All Episodes
Previous Next
April 12, 2022 - America First - Nicholas J. Fuentes
01:58:25
UKRAINE CHEMICAL WEAPONS FALSE FLAG INITIATED: NUCLEAR HOLOCAUST IMMINENT??? | America First Ep. 976UKRAINE CHEMICAL WEAPONS FALSE FLAG INITIATED: NUCLEAR HOLOCAUST IMMINENT??? | America First Ep. 976
Participants
Main voices
n
nick fuentes
01:46:17
| Copy link to current segment

Speaker Time Text
unidentified
Thank you.
Thank you.
They hate us.
They hate the people of this country.
Because we believe in our mighty God.
So we're willing to drink death like water if we have to.
But I don't think we're gonna.
We're bigger and stronger and tougher and meaner, and we want it more than they do!
We will shut this country down!
This is about making we the people accept less!
Except the erosion!
Slavery is a choice.
Craveness is a choice.
Compliance is a choice.
I choose to be a free man.
is a choice.
The riots is a choice.
I choose to be a free man.
If you want to try and put us in the concentration camp, if you want to take our rights, I'd say come and try.
I choose to be a free man.
for complications.
Kruipers!
They were a good one!
They were a good one!
They were a good one!
They were a good one!
your life like turn it down right like driving with my dad and he told me it ain't Christ like I'm just trying to find I'm looking for a new way just really trying not to reach through the pool way I don't have a clue to get thinking on my best though if I come on a text though tell text though another word better picture or a test smoke wrestling with God I don't really want to wrestle Spanish life like everything in my life arguing with my dad and he said it ain't Christ like America first
inevitable unstoppable and the reason why is because it's not cool to shill big business it's not cool to shill for Israel it's not this is a Christian nation this is America
I fear and love God - No.
When you remove the fear and love of God, you create the fear and love of everything else.
You talking to somebody right now that only fears God and Jesus has won the victory, bro.
Americanism, not globalism, will be our credo will be our credo in 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.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼
Good evening, everybody.
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.
We have a lot to talk about tonight.
Lots to get into.
Big show.
Big story.
Nuclear war.
Okay, World War 3.
This is serious stuff.
Our featured story is about the false flag chemical weapons use, which I've been predicting now for weeks, finally happened this weekend.
And it hasn't made the headlines yet.
I didn't see it in the headlines anywhere, but it is in the news.
And there's rumors and there's whispering and rumbling about Potential evidence of Russian chemical weapons use in Mariupol where they're finishing the siege of the city in the southeast of Ukraine.
And this could be a very significant development because if Western media and Western authorities say that chemical weapons were used, and there doesn't have to be any real evidence, probably didn't even happen.
But if they determine that that's going to be the pretext, this is the moment, this is the event, that could be the sign of an escalation in the conflict by NATO and specifically by the United States.
So this is kind of a watershed moment here in the conflict.
It's been a little bit slow for the past couple weeks, but Russia is preparing for its big offensive in Donbass.
And cleaning up the Donbass.
And then we also now have the alleged evidence of chemical weapons.
Could be a really big deal.
So we'll talk about that.
We'll also be talking tonight about the Gretchen Whitmer kidnapping plot.
And it came out on Friday that four of the people that were charged in connection with that plot were acquitted.
Rather, I think it was four of them were acquitted and two of them had the trial was declared a mistrial.
So they didn't get convicted.
But basically the charges failed against a lot of the guys that were involved in the plot.
And that's because there was no real evidence of any kind of a plot after all.
And it's worth keeping in mind that some of the people involved in prosecuting these people and the fake Gretchen Wittner plot where there were federal agents everywhere and confidential informants, they're now working on the January 6th probe.
And it's like the same story.
Fake attack on the state capitol, fake attack on the government, and the feds are soliciting this from right-wing people and then it turns out to be a big honeypot and it's a big trap.
And they take down a bunch of patsies and they get to put in the news media that there's this real anti-government movement in America.
And then the same thing happens on a much larger scale in January.
And it's the same people involved.
So we'll talk about that too.
Should be a pretty good show.
Yeah, I mean, there's not like a lot going on, but the chemical weapons thing is a big deal.
That obviously matters a lot.
So that's the big news.
But we have some very big news about our platform before we get into the topical stuff.
Big news about the Cozy platform.
You probably have already seen it, but this is really exciting stuff and I'm very proud to announce tonight that Stephen Bonnell, better known as Destiny, has officially joined Cozy.tv.
As we announced this last night, huge!
