Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Feb. 25, 2020 - America First - Nicholas J. Fuentes

02:23:11

AMERICA FOR SALE? Bezos and Bloomberg Pledge BILLIONS | America First Ep. 548

Participants

Main voices

nick fuentes

01:48:27

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Show episode speakers

Speaker	Time	Text
unidentified		- Not my words, not my rules.
		I just endorse him, alright?
		I just endorse him, alright? alright?
		Last dollars is gone.
		Oh, everything.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		It's warming up.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		Everybody dare to roll.
unidentified		All right.
		All right.
		Music and COVID-19.
		This is from your biggest Protestant fan, may you one day see the light.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		Well, hey, thanks.
		Love you, too.
		But sorry, I believe in religion that makes sense.
unidentified		But as soon as people start playing games, I stop.
		I stop playing games.
		And at any moment, you should play a play.
		They said trust your man.
		I'm going to start a little bit.
		Take pause and a dollar.
		I said change from girls and a dollar.
		My mama said trust don't hold you.
		So come on.
		I'm going to start the track.
		I'm going to start the track.
		See what they said.
		I'm going to hold you.
		I'm going to hold you.
		You don't want to hold you.
		Okay.
		I'm going to start the track.
		You don't have your back with the punches.
		It's doing what they want.
		Always, always, always.
		You know what they want.
		Put them in above your head.
		Pray before you want to be everything.
		My mama said trust don't hold you.
		No, baby.
		Not my words.
		Not my rules.
		I just enforce them.
		All right?
		They said trust don't hold you.
		But they said trust don't hold you.
		They said trust don't hold you.
		They told me.
		They told me.
		Bye.
		Bye.
		I just enforce them, alright?
		Last stop, Scott.
		Everything is warming up.
		Everybody dare to oppose.
		We'll be right back.
		We'll be right back.
		We'll see you next time.
		This is from your biggest Protestant fan.
		May one day see the light.
		Well, hey, thanks.
		Love you, too.
		But I'm sorry.
		I believe in a religion that makes sense.
		But as soon as people start playing games, I stop.
		I stop playing games.
		and at any moment I can check that yay button I'm going to start the first action
		okay not
		my words not my rules I just need your stuff alright
		last time is Scott and Everything is warming on everybody who dare to oppose.
		Thank you.
		This is from your biggest Protestant fan.
		May you one day see the light.
		Well, hey, thanks.
		Love you, too.
		But sorry, I believe in religion that makes sense.
		But as soon as people start playing games, I stop.
		Thank you.
		I stop playing games.
	And at any moment, I can kick that yay button.
	They said, trust no man.
	I said, if you believe, you can take what's in your pocket.
	I said, drink with girls in your pocket.
	I said, trust no hoes who's on top of you.
	I asked you when to start the track.
	I'm just another person trying to catch you.
	See what he said.
	Okay.
	See what he said.
	See what he said.
	Warming by everybody compared to a world.
	Warming by everybody.
	This is from your biggest Protestant fan.
	May you one day see the light.
	Well, hey, thanks.
	Love you too, but I'm sorry.
	I believe in religion that makes sense.
	But as soon as people start playing games, I stop it.
	I stop playing games.
	And at any moment, I can check that yay button.
	I'm going to go first.
	Okay.
	Bye.
	Bye.
	Keep the code in the sack.
	You don't have me back.
	I just enforce them, alright?
	Not my words, not my rules.
	I just enjoy it, all right?
	I just enjoy it, all right?
	I just enjoy it, all right?
	I just enjoy it, all right?
	I just enjoy it, all right?
	This is from your biggest Protestant fan, may one day see the light.
	Well, hey, thanks.
	Love you, too.
	But sorry, I believe in religion that makes sense.
	So.
	But as soon as people start playing games, I stop.
	I stop playing games.
	I stop playing games.
	At any moment.
	I just enforce them, alright?
	Blast off the sky!
	Everything is warming up.
	We'll see you next time.
	We'll see you next time.
	We'll see you next time.
	This is from your biggest Croston fan, may you one day see the light!
	Well, hey, thanks.
	Love you, too.
	But sorry, I believe in religion that makes sense, so...
	But as soon as people start playing games, I stop playing games.
	And at any moment, you should play a play.
	I'm going to go first.
	Okay.
	Not my words, not my rules.
	I just enforce them, all right?
	They say trust, no, baby.
	I'm not sending to believe your day was in the dark.
	I'm not sending to the dark.
	Everything is warming up.
	Everybody who dares to oppose.
	Everything is warming up.
	Everything is warming up.
	Everything is warming up.
	Everything is warming up.
	This is from your biggest Protestant fan.
	May you one day see the light!
	Well, hey, thanks!
	Love you, too!
	But sorry, I believe in a religion that makes sense.
	But as soon as you can start playing games, ask that.
	I stop playing games.
	And at any moment, I can check that yay button.
	Not my words, not my rules.
	I just enforce them, all right?
	Not my words, not my words.
	Not my words, not my words.
	I can enforce them, alright?
	Blast out the sky.
	Everything is warming up.
	Everybody dare to vote.
	We'll be right back.
	We'll be right back.
	We'll be right back.
	Well, hey, thanks.
	Love you, too.
	But sorry, I believe in religion that makes sense.
	But as soon as people start playing games, I stop.
	I stop playing games.
	and at any moment I can check that yay button I'm just going to Okay
	Not my words, not my rules I can endorse them, alright
	I can endorse them, alright, let's alright, let's go to the next one.
	It's everything.
	It's warming up.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		Everybody dare to oppose.
unidentified		We'll be right back.
		We'll be right back.
		We'll be right back.
		This is from your biggest Boston fan, may one day see the light.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		Well, hey, thanks.
		Love you, too.
		But sorry, I believe in religion that makes sense.
unidentified		But as soon as people start playing games, I stop.
		I stop playing games.
		and at any moment I can check that yay button.
		Okay.
		Not my words, not my rules. not my rules.
		I just enforce them, alright?
		Woo!
		I just enforce them.
		Last time, Scott, I'm going to turn everything.
		Warming on everybody.
		This is from your biggest positive fan, may you one day see the light.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		Well, hey, thanks.
		Love you, too.
		But sorry, I believe in a religion that makes sense.
unidentified		But as soon as people start playing games, I stop.
		I stop playing games.
		And at any moment, I can check that yay button.
		I can check that yay button.
		I can check that yay button.
		Blast off, God.
		Everything.
		Warming up.
		We'll be right back.
		We'll be right back.
		We'll be right back.
		It's going to be only America first.
		America first.
		The American people will come first once again.
		With respect, the respect that we deserve.
		From this day forward, it's going to be only America first.
		America first. America first.
		America first.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		You are watching America First.
		My name is Nicholas J. Fuentes.
		We have a great show for you tonight.
		Very excited to be back with you here tonight on Monday, our first week, the first week of the show without YouTube, with the channel deleted.
		So it's truly the beginning of a new era here on Monday.
		We can restart the clock.
		New age of America First.
		And I'm excited to be back.
		It just goes to show.
		And everybody was talking about it, obviously, over the weekend.
		And this is the big development in the America First universe.
		I see all these people, like, celebrating that my channel, my show, was banned from YouTube.
		Take that!
		Oh, good!
		Serves you right!
		Whatever!
		Okay, see you on Monday, right?
		Here we are!
unidentified		Hello!
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		Welcome back to America First!
		Show goes on, right?
		So, it's exciting to be back.
		It's like a vindication.
		It's like, look, we're still here.
		We're still doing the show.
		And we've got a lot to talk about.
		It's gonna be a big show tonight.
		Our featured story is actually kind of different than usual.
		Tonight we're not really so much talking about current events.
		It's inspired by current events, but it's just like a bigger subject we're talking about tonight, which is about these billionaires.
		Something needs to be said.
		Because we addressed this a little bit on Friday, talking about how the free market conservatives, like Charlie Kirk, Ben Shapiro, and so on, are the vanguard of the capitalist class.
		And that's a phrase which I really like.
		I like saying it.
		I like the idea.
		It's so important.
		And so we're gonna expand on that a little bit more tonight.
		Like I said, we touched on it on Friday.
		And why things are the way they are in the American right.
		But tonight I want to talk about why things are in America, across the whole country, because of this class of ultra-wealthy billionaires.
		And what got me thinking about this was because of the news today, the announcement that Jeff Bezos is going to spend $10 billion On some climate change fund and I don't have the details right off the top of my head I've got a report that we're going to read but you might have seen this was all over Twitter all over the news that Jeff Bezos is starting a fund designed to combat climate change and he's starting off the fund with a 10 billion dollar contribution.
		This is 7% of his net worth.
		So that got me to thinking about all the other billions that are being spent.
		In particular with Michael Bloomberg.
		We've been talking a lot about the Democratic primary lately with the New Hampshire primary, the Iowa caucus, the Nevada caucus is coming up I think this Saturday?
		It's coming up this weekend.
		And the big question in the news today was whether or not Michael Bloomberg will qualify for the debates.
		He's not on the ballot in Nevada, but he may qualify for the Nevada debate anyway.
		But we know that he'll be in the Super Tuesday states where he's pouring in hundreds of millions of dollars already in advertisements.
		So far, he has spent more than every other campaign combined.
		And he's spent, as of today, more than $400 million on advertising alone.
		And he's said in the past that he's willing to spend up to $1 billion or possibly more on the 2020 election.
		So I see Jeff Bezos, I see Michael Bloomberg.
		Very recently at the World Economic Forum George Soros said he was creating his Open Society Institute Where he's putting one billion dollars into the fund and this is after billions of dollars pledged towards other political contributions and the list just goes on and on and on.
		What has been the constant throughout the past year at least, but you could go back even further than that, it is the influence of huge money from these huge ultra-wealthy individuals.
		Whether it's Michael Bloomberg and the billions for his campaign, buying the nomination.
		It's Jeff Bezos buying the Washington Post, buying media influence, $10 billion for climate change activism.
		George Soros, $1 billion for open borders, globalism in Europe and North America.
		It's the Koch brothers.
		Hundreds of millions of dollars towards libertarians, open borders, free markets, all the rest.
		Sheldon Adelson.
		Hundreds of millions of dollars in the last two elections, the 2016 and then the midterms, on candidates who will support Israel in the interests of world Jewry.
		The list just goes on and on so we're going to talk about that.
		That's going to be our main story tonight about the billionaires and what must be done about them because this is maybe the biggest blind site of the American right.
		It's not even really so much blind spot, it's turning a blind eye deliberately because of where their money comes from.
		This is the biggest area the conservatives are maybe Ignorant, at least when you're talking about the masses, the voters, the rank-and-file conservatives, just will not talk about, don't see the problem here, that we're never going to get our country on the right track if we don't address the problem of this insane influence of this cadre, this handful, Of ultra-wealthy globalists, transnational people.
		So that'll be our main story.
		We'll be talking about that tonight.
		It's about time.
		It's about time we named them.
		And then we'll also be talking about President Trump's immigration proposal, which is still being worked on.
		You may remember this goes way back to May 2019.
		That is when Jared Kushner and President Trump unveiled The immigration proposal.
		And we never saw a text.
		We never saw anything written.
		But you may remember we covered this on the show all the way last year back in May.
		And it's Kushner's immigration proposal.
		He's spearheading it.
		It's the White House's proposal for comprehensive immigration reform.
		And there was a recent article about this in Politico, which I think came out this week, talking about how they're still fighting, still slogging through, trying to win support for this from NGOs and think tanks and congresspeople, and they can't fight anybody to support it, even amongst the president's allies, who are immigration even amongst the president's allies, who are immigration restrictionists.
		And that's for a very simple reason.
		Going through the immigration proposal, even the people that are privy to the bill, you look at CIS, FAIR, Numbers USA, all the immigration restrictionist groups, they don't support the president's immigration proposal because it does not reduce the overall amount of immigrations.
		So, we'll talk about that.
	That'll be our other story.
	And that should be our show.
	It should be a pretty, pretty exciting, a lot of substance in the show tonight.
	There's a lot, there's a lot to talk about.
	A lot of ground to cover here with this immigration stuff and the billionaires.
	Kind of an interesting show.
