All Episodes
Previous Next
Dec. 15, 2020 - The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters
01:32:35
The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #25
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the slightly delayed podcast of the Lotus Eaters for Monday, the 14th of December, 2020.
Sorry about the delay.
Google had a big outage.
And if there's one thing that unfortunately we're relying on at the moment, it's Google.
And it seems that a lot of other people are as well.
But I'm joined by Callum, and we're going to be discussing the rejection of the Supreme Court.
The Texas lawsuit by the Supreme Court in the United States, which happened after we'd done the podcast on Friday.
What Trump's options are next.
A few other little bits and bobs around the election.
And then the major leak that exposes the infiltration of the Chinese Communist Party throughout the West.
Which is concerning.
But I guess I'll begin with the Texas lawsuit, because I was as in the dark about all of this as almost everyone.
When the flat rejection just came back, no.
But a similar thing had happened previously, where they'd given a one-line dismissal.
And so I suppose we should be thankful that the Supreme Court has given us more than one line here.
The state of Texas' motion for leave to file a bill of complaint is denied for lack of standing under Article 3 of the Constitution.
Texas has not demonstrated a judicially cognizable interest in the manner in which another state conducts its elections.
All of the pending motions are dismissed as moot.
Statement of Justice Alito, with whom Justice Thomas joins, In my view, we do not have discretion to deny the filing of a bill of complaint So,
in summary, and I think a lot of people took exception to this, what they are saying is that Texas is not hurt I think?
And I find this really bizarre because I'm an outsider, obviously.
I'm looking at it and thinking, well, if an illegitimate president is elected, Texas is affected by the subversion of democracy as much as any other state would be.
So is this not a concern?
I mean, if there was a state or group of states that simply decided to cheat, decided, well, actually, we're going to do this...
The other states apparently, according to the Supreme Court's view on this, have no recourse, which I would say is concerning.
But constitutionally this seems to be correct and a lot of people have brought to my attention something I was not previously aware, which is the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact.
Because I had done a stream yesterday saying, well this just means that a collection of states that were ideologically aligned could get together and essentially rig the Electoral College forever, if they so choose, which is actually what the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact is.
An agreement among a group of states in the District of Columbia to award their electoral votes to whichever presidential candidate wins the overall popular vote in the 50 states and the District of Columbia.
It's designed to ensure the candidate who receives the most votes nationwide is elected president and would come into effect only when it would guarantee the outcome.
And as of 2020, November 2020, it had been adopted by 15 states in the District of Columbia.
But like I said, this isn't going to do anything until enough of a controlling share has been acquired.
By this coalition of states.
Now, this is a particular ideological interpretation of democracy, let alone the American Republic, and the American Republic was set up to avoid the perils of democratic democracy, because the Founding Fathers knew very well exactly what had happened in Athens and preferred the model of Rome.
And so what this is, in my opinion, is a kind of bad faith engagement with the system.
The system is designed so that the, in theory, the electors are supposed to represent the will of the state itself that they send.
And some states send proportionally representative electors, some just send all depending on the majority of that state or whatever.
But in this particular view of things, the National Popular Vote in State Compact, It could well be that you can get states that are deep red, but the overall majority goes to a blue candidate.
And so they're going to send nothing but blue electors in totally in contravention to the actual will of their own state.
And this could be done if a state like, oh, I don't know, let's just pluck one randomly out there.
Like California might just open their goddamn borders to Mexico and bring in millions and millions and millions and millions of people who they then say, well, actually, they don't need IDs to vote and we'll let illegal aliens vote.
And so it could turn out that you could get millions and millions and millions of votes in a particular state, again, just for some reason we're going to say California here, that would weight the national popular vote, which is not the metric by which these things are decided in the American Republic anyway, but that would weight that.
And then because of what is actually a constitutionally valid vote, I don't want to say conspiracy because it's not secret, but a kind of unionization for a particular ideology on the level of the state.
You actually essentially are now going to tyrannize those states who did not sign up to it, and all of this will be constitutionally legal.
That seems concerning to me.
Are you an expert on this, Callum?
No, I'm not.
I'm just going to plug, because I might as well, CGP Grey's video on this, because he's done a very good video explaining his position from the people who want to promote, what's the abbreviation, Napa Vote Interco?
Yes.
Yeah, snappy.
Anyway, but your interpretation of the problem there seems absolutely right.
Because one of the parts of this lawsuit was they were alleging that felons who don't have the right to suffrage, illegals, and dead people have been voting.
Also, people have voted in two states because they moved out of the state...
Yeah, so they were saying, look, these people who don't have the right to suffrage had voted, and that affects us, so why can't California just do what you suggested?
Because, I mean, they already, you know, what is it, LA, San Francisco, quite a few others have labeled themselves, was it sanctuary cities?
Yep.
Where if you run illegal, they won't report you to the police, and they won't make it a crime.
Yep.
They don't want voter IDs or anything like that because that's racist.
Also, if you do a mail-in ballot, you don't have to put a signature.
Yep.
Yeah, and this was part of the Texas Supreme Court challenge was, well, hang on a second, they're not even following their own state constitutions and the federal constitution.
So, I mean, there's a lot to be discussed here.
And I kind of do agree with Rudy Giuliani that really what this is about is cowardice.
Because apparently Kavanaugh, ACB, and who's the other one that Trump appointed, abstained from this.
Now, I can understand why they would abstain, because they would say, well look, we're Trump appointees, we don't want to look as if we're favouring anything, and there is this technicality that is true.
But at the end of the day, this isn't really what the question is about.
There appear to be so many examples of direct and targeted malfeasance that we don't know swung the election or not, as you were obliged to say because of YouTube's turbine service.
So we're not making a comment on whether this changed the outcome of the election, but the procedure itself is important, and the integrity of the procedure itself is important, because if people don't have faith in the procedure, then they can't have faith in the results.
And it does seem that there are more than enough concerns around these procedural issues in particular states.
In fact, Donald Trump tweeted out the states, in fact, not just the states, the cities in which he's concerned.
Detroit, Philadelphia, Milwaukee, Atlanta, Pittsburgh, and elsewhere.
No, Minnesota state.
Milwaukee is a city, isn't it?
I believe so.
Yeah, Minnesota state, right.
And it's not...
I don't even think that's the right state.
Look, I'm not a geographer, right?
But the point is, he's calling up particular cities.
So he's not saying it's widespread fraud.
He's saying it's direct and targeted fraud.
But these are just his allegations, obviously.
But Trump is saying that these elections are under protest.
But I guess we'll just go for Giuliani's response very quickly on this, if we can.
Basically, the courts are saying they want to stay out of this and they don't want to give us a hearing.
They don't want the American people to hear these facts.
And I think that's a terrible, terrible mistake.
These facts will remain an open sore in our history unless they get resolved.
They need to be heard.
They need to be aired.
And somebody needs to make a decision on whether they're true or false.
And some courts are going to have to have the courage to make that decision.
Could you describe that?
I didn't hear that very well.
Yeah, so Giuliani is saying the courts lack the courage to deal with this issue because otherwise there's going to be an open sore on the wound of the body politic in the United States.
And I actually completely agree with him on this.
This has to be resolved.
To whose satisfaction, it doesn't even matter, but it has to have its day in court.
In the public dialogue, they have to go through the evidence and either accept or refute it as it is, because otherwise there is literally going to be half the country that thinks this election was stolen, and that's an untenable position.
You can't go on like that.
The Texas GOP, they put out a statement when the Supreme Court rejected them that actually mentioned secession and civil war, which I guess is nothing new in the sort of Texas rhetorical armory, and for many good reasons.
But I think that this is adding fuel to that fire.
I get a lot of comments in the comment sections and messages and things like that of people who are like, well, look, we are...
There is something shady.
And we're not even being given our day in court.
Trump's response, as I said, he ironically tweeted out something that was actually in line with YouTube's terms of service now, because as Tim Pool pointed out, you can say that Trump won, or the Democrats lost, you can say that there was fraud, but you can't say that Trump lost because of the fraud.
And Trump actually tweeted out something that was in line with that.
It's weird.
But he also tweeted out this video.
And I found this very interesting.
Because it's essentially the kind of video that we'd make.
Essentially what we've been saying.
Let's watch it.
Saved the economy from a worldwide pandemic and led the effort to discover a vaccine at warp speed.
America rewarded President Trump with over 74 million votes, millions more than Obama and both Clintons.
More votes than any president.
More votes from African-Americans, Latinos and Jewish-Americans than any Republican in decades.
President Trump won Ohio, Florida and 95 percent of bellwether counties, suggesting a landslide Trump victory.
But something happened.
Some states rushed out mail-in ballots.
A recipe for fraud.
Dead people voted.
Ballots miraculously appeared.
Biden ballots added in the middle of the night.
Joe Biden bragged about having the most extensive and inclusive voter fraud organization in the history.
It's an outrage.
The American people deserve to know the truth.
Demand an honest election and an honest count.
Contact your legislators today.
God, I wish I had a voice like that.
But all of All of that is basically true.
All of those things did happen as represented, which I'm genuinely impressed about because one of the things that is easy and tempting to do for partisan politics is essentially skimp on the truth.
But that was essentially accurate.
And then, I mean, there are, as usual, more examples of malfeasance and suspicions that have come up in these elections.
Today's one is the Nevada GOP, who appear to have proof that the Democrats would vote buying.
These are screenshots of local Democrats in Nevada, as you can see, the Nevada Native Vote Project.
They're going to have a raffle for adult voters, win a visa gift card, all this sort of essentially bribing people to vote for them.
And as you can see on the bottom of there, let's go voters from pyramid-like communities.
We're coming down to the wire.
Get to the polls tomorrow.
Polls up at nine.
Some great incentives thanks to a grant from NCAI that Walker River Tribe included us in.
We'll have a daily drawing tomorrow.
We'll have spaghetti lunches and all this sort of stuff.
All of these things to incentivize them to get out and vote, presumably for Democrats.