And I'm so excited because I don't use Twitch and I don't really use YouTube anymore because I'm banned from both of them.
So I never get a chance to catch his content but now officially you can find Stephen Bonnell at Kozy.tv slash Destiny and I'm told that he'll be doing his first stream this week.
So welcome aboard Stephen Bonnell!
It's so great to have you.
Welcome to Kozy.tv and welcome to all of Destiny's fans.
And we're gonna be good hosts.
You know, we're gonna try our best to welcome these guys in.
I know that Stephen is a little bit more extreme than us.
That's why he's earned the moniker Stephen the Swastika Bonnell.
You know, they don't call him Stephen the Swastika Bonnell for nothing.
Everyone calls him that and he didn't get that nickname by not being a far-right extremist.
He didn't get that name by not being a hardcore Jew-hating neo-Nazi.
He earned that name.
He is the Swastika.
And no one would ever try and take that away from him.
Nobody would try.
Because they know he's just too out there.
He's just too extreme.
So they call him Stephen the Swastika Bonnell.
I said, you know, that's a little bit too far right for this platform.
It's a little bit too out there.
But it's a free speech platform.
It's the First Amendment.
I don't, you know, I don't endorse necessarily everything the guy says, okay?
I don't endorse every far-right conspiracy theory, every hateful prejudice that he's out there promulgating on his streams.
But you know what?
I swore an oath to this cozy TV terms of service.
I swore an oath So I don't care how far right he is.
to protect free speech on this platform.
And that is exactly what I will do.
So I don't care how far right he is.
I don't care if he's going to turn this platform and pimp it out into some kind of concentration camp.
We have a First Amendment in this country and we honor it here on CozyTV.
So, welcome Stephen and his swastikas.
We call them the swastikas.
If you see any of his fans in chat, they are the swastikas.
And they're like spinning swastikas flying through the air.
They're like ninja stars.
They're like spinning swastikas cutting through the air.
And, uh...
You know, again, I'm not necessarily in love with everything that the guy says, but we're gonna try and be good hosts.
And we do have moderators, so if you see any unoptical live chats or anything, just make sure to report that to the moderators.
We have a robust moderation system on the platform.
We have a report button.
We have hundreds of moderators, hundreds and thousands of people reviewing your reports.
And really the goal is to protect the community, specifically the marginalized, the black and brown bodies, the queer folk, the Jews, all of that good stuff.
You know, I swore an oath to protect the marginalized and the oppressed, and the sort of bio-Leninist, sort of, Extra the sort of the sort of excess of society this sort of superfluous You know Sort of stuff.
I swore an oath that we're gonna protect those people in the community.
Okay?
people like Veda and Some of our other streamers we swore to protect them our trannies our queers Veda says thank you.
You're welcome.
You're welcome Veda.
We gotta protect these guys from these spinning swastikas flying through the air, chopping up everything.
Chopping up all of the, what they would call, human refuse.
I wouldn't say that, but that's what they would say.
Chopping up all of the human refuse, the human garbage.
Again, not my words.
I think that's sort of their program, and I think that's abhorrent.
I think everyone is valuable.
I am a lover of all people.
But, you know, what they would say is chopping up the human refuse to be tossed into the furnace of history.
I would never use those terms.
But this is just how the platform is changing as a result of the far left coming on.
You know, it's like far left.
You go far enough left and you come out on the other side on the right.
You support Joe Biden enough and you get out on the other side and wind up supporting Hitler.
National Socialist, Omniliberal, Socialist, National Socialist.
You know, it's a very thin line, as they say, between the Ku Klux Klan and Stephen Bonnell.
Anyway, so he's coming on the platform now.
It's all jokes.
He's a liberal.
He's liberal.
And that's great.
And it's fine.
And we look forward to radicalizing all of his supporters.
I welcome them onto the platform.
And really the goal of having him on the platform is that he will bring thousands and thousands of disaffected leftists to the site and they will watch my show and other shows and be radicalized and turn into hopefully far-right extremists is really the That's the idea.
Because some people are like, you know, why would you let Stephen Bonnell on the platform?
He's so liberal.
And I said, because he can bring thousands of new people that I can't reach because I'm banned from everything.
And we're going to sort of bring them into a rabbit hole of far-right radicalization and fanaticism.
And if we could even just have 10%, I consider that a victory.
If we could even just radicalize 5% to 10% of his audience, it will be a net positive.
And that is really what I seek to do.
That is what I set out to achieve.