	A little bit different than normal.
	Nothing's been happening.
	Nothing's been happening for like, weeks.
	And it's so funny, I've been saying that for so long, and usually when I say, there's nothing in the news, whenever I complain there's nothing in the news, something terrible happens.
	You know, last year I was complaining that there was nothing going on in the news for weeks, and then the Notre Dame Cathedral's on fire.
	And then at some point last year I was complaining nothing was happening in the news, and some guy sets himself on fire in front of the White House.
	And it seems like this happens every time that when I'm doing the show, nothing happens, I complain about it, something terrible, and I've been making a habit of complaining in the past couple of weeks, and then my YouTube channel gets banned.
	So it's kind of fitting, you know?
	It's kind of fitting that me being the prophet of doom, whenever I do my rain dance on the show for news, lightning strikes, something catches on fire, and sooner or later, I am the victim!
	Now it's me!
	Now it's my YouTube channel on fire, right?
	I complain for weeks, nothing's happening!
	And then I'm happening!
	Then I'm in the news because something bad happens to me!
	But I will persist.
	Nothing has been happening, so we're having to get creative and formulate new shows, so it's gonna be fun tonight.
	It's gonna be interesting.
	But before we dive into any of that, I do just want to clarify something.
	I said just some housekeeping things.
	I said on Friday that we would have the alternative platform for the show tonight.
	It's gonna come this week, but it won't be tonight.
	I've been working on it with my web developer all weekend.
	You might have seen that my website nicolaschafewentis.com was down over the weekend, and everybody was emailing me and tweeting at me and all the rest.
	Dick, your website is down!
	Your website is down!
	I know it's down, which I guess I can't blame people for not knowing why.
	They were just trying to help.
	But people were concerned that the website, they weren't able to reach it.
	They weren't able to load up the website.
	It was taken down because we were updating some things and getting the site ready.
	We ran into some like just very rudimentary simple technical issues.
	We were trying to reach support because we're trying to set up all these different plugins and extensions and services.
	I'm not a tech guy so I don't have the vocabulary to describe the process but in short we were putting everything together for my proprietary streaming site.
	And we just needed some support from the people that were running some of the extensions and plugins, and they weren't in the office over the weekend.
	I'm like, you know, links had expired, things were happening, I'm like trying to reach customer support, and it's like, oh no, they come back on Monday.
	So we just have to iron out just some very, it's not complicated, just some simple problems, you know, launching this very complicated project.
	It's not easy to put everything that we're putting together You know, by myself.
	Like, I don't have, obviously, some of these billionaires funding me, or huge teams, or anything like that.
	So, it's sort of a demanding project that we've undertaken here, but it will be unveiled this week, I promise.
	We just gotta put some finishing touches, polishing, And then you'll be able to go to my website and watch the show and there will be all kinds of new functions and features and that way you can't really hurt the show at all.
	Once that's set up it doesn't matter.
	I could get banned on YouTube.
	I could get banned on DLive.
	I could get banned anywhere.
	You can't ban me from my own site and it took a long time to figure everything out and Find services that are ban resistant or you know find the best way to do it so that I was basically censorship proof and hopefully that's what we will have created by at some point in this week we'll be able to unveil it and you'll be able to load up my website and it'll have all the features of the show and more so just be on the lookout for that.
	I think I said on Friday they would be ready by Monday It's a little too soon.
	It'll probably be ready in the next few days, so just be on the lookout for that.
	Just make sure you're tuning in to Twitter, Telegram, the show on DLive, whatever it is, just to see any updates about that.
	My apologies, we couldn't deliver right out of the gate, but it's this technical stuff.
	It's a complicated business, but we've got something ready right now, but it just doesn't have all the features that we need it to have, so I thought better.
	Let's launch it when it's totally complete.
	And that way, everybody will be blown away.
	People will say, wow, this Nick, he really pulled something off.
	This is incredible.
	It's going to be very exciting.
	So that's just going to be put on pause.
	Temporary delay for that.
	No worries there.
	So there's that.
	The other thing I wanted to address, you know, obviously, if you didn't catch the show on Friday, and if you have been living under a rock, For the past three days, yes, I have been banned on YouTube.
	You know, that happened on Friday, so it's still very recent.
	It feels like, to me, it's old news already because I've just been hearing about it constantly for the past, you know, 96 hours or so.
	But, yes, if you didn't catch the show on Friday, my channel was terminated permanently, completely forever, three strikes.
	The channel is no more.
	So, in the meantime, the only place you're going to be able to find the show is DLive, and then until I get my platform set up on my website.
	So just a heads up on that.
	I am going to try and get my YouTube channel back.
	It's worth a shot.
	I put out a tweet this weekend where I tagged YouTube on Twitter, and I said, Hey!
	Reinstate my channel!
	I didn't even do anything wrong!
	And some people are saying that was, like, groveling.
	It's not groveling, it's just worth a shot.
	If I could get my YouTube channel back, it would be nice.
	It's sort of, there's no real good way to do it, because if I say, can I have my YouTube channel back, then people say, oh look, he's desperate, oh look, we heard him, we got him on the ropes.
	I'll be fine no matter what.
	I'll be fine on DLive, I'm building a solution that should be, like, permanent to do the show.
	But it's nice to be on YouTube, because YouTube, obviously you've got billions of people that use YouTube that you can have exposure to through the algorithm, through the recommended section, and it's just easy, it's got all the bells and whistles, so...
	I'm gonna make an effort.
	I'm talking to Ryan Dawson.
	Apparently he's gotten his channel reinstated like four times.
	So I'm gonna try my best to get it appealed.
	I'm gonna try my best to get it reinstated.
	I honestly doubt it's gonna happen because it's like one of these political targeted things, but it's worth a shot.
	If all it takes is minimal effort, if it takes a few steps, if I have to go to YouTube headquarters and, you know, whatever, That's a small price to pay for being, you know, for getting another so many months or years on YouTube.
	So we'll see if that happens, but I'm not like, it's like if it happens, it's nice.
	If it doesn't happen, you know, we've been preparing for this day forever.
	So I just, I just want to clarify that because I put that tweet out and I hate doing that kind of stuff.
	I have, you know, I don't know if this is a bad trait, but I have so much pride When it comes to these kinds of things, my pride is telling me, no!
	We can do it without YouTube!
	We don't need them!
	It's better that I'm off YouTube!
	But, you know, the practical side of me says, the more platforms I'm on, the better.
	So we'll explore that, but no promises, and I'm not really optimistic.
	We'll be fine no matter what, but...
	It'd be nice.
	So, that's just about the YouTube thing.
	That's it, I think, of the way of housekeeping things.
	There are just a couple of things I want to say before we dive into our current events, before we dive into everything we're going to talk about for the show.
	Just want to say, hey, happy President's Day for all the wagees out there.
	I don't know, do wagees get today off?
	I was talking to some of my friends and some people have school off today and some people do not have school off today.
	Some of my friends in college don't have school off.
	My friends in high school do have school off.
	And I don't know, do private sector people have the day off or is that just government workers?
	I really have no idea.
	I just do this show, and this show is on most days except for when I don't feel like it.
	So, you know, President's Day is like if I eat too much pizza and I'm feeling queasy.
	So, happy President's Day.
	If you got the day off, congratulations.
	If you didn't, you suck.
	No, I'm kidding.
	It's, uh, you know, whatever.
	But I don't really have too much to say about President's Day.
	Everybody has, like, a, you know... I watch all this other content and people usually have a hot take on the holidays.
	Well, today's... and I usually do, too.
	Today's Columbus Day, and here's something about Columbus.
	Today's Martin Luther King Day, and here's, you know...
	The holidays, it's just all so tiresome.
	Eventually, it's like, what is there really to say about the Day of the Presidents?
	I don't know.
	Happy birthday to George Washington was the original purpose of the holiday, and like, I don't know, let's celebrate all the other presidents, too.
	What do you want me to say about this?
	So, some people are saying, well, these are my favorite presidents, and these are my least favorite.
	I think that kind of stuff is just boring.
	So, Happy Presidents Day, and then one more thing.
	Which is a little bit more substantial before we dive into the show.
	We talked about this last week as well.
	It's this genre now of Bloomberg said something racist ten years ago.
	We talked about this last week.
	Some clips surfaced where he said that all the people committing crime in New York City are like non-white young adults, right?
	What did he say last week?
	There was some unearthed conversation, remark that he made in 2015 at some private dinner where he said you could take the profile of any criminal in New York City and Xerox it and that's like all the criminals.
	And he said it's a black or Hispanic male between the ages of 16 and 25.
	And oh, he got hounded from the right.
	They call them a racist.
	And I talked about this last week, how silly that is.
	And here we are again today.
	Exact same thing.
	Exact same controversy.
	Except something a little bit different.
	Today there was another unearthed There was an unearthed audio, secret audio from I don't even know when, but he made some comments.
	It was actually on television, so it was public, where he said something to the effect that you've got like this underclass in New York City of black and Hispanic 16 to 25 year old men who are unemployed, have no job prospects, have no skills, they don't even know what skills they have, and they don't even know how to behave in the workplace.
	And oh, he's getting blasted from all the right-wing people, from MAGA Twitter, from Conservative Inc Twitter, Benny Johnson, all the turning point proxies saying, wow, he's such a bigot, he is such a terrible person.
	And I'm here reminding you once again that as much as I want to hate Michael Bloomberg, and I do, You know, look at everything about Michael Bloomberg.
	We're not a fan of him on the show.
	So, I saw some people, I tweeted about this today, and because I wasn't calling him racist, people said, oh, he's in the pocket of Bloomberg.
	I don't support Michael Bloomberg for president.
	I didn't get paid, and I'm not asking, he's paying like $150 for influencers like, I'm sorry, that's not enough.
	But you know, I'm not supporting Michael Bloomberg.
	I would never support Michael Bloomberg.
	But you make it hard when, how are you trying to convince me not to like him?
	It's because, what, he's speaking frankly about black and Hispanic young men?
	Sorry, but that only makes me like him more.
	When he says things like that, it's true!
	That's more honest.
	It's more based.
	That is more consistent with my ideology than literally anybody else running for president, including Donald Trump.
	And Donald Trump has said things like this in the past.
	If you go on his Twitter back in like 2012, there's a famous tweet he has, we retweet it all the time on our side of Twitter, where he said something like, 99% of all the murders in New York City are blacks and Hispanics.
	True!
	He doesn't talk like that anymore, and I guess Bloomberg isn't talking like that now, but I just see this across the board, and my take on this is the same as it was last week.
	I just, but I just can't get over it.
	All these MAGA people who are saying Michael Bloomberg said black and Hispanic young men don't know how to behave in the workplace and are unemployed and can't get jobs, and that's terrible!
	And that makes him a bigot.
	And that makes him a racist.
	And that proves that the Democratic Party is actually the racist, bigoted party.
	And here's where I'm going to switch it up a little bit from last week, and I put this out on Twitter today, I tweeted this.
	This is the bottom line, which I think people don't understand, maybe to rephrase it in a more concise way.
	Anti-racism is bullshit.
	I'm not an anti-racist, and you shouldn't be either.
	Anti-racism is not... I mean, that might be like a euphemism for something, but it's not a good thing.
	It's not conservative.
	It's not right-wing.
	That is nothing that should be a part of our worldview as people that are of the right.
	The country was not founded under anti-racism.
	Anti-racism is not a Christian value.
	It's not a conservative value.
	Anti-racism is a radical, revolutionary, progressive, left-wing, anti-white, egalitarian idea.
	And this is what has consumed the American right in recent years.
	It's a very recent development that now people like Dinesh D'Souza and all these other like fake conservatives, people of no convictions, people that are not temperamentally naturally conservative, ...bit of infiltrated that are now influencers or media personalities or whatever, they have embraced this idea of the American right as like the real liberal party.
	They've embraced this idea and pushed this idea on conservatives across the country that we're actually the people that are not bigoted.
	We're actually the people that are against racism.
	We're actually the people that don't care what skin color you have or where you come from.
	We're the ones that are open immigrants.
	We're the ones that bleed red, white, and blue.
	It's the left with their identity politics that are the real bigots.
