Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

March 6, 2024 - The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters

01:30:55

The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #865

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Music Hello and welcome to the podcast of Lotus Seaters, not based in Germany or Pakistan.
	I'm joined by Josh and Stelios.
	Hello.
	Hello.
	Nice to be here.
	A resident Pakistani and German.
	There we are.
	Whatever, anyway.
	They're not going to get that.
	No, I realise it doesn't make any sense.
	Basically, Josh does a perfect Pakistani impression, and we discovered before we started that Stelios is secretly German because he has too many German traits.
	Before we started, he was like, oh yeah, my segment's pretty bad, so have you eaten undigested?
	Yes, I will issue a warning for people when my segment starts.
	Is he going to be the third one?
	Stelios is very concerned with your digestion, our dear audience.
	I mean, you've got a friend in Stelios if you've got digestive issues.
	Also, what day is it, Callum?
	It's morning.
	No, it's afternoon.
	Off to a bad start, if you insist.
	We should be today talking about the Dems hating democracy, the cost of lies, and Doritos' new brand ambassador.
	Sure is a lovely, lovely lady.
	Anyway, I have an announcement to make, which is, I think it's tomorrow.
	Tomorrow it is indeed!
	3pm, heredy heredy!
	There is a Calvin Robinson on the horizon and he is coming with his Crusaders to do his show, Common Sense Crusade, and he'll be having a very special guest, the bad man.
	He rises from the dead to come here to Swindon and is going to be doing a show with Calvin.
	So there we are, do come and join.
	Coming to Swindon is a fate worse than death though, isn't it?
	Maybe he can run a crusade down... No, I can't say that.
	I'll go to jail.
	Tell him!
	Let's get into the news, shall we?
	But first, I've got to mention, it is the 6th of March, 2024.
	That's all.
	Now onto the news.
	Right, next segment!
	That's my segment over with.
	No.
	Of course, we know that the Democrats are very concerned with democracy, aren't they?
	They love democracy so much, and everything they say is a criticism of Republicans, normally, about how they treat democracy.
	And because they love democracy, and following the rules and the systems of government just so much, they're known for it, really, aren't they?
	They epitomize the law-abiding citizen, the Democrat, don't they?
	I think this is a known phenomenon.
	Except the Civil War.
	Yeah.
	That was that.
	Okay.
	But I wanted to look at their reaction to the Supreme Court case Trump versus Anderson, which most people probably know as Trump being struck off the Colorado ballot for the presidential election, which it turns out is not constitutional.
	And we're going to have a little look at that just so we know the background so we can be informed when ridiculing the left for being unhinged.
	So this actually did get struck down in the end.
	Yes.
	Very good.
	And in a rather amusing way as well.
	So here is the Supreme Court document that they put out after the ruling.
	And there's an extract from this which pretty much summarizes the whole case in a pretty concise way.
	And what I find funny is their summary of why they came to the judgment Which is hilarious to me, but it says a group of Colorado voters contends that Section 3 of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution prohibits former President Donald J. Trump, who seeks the presidential nomination of the Republican Party in this year's election, from becoming president again.
	The Colorado Supreme Court agreed with that contention it ordered the colorado secretary of state to exclude the former president from the republican primary ballot in the state and to disregard any write-in votes that colorado voters might cast for him former president trump challenges that decision on several grounds because the constitution makes congress rather than the states responsible for enforcing section three against the federal office holders and candidates we reverse
	so yes it is not the state's responsibility to enforce the constitution it is a federal thing i think at least in this instance here And so they reversed it, unanimously, 9 to 0.
	So here is the 14th, this is section 3 of the 14th amendment, and it's basically talking about Insurrection and that sort of thing and rebellion and one interesting aspect of this is that they didn't really comment on this part of it.
	They just said no, actually the states can't determine this.
	They didn't comment on whether they thought Donald Trump actually carried out an insurrection.
	And I would be very surprised if they would even agree with that because the legal definition is not you told people not to go into the building and break the law.
	So this is why I found this interesting because of course the Supreme Court doesn't give a crap about the Constitution if you're a Democratic Supreme Court judge.
	They never have.
	It's just pure party politics.
	The idea that they voted with the Republicans to say, no, this is bollocks.
	The Supreme Court tends to be one of the least partisan areas of American government at the minute.
	But, come on.
	I don't agree with that.
	What are you on about?
	Of course they are partisan.
	They are partisan, sure, but they're one of the least partisan parts of the government.
	If you're talking about the legislature, the presidency, and the Supreme Court, you get people going against their appointees.
	You've had appointed judges ruling against political pushes by the presidencies who've appointed them because of their legal interpretation.
	I don't want to get into a whole argument about this because we could be here forever.
	It is also pretty pointless to the story we're talking about today.
	Yeah, I just found it interesting that even they sided with the Republican judges on this.
	I assume it's because, as you say, it's a question of should this be for the states to decide or us?
	And they just went, no bugger off.
	Yes, that's pretty much it, yeah.
	Okay.
	And it's been amusing to see some of the fallout of it.
	Here's one of the justices, one of the most recently appointed ones.
	I can't remember how to pronounce her name so I'm going to butcher it anyway.
	The diversity hire?
	Yes.
	Biden vowed to nominate a black woman and he said, this is exactly the quote here, while I've been studying candidates' backgrounds and writings, I've made no decision except one.
	January of 2022.
	The person I nominate will be someone with extraordinary qualifications, character and experience and integrity, and that person will be the first black woman ever nominated to the United States Supreme Court.
	It's long overdue in my view.
	Well, you've got women in the Supreme Court before this, and you've got black people in the Supreme Court before this, so then being a black woman, I mean, it's kind of a bit pointless.
	You've got both criteria already covered, but Never mind.
	It's intersectionality in the oppression calculus.
	That's true.
	But have we have a disabled black lesbian woman yet?
	We know who's next.
	If you're a disabled black lesbian woman, get into law and you'll be in the Supreme Court in no time.
	But, she was appointed.
	Here she is, Contangi Brown-Jackson.
	I don't know how to pronounce her first name.
	But yes, even she, who was appointed by Biden, voted against Biden's interest.
	Which kind of indicates that the law is pretty resounding on it, isn't it?
	On to the leftist reactions.
	So this is, I think, she is the Colorado Secretary of State.
	She was involved in striking Trump off of the ballot.
	She seemed pretty upset about it, as one could imagine, and she said, I'm disappointed in the US Supreme Court's decision stripping states of the authority to enforce Section 3 of the 14th Amendment for federal candidates.
	It wasn't that they were stripping them of the authority, it was that they didn't have it to begin with.
	Colorado should be able to bar oath-breaking insurrectionists from our ballot.
	And as you can see from the replies, people are pointing out, hang on a minute, you're the one carrying out the coup here because you're preventing people from voting for the president, potentially.
	You know, that's interesting because the whole idea of the separation of powers is that, you know, all people can all be judged juries and executioners of their moral views.
	In, let's say, a system where you have a Republican system, where you have a separation of power, that means that in particular cases, you defer judgment to judges.
	It's not only when you like it, and it's exactly what they're doing.
	Well, the Democrats now are so openly partisan that it's basically just your side versus mine.
	There are no rules anymore.
	That's pretty much what we're going to be looking at here as well.
	Because of course the people who have no interest in actually keeping their states right to anything are sitting here being like, what about my state's right to ban cannabis?
	Yeah.
	Aren't the Democrats the party of empowering the federal government?
	And now federalism has come back to bite them and they're crying about it, really.
	But no, I think states' rights is the right way of going about it, right?
	There's a huge, interesting argument about what a state should have rights to and what it shouldn't do in the United States system.
	And I find it fascinating as an outsider.
	But, well, the arc of the United States is that it centralizes it in the Supreme Court, away from the states.
	That's just what's happened all the time.
	And well, it happened again.
	And we can also revel in some leftist hears from the mainstream media.
	The Supreme Court has just erased part of the Constitution.
	This is the opinion of David French.
	The Supreme Court claims that it is the Supreme Court.
	God damn it!
	Yeah, the bending of reality here.
	I mean, the Supreme Court is the ultimate determinant of Of the Constitution.
	They don't erase the Constitution.
	Robert E. Lee Publishers.
	The Supreme Court have stolen our rights.
	Maybe you've got a case, Mr. Lee, but that's over.
	And also the Atlantic, not one to leave the New York Times to say stupid things.
	Here they are.
	The Supreme Court is not up to the challenge.
	The challenge of what, Atlantic?
	You mean being partisan hacks?
	I don't know.
	I think actually I think the same, yeah.
	the institutions that aren't entirely captured yet, to be honest.
	I mean, the existence of Clarence Thomas alone.
	I think the same, yeah.
	I agree with you.
	So, also, I think we may as well play this, just so I can make you all suffer.
	Stand on to other states that have deemed him an insurrectionist and kicked them off of their ballots.
	And then Allen Weisselberg just turned himself in to the Manhattan District Attorney for criminal charges of perjury.
	So, the reason I point this out, and this is something that has been doing the rounds, is they just don't get it.
	today so i'm just gonna sit on the couch and watch the news the bad news roll in today so the reason i point this out and this is something that has been doing the rounds is they just don't get it they're like but he's insurrectionist though because of course they've they bought into the propaganda propagated by the democratic party in the media that trump carried out a coup and they don't realize that actually they didn't even rule on that the
	They ruled on, do the states have the right to knock him off the ballot, which is no.
	And that's it.
	And it really highlights to me the cognitive dissonance going on.
	Like they said, it's a matter of state versus federal rights.
	That's what it's always been about.
	That's what the Supreme Court rules on sometimes.
	And so.