By bringing the left into our embrace, we are therefore normalizing our views and by proximity, we're also moving the Overton window further to the right and hopefully radicalizing thousands of people.
So thank you, Stephen!
Big shout out.
Put her there.
I know we don't see eye to eye on everything, but you are going to help us radicalize thousands of young people.
Thank you.
Can we get an 07 in chat?
Can we get an 07 in chat for Stephen Bonnell?
We appreciate you.
He built up a huge audience just to drive them into our arms.
I so appreciate what you've done.
How's my hair?
No, I'm kidding, of course.
This is a normal website.
No, I'm kidding.
This is a normal... I am a normal political actor and this is a normal website.
And he's just... Listen, it's about free speech.
He's cancelled everywhere.
He's cancelled and we're fighting cancel culture.
First they came for the Gropers and I said nothing because I was gay.
Then they came for... Then they came for... Vladimir Putin and I said nothing because I was Jewish.
Then they came for Stephen Bonnell and I had nothing to say.
Because they're killing all of us.
I don't even know how that expression finishes.
And then there's no one to speak out because we're all trans.
I don't even know what the expression is.
But anyway, so we are against cancel culture.
He is a cancelled individual.
And, you know, it's often the most cancelled people that are the most interesting.
So we're bringing... Don't burn his stream!
Hey, listen, Destiny fans, do not burn this website.
Do not burn this book.
All right, anyway.
So welcome, Destiny.
We are also welcoming on Politically Provoked.
It's a girl.
Huge bummer, I know.
Her name's Brittany.
Trust me, I wasn't thrilled about the idea, but that was part of the deal.
In order to bring on Destiny, he made us agree that we would bring the girl on, so we brought her on.
You know, I actually like her.
She's not, she's actually not that bad.
She does a good show.
I just don't want women on this platform, really, at all.
But we make compromises where we have to.
It's just about being pragmatic.
She's actually not so bad.
She's nice enough and she's got a good show and everything.
But I basically prefer to have as few women as possible as users on this site and also as live streamers.
We have about two girl streamers, I think, and let's hope we don't have to bring on any more than that.
So, well, no, I'm kidding.
Welcome, Politically Provoked!
Excited to be watching your streams on Cozy.TV.
Very excited for that.
And she will be doing a huge kickoff stream tomorrow, and I will be on it with the Sultan Haas, whatever his name is.
I'll be on with, I think he goes by Infrared.
I'll be going on her stream tomorrow.
She's doing some debates.
She's doing some panels.
She's gonna be streaming all day, big, you know, sort of like a big festival.
And I'll be there, I think, at 7 o'clock Central?
I'll be on the stream as well and I'll be talking to Infrared Haas.
So it's going to be a lot of fun.
So it's great.
The platform is growing.
We have like 40 plus streamers now.
I added them up recently.
I think we're between 40 and 50 streamers, which is huge.
I didn't think we'd get to be this big this fast.
We're now bigger than DLive.
We are nearly bigger than Truth Social.
We are bigger than Getter.
We are now one of the biggest alternative tech social media platforms in the world.
And I saw our web traffic we're hitting between six and seven million page views per month, which is making us one of the top biggest websites in the United States and in the world period, but also one of the biggest all tech platforms and it's only going to grow from here.
With Destiny, Politically Provoked, and we're even in talks with some other people to join the platform.
You know, we get them an Afpac, And then maybe we get him at Cozy.TV.
So there's been some, there's been some, there have been some discussions about bringing on some even more exciting people onto the platform.
So, so we'll see.
But it's all very good.
Anyway, okay.
So that's our big news on the platform.
Also, before we get into the show, people are saying Leafy, Leafy was not an AfPak.
I would love for Leafy to get on here, but I'm making a pretty big hint here.
Okay, whatever.
Nick is just... whatever.
I'm just making the mistake of reading the live chat again.
Let me just click out of that window.
Yeah, Leafy was at AFPAC.
No, I mean, maybe.
I'm hoping him going on the platform, but I was hinting at somebody else.
But anyway, so that's the big news about the platform.
Before we get into the news, I want to remind you, follow me on this channel as always.
Click the follow button down below.
Smash the follow button.
Get a push notification whenever I go live, whenever my show begins.
Also, follow me on Gabin Telegram.
Links are down below.
Just click the buttons.
I took the shirt to a dry cleaner.
Now it's all tight.
I'm a little uncomfortable.
I'm a little bit less than comfortable.
It's a little bit hot and the shirt is too tight.
And I am already pissed off.
But anyway, so click the buttons, follow me on Gavin Telegram, and with that we'll get into the show.