	It's the left that descends from the KKK Democrats and the slave-holding Democrats.
	They're the racists all along.
	And it's like a total paradigm shift, a total reversal, where it's like, wait, we just didn't realize, oh, no, we were the good guys according to the liberal paradigm all along, and they're the evil guys.
	And it's all just a question of who inherits the legacy of so-called racism and who's going to break the mold fast enough.
	And I can't tell you what a terrible thing that is for conservatism that we've decided to embrace that.
	That now, and understand, is different from saying that Michael Bloomberg is a hypocrite.
	Because you could say, and I've heard this said before, people say, well Nick, you don't get it.
	We don't really believe any of this stuff.
	That's what they say, as if that's supposed to make me feel better.
	We don't really believe any of this.
	We're just saying this because it has a tactical benefit.
	If we call Michael Bloomberg a racist, Democrats won't vote for him.
	And I get that, and that's fine.
	Saying that Michael Bloomberg is a hypocrite, and he doesn't live up to the left-wing standard when it comes to racism, that's fine, because that's true.
	But the problem becomes when people say, no, Michael Bloomberg is a bigot, and I'm not a leftist because I'm not a bigot like them, because I'm not somebody who's going to talk about black and Hispanic crime like Bloomberg.
	I'm not going to talk about black and Hispanic I don't know what you would call it.
	Laziness, joblessness, whatever it is, like Bloomberg.
	Therein lies the problem.
	And I can see that happening.
	If you think that's not happening, it's happening across the board.
	And that was a big part of like the Turning Point USA thing.
	So I know we said a lot of this last week, but it just really can't be said enough that that is not what we are about.
	We are not about anti-racism.
	Anti-racism is not our value, it is not our priority, that is not our moral framework.
	Anybody that is perpetuating this anti-racism crusade, just take a look at who's doing it.
	It's always socialists, communists, it's another group of people, it's liberals, leftists.
	Radicals, revolutionaries, you know all this anti-racism stuff was born in the 60s and 70s and who do you think it was?
	It was all these like Jewish intellectuals, it was the cultural Marxists, the post-modernists, it was the decolonialists, I mean it's like all the worst like Political actors in American history are the ones that pushed it.
	And now, 50 years later, people think it's a good idea that we're going to embrace that and make our whole worldview built on top of that.
	Built on top of a moral crusade that came out of the most, like, degenerate politically time in American history.
	And from the worst political groups in the country pushing the worst ideas.
	Just so happens that Martin Luther King Jr., Nelson Mandela, Barack Obama, all these characters, Louis Farrakhan, just so happens that that was their crusade.
	But I'm sure that that has nothing to do with it, right?
	I'm sure it has nothing to do with the fact that it's all commies promoting that.
	It's all people that want to destroy America, that hate America, hate Christianity, hate the family, that are pushing anti-racism.
	I'm sure that's an innocuous idea that, you know, we could just incorporate into our thing.
	Wrong!
	That applies across the board by the way.
	Racism, sexism, misogyny, xenophobia, homophobia, all those words are just code words for everything that's good in our society.
	Obviously.
	Anybody that's fighting against those things is undermining all the traditional social institutions that make America great.
	You know, racism, sexism, all those different things, patriarchy, like, that is, that is the sort of, I don't know what you would call that.
	Those are the pillars.
	And I'm not, like, defending racism as defined as, you know, hating minorities.
	Like, that's not what I mean by that.
	But all those words, all those crusades are meant to undermine those traditional social institutions and the social fabric.
	So if you stand with that, you're undermining the social fabric.
	If you're standing against, you know, how race relations are, and you're standing against how gender relations used to be, and families, and all that, like, just think about what you're doing.
	So, anyway, that, that's, it's another, it's another day, it's another Bloomberg comment.
	As much as I want to hate him for being a billionaire, buying our country, it's like, well, he seems to know what's up about race relations.
	But, no, he's not, he's not based, he's not, he's not gonna govern like that, but, so I am saying that in a tongue-in-cheek way, but, We're going to move on and talk about this immigration proposal.
	from the president.
	This isn't exactly like news.
	It's really more like a reassessment at this point.
	There was a big article in Politico that came out this week about the president's comprehensive immigration reform.
	And by the way, this is different from the wall and law enforcement and illegal immigration.
	Immigration policy can kind of be broken down into two parts.
	You've got like a law enforcement angle, which is your illegal immigration.
	That's building the wall.
	That's addressing a lot of the loopholes with asylum seekers and child arrivals and things like that, which we've been talking about and that's been going relatively well for the past couple of months.
	But the other part of the immigration picture obviously is the legal immigration, which is what is our immigration system?
	How many people are we permitting to let in legally?
	Who are we permitting to come into the country legally?
	And so that has to be changed through legislation.
	And the Trump administration has said as much that they've exhausted how much they could do with executive orders and regulations and enforcement from the executive branch.
	Really that's more illegal immigration is the purview of the executive.
	Because the president is the chief law enforcement officer and illegal immigration is fundamentally enforcing the law before anything else.
	Illegal immigration is more about legislation.
	So the Trump administration has kind of put this on a back burner.
	They unveiled their plan for reforming the immigration system last May.
	Jurid Kushner spearheaded it.
	We got very little in the way of specifics.
	We got sort of like a broad outline about what was going to be done.
	And the latest news that we have from Politico is where that is in light of the 2020 election, how that's going.
	And I'll read you some excerpts from this report.
	And the reason why we need to talk about this is because while the illegal immigration is getting better, the legal immigration is still very, very bad.
	The problem is still very bad.
	The problem is still imminent and urgent and not getting solved anytime soon.
	And the president's proposal to fix it is horrible.
	Terrible.
	So we'll read this report and I'll kind of analyze where we are here.
	This is from Politico.
	It says, quote, In May 2019, President Donald Trump unveiled a much-anticipated proposal to overhaul America's immigration system and launched a quiet campaign to build support.
	It's gone nowhere, and few believe it ever will go anywhere, I think is what they mean.
	The White House is still regularly holding meetings with lawmakers, business leaders, and activists about its 600-page bill, but none of them see any hope for it to pass.
	Some outright oppose the efforts, and no one has stepped forward to introduce the legislation, in part because the White House insists on retaining control over any changes, according to three people familiar with the situation.
	Within the administration, a divide remains over the offering.
	One Homeland Security official mocked it as a silly bill.
	Outside the administration, some of the once sympathetic immigration activists are taking the rare step of opposing the White House's efforts through TV ads and email blasts.
	Even business groups that broadly support the thrust of the bill prefer more narrow legislation that has a better chance of passing.
	According to Jessica Vaughn, Director of Policy Studies at the Center for Immigration Studies, the substance is flawed because it doesn't address the most important reforms that the President's supporters want to see.
	The strategy is flawed because they are trying to do too many things.
	The proposal would admit more high-skilled, well-educated immigrants while reducing the number of people who enter the U.S.
	based on family ties or whether their native country has a low rate of immigration.
	So that is, by the way, chain migration and the diversity visa lottery is what they're talking about.
	Currently with legal immigration, a very small fraction of the people that come into the country are coming in for employment reasons.
	And most of the people that are coming into the country are coming in because of chain migration, which is another way of saying family-based migration.
	That's when one immigrant comes here and they're able to bring over their whole family.
	That's a result of the 1965 and 1990 Immigration Acts opened that right up.
	And also the diversity visa lottery system, which says that countries that have a low rate of immigration, like Central African countries or Southeast Asian countries, you know, A lot of smaller countries.
	If they don't have too many people coming from those countries to the United States, we throw the name of their country in a hat, we pull them out in a lottery system, and we bring over I think it's like 80,000 people a year through the diversity visa lottery.
	So that's what they're talking about.
	So the reform, what instead of having merit or rather instead of having family-based and the diversity-based immigration, they're going to have merit-based employment.
	That's the broad strokes of the reform.
	It says it also includes measures to boost security at the border including stricter visa screenings at the ports of entry and tighter asylum rules and expanding the implementation of E-Verify, which is an electronic system that allows businesses to check work authorization of employees.
	It would also restructure the Department of Homeland Security and create an immigration czar.
	The Deputy Director at Numbers USA, which supports immigration restrictions, said his group has concerns about the legislation primarily because it doesn't reduce the overall number of immigrants or make E-Verify mandatory.
	So Numbers USA is a great organization.
	They're one of the best immigration restriction groups that is in politics today.
	And they are not supporting the president's legislation, as their director said, because as much as some of these reforms are needed and welcome and better and an improvement, it doesn't reduce the overall amount of immigrants.
	It keeps the same and actually in some cases increases the amount of immigrants, but it's just different kinds of immigrants.
	Well, that's really not an improvement.
	And more than that, no mandatory e-verify, which is like a huge concession.
	So that's Numbers USA.
	It says more than a million immigrants are allowed into the United States each year on a permanent basis, but only a fraction, 140,000, come through employment categories.
	The rest are relatives, refugees, or individuals from countries with low rates of immigration.
	This is what I just said.
	Business groups want the Trump administration to create more permanent slots for immigrants coming to the US, saying companies have struggled to fill jobs as the unemployment rate has fallen.
	The latest plan does that, and according to the White House official, raises wages.
	But business groups remain skeptical such a massive proposal can get through a divided Congress in an election year.
	And so this is maybe the most ridiculous part about the whole bill, about the whole pitch altogether.
	They're saying at once, That the business leaders are happy with some parts of the bill because it's filling jobs that they need.
	Because unemployment is so low, what does that mean?
	When unemployment is low, there's not a lot of workers available.
	There's not a huge labor pool for major firms to pull from.
	If you're a firm and you're trying to increase your profit, you're gonna try and reduce your costs, you want lots and lots of cheap labor to hire in your factories or manufacturing or, you know, in other areas and in other kinds of companies, service information-based companies, And so when the unemployment gets low, there's less employees.
	When there's less employees, what do you have to do?
	You've got to raise wages.
	Raising wages means you're competing with other firms for a limited pool of labor, or if you raise wages, people will join the workforce.
	You know, there's the unemployment rate and then there's also the labor participation rate.
	So the unemployment rate is only the percentage of people that are participating in the labor force that are unemployed.
	But the labor force participation is a whole other number that shows how many able-bodied people in the country that can work are counted in unemployment.
	How many of them are seeking work.
	So if you're raising wages, you're bringing people into the workforce, or you're competing with other firms for labor.
	That's a good thing, by the way.
	But what this immigration proposal does, as this report says, is it's increasing the amount of immigrants that are going to get jobs, employment-based visas, and so what does that have the effect of doing?
	Obviously, if you're bringing more workers, it's what it says, the firms want more permanent slots for workers, And that's what the bill does.
	It creates more permanent slots, more permanent people coming over here on employment visas.
	That means there's more workers in the country, there's a bigger labor pool, and that means that firms don't have to compete, they don't have to raise wages, they don't have to offer more benefits, anything like that.
	It fits their bottom line.
	So they say all that, okay.
	And then in the same breath, they say, well, it also raises wages.
	How is that possible?
	How is that possible?
	How does that make any sense at all?
	That on the one hand, you're flooding the zone with more workers, with more labor, and that's all we've been doing for 60 years.
	What do you think has fueled the enrichment of firms and millionaires and billionaires?
	And Wall Street and all the major cities at the expense of the middle and the working class.
	It is the constant and ever-increasing supply of cheap labor.
	That is a story of our economy since 1965.
	And for once we have a president who might be an immigration restrictionist who says at the bare minimum we have to put the American worker first.
	And what does that mean?
	It means you turn off the spigot and instead of having this flood of labor coming in that it's just like What is the expression?
	Shooting fish in a barrel for firms just be pulling labor left and right.
	It's like free.
	It's like taking candy.
	Instead they would have to compete with one another and in doing so raising wages and making the workplace better and more benefits and so on.
	You know, so I just don't understand how you have these two things at the same time.
	How, on the one hand, it's more immigration flooding in and necessarily lower wages.
	You know, if there's more of something, it's worth less.
	If there's more of something, the price goes down.
	This is basic supply and demand.
	So to say these two things at the same time is impossible and ridiculous.
	Well, we're going to increase employment, but also increase wages.
	Well, it doesn't work like that, actually.
