Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Dec. 11, 2020 - The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters

01:22:59

The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #22

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Good afternoon ladies and gentlemen.
	Welcome to the podcast of the Lotus Eaters for Wednesday, the 9th of December, 2020.
	Every day blurs into each other day with me because my life is busy and I don't get time to pay attention to it.
	But anyway, thank you for joining us.
	And I'm back with Callum today, which is very nice.
	And we are going to be talking about the enormous, the cataclysmic Texas lawsuit, which frankly, I think is heralding the beginning of the Civil War.
	This is where I think it actually is going to begin.
	Then we're going to talk about how China owns Joe Biden.
	Which is just admitted by the Chinese.
	And then we're going to be talking about the disgusting, rampant hypocrisy of the media.
	The left-wing media, incidentally.
	Aren't we?
	Yes.
	Right.
	So I guess we better get started.
	Tell me about this lawsuit.
	I want to know what's going on.
	Yeah, we have a lot to get through on this.
	So I didn't see this coming, and it seems to have blindsided everyone.
	But it turns out that the Attorney General of Texas has decided to sue the states of Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin for failing to follow constitutional prescriptions when it comes to actually conducting their elections.
	And this has been this is straight to the Supreme Court, obviously.
	And it was a 154-page complaint, which I personally haven't read, but I've been listening to lots of other lawyers talking about this, and some of them seem to be very impressed with this lawsuit.
	Apparently it's very, very well written, it's precise, and it's a bit better than what Giuliani had done in his attempts, according to these people.
	But the Heritage Foundation gives us a fairly comprehensive breakdown, which makes our life a lot easier.
	So the complaint apparently goes into great detail describing what happened in each state.
	In Pennsylvania, the complaint accuses the Pennsylvania Secretary of State, Kathy Bokvar, of, among other things, without legislative approval, unilaterally abrogating Pennsylvania statutes that require signature verification for absentee or mail-in ballots.
	These changes were not ratified by the Pennsylvania legislature, and as I understand it, all of these things go against either the federal constitutions or the state constitutions.
	And so this is a procedural complaint that they didn't follow the right procedure, and therefore the process is illegitimate, which seems to be uncontestable to me.
	Exactly in black and white.
	This is the procedure of the rules surrounding the mail-in ballots, right?
	Yes.
	And how these things can be conducted.
	And the fact that Cathy Bokvar changed these things unilaterally without going through the correct process of getting these things legitimately done.
	And so that's illegal.
	That's unconstitutional, which I suppose is another way of saying illegal.
	In Georgia, similarly, the complaint describes how Georgia's Secretary of State, Brad Rathensperger, who we've talked about many times and if you've got any questions, I'll answer them in a second, also, quote, Michigan.
	The complaint states that the Michigan Secretary of State, Jocelyn Benson, abrogated Michigan election statutes related to the absentee ballot applications and signature verification.
	And in Wisconsin, the Elections Commission made similar changes in state laws without the permission of the legislature that weakened or did away with established security procedures put in place by the Wisconsin legislature to ensure absentee ballot integrity.
	So why would they do that?
	Yeah.
	of their elections when it comes to mail-in ballots?
	Why would they be interested in...
	There are other things like extending the date by which they can be counted on, past the due date.
	Again, I think it was just unilaterally done, things like this.
	Why would they be doing this?
	Weird little laws about how to maximize the amount of mail-in ballots that were counted.
	I can see three of them are the state's Secretary of State, and the last one's the Wisconsin Electoral Commission.
	They're accusing of doing this.
	I'm guessing if I had to give a defense for these Secretaries of State, they would be saying, well, come on, coronavirus happens.
	Come on, man!
	They were saying, you know, come on, coronavirus happens, we believe that people have the, you know, their right to vote should be made secure, so if they want to cast their vote by ballot to save them from coronavirus, we ought to have these, you know, extensions.
	Yeah, but the counter-argument to that is, well, A, you're...
	That's legal.
	Well, no, A, if you want to do those things, there is a process to follow, which you didn't follow, which is what the lawsuit's alleging.
	But B, are you making it more secure by making it less secure?
	No.
	I shouldn't have used the words secure.
	It should have been...
	Inclusive, maybe?
	Yeah, that would be a better term.
	But again, then questions of security pop up again when you say, well, that's true.
	And they do cite a case from, I think, the year 2000 where judges or whoever it was at the time found that mail-in ballots were the largest source of voter fraud.
	And then you say, well, by trying to make it more inclusive, you're actually allowing more fraud to enter into the system and therefore nullifying other ballots.
	So you're actually making it less inclusive by nullifying other people's ballots.
	It's not a very defensible position that they found themselves in, in my opinion.
	I'm just laughing because I'm loving the idea of arguing that it's more inclusive because more dead people can vote.
	It's like, that's true.
	Don't be a necrophobe.
	What's wrong with you?
	But again, I find it very difficult to create a charitable interpretation of what's happened from the Democrat position.
	And apart from Raffensperger, these are all Democrats.
	Raffensperger appears to be the only Republican involved under accusation here.
	He's had a bit of a rough time recently because he seems to be straddling the fence, and I don't know what he's doing, and I don't want to make allegations or cast dispersions, but there are a lot of Republicans who are very suspicious about him.
	A lot of the sort of MAGA patriots are very suspicious about him.
	And I don't doubt that if I were to Google, I would find allegations that he's been paid off by Dominion.
	I can't confirm or deny any of these things, of course.
	I'd have to double-check, but I swear to Christ, the local Democrats there are also very suspicious of him.
	Because he was the one who, I think he wrote off or he proposed the idea of having these electronic machines for the vote in 2020.
	But the local Democrats were like, this is absurd, these things can't be checked for fraud.
	And then, of course, now they've won.
	Yeah, yeah, that's exactly right.
	They had previously complained.
	And in fact, there had been lots of previous complaints, not just from Georgia Democrats either, but from lots of Democrats around the country.
	I mean, Warren and Klobuchar signed a letter complaining about the Dominion voting machine saying, well, hang on, this is a bit insecure, isn't it?
	Yeah, but now, Biden won.
	Now they're shutting their mouths.
	And the response to this has been...
	But before we get into the response, I can't find myself constructing a reasonable excuse for this, because it...
	It just comes across looking very much like they thought they were going to take an absolute kicking and they're trying to accrue to themselves any small advantage that they think can cumulatively improve their chances of victory.
	And that's assuming that they're not cheating.
	They're not outright cheating.
	Assuming that, which frankly I don't assume.
	But if we were to assume that, that they weren't just outright cheating and they were just trying to make tactical manoeuvres from within the system, or as they thought within the system, to...
	beating donald trump and the republicans um that's the sort of most charitable way i can interpret it yeah sure maybe but if that's the case then they appear to have gone over the line constitutionally sorry about the sirens daily sirens yeah daily sirens swindon isn't really a very violent place normally either no it's just we live near the police yes it's always nice yeah Yeah, sorry.
	But you're saying you can't think of a more charitable interpretation.
	You seem to be thinking of it very Machiavellian, where it's just like, you know, they're doing this only to increase their vote share or they're cheating.
	Well, your argument was the most charitable.
	They could potentially.
	I mean, I know it's kind of hard at this point.
	Why would you want to break the rules?
	Well, that wouldn't be their argument.
	They would say, well, I'm not looking to break the rules.
	It was just, look, there's this huge pandemic.
	They genuinely believe it's a huge public health threat.
	So the reasonable thing to do would be to make mail-in ballot more inclusive so that you can have a legitimate election.
	But why would you be interested in reducing signature verification then?
	I don't know.
	Exactly.
	I mean, I agree.
	I wouldn't even be against them saying, well, look, because of the coronavirus thing, we could have mail-in ballots up until a week afterwards or something like that.
	Yeah, let's start a week earlier and go a week afterwards.
	Yeah, I could understand it.
	I could say, yeah, sure, why not?
	That could be fine.
	But why would you be trying to reduce the validation process afterwards?
	Don't worry about the signature verifications.
	We'll damage ballot integrity, as the lawsuit alleges, by not being concerned about these things.
	That doesn't make any sense unless you wanted fake ballots to be counted.
	Because you know you're going to be introducing an element where you are going to get an increased number of fake ballots.
	Could you argue that maybe they're thinking, you know how you go and do a ballot, I assume it's the same in the States, where you don't have to sign when you're in person, you just fill them in, right?
	And then you throw it in.
	Yes, I believe so.
	I'm assuming it's like this.
	I believe so, yeah.
	So therefore they might be thinking people, you know, loads more people are going to be using mail-in ballots, therefore there's going to be a lot more mistakes because people aren't used to it.
	Maybe.
	I'm trying here, but it's tough.
	Yeah, I mean, it's pretty optimistic, to be honest.
	Like, I just...
	I don't understand.
	It's a weird thing to demand.
	Yeah, I don't understand why you would want to undermine the verification process.
	And again, it's about the integrity of the election.
	And...
	Oh, what was I about to say then?
	Sorry, that's gone.
	I was going to say something else, but it's gone.
	But anyway, the response to this, right, is not valid, in my opinion.
	It's totally not valid.
	So Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, a Republican, says their failure to abide, in the Hill article, their failure to abide by the rule of law casts a dark shadow of doubt over the outcome of the entire election.
	We now ask that the Supreme Court step in to correct this egregious error.
	That's the sort of thing I'd expect a lawyer to say.
	That's just totally cut and dried.
	There is a dark shadow.
	I mean, half of the country doesn't believe that Joe Biden won legitimately, and it's because, in part, that they changed the rules at the last minute in what appears to be an attempt to get themselves more votes.
	And that's without us even alleging that they cheated.
	Yeah, this isn't the cheating stuff.
	This is just the sus stuff you were up to beforehand.
	Yeah, why are you doing this?