Before I talk about Gretchen Whitmer, I want to talk a little bit about Elon Musk.
I may not talk about the Gretchen Whitmer thing at all.
I think I might just save that for tomorrow because I want to talk about a couple of things.
First, I want to talk about Elon Musk.
And there was another news story today which is not a huge deal but I do want to cover this because in my opinion Elon Musk and his move on Twitter, whatever this is going to materialize into, this is one of the most important stories that's going on right now in particular for us.
And I talked all about it last week and what a significant thing it is that this conversation is happening, and what a big deal it is that Elon Musk seems to be making a serious attempt at transforming Twitter.
And so the big news story today is that Elon Musk has actually declined to join Twitter's board.
And so to catch up to speed in case you're out of the loop, a couple weeks ago Elon Musk ran a poll on Twitter and he asked his followers if they thought that Twitter was adhering to the principles of free speech and everybody voted no.
Then he quote tweeted the poll And the results were dramatic.
I think 70% of people said, no, Twitter does not have free speech.
And Elon Musk quote tweeted that and said, well, if free speech is vital to democracy and Twitter is not free speech, and if Twitter is now the modern town square, should there be an alternative?
And he didn't put a poll for that one.
It was a rhetorical question.
And so people began to speculate, is Elon Musk gonna buy Twitter?
And then he did.
The next week he bought up $3 billion worth of Twitter shares.
He bought 9.2% of Twitter shares and became the largest shareholder in Twitter.
More than four times more, the next largest shareholder, which is Jack Dorsey, the founder of Twitter, And so last week then, I think we covered this on Thursday or Friday, they offered him a seat on Twitter's board.
And they said that they welcomed him and he's the big shareholder and it seemed like they were trying to make a deal.
But we found out about this deal that there was a catch.
They welcomed Elon Musk onto Twitter's board and Elon Musk would have joined the board at their first official, well, their first meeting with him.
He would join the board at their annual meeting in May, I think May 25th.
But the stipulation was that Elon Musk could not own more than 14.9% of the company.
Because there's a stipulation in Twitter's, I think it's their SEC filings, it says that a sitting board member cannot own In any way, with any organization, with no combination can they have an interest in the company of more than 14.9%.
No individual in themselves or through other entities or organizations can have more than 14.9% of Twitter stock and sit on the board.
And so I remember reading that last week and I was actually concerned because if Elon joined the board, you know, some people said that he would have influence over the company, but actually that would constrain him more than it would elevate him.
Because last week you saw when he's not a board member he just bought up as much stock as he could.
He bought up nine percent of the company.
By joining the board he would be putting a ceiling on how much he can buy and restraining his options.
And as a board member he doesn't control the board.
He may be influential, he may be persuasive, he can contribute his thoughts and ideas to the board, but it's not like he can make Major transformations at the company.
He doesn't own enough of the company and he only has the one seat on the board.
So I was thinking last week that would actually be a raw deal for him.
He could do so much more.
He's got essentially limitless capital.
I mean if you think about it, the market cap for Twitter is not very big compared to the other major social media, the other major American social media.
Compared to Amazon and Alphabet, And Facebook which have trillion dollar market cap you know multi trillion and some I think Amazon is 2 trillion I think Facebook or Meta now I think is between 500 billion and a trillion compared to the other big tech companies Twitter is relatively small in terms of market cap and in terms of user base
And so I thought conceivably he could go all the way and just simply buy the majority of the shares in the company and then he can do whatever he wants.
He could buy as much...
As much of the companies he needs to, again, limitless capital, and then he could just do whatever it is that he needs to do.
But if he joins the board, he can't buy as much as he wants, and then he can't influence the company as much as he needs to from his seat on the board.
And the board seat would last for two years.
So he was supposed to sign the deal on April 9th, and then he would be on the board until 2024.
And I remember thinking, are we really going to have to Slog through two years of Elon fighting in the boardroom, and I thought that's just not the best way to do this.
So the good news is, and this was the news this weekend, he declined the seat on the board.
And so Elon Musk will not be getting a seat on the board.
And some people said, oh well, that just goes to show he never intended to make change or something like that.
I think it's quite the opposite.
That he's not joining the board, to me, suggests not that he has lost interest, but rather that he would not be able to make transformative, sweeping change from the board.
Because, think about it this way, two weeks ago he says, my intention is to change Twitter.
Then he puts his money where his mouth is and he's three billion dollars in.
The deal comes forward and it's, he can sit on the board, but they have to cap his ownership.