	The fact that they're harking on about this, even though it's an irrelevant point to the actual case, and the ruling of all of the justices, goes to show the length of the delusion.
	And on the topic of delusions, I think this takes the cake.
	So this is Keith Olbermann, I believe he is CNN is it or is it MSNBC?
	I always get them mixed up for some reason.
	The same bloody place isn't it?
	They may as well be.
	He says the Supreme Court has betrayed democracy.
	Its members including Jackson Kagan, Sotomayor have proved themselves inept at reading comprehension and collectively the court has shown itself to be corrupt and illegitimate.
	It must be dissolved.
	They're saying it didn't give us our way, so we're going to throw all our toys out the pram and declare it an enemy of democracy, sort of akin to the Chinese Communist Party.
	They said it also when Trump was elected with the electors in 2016.
	Yeah, it's ridiculous, but this is now the mainstream left-wing commentary.
	They're saying we need to dissolve the Supreme Court because it's not giving us the results that we want.
	Also, Sotomayor was appointed by Barack Obama.
	But that's the thing, there's not a single law or previous comrade they won't destroy in their aims.
	In this case, it's just, I hate Trump.
	Can I just point out something really weird?
	I mean, this guy is a meme at the best of times.
	What the hell's going on here?
	Someone says, CryMore90, and he goes, those aren't tears, fascists, they're urine.
	What?
	I'm sure you'll enjoy being bathed in it.
	This is the same political commentary that you get.
	I did want to go through some of these replies, so if you want to go and have a look, there's... Can you open it up?
	I want to see what the response is.
	By the way, fat head, if this court now grants Trump this hallucination of presidential immunity, it applies to Biden too.
	He could arrest the justices and cancel the election and you couldn't do S about it.
	No?
	That's not what any of this case was about?
	No.
	And the response there from another one is, you're like the less talented version of Ron Perlman.
	Censorious, authoritarian, obsessed with bodily fluids.
	Yes, it's very strange, isn't it?
	Sorry, but I want to say you frequently find this because you have some responses that some leftists have done.
	You can say they have spent hours thinking how to phrase it, and then when someone replies to them and they have to think fast, they just show incredibly vulgar traits.
	Yeah, you're a poo-poo head.
	That's the length of their political commentary.
	So it's also worth pointing out that In the past, this was 2016, he says, so, real Donald Trump, you're saying you'll violate the Constitution in an attempt to interfere with the Supreme Court?
	Hmm.
	It's almost like there's a very transparent agenda and that they don't actually care about laws.
	They're just a means.
	They're basically a bludgeon to hit the other side with.
	I think it's as naked as possible.
	It's an interesting extremism, isn't it?
	Where you literally don't recognize any of the rules of the game, any of the institutions of the game.
	It's literally just, if these things exist, they just exist for me to destroy and censor any political opposition.
	That's it.
	And as soon as they stop doing that, I'll destroy them.
	That's that guy's worldview.
	It is, yeah.
	And it's so naked here.
	That's part of the reason I wanted to talk about this.
	Because, you know, normally leftists freaking out and complaining about democracy and that sort of thing.
	And that's not anything new.
	It's been going on, as Stelios said, since 2016.
	But it's never been as transparent as this, where they're saying, the Supreme Court has come out with a decision I don't like.
	Let's get rid of it.
	I mean, It's been echoed in lots of different areas as well and Vivek Ramaswamy has also tweeted about this as well and he rightly points out, open your eyes to which side is trying to overthrow our Republic.
	I have to say something here because we have talked loads about skin suiting.
	So what is interesting is that, you know, when people are saying that they're pro-democracy in words and their slogan, but in action, they try to constantly restrict speech.
	They restrict public dialogue over the most important things.
	So that actually shows that they are not.
	They are the danger because you can't have a democracy without public dialogue.
	And they are completely trying to destroy public dialogue.
	Yes.
	So what you're saying is democracy basically means doing what you want.
	I'm saying that these people claim themselves to be Democrat where they are not.
	And I speak as a Republican in that because I think Republican systems are better than, let's say, direct democracies.
	Monarchy.
	But anyway.
	Here's some more.
	This is Glenn Kirshner.
	So the Supreme Court has killed the insurrection clause by turning it over to Congress.
	If the do-nothing Congress does nothing, then insurrectionists will be permitted to serve openly and freely in federal office.
	This Supreme Court dismantling of our democracy is disgusting.
	But of course, if people vote for the people who are insurrectionists, whether they're insurrectionists or not, they're still democratically elected and have just as much of a mandate to be there as anyone else, but also the fact that they're not interactionists as well.
	There is that side that venerates the constitution and actually follows it.
	Probably aren't going to be the ones that overthrow it.
	Just saying.
	But even this specific case, if it's fine to understand it as you laid it out, literally all this case was, is it the right of a state to ban a candidate or is it up to the Supreme Court?
	The Supreme Court went, no, it's us.
	We'd like that power.
	This dude over here, see if his bio, legal analyst, 30 years federal prosecutor.
	You're pre-saging what I was going to say.
	Sorry, but that's just, sorry.
	He's this legal analyst, he's supposedly done it for 30 years, and he's on about insurrection clauses in a case about a state's right to implement the constitution.
	His view of law is that the judiciary should just do what the executive wants, which is ban the opposition because we can.
	That's how he views law.
	It is purely just a weapon of suppression.
	Not a checks and balance system.
	And he used to be a federal prosecutor for 30 years.
	I think he might have been sniffing glue when they covered the part in his legal education that covered the separation of powers.
	I don't know.
	It's very strange to me.
	They also, interestingly enough, you know how much they love democracy, well they also love anti-racism, which is why they all targeted Clarence Thomas, of course, a black conservative judge.
	He didn't support the main line.
	Remember Biden telling some people, you're not black if you're not voting for me.
	I know, yeah.
	As far as I'm concerned, that kind of thing is a bit funny, but it shouldn't be the death sentence.
	But here is a jumped up pipsqueak.
	I can't even say it for some reason.
	That kind of ruins the insult, doesn't it?
	But Harry sits on saying, insurrection sympathiser Clarence Thomas ruled that insurrectionist Donald Trump can remain on the ballot in 2024.
	That should be the headline.
	Well, him and eight other people.
	I mean, it's ridiculous.
	And also it's been community noted, of course I'm pretty sure this guy, he's not just Well, he is a nobody, but He's a nobody that's got an amount of following I don't know how much I'm here, but he says 800k on TikTok Yeah, 180 something Nuance Bro did a load of tweets about this guy This one is being paid by the Democratic Party He is, yeah.
	He's a democratic shill.
	That's the reason I've included it.
	He's a human bot.
	But these people can be useful to people like us because they're sort of a litmus test for what kind of rhetoric the Democrats are going to spew out.
	And if this is the quality of their rhetoric, the headline should be that one of the judges, in which all of the other justices agreed with, had an opinion, therefore it's void.
	It's not good propaganda, even by the left standards.
	Is he one of the two dudes who are talking very fastly and try to rally young people to vote for Biden?
	I don't know how quickly he talks.
	I only see his social media posts, but he's certainly trying to rally people for Biden.
	So here we have Robert Reich, who is known for being an economic illiterate.
	He was talking about Clarence Thomas' wife, which of course is very relevant to the case of states' rights.
	Jeannie Thomas was directly involved in efforts to overturn the 2020 election.
	Her consulting firm also stands to gain if Trump is re-elected, yet Clarence Thomas didn't recuse himself from the Colorado ballot case ruling.
	How is this not a scandal of epic proportions?
	I mean, I'd understand this argument a bit more if it were a split jury.
	And his vote actually mattered.
	It was unanimous.
	It would just be 8-0 rather than 9-0, as pointed out by that account down the bottom there, actually.
	Even if that was enough for him to have to recuse himself.
	I don't agree it is.
	It's not the first time anti-black things have come out of the Reich, but there we go.
	Cheap joke, I know.
	Mehdi Hassan here.
	9-0 is bad enough for this Supreme Court decision, but it should have been 8-0.
	In no scenario should Clarence Thomas... Shut up, you British Muslim.
	I'm sorry, but like... But he's talking about the fact that Clarence Thomas could vote in it, and even acknowledges that it wouldn't have made a difference.
	So why are you annoyed?
	Is this collective guilt?
	I don't know.
	I mean... Trying to punish Clarence Thomas because of something someone else did?
	His wife.
	Yeah.
	Well, apparently it's a conflict of interest, but you know, they have a bit of a conflict of interest in them saying that he's done this in the first place.
	So Biden also joined in on this as well.
	And he talked about, I think he was having an interview with the New Yorker and he's referred to Clarence Thomas.
	This was talking about Roe v. Wade, but you know, it was topical.
	I think that the cheap shot.
	He was targeted, I'm sure his handlers came up with it, and he said, referred to him as the justice who likes to spend a lot of time on yachts, trying to allude to the fact that he's somehow compromised by big business or something, says the man who's got lots of questionable links to Ukrainian money.
	The man has a sailor in him.
	A sailor?
	Yeah.
	What?
	He loves the sea.
	Okay.
	What's the problem with just spending time on yachts?
	Stelios is very passionate.
	Oh, what's going on here?
	You did make a good point, which is it is interesting that there's the 9-0 vote and their only commentary is, I hate Clarence Thomas.
	Nobody mentioned him.
	He was one of nine.
	It's like they've not really realized what political discourse is meant to be.
	It's just like them screaming in a corner, soiling themselves like a baby.
	And normal people are having a conversation about what actually happened in reality.
	But that's their default state is to just be like, the race trader did this.
	That's what it amounts to, isn't it?
	They're annoyed that a black person can be siding with the Republicans.