	And so Pennsylvania Attorney General Josh Shapiro replied to this saying, These continued attacks on our fair and free election system are beyond meritless, beyond reckless.
	They are a scheme by the President of the United States and the Republican Party to disregard the will of the people and name their own victors.
	I mean, you can say that, but that's like Rudy Giuliani saying the mob stole the election in Philadelphia.
	So, okay, I mean, you can say that, but at the end of the day, you're not addressing any of the allegations that are being made directly to you about their abrogation of the law unconstitutionally.
	So what on earth...
	Why won't you address the direct allegations in this case?
	Michigan Attorney General Dana Nassel, also a Democrat, responded, saying this was a publicity stunt.
	The erosion of confidence in our democratic system isn't attributable to the good people of Michigan, Wisconsin, Georgia, or Pennsylvania, but rather to partisan officials like Mr.
	Paxton, who's placed loyalty to a person over loyalty to their country.
	Sorry, there's more than enough evidence, more than enough, to suggest that there is merit to this, that there is genuine doubt about the elections in at least these four states.
	This is, again, she's not denying.
	She's not denying the core claims that have been made in this thing directly.
	She's just, blanket, no, there's nothing to this.
	If there wasn't anything to this, it's unlikely that it'd be in the Supreme Court, right?
	Like, I'd give the Texas Attorney General some credit and suggest that he wouldn't act on something that was actually meritless.
	Again, if you consider them to be, like, the loyal opposition worthy of respect.
	But if you consider them to, I mean, this is the sort of thing I would expect them to say about internet trolls, Right?
	There's no merit to it.
	It's just nonsense.
	It's just partisan rubbish.
	Don't worry about it.
	They're treating him like they treat some sort of guy on Twitter with an anonymous account.
	Right?
	There's this total lack of respect for the issue that's been raised.
	And the issue that's been raised seems to have some legitimacy.
	The Michigan issues raised in this complaint have already been brought, have already been thoroughly litigated and roundly rejected by both state and federal courts, by judges appointed from both political parties.
	So Mr. Paxton's actions are beneath the dignity of the office of the Attorney General of the people of the great state of Texas.
	Yeah, no one believes that.
	Like, that's just not the opinion.
	That's just not the general opinion of people.
	They don't think that he's humiliating himself by saying, hang on, why aren't you following the same election rules that we have to follow?
	They're not addressing the points.
	Katie Bird, a spokeswoman for the Georgia Attorney General Chris Carr, this one's a Republican in Georgia, added in an email that, with all due respect, The Texas Attorney General is constitutionally, legally, and factually wrong about Georgia.
	Notice the difference in tone with that response.
	That's not, this guy's a disgrace.
	That's not, this guy's embarrassing.
	That's not, this guy's scum.
	That's not, there's no merit to this.
	He is factually and legally wrong.
	Okay, great.
	You are saying that his claims are not correct.
	So we can address that.
	You can give your reasons for why this isn't correct.
	He can give his response as to why it is correct, and then the judges in the court can have it out.
	That is the kind of statement I would expect.
	Then Wisconsin Attorney General Josh Call, a Democrat, tweeted, I feel sorry for Texans that their tax dollars are being wasted on such a genuinely embarrassing lawsuit.
	Texas is as likely to change the outcome of the ice bowl as it is to overturn the will of Wisconsin voters in the 2020 election.
	That's a PR statement.
	That's pardon.
	That's I want to go viral on Twitter.
	Yeah, but they are partisan actors.
	Oh, very much so.
	That previous respectful one is obviously a Republican talking to a Republican.
	That's true.
	But isn't that...
	I mean, I don't think Americans will actually know, but it is quite weird that after every single name you have in your articles, you have a D or an R in brackets.
	Like, we don't have that in Britain, and I don't know any European country that does that.
	Well, it's because the Supreme Court in America, the judiciary is a political branch, and in Britain, the...
	Yeah, I understand.
	The courts aren't.
	But when they write about MPs, usually, or at least I don't see it, people putting Labour or...
	They do.
	They say Labour or Conservative.
	I don't see it that often.
	It seems way more entrenched in the US system.
	They say Conservative when they're talking about Conservatives, and then they say nothing when they're talking about Labour.
	Maybe that's why.
	And it's a deliberate attempt to make it look like the Labour MPs are actually not partisan and not aligned.
	And it's to their credit, in fact, that they at least give us the information of who these people are.
	But with the exception of Georgia...
	This is all Democrat versus Republican.
	And this is going to be the fault line under which a civil war would happen.
	Now, I mean, a lot of people have been talking about, like, civil war in the streets because of Antifa and the Proud Boys fighting.
	And I wouldn't call that a civil war.
	I call that a kind of social war, where there are two ethoses being...
	Finding themselves coming to conflict in the streets.
	How we should treat one another is being played out in the streets there.
	But this is where I think you'll find the partisan line, the fracture, is going to be drawn.
	And this, in the future history books, will be where the defining points are.
	Because a bunch of states have joined Texas in doing this.
	Just before we went live, because it's very early in the United States still at the moment, Apparently nine other states have joined, but I could only find three other states reported on at the time.
	But this is what I mean.
	This is actually getting huge, because this now is a question of, can the mostly Democrats run states that are the battleground states that are in question?
	Are they free?
	For their governors or their attorney generals or whoever it is to just abrogate the law, just change things, to just say, well, I don't care what our state constitution or the federal constitution says, we're going to extend the mail-in ballots because reasons.
	Are they allowed to do that?
	And all of the people on the other side are all Republicans, obviously, saying, no, you can't do this.
	With Alabama and Louisiana, the Attorney General Steve Marshall of Alabama says, the unconstitutional actions and fraudulent votes in other states not only affect the citizens of those states, but they affect the citizens of all states in the entire United States.
	Again, not calling them scum, not calling them names.
	You know, this is a genuine sort of moral and constitutional position he's taken.
	It's hard to disagree.
	I mean, he is right.
	You can't allow this kind of undermining of the elections in certain areas of your country to go unchecked.
	And Texas refused, I mean, this guy's from Alabama, obviously, but Texas refused the Dominion voting systems on exactly these grounds, that they introduce election insecurity, you know, that can't be trusted.
	Louisiana attorney Jeff Landry, again a Republican, states, Again, not calling them scum.
	I mean, it's obvious.
	They're like, oh, you know, rush ahead.
	Joe Biden, we've confirmed Joe Biden.
	You know, it is expediency that they're doing this for.
	And there are legitimate issues.
	Missouri joined the lawsuit with Eric Schmidt, the Attorney General from Missouri, announcing on Twitter that he is in the fight.
	He said, election integrity is central to our republic, and I will defend it at every turn.
	As I have in other cases, I will help lead the effort in support of Texas.
	SCOTA's filing today.
	Missouri is in the fight.
	Good.
	It's very good.
	Because this is just a common thing that the Democrats do.
	You see it in every example of them.
	Not just on the local level here, where they're like, oh, we're going to allow mail-in ballots from whatever date.
	We're not going to bother checking with signatures, etc.
	When Joe Biden's asked, are you going to pack the Supreme Court?
	He's like, I'm not going to tell you.
	That's a yes.
	You're going to pack the Supreme Court.
	And it's all of these little things.
	Are you going to be strict on border control?
	No, we're going to allow millions of illegal immigrants in.
	And it's a good thing that we've made it so they can have mail-in ballots without even signing it.
	And they'll say, oh, well, we need to count every vote.
	And it's like, well, hang on a second.
	No.
	What you need to do is make sure the will of every voter has been honoured.
	And that's a legal, legitimate voter.
	Because not every ballot is connected to a voter.
	But every voter is connected to a ballot.
	So fraudulent ballots are extinguishing the right of the voters, the individual, to actually vote.
	That's the problem.
	There's a deep moral issue there.
	And these guys are absolutely right to be concerned with election integrity.
	It's a real problem.
	The response from the media was embarrassing.
	The first one is essentially, you know, like complaining about Ted Cruz, who said...
	He would step up and give the opening arguments in the Supreme Court.
	Well, Ted Cruz is a big meanie head.
	7 million people's votes to toss out.
	Appalling.
	No, you've done that with making the election insecure.
	You don't know that 7 million votes.
	You don't know.
	You don't know anything about it now.
	You can't be sure of the process, and therefore you can't just assume the outcome.
	The next one, Bloomberg.
	Texas Attorney General asked the Supreme Court for a coup.
	That's not what he said.
	That's not what any of them are doing.
	They're saying, hey, we're really concerned about the quality and integrity of your elections.
	Can we have some sort of judgments on this?
	Because it seems that we have categoric evidence that they had violated their constitutional duties.
	They're not saying we want a coup.
	They're actually saying we'd like to protect the integrity of the American Republic.
	Total opposite of what is being said there.
	Open propaganda.
	Open lies.
	And then you've got the CNN one, obviously.
	Oh, the rank hypocrisy of it.
	I don't think you guys should start talking about hypocrisy.
	I mean, we'll talk about that in the last segment that we're going to do today, because rank hypocrisy, I mean, just don't point fingers, Democrats.
	But then you've got George Conway, this is the most insane thing yet!
	This is not insane at all.
	This is totally level-headed.
	Do any of them even try to address the arguments?
	Not once.
	Not once.
	That's just not true.
	The bulwark one, she does try to address it, but she doesn't actually talk about what the real problem was.
	What she does is she fails to address their arbitrary actions and says...
	Well, look, in Pennsylvania, they're allowed mail-in voting, so this is fine.
	But that wasn't the argument.
	It's not about whether mail-in voting is legitimate.
	It's about whether the rules for mail-in voting were followed.
	And they weren't.
	So address it.
	This has got to make you a little bit worried about the United States.
	Terrified.
	I mean, this is where civil war will come in.
	Because this is, like, the United States is the constitution, right?
	The English colonies were ethnic colonies, right?
	They were an expansion of England.
	The United States is an ideological revolution.