It's all being organised by their local Democratic Party, which is what the details in the top right are.
That's a crime in the UK. Yeah, it's just a crime.
I mean, the Nevada GP, if you can scroll up just a little bit, they didn't make any particular comment.
They just tweeted out the section of the Constitution.
Whoever makes or offers or to make expenditure to any person to either vote or withhold his vote shall be fined or imprisoned not more than one year or both.
If the violation was willful, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than two years or both.
So, I mean, someone from the Democratic Party in Nevada should be going to jail from this.
He should be fined or imprisoned.
This is obvious vote buying.
It's obviously on contravention to their constitution and local laws.
So what the hell is going on, right?
Again, it's not that there isn't evidence.
It genuinely is that people, I think, at this point are afraid to look.
Because I don't think that it's going to...
And it were to be found that, oh yeah, some people took money from Dominion, these machines got installed.
It's not just going to be Democrats, which is why Warren and Klobuchar and two other Democratic senators filed a letter last year saying, oh, these Dominion voting systems look a bit suspicious.
We find these a bit suspect because it's not just going to be one side.
And I imagine, you know, people like Brad Raffensperger are going to come under heavy scrutiny because it was under him that the Dominion voting machines were installed in Georgia and suddenly Georgia flips blue.
There's going to be a lot of fingers pointed and I can see why the Supreme Court and all of the other courts are just like...
Not our job, not our job, you know, because at the end of the day, technically it's not their job.
Technically it's the Congress that ends up confirming all of this, but it seems to be a lack of courage.
I am very weirded out by the idea that the Trump appointees decided to abstain.
I mean, I kind of get...
You can see the argument where, like, we were appointed, therefore we shouldn't have a voice in the case regarding the guy who appointed us.
But, no, you've been appointed.
There's only seven of you.
Well, there's not 11 people on the court.
Sorry, nine.
But, you know, you're not even voting on the case.
You're voting on whether to hear the case.
Like, surely...
I don't understand their argument.
It doesn't make any sense to me.
It's on the technicality that as the system is set up now, they don't recognise that a state cheating or potentially cheating is actually damaging the other states.
Now, I would argue that it is.
That was the verdict.
I'm just talking about the abstention part.
Oh, well, yeah.
I mean, that's...
Good question.
I don't know.
But remember that the Democrats are ruthless and they are going to go after Trump supporters and the MAGA people with as much force as they can.
I mean, like, we can see in the next one.
One Democratic senator has...
Calls to unseat the other members of Congress.
So men and women who would act to tear the US government apart cannot serve as members of Congress.
This is over 100 members of Congress, elected representatives.
These lawsuits seeking to obliterate public confidence in our democratic system by invalidating the results of the 2020 election undoubtedly attack the text and the spirit of the Constitution which each member swears to support and defend.
So how is that the case?
Because Trump has done absolutely nothing unconstitutional up until this point.
Everything that Trump has done has been within his constitutional rights.
And this is one of the reasons why the media is finding it so difficult to actually complain about Trump doing this.
Because every time it's like, well, constitutional lawyers say that this is an option he can pursue, but oh, how dare he?
They'll just say it's nuts or it's a conspiracy because that's all they've got.
Exactly.
They say it's an insane gambit, it's rubbish, but they're not addressing the meat of it.
Because it's actually, you know, something he's allowed to do.
That's the point of it.
And finally, in this particular segment, I want to talk about a report, the Iowa caucus report that's come out.
And people are actually misrepresenting.
Now, I don't think anyone would accuse me of being a sympathiser for the Democratic National Committee.
And so I don't want to have to say they didn't cheat because I'm firmly convinced that in the case of Bernie Sanders' nomination in 2016, they did cheat.
The manoeuvring of Herman Cain, Debbie Wasserman Schultz and a couple of others who chair the DNC in order to move to block him and then leaked emails that showed that essentially they were going to start smearing Bernie as an atheist, which in American politics is apparently an unthinkable crime.
If he were to somehow advance, shows that there was an active and organized plot to keep him from getting the nomination, and then Hillary Clinton got it after, I mean, Herman Cain was the chair of the DNC, and then he became her running mate, the vice president, candidate.
So it just appears very much, in my opinion, that this is the case.
But the Iowa caucus report, as much as there are socialists online who are reporting, oh, this is proof of them being corrupt.
Actually, no, it's proof of them being incompetent.
It doesn't look like it's actually corruption, according to their own...
So what actually happened here?
Well, what appears to have happened is, basically, they felt that they were not going to have various kinds of accurate reporting, and so they grafted on a new front-end to an app, which didn't interface well with the back-end, and so this delayed a bunch of results.
Now, this is just their report.
I can't confirm or deny this, obviously.
And it may well be that this is not true.
I'm not saying for a second that the Democratic Party is an institution that is above reproach and beyond the concept of cheating or anything of the sort.
How does that help anyone?
I'm not understanding what actually happened.
Right, so the Politico report.
February caucuses were overrun by foul-ups.
The state party was unable to report a winner on the caucus night.
The mobile app report results failed to work for many precinct chairs.
The backup telephone systems were jammed and some precincts had initial reporting errors.
The state party chair, Troy Price, resigned in the wake of the debacle, which put their status very much lower.
So, basically, they call it meddling, but really it's about control, right?
It's about a sort of control freak mentality.
But they do explain, basically, they built a tool called Shadow, which, again, what a name.
Why?
Oh, we've got Dominion voting systems.
Shadow reporting tools and stuff like this.
Okay, if you're just admitting the villains, I guess, all right.
But apparently they demanded this technology company Shadow to build the tool weeks before the caucuses to allow them to have real-time access to the raw numbers because they feared that the app would miscalculate results.
So they grafted this tool onto what they had.
It seems to have buggered up the system somehow.
And this has led them to...
Incompetence, it seems.
Hang on, this tool completely messed up the results being reported from people using the app?
Yes.
But this couldn't be remedied afterwards?
Apparently it was remedied afterwards, but it caused long delays so the results couldn't be reported on the night.
Not sure that helps anyone, does it?
It just seems like stupidity.
Well, yeah.
I mean, it seems like, again, like hyperactive control freaks who are just like, no, no, no, we have to have live reporting of these results as they're coming in.
It's like, what difference does it make?
You know, the results are the results.
So if you get them an hour later after they've all been tabulated, You know, how does it affect you?
But I guess if you're constantly plugged into this thing, constantly refreshing your phone, you know, twitching about it and just being like, oh, I have to see, I have to see, because you think you're going to get a historic kicking or something, then I guess that was the incentive.
But...
I don't know how that harms Bernie.
How does that steal it from the boy?
Well, no, that doesn't steal it from Bernie.
With Bernie, I don't think Bernie had it stolen from him in 2020 either.
I don't think it was actually necessary.
I think Bernie starred, just like Jeremy Corbyn, had burned out.
Because, I mean, he came out strong.
Again, just like Corbyn, here are some injustices.
Sure.
The general public can hear the...
The slate of general injustices and be like, right, okay, we might agree that we're sympathetic.
But then everyone's like, yeah, okay, but this guy is a communist and there's all this stuff that he wants to do that's not just about these injustices.
And everyone's like, oh, wow, he actually is a communist.
And so I think the Bernie star had burned out by the time it came to Biden.
And Biden was just like the default candidate.
He got a lower turnout in the primaries than normal, which really...
I think it's one of the main factors why everyone's looking at the election and going, wow, 80 million votes for a candidate with historic low primary turnout in a primary race where there was no good candidate anyway that nobody particularly liked.
Okay, weird.
And then in the election it didn't get much better anyway.
Well, yeah, him getting 81 million votes is just like, nah, something, you know?
That's a lot of Civil War veterans who voted for Biden.
So yeah, as things stand, I'm actually not very optimistic at Trump's chances at this point.
I think that the powers that be are sufficiently powerful to be able to make sure that what has been ordained by the Associated Press will come to pass, which isn't good news, but I've got to be honest, haven't I? I mean, that's one of the things that's very irritating.
I could agree from a, you know, if you're a Supreme Court justice, you feel there's conflict of interest.
All the rest of it.
It might not be the best idea to take this on.
You might feel like you're hypening tensions.
But if you don't take it on, I feel like it's worse.
Because at least in the Supreme Court case, everyone can see the transcripts.
It'll probably be televised, you know, national coverage live as it's going on.
People can see what's true.
People can see what's been debunked.
And then we can find out what reality is.
And this is why Giuliani's like, well, this is about cowardice, this is about lack of courage, and this is going to be a festering wound on the American body politic.
He's right.
That's absolutely going to be the case.
And if I were the people in charge, I would be very concerned about this.
But let's go for a few superchance, and then we'll talk about what Trump's options next will be.
Lars, Pete Simonson, good start for Monday, December the 14th.
Our brisk walk in the woods, catch some daylight.
Oh, nice.
Just south of the polar circle.
And sign up to lotusheaters.com.
Well, thank you very much.
Oh, yeah, we should probably shill a bit more, shouldn't we?
Sponsored by lotusheaters.com.
Yeah, which is us, incidentally.
You can go to LotusEast.com.
We'll have two new news articles up today.
I've got an analysis piece up there, and we've got Frank Dicotta's Dictators in Our Book Club, which has gone up recently.
I also wrote that YouTube thing, which will be up later today, hopefully.
Yes.
So why Susan Wojcicki destroyed YouTube in her own words?
Like, she literally just tells you why she did it.
And there's no question at this point that YouTube has editorial policies.
They're very explicit about it.
I wish the Republicans would do something about it.
But yeah, go to lotuses.com and check us out.
Mute stream.
Cockroach here reporting for simping Team Hugo.
Disgusting.
Possible pilot deviation.
Grease from Utah at 6am, temperature of minus 4 degrees Celsius and snowing.
Been outside playing with the dog.
Now I'm back in cleaning my firearms and patiently waiting for the commies to start the war.
While I wait, I'll enjoy listening to my favourite sons from the Great Fallen Empire.
Nice.
Do you want to do a couple?