By rejecting the deal, what this suggests is not that he's abandoning the project, but rather that the seat on the board would constrain his ambitions.
And his ambitions seem to be far larger than anything that could be achieved on the board.
I mean, logically, I think that's how it squares.
Because if he didn't want to make sweeping changes, why wouldn't he just get on the board?
And if he just intended to, it was some kind of a publicity thing or an attempt to make money, again, why not go on the board?
I know some people suggested that he bought $3 billion worth of Twitter stock because he didn't want to get banned on Twitter.
Okay, again, well if he didn't want to get banned on Twitter by joining the board, I think that's a pretty good way to protect your account.
I think instead it suggests that he his ambitions go far beyond anything that could be achieved with just 9% of the company and a board seat.
It tells us that he wants to do a lot more and I think it suggests that he's going to take a much more hostile and aggressive approach which is to just simply buy up more of the company and it's a straight-up hostile takeover which is very exciting and I would be surprised if that wasn't what he was going for.
Because the guy clearly, he wants to change Twitter.
He didn't say two weeks ago he wanted an edit button.
Think about what the tweet said.
He said, is Twitter adhering to free speech?
No.
Okay, well, free speech is essential to democracy.
Twitter is not free speech, therefore we need an alternative.
So the stated goal, and this is a provocative thing that he put out there, this is not like, he chose his words very carefully, this is very deliberate, There was not a lot of ambiguity there, and there also, it was a committal statement.
It's not like this was a non-committal thing like, hey, what do you think about Twitter?
He said, is Twitter free speech?
This is important.
And then he laid out the significance of it and said, well, it's about our democracy, which I usually hate that word, but in this context I like it.
And then the following week made a very aggressive, very dramatic play.
Which I've never seen in my lifetime with Big Tech and scooped up 10% of the shares.
They came to him and they said, hey, listen, you can come on the board, but you can't own as much of the company.
And he basically rejected it.
Again, to me, if he stated this were his ambitions, he's $3 billion in.
I think what they try to do is essentially pacify him.
And I think they try to get off easy.
They tried to put on this charm offensive, very publicly make an overture towards him and embrace him.
and say, okay, let's do an edit button.
Let's do, you know, these more modest changes.
But he said free speech, not edit button, not Twitter blue, not whatever else.
He said free speech.
So I don't want to get my hopes up because it seems like we just never catch a break with social media but I kind of am getting my hopes up because here's a guy where I'm just failing to see how this could be stopped.
He's worth $285 billion and the market cap for Twitter is what?
billion.
And the market cap for Twitter is what?
$30 billion?
So he's $3 billion and he bought 10%.
So to buy 40% more is what?
$12 billion more?
Is my math right on that?
$15 billion.
$280 billion net worth.
Again, what's stopping him from buying a majority interest in the company outright?
I just don't see it.
And if his intention is to make Twitter free speech, you know, I saw this one guy on Twitter and he made this big thread and he said, OK, listen up.
Here's my advice to Elon.
You got to do this.
You got to do that.
You got to.
And I'm like, you know, Elon Musk, again, the net worth speaks for itself.
He can hire the smartest lawyer, the smartest tech guys, the smartest programmer, the smartest CEO.
And if you have limitless capital, you're the boss.
So, I don't think you really need a game plan.
When you have that kind of capital, you can just brute force with money.
And you can bring in whoever you need to, and you could whip it out however you need to, but if you've got that kind of money, and you're not gonna be sated with the board seat, it seems to me like he's just gonna push for hostile...
Take over of the company, take a majority interest, and then say we're changing the rules.
Twitter is going to bring back Donald Trump.
It is going to be free speech.
Now, I don't know exactly what that's going to look like, and again, I don't want to get my hopes up, but if he said that's the goal, and if he rejected the seat, and he's invested three billion dollars in, you've got a demonstration of intent, you've got a demonstration of means, and follow-through.
It's all there.
He said this is the goal, he's able to achieve it, and he's already 3 billion in, and that he rejected the seat.
On the contrary, I don't think it shows he's abandoning it.
I think it demonstrates that he wants to go further than they would have allowed him, which means that his goals are a lot more far-reaching than maybe some people anticipated.
And of course that would be a huge deal.
Because if this development happened, Twitter is one of the most important of the social media companies.
It's one of the smaller of the big social media companies.
I think it might be the smallest of the big ones.
Because when you think about the family of big social media, you think Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, Reddit, Twitter.
And I think Twitter is the smallest out of those.
Maybe you might think of some other ones.