	And so the country that is created from the ideological revolution...
	It's not now the American colonies, it's the United States of America, and it is based on allegiance to this document.
	So the Republicans will be totally justified in saying, look, if you're not going to pledge allegiance to this document, if you're going to try and subvert it, you're not going to follow it, then it will be war because that is treason.
	So the Republicans have got a very strong case here, in my opinion, morally, very morally correct in this regard.
	The Democrats are the ones who have obviously been cheating, obviously been caught, and now are, I guess, going to have to either have their own swamp drained and have the people who were involved in it Convicted and then arrested, locked up, whatever the punishment is, or it's going to come down to a fight.
	Because the Republicans can see that this is the case.
	It's genuinely concerning.
	Like, all of the talk of civil war up until this point because of all the social issues.
	No, that's not going to be the cause of a civil war.
	This will be the cause of a civil war.
	That's sort of the thing I was trying to get at earlier when I was saying about how I perceive the Americans to be far more partisan than us.
	It's because, you know, Tim always talked about this for a long time.
	And he was right to in the sense that there are certain things you need for this to become quite serious.
	I mean, the hyper-partisanship in the United States is off the charts.
	Something you need.
	I don't think you can blame one side for that.
	I have no idea about the interlinks of American politics.
	History there, but both of them seem to be making it more and more partisan.
	Honestly, I mean, the Republicans, yes, are partisan, but I'm not going to lie, even when I consider myself to be a left winger, looking back, I did feel that it was the left making things more partisan.
	I mean, I hear a lot about people talking about the things Obama did, and then with the Supreme Court justice.
	I mean, Obama spied on Trump's campaign.
	It's just weird.
	Where are the Republicans doing this?
	The Republicans seem to be the ones with a commitment to the system.
	They actually seem to care about the constitutional nature and the law-based nature of the United States.
	But the Democrats see the law as an obstacle to where they're trying to get to, which is why they're prepared to try and circumvent it at every cause.
	Yep.
	I mean, this is absolutely true because you've got that problem.
	You know, hyper-partisanship is a problem.
	Totally.
	But then we had the introduction of the street violence from Trump's election until about a year later and whatnot.
	By the left.
	By the left.
	It was, you know, there is no argument here.
	We have the dates, we have the videos.
	There were no Republican street violence squads or Proud Boys going around, feeding up, setting fire to socialists speaking on campus.
	It was conservatives would come to campus, conservatives would be attacked.
	And then they got annoyed in Berkeley because this happened to Milo.
	Very big attack, really.
	And Ben Shapiro and...
	Yep.
	So then they went out and protested, and just for protesting, Antifa turned up continuously and kept attacking them.
	And it's got to the point now where it's completely normal.
	We don't even flinch about when there's another attack, because we've got bigger issues.
	Well, I mean, today, we're getting an article up on LotusEast.com today about a new autonomous zone that Antifa have set up, which is like...
	What is this, like the 5th or 6th in the United States?
	Yeah, something like that.
	It's ridiculous.
	You have people throwing Molotov cocktails at police officers on the regular...
	Burning down blocks in cities during the George Floyd riots.
	I know.
	Attacking police stations, attacking courthouses.
	It's not the Republicans doing any of this!
	Yeah.
	So, you know, you combine the partisanship with open street violence just being normal at this point.
	Yeah.
	And, you know, we can clearly see the street violence as a result of the lefts.
	Yeah.
	This has not come from the right.
	This has not come from the right.
	But it was the inability to denounce them.
	Yes.
	Because Orange Man bad.
	Yeah.
	Therefore, we'll just accept it.
	Yeah.
	So then you introduce something like this.
	I mean, this is why I don't want to be too critical of Tim saying, oh, this is a civil war.
	This is a civil war.
	Because he's right.
	It is the sort of roots of it in the social dynamics that seeps upwards into the parties and causes a divergence.
	Yeah.
	When you get into party politics and then into the electoral system, that's when I start getting worried.
	Yes.
	Yeah.
	This is huge.
	This is huge.
	Right.
	Do you want to read some Super Chats?
	Sure.
	Where did we leave off?
	I'm not sure.
	Not a bound account.
	If the Constitution can be ignored in the election, America is no longer a republic.
	Would this not be grounds for states such as Texas to secede?
	Yeah.
	This is grounds for American patriots to essentially crusade against the corruption that is trying to undermine or overthrow your Constitution.
	And I'm not saying that...
	I'm not advocating something, but this will be seen as grounds for that.
	And it will be hard to argue from a constitutional perspective, from an American perspective, that you shouldn't be concerned about this.
	This is totally legitimate.
	Decided to sue good effem.
	I'm not going to read the...
	I'm disappointed.
	Release him.
	Hashtag Team Hugo will riot.
	Always right, I think.
	The Chad Texan versus the Virgin California.
	Yep.
	Next one.
	We should stop calling it BLM violence or Antifa violence and call it what it really is, Democrat violence.
	Keep hammering until either normies stop supporting it or force the Dems to change.
	That's a good point.
	I mean, it is partisan.
	I'm not sure I agree because it's...
	No, the Democrats didn't own this.
	They fostered the environment and they didn't do anything to resist it.
	They accepted critical race theory and all of this radical nonsense.
	They accepted Bernie and his supporters in.
	They totally gestated this in their party and they didn't denounce it when it burst out onto the streets and started attacking people.
	It is Democrat violence that is being done.
	It is Democrat supported and Democrat adopted.
	They're all thrilled Joe Biden won.
	Well, that's the thing.
	If socialists go out and do something, I mean, you know, socialists who don't like Joe Biden, for example, and they're Antifa burning something down, I think it's still proportionate to call that Antifa violence, but of course it is supported by...
	But Antifa are a part of the Democrats.
	But it is, of course, supported by the Democrats.
	You can watch the Senate hearings, you can watch the congressional hearings.
	They were asked about this and they refused to denounce it.
	Yep, they all play cover for it.
	CNN give them puff pieces.
	Vice are embedded in, like, Rose City Antifa, things like this.
	The murder.
	They actually went out and interviewed the murderer to give him cover.
	Yeah.
	It's unreal.
	Michael Reinhold, who murdered Aaron Danielson.
	Yeah, they gave him cover.
	They haven't taken that down either.
	If you haven't seen it, just look up Michael Reinhold Vice.
	They interviewed the guy, and they're trying to make him look like a hero.
	I think this was before the shooting, though.
	No, this is after the show.
	This is after the show?
	Yeah, yeah.
	That's why it's bad.
	That's even worse.
	Because they literally met him afterwards and then tried to give him a platform.
	Okay, you might want to give him a platform to explain himself.
	But they couched it in the fact that he was acting in self-defense.
	It's like, this is not acceptable.
	Anyway.
	Texas is the best country in the world.
	God bless Texas.
	Well, if you secede, you definitely will be.
	Calum is looking fine.
	Still hashtag Team Hugo will riot.
	No one's mentioned your white shirt yet.
	I think we're going to mute stream at this rate.
	Not sure if it's been said already, but Fauci said voting in person was fine.
	By their own expert, they have no argument for mail-in voting.
	Yeah.
	If he said that, yeah.
	Yeah, he did.
	He did.
	He said there's no problem with it.
	I mean, Fauci at one point was against...
	Against social distancing, against lockdowns, and against masks.
	So it's like, okay, Fauci-based.
	It's actually quite useful.
	You can pick whatever advice you want.
	Yeah, exactly.
	He's held both positions at some point in this.
	He's never wrong.
	Well, that's true.
	Conversely, though, he is always wrong.
	Given the massive amounts of mail-in ballots thrown out in the primaries, a good-faith interpretation could be that they wanted to remedy that.
	That is one option.
	Petition to make Carl manly man-emperor of mankind.
	You'll probably need a lot of signatures.
	Finally sorted my student maintenance loan, so I wanted to say thanks for all your hard work.
	Keep up the good fight.
	Thank you very much.
	We need to return to Chad.
	Yes.
	Yeah, it's going to be the conservative version of Chop, isn't it?
	Yes.
	So we're just going to set up Chad.
	They should.
	Leave it...
	That's what Texas is going to be called after this.
	Leave it to us Texans to save the Republic from the chaos gods of the left.
	Love the show.
	Keep up the awesome job.
	That's a great way of framing it.
	Sweden always have brackets by the names.
	Dunno why.
	Dunno what a reference that is to, sorry.
	I'd wager the media is trying to create the illusion of the public perception so that the electors will be too afraid to go against the narrative because they think the people will want Biden.
	Yeah, and I think this is one of the reasons why a lot of the judges at the local level were like, I'm not touching this.
	I think that they're afraid of the machine, like the eye of Sauron that will be focused on them.
	I can definitely believe that.
	We'll go on to the next one, because again, I've got a lot to get through here.
	Sorry, chaps.
	Yeah, sorry, we're already halfway through.
	So, China owns Joe Biden.
	This is just, I think, an uncontestable and uncontrovertible fact.
	And I don't even think it's particularly contentious to say this, because this, coming from Joe Biden's own words in many cases, makes him seem like a China sympathiser, when I would...
	Personally view China as a primary competitor to the United States.
	So, I mean, this is just from foreign policy.
	Joe Biden thinks he's tough on China.
	He's just complacent.
	He talks, obviously, but he talks out of both sides of his mouth.
	And I don't agree that he's tough on China, obviously, and I don't think he's complacent on China.
	I agree with The Federalist in the next one, where he just sold China, America's industry.
	And this is, I mean, you see him there with Xi Jinping.
	There's no secret.
	Absolutely no secret at all.
	This is all well documented.
	In fact, you could go as far as, say, Joe Biden is a bit of a China simp.
	If we go to the next one, there's a clip of him saying just this.
	China is going to eat our lunch?
	Come on, man.
	They can't even figure out how to deal with the fact they have this great division between the China Sea and the mountains of the West.