Yeah, sure.
Biden02.
Hi, did you hear that Joe Biden leaked audio clips?
I assume this is the BLM leaked audio clips.
Yes.
Which are great.
Where he told BLM leftists basically to sod off Yeah, we'll cover it in tomorrow's podcast or a video for the second channel because it is kind of glorious and you got in bed with Joe Biden.
You deserve this.
Jesus fried Christ.
Everyone needs to chill.
It's all going to plan.
Let's hope so.
What plan?
Tell me, buddy.
Charlie the Beagle, you mentioned on Friday about the Celtic countries going SJW. I think it's because they have a victimhood narrative to their history.
Yeah, I've got a very similar opinion.
The only reason I can make any sense of it is that they can say, oh, we've been historically oppressed by the English, and therefore, and this seems to have fallen into that kind of mindset.
Ewan S. I'm tired of all the Hugo and Josh simps in the chat.
Just make a Lotus Eater's men's calendar to satisfy the kumas.
I'm not organising that.
No.
ST Grit.
Hey Sargon, I set reminder on for this podcast and yet I got no reminder when you started, which that's...
Well, YouTube was down before.
We're going to be, from tomorrow onwards I believe, we're going to be streaming to other platforms through some multi-streamer app.
So you will not have to just watch us on YouTube.
If today's outage has shown anything, we should probably build up a presence on the other platforms as well.
So we'll be on Facebook, DLive, Twitch, wherever else you can stream to.
Okay, mute stream.
Chat.
Press H for Hugo.
Hashtab Team Hugo Unite.
Disgusting.
Ugh.
I'm trying to figure out how to say...
Nah, I'll figure it out later.
Sad Wings Raging.
Will Sargon's mum please grab his ear and make him watch Viva, her favourite lawyer's last stream with Barnes, please?
So this is Viva Lafriere.
Yeah, I haven't had time to watch his rest.
Educate your boy.
So, yeah, Viva Lafriere's a lawyer.
He'll know better about the law, but...
Yeah.
Mark Lukachev.
Carl, the other day you said you didn't think secession was a good idea.
Why do you say that?
Unity would be best for sure, but not at any cost.
Oh, I didn't say unity at any cost.
I said secession wouldn't be a good idea.
And I don't think it would be a good idea.
Massively advancing China's position in the world without them doing a thing, which I think is a negative thing.
At least for freedom and human rights and democracy.
I assume his argument is if every election from now on is fraudulent.
Well, yeah.
I mean, yeah.
I'm not saying secession is off the table or anything like that.
That's, you know...
But it's not justified yet.
Well, yeah.
I mean, wait till everything's finished, basically.
Shaker Silver.
Being thrown out on standing might have been necessary.
Okay, yeah, thrown out on standing.
Otherwise, what's stopping California from suing Texas for their own elections?
Well, nothing.
I mean, if Texas aren't breaking the rules, then the Supreme Court will just side against California.
So California will have wasted their time and money.
And that surely would reflect on...
The demos of California would say, why the hell are you doing this when there's no reason?
Because Texas seems to have followed the rules, etc., etc.
But, conversely, if California is unable to sue Texas and Texas are like, actually, we're just going to rig it and we're actually not going to have elections anymore.
We're just going to have a council of elders who are going to appoint the particular person that we like.
Then California's like, well...
I guess that's it.
You know?
Jesus Fried Christ.
This podcast has been sponsored by Kiwi Farms.
Come on down and get your daily milk fresh right from the source at YouTube...
Kiki Farms.
Kiki Farms, sorry.
Whatever that is.
At YouTube...
Usalu?
Cabal Prevails.
I'm not sure we want that sponsor.
I don't know who it is.
Pyromania0918 thought the case for a state suing another that didn't follow federal law or its own state laws for a federal election seemed fair.
Not even a hearing.
Sounds like the courts want accelerationists.
Could be.
Nightmarish visions.
With this ruling, why do states even need to have elections?
If only the state can challenge election procedure, then if everyone agrees to be a dictatorship, none of the other states can stop them.
Yeah.
That's exactly the point you made.
But this is the problem.
This seems to be permissible from the current state of the constitution.
Sterling Jennings, do you now understand why Americans made such a big deal about saying, we're a republic, not a democracy?
Because the left use it as misinformation to the uninformed masses to make them think otherwise.
Oh god, I hate this distinction.
So, no, because you are a democracy, as in you are a form of government that is democratic and has voting.
Because the word democracy is a flexible umbrella term.
That includes lots of different things.
What you mean is you're not a direct democracy, and very few states are.
In fact, I can't really think of any that are actually direct democracies off the top of my head.
Most of them are representative democracies based on the sort of decentralized form of elections that we use.
And so essentially what they're comparing to is Athenian democracy, where it really was just the mob rule.
So, yeah.
But, I mean, the problem is, like you say, saying, you know, we're a republic, not a democracy, is like saying I'm an elephant, not an even-toed ungulate, or something.
It's like, elephants aren't.
I mean, I don't actually know if they are, but I'm just...
You know, it's a category of the thing, but you're not a direct democracy like Athens.
But again, it's just inaccurate terminology, really.
Charlie the Beagle, hey, saw your tease of the speech you made in the German parliament.
You're looking great.
Keep up the great work.
Thank you very much.
Also, I think Tim Pool beat your dictator's book club in his song, Will of the People.
I don't think he did.
It was a good song, though, wasn't it?
The people screaming that Bernie was cheated are then somehow convinced that the DNC only plays dirty during the primaries.
Yeah, I know.
Easy.
It's exactly right.
Yeah, I was watching Sean Headstream yesterday, and that's why I was under the impression that this had been, you know, the evidence that they'd stolen it from him, because she was making out that it was.
And then she said people were making the point to her, well, if they stole it for the DNC, why didn't they steal it for this election?
You know, what's the difference?
Yeah.
And she just said that the difference was that the DNC is a private company, and in court they said that we're allowed to do it because we're a private company, which I guess is technically true, whereas this is a federal election that's run by the government, so that's different.
Oh, and therefore the DNC certainly wouldn't cheat.
Just didn't explain why, am I? Okay, let's crack on, because I want to talk about Trump's options.
So, Trump's options.
I'm no expert, but I've found two particular sides of a view.
One is Sidney Powells, who has recommended that Trump acts on a 2018 executive order.
Now, I don't think this is wonderful, but as reported by the Epoch Times, Trump signed an executive order that says It's obviously going to have been under pressure from
the left saying, well, Russia, Russia, Russia.
We need something to secure our elections.
And so Trump had signed this executive order.
Powell told the Epoch Times, under emergency powers, he could even appoint a special prosecutor to look into this, which is exactly what needs to happen.
Every machine, every voting machine in the country should be impounded right now.
There's frankly more than enough criminal probable cause to justify that for anyone who's willing to address the law and the facts purely on the basis of truth and not politics or corporate greed or global wealth.
The Epoch Times report from the past month, some including Arizona's Maricopa County GOP chairwoman Linda Brickman as well as Powell have alleged that Dominion voting system machines have allowed votes to be switched from Trump to Democratic candidate Biden.
Dominion has pushed back saying it's not possible to change votes while asserting that it has no ties to foreign governments and doesn't allow its employees to engage in vote tabulation efforts.
I can't confirm or deny the truth of that, of course.
Powell noted that Director of National Intelligence, John Ratcliffe, only has a few days left until he's prepared the report, which, according to the executive order, means that it's not clear whether he will issue such a report, as no public confirmation has been given so far.
And if he's only got a few days left, I think it's very unlikely that such a thing is going to happen.
But one of the things I think is the problem with this is that it looks...
Yes, the law, you know, the executive order may well be there, but the executive order is just the pleasure of the president, him making executive actions with no further accountability from the people below him.
It looks kind of bad if he signs the executive order, then he's the one who invokes it, and then, you know, I don't know, suspends whatever he needs to suspend and all this sort of stuff that goes on.
That's not to say, I mean, Dominion is a Canadian-owned company, so she's not wrong when she says he could do this, and if there was enough suspicion, and there is suspicion, that this could be something that could be done.
But I think that it would look very bad.
And I think that the way the media would report it would be essentially, oh, Trump's engaged in a coup.
And I think that would be more persuasive to normies than the alternative, which would be to work within the existing constitutional framework that he has.
Because that's what he's been doing so far, and so far they've really been unable to kind of impact what he's actually done.
They've essentially just resorted to ridicule.
It's been like, oh, ha ha, you've lost every lawsuit.
How many more times do you need to lose Donald Trump?
And it's like, well...
All of them.
If he wins one of them, then he's won.
So you've got to get lucky every time, don't you?
He only has to get lucky once.
But moving from Sidney Powell's view there, again, I'm not going to endorse or rebuke or whatever, but I just think that it would look worse than actually the recommendation made by the New York Times.
I don't want to say recommendation necessarily, because obviously they're not recommending it, but they are in a position where they're like, well, we have to kind of admit...
That there is still a path to victory for Trump.
So they say that an effort is being led by Representative Mo Brooks, a Republican of Alabama, a backbench conservative.
Along with a group of allies in the House, he is eyeing challenges to the election results in five different states, Arizona, Pennsylvania, Nevada, Georgia, and Wisconsin, where they claim varying degrees of fraud or illegal voting took place, despite certification of the voting by authorities, and no evidence of widespread impropriety.
I don't know why we have to keep talking about widespread impropriety.
I mean, they literally state the exact states it's in.
And in Trump's tweet, he states the exact cities he thinks it's in.
No one's saying it's widespread.
Everyone's saying it's actually targeted in these places.
And YouTube says we're allowed to say that.
It's a very broad definition of widespread, isn't it?
Yeah, it's widespread in these specific places and these specific cities.
You are naming five cities, therefore you're saying it's widespread.
But he's not saying it's widespread.
That's the thing.
He's actually direct targeting.
But anyway...
The New York Times goes on to say, You
know, we're all starting to sweat here, man.
Come on, like, you know, don't leave it until the 11th hour.