	And people are responding to this on our side.
	Mark Krikorian, who is, by the way, not a friend of the show.
	Very nasty guy.
	He is the Executive Director of Center for Immigration Studies.
	CIS is a great organization, but Mark Krikorian is a dumb asshole.
	He says that Kushner also called him looking for support for the bill.
	Brett Krikorian said he rebuffed the overture from Kushner, telling Kushner he couldn't back a plan that doesn't reduce the total number of immigrants.
	He said, quote, there is zero chance this proposal could become law in an election year with a divided Congress.
	That ship has sailed.
	And that's according to RJ Hauman, who is a director at the Federation for American Immigration Reform, which also wants to reduce the amount of immigration in the United States.
	He says, quote, however, things could be different in 2021 after the American people choose between an immigration system that puts them first and whatever open borders prescription Democrats settle on.
	So the main idea here in this article is number one about the proposal itself and then to me about where immigration restrictionists are.
	I'm an immigration restrictionist.
	That's probably my most strongly held belief, my biggest priority.
	As a political person, you know, according to my political beliefs, that's the most important thing we have to take care of, is restricting immigration.
	I'm in favor of an indefinite moratorium on all immigration, which means that for the time being, indefinitely, with no set time period, no set deadline, We shut down all immigration.
	And you could have something like net zero immigration where you get net zero means that as many people are leaving the United States, that's how many you can take in.
	So for example, if like 300,000 people leave the United States in a year, you could bring in 300,000.
	I think even that might be a little excessive.
	I'm not a policy wonk but we basically just got to shut it down.
	We've got more than a million people coming in legally every year.
	Millions coming in illegally every year.
	We've got to shut all of it down indefinitely.
	Some people said 10-year moratorium.
	I say indefinite.
	Who knows where we'll be in 10 years.
	We could be worse than we are now.
	So just shut it down indefinitely and we'll figure out when we open it back up.
	That's how immigration has worked forever in the United States.
	For as long as we've had the United States, you have a wave of immigration, and then you have basically a moratorium.
	I don't think they've called it that in the past, but that is traditionally and conventionally what happens.
	You get a big wave, we have too much immigration, people get sick of it, and then they shut it down for 10 years.
	And then they open it up, and then they shut it down.
	And we just keep getting more every year for the past 60 years.
	So what if we shut it down for 60 years?
	That would be commensurate to how long it's been open and increasing.
	And maybe that sounds like a long time.
	So maybe it's 50 or 40.
	But indefinite.
	Until we can figure it out, we should not take any more substantial amounts of people.
	That's my position.
	And I think the best organizations in the country When it comes to immigration restriction are the Center for Immigration Studies, the CIS, the Federation for American Immigration Reform, which is FAIR, and NumbersUSA.
	All three of those organizations constitute like the strongest, the most vocal, the most consistent immigration restrictionist voices on the American right.
	I guess in the country in general.
	I don't even think they're strictly right-wing.
	Not a single one of those groups supports President Trump's immigration proposal.
	And that should tell you something.
	I think that should tell you all you need to know with this immigration proposal and what a huge disappointment it is.
	And that gets to the other big point, which is what exactly is in the immigration proposal.
	People like Charlie Kirk and others have said that this is a patriotic immigration plan.
	It really isn't.
	It changes the structure of who's coming into the country, but it doesn't change the overall numbers.
	Or, better yet, it doesn't reduce the overall numbers.
	That's the first thing that's wrong with it.
	It doesn't matter if people are coming here because they've got a job lined up, or they're coming here because they got a relative in the country.
	They're still coming here!
	By the millions!
	That's insane!
	We can't handle that!
	We can't handle, certainly, people that are coming here and they don't have a job lined up, and they're just going to take welfare, and they're low-skilled and, you know, underemployed or whatever.
	We definitely can't handle that, which is what the current system is, but we still can't handle if we have a million people coming in and they're highly skilled, because that still does damage.
	In some ways, it actually does more damage, because the people that are coming in for the family-based migration Maybe they're pulling entitlements.
	Maybe they're pulling a check from the government.
	They're a public charge or something like that.
	And that's bad.
	And they're coming into these cities.
	They're going into, in a lot of cases, these ghettos or these ethnic enclaves.
	Or they're taking really low-wage work or really low-skill work.
	And that's bad too.
	But think about the alternative.
	When you bring in all high skilled STEM workers or tech workers or, you know, other highly educated workers that would be permitted through employment visas, who are they displacing?
	They're displacing all the college kids, all the advanced degree holders in our country that come from our universities.
	It's hard to argue that that's actually better.
	Some people are saying, well, you know, we're getting the same amount, but it's better because, well, these are high IQ, highly educated Indians and Chinese.
	I don't know if that's better.
	Because it's like, instead of importing an underclass, we're importing a new middle class.
	And who do you think they're replacing?
	Our middle class!
	That's us!
	That's not a good thing.
	I would rather have an immigrant underclass than an immigrant overclass, wouldn't you?
	If we're going to totally transform the demographics of the country, in my opinion.
	I would rather be safe and secure as a middle or upper middle class or even a working class person, right?
	And be secure in my status as a Native American and maybe you have people that, through our benevolence, we've allowed to come in and they've got the rough neighborhoods and whatever.
	As opposed to people are coming in and they're doing better than us, and you go to the rich districts of your cities, the financial districts or whatever, and it's all immigrants that are driving the fancy cars and taking the best jobs, and they have the best salaries, and they have the most influence?
	That would be worse!
	How is that better?
	Neither of them are good, by the way.
	They're both bad.
	We just have to have less immigration.
	I don't care who comes in, as long as we get less of them.
	We could have, you know, and I don't know, criminals or drug dealers coming in, but we could have people with no skills, no education, whatever.
	I prefer 100,000 people with nothing lined up in the country than a million people are going to come in and take jobs away from my peers that just graduated college with $100,000 in debt for advanced degrees, and they take all the best jobs, and we got to work the shitty jobs.
	We just have to reduce all the numbers.
	That's the first thing that's wrong with the bill.
	The second thing that's wrong with the bill is no E-Verify.
	E-Verify, if you don't know, is a system where if an immigrant or anybody applies to work for a job, the employer, the firm, will have to double check, they'll have to verify with the Department of Homeland Security that they are in the country legally.
	That means that their visa hasn't expired.
	That means that they're not an illegal immigrant.
	Mandatory E-Verify means that you must verify for any firm that the person here is supposed to be where they are.
	And you understand that if we had mandatory E-Verify, this would be a huge game-changer because all the jobs would dry up for everybody that's here illegally.
	Virtually all the jobs.
	You'd still probably have some like, you know, these like off-the-books type businesses like these landscaping companies or You know, cash businesses, stuff like that.
	In these ethnic enclaves in particular, you have a lot of fraud.
	But across the board, jobs would begin to dry up.
	For people that don't belong here.
	And if the jobs dry up and they can't get entitlements or anything like that, they'll just go home.
	They'll just leave.
	This is what Mitt Romney talked about in 2012, the self-deportation idea.
	And it's totally true.
	If immigrants know that they can't get a job here, they'll leave.
	And better yet, if people that have yet to come here know that if they arrive here they won't have a job when they get here, they won't even come in the first place.
	And so these are like the two biggest things that are necessary in an immigration proposal.
	Reducing the amount of immigrants altogether and mandatory e-verify.
	These are essential as far as meaningful immigration restrictionist immigration reform goes.
	You have to have them, otherwise you might as well not bother.
	Neither of these things are in the bill.
	It's unacceptable and As far as this administration goes, I've been more white-pilled with the wall.
	The contracts look like they're coming together.
	The money is being allocated for the wall.
	The loopholes are being closed.
	Enforcement is better than it was a year ago.
	But look, that's one part of the conversation.
	If that's beginning to look better, that's half of the story.
	And you know, that's not exactly half, but you know, that's one part of the immigration problem.
	The other part is bad and getting worse.
	And the Trump administration is going to facilitate it getting worse.
	This is no good.
	We have to change the paradigm, not just on illegal immigration, which is no amnesty, no pathway to citizenship, no legalization.
	The conversation should be, how many do we deport?
	And how high should be the structure on the border?
	So that paradigm is moving.
	But what about legal immigration?
	It's like no progress.
	This proposal is hardly any different from what any of the other candidates would have proposed.
	Cruz, Rubio, any of these guys.
	And maybe it's the same as what Mitt Romney and John McCain proposed.
	The sort of merit-based nonsense.
	It's no good.
	And they try to pitch it like this is immigration patriotism.
	Charlie Kirk always pivoted towards the RAISE Act, or the President's Immigration Proposal.
	You know, if you remember during the Groyper Wars, we would go up and ask Charlie Kirk, how do you support mass legal immigration?
	And he changed his mind along the way and said, well, I don't support that anymore.
	I support the RAISE Act.
	And you know, that's a great thing.
	Well, the RAISE Act is never going to pass.
	And as far as I know, that's dead.
	We have is the President's immigration proposal, which doesn't reduce immigration.
	And so like, up, down, visas, lottery, chain migration, it really doesn't matter if it's still millions of legal immigrants.
	We're not making any progress.
	That's really no better.
	In a lot of ways, it could actually be worse.
	So...
	Two thumbs down.
	Thumb down for no E-Verify.
	Thumb down for no reduction in overall immigration.
	This proposal sucks.
	It's no good.
	Unacceptable.
	I'm not going to say I wouldn't vote for the President because of this because, you know, if you say that we shouldn't vote for the President because his immigration proposal is bad, well then that's obviously a logical inconsistency because then just take a look at what the Democrats are proposing, you know.
	Democrats are proposing it's not illegal to come to the country undocumented, right?
	Without your papers, without a visa.
	Democrats are saying decriminalize illegal immigration, open borders, jam up the courts, citizenship means nothing, borders mean nothing, and people are like, I won't vote for Trump because his immigration plan is bad.
	Well, what does that say about the alternative then, you know?
	But I will just say it's a big disappointment.
	Hopefully, if he wins the White House, he'll win the House of Representatives.
	And if he wins the House of Representatives and the Senate, then we could get a good immigration bill.
	I mean, it's like, possible.
	I'm not gonna say it's gonna happen, but at least then it's possible.
	It's not possible if they divided Congress.
	So that's the immigration proposal.
	It's no good.
	We're gonna move on and talk about Bloomberg and about Jeff Bezos and all this, our billionaire segment.
	And I don't know how this is gonna go over.
	I don't really know.
	I don't do these complex analytics for my audience and who watches this show.
	I don't know how many people watch this show are libertarians or, you know, very mainstream conservatives, free market people, anything like that.
	But I'm none of those things.
	When it comes to economics, I'm not a socialist.
	I'm not a communist.
	I'm not even really left-wing on economics.
	I'm basically a centrist.
	I don't have an ideological conviction about the economy.
	I don't view the economy through an ideological lens.
	I think that what we should do with the economy is what's best for the nation.
	And whether that infringes on the tenets of the free market, religion, don't care.
	And whether that means eating the rich and the tenets of communism, don't care.
	What I want is an economy that works for families, it works for the nation, It works for the middle class.
	It ensures order, stability, political stability in particular, that kind of thing.
	That is what I care about.
	And pursuant to those ends, I think we should do whatever is in our power, whether that's through the government, whether that's through the private sector.
	You know, for example, I believe in private property.
	I think the price system is good.
	You know, price is communicating things about relative scarcity.
	That's fine.
	Markets are generally a good thing.
	Lower taxes and having a competitive economy, I think, is a good thing.
	But on the other hand, we clearly have a lot of perverse incentives in the economy about households, about marriage, about education, health care, all kinds of things.
	And I'm willing to say that the government should intervene when money, when markets, produce bad effects, bad externalities.
	That is how I think about the economy.
	So I'm going to preface what I'm about to say by saying that.
	You know, there are some people that watch this show and think, oh, he's not on board with a total free market, he's a communist.
	And, you know, conversely, a lot of left-leaning people will say that I'm the same free market guy as Ben Shapiro.
	Neither is true.
	I really am thinking beyond capitalism and socialism.
	And that gets to the featured story for tonight, which is about billionaires.
	We have to talk about this.