	They can't figure out how they're going to deal with the corruption that exists within the system.
	They're not bad folks, folks.
	They're not competition for us.
	Sorry, these people operate in a really corrupt system.
	They can't figure out how to deal with the corruption.
	They're not bad folks, are they?
	This is a weird perspective to take, Joe.
	But the real question is, why is it that Forbes are saying that you're worth $9 million?
	How does a politician become worth $9 million?
	What's his salary?
	Do you know?
	Yeah, something like $140,000 a year or $300,000.
	It's quite a lot.
	It's very good planning.
	Yeah, but there's a quote in here where he literally says here, you know, it's like, you guys, oh no, yeah, it's not, yeah, so you guys can be guaranteed upon graduation a job at DuPont Company, which is a nice starting salary, job for life, but you'd never make more than $340,000 a year today.
	Or do you take a job with half the salary, so $150,000, $60,000, something like that.
	No guarantees, but there would be no limit to the money you could make.
	Which could you take?
	And Biden obviously took the no limit one.
	Because Forbes have estimated him and his wife to be worth $9 million.
	Two Delaware homes of $4 million combined.
	Cash and investments worth another $4 million or so.
	And a federal pension worth more than a million.
	Where did this money come from?
	Well, the Hunter Biden emails suggest that it might have come from China.
	This was a massive story that was reported.
	If we can go to the next one, the Hunter Biden emails.
	I'm not going to go through the breadth and depth of it.
	The Washington Post, no, New York Post, sorry, have done an amazing job, actually, of reporting on this.
	This was the famous story that got censored from Twitter.
	Their Twitter account was suspended, and Twitter had to walk it back and say, yeah, okay, actually, we were wrong to suspend that.
	We were wrong to suppress this news.
	But it was suppressed generally across social media.
	It was a massive, massive case.
	Ted Cruz chewed them out in a Senate hearing, where Jack Dorsey, the mad monk of Silicon Valley, just sat there and went, yeah, well, we made a mistake, we made a mistake, we made a mistake.
	Yeah, you make a lot of mistakes, Jack.
	Mistakes that have real impact.
	But again...
	They can't be held to account.
	Nothing can be done, it seems.
	But Hunter Biden had dropped off his MacBook Pro for repairs in Delaware in April 2019, but forgot to pick it up.
	Hunter Biden, for anyone who doesn't know, is the feckless crack addict's son, the avatar of kumarism that Joe Biden has managed to raise.
	He seems to be a man without a single virtue.
	He seems to be kind of a disgusting human being, and he is the proxy for his father to receive tens of millions of dollars from foreign governments.
	This happened in Ukraine.
	This appears to have been This appears to have happened with him being on the board of Burisma, where he literally admitted, if my name wasn't Biden, I wouldn't be here.
	He got $4 million, I think it was, from the mayor of Moscow's wife, weirdly enough.
	And the Hunter Biden laptop, the...
	Emails that were pulled from it and given to Rudy Giuliani's legal team and the FBI have found that it seems that Hunter Biden is the man, the go-to man, that Joe Biden uses to enrich himself from foreign governments.
	Biden claimed he didn't know about Hunter's deals, but these emails show that this is a lie.
	Biden's in them.
	The email that's in particular that's important here, though, is that it outlined a provisional agreement under which 80% of the equity of the shares in a new company would be split equally among four people.
	This is a Chinese company whose initials corresponding to the sender and three recipients, H referring apparently to Hunter Biden.
	The deal also listed 10 to Jim and then 10 held by H for the big guy.
	Obviously, this is Hunter Biden holding 10% of whatever the equity of this, again, like $300 million or something, this company was getting invested into it, and he gets 10% of this equity.
	Okay, well there we go.
	This is open.
	Open.
	This was confirmed by sources to Fox News and various other outlets, so it's just there.
	This is now what we know.
	We know that Joe Biden, through Hunter Biden, is taking money from China and Ukraine and Russia, And it's just part of the swamp.
	And everyone knew that the swamp was there.
	Everyone knew that this was there.
	It was just now we actually have all of the proof.
	And so when Biden, if we can go to the next one, Biden, when he's asked about this, oh, he doesn't answer.
	The audio quality is terrible on this because he's in front of a running jet plane.
	But when asked, he just says, this is a smear campaign.
	I'm not answering.
	I knew you'd ask it.
	I have no response.
	It's another smear campaign right up your alley.
	Those are the questions you always ask, really.
	You always ask questions about my corruption.
	That's just a smear.
	Well, it turns out...
	How are you worth $9 million then, mate?
	Yeah, where did you get all the money from?
	Where is all this coming from?
	How do you afford a $4 million worth of homes on a $140,000 salary?
	How do you afford that?
	I couldn't afford that.
	I mean, if you had to find a personification of the swamp, I mean, the swamp is a term that, as I understand it, is meant to relate to the Obama-era administration.
	And the Bush-era one before it.
	And the Bush-era, and maybe the Clintons as well.
	The fact that people are just in it to make money.
	Yep.
	And to gain their personal influence, to gain power, influence, and money.
	That's exactly it.
	This is one of the beautiful things.
	I know a lot of socialists hate Trump because he's a billionaire, but if I can sit for him a little bit.
	One of the nice things about him being a billionaire is there is no money to gain.
	There is absolutely no interest.
	I don't think he's doing it for money.
	No.
	Someone put a graphic on Twitter the other day.
	I don't know if it's true or not, but I can perfectly believe it.
	Trump's wealth in real terms has actually gone down whilst he's in office, whereas everyone else has gone up.
	He's lost nearly a billion dollars or something, hasn't he?
	Yeah, but it's just that I don't care.
	I've got another three.
	Well, he divested from his own organization.
	Exactly.
	And he refused to take his salary from the presidency.
	So it's like, you know, if we're going to talk about corruption, it doesn't look like Trump's it.
	Yeah, what would be the point in giving, you know, let's say Trump Jr.
	had a meeting with China, and they proposed giving Tempest went equity to the big guy being Trump.
	Yeah.
	I don't care.
	Yeah, here's another $10 million, Trump.
	I've got four billion.
	But this is the point, right?
	This is why it's actually kind of a security to have a super rich American patriot in charge.
	And it's actually really beneficial for the regular American because, I mean, Trump's rhetoric on this has been consistent for 30 years.
	China, China, China, China.
	America, America, America, America, right?
	LAUGHTER I love America.
	I love the American people.
	I want America to be...
	America's the best country.
	I want to do great.
	I mean, of all the...
	Like, Trump has got many flaws, as I've said many, many times, and as all Trump supporters know, but there's no question of his loyalty to America and the American people.
	I mean, compare that to the quote you had earlier from Biden, saying they're all corrupt and they can't figure themselves out, therefore they're not bad guys.
	Could you imagine Reagan saying that about the Soviet Union?
	No.
	An absurd thing to say.
	It would never happen.
	And Trump's the same.
	But anyway, let's go on to a viral speech.
	The presentation that has been given by a Chinese professor called Di Dong Sheng.
	He apparently is also part of the smear campaign against Biden because he has come out in a speech given in Beijing and said, well, actually, that's exactly what we're doing.
	We own Biden.
	And we're going to get to the exact words that you get to because it's just staggering.
	But before we do, so Di Zhang Zhang is a professor at Renmin University, which means the People's University of Beijing in China.
	He focuses on political economy of China's foreign policy, theories and practices of triangularity in international relations, the politics of global financial monetary investment affairs, and theory and practice of grand strategy.
	Okay.
	You can see what this guy's thinking.
	He's thinking the world does grand chessboard where money moves pieces around.
	That's what he's thinking.
	That's his worldview.
	And it's not wrong.
	It's perfectly sensible.
	He's got an amazing education.
	A BA in international politics from the Renmin University, postgraduate in international finance, an MA in political science, and a PhD in international relations, all from the same university.
	He's the kind of guy who would really know how the world works.
	Precisely.
	And he's deeply tied in with the Chinese Communist Party, as anyone of any prominence obviously is.
	And he'll explain exactly how.
	In fact, in a second we'll go through what he says.
	But yeah, he's an expert on this.
	He is an actual expert on this.
	He is deeply tied into the Chinese political system and he fully understands the Chinese economy.
	And that's actually the point of the speech that he gave.
	I believe this was on the 28th of October that he gave this speech.
	We can go to the next one, John, just so we can see a clip of it, right?
	So you can see he's hosting and speaking at this speech that has been translated by Jennifer Zong, I think her name is, who's an anti-CCP activist.
	And she's translated this.
	John, our own producer, is from Hong Kong and has confirmed that the subtitles are correct because he can also read Chinese.
	And he has, well, you know, what he's saying here is essentially, in fact, I'll get to that in a second.
	So the theme of the event is, will China's opening up of its financial sector attract Wall Street Wolf?
	The people who are also participating in the events, so the three champs there, are Zhang Zihen, the former president of the Asian Development Bank and the former developer of the International Development of the Central Bank of the Communist Party of China, Ding Yifan, deputy director of the World Development Institute of the Development Research Center of the State Council of China, and Yao Yang, the president of the National Development Research Institute of Peking University.
	So, totally credentialed people, massively important, and undoubtedly overseen projects worth hundreds of millions of dollars, and are doubtless members of the Chinese Communist Party and deeply tied into that pyramid.
	Some of the elite of the elite of China.
	So there's absolutely no reason to think that this guy's going to lie to them or say anything wrong?
	No, and he's speaking from a position of credibility and doubtless wants to improve his prestige.
	I mean, we've recently been studying the communist regimes of the 20th century, and if the Chinese Communist Party still works in the same way...
	And there's no reason to think that it doesn't because it is the party of Mao, then it is definitely everything they do to essentially boast about what they've achieved is a way of trying to improve their prestige within the party.
	Look what we've done, how we've advanced China's interests.
	And angling for promotion and security, right?