Once an objection is heard from a member of each House of Congress, senators and representatives will then retreat to their chambers on opposite sides of the Capitol for a two-hour debate and then vote on whether to disqualify a state's votes.
Both the Democratic-controlled House and the Republican-controlled Senate would have to agree to toss out a state's electoral vote, something that has not happened since the 19th century.
So this is looking particularly unlikely anyway, because I can't see that the Democrats would agree to this.
I mean, the political dynamite that it would be if a segment of the Democrat senators detached themselves from the body and said, no, we're siding with the Republicans on this, and we're throwing out all these votes.
Man, it'd be nuclear.
Like, the fallout would be incredible.
And people have got to remember that...
It's genuinely personal threats and damage that will happen to them.
Their reputations will be destroyed.
Their peers will hate them.
They'll get all sorts of activists swearing at them and whatnot.
And the consequences of...
Trump winning now will still be riots and burnings and threats and probably shootings from radical left-wing activists and lefties, generally, who have been persuaded by the media and the apparatus around them that actually Joe Biden won, and now Trump has succeeded in a coup, even though he's doing everything constitutionally.
Yeah, so no change.
So no change, yeah, exactly.
Nothing particularly different.
But if you're a senator and you're a Democrat or you're a judge or something like that, You can survive a Biden administration.
You might not survive a bunch of rabid activists trying to storm your house chanting Black Lives Matter or whatever it is, right?
You know, Trump's a fascist, all this sort of stuff.
You might not survive that.
And so I can see the pressures against them just going, well, look, I didn't see nothing.
Several state Republicans, Senate Republicans, sorry, including Patrick De Toomey of Pennsylvania, Susan Collins of Maine, blah, blah, blah, have forcefully rejected the idea of overturning the results and their votes would be enough for Mr. Biden to prevail with the support of the Democrats.
the results and their votes would be enough for Mr. Biden to prevail without with the support of the Democrats.
So even in the Republican Party, there are enough Republican senators who are going to be accused of being on Dominion's payroll, shall we say, that they're not interested in engaging in this.
So even in the Republican Party, there are enough Republican senators who are going to be accused of being on Dominion's payroll, shall we say, that they're not interested in engaging in this.
And so Trump will probably lose this as well.
And so Trump will probably lose this as well.
This is not, however, again, something unconstitutional or unusual or anything of the sort.
Mr. Brooks, as they say, is far from the first lawmaker to try and use the tallying process to challenge the results of a bitter election loss.
Democrats did it in 2001, 2005 and 2017.
But these were essentially acts of protest after their party normally had already accepted the defeat.
And But Trump, of course, is defiant in his apparent defeat and has not conceded, and therefore it would be worth them doing this, even if just say no, you know.
But these seem to be the two sort of options that are on the table.
I mean...
Neither of them are good, to be honest.
And I'm not actually very optimistic at this point.
I think the power of the system against Trump was insurmountable, and I think that he's probably going to be unfortunate and is going to be ousted.
Do you think he'll give a secession?
Sorry.
Let's hope so.
Do you think he'll give a...
What's the word?
Concession speech.
Concession speech, not secession.
Hopefully it's something with a bit of fire and brimstone in it about how the Democrats are all a bunch of cheats and this is the end of the Republic unless all the Dominion voting systems are taken out and we return to pottery shards.
It's your dream.
Yes.
I have heard a third argument, which is how you can win, and I saw some Republicans pushing this, which is the General Flynn argument.
So General Flynn was proposing that they just declare martial law and the whole thing investigated whilst the country stays under military occupation.
And it sounds crazy, and I agree it is, but he's not without precedent.
His precedent is Lincoln.
So Lincoln being able to do X, Y, and Z whilst the Civil War was starting and then going on and afterwards.
I mean, that was a civil war.
Yeah, I know, but Flynn's looking at this, I assume, in the same lens because he's seeing it as a coup.
It's not good news.
But, no, I don't support that.
The people arguing for that, I think, have sort of lost their mind.
I think they've gone too far, though.
Yeah.
But I understand why they're so bothered about all of this.
Anyway, EZE. The people screaming that Bernie was cheated are somehow convinced that the DNC only plays dirty during the primaries.
Yes.
Mark Lukachev.
I have friends in the Texas legislature, the GOP voting office, and both groups are discussing the likelihood of Trump declaring martial law.
Well, here we go.
Yeah, I mean, I... Either way, it will be an optics defeat if Trump does this.
Even if he wins, the left will never forgive him for this.
I spoke to Voltaire's Ghost earlier, and he was saying it's not a terrible position to be in either if he does end up stepping down.
The fact that you still control the Senate, you're able to block pretty much everything that he does, and you're springboarding yourselves for what would be a terrible four years.
So the next election, you'll get back the House, you'll probably keep the Senate, and then maybe get back the presidency.
Because Biden's going to be trash.
He already is trash.
Absolutely.
I mean, Biden is already selling out, to the extent that he could, the United States to China.
And it'll be on every Republican's lips.
Because suddenly this has all been brought to the fore.
This has all been made apparent.
And looking back on it already, Trump's four years appear to be gaining a kind of golden shine to them.
Where it's like, oh, numbers go up.
The world is good.
But they did.
And the world was.
But if he wants to rerun in 2024, he's in a great position.
So the idea of declaring martial law is a good idea.
It's crazy.
Yeah, I'm not...
It's not the worst thing in the world, but I would much prefer it if Trump had won.
Anyway, Sterling says, the Trump judges are stupid for thinking there is honour in the court.
Yeah, I mean, Joe Biden's going to pack them out.
He's literally going to pack the court, so their opinions won't matter anymore.
Yeah.
Sotomayor, Obama would 100% take a partisan stance if given the chance.
Yes, he would.
The court will now be packed and destroyed.
Yes, it will, but at least we have honor.
Yeah, at the end of the day, I don't see why that was necessary.
This is too tense.
Charles says, the Texas suit can be refiled if they show a damaged party.
Yes, it can.
The court said that Texas can't be hammered by the crimes of other states, so they're gathering citizen complainants from these states first.
Well, I hope they do, and I hope they get on with it.
I mean, I'm surprised that the...
Well, I saw a comment the other day.
In fact, yesterday on the livestream, this was actually backwards.
The House leader from Pennsylvania should have been the one filing the suit, and Texas should have been supporting that, because they are actually an aggrieved party in Pennsylvania, allegedly.
Can they not just file a new one?
I don't know if anything stops them.
So, I mean, Rudy Giuliani in the interview with Newsmax said that nothing's stopping them from doing that.
And I assume that he knows what he's talking about because he's a lawyer.
So, let's hope that they do do something like that.
Have you dem simps, I mean honourable comrades, soon to be recognised by Emperor Pu, President Xi Jinping, learned Mandarin yet?
John, do you speak Mandarin?
No, a bit.
Do you speak Cantonese, is it?
So no, is the answer.
Eric Edward cockroach 2.0 simple for you Wolf at the Leon.
It's funny.
You reject a cue out right, but you haven't even looked into the cue board classic lefty style Look at the keyboard cue is real.
I'm not saying it's not real.
I I'm saying it's not something we can really talk about because YouTube is YouTube.
Stuart McLean, I don't really know, to be honest.
I think the statements made by QAnon probably do overreach what is actually true, but I think what is actually true is probably sufficiently bad to have justified Q's revulsion and concerns.
I've seen some of the posts, and I'm not that really convinced, but the thing that really made me unconvinced was watching the supporters.
Like, Nuance Pro interviewed a bunch of them.
There were a bunch of them where they're not even trying to be hostiles.
Just, what do you actually believe?
And it's not coherent, and it's upsetting.
Yeah.
And the thing is, I don't see the need for a mythology surrounding this.
Because, I mean, like, you know, say there's trial trafficking.
Yeah, Epstein.
Definitely.
He's connected to a load of Democrat politicians and various other people.
Like, there's definitely something going on.
Don't create a mythology, because then I can't follow that.
You know, I can't join in.
You know, but if you can talk specifically...
Too much effort as well.
Yeah, I could never get my head around it.
But anyway, Stuart McLean, Trump News Network, Julian Assange, editor with Glenn Greenwald, Jack Posobiec, and others doing real news.
Actually, that sounds pretty good.
I'd watch that.
Yeah, that sounds great.
Earl of Longford, can we have premium full upload of the podcast?
I work at 5 and finish between 12 and 2 of yours in...
I can't say what that is.
Is that potato?
I guess so.
I don't know.
I don't even know what that means.
Sorry.
The podcast is...
We don't take it down.
So it's still there afterwards.
So you don't even need a premium one.
You can get that for free.
Oh, he's Irish.
So that's what the potato means.
Oh, right.
Okay.
Right.
But yeah, it should be there.
And I believe we'll have on...
What was it?
Vicky, where were we putting the podcast again?
Do you mean where are we playing?
And we put, well, you know, just the audio file.
They're on SoundCloud, Spotify, and they're going up on Google Podcasts and Apple Podcasts.
Right, so SoundCloud, Spotify, Google Podcasts, and Apple Podcasts once they're finished processing.
So it will all be available everywhere, hopefully.
Also, I just want to say that the CCP does not infiltrate.
They hired and do their work admirably.
They are not to be spit on my brothers.
Well, since we're talking about the CCP, let's do your bit before we finish off.
Yeah, try and be fast because there's a lot.
So what happened is a couple of days ago it got released, which is a full list of CCP members in Shanghai.
So the Communist Party of China has 90 odd million members, huge country, but Shanghai has about 2 million from what this leak shows.
And it has their names, their IDs, their date of birth, their education, their hometown, their party position, the ethnicity of each of them, and of course the This wouldn't be news if it's just people working in China.
It's like, oh, you're a Chinese Communist Party member in China working for the Chinese government.
No one cares.
It's the only way to get ahead.
Yeah.
A lot of people will be joining because of career prospects or to get favorable situations with the government.
So it's not necessarily that all these people are communists either, which we should make before we...