	That's what it amounts to at the end of the day.
	And I found this amusing.
	This is Sonia Sotomayor.
	I'm not sure when this was, but this clip has been doing the rounds and she's talking about how nice a guy Clarence Thomas is.
	By the way, she was appointed by Barack Obama.
	She's a Democrat and she acknowledges at the start that Clarence Thomas disagrees with her the most out of any justice.
	With him more than with any other justice.
	And yet, Justice Thomas is the one justice in the building that literally knows every employee's name.
	Sorry, there's an annoying thing.
	I couldn't find the original clip.
	When you're walking with him and say, is your son okay?
	How's your daughter doing in college?
	He's the first one that when my stepfather died, sent me flowers in Florida.
	He is a man who cares deeply about the court as an institution, about the people who work there, but about people.
	I mean, if the person he disagrees with the most in the court is saying that about him, that he's the person who's most likely to be nice to people, And yet, is the focus, almost like an instinct, the focus of hatred of everyone outside of the court?
	That's unusual.
	And I thought it would be interesting to end on this, that this is, you know, typical Trump stuff.
	Not necessarily anything to write home about, but he says Joe Biden is the real threat to our democracy, says Donald Trump, which I agree with, funnily enough.
	And this coincides with this story, that the Biden administration admits flying 320,000 migrants secretly into the US to reduce the number of crossings at the border.
	Of course, this is also Going to win them voters which is kind of... So they brought in six million illegals over the southern border and then there's another 300k they brought in.
	Yeah.
	Yes.
	And so they're basically sprinkling all of these people all around who, you know, they're going to remember that Biden did this and they're going to vote for him if they're voting at all.
	And I mean, if you're talking about democracy, well, just importing in a bunch of foreign people so that they'll vote for you.
	I mean, isn't that kind of a threat to democracy?
	I think it probably is.
	All right.
	Well, let's move on.
	We should have some fun.
	Fun?
	Is that true?
	Well, I'll try.
	We'll have fun.
	Yeah, sorry about my serious segment, but it was important.
	Alrighty, I want to talk about the cost of lies, and I've stolen that phrase from HBO's Chernobyl, which if you haven't seen, I highly recommend.
	Not paid, just like it.
	And this is the scene here, and I guess I'll play along, but this fella in the middle, if you haven't seen the show, this is the story of the Chernobyl nuclear power plant disaster and what happened.
	Now this fella is Professor Legatsov, and Professor Legatsov was a real human being who was in charge of the cleanup, from a scientific perspective.
	and he is remembered most fondly as the guy who dealt with it and then when it came to the actual court trial in the soviet union just spilled the beans in front of everyone and was like yeah no this was all caused by our secrecy and cover-ups and they got everyone killed and for that he ended up being followed by the KGB for the rest of his life and committed suicide for the age of 50.
	So there we are, cheerful Soviet stuff.
	Nice happy story to start us off, isn't it?
	But you can see here, I mean, this speech is fantastic.
	And the speech is the judge warning him.
	This is a drama, of course, the judge warning him that he should shut up.
	And he says in front of his colleagues from the various nuclear institutions of the Soviet Union, that the problem was not that, as most people think, that, you know, the staff were idiots, although that's a factor.
	It's not that It's communism, although that's a big factor.
	The big specific problem is that a fault was found with the nuclear reactors, which is that you have a shutdown mechanism.
	No matter how bad things get, the nuclear reactor, at least at this time, he explains, you shove in the boron rods all the way, kills the reactivity, turns the power plant off.
	Bad day if you're trying to make electricity, because now you've got to find somewhere else to make up the lack, but good day if you're trying to avoid blowing up a nuclear reactor.
	So you started this segment by saying it was going to be fun.
	You've talked about The Soviet Union, a suicide, and a nuclear detonation.
	I have a different definition of fun.
	But the problem with the boron rods is you shove them in, alright, everything solves, you get a bollocking, but you don't blow up the reactor.
	Now, in the Soviet Union, apparently, at the tips of these boron rods, they have graphite.
	So they pulled the rods all the way out, and then they had to shove them back in to stop it blowing up.
	But graphite accelerates the reaction.
	So once the tips got in, accelerates it, pushes the rods, so then they can't go in, and then the whole thing went boom.
	Now this fault was found years before and they just covered it up and never told anyone.
	So then the high school educated boys who were running Chernobyl didn't know.
	So even though they were playing around with a safety test and buggering up all kinds of different ways, they thought they could just press the button, solve the whole thing, no actual risk.
	The exact opposite happened and Chernobyl is now a death zone, of course.
	So that's that.
	And he gives this speech and there's a line in there that's always stuck with me because it's just good advice.
	Every lie we tell incurs a debt to the truth.
	Sooner or later, that debt is settled.
	So they told a lie, wanted to cover up that this was a fault of these reactors because they wanted to either make money by selling them abroad or dealing with them in the home country.
	But that debt was paid by Chernobyl blowing up.
	And for those who are interested, you can go and check out Professor Legatsov's tapes.
	The ones you see in the end of the series are real and he recorded them and then hid them from the KGB.
	So someone got hold of them and they've done a compilation in English with some footage of Chernobyl as it is now.
	So there's that.
	You can go and see Soviet Empire still in dust.
	There we are.
	But the point I tell you all that is that it's just good life advice, really.
	The cost of lies isn't worth it.
	Ever.
	Very, very rarely is it actually worth it.
	And we have some good examples that just happened to happen in politics over the last few days.
	First and foremost, AOC.
	You may remember back in the Summer of Love advocating that you should just harass politicians in public whilst they're trying to go to whatever, the diner, the movies, whatever it is.
	Make their lives horrible.
	She says here, the thing that critics of activists don't get is that they tried playing the polite language policy game and all it did is make them easier to ignore.
	It wasn't until they made folks uncomfortable that there was traction to do anything, even if it wasn't their full demands.
	She's talking here about harassing politicians in their daily lives because they won't fund to defund the police.
	It was an insane policy then, it's an insane policy now, but the way of advocating for that in her view is to just literally harass these human beings so they can't live like human beings.
	It is also worth mentioning as well that the defunding the policing has been repealed in a lot of places because they realised that with fewer police officers there was more crime.
	Yes.
	My goodness, who'd have thought?
	Yeah.
	Okay, retarded policy, but even- Okay, we'll take her at word, that was a viewpoint.
	Well, uh, now what happens?
	Oh, she gets harassed everywhere she goes because she won't call what's happening in Gaza a genocide.
	Let's enjoy this, shall we?
	You refuse to call it a genocide.
	No, I need you to understand that this is not okay.
	It's not okay that there's a genocide happening and you're not actively against it.
	You're lying!
	I'm lying?
	You went on TV and avoided talking about it.
	Well, look, he was not actively against it.
	It's genocide.
	It's actually a political race.
	A white boyfriend Anti-racist on the streets colonizer in the sheets so
	that it's completely out of context.
	I already said that it was.
	And y'all are just gonna pretend that it wasn't over and over again.
	It's fucked up, man.
	You're not helping these people.
	And you're not helping them.
	You refused to.
	Enjoy your life.
	I'm sorry.
	This is so funny.
	This is so funny because, you know, if she actually said it, why can't she just tell it to that dude and they could just hack themselves?
	That's very funny because, as I said also on Twitter, that she gets a taste of her own medicine and you see a leftist issuing an ultimatum on her.
	She's to the right of Stalin.
	And that's a big no-no.
	And this isn't the only one.
	We played before.
	I think she also, we saw the footage where she's getting harassed by New Yorkers who are like, deport them, close the borders, because so many have now come to even these deeply blue areas that they're screwing up their lives.
	Oh no!
	Even New Yorkers are saying deport them.
	This is the thing, that advice of making politicians uncomfortable.
	I mean, there's two outcomes of the kind of activists who would engage in that sort of thing.
	Either the activists are insane, just unhinged people who don't see their elected representatives as people and therefore have to be harassed, or the politicians really are so genuinely, insanely out of touch with their electorate that they can't go anywhere without being shouted and jeered at.
	Now, she's an area that's deeply blue.
	She's not deeply unpopular with her electorate.
	Her electorate are dumb, but whatever we can do about it.
	Instead, you've got insane people here.
	And, um, live with it!
	This is the cost of your life.
	You will just have to live with people harassing you 24-7.
	Because, oh well.
	And it's not the only place I found this over the weekend.
	I don't know if you noticed this.
	Local man, oh, before we go on, just wanted to mention, there are some lies which are not out of being dishonest, instead they're just being stupid.
	This is a historical example, if you ever wanted to look it up, it is hilarious.
	This is people protesting the moon landings because, as they say here, $12 a day to feed an astronaut, we could field a starving child for $8 a day.
	I think the astronaut, I don't know, I think it's serving quite an important role.
	I mean, the moon landing.
	I mean, unless you're Dan, you think it's a very important thing.
	We can't go to space until you feed my kid.
	This was a real protest movement back in the day of the moon landings and it's just stupid.
	Hang on a minute.
	She is eating all her kid's food.
	Let's be honest.
	Very clearly.
	Her kid is starving because she's eaten her lunch.
	And yeah, I mean, this is where you deal with like insane protesters.
	This is my example here of one that's not arguable.
	Some black nationalists who are just like, give me money.
	Don't go to the moon.
	I don't know if you've ever heard the song Whitey on the Moon.
	It's a real song.
	I think I have, yeah.
	It's mad.
	But anyway, we're not dealing with that.
	We're dealing with dishonesty, mostly.
	And you'll see this in stuff like this.
	This Fraser Nelson chap.
	Brexit was supposed to control immigration, lift pay and lower welfare.