	Conservatives don't like to talk about it because they think that if you're talking about millionaires and billionaires, you sound like Bernie Sanders.
	And if you're talking about billionaires, then what you're talking about is equality of outcome, right?
	You're talking about inequality, and when you're talking about inequality, that means wealth redistribution, and wealth redistribution is bad.
	Rand Paul said so.
	Ron Paul told me so, right?
	But we have to talk about the pernicious influence of big money in our country, particularly of concentrated wealth, super wealth, in the hands of these ultra-wealthy individuals.
	And what do I mean by this?
	Why are we talking about this tonight?
	Well, I saw in the news today, and you might have seen, that Jeff Bezos, richest guy in the world, richest man in modern history, bar none, is creating a $10 billion fund to stop climate change.
	And I'll read you just a couple of brief reports about these different people and their activities.
	This is about Jeff Bezos.
	It says Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos announced Monday that he is committing $10 billion to fight climate change, which he calls the biggest threat to our planet.
	Bezos says the funds will go toward the creation of the Bezos Earth Fund.
	Nice knock down my mouse there.
	This global initiative, he says, will fund scientists, activists, NGOs, any effort that offers a real possibility to help preserve and protect the natural world, he wrote in an Instagram post.
	He goes on, I want to work alongside others both to amplify known ways and to explore new ways of fighting the devastating impact of climate change on the planet.
	And so you can be assured that in some capacity, this is like a political slush fund.
	If he says it's going towards activism and NGOs, that is political activity, right?
	It's going towards scientists.
	Okay.
unidentified		Yeah.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		I mean, maybe, maybe it's going to go to innovators and scientists, some of it, but if it says activists and NGOs, what do you think that is?
		It's a lot of political lobbying, a lot of political activity, protests, that kind of thing.
		$10 billion slush fund.
		And that's easy for this guy.
		Jeff Bezos, his net worth is $126.9 billion.
		$126.9 billion.
		That's after he gave $30 billion to his wife in that divorce.
		So $30 billion to his wife.
		He's still the richest man in modern history with $130 billion.
		$10 billion he pledges.
		That's 7% of his net worth.
		That is pocket change for somebody like Jeff Bezos.
		He could just do $10 billion and that's more money than anybody like you or me or anybody you know combined will ever see in their entire lives.
		Just throwing it out there for a political slush fund.
		So I saw that.
		And of course this comes on the heels of all kinds of other billionaire political activity.
		Michael Bloomberg.
		This is according to the New York Times.
		Michael Bloomberg has made it clear he's going to try to buy the presidency.
		His campaign spent over 188 million dollars of his own money in just the last quarter of 2019.
		And actually, it's even a shorter amount of time than that.
		In five weeks, the last five weeks of 2019, from when he announced to the end of 2019, he spent nearly $200 million.
		More than all the other candidates combined.
		And, on top of that, as of this morning, today, $417.7 million on advertising alone.
		$17.7 million on advertising alone.
		So we're already in the ballpark of $600 million.
		The general election hasn't even started for Michael Bloomberg.
		One guy.
		He says he's prepared to spend a billion dollars of his 64 billion dollar fortune.
		As of this week, Bloomberg's 2020 campaign has 2,400 staffers, with 2,000 located across the country and 400 at his New York City headquarters.
		And he's opened 150 campaign field offices.
		More than this for his employees, he buys them iPhone 11s.
		He pays for them for three meals a day, caters meals, buys them all kinds of supplies.
		So he's got the most staffers.
		They're the best paid.
		They're the most catered to.
		He's hired so many people with his political apparatus that other campaigns are struggling to find political operatives for their campaigns.
		There's a big story about this last week, that state and local campaigns can't even find anybody to hire because Bloomberg has literally hired everybody, like all the staffers in the country.
		Bloomberg, 64, 61, somewhere around there, billion dollar fortune, Could spend up to and more than 1 billion dollars on this campaign alone.
		Recently, then, there's the case of George Soros.
		This was at the World Economic Forum in Davos.
		He pledged 1 billion dollars for a new university network project to battle the erosion of civil society in a world ruled by quote, would be an actual dictators and be set by climate change.
		Speaking at the forum, Soros said humanity was at a turning point and the coming years would determine the fate of rulers like Donald Trump and Xi Jinping as well as the world itself.
		He described the plan of the Open Society University Network as the most important project of his life and would be an international platform for teaching and research that existing universities all over the world would be able to join.
		He said quote to demonstrate our commitment to this organization we are contributing 1 billion dollars to it.
		And that's on top of billions of dollars that he's already pledged to other slush funds.
		Billions of dollars.
		He's worth 8.3 billion dollars in total.
		Then there's the case of Sheldon Adelson, a right-wing character.
		You know, Bloomberg, Bezos, Soros, these are all obviously ostensibly left-wing people.
		But then you've also got the case of Sheldon Adelson or the Koch brothers on our side.
		The Guardian reported that Sheldon and Miriam Adelson donated a total of $113 million in the 2018 midterm elections.
		There were $33.4 billion collectively.
		in the 2018 midterm elections.
		They're worth $33.4 billion collectively.
		And the Koch brothers, I couldn't even find reliable information on them, actually.
		I scoured the internet, but it's safe to say that they've spent something like a billion dollars in the ballpark over the last ten years in politics.
		And so all of this is to say, this is wrong.
		This is deeply wrong in our country.
		It's not wrong that people can have a fortune.
		It's not wrong that people can become rich in our country.
		I don't think there's anything wrong with that, of course.
		But there is something wrong that our country is basically just up for sale.
		That when it comes down to influence, political power, making decisions that matter for millions and millions of people, often it comes down to a handful of people that have most of the resources.
	You know, somebody like George Soros, Michael Bloomberg, Jeff Bezos, Sheldon Adelson, and the Koch brothers.
	You know, this is five people who will wield more influence over the lives of 330 million people than probably all the other people put together.
	I don't know if that's safe to say, but something like that.
	That distribution of power is wrong.
	That distribution of power is not sustainable or tenable.
	I don't know how you could see or think that we're living in a free society We're living in any kind of a republic or the society that the founding fathers intended to have.
	If you have that kind of a discrepancy between the power of, you know, a handful of people and all the rest, that just simply isn't what anybody had in mind.
	Because, and this is what I hear all the time from libertarians is, well, there's no alternative to this.
	This is the free market at work.
	People make $150 billion, and then they can buy the presidency, and they can buy the Congress, and they could buy elements of the private sector.
	You know, they could basically just exert more influence than just about everybody else combined.
	This is the free market at work.
	And more than that, this is what the Founding Fathers intended.
	You know, the Founding Fathers were basically crypto-libertarians, and their overriding conviction was the free market, capitalism, and so what they wanted was for Jeff Bezos, with $130 billion, to be able to spend tens of billions of dollars, or be able to spend tens of billions of dollars on whatever political activities that he so chooses.
	And the same is true with Michael Bloomberg.
	You know, this is the Founding Fathers' dream.
	That a Jewish guy in New York City could accumulate $65 billion and buy his way into the presidency by buying a political army across 50 states and bribing everybody on his way there from journalists to pundits to party officials to everybody else buying advertisements, commercials, door knockers, field offices, employees, all the rest.
	Obviously, this is not what the Founding Fathers had in mind.
	And I'm not even defending everything that the Founding Fathers set out for our country, but I'll tell you, it wasn't that.
	This is the argument that we hear.
	We hear that what our country is about is freedom, and freedom means that rich people can do whatever they want.
	Well, that's wrong!
	That is completely wrong.
	What the Founding Fathers set out to do in our country, what the country is based on, was about distribution of power.
	Power checking itself.
	Right?
	The Founding Fathers did not create a democracy to have the free society ever.
	They didn't set up even a totally free market.
	What they set up was a very sophisticated system of checks and balances, federalism where the states have power and the federal government has other powers.
	Three branches in the federal government.
	You've got judicial, legislative, executive, so one side doesn't battle the other.
	You've got a chamber in the House for the people, a chamber in the Senate for the states.
	You've got some elements of the country that are elected by popular vote, some elements where the aristocracy exercises restraint.
	And I'm not defending the founding father system is perfect.
	I'm not one of these ride-or-die constitutionalists or anything like that.
	I'm not naive about the fact that small government and what the Founding Fathers created is never coming back, but it is to say that we're told that this is what conservatism is.
	Conservatism is conserving the Founding Fathers, and the Founding Fathers meant that this is what it's supposed to be.
	Well, that's not true.
	And so once we dispense with that myth, once we dispense with this idea that, you know, having billionaires buy things is part of our sacred tradition, let's talk about the merits of a system like this.
	Once we've dispensed with the idea that this is what they would have wanted, this is constitutional.
	Let's just talk about whether it's practical, whether this is something that's sustainable for us to have in the society, or what the benefits are for us as conservatives.
	Free market people really do believe that what is critical to having a moral society Is that the government doesn't interfere in the economy.
	That's what I meant earlier when I said I don't have any ideological convictions about the economy.
	The economy has become ideological for conservatives.
	It's actually even become more than that.
	It's almost religious or moral.
	They believe that a free market is not just good for the country.
	They think it's the only moral way to govern a country.
	Because if there's too much government interference, that interferes with your God-given rights, your natural rights to What, buy and sell across state lines or across international lines?
	Something like that?
	That's their conviction, that a free market is a moral imperative.
	They think it is a moral imperative, in other words, that people are able to amass these giant fortunes and then do whatever it is that they want with them.
	And whatever effect that has, positive or negative, we can have no say in that because that is simply a moral way to conduct the society.
	This is why you get a lot of like free market libertarian people that are just boneheads.
	They might even concede that the free market and that the current paradigm, the current system of rich people dominating the political conversation They might even concede that this has negative effects, but they will argue that it is necessary anyway because it is the only moral way to have it this way.
	Even if it's bad, that's the only moral way to conduct our society.
	I think that's wrong too.
	We have to dispense with that logic as well.
	We have to think what is best for the country, what is best for the people in the country, not what is in the abstract natural rights doctrine, what is best for the individual from some Lockean perspective.
	That is fundamentally an immoral or amoral way of thinking.
	We have to think what is best for all the people in the society.
	What is best for the working class, middle class, the upper class?
	What is best for the society as a whole organism, as an ecosystem, as people relate to one another, the stability of the country?
	All these things must be taken into consideration.
	And as conservatives, we have to look at things not just like the economy, but the entire picture of the country.
	And we could look at things like immigration, for example.
	It's actually perfect that we talked about immigration and now this.
	Let's look at immigration.
	This is one of the most important issues in the country.
	Immigration is probably the biggest problem that we face.
	It's the number one threat to our country.
	Number one threat to our identity.
	Number one threat to the stability and orderliness, cohesion of the country.
	Number one threat to our culture.
	It's eroding the working and middle class.
	It is the biggest threat to our country.
	What's causing mass immigration?
	If it's so bad for the country, why do we always get it?
	Why do we always get more of it?
	Even though people, if you look at all the polls, if you look at all the opinion surveys, even if you look at a lot of ballot measures that have been passed in the different states over the past 25 years, people universally want less immigration.
	Why do we always get more?
	Who wants more immigration?
	Well, the answer is obvious.
	It's the rich.
	It's the billionaires.
	The firms.
	It's the people that own the firms.
	The firms that employ immigrants.
	You know, we just got done talking about it.
	Very simple equation.
	You've got a firm that wants to maximize its profit.
	Well, how do you do that?
	Increase revenue, decrease cost.
	What's the biggest cost for most firms?
	It's labor.
	It's employees.
	How do you reduce the costs?
	Well, if you have a constant supply of cheap labor, or just labor in general, but people that'll take less pay, or if you have so many people in the country, everybody will be forced to take less pay.
	You don't have to pay people as much.
	You can have more profit.
	There is a natural financial incentive in a free country, in a free market, for the ultra-wealthy to lobby for more immigration.
	It is clear as day, inarguable, that that economic incentive exists.
	That all these titans of industry will use their money, insofar as it is cost effective, insofar as that's going to create a positive return, to use their money to bend Congress
	To their will to lobby for more immigration because if they spend this much money to elect a certain politician, politician turns around an amnesty, turns around an immigration bill like in 1990 or 1965 or the amnesty under George W. Bush or under Reagan or so on, and their bottom line increases by this much.