	So the thrust of the talk is to persuade the audience.
	And overall, the point of him being there and doing all of this is to persuade the audience, which presumably is made up of other business magnates, bankers, people who deal with international finance, things like this.
	That opening up China's markets is a good idea to enrich China, and he uses the metaphor of a tree, saying that it used to be, in the 20th century, China had its own tree growing in the northeast of China, around Beijing.
	Its own economic system.
	It had roots there, and it grew up into a trunk that was sprouting...
	Profit.
	But in 1992, he says that this was grafted onto the American tree, so it was cut off from the roots and grafted onto the American tree.
	And this is the reason that the Americans, in his opinion, and again, he is an expert on this, can essentially control the Chinese economy.
	And he gives the example of the Premier of Hong Kong, who's been sanctioned by America, and so has to carry around money, like actual money, because she hasn't got a bank account.
	Yeah, I saw her complaining that she had to take $2 million in cash home.
	I was like...
	It's not a worse problem to have.
	I didn't even know that was happening.
	I had no idea that that was the case.
	But yeah, and he says, you know, you see her walking around with stacks of cash because she can't have a bank account.
	Like literal suitcases.
	Because the Americans essentially control the Chinese economy because his complaint is that we've grafted onto the American tree and what we need to do is divest and replant the Chinese tree.
	And so he's saying, well, look, opening up the international markets is only a problem if the Americans have dominance over the system, which they do at the moment because we're grafted onto their tree.
	If we were to divest and plant our own tree, then opening up the markets would be fine because it would be our tree that was getting all of these things.
	And so this is a direct quote from him.
	I mean, he's talking in Chinese, so I may as well just read out the quotes verbatim.
	He says, after grafting onto the American tree, he says, that energy was big, that market was big, so it boomed quickly, it blossomed quickly, and we are all enjoying the fruits of that decision today, and we are all better off.
	We know the Trump administration is in a trade war with us, so why can't we fix the Trump administration?
	And the term fix is a very important one that we'll get to, and that he explains in a minute.
	Why did China and the US used to be able to settle all kinds of issues between 1992 and 2016?
	No matter what kind of crises we encountered, be it the Yin-He incident, the bombing of the embassy, or the crashing of the plane, things were solved in no time, like a couple do with their quarrels, starting at the bedhead but ending at the bed end.
	As in, you know, a couple arguing end up going to bed and solving it.
	It's like, okay, that's how he's describing America and China.
	And that's a weird way of describing it.
	We fixed everything in two months.
	What was the reason?
	I'm going to throw out something that may be a little explosive here.
	It's because we have people at the top.
	We have our old friends who are at the top of America's core inner circle of power and influence.
	Just says it.
	Just comes out and says it.
	I mean, this would normally be the result of years of investigative journalism, to speak to the right people, to link up the connections, to be able to find documents and make these proofs.
	Or an expert who's deeply connected to the Chinese Communist Party, and Xi Jinping himself, could just come out and tell us.
	Talking to party officials.
	Yeah.
	He could just come out and tell us, well, actually, we own a bunch of old friends at the top of the American government in the core of the circle of American power and influence.
	Which gives you an indication of how confident they are.
	The fact that they can come out and say this and they're not expecting any back.
	Although Tucker Carlson has covered this.
	I believe Trump retweeted it as well.
	And suddenly this has disappeared from Chinese social networks.
	This video.
	That's an admission of guilt.
	Yes.
	And they're actively censoring it.
	And I wouldn't be surprised if Western social media ended up censoring it too.
	He tells a story in this presentation that's very interesting.
	And not very politically correct.
	But he says without wanting to reveal too much, literally saying, well, I don't want to be politically incorrect by revealing too many details.
	And so he doesn't give a name and he doesn't give an institution for whom these people work for.
	But it's pretty easy to guess who they would be because the institution is probably Goldman Sachs.
	It's definitely one of the big Wall Street banks.
	But he says how Xi Jinping wanted to improve his public image in the US, so he would release his book in the US in English before his visit.
	And Di Dongsheng was chosen by the Chinese Communist Party to go and sort this out.
	So he is arranging the book signing and the book release in a bookstore that Xi Jinping will be present at signing books in advance.
	So this is how important this guy is.
	This is how connected to the highest of high levels.
	And he says it was the CCP, the leaders, the leadership that chose him.
	So the inner circle of the CCP chose this guy.
	And the reason why is amazing.
	He says, quote, who should do it?
	Just like today, they found out and they said to me, Di Dong Zhang, you have a way with foreigners and are better at fooling them, right?
	You know, because they had seen how I had fooled foreigners and they thought it was very good.
	So they said, you act as the host and guest speaker.
	So it's very similar to our event today, where I'm both the host and the guest speaker.
	It's like, you're good at fooling foreigners.
	We want you to go and sort this out.
	I mean, this is the Communist Party of China.
	Totally.
	You sort of expect this from them.
	Well, it's comical, though.
	The fact they're admitting it in public.
	Yeah, and they're proud.
	And the audience is cheering.
	Oh, bravo, yeah, you're brilliant at fooling the foreigners.
	It's like, well, I guess he is.
	I mean, I guess he was, you know?
	I guess you were brilliant about fooling the foreigners.
	And so he tells us about a bookstore called the Politics and Prose Bookstore, right?
	Now, I look this up.
	It's a real thing.
	He even gives the address in the speech.
	He gives us the address.
	He's actually wrong.
	He calls it like 2605 Washington Avenue.
	It's actually 5092.
	Washington Avenue, but it is on Washington Avenue, and it is an independent bookstore.
	But this venue was decided by Xi Jinping himself, and so he goes down to the venue.
	But the venue turns out was already booked.
	He says, it turned out that the bookstore owner was very spoiled, and he said, sorry, we cannot host you.
	And I asked him then, I said, you tell me which author has already booked the bookstore.
	What did I mean by that?
	There's nothing that dollars can't handle, right?
	And he literally does this motion in the video.
	I can't do it with one stack of dollars.
	I'll do it with two.
	That's my way of handling things.
	I mean, that's just him saying, right, well, I'm going to bribe this author.
	I'm just going to pay him off to not have the bookstore on that day.
	I mean, it's small corruption in the grand scheme of things.
	Oh, I bribed an author to change the day of his book.
	Sure.
	But at the end of the day, that's not something to be proud of.
	But that's how you solve things in the West.
	That's how we solve things in the East, too.
	That's how they understand that you can solve things in the West.
	We'll just pay them money and then they'll do what we want.
	But the problem is the bookstore owner wasn't this weird, corrupt Washington politician.
	He says, the bookstore owner was very spoiled and said, I'm sorry, I'm not going to tell you which author has booked this time slot.
	We have our principles.
	So he was very spoiled.
	He really put on airs with me.
	As if morality and principles are disrespectful to the Chinese.
	They're luxuries as well.
	They are absolutely luxuries.
	It's like yes minister.
	It absolutely is.
	But again, this is a very materialistic attitude, right?
	Because when you appeal to principles, you're appealing to something you can't bring a pound of.
	You can't...
	Say, right, bring me a tray of principles now.
	You're appealing something metaphysical, something almost spiritual.
	You're appealing something abstract.
	It's anti-materialistic.
	And if you were a materialistic communist party, you'd be like, don't put it on airs.
	You can see the mentality.
	You can see the mindset.
	But we in the West, the sort of liberal West, we have a reputation from being, especially in England, we have a reputation from operating from principle first, which makes us kind of insufferable in the realm of international relations, right?
	Right.
	I mean, we would refer to him as a spoiled person, because he thinks he can just buy it.
	Openly corrupt.
	Spoiled, I don't know the moral intonation that's meant to be on the word, but corrupt, absolutely.
	I mean, he's just promoting corruption here.
	So he doesn't leave it there, right?
	Because obviously he can't.
	Xi Jinping wants this bookstore.
	So he finds out who the bookstore owner is, and it turns out he's a Democrat, and it turns out he doesn't like the CCP. What amount of research he must have done to find this out?
	So he turns the issue over to the leaders of the party so they can solve it, in his words.
	They tell him that on the morning of the event, he is to go to the bookstore.
	And so he does.
	And there he meets an old lady who he says he thinks is Jewish.
	And this is what he says.
	I'm just going to take a drink.
	This is a bit of a long quote, but you guys are going to...
	Unreal.
	It's unreal.
	She handed me a business card saying, my name is so-and-so.
	I won't betray her name here.
	She said, my name is so-and-so.
	Nice to meet you.
	He was surprised.
	The translation is attention, but, you know, I'm shocked.
	She speaks very fluent Mandarin in the Beijing dialect.
	I was very surprised.
	I said, oh my, you speak Chinese even better than I do.
	I can't get rid of my Jiangsu accent, which is a provincial accent.
	Like, if you're in the UK or if you're in America, this would be like someone from Alabama or Texas coming to Washington and not speaking with a received pronunciation accent.
	Upon hearing that, I flattered her and she was very pleased.
	She said, let me tell you, not only do I speak Chinese, but I also have Chinese citizenship.
	And he says, do you understand this?
	Do you have foreign citizenship?
	If you have foreign citizenship, you can't have Chinese citizenship, right?
	This old lady wouldn't give up her dual US-Israeli citizenship for Chinese citizenship, right?
	So I immediately understood that she was an old friend of us Chinese people.
	Then she said another sentence that impressed me very much.
	She said, I not only have Chinese citizenship, but also have Beijing Hukou, which is a registered permanent residence in Beijing.
	I have a Sihuan, which is quadrangle dwellings, apparently a big house, a mansion essentially, on Chang'an Street in the Dongcheng District.
	When you come back to Beijing, come and have tea with me.
	If you need anything here this year, don't forget to call me.
	What did that mean?
	She could fix anything here.
	Fix, again, being the operative word.
	We'll find out what fixing means in a second.