	Instead, net migration trebled.
	Man, whoopsie daisies!
	How could this happen?
	What's your hawk?
	It's a surprise!
	I mean, someone published this, like, we accidentally trebled net migration by mistake.
	Please help us.
	How does that happen?
	It's, you know...
	We were throwing darts at our immigration target board, and we accidentally missed.
	Yeah, I'm sorry, you're a liar.
	This was not a mistake.
	This was not a cock-up.
	This is something you orchestrated, being the conservative intelligentsia who were in charge at that point.
	I say conservative, I mean the party, obviously, all the bloody people.
	These people aren't actually right-wing and the slightest.
	Socialists, at this point.
	Yeah.
	Wages point kind of interesting, so I thought I'd bore you with some numbers.
	So, uh, pulled out this.
	This is the ONS data for national earnings.
	And if you scroll down, eventually there's some bloody graph where you can find how much average earnings were for full-time workers in these time periods.
	You have to take my word for it.
	So in 2019, full-time median pay was £2,340.80 per month.
	full-time median pay was £2,340.80 per month. 2019. All right.
	2019, right?
	And 2023, the full-time median pay is £2,726.80 a month. An increase of 60%.
	In the same time period, inflation was 33.5%.
	So it's a real-terms pay cut then?
	Yes.
	So since we left the European Union, that being January 2019 where it finally went into effect, there has been a minus 17.5% real-term pay increase.
	It's minus 17%, cut of 17%.
	Right.
	Now, I don't know about you, I'm a little bit miffed.
	Yeah, I'm incredibly resentful.
	I know I'm smiling because... I'm on camera.
	Yes.
	But when I go off camera, I'm going to be miserable.
	You can vouch for that, you know?
	Definitely can.
	And yeah, no, I just can't help but feel that maybe importing literally millions and millions of people, trebling the migration, that was already suppressing wages, might have contributed to this quite a bit.
	And we're not the only ones.
	I mean, the Americans have got their own problems as well.
	I looked up, this is Department of Labor, it's tier 6.
	I ran these through.
	So, you run the inflation, the inflation of that period for 2019 or whatever, there's 19.2%.
	So, they end up with a 1.8% real-term wage increase according to these numbers, which are probably a bit fudged, let's be honest.
	Yeah, but I think... Because there's been more inflation than that in the US.
	I've run some numbers as well, just in a separate thing, and the Americans seem to be faring a lot better than us.
	Even more so than, you know, before all of the money printing and massive inflation.
	I mean, there's a perk to being the global superpower, but one of the provinces, that island over there, is doing worse, a lot worse, in these terms.
	But moving on, because there's that, that's the cost, right, of everything that's gone on.
	So, a lot of people in the UK have started to notice, damn, I seem to not get much pay rises and all that tax I pay seems to be going to foreigners.
	I don't know if I like this, this is pretty bad.
	I keep going on the ONS and they keep telling me these statistics that confirm that.
	So you know what they're doing?
	They're getting rid of them, aren't they?
	They're banning them!
	Moving on from that.
	So here we are, here's the news.
	News today, the British government has made a deliberate ideological decision to stop publishing data about welfare claimants and tax contributions by nationality.
	What's the, uh... What's the reason?
	Well, they quote it...
	We fear its use by xenophobic politicians and the media to portray those who are economically active as scroungers.
	Well, they're not economically active if they're a scrounger, so that's already a stupid statement.
	Written by an illiterate person.
	Yeah.
	I've always found that less information is always good, you know?
	the right way.
	They've gone saying that they would be a focus for xenophobic political and media reporting, and would more likely to lead to a debate being skewed rather than informed.
	Yes.
	So to inform the debate, we won't publish the data.
	I've always found that less information is always good.
	You know?
	When you have less information, it tends to make the argument more informed.
	Yeah.
	Obvious lie.
	Obviously, the government is just now hiding the data because people like us, obviously, keep showing you graphs like this because they published it.
	Remember this?
	Remember my favorite map?
	Because it's just a big old map where you can go all the way down to the house you live in and the neighborhood next to you and find out literally what ethnic group of the people in that neighborhood are the economically active, what's their health like.
	It's brilliant, the level of data.
	You're like the supreme nosy neighbor here, aren't you?
	You're finding out everything about everyone.
	But the great thing is, is that you can then use this to find out what's happening in your country.
	That's what is useful about data, actually.
	It's the whole point of the census, yeah.
	It informs you about the world.
	And I'm going to pick an ethnic group at random.
	My favourite, Pakistanis.
	And as you can see here, Pakistanis don't really exist in much of the country.
	They're not really a thing.
	But in these dark blue areas like Birmingham, they are.
	So let's give a good old scroll, shall we?
	Let's have a look-see, boys.
	See where the Pakistanis are in Birmingham.
	Just having a look.
	There we are.
	There's a little graph, as you can see.
	So there's, uh, as you go down, this area is like 50 odd percent Pakistani.
	60.
	Yeah.
	Gets up there.
	And then the other parts aren't.
	Okay?
	We've all got that in our minds.
	Now, doing the ONS's job for them, because they won't publish it, they also have here economically active people.
	And as you can see, the dark areas, there's more people who have jobs.
	As high as 67% of people in this area have jobs.
	Let's go to Birmingham, shall we?
	We have a look-see.
	Just give it a scroll.
	Now, Birmingham's not very workaholic for some reason.
	Great.
	That's true.
	Turn of phrase, they're not very workaholic.
	Do you in English?
	Do they have a job?
	Well, these places have a job here, as you can see.
	75% of people in these areas have jobs.
	And in these areas, they're a lot less than the others.
	Blimey, that's less than half of people are working.
	Obviously some of those people are presumably children.
	No, this is over 16.
	Okay.
	This is all working age people.
	Okay.
	In these areas it's only half, or less than half, have a job.
	Now the areas around it, it's higher, it gets to 60 odd percent around here.
	Getting around.
	Do you guys notice a pattern?
	I'm just gonna play spot the difference.
	Is anyone spotting any differences?
	Yes, it seems like there's a pretty large overlap between Pakistanis and sitting on their backsides.
	Well, at least in Birmingham.
	That's the ONS for you.
	Can't believe they would publish it.
	Maybe there's just something about Birmingham that makes Pakistanis particularly lazy.
	Who knows?
	Who knows?
	But anyway, let's scroll back out a minute before we get there.
	Because remember, I mean, that's not the only place.
	There could be bias.
	Let's move on up here.
	Let's go to this area next to Leeds, which is a beautiful British city.
	This is Bradford.
	Bradford, my favourite number two city in England.
	Yes, the Pakistani community here, very hardworking, grooming gangs.
	It gets as high as 80% there in that particular area of Bradford.
	Right, okay, so we've all seen that, right?
	Now we're going in.
	We're going in, boys.
	Now brace yourselves.
	There's Bradford.
	Oh, there we are.
	For some reason, around these areas, 50-odd percent of people are working 50-odd-odd.
	Now, let's spot the difference again, shall we?
	They look... they're the same, Callum.
	Yeah.
	There's no difference here.
	Now, I'm not just picking on Pakistanis, I have plenty of people to pick on, don't worry.
	I've got a diverse array of people to pick on.
	But my point being, they are a particular favourite of this investigation, because they're one of the most stark differences.
	And this is the reason the ONS have said they're never publishing anything like this map again, because I keep using it.
	We're targeting you.
	This is anti-Callum hatred everyone.
	So everyone write to the ONS and say Callum is being discriminated against.
	How else am I going to make segments if I don't have access to literally all the data in the world down to the neighbourhood that you live in?
	For £5 a month you can sponsor Callum and give him access to maps.
	Quick call, if there's anyone out there who can archive this piece of technology, do it and let me know because I am scared they're going to delete this piece of technology.
	But the reason I mention all this is because, well, it keeps happening.
	So you can find this in your daily life.
	So you know when you read a Daily Mail article about some scrounger who's a foreigner, has ten kids and three houses and blah blah.
	You know this story.
	Shortly before I throw my phone across the room, yeah.
	Yeah, they're pretty rare.
	They're usually the most extreme people who are basically committing fraud.
	But then you get them boasting on TikTok.
	So let's listen to this lady boast about it.
	So I'm just on my way to the job center, right?
	And I just wanted to say a quick thank you to everyone who pays their taxes.
	Because without you, I wouldn't be where I am today.
	Like the fact that I can still go out about my day and still do my things and get paid for not doing absolutely anything.
	Because of others who are working and paying their taxes.
	I don't think I've ever said thank you.
	So, genuinely speaking from the bottom of my heart, thank you so much and keep up the good work.
	I hate her so much.
	Callum, you know I'm not a big fan of freeloaders.
	Or taxes.
	Or taxes.
	And this is the perfect combination of both of those things.
	And Muslims.
	This trinity of things I hate all coming together in a horrific, condescending medley here.
	But this person here is stealing.
	I mean, they're admitting, like, well, I get to live a free life because you guys got to work to pay for me.
	Okay, well, why does this all come back into the lies?
	Well, obviously the ONS are lying.
	They're saying that they're not going to let this data be published, because it will cause xenophobia.
	Really?
	Why would that be?
	Because if it's not true, it wouldn't cause xenophobia, because I'd autistically look at your map and your data and I'd come out of it and be like, no, it's the workshy British who aren't doing the jobs.
	I'd be accurate about it.
	In fact, we have some data, don't we?
	So here's an article.
	State support, okay?
	So this is probably the last ever publishing of this information that we're ever going to get, because they said they're not going to anymore.
	So this is data on which ethnic groups are getting which kind of benefits and what percentage.