	It's pretty obvious.
	And that's been the equation with immigration for the past 60 years.
	If you look at the economic benefits of immigration, immigration since 1965 has brought in the short-run surplus economically from immigration is $2.1 trillion.
	Almost all the wealth, almost all of it, That immigrants have brought by growing the economy has accrued to the people that own firms.
	A lot of people talk about the economic benefit of immigration.
	And they'll say, well look at all this money that came from immigration.
	Look at how much the GDP grew.
	But they don't talk about where the money went.
	Of course, we live in a country.
	The money just doesn't go into the country's bank account.
	It goes to people in the country.
	Who did it go to?
	Well, if you break down the numbers, almost all the economic surplus derived from immigration went to the firm owners, went to the millionaires and billionaires.
	And who did the costs from immigration, who paid for those?
	You know, you have surplus and you have cost for immigration.
	And on net, there was more of an economic benefit than a cost.
	But the benefit and the cost doesn't go to the same people.
	The benefit goes to the firm holders who paid the price for all the people coming here.
	Where did the cost come from?
	The people competing with the immigrants.
	That's the story of immigration.
	On net, you had a little bit more benefit than you had cost.
	On net, there was this $2 trillion surplus.
	Almost all the benefits went to one group of people, the people that employ the immigrants, and all the costs that are still paid might be outnumbered, might be outweighed by all the benefit, but the cost is paid by people different than the benefit.
	The cost was to the working people, middle and working class people competing with the immigrants.
	And so here's something very obvious.
	We're the vast majority of the country is competing with immigrants and only very small percentage of people are the ones employing them.
	Very small percentage of people that are owning the firms.
	And so how does it make sense that the very small number of people owning the firms get to dictate a policy on immigration where it delivers huge costs, or it extracts rather, huge costs for most of the population and benefits this very small minority that does all the political spending?
	How is that a system that is right?
	How does that make any sense?
	That's one example.
	That's one issue.
	You could look at trade.
	It's the same story.
	When you look at free trade, who has paid the price?
	Who has paid the cost for free trade?
	All this creative destruction.
	Who's been destroyed in the creative destruction process?
	The workers.
	Who always wins in the creative destruction process when you're talking about free trade?
	You know, they say that, well, a factory may close here in the United States, but it's making the economy more efficient.
	Well, some jobs are eliminated, but it opens up more jobs.
	That's what they say about something like free trade.
	Well, the people that are unemployed, that are destroyed in this creative destruction process, the people whose jobs go away, they don't get the new jobs, right?
	Do you follow that?
	The argument is, well, maybe a factory closed down in Springfield, but the money saved allows us to invest in some kind of high-tech information center in Chicago.
	If you're looking at Illinois as an example.
	Well, the people unemployed in the factory don't then migrate and learn all the skills and get the new jobs.
	They're just stuck in their town.
	They're just stuck where they are.
	With no luck.
	You're out of luck.
	No job, no income, no nothing.
	And you're just left to fend for yourself.
	Well, I mean, they just got destroyed.
	And maybe some people get lucky somewhere else.
	Maybe they don't.
	But who always benefits?
	It's the people that own the company.
	Maybe the company will shut down a factory here and the workers that work there are out of luck, but the company will open up something somewhere else.
	Maybe in China.
	Maybe Mexico.
	Maybe somewhere else in the country.
	Maybe they do a different service.
	Maybe it's an investor.
	Maybe they sell the company and buy something else.
	The person that's doing the buying and selling at the top always wins.
	It's immigration.
	It's trade.
	It's every sector of these political issues where harm is being done to most of the people because it's the tiny amount of people that are making the decisions that benefit them.
	It's like a parasitic relationship where value, money, everything is extracted from the most and it's given to the people that are at the top.
	And the people at the top are the ones calling the shots.
	That's why it is.
	And it's a self-perpetuating system.
	They have the resources.
	They're the ones doing the political spending.
	You know, I might do political spending.
	Maybe I donate, what was the maximum contribution?
	$2,000?
	Somewhere in that ballpark.
	Maybe I donate $2,000 to the Trump campaign, okay?
	Michael Bloomberg spends $1 billion for his campaign.
	All the money raised in these small dollar contributions for all the candidates put together does not match a fraction of the money that Michael Bloomberg alone will spend on his campaign.
	That's the system we've created.
	And so we're not talking about an aristocracy.
	We're not talking about a plutocracy, an oligarch, anything like that.
	We're talking about, like, this many people making all the important decisions for everybody else.
	And, by the way, maybe that wouldn't be a problem, but they're making the wrong decisions.
	And that's when it becomes our problem as conservatives.
	Conservatives enable these people through the free market.
	They enable Bloomberg, Soros, Adelson.
	You'll hear these conservatives, and they'll say, you know, well I don't agree with Bloomberg, I don't agree with Soros, but God bless them.
	That's what America's all about.
	You come here, and no matter where you start off, you can make it to the top.
	I don't like these capitalists, but I love capitalism.
	Well, that doesn't make any sense.
	I'm sorry.
	On some level, they delude themselves into thinking that these two things are consistent, that these two things can go together, because they believe that you can divorce the people from the system, that the free market is fundamentally a good system.
	It's only because of the abuses.
	It's only because of the abuses of people which cannot be controlled that is the problem.
	And anyway, that's the price of freedom.
	Well, I don't really want to pay the price of freedom anymore.
	I'm actually tired of the abuses of the people that are enabled by the system.
	If the system, by its nature, enables abuse, maybe it's a bad system.
	They act like it's a coincidence.
	They act like, oh, it's an accident.
	We just got unlucky this time.
	Aw, dammit!
	This free market system, which by the way has all the incentives for this stuff as I just explained, ah dammit, this free market system once again created a plutocratic class of billionaires that are looting and pillaging the country through free trade and mass migration.
	Ah, we just got a really bad, bad luck of the draw this time.
	Well, maybe we could get other billionaires that are gonna be more charitable.
	Now, maybe that argument makes sense until you think about the fact that it's built into the system.
	As I just said, the incentives are such that you get to this point of wealth and there's a financial incentive for you to make the immigration system the way it is.
	There's a financial incentive for you to make the trade regime the way it is.
	It is built into the system.
	These are not accidental abuses that can be combated with.
	Other accidents, you know, in other words, other instantiations of success stories of rich people that are going to go the other way.
	Why do you think it is that George Soros and the Koch brothers are advocating for open borders?
	They're supposedly right and left.
	Well, they're both advocating for open borders because they both benefit from open borders as firm owners, as owners, as investors, venture capitals, whatever you want to say, financial people, that group at the top, the rich.
	That is their interest.
	It is built into the cake that that is their financial incentive.
	Baked into the cake, rather.
	And that's why, allegedly, on these distinct and separate sides, they're pushing for the same thing.
	Because it's not an accident.
	It is systemic.
	And conservatives have been enabling this now for like 40 years.
	Perpetuating the system, perpetuating a system that enables their political enemies to get into these high positions of power and then loot and pillage and do all these anti-conservative things.
	Why would we enable that?
	Why would we allow that?
	How does that make any sense?
	We enable the free market system as conservatives who believe in the family, who believe in Christianity, who believe in American culture and all the people to get rich off the system fight against every one of those things every step of the way.
	Fight against America first, fight against God, fight against the cultural Cohesion of the nation, the social fabric.
	That is why we as conservatives just simply have to stop.
	Just simply stop.
	People say, well, what's the solution then?
	Are we supposed to eat the rich?
	Are we supposed to... I'm not advocating for anything radical.
	Like I said, I'm not a socialist.
	I'm not in favor of wealth redistribution or something like that.
	But we must simply stop with the free market propaganda.
	Simply stop with this stuff about earning your wealth and these billionaires and so on.
	These people are harming our country and they've been enabled by a very bad system.
	We have to stop supporting it.
	So that's, that's my pitch.
	As somebody looking at all these different things, all these different, I call them vignettes, all these different episodes that I've seen in the last year from Bezos to Adelson to the Koch brothers to Bloomberg, all across the board, and it's the same problem.
	It's the elites, but more particularly the ultra-wealthy that just have the power and the incentive to abuse our country.
	And that has to be put to a stop and dispensed with all the ideological stuff, all this free market dogma that's doing nothing but hurting us and our agenda and what we want for our country.
	So that is me in favor of a third position.
	By third position I don't mean fascism.
	I'm a third positionist, a fascist.
	I simply mean we have to move beyond capitalism and socialism.
	We have to think about something else that is outside of this dichotomy.
	Because that's the way it is now.
	Either you're a capitalist and you're down with this, or you're not okay with that and you're a socialist.
	We have to think beyond that dichotomy.
	But that's the billionaires.
	We're going to move on to our Super Chats.
	We'll see what you guys are saying about all of this.
	My apologies.
	My nose is itching.
	My allergies seem to be acting up.
	I know that might be... Whenever I watch my show and I'm itching my nose, it's very irritable for me.
	It's irritable for me to watch myself do that.
	It's irritable when I have to itch, but then when I'm watching it, I'm like, why does he keep... I watch my show and I'm like, hey, stop doing that!
	But I apologize.
	We're going to move on and look at our Super Chats.
	We'll see what you guys are saying about all this.
	Let's take a look.
	We've got Sticky Frappuccino, who says, Hey, Mr. Hey.
	Cor Marie says, Pray the Rosary.
unidentified		Yeah.
unidentified		Wow.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		Great.
		Great advice.
		Groundbreaking stuff there.
		Poshton Zoomers says, AF has quickly become my favorite show.
		Keep it up.
		Well, thanks a lot.
		Glad to hear it.
		Giant says, what is your ideal economic system?
		I don't like to think in this way.
		You know, people ask me this question.
		What is your ideal system?
		I don't like to think... I don't like to think in these terms.
		That is set against everything that I believe in.
		The idea of the ideal system.
		I am very much against the very nature, the very idea of ideals.
		I believe in virtues.
		I believe in, you know, practical things, practical improvements.
		Well, if we just had it like this, then we wouldn't have to worry.
		If we just had this economic system, if we just had this governmental system, then we'd be okay.
		I stand opposed to that completely.
unidentified		No.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, I think so.
		Yeah, I guess so.
		says TTP, trust the sacrifice Nick earned faith long ago.
		Very true.
		Pikachu says, did you ever get into a fist fight at school?
		No.
		Rebel says, do you think PewDiePie is epic and red-pilled?
		Yeah, I think so.
		Big Globe says, boss making you work on a holiday?
		Can't relate.
		Yeah, I guess so.
		Yeah, my boss can be a real hard ass.
		McChicken says, would you ever get a billboard ad for one month?
		No.
		Polish American says, something wrong?
		Hold my head.
		Hey, I've gone and nibba dead.
		What is that from?
		That is from all of the lights, right?
		Yeah.
unidentified		Okay.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		Very, very easy.
		Very easy one.
		Kanye quote there.
		Hotdog says, this comment won't trigger you.
		You're right.
		Lo-Fi Cath says, I get to see Kirk this April in Wisconsin.
		Totally epic.
		Ah, very, very cool.
		Andrew Jackson says, if you could get one endorsement from anyone, who?
unidentified		Donald Trump, probably.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		Pro-truth, anti-media.
		I'm just not going to read that.
		Dwellers has been watching since National Review.
		Long live America first.
		Hey, thanks man.
		Save the West says, we're going to win.
		I really feel it.
		I have no doubt.
		I'm glad to hear that.
		Keep the faith.
		They want you to be black, though.
		Legacy account.
		My mouth is itching, right?
		I think my mustache is making my mouth itch.
		I'm a mess today.
		I'm itching.
		My mustache is itching.
		My nose is itching.
		I'm getting vertigo right now.
		I'm a mess today!
		I don't know what's happening.
		They poisoned my empty water mug when I was away.
		Mossad came in, they dropped a couple of AIDS tablets, dissolved into my water.
		Legacy Accounts says, why aren't there stickers in chat?
		Annoying spam.
		Yeah, people just spam whenever the stickers are enabled.
		ArmenianGropers is excited for the new platform, the next chapter of America First.
		Me too.