Yeah, this was just the case through all of the totalitarian regimes of the 20th century.
If you wanted to become successful, you'd join the fascist party or the communist party, whichever the dictatorship was, you know, the one party.
And you may not be in your own life, particularly political, you may not have any convictions either way, but if you wanted to get anywhere, you had no choice.
Yeah.
So this information was apparently hacked in 2016 and then was handed over to the security services.
And then in September this year, it was handed over to specific media outlets to take a look at for a couple of months before they released it to the public.
And the reason they wanted to do that is they wanted to find out where these guys are abroad.
Because, of course, if you work in China, no one cares.
But if you're a Communist Party member of China, but working in, let's say, a military industry in the UK, that's quite worrying.
So a bunch of news outlets got a look at this, and they've reported that, yes, they have found a bunch of foreigners working in places where they shouldn't be.
So the obvious fallout is, right, did the companies know?
Did the governments know?
And if they did, that's bad.
You should have fired them immediately.
And now that you do know, what are you going to do about it?
Because you have to get rid of them if it's a sensitive field.
So what sort of companies are we talking about here?
So that's the thing.
If we can go to the Daily Mail article, they list a whole bunch of them.
So the first one that's very concerning, because there's some in Australia, some in the United States, but we're going to focus on Britain a little bit because it's a little bit larger and also because it's where we live.
So there was one senior official in the British consulate in Shanghai who was on the list.
Right.
So he's a member of the Communist Party and he's working in the British consulate.
Right.
Okay, you could argue he's in China, therefore maybe it's reasonable.
No, because MI6 are literally one floor above him.
So he would be able to identify members of MI6 working in China.
Yeah.
So not only that, he may try to plant bugs or something.
Who knows?
Spy work.
Right.
All sorts of things.
So massive, massive security risk.
So the British need to get rid of him immediately, surely.
So this is also a thing where it's like, well, he's a member.
It's not necessarily evidence of him being a spy.
It's just he certainly got the opportunity and a little bit of a motive here, doesn't he?
Yes.
So in response to finding this out, 30 MPs have tabled in urgent questions at the Parliament asking how did this happen and what are we doing about it, which should be out, I assume, tomorrow or later this day.
I've looked at the agenda.
It's not on there yet, but Parliament takes time.
So the Daily Mail wrote to the Foreign Office to ask, well, how did this happen?
What are you doing about it?
And the Foreign Office insists that they have robust procedures to vet staff.
Okay, clearly not that robust.
But they were aware that they employ party members.
So it's like, hang on, but you knew.
You knew that this guy was on the list.
I mean, why is that something they can just say and then move on from?
I don't know.
I'm assuming the MPs will bring this up in the Parliament saying, why on earth is the Foreign Office hiring Communist Party members to work in our consulate next to our security services and just thinks this is fine?
Because it's obviously not fine.
Yeah, that's ridiculous.
Yeah, so that's the governmental part of this.
But there's the...
Well, there's one other guy in a semi-governmental, because there's a guy who works in...
Is he on a Quango?
No, he works at a British university dealing with aerospace technology, and aerospace technology is considered militarily sensitive, because it is.
So the obvious point is, why are we employing a hostile, potentially foreign agent in a military capacity, which...
I mean, it's a really good question.
Yeah, they wrote to the university and to him.
Neither of them have responded, so I can't say any more about that.
But the private industry is funnier.
So they list here that the people they were able to identify who are party members and working in UK industry included working for Pfizer and AstraZeneca, both of them involved in the coronavirus vaccine.
Yeah, yeah.
So they collectively hired 123 party loyalists, is how the mail is reporting it.
So they've got 123 party members working in those two companies, which...
As a private company that has presumably patents on all of these things, and is concerned about their own intellectual property, isn't China like the number one...
Patent thief.
Yeah, thief of intellectual property.
I think yes.
I think Russia's just behind them.
Sure, it's probably just the scale of each one, isn't it?
It's just China's doing it a lot more.
So as a private institution that had a particular concern in this regard, you would think that many of them would be like, well, we don't want Communist Party loyalists stealing our information.
You'd think so.
So it gets worse.
They found out that members, literally hundreds as they say, were working in Airbus, Boeing and Rolls Royce.
All of them get contracts for the British government to make military technology.
Making planes, Rolls Royce making engines.
The kind of secrets that these companies desperately want to keep secret because they are very good at them and they don't want other people with the technology.
Yeah, but China obviously has a direct interest in acquiring this information.
I mean, the famous joke was that it was only a few years ago that China was able to actually manufacture ballpoint pens.
Is that true?
Yeah, yeah, in like 2006 or something.
There was a bunch of articles being like, oh, breakthrough, China can now manufacture ballpoint pens, because it was a kind of technology they just didn't have access to, apparently.
Well, you know, in 1990, it was still a third world nation.
Exactly.
So they need to catch up.
They need to catch up quickly.
And I would suggest that if Di Dong Sheng is anyone to go by...
The Chinese Communist Party appears to be filled with people totally without scruples.
He was the Chinese professor from Beijing, a Communist Party loyalist who was tasked with going over to America and getting the bookstore opened up.
Yes, I remember now.
Who said, oh, you're good at fooling the foreigners, you go and do it, Dee.
And he was a little d.
And he was like, oh, okay, I'll go for all the foreigners.
Here's a stack of cash.
Is that not enough?
Here's two, you know?
He's like, well, maybe that's not enough.
That's our last episode, I think, so go check that out.
But the point is, like, the Chinese Communist Party is not exactly a party of upstanding, honest citizens.
Yeah.
Yeah, it's not.
So you would think these private companies would have at least, you know, thank you for telling us we're going to do something about this.
No.
The mail wrote to them and the responses universally were that they do not bar communists from having positions in their companies.
Well, maybe you should think about it.
I do.
They obviously recognise that this is a security concern, because their response was, we have measures in place to protect data.
I hope you do.
If you're employing the member of the Communist Party to make sure that that data is secure, I'm not sure how secure that data is.
Well, the memory of the Chinese Communist Party will certainly tell you the data is secure.
Yeah.
Which...
Good news.
You've got nothing to worry about.
Again, it might just be a guy who's joined for career reasons or whatever.
He's moved to the UK and he's not got a job.
And I understand that this is unfair on the guy, but...
But this is a very charitable interpretation, because another way of interpreting this is, do you think the Chinese Communist Party is unaware of its own members that go and work overseas?
No, of course not.
Of course not, right?
They're going to have a fairly tight lead on these people.
They're going to be...
I think they are.
I think they're going to be paying close attention.
Okay, yeah.
They might not be in contact, but they'll be paying attention.
Yeah, they might not be directly puppeteering them or something.
But the thing is, these people then know that the Chinese Communist Party knows about them and is going to be thinking about them, especially as they are members of this party.
And so, even if they're doing it for personal advancement rather than ideological commitment, I mean, I would be worried about them watching over my shoulder, basically, if I were one of these people overseas.
And I think that's a valid concern.
So basically, our security services and our aerospace services are definitely at risk.
Compromised by the Chinese Communist Party.
And when we talk about the private companies that sell us equipment for our defence, they're also compromised.
At least the government was upset.
The private companies don't seem to care.
Well, you say that, but Boris nearly bloody sold all of our infrastructure to Huawei.
Yeah.
Yeah, I'm not saying the government's perfect, but at least there was outcry about this.
Like, the MPs are going to have an urgent question and demand that the foreign office explain themselves.
And if it wasn't for Trump, he would have done.
It was pressure from Trump that made them stop doing it.
So it's just like, okay, I guess that Western governments and companies have just not really thought about what's been going on.
So to give the opposition point of view, they wrote to the Professor for Oriental and African Studies at the University of London to explain why everything was...
And Di Dongsheng Se.
He's an English guy, so...
But it'll come clear the kind of guy he is.
So his quote in response was, It's not likely that many members in China actually believe or care about communism.
Perfectly true.
I agree.
So it's largely a nation-building project, not an ideological one, the Communist Party, which, no, that's an ideological one.
Well, even then, if it was a nationalist project, that would still be ideological.
But at least it would hint that China has fully morphed into a fascist mode now.
So in response to the idea that we need to get rid of these people from these departments, his response was, that's just one of the many reasons that the MacArthurist catch-all approach doesn't make sense, even from the fact that it would be a gross abuse of people's human rights.
Your human rights to be employed by the government?
What?
Don't have rights to work in sensitive areas.
Yeah.
What human rights are we talking about here?
I just...
I don't understand how he...
A human right is anything that's in the front of my mind at any time when I'm speaking, right?
This is the leftist view.
So whatever sounds bad is a human right being violated.
It's my human right to work at Boeing or Rolls-Royce and be in contact with these trade secrets that, yes, the Communist Chinese Party would be interested in having, but I'm not taking them, I promise.
It's just my human right to...
No.
Nonsense.
It's an obvious appeal to human rights that come up.
Like, the Chinese Communist Party is a camera man.
My human rights to this sensitive information?
Shut up!
I bet we could find a socialist arguing that.
Oh, doubtless.
Because it would save lives, therefore it's a human...
You can do it.
You can do it.
Anyway, so the obvious point is...
No, this happens all the time.
There are reasons for these things being in place that we do not hire possible foreign agents.
Because that's the thing.
It's not proven that they're agents just by being members, but that's enough to make people suspect.
Dude, I probably wouldn't allow Chinese Communist Party members in my country if I were the government.
I'll get my wax.
I didn't say North Korean Party members.
Oh, okay, I'll find that.
But why would you?
Why would you?
You know that this is a nefarious party, the tyrannical totalitarian dictatorship of China.
Why would you like them in?
We only do a lot of this as the UK. I wouldn't let Nazi Party members in.
Yeah, we ban people who come from extremist parties in Pakistan, for example, from coming to the UK because they're extremists.
We don't let UK citizens who joined ISIS come back.
We don't let UK citizens who are libertarians in this country.
Sorry, Canadian citizens.
That's true, yeah.