	And as you see, most journalists, you know, those lazy worksite bastards, will come on here and they'll read this, which is that white families, 51%, were the most likely to receive non-income related benefits, such as a state pension.
	Done with my job, I'm going home.
	Per capita.
	Yeah, yeah.
	It's a difficult concept.
	Now, of course, what we can do is just scroll down.
	Because, of course, there's data here.
	So this is people getting benefits of any type.
	And as you can see, it's pretty broad.
	These are the percentages of households.
	This isn't per capita.
	This is just percentage of households that exist.
	So it's all up and down.
	That's interesting.
	But then when you get digging, it's pretty weird, to say the least.
	Because, again, here's the any amount of state support.
	And as mentioned, White British right at the top there.
	54% of British households with White British are getting some kind of state support.
	The Europeans, so the White section, 53%, then Bangladeshis at 52, so on and so forth.
	And then the Chinese are too busy at work.
	It's funny how in all statistics, the Chinese always come out the best.
	Like, crime, they're the lowest on crime.
	Lowest on welfare.
	You know, we're not worthy, basically.
	Sincerely.
	We've got the good Chinese, the Hong Kongers and whatnot.
	So as you can see here, Jon's just like, based.
	But it goes down and there's some data and more and more and more and keep scrolling, my boys, because you're going to find something that made me... I almost got postal this morning.
	Child benefits.
	Right.
	OK, let's take a look at that.
	Child benefit, which the group's getting all that.
	So that's Bangladeshi, Pakistani, black, Asian, Asian, other, then Europeans, then other, then mixed, then Indian.
	Right at the bottom here, you've got the Chinese and the white British.
	They're not the ones having kids.
	So we, as the British state, we, in that sense, are paying for Bangladeshi and Pakistanis to have kids.
	And then who's getting the state pensions?
	Well, that's the white British.
	So that's why the white British are getting so much, is because they're literally dying out of old age.
	That's them.
	So what does the British welfare state do?
	Well, it doesn't give money to white British families to have kids, OK?
	What about disabled white British?
	For some reason, the Bangladeshi is the most disabled.
	I don't know why that works.
	Alright.
	I imagine you're probably going to veto what I'm going to say.
	I will.
	Because my house has figured it out.
	But then it goes on, because then we get the next one, the next section here.
	Council tax reduction.
	So the groups that get council tax reduction, so this is property taxes for Americans.
	Black, Bangladeshi, other, mixed, Pakistani, and then white British there.
	Right at the bottom, again, Indians and Chinese, just too busy at work.
	Who are we giving free houses to?
	Housing benefit?
	Let's have a look.
	Black, Bangladeshi, other, mixed, Asian, other, Pakistani, then white British.
	Okay.
	Okie dokie.
	And then income support.
	I don't even know what that is.
	Black, Pakistani, Bangladeshi.
	Right!
	Rightio!
	That's the cost of the lies, is it?
	That's why you're lying.
	That's why you're saying we won't publish this data in future.
	Because literally the cost is in pounds.
	Billions of pounds.
	It's favoring anyone but the native British population, isn't it really?
	And the Chinese as well.
	Yeah.
	The Chinese Indians are the foreign ethnic groups that are too busy working.
	And then there are groups that aren't.
	And the white British, yeah, they need reforming.
	You know, do what you can to make people be successful, build wealth, etc.
	Rather than relying on the state.
	But at least they're natives.
	So if they're assholes, you've got to deal with them.
	You can't deport them.
	Yeah, they are our own problem, as opposed to people who we've imported in who we shouldn't be dealing with in the first place.
	We could send them all to Pakistan.
	They're on the cards, but the Pakistanis won't take them.
	So there we are.
	But I have archived this.
	So this is the archived version for all you people who wish to read data in future, beyond the state's prying eyes.
	But yeah, that's the cost of lies.
	Not only is it in human and civilizational terms, like AOC, And by the lying from Nelson Fraser, pounds, lots and lots of pounds is what the lies are costing us every single day.
	There we are.
	You promised me fun.
	That was fun.
	I enjoyed it.
	That was one of the most depressing things I've ever seen.
	You should come to Russia with me.
	You get a new perspective on fun.
	Right.
	So before I start, I need to give you a warning because I'm going to show you some very weird stuff.
	If you're eating or digesting, just keep that video for later.
	Right.
	So I love nachos and I love some brands that sell nachos, but recently got very frustrated with Doritos.
	You know what they did?
	Do you have any idea?
	Let me show you.
	Let's look at this Spanish tweet.
	And translated from Anthony.
	Guys, this is historic.
	The national press is not saying anything about Samantha Hudson.
	We have to find out from the international press.
	What an absolute shame of totally subjective Spanish journalism.
	The Reaters faces backlash for transgender ambassador's tweet about 12-year-old.
	We'll see.
	Now, I want to say some things about it.
	Look at this here.
	What could possibly go wrong?
	I just want you to look at the image.
	It's difficult to look away.
	Who would ever pick up this person for a Doritos commercial?
	It's for children.
	It's for children.
	What is the message?
	The children are going to listen to you.
	Have some Doritos and your teeth are going to look like a Swiss army knife style.
	Now, honestly, you know, it's horrifying here.
	What's the message here?
	You're selling food!
	Get the London look.
	You're selling food!
	It's harming teeth, okay?
	Unacceptable.
	What could possibly go wrong?
	You could tell it's a bad idea.
	Paid off by big dentistry.
	Speaking of bad ideas, communism is one, and socialism.
	Visit our website and check out our latest symposium, Symposium 60, where Connor and I talk about Friedrich Engels.
	Who's writing on socialism and communism.
	The good thing with Engels is that at least you can read him.
	Okay, so it's 30, 40 pages where he explains lots of Marxist ideals.
	So just read it and watch the symposium.
	Five pounds a month, you can gain access to all our lovely content.
	What happened to beards like that?
	I want them to come back.
	I know I'm a hypocrite.
	I'm clean shaven.
	Now, I want to show you some of the reasons why Samantha Hadson became the brand ambassador of Doritos and some potential problems.
	Now, Doritos really got the Night Stalker to promote their chips?
	I hadn't seen this comparison before, but it actually crossed my mind that this person looks a lot like... are they called Richard Ramirez, the Night Stalker?
	I think so, yeah.
	Yeah, I saw a picture of them and I sort of clocked it, just like, they look exactly like him.
	Well, what can I say?
	I need to be a bit cautious here for obvious reasons.
	Physiognomy never lies.
	Yeah, so we have some of the old tweets that Samantha Hadson had tweeted.
	I won't read them.
	I will describe sort of what they say and just say that it says here Doritos has hired Samantha Hadson to be their brand ambassador in Spain and this person has said some really nasty stuff.
	I'll show you more in a bit, but I want to show you some of the really funny response here.
	Where is it?
	It's gone.
	It's gone.
	Yep.
	Well, it's gone.
	No, someone was saying basically, please be fair to them.
	They hired Samantha Hadson because Joseph Mengele and Jeffrey Dahmer were unavailable.
	Anyway, so I'm going to show you this thing here because a lot of these tweets are being deleted and a lot of other stuff related to that person are being deleted.
	So I will describe that Samantha Hudson expresses the intention to do inappropriate stuff to 12 year old girls.
	This is a tweet in 2015.
	You can see here, I'm not going to say this, but you can see how horrible stuff... Sorry, what?
	Yeah, this... Yeah.
	I suppose we've got to for the audio listeners, but... I don't want to use the exact words, so I'll just... Don't use the... I have the thing here, because it's like, you know, it's like a... So this person is saying they want to do things to a 12-year-old's anus.
	I hate women who are the victims of the rape card and then turn to self-help centers to overcome their trauma.
	What heavy whores.
	Okay.
	I mean, unless this is some... Also, let me just say, if we can scroll down a bit, Samantha Hudson also expresses some disgusting stuff about a cousin and ends up with a chilling, they deserve pleasure.
	So this is obviously just really disturbing.
	These are real tweets?
	I think they are because they are all taken down and there is an attempt to cover this thing up.
	Well, they're clearly a mentally ill nonce, aren't they?
	That much is certain.
	Well.
	And I find this incredibly disturbing.
	I don't know.
	I mean, don't you guys at Doritos do just basic background check?
	The funny thing is, it's probably children that are the main customers of Doritos.
	And so this is like a catastrophic own goal from their marketing department, isn't it?
	There's a dilemma here.
	Either no one did a background check, which I don't believe, or they did and hoped people would forget.
	And I'm inclined to believe the latter.
	And this shows how, in a sense, important alternative avenues of information are because a lot of media would not show this.
	They would bury it as they have tried.
	Could you imagine sitting there and being like, well, we need to sell more of our product.
	What do we associate product with?
	How about paedophilia?
	That'll sell.
	I don't know what they were thinking.
	Now, Samantha Hadson has expressed the desire to abolish the nuclear family.
	Says, I advocate the destruction and annihilation of the traditional nuclear family.
	Obviously, you know this.
	There are all sorts of disturbing things going here.
	Now I wanted to show some bits.
	If you just do a background, small background check that apparently people who made Samantha Hadson a brand ambassador didn't do.
	I'll just show you here, Samantha Hadson.
	Creepy dude.
	Some pictures.
	All the tweets are listed as too sensitive to show.
	Yeah.
	It's always a good sign, isn't it?
	It's always a good sign.
	Where was it?
	It was a particular one I wanted to highlight.
	Was it one of the sensitive ones?
	No, no, it wasn't a sensitive one, but anyway, you get an idea.
	You get an idea.
	Okay.
	The hell was that?
	All of a sudden, Colm's interested.
	Are you talking about, well, this is a kind of, um... It's that Canadian school teacher!
