this.
And there, you know, there were a lot of people in the Iran thing, not to dive too deeply into that again.
Uh, that thought that Iran was was not being truthful in their aspirations.
And uh they had kind of this apocalyptic ideology at the top that was really one of the main problems.
I don't I mean, I think the people of Iran by and large probably didn't want anything to do with this.
There's been a lot of movements for freedom in Iran that have been kind of put down, mostly just by this kind of smaller but sizable group of people that are very um I don't know, i kind of extremist in their beliefs and the apocalyptic nature of their beliefs is not that they will be destroyed, so that people are like that's stupid, they'd never launch a nuclear war.
Not that they wanted other people to be destroyed, and that there was kind of an apocalyptic climate globally that would usher in the 12th Imam and their preferred caliphate.
So they have more of a they have more of a hive mentality.
You've got to be kidding me.
Think about it.
Communists kill bosses for Christ.
Hey, can I draw attention to CNN real quick?
Uh the Governor Stein of North Carolina is talking about whether he's gonna sign uh I can't uh arenas arena's law after the stabbing on the bus.
In the meantime, go ahead.
Go ahead and place to go when when they're having uh a schizophrenic attack.
If they are a risk to themselves, if they're a risk to other people, we need some place for them to go.
And one thing you taken to the people do is provide any funding to help us address that issue.
Yeah, that that definitely makes sense.
In the meantime, you do have this bill on your desk.
If you don't sign it uh or veto it, either one, it will just automatically go into law.
Are you considering doing that, or will you either sign it or veto it?
Will you take your pen out no matter what?
I I'm uh as I said, I'm reviewing it really as we speak.
It was the last meeting I had before I got on.
Okay, listen.
I think he doesn't want to go on national television and say he's not gonna sign this.
I think you're 100% right.
They didn't have any money in there for schizophrenics to be able to come in and self-report.
Well, if you don't get what place for them to go, then uh well uh it doesn't make any sense because it's it it's about cashless bail.
Well, it's if they don't have anywhere to go, then they can stay in county jail.
Well, I I don't understand.
If uh if you had any testicles, um then you would actually go, damn right I'm signing this bill.
I'm gonna make sure that we protect the citizens of this state, and we'll get to the other stuff as soon as we can.
And you know what my next meeting is?
It's to talk about schizophrenics and how we can help them and make sure that they're not a danger to themselves, or more importantly, the public.
I don't want them killing themselves, but I certainly would prefer that over them killing people in public.
So we'll work on that.
Yeah, sounds like it doesn't matter.
I could run for office.
These guys are total posers.
Anyway, I like that, Gerald.
I like your shutter island law.
That'd be great.
It is.
Yeah, we'll put them on a island.
We just won't do the shock treatment thing because that's cruel, and uh we'll do something.
I don't know, maybe it's not.
I just thought it was.
I just wanted to sound virtuous.
Okay, it's effective.
Okay.
Next chat.
All right, next chat from Or did we skip something?
What was there a chat that we were on?
You were you already kind of answered it.
I didn't.
Good.
I didn't want to leave you actually.
Billy, you have anything to say on the uh nuclear Muslims?
Hard no.
Depends on the ideology.
That's great.
All the wh also I don't care if Israel has the bomb.
Come at me, bro.
Israel?
They have it.
People are mad.
I can't believe you let Israel have a bomb.
They've just been using it to do whatever they want.
I'm like, they haven't done anything with it.
Yeah, they've nuked a lot of people already.
Can't you tell?
Next chat from Depatriate Panda.
Question for the crew.
If someone on the right is attacked again and they fight back, do you think legacy media will go off the deep end and call the entire left to arms against us?
No, I don't think so.
I mean, if they if they're attacked and fight back, are you talking about like a situation where they're out in public or something like that and they're attacked, and then they maybe like some like a mob attacks them, they take out a gun and shoot somebody to defend themselves?
Is that maybe maybe like a written house situation or something?
Uh well listen, it does it doesn't matter.
The written house situation was before really all of that was going like somebody just defending themselves, and they tried to fry a kid who literally was out there to try to help a community and was dealing with some of the worst people.
I mean, he shot three times, hit three pedophiles, I think.
It's kind of a really interesting record or shot twice.
I think it was uh maybe I think maybe it was two pedophiles and one domestic abuser.
Uh yeah.
I was being somewhat hyperbolic.
But um But yeah, definitely not three high lifes.
This is this is four today.
Uh we need to have we need to have an admonish counter on real screen.
We do need an admonishing.
Real quick chat from Gerald.
So we need an admonish counter.
Yeah.