But we're able to be very nanny-state about certain things that may harm the population, but when it comes to foreign agents, eh, we don't care.
I don't see why we wouldn't stop foreign agents.
Which we'll get into.
The Americans, well, Trump has done something about this.
It's not the Americans.
It's literally the only person on Earth who's actually going to do anything about anything, apparently.
Yeah, anyone with any good foreign policy.
It's always Trump.
So this is just to make the point that this happens all the time.
So this is a report from the Department of Justice that they arrested a Harvard professor and they tried to arrest two other guys.
They only got one of them.
And this was 28th of January 2020, so this year.
Yeah, very, very, very recent.
So the first one is the professor, and he's being charged with a count of making a false statement to the Department of Defense.
So they gave him a grant for $15 million to carry out research.
And of course, to get a Department of Defense grant for research, especially that large, you can't have associations with foreign enemies.
So they asked him, do you have any connection with foreign countries?
Are you a member of the CCP? And he said no.
He said no.
He didn't say that he had any links with them.
Well done, D Dongcheng.
Which is a complete lie, because at the time he was working with the Thousand Talents Plan, which the American government is saying is just a front to steal information.
So you have people come over with their research and they just take it.
Then you get rewarded by the party.
Seems like a front to me.
So he was getting paid $50,000 a month in expenses to be part of this program for the CCP. That's a lot of money for someone.
So he must be very useful for them to pay him that much.
That's Hunter Biden on Burisma levels of money.
I don't know if it's Hunter Biden money, but...
No, he literally got 50 grand a month.
Did he get 50 grand a month?
Yeah, at Burisma.
Yeah.
Okay.
This guy's worth as much as Hunter Biden.
There we are.
So he was getting given that much for housing and expenses.
I don't know what kind of life he was living for 50 grand a month.
You can see why people do it for that sort of money, can't you?
How do you even spend 50 grand a month?
You don't.
You sit there and accumulate it.
Yeah.
Anyway, so the DOD said, well, this guy's clearly some kind of agent.
We're arresting him, and they're going to charge him with espionage and all the rest of it.
So the second guy tried to get a student visa, which they're charging him with lying, because he was a lieutenant in the People's Liberation Army whilst working at university.
And it said that whilst at university, he continued getting assignments from the People's Liberation Army, and they were to evaluate U.S. security services, U.S. defense websites, and also kept sending documents back to the Chinese...
So literally spying and funneling documents back.
Yeah, so they've tried to arrest him.
He's currently in China, so they're not going to get him, which is a shame.
And the third guy they did get, literally on the plane as he was trying to leave, he was accused of stealing research because he was found on the plane with 21 vials of biological research.
And it was like, you're not meant to have this.
Why are you taking this back to China?
So they've arrested him and charged him with espionage and all the rest of it.
Yeah.
Okay, so that's...
Are these the students that got deported as well?
Or is that something separate?
These are professors, though.
I didn't have time for the students because there's so many.
Because there were a bunch of Chinese students as well who got deported for espionage.
I mean, the metal one was technically a student, even though he was a member of the army.
The next one's just another example, because we don't have time for a million of these, so just to give the point.
This guy was actually charged and found guilty, so it's not just a charge.
This guy has been convicted.
He's the University of Southern California, and he was convicted of economic espionage and trade secret theft.
So he was stealing information about radio filter technology.
And they caught him, they tried him, they found him guilty, and that's another spy.
It's like this goes on all the time.
I'm not saying that just because you're a member means you are a spy, but this is why we don't have them in sensitive areas.
Yeah.
You know, perfectly reasonable thing to do.
If you're a member of the Chinese Communist Party, why would we want that?
Yep.
Yep.
So Trump actually did something about this.
So the next clip is China being upset because the US government decided that if you are a member of the Communist Party, we're not going to give you a long visa, at least.
We're only going to give you a tourist visa for a month.
So you can come here and be a tourist.
And the Chinese are claiming that this is some kind of prejudice against Chinese people, which...
It's such a weak argument, but it's such a transparent...
Isn't kicking black people out of the country prejudicing his black people, China?
But that's the thing.
It's an appeal to Western morality.
Yeah, is it prejudice to persecute and exterminate the Uyghurs, China?
If you can get the full title up there, if you can scroll up a little bit more.
China claims prejudice as US shortened visas.
The most prejudiced country on Earth claims other people are prejudiced.
Their argument is, well, we know prejudice when we see it.
Yeah, it's like they're experts.
Yeah, we're experts on prejudice.
But I'm assuming this is to try and counter things like the next story, which has come up a lot, which is the spy that loved him, which is this US senator who was having sexual relations with this lady who was a Chinese spy.
Yeah.
Why?
Like, why are you in bed with a Chinese spy?
So I'm assuming this is...
For the same reason that Joe Biden takes money from China.
Yeah, so this is the sort of thing where, you know, if we keep a Chinese spy, you know, a member of the Communist Party in here, we don't want them here for very long because too many of them are spies.
It's not all of them, hashtag not all, but too many.
But they will go and start relationships with all of your senators and various, and they'll steal lots of information, and then the president will actually have to take action against them.
Yeah.
So there's one argument for not doing this that I think actually needs to have a fair hearing, just so we can finish up.
So this is a story from the BBC talking about this guy who came to the United States as a Chinese national when the nationalist government was in charge of China.
And of course, there was no suspicions about him because the nationalists were allies of the United States, at least in name.
So he was allowed to work in San Stavarius, and he was allowed to work on the Manhattan Project and also the Jet Propulsion Lab.
So he was—I'm not sure how key he was, but he was involved in this.
And then he was accused of attending a Communist Party meeting in the U.S. under the Red Scare, and of course this meant that, no, we're not going to keep you working on these projects.
So they then put him under house arrest for five years and then exchanged him for some U.S. pilots to send him back to China.
right and the argument that this is why we shouldn't kick people out is he then went back to china and participated in the two bombs one satellite campaign in which he developed the atom bomb for them the hydrogen bomb and then the first satellite right so we kicked this guy out well the u.s kicked this guy out and then he was able to develop technology for china right instead of staying here for the for the u.s Yeah.
Well, I mean, okay, that's a fair criticism, but that's not going to be most cases.
If you can find the, oh, here's one case where it actually would have been more sensible to allow this guy to stay in the United States.
Well, okay, let's say that that represents every case.
I'm not saying we have to deport every member of the Chinese Communist Party.
I'm saying don't give them access to the secret files.
Is that too much?
I don't think that's too much.
You know, we don't have to just yeet them out into the ocean or anything, but just don't say, well, come inside this room.
No one else is allowed in, but you're allowed in.
Promise not to send any of this back to China, okay?
Like, you know, come on.
There's another argument that this is technically, you know, people say this is a bit of bias because you take Enrico Fermi, for example.
I don't know if you know about Enrico Fermi.
The name rings a bell, actually.
So he's a nuclear physicist working on the Manhattan Project.
Is he the Fermi Project?
Yeah, yeah.
So he was a member of the fascist party of Italy until they started discriminating against Jews.
Right.
And his wife was Jewish, so that put him off.
So then he left for the United States.
Yeah.
So the argument is, well, you know, he was a member of the fascist party, should we be letting him in?
But...
I mean, if you are actively becoming anti the ruling party, I guess you could make an exception, maybe?
Well, I guess, but again, I wouldn't give him access to any top-secret information that I'd be worried about him sending back.
Exactly.
So the US policy on this, in light of what went on in World War II and the Cold War, is that if you are a foreign national, we're not hiring you for anything military, which I don't know why the British don't have.
Why would any country hire foreign nationals to run their military?
Yeah, there's a video from Elon Musk, I don't know if we can get up, just to demonstrate this, because it's actually quite funny, the video.
Yeah, go for it.
I would like to ask you the following thing.
I'm Russian, and a lot of people here are from many different countries.
You're going interplanetary, but you're not going international.
When are you going to hire people from other countries than the US? Yeah, so I think people are a bit confused about this.
Unfortunately, this is not up to us.
So the US government regulations Well, they make getting a job in the U.S. hard as it is.
They're just getting a job as hard as it is.
But if you're working on rocket technology, that's considered an advanced weapons technology.
So even a normal work visa isn't sufficient unless you get a special permission from the Secretary of Defense or the Secretary of State.
So, I want to be clear.
This is not out of some desire of SpaceX to just hire people with green cards.
It's because we're not allowed to do anything else.
So yeah, it's US policy.
They don't hire people.
I love the So the Russian agent there who is clearly...
I love the entitlement.
It's just like, give me a job.
So you're saying that we're not going to be able to install Russian agents in SpaceX's infrastructure.
That's difficult for us, isn't it?
Sorry to hear that.
You just have to get a job in the 7-Eleven or something like everyone else.
I can get...
Some of the legitimate frustration of, we've got foreign talent we want to hire for SpaceX, and you're not letting us.
But the US government has to put a line somewhere.
And if, you know, letting them have access to sensitive technologies, no.
Just no, I'm sorry.
Why?
I believe he can't even hire British or Canadian nationals to work there.
That's too far.
How are we going to infiltrate and undermine the US if they won't?
This is right, because it's also a problem of, let's say, the Americans let British nationals come in, but the British let Chinese come over or something.
And then, you know, information spreads.
It's, you know, Chinese whispers.
Hello, I'm Dr.
D. Dongsheng.
I'm a British national.
John Wong.
I was chosen because I'm good at fooling the foreigners.
Yeah, yeah.
Yeah, exactly.
You're in no position to talk.
Burj Moy.
Comrade.
I didn't know how to fit this in, but I thought we had to mention it.
This isn't actually related to the leak, but it's hilarious.
The National Pulse has released a list of, I think it's four or five YouTube software engineers who all have ties to the Chinese Communist Party in one way or another.
Some of them are a bit weak.
Some of them are like, you know, I worked at Peking University or Sun Yat-sen University.
But one of the tops, really funny, like the guy worked on some technology company and then had to get certification from the People's Liberation Army in congruent with the People's Security Bureau and the State Security Bureau.