	Anyway, so, um, this person had a podcast called Bimbo Ficadas that was taken down today.
	Yesterday you could see it, now it has been taken down.
	But you can see things for me here.
	Bimbo Ficadas, they have several things here.
	You get the idea.
	You can find it on Spotify, just to check that I'm basically not saying weird things.
	And I want to say one thing here because it's unbelievably sad and disgusting.
	If you, again, I'm going to give you a warning.
	We're going to play a small part of the next video to show you a video clip that Samantha Hadson has directed.
	Uploaded and circulated through a YouTube account.
	That is incredibly weird.
	And just bear in mind, please, could we play with no sound?
	Some of the... Look at, you know...
	This is obviously very weird.
	You will see, for those who are listening, and especially those who are listening and eating, we see Samantha Hadson doing some twerking, doing stuff, and doing all weird things.
	And this was... I'm just going to pause it.
	Please don't pause it there.
	No!
	You want us to continue?
	I don't want to see Madness!
	The next thing.
	Okay.
	And then you have a sort of weird things here.
	All sorts of stuff.
	You don't understand what I mean.
	Yeah.
	So I want to say, if you look at this, if you look at the previous video, that was eight years ago when Samantha Hadson was underage, was 16 years old.
	And, you know, that was a kind of background resume check that if Doritos had done, they would have shown and they wouldn't have chosen probably Samantha Hadson as their brand ambassador.
	Now, let me, what?
	I was just going to say, if anyone has any bleach, I need it for my eyes.
	Yeah.
	So, uh, for those of you who didn't listen again, we had some twerking and there was also a kind of.
	Uh, Samantha Hadson fell down on a pavement and started doing things to a graffiti shaped thing on the pavement.
	It was a male reproductive organ.
	Spray painted on the pavement.
	I just think that, you know, this is, this is horrible.
	Okay.
	And a basic background check just reveals it.
	Um, I didn't prepare much for this.
	It's just.
	You know, about an hour, which means that the people at Doritos most probably knew that.
	And they pick that person to be a brand ambassador for a brand that sells chips and nachos to children.
	Okay.
	So I think that is completely weird.
	And it's completely weird that they didn't tell to that person to take that video down because a lot of the other stuff are being taken down, but apparently this wasn't taken down.
	Hmm.
	Well, so I'll just gonna show you here, there's an article about the backlash from the Daily Mail.
	I'm gonna read from here to just say, from the text.
	Doritos is slumped for hiring Samantha Hudson, transgender ambassador who previously tweeted about doing thuggish things to a 12-year-old.
	Samantha Hudson, 24, is a singer and activist from Spain with a YouTube channel with over 30,000 subscribers.
	Doritos Spain, which is run by PepsiCo Spain, announced a partnership with Hudson as a brand ambassador.
	The trans influencer has been condemned for past tweets that some say celebrate sexual abuse of children.
	Hudson 24 identifies as anti-capitalist and Marxist in interviews, released a song critical of the Catholic Church and even expressed support for the abolition of the nuclear family.
	As a teen, Samantha Hudson has also tweeted about wanting to do thuggish things to a minor.
	The partnership between Hudson and Doritos was quickly biased online, and many made reference to Bud Light's disastrous partnership with trans influencer Dylan Mulvaney, which saw Budweiser lose $1.4 million in sales as a result.
	Now, this is what they get for hiring the ghost of Jeffrey Epstein as the advertising consultant, isn't it?
	Now, I have to say that there were other clips also for the segment.
	This is half.
	I'll just say that here someone says, for those wanting to boycott Doritos, they should remember that behind Doritos, it's PepsiCo.
	And they show that if you want to actually do something about it and some boycott, these are the PepsiCo brands.
	Now, I did some check.
	I don't know about all of them.
	It seems a lot.
	Personally, it's very easy for me to boycott it because I literally buy nothing but Doritos and I'll stop buying them.
	Okay.
	Is that all you eat?
	From these brands.
	Yeah.
	For me, I must say, you know, it's very easy to boycott them.
	Quaker Oats.
	I'm devastated to see that on there.
	Yeah.
	So, um, we have some other clips here, not clips, we have some other Well, whilst John's loading that up, I just want to say something about this, because I kind of get a bit annoyed when people say, well, there's no point boycotting, say, Doritos in this case, because they're owned by PepsiCo and PepsiCo owns bloody everything, so what can you do about it?
	Because it's kind of not true.
	Because when, yeah, okay, PepsiCo owns a billion different things, but if one particular brand falls off a cliff, it's not like that department doesn't notice and ends up losing people and may even get discontinued.
	So the idea that you shouldn't boycott Ben & Jerry's because they're insane leftists because, well, they're owned by someone else and therefore it has a minimal impact.
	No, not really.
	It has a real big impact on that specific branch of PepsiCo's several holdings.
	In this day and age, voting with your wallet has more of an impact than at the ballot box.
	100%.
	Well, we can see here, Doritos is here.
	So definitely PepsiCo Hispana.
	And if you see here, information about products.
	They have Doritos underneath.
	Cheetos?
	No.
	Cheetos.
	Lays.
	Oh, not Sun Bites.
	What is this Horno?
	Why are you asking us about Spanish snacks?
	I don't know.
	You don't want some Horno?
	What does it do to you?
	And I want to show you some bits from the DEI initiatives from PepsiCo.
	What we have here, again, create more smiles with every sip and every bite.
	The average Spanish female and male.
	You shouldn't be smiling while eating.
	That's bad manners.
	What?
	If you have food in your mouth, going... with like bits of food.
	Enjoy your food!
	I don't think they care.
	They're just a brand ambassador with the worst kind of teeth.
	That's true.
	So if you see here about...
	What?
	The impact.
	And you see here about the impact.
	We can see sustainability, diversity, community.
	Let's click on diversity here.
	You see all sorts of profiles, the usual stuff.
	DEI, racial equality journey, DEI reports and progress.
	Let's click on here.
	What makes us unique makes us stronger.
	Let's see about that.
	Normally makes you weaker.
	Look at this weird statement here.
	We are creating a space to be you.
	Is that grammatical?
	It's weird talking about creating a space.
	I mean, to a physicist like yourself, Callum, it must be even more weird because everything, particles or space, all matter is.
	Look at here, the other statement that the ultimate objective is to become a company that's focused on equity and genuinely inclusive.
	Ramon Laguarta, chairman and CEO, and What I want to show you here, they say building a workforce that reflects the real world.
	I think they took that too literally.
	Because imagine you take a graph and you say, I want my company to reflect the real world.
	And you start and you take all sorts of categories.
	You say, okay, there are many people who are violent.
	Let's have the percentage of the violent population being reflected on our workforce.
	We need more thieves.
	Yeah.
	We need more sex criminals in our workplace.
	That's the problem with this business.
	You started by saying there's a particular kind of percentage of people in prison.
	In a particular society let us found that percentage and let the workforce reflect that.
	I'm gonna take a stand for people in wheelchairs.
	Again I think that if we don't focus on structuring our institutions with meritocracy we get all kinds of weird things.
	And let me also show you some other things here.
	Diversity reports and progress at PepsiCo, a space to be you.
	Why have they done the brackets?
	It's pretty anti-Semitic.
	It's meant to be the O in you, isn't it?
	You're not well acquainted with the ADL.
	The E and I is an imperative to our long-term success and continues to be a competitive advantage at PepsiCo.
	We have all those things here.
	A space to be you again.
	What?
	Okay.
	What?
	You look like you've been maced.
	What have you seen?
	Nothing.
	Tell us.
	A space for people to be themselves.
	That's weird.
	Thank you, Pepsi.
	A space for communities to thrive.
	Well, what kind of communities?
	That's an interesting question.
	And let me just end with a tweet from... Is this a PepsiCo employee?
	Honestly, I just don't think that this is the next brand ambassador they should pick.
	Just a suggestion.
	Yeah, that's it.
	All right, let's go to the video comments.
	Well, that was a cursed one, wasn't it?
	Look mate, would you like to come up to the station with us and be interviewed?
	Can be very nasty being interviewed.
	Are you threatening violence?
	Right!
	Send for reinforcements!
	Police willfully misunderstanding a situation to turn it violent.
	Funny how achingly left-wing comedy from years ago can be seen as dangerously right-wing these days.
	It's a good point, yeah.
	The next one.
	Hello, we saw Dune Part 2 on opening night, and no spoilers, but they made some pretty egregious changes to the source material.
	The most notable and kind of funny one is Paul's wife Chaney, played by Zendaya, got the full DEI treatment and is now essentially a secular Fremen who is skeptical of Paul, her character is stripped of all its femininity, and she is now a leader of the Fedaykin, aka Muad'Dib's Death Commandos.
	In a universe that is bursting at the seams with strong women, they just had to shoehorn in another girl boss.
	That was 17 reps for anyone who was keeping count.
	I watched June Part 2 and I quite enjoyed it as a film.
	I haven't read the books yet but I know Beau is a fan of the books and he did enjoy the film for what it was worth.
	But I also did pick up on some, like her character in particular just seemed like the worst written one to be honest.
	I think it's the weakest one and clearly if they've changed it from the source material that would be why.
	I'm also a Dune fan and I also agree with Andrew that there are several sagas that you can say they have a diverse cast of characters but somehow they feel that it's not enough.
	It has to be from season one.
	Ridiculous.
	Wheel of Time was a book like that.
	They absolutely butchered the series.
	Since Carl and Callum are talking about drone warfare and, you know, the efficacy of jammers and how to use them, portable jammers actually get used quite often during farm attacks and such things in South Africa.
	They're actually quite cheap and easy to get if you know where to look, apparently.