	Then I saw the owner of the bookstore, who was very proud of himself before, an independent businessman, standing by his principles, saying, well, I'm not going to be bought off to tell you who the name of this author is, so you can bribe them too.
	You know, that would be the wrong thing to do.
	That would be corrupt, even if it's in a minor way, and there's no real harm done.
	It's still a corrupt thing to do.
	Again, very proud before, but why wouldn't he be?
	Why wouldn't he be proud of himself?
	Why wouldn't he have dignity about himself?
	He'd done the right thing.
	He's an independent businessman who did the right thing.
	And now he's like, well, I saw the owner, who was very proud of himself before, with an unhappy face, asking his employees to arrange tables and chairs.
	He was very reluctant as he was forced to do this.
	I said, how did you fix him?
	We tried to communicate with him but failed.
	He was very spoiled.
	The old lady smiled wryly and said, I reasoned with him.
	And then, Di Dongsheng says, As we just said, Wall Street.
	She is from a famous leading global financial institution on Wall Street, presumably Goldman Sachs.
	She is the president of the Asia region of a top-level financial institution.
	Of course, it would be politically incorrect for me to go on.
	So we can't reveal any more details on that because they might be able to name her.
	Okay, so in fact, that is to say, to put it bluntly, for the past 30 years, 40 years, we have been utilizing the core power of the United States.
	As I said before, since the 1970s, It's very awkward.
	Why?
	Trump had a previous soft default issue with Wall Street, so there was a conflict between them, but I won't go into details.
	I may not have enough time.
	So just, we're not finished with everything he's telling us here, but this is all, again, like, usually this would be years of investigative work to produce all of this information.
	So thank you for telling us everything, Dong.
	Di Dong Zheng.
	But that last bit, we can't fix Trump, that's a direct quote.
	Yes, that is a direct quote.
	All of this is a direct quote, almost.
	Apart from where I'm breaking to interject slightly.
	But that's a direct quote.
	Wall Street can't fix Trump.
	And fix means to stuff a horse's head into their bed.
	Threaten, intimidate, bribe.
	They can't persuade him to change his course with money or threats, right?
	And that is an amazing statement, because this validates everything that the Trump people have been saying about Trump.
	He is not the establishment.
	He is not the swamp.
	And he doesn't appear to be corruptible, at least in this way.
	And that's an amazing thing.
	That's an amazing validation for Trump supporters.
	No wonder they're chanting, we love you, Donald Trump at his rallies.
	No wonder.
	And what I think here is that Di Dongzhen doesn't actually understand why Trump, it can't be fixed, right?
	Because he's saying it comes from a previous soft default issue where obviously Trump had, someone had defaulted money, presumably Trump defaulted money to Wall Street.
	And so Wall Street are angry with him.
	He's angry with them.
	And so Dijongzhen thinks that's the source of the problem.
	Well, if you were a materialistic communist who thought that all things were based on money and everything was based on material circumstance, you would think that.
	But I don't think that's the case at all.
	I think it's the case that Trump views Wall Street as being anti-patriotic.
	He views Wall Street as selling out the United States to China, because, I mean, they are.
	And I think that that's the source of Trump's contention with Wall Street.
	Trump's a billionaire.
	He loves money.
	He loves moving money around.
	He thinks moving money around is great.
	If Wall Street were like, yeah, American flags, patriotism, fuck China, then Trump would be well on board.
	He would be like, oh, don't worry about the soft default issue.
	That wouldn't be a problem with him.
	Because Trump is not just a materialist.
	Trump has a kind of heroic soul.
	He thinks about heroic things.
	He thinks about the mythos of America.
	He's concerned with the greatness of America.
	And that, I think, is the reason.
	But if you're a materialist communist, you don't really understand the people that you're talking about.
	And it's only because I've spent a lot of time thinking about this and studying this that I think I have a firmer grasp on the different cultural...
	But again, maybe I'm wrong.
	Who knows, right?
	But anyway, we're not...
	Well, you can't be wrong with the guys telling you that's what it is.
	But we're not quite done, right?
	Because it gets better.
	So during the US-China trade war, they, Wall Street, tried to help.
	And I know that my friends on the US side told me that they had tried to help but couldn't do much because Trump was just blocking them out.
	But now we're seeing Biden was elected.
	The traditional elite, the political elite, the establishment, they're very close to Wall Street.
	So you see that, right?
	Trump has been saying that Biden's son has some sort of global foundation.
	Have you noticed that?
	Who helped him build those foundations?
	Got it?
	There will be a lot of deals inside of these.
	We have seen the deals.
	The email from Hunter Biden's laptop that I read out is literally about a Chinese sort of shell company that is going to own various other industrial companies and that he is siphoning money out of.
	We've seen the deal and he's saying, well, these are the deals.
	So then, so at such a time, we will use an appropriate way to express some goodwill.
	This is my personal understanding based on my limited professional background.
	If we understand this matter from the perspective of international political economy, I think there is a tactical and political value in it.
	He's just admitting it all.
	It's a tactical maneuver.
	China's interests will be advanced.
	The Communist Party of China's interests will be advanced.
	And Wall Street are a part of this because everyone involved can be bribed.
	And Trump apparently can't be bribed.
	I mean, this is the thing we know to be true.
	Yeah.
	I mean, this is the problem with Trump from a lot of Americans as well.
	The fact that they can't do traditional lobbying.
	Yeah.
	Trump is, I don't want to say a hero, because that makes me sound like I'm venerating him, but in the way that he thinks, you know, he thinks in heroic terms.
	He thinks in terms of greatness.
	And what they're thinking in terms of is individual and personal corruption and, you know, Manipulation maneuvering.
	It's very Machiavellian for them.
	But Trump is not afraid of using heroic rhetoric and does so all the time and is concerned about the dignity of the United States.
	And he sees the country being sold out to China and it's not wrong.
	He's not wrong.
	The Chinese admit it.
	They admit it.
	Yeah, the fact that they took down the video in China as well.
	I mean, it would be bad enough if this was up and they could blush it off or something.
	The fact that they took it down, they know they've been caught.
	Yeah, exactly.
	This has been cool.
	We were going to do a third segment, which was your one, but I took...
	I can put it tomorrow.
	Or you could just do a video for the Load Seaters channel, which is linked in the channels, just after this, because we've been going on quite long, and I do have other things I have to do, I'm afraid.
	It's terrible.
	Yeah, let's finish up the Super Chat.
	Yes, yes.
	People to pay money and not get back.
	Where were we?
	Do you remember?
	Yeah.
	Yeah, this one here, Midnight, Mike Ninja.
	Yeah.
	Also, my Chinese girlfriend told me a local news headline the other week, President Xi has a new dog and his name is Joe Biden.
	Madness.
	Well, I mean, it's true.
	Joe Biden is Xi Jinping's dog.
	Put the balls on these people.
	Going after the Australians, going after the Americans, just don't care.
	Just don't care.
	Legendary blue guitarist Eric Clapton censored by streaming services at the age of 75 for his anti-lockdown song, CD Burning.
	Yeah.
	I guess that's the only way you're going to get to hear it.
	Who's got a CD player these days, then?
	The Republicans need to get better at cheating and disenfranchisement of voters than the left.
	Absolutely not.
	I will be very, very angry with the Republican Party and the Republicans if they start endorsing cheating.
	The reason the Republicans are worthy of support at the moment is because they're against the cheating, because they have a commitment to the integrity of the system.
	So, yeah, no, absolutely not.
	And you just need to hold the line, man.
	Hold the goddamn line.
	Dragzoon says, buy Cyberpunk.
	Do you understand what the meme is for Cyberpunk?
	Well, he sent us a $70 donation, so I guess I'm going to have to.
	Oh, okay.
	Money always wins.
	Yeah, well, look at this!
	Look at this!
	Chinese agent Dragzoon has just bribed me to buy Cyberpunk.
	Yeah.
	No, but what's the meme going on with Cyberpunk?
	I see a lot of arguments about it on Twitter.
	I don't understand.
	I've seen nothing but video game outlets calling it transphobic.
	For what?
	Well, I don't know.
	Saying that if you're transhuman, that's the same?
	Well, I mean, I've been playing Cyberpunk for decades now, and one of the fun bits about Cyberpunk is genuinely the sort of fantastical things that people do with their own bodies.
	I mean, transgenderism wasn't something new to Cyberpunk.
	It's not something outside of the canon of Cyberpunk.
	And I don't see why...
	I mean, you can do it in the Cyberpunk game, as I understand it, so what the hell's the problem?
	I haven't looked into it.
	Is there a joke in the game that essentially being half-human is somewhat similar and you can change in a whim or something?
	I don't know.
	I'll have to look into it.
	Let's find out.
	Hugo, if true...
	Says President-elect due by den.
	Our founders would be shooting by now.
	Yeah.
	If you can start a revolution over a 1% stamp tax, then, I mean, which, you know, I agree with you.
	What would be the equivalent?
	I don't know.
	The Prussians buying America?
	I don't know.
	The Prussians have bought the crown.
	We need to secede.
	Yeah, well, yeah, I mean, yeah.
	This is staggering.
	Staggering.
	Shameless ad time.
	From Captain Metaphor.
	Read the name first, man.
	Shameless ad time.
	If you're tired of censorship and manipulation on social media, join Ruckus.
	We are open source and use First Amendment case law to make our policies.
	Lotus Eater's page links are in video description.
	Yes, you can go down to the video and follow us on Ruckus.
	Yes, they are.
	So I'm assuming that's the guy who works at Ruckus.
	Thanks for your help, man.
	Yeah, thank you.
	And we're happy to be able to promote you.
	Any alternative media, frankly, at this point, that doesn't have the same agenda as Silicon Valley, we're happy to promote.
	Kyle Pascoe.
	Did you see the video of the Chinese professor Trump retweeted?
	What we were just talking about, I assume.