Real quick chat from Belmont 03.
I would like you to hit the admonish button on Gerald again, please and thank you.
Approved illegal.
I don't understand like how that's our biggest line item here.
Legal and it's it's paying dividends right now.
You're adding to it, Gerald.
Yeah.
That's an extra.
You're a sick group of people that just and I when I say sick group of I mean all of you.
All I mean, because apparently this is a universal thing that you like me admonished as even when I'm right, or like I'm not even like I don't understand.
It's like it loot it's like a car alarm at this point.
I'm like, I'm gonna be admonished for just saying hi.
Admonished.
Admonish, please.
No, I just built it's just a request from legal.
This is actually this was a test to see whether they listened to legal fast enough.
So it was less about the ammonia.
I mean, you deserved it.
We need to stop with the friendly fire.
Okay.
Tim's hands are tied there.
He couldn't do anything about that.
I expect it from Must Club because they pay the money.
What do you want to get suited?
And they can get what they want when they pay them with limitations.
They get what they pay for, but you look at the Look, I don't know how they do it in Notre Dame, but here we practice the reps in order to be good at game time.
So we needed to make sure.
Our defense sucks.
Gerald's gonna murder somebody.
Well, you shouldn't have written firing, you know, firing squad on the front up there on the desk.
Yeah.
Well, you just bring up every bad thing in life.
Next chat.
All right.
Well, here you go.
Here's the softball for you since I know you love talking merch.
And my wife's been asking this too.
Monster Mangler.
Why do I love talk anyway?
Go ahead.
You do.
Would you all consider making your crowder shop shirts available in women's film?
No.
Okay.
There you go.
Sorry, woman.
Gerald preverses women's shirtless.
No, so listen, we uh Thank you for that.
Look, I I want shirts like this to be ubiquitous.
And again, I said this yesterday about the ice shirts that we had, the DHS.
Go to Crowdershop.com and grab one.
I I highly, highly recommend you do that.
I cannot tell you how many conversations that I have had with people who see Jesus is risen.
Uh change my mind shirt and go and just either say something or have a conversation about it, or it it's it's a great conversation starter.
So listen, I know that sounds self-serving, and yes, you know, we sell merch and that's fine.
But but when it comes to supporting the you know Department of Homeland Security and ICE and the agents, I go buy it from the Hodge twins.
Go buy it from Bannon's shop, go buy it from TP USA, Alex Jones, pick your favorite, but just do it.
That's the bycot mentality is that we want to support, especially when things like this happen.
And they happen far too often, and the media tells you they don't care because they're like, oh, this happened, whatever, they're fine, oh this happened, no big deal moving on.
It happens all the time, and these people need to know that we support them in their efforts, and we know that they're not going to be anybody's favorite because of it.
Now, they may be ours, but they're not gonna be anybody on the left or anybody out in the media's because they're just gonna try to demonize them.
So go support them, buy buy some merch, make sure you wear it, be proud about it.
If people ask conversations or ask questions, don't be a jerk.
Make the case well.
Like, do it in love, but make the case well for our side and represent everybody well, and that's helpful.
So that's my thing.
On the shirts.
Yeah, can I ask about the women's about women's feelings?
Yeah, so the the on the women's shirt.
We actually had that conversation and feedback in this industry, because we asked for that.
We said, hey, you need some women's uh cuts.
And they're like, actually, we we've tried that before with several very large merch accounts, and they don't sell at all.
He said women actually prefer the men's cuts.
So that may not be the truth.
Let me tell you the truth.
They sent a request illegal, and I said, no, we will not authorize women's sewing kits to be sold with the shirts.
Why not?
Hard no.
So anyway, it's demand.
It really is demand.
I don't think there's as much demand for that.
They've tried that in the world.
The women could buy the sweatshirts.
Yeah.
Because women steal guys' sweatshirts all the time.
All the time.
And they steal our t-shirts as well.
Yeah.
I understand that the problem with it though.
Uh you know, you may want to do that differently, but they they said, listen, we've tried that before.
And honestly, it was kind of funny because they had had an internal debate about it just recently when I had this was like two years ago when we talked about it.
Um yeah, they were like, nah, they just they just they just don't sell.
They just sit around.
So anyway.
Chad, how about making a mug club apron?
Unisex.
I mean, they could work.
I'd rather be driving a mug club.
I don't know.
Like put that on there too.
On the apron.
No.
Oh.
We just got different ideas.
Anyway, next chat.
What about uh squirrel?
How about mug how about mug club?
How about mug club uh uh maternity shirts that say, can you milk me?
And it's just my face.