So you've got these contacts.
You have the ability to get things done.
And then you work at YouTube as a software engineer these days.
Hmm.
Which...
Hmm.
Like, it's enough to get the noggin of jogging, isn't it?
It really is.
Yeah.
Yeah.
And, you know, just saying, you know, we were prevented from broadcasting because YouTube outage.
Is there a connection?
Absolutely.
Well, take the...
Sorry, the YouTube decision on the election.
If you report that Trump did some things, and I'm not going to say the things, therefore you can be banned from YouTube.
Well, this isn't a great look, YouTube.
Hiring such people.
Like, I bet some of them are going to be spies.
Hashtag not all, but some of them are going to be spies.
So that's all I've got to say.
Anyone who leads software efforts on behalf of the People's Liberation Army, then is working in America for YouTube, probably a spy.
I don't want to sound pessimistic right again, but like, come on.
To be honest, about half of Chinese Americans, sorry, the YouTube American employees are also like, I don't know, chayaboos?
Possibly.
And the thing is as well, I don't want to make it seem like these things don't go both ways.
I'm sure the Americans have got loads of spies in China.
Absolutely, but there's a reason that they counter subversion.
Yes.
And why should the democracies not do the same thing?
Well, it makes sense to do so.
Yeah.
I just get into the Super Chats.
Don't know where we left off.
Blimey, there's a bit...
I'm having problems with my ear.
Zoranex, I just want to say that the CCP does not infiltrate...
Does not not infiltrate.
They're hired and do their work admirably.
Oh yeah, I read that one.
Um...
Nescai Libertas says, what country do we all go to if it all goes to hell?
Only with the same values as the US, starting to contemplate leaving.
No.
You've got nowhere else to go, so you better win this battle.
Like, mate, for the Commonwealth, you're our last lag.
Yeah, you really are.
Emanuel Seward, Q is a supermassive LARP and everyone is in on it.
Q for questions.
MuteStream says, Carl, imagine the goldmine that is Hugo OnlyFans.
Yes.
I think you missed Ryan there.
If we remain with the states controlled by the Chinese spy simps, we'll be getting pegged as well.
Possibly.
Chris says, first time waking up early enough to watch live, just want to remind everyone that the song Steam Cleaner exists.
I've never heard of that.
The Engaged Few says, history shows that when people are denied words to resolve disputes, they reach for weapons.
Discoters believe that can't happen here.
If they're wrong, the price will be high indeed and paid by more people than they imagine.
I mean, it's already happened once, isn't it?
So it's not like the US could never have a civil war.
Okay, let's not go down that road.
Possible Pilot Deviation says, Callum, did I hear you were physics major?
I'm now in grad school researching 2D flux integrals in vacuum space-times, admitting killing vector fields.
I never said I was a good one.
2 Chain says, Why are we acting like things can only get spicy over the election?
Biden's gun plan will surely set off the powder keg.
Well, yeah, I mean, Biden is going to take your guns.
Pete Butt Judge is going to be right there behind him, leering like a little gremlin about it.
Willie says, What's it matter how something looks?
Everything Trump does or will do is reported as a coup already.
Yeah, but there is...
The concern about a linkage between what he's doing and what they're saying, because, I mean, the public is surprisingly skeptical of the press, and so them saying Trump is a dictator while he follows the Constitution makes no sense, and makes them look ridiculous.
If he's enacting some executive orders they didn't even know about, then it may well look a lot worse.
But if he enacts the executive order, then Trump will be a modern-day suller, especially if he goes ham, since he effectively can do the prescription lists.
I hope he doesn't become a modern-day Sulla.
For anyone who doesn't know who Lucius Cornelis Sulla was, I mean, no man served him and no enemy wronged him that he didn't repay in full.
Wasn't that the guy who used to issue lists and then you could steal everything and kill the guy?
He'd pull the list?
Yep, yep.
Crazy.
He went into the Senate and had a bunch of his political enemies taken his Temple of Jupiter or something.
And then just have them killed while he was lecturing the Senate on how things were going to be.
And so they could hear all these terrible screams.
And I was like, right, so the Republic is going to be put back on its feet like this, this and this.
And then he retired and lived out his days in sort of, you know, hedonistic life.
Jeez, really?
He didn't even get, like, he didn't get what he deserved.
Well, he killed everyone who would have done something.
I guess.
That's why on his tombstone, it's like, you know, no man ever served me or enemy hurt me, then I didn't repay in full.
Oh, that's cool.
He didn't lose a single battle either.
So he's genuinely an amazing historical figure.
I'll probably do a podcast, a premium podcast on him at some point.
And the thing is, he...
Mad lads.
Yeah, absolute mad lad.
When he first arrives back on Italian soil after sacking Athens, and armies start defecting to him that are sent to destroy him, and they're just like, right, okay, this is not going as planned, but I won't go into it now.
It's really good, though.
Do you think that Trump will use the 2018 executive order?
I don't know.
I dread to think.
I actually don't think he will.
I think Trump is actually, under all the bluster, I think he is actually someone who believes in the American Republic.
And so I don't think he's going to do things that look dictatorial.
but he will say a lot of stuff that does Wicoli says the chance of GOP keeping the Senate next to nil, Trump isn't on the ticket his followers won't turn out as Timple said, they aren't GOP and that's a good point Uh, Easy.
I would have preferred a Trump win, but ultimately I don't think he's done with politics, and a private sector Trump could be just as effective.
Yeah, setting up the new Fox News or something could be useful, but I think he can just remain...
Trump's presence on the internet and in the public dialogue is now going to be too big for it to disappear, so Trump can easily be prominent in the next three years, and then it's like a year before the election, everyone starts campaigning now.
And so if Trump is back out on the beat, just smashing these huge rallies, going on about the steal and all this, I think that he can easily be a contender for 2024.
You realise they will cheat on every election going forward?
How will a Republican get in office again?
Well, this is the thing.
The Republicans have got to essentially make sure that everything is done by paper ballots that can be accounted for.
They've got to go out of their way to start cleaning this up.
Like put the Dominion voting machines in the sea.
Yeah, no electronic voting machines.
Oh, it's time-consuming.
Yes.
Yes, it is.
Like, really?
How long are we now?
We still don't officially have a result?
Exactly.
Colt says, "If the elections this term could not be protected from Dem fraud while the executives were controlled by Republicans, what makes you think there will ever be a fair election again?
There will be no 2024." Yeah, well, I'm not very optimistic, actually, to be honest.
Robert Dune for $50.
Thank you.
"Surprised you don't know Peter Cook.
Brit Treasure.
Here's a good clip.
Stephen Fry eulogy upon his death.
Comedic genius who did brilliantly caustic political satire.
Found a private eye." I haven't, Edvin, but thank you.
You mentioned him last time, if you remember.
Yeah, no, no, I remember mentioning him, but I didn't know who he was.
Steve says, why discuss secession when revolution would do better?
Overthrow and arrest the corrupt government officials, big tech media people we know who are compromised, CCP. Moving on.
Yeah, moving on, yeah.
No comment, I guess.
Joe R., Trump will win 2024 and remove the new SCOTUS judges like a landlord, removing crackhead tenants from his rightful property.
If only...
Dems will win Georgia.
Many Trump supporters want to punish GOP for being cucks.
Destroy the GOP was chanted in DC. GOP just had to call for an audit.
Yes, it's very frustrating watching the GOP kind of hesitate.
If there's one thing I've learned, it's the god of war hates those who hesitate.
You've got to go all in as hard as you can.
Daryl says, read up on Irish history.
As your closest neighbour, there's a huge gap in your knowledge.
It is, it is, I have to say.
Start with 1916, Padraig Péus, de Valera and Michael Collins.
I would, I'm currently doing the French Revolution and I'm going into the Paris Commune next.
The Paris Commune seems to have not been what the Communists called it either.
It wasn't Communist very much.
There were some leftists in there, but it seems to really be about the king going, Paris is a problem.
Maybe I need to kill a bunch of people in Paris to sort this out.
But anyway, Thug Life Bear says, it's not a communist project, it's a nation-building one.
Nice to see the socialists are evolving into national socialists now.
China is.
Yeah, it's a fascist country.
And fascism is a product of communism.
It's a socialist country.
They're all the same.
All the socialist regimes end up in the same place.
Yeah, but they're not trying to get communism now.
Now they've arrived at fascism, where it's like the state power for the legitimization of state power.
It's the end goal of it.
Not the end goal, but the end place you end up at.
It's where you end up, whether you like it or not.
But yeah, it's not the aim of communism.
But yeah, China has arrived in their fascist phase, which is nice for them.
Vicky confirmed 2021 mail calendar in chat.
Nice.
Jones and Man says, Do you think President Biden will pardon the Harvard professor that got caught?
Maybe.
China pays them enough.
Karma and Kerosene.
Shameless plug for our new song, Revolution Rising.
All Western chauvinists should come and listen to it after the stream.
Karma and Kerosene channel.
I will.
Davey Jojo says, have you guys considered someone from China Uncensored to talk about Falun Gong and China's education camps?
That would be interesting.
Yeah, you can get in contact with me.
I don't know if they have a contact, but we'll certainly try.
That would be very interesting.
Shakespeare says, Swalwell, the senator who said, nuke the gun owners.
Yeah, it's not...
Again, do we think that he's an agent of China now?
Well, maybe.
Jerry3, Germans are the most outraged weapons dealers.
Thank you, Daniel Holtham.
And Executive Order 13848 inbound.
Five days to go.
Tick-tock, tick-tock.
It's all white-knuckle ride at this point, isn't it?
Tante Lorana says, Your fancy studio demands you wear fancy clothes.
Seeing your pasty assets and casual clothes triggers me.
Well, I'm wearing a shirt.
Because you're the problem.
LAUGHTER Pay for my clothes.
See, this is why I needed a co-host.
So I can point to you and say...
You got someone to blame.
That's what it's about.
Exactly.