	Seems to tie directly with the UBS article.
	The website podcasts are great work, fellas.
	Well, thank you very much, and if you're looking for extra content, we've got multiple book clubs coming up this week, in fact, because we've been re-rendering stuff to make sure it's all nice, so you can go check out Lotuses.com and become a patron or a member there, and you'll get access to all sorts of interesting content, such as the book club and interviews and various op-eds from people you'll know and presumably like.
	Anyway, plug over, let's go.
	Calum deserves simps 2.
	Add me on the list.
	Simps get the gulag 2.
	Andre C.
	Was a primer for America.
	Republican.
	Concerned with republic process rules.
	Dem. Concerned with democracy and mob rule.
	Rule of law versus rule of numbers.
	There's definitely a firm argument to be made there.
	You'll get people saying, well, you know, Republicans are also Democratic, and that is true.
	They have elections and things like this.
	But the primary concern for the Democrats is certainly not the rule of law.
	Power.
	Yes.
	And that is what mob rule is, an expression of raw power.
	And this was the problem with direct democracy Athenian style, which was very much in the forefront of the minds of the founders when they created their country, when they created the Republic.
	They were well aware that the unlimited nature of the Athenian demos was the reason for Athens' downfall.
	It absolutely was.
	I was having an argument about this on the internet the other day, where some people thought, oh, Athens' army sucked.
	No, Athens has a great army.
	It's just that they kept exiling all their generals and making terrible, terrible decisions because a demagogue would be able to whip up the majority of the Athenians to be like, oh, let's invade Sicily and stuff like this, which is a ridiculous quest.
	Not to get too much into it, but wait, so some demagogue would rally the populace and then he'd just get rid of all his political opponents by exiling them?
	No.
	Oh, yes.
	Well, yeah, that is something that happened.
	It was called ostracism.
	So basically, if a demagogue could make the public annoyed enough with an individual politician, they could have votes whether to ostracize them from the city for 10 years.
	They would just have to leave Athens for 10 years.
	They'd be able to come back and their property would be intact.
	Can you imagine how many Republicans would be gone?
	Yeah.
	Twitter Democrats would be doing this all the time.
	But it's not just that they make insane decisions often because of fantastical ideas that are put into their heads.
	And a lot of them may not have even failed.
	It's just that then, because the leadership was...
	I won't get into it.
	I'll do a premium podcast talking about it sometime.
	Sam B. Subverting the Constitution sounds like war talk.
	Yep.
	I mean, this is what your enemies do.
	Your enemies want to subvert your Constitution.
	Ball and Stalin.
	Texas filing a suit is totally within the state's rights as corruption in one state affects the rest when it comes to federal elections.
	Yep.
	Every red state should follow and do the same.
	All the blue states should be doing it too.
	Like the...
	That's the thing.
	If it's only the red states doing it, then it shows that it's only the red states that care about the rule of law.
	The Democrats themselves should be like, well, we care about the rule of law.
	We're going to join in in your attempt to root out corruption.
	But the thing is, that's not going to happen.
	Yeah, because who are they convincing?
	Yeah, they'll have a big spotlight in their own faces.
	They'll be like, oh yeah, that was a mistake.
	And you know that's the reason.
	You know that's the reason that they're not engaging.
	It's like a murderer, Charlie.
	We've got to find this murderer, guys.
	Yeah, and then suddenly the trail of clues leads to his house, and he's like...
	Grumbledore.
	Ellen became Elliot.
	Welcome to the patriarchy.
	We have some privilege for you right over here.
	Let's see what we can do with something about that five head.
	Yeah, you need to shave your head to make it...
	If you're losing your hair, just shave your head.
	It looks better.
	So what are you going to do when you're 50?
	Yeah, yeah.
	How old are you now?
	41.
	It's not that far away.
	Yeah, I'll just shave my hair off, even.
	But Elliot Page, actually, I do need to ask a favour, Elliot.
	I actually have a big amount of furniture I have to move, and I need some help carrying it.
	So you, being a strapping lad, could come over and help me, couldn't you?
	That'd be really appreciated.
	Laughter is deadly.
	Cynthia?
	Cynthia A. Johnson of the MI House of Representatives, Michigan House of Representatives, tweeted a video message she wants Trump supporters to hear.
	Spoiler, she makes a blatant call to violence.
	Yeah, I don't engage in any violence.
	Obviously, we do not recommend engaging in violence.
	We are very much committed to the democratic process and the rule of law, which is why we're supporting the Republicans in their attempts to protect the rule of law.
	Now is not yet the time, frankly.
	This is something I'm going to make a video on later, which is about Antifa and the Proud Boys.
	I don't want to make excuses for the Proud Boys because engaging in violence is never justified.
	Sometimes in self-defense it's justified.
	Yeah, exactly.
	But what would be preferable to this nonsense in which we just have open street violence in the States is that the Department of Homeland Security or the police should just raid the guys who are going out and assaulting people.
	Yeah.
	Charge them with the crime and then give them bail conditions that they can't go to any public gatherings.
	The antifa should have been disbanded on day one by force, by the police.
	If not, just after Berkeley.
	Could you ask for a better time?
	Yeah, it should have been done on day one.
	Mute stream.
	The brackets with political affiliation, R&D. Ah, I know what you mean now.
	Yes.
	I'll mute myself now.
	Stay awesome so I can keep simping for Hugo.
	Stay strong.
	Is that your girlfriend, Hugo?
	You know, I'm Swedish.
	I guess we know where you are from now.
	Will the Impaler?
	Biden gets in.
	Sorry, Biden gets in.
	Antifa will be cleared out violently.
	Yep.
	They have served their purpose and now will only be a threat.
	Knight of the Long Knives incoming.
	That's already been happening in Portland.
	It's already been happening where Antifa have gone out and the police have now, finally, Ted Wheeler has been like, yeah, okay, you can go and deal with them now.
	You know, after years of them being given free reign under Trump...
	Now that they think Biden's coming in, oh, well, we'll deal with this.
	Well, there we go.
	You were just using them.
	They are a product of your party and a part of your party, and you know it.
	Yeah, but you now have thousands of proto-terrorists running around your country.
	Proto?
	Sorry.
	Current terrorists.
	Yeah.
	Yeah, but yeah.
	Anyway, easy E. Biden is falling apart, prone to frequent syntax errors, and will probably need to be replaced in a year.
	Sounds like a Chinese product to me.
	Oof.
	Oof.
	That's good.
	It's not German engineering, is it?
	No.
	But he's right about Biden, though.
	Biden looks...
	I saw a video of him yesterday just stumbling over one of his own appointees, or potential appointees, and then he kind of walks...
	Didn't give him the wrong name, did he?
	Yeah, no, he just mispronounced it, but he walked off and he's like, you know, using a table to sort of steady himself as he walks off, and it's like, this guy needs to go to bed.
	It's like they poisoned him, like, elected now, don't need you.
	Yeah, like, he's in bad state.
	Oh, man.
	Galacta Watkins?
	So, can we go to war with China now?
	Hashtag Opium Wars 2021.
	Well, we don't advocate war, but we may well have to predict it.
	It's very much a British tradition to sell opium to the Chinese.
	That's true.
	By force.
	Was it by force?
	Yes.
	Before the war.
	Before we actually started.
	No, no, no.
	It was legal.
	Was it legal?
	Yeah, yeah.
	And then the emperor was like, well, hang on.
	This isn't good, is it?
	And we were like, no, it's not.
	Just buy the opium.
	But that's, you know, 18th century, 19th century politics for you.
	Which is not now.
	It's a shame, but I will.
	Anyway, Rodin Glasgow, how many Dems need to say some version of by any means necessary before we take them at their word?
	Exactly.
	One.
	Take the first one at the wedding.
	And this is why we're taking the Donjeng, his word.
	If he's just going to say it, then we're going to accept it.
	If Joe Biden's not a critic, the largest and most inclusive voter fraud organization in the history of the United States, I'm going to accept it.
	You said it.
	Josh Lake, I'm worried about Virginia.
	Much of the state is country and conservatives, but Richmond and D.C. is acting like a monarchy.
	They have abandoned us financially, leaving our cities in ruins.
	Welcome to Democrat centralization.
	Yeah.
	Woot40.
	My GF, a doctor, and her consultant, both working on respiratory and are both concerned about fertility regarding the Pfizer vaccine.
	Thanks for covering it.
	Yeah, well, I'll probably do some more on that tomorrow, in fact.
	That was, for anyone who missed it, on the Lotus Eaters channel.
	If you go to our YouTube channel and click on the Channels tab, you'll find it linked in there.
	It's also on the site.
	Or it's also on lotuses.com where you get, you know, it's public.
	Endless plugs.
	Endless plugs.
	We have no sponsors, so sponsor ourselves.
	Yeah, sponsor us.
	You sponsor us.
	But we're working really hard.
	I hope that's coming out.
	But hang on, hang on.
	Yeah, no, I've got some more coming out about this.
	I'll probably do a video about it tomorrow.
	Because, yeah, there's even more concerns.
	And the governments are, like, not recommending it for pregnant women and things like this.
	And, yeah, I mean, they don't normally recommend vaccines for pregnant women.
	But, like, There are other concerns, and I'll go into it in another video.
	Okay, the Earl of Longfoot.
	Why Chinese apartheid okay?
	Boycott South Africa, but not the CCP. Yeah.
	I mean, the things that China is doing to the non-Han populations within their borders are atrocious.
	It's been the same with Tibet for decades now.
	It's why the Dalai Lama can't go home.
	And, I mean, the only person I ever see talking about the Uyghurs is myself and Majid Nawaz.
	No one talks about Tibet even anymore.
	No, they don't.
	They don't care.
	It's okay.
	China's just consumed them.
	Yeah.
	Kodiak.
	Local 18-year-old arrested today for extreme right-wing ideology by the Australian Federal Police.