	Yeah, well in the UK, I know the law on this, so I'm going to be careful what I say, you can buy one on the internet very easily.
	They cost, I think, 200 quid for a big one like that.
	Might be more for a bigger one like that actually, now I think about it.
	But either way, you can own them, you can buy them, just if you switch them on, you're going to jail.
	Because if you ever switch them on, you knock out the communications for quite a large area, and it's a circle.
	So to find who set it off You just go to the middle, the center of the circle, which is you.
	So yeah, it's illegal to put them on, but you can own them.
	And yeah, they do get used by people who don't care about breaking the law.
	I certainly won't be getting one of those as someone who's very much pro-government.
	Indeed.
	To the next one.
	So on the subject of Parliament not doing its job because they're afraid of being killed by the diversity, I can't help but notice that the same Parliament members are probably the ones that complain about January the 6th and it's an attack on our sacred democracy and whatnot, and basically justified rounding up everyone that attended Jan 6th, but somehow they can't do the same to all these Muslim protesters that are basically doing the same thing in their book.
	Yeah, um, they, they did talk about Donald Trump and there was some echoing of he carried out an insurrection in, in, you know, the left, particularly the left-wing parties.
	Although there were some in the conservative party that said so, and now they're whinging about violence, but they're going about it in a very cowardly way.
	Let's go to the next one.
	Harry, I must express my disappointment.
	You made a righteous and valiant effort to defend the long hair master race on Lads Hour, and you rightfully made the case that long hair is the hair of aristocracy, and is a sign of good health, good discipline, good grooming, and downright good taste.
	And unlike what Chat says, it is not a leftist aesthetic.
	This is an appeal to a naturalistic sense of beauty, unlike the less capital-Q queer, neon color-coded rebellion against nature.
	So what happened?
	Did the boys in the office coerce you, cajole you, bribe you even?
	I do believe the going rate is 30 pieces of silver.
	To be fair, I defended long hair.
	I said it wasn't leftist, and you know, you only need to point to one character in fiction.
	Aragorn.
	You know?
	Yeah.
	Aragorn had long hair.
	He pulled it off.
	It is Viggo Mortensen though, so there is that.
	But I don't think Harry was going to cut his hair anyway, and the fact that people were calling it left-wing was not the reason that he cut it off.
	I don't really care about this.
	I don't really have an opinion on hair.
	Just do what's practical.
	Hey Callum, but you grow it.
	If you don't have an opinion, how is it still there?
	The only thing I do with my hair is try and make sure there are the biggest gaps possible between going to the barber to save money.
	That's it.
	That's all I do.
	That is the most Callum thing I could have heard, so... Yeah.
	Next one.
	Dissolving Illusions by Susan Humphreys and Roman Bistrionic makes the case that better living conditions, better sanitation, better food did all the heavy lifting in ridding us of childhood illnesses like measles, mumps, rubella, smallpox and the likes, while the vaccine producers claim that the vaccines that came on the market after the decline in both sicknesses did all the heavy lifting.
	It's a really, really good book and you should give it a listen.
	All right, that's a book recommendation.
	Let's go to the next one.
	So based off the current goings-ons within the world, between America, France, England, Germany, wherever it may be, I look back at a thing known as the National Human Freedom Index.
	It scores a person's individual freedom or a country's individual freedom based off a whole host of different ranges, economics, religion.
	How would you guys Make your own freedom index?
	What would you score it off of?
	And what would be your actual range within, you know, someone truly being a free individual or free country?
	That's a good and complicated question.
	I have a symposium on that called The Idea of Freedom.
	It's symposium, let me tell you, 42.
	By that index, I think Somalia is the only free country in my book because they don't have a government.
	What's that quote?
	If they're equal, they're not free.
	And if they're free, they're not equal.
	There we are.
	The least equal society, South Africa.
	There you go.
	They're the most free.
	I think you've got to be free to be equal.
	That's the point.
	They're not the other way around.
	Oh, right.
	You've got to be unequal.
	Then you're free.
	Trust me.
	I imagine to give you a short answer, it would probably be some sort of metric of sort of government interference in people's lives, basically.
	What are you free to do and not to do?
	And make it based on the sort of standard, the median policy in the globe.
	Yeah, but they're not the only people, are they?
	Like, there are other groups in society that will restrict you from doing what you'd like them to do.
	Of course.
	I'm very close to a classical Republican view of freedom as non-domination, which is an interesting one.
	So check it out.
	I kind of like, this is going to be a weird one, but, um, so in Russia, right, not the best political freedom.
	Okay.
	I think we're all, we're all clear with that.
	But as a result, no one gives a crap about a lot of things.
	Well, personally, I don't believe this.
	It's that, you know, it's, uh, it seems to me it's an authoritarian system.
	Yeah.
	I mean, they don't give a crap in day to day life.
	That we hear about.
	No, sincerely, like if you want to, um, Okay, this might be a bad example, but there's this person with an LGBT flag in, I think it's St.
	Petersburg or Moscow, and they're shouting at this guy and they're just arguing in Russian, and the Russian guy just pulls out some mace and then sprays the woman in the face.
	I sent that to Stelios yesterday, yeah.
	The best part of that video is not anything that goes on between those two people, don't understand what's going on, not important.
	What the best part of that video is that you see everyone around them, don't even look at the situation, they're just, hmm, they just carry on.
	And you can, um, you can kind of be a weirdo in Russia, and it's fine because everyone gives a crap.
	Everyone's so defeated and apathetic from years of communism.
	There's a level of freedom that comes out of that, that's really weird.
	If everyone's given up on life, that's the ultimate freedom to Callum.
	You heard it here first.
	I will say this, and I hope Russian people understand, freedom means the freedom to say blyat.
	I'll stand behind that.
	If that's your campaign, President Trump over there.
	I think this is their keyword for many things.
	It's really funny because have you watched the videos with driving in Russia?
	Of course.
	Every now and then, you know, they're driving and the car starts sliding and they say blyat.
	Videos from Russia are just like live action GTA.
	Yeah.
	Well, uh, that's a good question.
	I don't really know how to answer properly.
	Um, that's just my instinctual thoughts.
	Let's go to the next one.
	The Jungle Gems in Ohio, looking at the Great Britain section.
	This is our international grocery store, so this is what we think people in Great Britain eat.
	Ooh, I'm interested.
	Just jam everywhere.
	Oh, okay, it's huge.
	I didn't see any big boxes of Yorkshire tea.
	Probably lots of frozen sausages.
	I see the scones.
	I see scones, yeah.
	Is it scones or scons?
	Just introduce me to the debate.
	No.
	I just want to say that I love them.
	The War of the Roses is over, we don't need to restart it, alright?
	But what do you say, Callum?
	Scones, obviously.
	You won't kill me tonight?
	You're safe.
	You can come into work tomorrow.
	What?
	That sounds terrible.
	That's really cool.
	Um, I do happen to notice that that's the preserved thing.
	So the things you can freeze or send over a long distance, which makes sense.
	But it is, it is always interesting to see how your country is represented elsewhere.
	Like when I bring Americans to the UK, I always take them, but they don't usually appreciate them.
	I always take them to the little section with American food and I'm like, look, look at you guys.
	And it's all just like disgustingly sugary sweets that nobody, even they want to eat.
	But also I think that what a British audience wants to buy out of American food is the sugary stuff and so it's a bit selected.
	It's not like they can send over like southern biscuits and gravy or southern fried ribs or something.
	You know the stuff you actually want to try, like I want to try some proper southern food but that's not going to come across the Atlantic is it?
	I found one place in London, I'll get you a link.
	It's really really good.
	Anyway, let's go to the next one.
	In all the Western world, there's a peculiar thing you can notice only here in Canada.
	Because we revere our natives as some weird intersectional aristocracy, our leaders rightfully refer to each tribe or band as a nation, which is to say a political body of, for, and by a peculiar ethnic group.
	Now, do they or any other Western leaders refer to their country of charge as the nation-state of, even though they very technically are?
	No.
	Now, this may seem like a petty distinction to some, but there is a world of difference between your life being ruined by some politically illiterate rube and a capricious cabal of quixotic quizlings who know better.
	And they do.
	Some good alliteration there.
	I would like to, you know, start referring to the Celtic Kingdom of Devon.
	I'm just saying it to wind up Callum.
	Been arguing about whether or not it's Saxon or Celtic for hundreds of years.
	Saxons are foreigners.
	Portimor.
	Yeah, whatever, get back to it.
	There's none left.
	Let's go to the next one.
	20th Century Goat presents the long-awaited sequel to The Life of Brian, The Life of Amir.
	A poignant story of love, lust, betrayal, and tolerance.
	The Life of Amir is rated R for Ridiculous.
	Coming soon!
	Oh my God, yeah.
	That's the thing I love about this whole AI movies debate is that what do you think the first movies are going to be?
	It's going to be shitposts!
	If we lived in a just world, the West would make like a Life of Brian thing for the life of Muhammad and make it really absurd.
	Yeah.
	I'm not Muhammad.
	I'm just a... No, I like my head.
	Let's go to the next one.
	He's like a horrible warlord.
	He's trying to be a tough guy and everyone starts worshipping him and saying that he's the Messiah.
	He's getting annoyed.
	Yeah.
	Let's go to the next one.
	So on the topic of shopping carts and how stores can keep them from being stolen is right here we have one where I live and this is how they do it in the area is if you take the cart any further than a certain point away from the shopping center the wheels will lock up and yes this is a thing that indicates you're not in the best neighborhood.
	This is my local grocery store.
	My condolences.
	You can go to the parking and then they have the car and they put it there and they leave the gangs.