Why not a why not a mug club sewing machine, right?
You just like make it any fit you want, right?
There you go.
I mean, we could do all kinds of stuff.
I think the world is really our oyster, but I hate oysters.
So chat.
All right.
Next chat from Nicole.
Wait a minute.
If Hillary thinks we used to be on the right track, does that mean she wants to make America great again?
No, she's saying that we used to be on the right track when we precisely got on the wrong track when the country went from not really having a race problem to having a race problem because a black guy was supposed to be a healing kind of thing as president, and it turns out all he did was stoke racism.
Weird how that works.
I think things were much better in the 90s with races.
Fantastic time to be alive, and then they screwed it up.
I what she just fails to comprehend is that the white guys seem to do a pretty good job of building civilization.
See, all of Europe and us.
Well, like except for Germany for like a period of time.
But just any everybody has their moments.
Okay.
Germany started.
We shouldn't have never let we should have never let them become a unified country because it's been like 40 years they started frickin' wars.
A white guy invented the Pontiac Aztec.
So I think you need to dial down this.
What?
You nursing the Pontiac Aztec.
I have.
I don't want to think about it though.
Yeah, yeah, that was a white guy.
We're not perfect, Bill.
Next chat.
Okay.
Next chat from Bill and I used to do on the show all the time.
We just give each other crap.
That was third chair.
Next chair.
And we loved it.
Son of a admonish noodles for failing to bring up the chat.
Goldie Rigtail.
Oh, come on.
Excellent anti-communism laws would solve our current problems with leftist terror attacks.
Uh Bill, what do you think?
What is an anti-communist law?
I don't know.
What what's the antifactor?
Well, that's maybe that's one of them.
It's not a law.
I mean, that's just a thing.
Just do the thing.
Enforce the law.
Enforce the thing.
I what I would say is this reminds me very much of is it that we need more laws or that we need a government and agencies and the people in those agencies to enforce the law?
So so many times, like in the gun debate, people would go, well, how is it that we have, you know, we have all these rules and they're not enough?
And it's like, well, we're not actually funding the rules that we have in place right now.
So if we had more folks who are actually investigating Antifa, taking it seriously, is it that we don't have the resources or the laws to prosecute Antifa?
No.
It's that we're not focused on it, that we have agents or factions within these agencies or specific, you know, municipalities or law enforcement organizations who are not allowed to go after Antifa.
So let's make the directive clear.
Let's put the resources into it, and then we can decide do we need more laws?
But I am 100% confident that the thousands and thousands and thousands of laws we have are more than enough.
What we need to do is enforce them.
I think that's fair.
Good good point.
All right.
Uh two more chats and then we're done for today.
And I want to run that uh epic teaser again before we leave.
Yeah.
Okay.
All right.
Uh second to last chat from 69.
Since the government has lied to us so much over the years, conspiracies run rampant after every event.
How does anyone decipher the truth these days?
Hashtag Gerald might not be gay.
Hey, there we go.
You're 100% correct.
I am not gay.
That's a conspiracy that is my That's actually that's actually an appropriate admonishment because you said you're 100% correct.
And what they said was he might not be gay.
They didn't say that you are not gay.
They said you might not be gay.
Okay, that's fair.
I did clarify though that I am not gay.
See my three children.
Anyway, um I I think has a kid.
I get it.
And you know what?
You can milk him.
Oh we all saw it.
Not a fan of chest feeding.
Um, uh I'm not a boob guy.
It's true.
I uh I uh I I think uh with the conspiracy like I understand that we've been lied to a lot, and you know, Megan uh Kelly got this question at an event recently within the last couple of days.
I just saw a clip of it before the show.
Who can we trust?
Well, there's there are a lot of people out there that want and desire your trust.
Um obviously the the people watching Candace Owens, she's depending on your trust and your suspension of reality for at least a portion of what she says.
Um I I think track record is what you really have to go after.
I don't I don't trust anybody in the mainstream media.
Not a single person, not a single main show host.
Let me put it that way.
There may be individuals that end up doing guest spots and stuff that I have some trust.
Like Scott Jennings, I I I typically trust where he's coming from on most subjects.
And even people I disagree with, I might trust that they're at least honestly seeking the truth from their worldview.
That's a different thing than just completely lying.
But you have to look, and I'm sorry, like I'm not tooting our own horn, but nobody does what we do.
Nobody does what we do.
Nobody puts their sources out like we do.
Nobody says, here's what we believe, and here's why we believe it, like we do.
We don't just show you text messages where we're the only person on them as receipts.
We actually show you the articles, the studies, the sites, the data, the calculations, all that stuff.