	When asked on Facebook to define what that means, they replied, Google.
	Have screenshots of this.
	You can email that across to tips at lotuseaters.com.
	And our article writers, Josh and Hugo, will find it and do something with it.
	Because that sounds wild.
	Sorry.
	Gator, please consider posting these full podcasts alongside everything Lotus Eaters on Google Podcasts app, just like you did with the Cat Daily.
	I don't think you did with the Cat Daily.
	It was some rando who was doing it.
	Thanks, guy.
	Vicky, can we make that happen?
	Great.
	I think they have certain requirements, but we should be able to reach them by now.
	Yeah, I should hope so.
	We couldn't initially put it on Apple, for example, because of requirements.
	Yeah.
	We'll get there.
	Lars Peter Simonson?
	Simonson.
	No, Simonson.
	Communist Bandits is tautology.
	All Communists are Bandits.
	Yes, but that's the phrase that the Patriot government, opposed to the Communist Revolution, called them.
	It's Communist Bandits.
	Yeah.
	Nicholas Fitzgerald.
	Politics and prose bookshop is several doors down from Comet Ping Pong.
	Oh, God.
	Oh, boy.
	Oh, God.
	That's the...
	For anyone who doesn't know, that's the...
	Who knows how far down the rabbit hole goes?
	That's the pizza shop associated with the Pizzagate conspiracy theory, which...
	Yeah.
	Uh...
	Haiti charity across the road, Saudi-owned properties, FBI symbols disappear from several restaurants.
	It's a Democrat hive.
	I believe it.
	I can't imagine that Xi Jinping himself chose it because it was just his favourite bookshop in Washington.
	I mean, maybe he's just a fan.
	Maybe he's just a fan.
	Or maybe there's something else that we don't know.
	Xerax.
	Adam...
	How do you say that?
	Crigler?
	Adam Crigler did some coverage on Trump's family history.
	It makes sense that Trump would be interested in heroics if his grandfather's story is true.
	I'll have to look into it.
	Juggernaut.
	How long till MacArthur's grave explodes in a ball of furious rage?
	Well, I mean, if anything, we've seen that McCarthy was right.
	I wonder if he voted this election.
	And he vindicated in every degree, it seems.
	Yeah, and he probably did vote for Joe Biden, as I'm sure George Floyd did and various other people.
	Epstein.
	yeah yeah epstein voted for biden and he would have voted for biden if he was alive 1991 shadow heart off topic but my fiancee and i are at the hospital right now epidural is in and currently awaiting doctors before the big push you became a dad for the second time a few days ago this is my first wish us luck mate good luck man Good luck.
	You're going to do fine.
	You are going to feel like the baby is incredibly delicate, because it is.
	But you will be fine.
	You'll be fine.
	It's scary, but you've got all kinds of natural instincts with how to deal with these things.
	And you can trust your instincts as well.
	If something looks wrong, then something's wrong.
	And if something doesn't look wrong, then it's probably not.
	You can trust your instincts on this.
	Alejandro something.
	I don't care what anyone tells me.
	The China story shows what genuine human evil looks like.
	Well, this guy's just proud of his corruption.
	And he's promoting corruption to the most powerful people in China.
	And they're all applauding him.
	I mean, he literally says, if you understand what I'm saying, applaud.
	And the audience, the godfather metaphor.
	They totally understood that there was coercion involved here.
	And it's like, no, this is not an acceptable way to run a society outside of China.
	You know, Western democracy shouldn't be run this way.
	Jim says, meanwhile, the useful idiot progressives continue to lead the Nose...
	To be led by the Nose.
	Sorry, to be led by the Nose into fighting for rights while China wins battles behind the scenes.
	Yeah, I mean, I don't know what rights the progressives think they don't have.
	I haven't got one.
	Anyway, the Earl of Longford.
	Denounce Bonaparte, sir, or forever be tarred and feathered.
	Old nosey knows where my loyalties lie.
	Julian Fuentes?
	Hello, Mr.
	Akkad.
	Congrats on the new baby.
	Please spend this on diapers and formula and not the chudge you work with.
	P.S. Any good books on Socrates?
	Yeah, I mean, it depends what you're looking for.
	I mean, the Apology of Socrates by Plato is the first thing that you really should read.
	It's good.
	You know, it's interesting.
	My favourite part is, genuinely, when the Athenians are like, Socrates, for corrupting the youth of Athens, what do you think your punishment should be?
	And he's like, I should be given free meals at the public expense.
	LAUGHTER He's the most base shitlord philosopher in history.
	What about the guy that lived in the barrel?
	Is he not better?
	Oh, Diogenes.
	No, because he didn't get executed for being a corrupter of the youth.
	That's cool.
	Diogenes is very cool, but Socrates just balls-of-the-wall doesn't care.
	Does not care.
	Although Diogenes used to have a wank in the street.
	What was that face?
	There are lots of levels of who doesn't care the most.
	I mean, Socrates allowed them to just kill him, but Diogenes used to just masturbate in front of people.
	Pick your poison again.
	Yeah.
	Which was Hemlock, incidentally.
	By Ron Dumont.
	Cyberpunk 2077 has an in-game advertisement that has a transgender person openly displaying the male bits, with the tagline, Mix It Up.
	It is a transgender version of the female objectification, and it made leftists seethe.
	I'm...
	To be honest, by reading that, I'm seething.
	That sounds gross.
	Well, yeah, but you would think that they'd be very happy with this kind of transgender acceptance and representation.
	Like, would you not?
	Pornography.
	It's a rum.
	Not to the intersectionals.
	Not to some.
	Like, there are different strains of thought, obviously.
	I thought the sex negative had basically won this argument.
	No, no, the sex positives had won the argument, I thought, because it's about, like, individual initiative, essentially.
	It's sex work.
	It's a work, Dad.
	Yeah, exactly.
	The sex positives, I thought it had won the war, but I mean, if we're not allowed to sexualise transgender people, even though that seems to be what they want, is to be accepted as whatever it is they are, then...
	I'm not even sure what that would be.
	Would it be a person who's born male, wants to be female, is displayed female, but has male bits showing?
	Or is it the other way around?
	I presume posing as if it's a sexualised...
	Female, right?
	I've got to Google it afterwards.
	Yeah, I'll have to look it up.
	Thanks.
	Yeah.
	Shaker Silver, C. Dank's Mad Lads on Alcibiades.
	Alcibiades, yes.
	Yeah, I did watch that one.
	Yeah.
	Regarding Athens.
	Yeah, it was pretty good.
	There was a few little points he could have picked up on, but it's okay.
	I didn't expect him to have sort of depth of knowledge on it.
	I do, because I'm a...
	That's my fetish.
	I'm big brain.
	No, no, no.
	It's not that I'm big brain.
	I spent a lot more time reading about the circumstances of it.
	Yeah, you did.
	Dan did a fine job, though.
	He did a fine job.
	President-elect Slatnik.
	Joe Biden is wanted in the Ukraine for felony bribery charges.
	Is he actually?
	Yep.
	Oh, wow.
	If Biden becomes president, he'll have immunity.
	His first visit should be to Ukraine.
	I mean, just for the shitposting.
	I bet the first thing he does is pardon Hunter Biden.
	Adam says, what do we call this war with China?
	I feel like it's more than a Cold War, but obviously less than a full-blown war.
	Lukewarm war doesn't quite roll off the tongue, though.
	Well, it's about corruption.
	Fundamentally, it's about are you going to have a republic that is free of corruption or filled with corruption?
	And at the moment, it's filled with corruption.
	Trump is right that there is a swamp that needs to be drained.
	We've seen it today being admitted on both sides of the swamp, you know, on both sides of the ends.
	And we've seen the ties that connect them as well.
	I mean, no matter what you call it anyway, you're losing.
	Yeah, yeah.
	It is a war on corruption that you are fighting.
	Ryan Ibarra, what do we do when our rule of law has been subverted and all legal recourse has been shot down with no recognition other than revolt with force?
	Well, it depends whose philosopher you're following.
	I mean, if you are a follower of American Republican philosophy, then you are a person who, whether you know it or not, is essentially following the view of John Locke.
	And John Locke has provisions for legal revolt.
	So I would suggest reading your Locke.
	It might not be popular on the internet, but my God, it's useful at the moment.
	Literally embodying the meme, aren't you?
	It's true.
	It's true, though.
	Do it.
	I'll do a book club on it.
	Yeah.
	Royal Ulster...
	Sorry, I'm thinking of memes, but...
	I'll chill.
	Royal Ulster Constabulary.
	USA should have preserved the British Empire.
	Well, they thought they could take it over, and that's fine.
	To be fair, the American system is actually more effective than the British system, because it's more covert, and President-elect Xi Jinping.
	Sargon OnlyFans when?
	Whenever you pay for it, sir.
	Yeah, well, the OnlyFans is on lowseats.com.
	It's going to become a premium member.
	Right.
	I think there's a couple more, and then we need to head off.
	Yep.
	You want to do these?
	Sure.
	Carlgon of Ben Cadd, says Jonathan Smith.
	Thank you for being an inspiration and a balm.
	The past half decade has been better for having you in it.
	Oh, thank you very much.
	It's a balm.
	salve i don't know what that means either something you rub on your skin to make you feel better um mark laferni uh the fact that anyone buys this election is proof that their propaganda is pervasive and destructive uh yes but on the plus side almost half of americans including 30 percent of democrats don't believe that it was legitimate so it's not all all that bad there is hope yet um but they're definitely maintain a commitment to the legal institutions
	as you can see there are republicans who have a backbone ted cruz stepping up and leading the charge in the supreme court and the I don't know what that means either.
	The Attorney Generals and the other states jumping in and saying, no, this has to stop.
	They need 100% support.
	Do your part.
	Share their information on social media.
	Support them however they need supporting.
	Otherwise, the Democrats are going to steal your republic.

▲