		Delco says buy tickets for new culture war tour or no Yeah, go for it.
		Big boots says do you skip showers or do you cook to big soap?
		No, I do not skip showering America first juices idea interrupt CPAC with the projector thoughts.
		Oh, yeah, I think this has potential NJ conservative says what's the coolest quote RT you got V dares was nice Coolest quote RT.
		Um, I don't know.
		I don't really keep track of this stuff.
		I Thanks for recommending Marshall McLuhan.
		Very Keno stuff.
		I know you hate Texas, but we love you King.
		done it.
		That would be the only one that would really knock my socks off and really blow me away.
		But everybody else, I don't know.
		For some people it's cool, but unless it was somebody on another level, I'd go nuts.
		That dude says, thanks for recommending Marshall McLuhan.
		Very Kino stuff.
		I know you hate Texas, but we love you, King.
		I don't hate Texas.
		Bobby Shmurdas is renowned.
		Culture warrior Ben Shapiro was unironically retweeting Right Wing Watch the other day.
		Yeah, I saw that.
		Take cover says, anyone have suggestions for anti-left kill shots?
		Okay, please don't do that.
		Plo Koon says, stop all that.
		Yeah, something shit.
		I don't know if I could read that without getting flagged or something, but I recognize that from the song Black Skinhead.
		SP says, Narf wanted me to pitch this sketch idea to you.
		Oh, my gosh.
		You get a string of the cringest super chats, and you're progressively getting frustrated, then chicken on a raft appears and just lose it.
		I knew that in reading through that cringe comment section that the worst part about that would be somebody would make a cringe super chat based on that joke two days later.
		So, so thank you for the self-fulfilling prophecy there.
		Armenian Groyper says, do you think Joker killed Zazie Beetz at the end?
		I don't know if that was her name, but no, I don't think, I don't think he killed her.
		What does it say?
		Rindo says the GOP have become simps for minorities.
		Yeah, true.
		Royal Goy says when can we unironically go Nozbo mode?
	I disavow Nozbo.
	I just am against billionaires.
	I don't think that makes me nauseable.
	Edge Sand says, Tom Tiffany or Jason Church?
	I don't know why those people are.
	Poison says, Hey Nick, keep up the good work.
	Love the show.
	Thanks.
	Q Beck says, Are you against capitalism?
	The greatest value of life is money.
	Yes, I am against this like hyper free market individualist stuff.
	Capitalism really doesn't mean anything anymore in the 21st century.
	Bobby Shmurda says, cringe libertarians be like, draconian drug laws don't work.
	Uh, hello Singapore?
unidentified		Check.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		Japan?
		Check.
		Yeah, that's a very good point.
		Uh, yeah, well, they always, well, what about prohibition?
		Not the same.
		And, uh, yeah, of course they work.
		Clockworks says, first time super chatting, have to support the king.
		Also, do you like Sam Raimi Spider-Man trilogy?
		Not really.
		I liked, um, Spider-Man 3, but, um, You know, I hate comic book nerds that are like, dude, I like the Reimi trilogy.
		People that talk like that.
		Do you know what I mean?
		I don't know if that's specific enough.
		But I see that all the time always surrounding the Marvel superhero talk are these people that are like, yeah, Rami Yeah, Rami's trilogy.
		Oh, well, you just shut the fuck up about spider-man movies spider, you know superhero movies are childish and juvenile and like just silly and so And I don't know, maybe I might sound hypocritical because I get so jazzed up about the prequels for Star Wars, but superhero movies to me are like particularly stupid.
		And it's like I do watch them, I do watch the superhero movies, but I recognize them for what they are, which is stupid and their fandoms are dumb and all that.
		It's when people say, no, the Raimi trilogy.
unidentified		It's like, will you stop?
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		So, I don't know.
		I mean, I don't remember seeing Spider-Man 1 or Spider-Man 2, actually, that Sam Raimi made.
		Is that his name?
		Sam, yeah.
		I don't remember seeing 1 or 2.
		I saw number 3 in theaters and I thought it was okay, but I'm not like one of them.
		Yeah, but that Spider-Man trilogy was Keno.
		I was never a superhero guy, so.
		I just whenever I hear that it just triggers me.
		I think about all these YouTube like like Marvel youtubers No, but Rami Rami's was great this show, you know, they're talking about all the different spider-man's like I don't know Why don't you why don't you get a job?
		Matt Ryan says Venus Surgeon says Bic Fuentes.
		Okay Peach Kranz has made big bust made big buck bucks Made big bucks today.
		Here's your cut, boss.
		Thanks.
		I don't know if you could tell or not, but at some point in the last 30 minutes, a tremendous, like, I don't know what you would call it, vertigo episode has set in, and it just feels like the room is spinning very quickly around me.
		So forgive me if my reading comprehension is not great, if I'm a little bit, uh, I don't know if you can tell or not.
		Maybe I'm just so good at keeping it together.
		Maybe I'm just so on the ball.
		I'm such a cold customer that it doesn't even matter.
		But for the past 30 minutes, it just feels like I've been on a tilt a whirl.
		I know I've been talking about that for the past week.
		I've been getting these vertigo episodes and I don't know, I guess it's back again.
		Just thought I would aware you if I seem like I'm a little bit off kilter.
		I can't really tell right now, but just a heads up.
		Soy Goys, the State of the Union, Oligarch vs. Kami.
		Yeah, that's basically what it is.
		Base Chias, be careful what you ask for.
		I got what I asked for.
		Okay, I don't know what that means.
		Royal says, uh... I don't know what that means.
		It sounds kind of ominous.
		Royal Goy says, when are you getting America First Ferrari for Italian pride?
		I think that's maybe a little bit of a ways away.
		Sporting Chances says, thanks for all you do.
		You're the best.
		God bless.
		Well, thanks a lot.
		Green Cedars says, whatever happened to America First Premium?
		I got banned from PayPal, so I was unable to do that.
		America vs. Premium, you know, we had, what was it?
		We had an exclusive show every weekend, and it was five bucks a month back then, but I got banned off PayPal, so that's what I was using to run the payments for it, and I was never able, I was gonna, I tried to find another payment processor, it didn't.
		It didn't work out.
		I got a new one.
		They shut me down within a week, so I said, you know, just forget it.
		Spaghetti Monster says, it was my birthday yesterday.
		Have a cut of the money.
		Ah, thank you.
		Guess it's my birthday, too.
		Royal Goy says, is there a live podcast so I can listen in the background?
		Uh, no.
		Bobby Shmurda says, chopo grope house with Nos Bowl Nick.
		Yeah.
		Giants says, thoughts on the Disney Star Wars trilogy?
		I hate it.
		Uh, Tesla says pee pee poo poo, okay.
		Boat School says, hey Nick, listening from radar class.
		No school off.
		Ah, well that sucks.
		I'm off of school forever.
		Royal Goyce says Bloomberg low-key based, Maga Tards lose their shit.
		Yeah, I mean he's not based, like he's not gonna govern in a based way, but I mean like everybody was based 20 years ago, for the most part.
		Newcombe says President's Day should be Andrew Jackson's birthday.
		Disagree.
		I think it should be Washington's.
	Bad Faith Poster says, I frisk them when you're a cop.
	They let you do it.
	Yeah, funny.
	Mormon says, do you know if the code for the new streaming platform will eventually be made open source?
	God bless.
	Uh, no.
	F5 says, hang in there, Nick.
	Thanks.
	Tyler says, very excited to see you on the Killstream Friday.
	Glad to hear it.
	Doing days says or doink.
	I'm sorry.
	It says doink days says my nibba have this bread.
	Thank you Royal Goy says, press D to dab.
	Minorities disavow.
	America Floats says, Bloomberg can fit 11 D batteries in his mouth.
	I don't know what that means.
	Burt says, I like sugar and I like tea.
	Okay.
	Gomo says, or says, go move to Gayville.
	Says, are Germanic people based?
	Love the show.
	They're not anymore.
	Maybe they were at one point, but they're not now.
	Burt Paulson says, fuck Brahman, literally the worst people on earth.
	Is that like the Indian cast?
	Molly McGuire says, Republicans had two years to do whatever they wanted.
	Yeah, tell me about it.
	General Pinochet says, keep up the good work, Nick.
	Thanks.
	Sticky Frappuccino says, holy shit, man, what a good show.
	Great substance.
unidentified		Thanks a lot.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		Chad of Chads says, would vote Bloomberg if he was no net immigration?
		Maybe.
		Just no immigration.
		Just no immigration altogether.
		Better, Nick?
		Oh, thanks.
		I'm glad you like it.
		Polish American says, curious if you would be for EU immigration.
		If no, why?
		Just no immigration.
		Just no immigration altogether.
		I think we should be consistent.
		But if we do open it back up, it should be open to EU first because we want an immigration system that's going to facilitate people that are going to do well in our country, and that means they're going to assimilate.
		And I continue to believe that the only people that can meaningfully assimilate on a large scale are Europeans.
		So maybe at some point, but for now, I would just say we've just got too many people all together.
		That dude Turtles has shut down immigration until we stabilize, yeah.
		Patrick Casey says, digging the tie.
		Great show tonight.
		Hey, thanks a lot.
		Glad you like the tie.
		Glad you like the show.
		Good old Patrick Casey.
		Be sure to follow him on DLive, by the way.
		I think just all together.
		That's right.
		50-year non-white immigration ban, please.
		I think just all together.
		That dude, Turtles, is America first, not capitalist class first.
		That's right.
		Reptard says Donald Blump versus Mike Bloomberg in the ultimate general election showdown.
		Who is the real racist?
		I think it might be Bloomberg.
		300 Spartans says going Nazbo mode live.
		Love to see it.
		Great show tonight.
		Thanks.
		Yeastwoods says, let's put every billionaire with a chicken on a raft.
		That's great.
		Molly McGuire says, the new grab bag is voting for Bloomberg, or the new bag grab is voting for Bloomberg.
		Shaking my head.
		It's not about the money.
		It's about securing Israel.
		Nick the Bricks says, Bloomberg equally cursed and based at the same time.
		Yeah, there's a lot to that.
		Groy Perzumer says, how do you feel about the Russell Report?
		I don't know what that is.
		Florida Man says, are the capitalist elite worse than the left?
		They are the left, actually.
		I mean, they're the globalists.
		That is the left.
		Mormon Knicker says, what would you do with a billion dollars in super chats?
		What would I do with a billion dollars in super chats?
		I don't know.
unidentified		I would, hmm, I don't know what I would do.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		Lifetime supply at Big Macs?
		I don't know.
		Maybe I'd get a new studio Cybertruck Mmm, I buy the high-rise in New York City.
		I buy the high-rise.
		I buy the whole building Purple says reparations for taking my foreskin when yeah, okay Saxon says the chadges you rocks their description versus the virgin below black unemployment.
		Yeah, that's true What is this Bhop says, first time super chat called the Streisand effect, but you getting banned got me to give.
		Yeah, well a whole $10 is worth getting banned from YouTube.
		I think that makes a lot of sense.
		Lord Maryland says, on the bloomer train now.
		Bye Nick.
		Hello iPhone 11.
		Bloomberg mode, not a bad idea actually.
		It wasn't a real free market though!
		I was waiting for that.
		Well, Shapiro's been bought by the Wilkes Brothers.
		Greatest story says, If you think this is a free market, you're retarded.
		There it is.
		We knew that would happen.
		It wasn't a real free market, though.
		I was waiting for that.
		That's what the communists do, isn't it?
		When you say, Oh, communism, that's a great idea.
		Like the Soviet Union, what do they always say?
		Well, but it wasn't real communism!
		Venezuela, Cuba, Soviet Union, North Korea, it wasn't real communism!
		And it's the same with the free market people.
		Oh, the free market is a disaster in America, Western Europe, the United Kingdom... But it wasn't a real free market!
		That wasn't real capitalism!
		Oh, okay.
		Real capitalism is when everything works!
		Oh, okay.
		They just should have worked instead.
		Florida Mance's economy should serve society and family, not the reverse.
		Very true.
		Polish American says it's immoral to have billionaires in a society.
		Yeah, I think so, but we just gotta limit their influence.
		Groypes has received a raise.