We show you the stuff.
Like that's what you should demand from everybody.
And that includes people that are friendlies on this side.
Yeah, we should make the only one doing stuff.
No, we should not.
A comedy show that really is because Steven couldn't find a late-night show that he really thought resonated with his generation or really can carried on the legacy of some of the earlier greater late-night shows.
That show should not be the one that's outsourcing CNN and Fox and MSNBC and ABC station everywhere else.
And and put in your favorite creators here.
Nobody else does that.
So then maybe some people are trying, they put up overlays and things like that, but they I want you to go do the research because you're the one that's going to be hit with a ton of false information.
I need you trained on how to spot it, how to do the research, to figure it out, and also where to come to get A first step.
I think we are a great place historically for that.
We have a viewpoint, but we give you the sources.
That's what we should be demanding.
All right, final chat.
Final chat from Twist Truss 42.
Sixth time asking.
Who's counting?
How do Christians reconcile defending ourselves against knowing we will suffer for our faith?
What?
What is the line between violence and persecution?
A's the question that Christians can't use self-defense, even though we know we're supposed to suffer for the faith.
Did Jesus tell us to turn the other cheek?
Yes, but do you know what the meaning of that is?
Yeah.
That's well, but that's I mean the reference to it that there is a deeper analysis around when you do it when you don't.
Yeah.
Right, et cetera.
But I think that is the question that is getting towards is when are you preemptive?
When are you going to take action?
When are you going to be in self-defense?
And how do you reconcile that around the over the maybe first message, the inch deep message of turn the other cheek.
I don't think Jesus was saying go out and just be slaughtered by these people uh that that hate you.
Just go out and be slaughtered.
If you're dying for the faith and there's, you know, you're being a martyr and you're going out and speaking the word and telling you to stop speaking the word and you don't, and you're breaking their laws, that's a different thing than somebody just attacking you on the street because you're a Christian and you not defending yourself.
I I think Christians sometimes get this Mamby Pambi view of Jesus where he was this, you know, peace, love, you know, let everybody live happily ever after kind of guy.
No, no, no.
He did not come to unite.
He came to divide.
That's his words, not mine.
Okay.
If you have a problem with that, you need to take it up with scripture, not me.
And that means God.
Listen, he is trying to unite people in him.
But that is the key fact here that a lot of people miss.
It's not unity for the sake of unity, it's unity in Christ so that we can become more like Christ, and so that we are separating ourselves.
Here's the dividing against evil.
That's a thing.
Now you need to be careful what you call evil.
When you call someone evil for some behaviors maybe that you don't like or positions that you disagree with, you have to be careful that you're actually seeing evil and not just disagreement.
And when you defend yourself, that doesn't mean going out and proactively being violent against people, but it does mean that if violence does come to your door, that you do have a right, a God given right that we have recognized in this country to defend yourself and your family and your property.
You have a right.
Now, how far you take that defense may be informed by your faith.
There may be certain lines you aren't willing to cross.
I don't really have a whole lot of those lines that I'm not willing to cross if somebody tries to take my family out.
I will defend them as harshly as I possibly can on the people that are trying to hurt my family.
I understand that.
But if you have any question on if Jesus thought that self-defense was necessary, I believe it was right before the garden around the Garden of Gethsemane time.
Jesus said, Do you have any swords?
If you don't have a sword, go sell your tunic and buy one.
And they said, Lord, we have two.
He said, okay, that'll be enough.
Why do you think he said that?
If you didn't believe in defending yourself, what do you need swords for?
This is also the same Jesus that made a a whip and ran people out of the marketplace, the temple court, selling doves and everything, turning over money changers tables, completely uprooting their way of life and making money with a whip, knowing that we're temple guards.
Do you think that Jesus really is saying, hey, just take every sling and arrow that comes at you and don't defend your family?
No.
Scripture's very clear.
You have a right to self-defense.
You're fine.
But it's also very clear that we need to love people and view them as Christ does.
He takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked.
He wants all people to come to repentance and to be joined in unity with him.
But when they make a decision that that is not what they're going to do, we got to be careful and understand, okay, you've made that decision.
I'm not going to condemn you, but listen, you come a knocking, I'm defending my family.
Part of defending our ideas is being able to speak on college campuses.
I told you at the top of the show.
This is something that we will never give up.
This is ground that we will never cede.
This is what the left wants.
They did the exact opposite of what they should have done.
They should have engaged in conversation.
They should have sat down and tried to win on the battlefield of ideas.
Instead, they tried to kill the ideas.
Well, guess what?
▲
Export Selection