	To be fair, in this day and age, because money's so tight, I see less and less shopping carts because we have the system of putting a one pound coin in to the trolley and that's normally enough to incentivize people to take their money out and it works.
	Wasn't that something that Tucker Carlson was amazed at in Russia?
	That they have to... Yeah, he clearly lives in a nice neighborhood.
	You have to put a pound in?
	That's true in a lot of places.
	I mean, when I go back home, you don't have to do that, to be fair.
	Hello, Mr. Ridgeback!
	Living in an ethnically non-diverse neighborhood, are we?
	Yes, we actually put our trolleys back without financial incentive.
	It's almost like we had a civilization once in Britain.
	So that's all the video comments.
	I will say something real quick because we're having a debate with the editors about this.
	So we already have a policy of trying to fist out the ones that... fist out?
	No, shift out the ones!
	that aren't suitable.
	Nice Freudian slip.
	Because they just don't make sense or we can't understand them.
	We're getting more and more gold tier commons.
	And we love them, of course.
	But we realize that if we get 100, we can't play 100.
	So there's probably a number between 100 and 0 where we need to have some kind of cutoff.
	So we haven't made any decision, I'm just letting you guys know.
	We'll be debating where that should be, and then we'll play like the best X number of those.
	Because that seems like the best way to make sure that they're high quality, which means the show's, you know, more enjoyable.
	And also, I think maybe, I mean, tell me if I'm wrong, but I think it might be funny to have a proper competition between you guys to see who can make the best video comments.
	Have a free market sort of idea of you compete for the best video comments, which creates innovation and a better product overall.
	That's my thoughts.
	Yeah.
	Which, um, I don't know, but there we are.
	So, but there may be some more stringent rules on what can be played just so it's high quality or whatnot, but none of that's being implemented now.
	I'm just thinking out loud, but then you boys know.
	Because, yeah, we can't play 100.
	And we got, I think it was 17 or something today?
	And then we were thinking, hmm, if we get 20, that's a problem, or 30.
	Yeah.
	11 today.
	I think I got told by Thomas we got 17 and then it went down to 11 because a few of them weren't suitable.
	Yeah, something like this.
	But anyway, I'm just telling you all that so you're clear on what's being said.
	Plus it's nice to read the written comments because they're actually about what we're talking about a lot of the time.
	Yes.
	In which case, we'll move on to them, shall we?
	Let's do that.
	So the first one is not related to my segment.
	It is for Calvin, which is from Charles Cottrell or Cottrell, sorry.
	Yes, go Calvin.
	So I presume that's in reference to the bad man coming on and talking to him.
	And for my segment, Dems Hate Democracy, Omar Awad says, leftists when they win by flouting the rules, that's just the consequences slash private company slash human rights.
	Leftists when they lose by the rules, this is oppression.
	Another 9-11.
	How is this legal?
	I mean, yes.
	They don't play by rules, do they?
	It's just in-group, out-group.
	It's that simple.
	Derek Power says, don't forget the court decided 9-0 on this and somehow this is a threat to our democracy.
	Yeah, of course.
	I did enjoy pointing that out.
	By our democracy they mean leftist control.
	Yes, of course.
	It's only democratic when they do it.
	They do have Democratic in the name of their party and finally, actually might do two more, Arizona Desert Rat.
	I personally think it's the Supreme Court deciding to protect Trump's individual right to run the president over a state's attempt to decide who is and isn't allowed to run for president.
	Trump is a natural born citizen and over the age of 35 constitutionally Trump has the right to run for president.
	That's true.
	The Crusader says the Dems know that if their shenanigans were upheld then the Republicans could use that same tactic against them in the future.
	That's the only reason it was a unanimous 9-0 vote.
	Okay, should we move on to your segment, Callum?
	Sure!
	The black pill suppository.
	I don't know, I kind of want to just sit and scream about states' rights for 30 minutes, but... So, Screwtape Laser says, all I can think about in the AOC clip is that New York has literally elected a woke Disney princess.
	Yeah, kind of.
	You know, the thing about Rome electing a horse for a consul.
	Have you seen British female politicians?
	Yeah, regrettably.
	Yeah, we might.
	I don't know if I can get away with doing that, but I kind of want to go and look at... So there's a particular kind of female British politician that comes from the aristocracy, and there was a lot of, you know, inbreeding.
	So a lot of them have horse face.
	I mean, like 80% of them.
	And it's really weird.
	So I might just do a segment one day that's just called Horse Face.
	Carl wouldn't let me upload it.
	It will be our proudest moment, to be honest.
	But what's going on?
	Because you look at German politicians or French or whatever, and it's like, you know, people look different.
	That's fine.
	Why are British female politicians so horsey?
	I don't know if they're all horse girls or something.
	You know how people look like they're pets.
	Well, if your pets are horses, it turns out!
	Yeah.
	So, uh, Thomas House says, stop calling it a pay cut, Callum.
	It's a wealth transfer to the richest politically connected looters.
	Yeah!
	And... Who got all that printed money?
	And the, uh, the minorities as well.
	Who got all the printed money?
	Oh, it got...
	Well in the US my understanding is most of that went to those loans during COVID, the newest printing.
	It didn't go to bankers like it did last time, it just got given to people who could lie on the form.
	The only reason that they ever print money is to transfer wealth from normal people to the rich.
	Pretty much every time that they have excess money printing, it finds its way into their hands, doesn't it?
	Increased demand for sneakers.
	Well, we've done the graphs.
	It happens.
	Sneakers are a bad example because they're so prone to theft for unknown reasons.
	Who knows who knows.
	Anyway, Supreme Doc says, at least she appreciates the tax money.
	I assume AOC.
	JJHW says, why would the Pakistanis have jobs?
	Nope, can't read that.
	But you're right, and I'm laughing because I'm angry.
	What was that?
	Oh yeah, I see it.
	Yep.
	Supreme Dark says, it should be illegal to remove that information, then it's obvious you are actively getting lied to.
	Yeah, I mean, that's the whole reason I did this, is that I think The problem is something... Okay, so let's say you're in the year 2000, the English Events League or around, whatever.
	Information free flow is not as good as it is now.
	There's a sneaking suspicion that quite a lot of the newcomers are just stealing money and you get these occasional stories in the Daily Mail, right?
	It's a bit more of a suspicion.
	Yeah, well, you know.
	But now, when we've got that ONS data and the age of the internet, I can literally see by neighborhoods and then do all the weird analysis and you get the picture of how much is being stolen.
	I think that the situation is just that bad, and transparently that bad, that they've sort of shit themselves.
	They're gonna call it micro-racism now.
	Just like, you're up that other street, I'm paying your bills!
	Yeah, I'll take the title.
	Anyway, Baystape says, I can archive data for you Callum, I doubt they will make it easy, but I can find a creative solution to scrape all the data if you want.
	If you can, that would be a service to humanity, to make an interactive, you know, that map.
	I really fear that they're gonna take that down, so if we could archive that somewhere, before they do, I mean, you've done humanity a service, if nothing else.
	Baystape will find a way.
	Salute to Baystape in the chat, boys.
	Let's move on.
	Right.
	George Happ.
	I thought that Doritos couldn't find a more cringe marketing face than the Doritos Pope.
	And yet here we are.
	They outdid themselves.
	Citizen Philosopher Detroit.
	Stelios, when you were getting your degrees, did you take a minor in psychological torture?
	I've actually raised this to you before, haven't I?
	They made me an honorary professor and asked me to teach their course.
	There's one thing I'd like everyone to know about Stelios.
	Throughout the day he'll send me videos of some of the most depraved and unawful things for his own amusement and for mine as well.
	It's not exactly that you're doing any different.
	I am sending them in return, that's true.
	Yeah.
	But there are lots of urban scholars in America doing depraved things that get sent to me.
	Omar Awad.
	It's always on purpose.
	The only question is at what level of management?
	Furious Dan.
	Why are Doritos, Twitch, and now Visa all trying to advertise with drag queens?
	Nobody likes it.
	It's also not working, financially speaking.
	I was never going to.
	Yeah.
	And Emos.
	Pepsi Lay fired this person 48 hours after they have been hired.
	Don't care.
	There was no apology and they thought this person would be a good way to sell chips.
	They have not issued an apology for hiring a pedo and I don't believe they were that incompetent.
	Bud Lighting Doritos.
	I think, you know what they say about some systems, very authoritarian and totalitarian systems, that their leaders have not, they have very bad flow of information.
	I think the world karate function this way.
	They just don't tell anyone who knew what happened to Bud Light would understand that this is a bad idea and no one said.
	Because anyone who would even suggest that would immediately be seen as a sort of, you know, last rampant bourgeoisie kind of guy.
	Well, when your ideology is a perversion of reality, then no wonder they can't see reality for what it really is, right?
	I mean, I highly suspect that they're all pedophiles, to be honest.
	I don't know.
	Animus also tells me that Doritos are not nachos.
	Sorry if I made that mistake.
	Sophie Liv, to be honest, no one should buy Doritos anyway, because it's 60% seed oil, ultra-processed poison, and... Sorry, I'm just imagining, because if they knew, they would have been sitting around being like, yes, yes, yes, the food of pedophiles, Doritos, yes, yes, yes, what a good marketing campaign.
	Which is, are they serious?
	When they arrested Jeffrey Epstein, there were actually Doritos falling out of his pockets.
	He had Dorito crumbs on his fingers and he actually suicided himself with a bunch of Doritos packets all tied up together.
	Right.
	Should we read the honorable mention?
	We want to read it.
	We're out of time, actually.
	Okay.
	This is hilariously funny.
	Is it?
	I haven't read it.
	Let's meet tomorrow.
	All right.
	Well, we'll be back.

▲