		Here's your cut King.
		I got a race today.
		Thanks Groype says read harassment architecture.
		Yep Base day apps is here have 10% of my 126.9 billion lemons.
		I'll thank you WD says great info tonight real eye-opening King shit.
		Thanks, buddy As pieces quality episode King.
		Thanks.
		The rocks is amen.
		I Yeastwood says, Nick, ever going to stream Red Dead Redemption 2 or Red Dead Online?
		No.
		Poopcoin says, I am necessary cringe.
		Okay.
		Waffles says, I'm a senior this year.
		Can't wait to graduate.
		Hey, don't, don't say that.
		Do you mean college or high school?
		If it was college, I'd say you're right, but high school should hang on.
		Tampa Bay says, thoughts on YouTuber Jreg based cringe.
		I think I know you're talking about some of his stuff is kind of funny, but he's like Centrist, you know, he's one of these like reddit type people So, I mean some of his stuff is funny, but at the end of the day, he's not our guy Boomer uncles is only a virtuous people can be free thoughts.
		I agree Little toads is what do you think?
		Who do you think will win the based tournament?
		Mmm, Jesse Lee Peterson probably I think it does.
		It was pretty cool.
		Yeah, I went to Sunday service in Chicago yesterday and, you know, it was awesome to see Kanye live.
		asks as well will we be able to tip on your new live stream um maybe life and hell says how is your sunday service king it was pretty cool yeah i went to sunday service in chicago yesterday and you know it was awesome to see kanye live it was like i was totally nerding out and uh but i'll just say it wasn't like a concert i I want to see Kanye and I want to see him like in concert.
		I want to see him perform the hits.
		And as much as I'm happy that he's a Christian, now he's on this new thing where he's like, oh, I'm not a performer.
	I'm, you know, spreading the word and I'm only going to perform songs with no swears.
	So the Sunday Service Choir played most of it, and he did like five songs.
	He did Father Stretch My Hands, which happens to be one of my favorites.
	He did Can't Tell Me Nothing, Jesus Walks, Say La, Close Down Sunday, and Follow God.
	So he did what?
	He did six songs.
	It was an hour and a half.
	He did six songs, and the rest was the choir.
	I mean, it was cool, and it was exciting to see him, and I got great seats, but I was like, I want to hear, but I want to hear stronger.
	I want to hear Jesus.
	I want to hear beautiful, dark, twisted fantasy.
	You know, I want to hear graduation.
	I want to hear the good stuff.
	I want to see Kanye.
	So, so it was good, but I was just like, well, you know, it is what it is.
	Uh, Croc is just trying to figure out how the CIA controls the government.
	Can't really figure it out.
	Can you help me?
	I don't know what that's supposed to mean.
	Big Gay says, laughs and neutered Benny Johnson.
	300 Spartans says, I know you hate these, but take on distributism.
	It's based.
	Is that what you wanted?
	Bert Paul says, the CIA literally killed JFK, dipshit.
	Well, it's the intel community that controls policy.
	And they control policy because the deep state...
	The Deep State is not just the CIA.
	I wouldn't be the one to say the CIA controls the government, but the Deep State, which is the intel agencies, the military industrial complex, and the regulatory body, they control the government.
	And they control the government because they're the ones that are doing the enforcing of all the provisions.
	They're the ones that have to carry out all the dictates.
	And a really good friend of mine opened my eyes to this stuff.
	Actually, Bureaucrats make all the decisions in government about everything.
	The only time that a high-up official makes a decision is if there's disagreement.
	If there's disagreement about enforcement or application or regulation at a low level in the executive branch between two people, it'll have to keep rising up.
	That disagreement will have to be unsettled all the way up to the food chain to cabinet people and then up to the president before a president makes a decision.
	Otherwise, if there's, you know, They're carrying out the policy.
	If a disagreement arises, if they settle it at the low level of enforcement, then it's just settled and bureaucrats make the decision.
	That's only when there's disagreement about changes or enforcement or whatever, and only when that disagreement goes all the way up through the different supervisors and next-ups and higher-ups, all the way through to the cabinet, do you get the president making a decision.
	So it's really not so much simply the CIA, but it's the intel agencies and it's the bureaucrats, and they are just the ones that are executing the day-to-day tasks of government.
	And they dictate how it's enforced.
	Most of the time they do write the law, but even if they're not writing the law or voting on the law, by enforcing it, in applying it they're deciding what the law is.
	Big gay says I just read that one Damn Dawes says did you know Jake Elliot in school Eagles kicker?
	No, he was before my time Apple, honey says is what you talked about today.
	Why you liked yang?
	Yes Bane without a mask says don't counter signal spider-man.
	It's Gen Z Keno.
	I know I will counter signal spider-man Francin says bless you AF Pat King.
	Thank you Steve.
	I Bless you as well.
	Be sure to follow Steve Franson on DLive.
	Got some great content.
	Wana says, Reminder to pray your rosary.
	Press R to commit.
	Yeah, there you go.
	On mute says, What fruit will recapturing the House bear?
	Oh, well, it leaves open the possibility that we could pass good legislation.
	But, I mean, we had the House before and that didn't happen.
	So I'm not holding my breath waiting for them to pass good policy.
	But at least it would be possible...
	And also then the Democrats couldn't do these investigations, which would be a plus.
	Sounds good.
	Favorite author?
	Says, going to the dentist tomorrow, eating dirt beforehand.
	Oh, sounds good.
	Clown says, who's your favorite author?
unidentified		Favorite author.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		Probably, I don't know.
		That's a tough one.
		I don't really love reading, actually.
		I do it because I have to, but I don't find it... I don't read books and I'm like, oh, this is delightful!
		Splendid!
		Splendid writing!
		Oh, it's delicious!
		Some people are like that.
		Some people are so gay about reading.
		I'm not an academic.
		I'm not an intellectual.
		I don't read these things, and I'm like, magnificent prose!
		So artful!
		I don't read like that.
		I read, I get the gist, I get the facts, I get the ideas.
		I extract them.
		Some books are easier to read than others, or easier to understand, or better articulated, but I mostly read non-fiction, and, you know, I'm not like, oh my!
		That was delightful!
		Some people are like that.
		I've never been that guy.
		I know a lot of people that are like that, and it's never been me.
		Look at this, it's marvelous!
		I read out of necessity, because that is how you get information, but I'm not like, oh, splendid!
		He is a joy to read!
		A joy to read!
		I curl up beside the fire, and I read, you know, this author.
		Nobody better!
		Simply delight!
		I've never done that before.
		I don't you know favorite author.
		It's not really a question that registers Bad faith poster says you see Bernie get attacked by Mike Stealing milkers.
		Yeah, I did see that pretty funny Purple says did you get to see based black man Kanye?
		I did I cringed Oh boost block boy It's like how dated is saying that like four years old boost block guy bro funny I remember we used to talk like that a hundred thousand years ago and Sellings.
		His problem isn't the market, it's fiat monetary system.
		Yeah, that's the problem.
unidentified		The problem's not the market.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		It's always something else.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		Isn't that always the case?
unidentified		It's always just, if we could just get this thing right, but that wasn't a real free market.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		That's what Mises argued 100 years ago.
		Money is its own class of capital.
		It's the most important class of capital, and the government controls it, so it's not a real free... Okay, yeah, we get it.
		We live in the world.
		We live in the real world.
		We have fiat money.
		That's the world.
		And it's a money system.
		I don't think the monetary system... I mean, don't get me wrong, the monetary system's part of it, but, you know...
		We're talking about the whole financial market, international finance system from top to bottom.
		Based Guitarist says, the only Catholic church in my town overlooks McDonald's.
		Oh, Based.
		Saxon says, do you cringe when Dawson pretends Japan is atheist?
		I don't really know much about you.
		Are they atheist?
		I don't really know.
		Bane Without a Mask says, have you ever seen Small Soldiers?
		It sucks.
		Small Soldiers.
		Is that that movie about the action figures that go nuts?
		Yeah, I have.
		Wow, it's so weird that you would bring that up.
		I do remember watching that movie when I was a kid.
		It used to freak me out.
		That's when all the action figures come to life and they're like blowing stuff up, right?
		I think I'm thinking about the right movie, yeah.
		But if so, very, very spooky.
		Might as well finish these.
		You're cool, Nick.
		Thanks.
		Yeats says, high energy and informational show tonight.
		Thanks.
		Big Nickus says, long time Super Chatter, first time viewer.
		Thoughts on... Okay, and then that's it.
		Thanks.
		Based says, no 400,000 lemons tonight?
		Hope these ninjettes help.
		Oh, thanks for the diamond.
		Red Sky says, is there a way to donate to the America First leadership team?
		Yes, there is.
		But There's well, we don't really have like a fund for the team in general We're doing a little fundraising for AF pack, which you can check Patrick Casey's telegram for information on that Jude says Chad Yang nuclear family versus virgin Trump divorce Yeah, I mean maybe there's something to that I guess Apple honey says James Polk based for invading btfo in Mexico.
		Yeah pretty based and Black Pill Quarantines is France's latest analysis video is great.
		Everybody should check it out.
		Yeah big agree.
		He's got great content Go zero us is no way guilt was counter signaling AF pack and Malkin yesterday Who cares that guy is like the biggest cringe Lord on the Internet?
		Hello?
		Oh, this guy, this, like, nobody who is not relevant and, uh, sucks ass said something bad about you.
		Oh, uh, I don't care, you know?
		It would be one thing if somebody relevant had something to say, but it's like, JF Gripey, no white guilt, Richard Spencer.
		It's like, oh, all these failed weirdos who are totally bizarre.
		They don't like my content.
		Well, that warrants a response.
		I don't think so.
		May Gorin says, uh, must we ever, by charity, take in refugees?
		No.
		Not anytime soon.
		Bad Faith Poster says, must we ever, by charity, jump off a cliff?
		Wow, really good, poignant, profound point there.
		AF Fan says thoughts on Robert Pattinson as Batman?
		I don't, I don't know.
		I don't really, I don't think I've seen a movie with Robert Pattinson in it.
		Yeah, I don't think so.
		Yeah, I don't, I don't think I have.
		Maybe I have, but I don't really, I haven't seen him in a lot of things, so I don't, I don't really have strong feelings about it.
	We'll see if he does well.
	Tamba Bases, congrats on going through a show without saying the F word.
	Does I, did I really do that?
	Wow, good for me.
	Seaman, Seaman says, thank you Paul Watson for bringing me to AF.
	Yeah, hey, thanks Paul Joseph Watson.
	He's been very kind to the show recently, very fair and promoting us and, you know, amplifying the message.
	So he's, he's been a real hero.
	Okay, looks like that's everything.
	I'm gonna call it.
	I feel like shit.
	I feel like I'm about to throw up.
	I'm so nauseous.
	I feel like, ugh.
	It's like the worst feeling in the world.
	The vertigo?
	Oh my gosh.
	I don't know what happened.
	I hadn't gotten it in like a few days and now all of a sudden it's like hardcore.
	Well, anyway.
	That's going to do it for us on the show tonight.
	Remember to follow my DLive channel.
	Just click the follow button.
	Remember to sign up for the email list.
	Go to nicolasjfuentes.com.
	Put your information in the email box.
	Email list field is right there on the front page.
	Go to nicolasjfuentes.com.
	Be sure to sign up because that's the only thing for now that I can't be deplatformed from.
	Remember to tune in all throughout this week.
	Be sure to be checking in for my website which is launching very soon.
	Remember, we are on the air Monday through Friday, 7 p.m.
	Central, 8 p.m.
	Eastern Standard Time.
	I'm Nicholas J. Fuentes.
	As always, thanks for watching.
	Thanks to our Super Chatters, in particular to our top three contributors, Bobby Shmurda, F5, and SP123.
	Big thanks to our top three guys, but thanks to everybody that's donated tonight.
	We'll open the chest.
	Why not?
	Thanks to everybody that's done a Super Chat tonight, and thanks to everybody that watches the show.
	We love you.
	And I will see you again tomorrow.
	Until then, have a great rest of your evening.
unidentified		Americanism, not globalism, will be our credo.
		It's going to be only America first.
		America first.
		The American people will come first once again.

▲