Zoranix, if the US falls and I can manage it in three years, I'll try to immigrate to Poland.
Poland's probably going to be one of the last places standing that actually cares about the West.
I don't even know how I feel about Poland, because they do seem a little bit crazy on a few things.
They are.
But on all the big things, they seem to get it right.
They do.
So what are we going to do?
Compare that to here where we get a few little things right, but we get all the big things wrong.
Yeah.
Aidan says, Carl, I met my girlfriend because of your vid on the Three Enlightenment Ideologies.
She's now pregnant.
Jesus, I didn't realise my videos were capable of that.
I'm wondering how many other women they've made pregnant.
Is it triplets?
I'd thank you by naming our child Carl, but I'm not a cuck.
Are you sure I did?
How do you know that you actually were involved in this pregnancy?
President Alexis, but congratulations.
Seriously, I'm joking.
Congratulations, man.
President Alexis Vlatnik, so much bad news.
Merry Christmas, everyone.
Stay positive.
Yes.
Jay Rollo, if Biden tries to take every gun, then war incoming?
Yeah, I think that that for Biden is partisan rhetoric in the same way that Trump building a wall is partisan rhetoric.
I don't think he's ever going to be able to take every gun or anything.
Alpha Omega Record says, Pretty sad that so many are so defeatist.
For God's sake, grow some spins.
I think it means spines.
Even Douglas Murray has let us down over the election.
This is how civilisations fall.
Stand up or lose all.
Well, I'm still very much hold the line.
I don't disagree with any of the evidence presented or the conclusions drawn from it.
The problem is just being realistic about the machinery that now the process is going through.
And I'm not expert enough in the US government to be confident That I can say, oh, Trump's definitely going to win at this point or at that point or at the other point.
That's what Douglas Murray did.
Yeah, I don't know what Douglas Murray did, though.
DRT is king.
Sulla did everything to save the Republic, save yeeting Caesar, who he knew would be a problem.
Had he executed Caesar, the Republic may have survived.
That's correct.
In Caesar, he saw many a Marius, who was the guy who was really the problem.
Marius being the Democrat of the day, Caesar being the Republican of the day.
It is genuine echoes.
I thought the Conservatives and the Reformers were the other way around.
No, Marius was a reformist.
Was he?
Yeah, he's the guy who disconnected the Roman army from land ownership.
And that's really where the fall of the Republic comes in, if he hadn't done that.
But I mean, Rome needed to raise troops, there's no doubt about it.
They had a giant barbarian invasion, the Teutons and Sombronis to deal with.
But yeah, it was Marius, the democratic reformer, who screwed everything up.
And Sulla, yeah, I mean, you know, Sulla probably...
But the thing is, the Republic probably would have fallen, even if he had executed Caesar.
This guy's meant to be the good guy.
He literally just said, I hate you, therefore we're going to take all your stuff and kill you.
Wait, Sulla?
Yeah.
No, he didn't say, I hate you.
You're corrupt and you've stolen the Republic.
I'm going to kill you.
Exactly, but who do you say that to?
What's the limiting principle?
Who's stopping him from just doing that to everyone?
People who don't support him.
We're all dead, coincidentally.
Yeah.
Repaid in full.
Because they'd backstabbed him.
That's why he marched on Rome.
It's not like he was being well-treated by it or anything like that.
There's a whole thing about it.
I don't buy this cell or something.
Just saying he did nothing wrong.
You can't demonstrate that he did.
All the evidence is burnt and all the people who can say anything are dead.
Anyway, moving on.
Robert Dune.
It's not wrong, but you know.
C Cuomo has a sexual harassment accuser.
We all believe her, right?
Hashtag me to my arse.
Selective outrage as usual.
I did not know that.
You've not seen that?
No.
She's claiming that he saw and did nothing for years.
Yeah, isn't Shia LaBeouf being accused as well?
Of course he is.
But the thing is, this one actually seems credible because it wasn't done on Twitter.
She actually went to the authorities.
Well, good for her.
We'll get justice that way.
Exactly, but the fact that she actually went to the authorities rather than going to Twitter makes me think that maybe there was some legitimacy behind it.
Zirinx?
I don't know how you say that.
A lot of people don't know that when Bloomberg ran a third time after two referendums on term limits, limiting terms to two, they reported low voter turnout.
I didn't know that.
I don't know anything about that, but thank you.
Mark Lukachev, so the consensus from you guys is that the best bet would be put up a good peaceful fight now, but wait on force and try again in four years.
I think that we would be deplatformed if we ever advocated the use of force, so that is technically going to have to be our position.
But yeah, I mean, sincerely though, I don't want to encourage terrorism or anything like that.
So...
I mean, this is one of the problems.
Like, if they had had the Supreme Court case and it was shown there was a bunch of fraud, and then they abstained and it went through anyway, then you could make the liberal argument, well, it's not a representative democracy anymore.
But we have no opportunity to even see what was true.
Which is not good.
It makes it way worse.
But, yeah.
I'm not your buddy, Guy.
Have you heard the news that here in Canada we are training Chinese soldiers to understand our terrain?
Military initially refused, Trudeau pushed it.
Yes.
Have you heard this story?
No, I haven't heard this story, but Trudeau, being one of the primary advocates of the Great Reset, is clearly a communist agent.
So he invited the Chinese military to teach them how to operate in winter conditions, Canadian conditions.
Why would the Canadians need that advice from the Chinese?
No, they were giving it to the Chinese.
Oh, what?
Why would they do that?
See, now, there's a justification here, which I don't...
Why do I always have to do this?
So we do it with the Americans and the Canadians.
We teach them how to operate in Arctic conditions because we have expert understanding of this.
Great.
But I don't understand why...
Because the military, which is like, this is wrong.
Why are we training our enemy?
And Trudeau was like, no, I'll make money out of it.
It's like, Well, there we go.
Absolute kuma.
He's just a Joe Biden.
He is just going to get paid off by the Communist Party of China to sell out our country.
If they don't take one stack, they'll take two.
E.E. Tack.
So you're saying that all Trump needs to invoke martial law is a civil war?
Well, technically, yes.
I think legally he can just do it now, can't he?
Yeah.
Which may well trigger a civil war, so...
Yeah.
Thunderstorm.
People forget that the Bolsheviks and Nazis were enemies and allies.
Yep.
They've developed tanks and fighters together and invaded Poland together.
Yep.
A lot more than that.
Yeah.
Do you know about the Jews?
Oh, yeah, didn't they deport Jews to the Germans?
No, yeah, so the Nazis invaded and a bunch of Jews in Poland were just like, well, this is terrible.
This is bad.
Worst second option, let's flee to the Soviet Union.
And Stalin, as a favour of good faith, sent them all back to the Nazis.
Fuck.
Mark Ferguson, glad you're getting along well, man.
Congrats on the weight loss.
Callum, you're going to have to start bench pressing Carl to keep up.
All the best.
Yeah, how many pull-ups can you do?
Zero.
I don't do pull-ups.
We've got a pull-up machine, so we're starting, but it's tough.
Eric Edwards, my GF is now simping for Callum.
Cut her off.
Antonio L. There are times when one needs to fight for their hill to stop the enemy from chasing them down it.
Is this our hill to die on, if not when?
We can't really make a comment.
No, literally.
We are constrained by YouTube.
I'd love to have a conversation about the justifications of violence and the limits of liberal democracy, but we can't do it.
Dusty Time, $5 USD. Thank you very much.
Gun Griffin?
There we go.
We cannot afford to lose the Second Amendment that says shall not be infringed.
Correct.
No right is safe.
Correct.
On the list of absolutes, they basically underlined it.
Correct.
And what I love about the term, shall not be infringed, is it is so crystal clear.
Like, there is no bad faith interpretation about that.
Well, actually, on this case, no.
Shall not be infringed.
It's way better than the communists as well.
Yeah.
Like, you hear the Bolsheviks are like, well, Marx said this thing, or Lenin said this thing.
Yeah, I don't give a shit.
And it's always in the context of, like, we'll have the guns until the revolution's over.
Yeah, exactly.
Whereas the American revolution...
Shall not...
Revolution happens, and you keep the guns.
Yeah, forever.
Seedfan85.
No, that's not right.
Yeeting Caesar early wouldn't have saved anything.
It was killing off Augustus that would have saved the Republic.
Well, you can say that, but you would also...
Augustus came to prominence because of what Caesar did.
So, without Caesar, there's probably no Augustus.
You want to do the last two?
Yeah, sure.
I can best follow these Hugo-less streams without his pleasant face, soothing tone, and talk through your smile expression, lulling me to sleep.
We start banning people.
What a weird way of simping.
The Dems had no choice but to make a Gracchus or Sulla.
The Dems have chosen Sulla.
I look forward to the prescriptions against the media and Dems have tea.
Yeah, well...
I'm going to have to go back and reread about the Roman Republics.
I mean, it was years ago that I read all about all this stuff, and it's just because of interest that I can remember a large portion of it.
Who would be the Republican Sulla?
Well, Trump.
He's the kind of guy.
He doesn't lose battles.
He wins.
Oh my god, could you imagine?
He repays his friends and enemies.
Marianne Antoinette, Nancy Pelosi.
We're going to take all our stuff.
You're all entitled to it, Bernie Burroughs.
Go for it.
Could you imagine?
Yeah.
I think we have two more.
Please don't send us any more.
We need to go.
In tragic news, remember the black kid who, on his bicycle, chased down those kidnappers and helped police rescue a little girl?
He's currently facing prison for armed robbery.
I didn't hear about that.
That's crazy.
Qui-Gon, US shouldn't let government take away their guns.
Our guns, arms, and India were taken away in 1857 by the East India Company.
We still haven't got them back.
Yes, I agree.
Don't let them take your guns.
I mean, as a citizen, it's your interest to be armed.
That's how you keep your government under control.
The Americans are completely right about that.
And thank you all very much for joining us and watching.
You can go to lotuses.com if you'd like more content from us and sign up if you'd like to support us.
▲
Export Selection