YouTube, I guess, technically.
And Twitter is at 300 million active users.
I don't even think it cracks the top 10 globally anymore.
But that is the place where the live news happens, and everybody knows that's a disproportionately sort of wealthier, it's more political, and certainly that is where the political conversation happens.
We all remember Donald Trump's tweets.
We don't remember his Instagram posts, or his Facebook ads, or anything like that, or his live streams on YouTube.
We remember the Trump tweets.
And I think that, and I've said this for a long time, Twitter is one of the most important platforms.
That's where the conversation happens.
And if that became a place where you could have free speech, that would be a beachhead for far-right people.
For people like us to re-enter the political conversation.
And that means that the meme war, the Trump revolution, all of that is back on the menu if Twitter is fundamentally transformed.
Significance of this cannot be overstated.
It's huge.
And like I said, this is a guy who can do it.
And I don't get all these people that are pessimistic about this.
Here's the thing on evaluating our prospects with this.
Think about it this way.
Right now the status quo with social media is just... there's no hope.
It's completely bleak.
The status quo with all of them, not just one, but all of them, Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, all the ones I just listed, it's completely hopeless.
It's getting worse every day.
It's been getting worse every day for six years.
And there's no, I don't think there's any prospect that that will change.
There is nothing on the horizon.
There's no force.
There is no idea.
There is nothing that I can see that is going to change that.
So you've got this trajectory that is horrible.
It is horrible specifically for us.
And it's hopeless.
It's bad.
It's getting worse all the time.
It's been getting worse.
It's getting worse faster.
And what's more is there is nothing that we can see right now or in the future anytime soon that is going to disrupt that trend or change that.
It seems like there's no relief anywhere.
So you could say there's like a 0% chance that things are going to get better on YouTube.
I don't think that there's going to be a new CEO at YouTube that brings America First back to YouTube.
I just don't see that happening.
I don't see a legal solution either.
People talk about Section 230 and these other options.
Honestly, I just don't see it happening.
We had Trump for four years and they didn't even start on fixing tech censorship, despite talking about it and knowing what a big deal it was.
So, the point is we really can't win with social media.
It's obsolete to us.
We've abandoned it.
And the problem with this is it's obsolete for us because we've all been censored.
And even if you're not censored, you have to use it in such a way that you might as well be censored because you can't really say what you mean.
You can't say what you need to say.
But that it continues to exist is a problem because we're off the platforms and that wouldn't be so bad if everybody left the platforms and everybody was on some other platform.
But everybody didn't leave.
Most people are still on the platforms.
Most normies and most political people, it's really a very small niche that is not on these platforms relatively.
But most people are still there.
So not only can we not participate and we not make change, but this global conversation, this global network grows bigger all the time.
And that is where the relevant conversation happens.
Just without us.
So you've got this giant center of power.
This is where the influence is.
Influence is being traded and it's being wielded on this platform.
Like, there is this great influence and it's being strengthened as the world becomes more digital, as the world increases its interface with social media, and we become further and further isolated from it.
This is just like a catastrophic scenario.
Again, there's like a 0% chance that we can win.
It's obsolete.
It's hopeless.
It's like, and everybody knows this, it's the sore spot.
It's the worst thing for us.
Here comes a guy now who says, well, you know, I'm the richest guy in the world.
Here's one of the most powerful people in the world who walks onto the scene out of nowhere.
Nobody predicted this.
Nobody could have anticipated this.
Some guy, the most powerful, richest guy in the world, one of them, comes forward and not only says he's going to change social media, but says we're going to give you exactly what you want.
I'm going to make Twitter have free speech again.
And the reaction to this, instead of saying, like, welcoming, again, any disruption, welcoming any change to the status quo or the potential for that, much less the richest guy in the world saying he's going to give you what you want, and they go, He's just doing that to make more money.
It's like seriously?
I can't tell you how much I hate that mentality.
And to me that's such a filter.
I think that just goes to show who is serious and who is either loves despair or is in it for themselves.
I don't know how you can't look at this as an unequivocally, inarguably positive development.
Because again, the situation is hopeless otherwise.
Strictly with social media.
I'm not talking about overall.
But in terms of social media, do you know what we would have to do to fix social media without Elon Musk?
We would need to overthrow the government and then nationalize it.
And good luck with that, right?
I mean, forget about winning the presidency in the Congress and the Senate, because we already did that.
Taking a case to the Supreme Court?
Yeah, that's a funny joke.
A lawsuit, regulation, whatever.
It's just, it's not gonna happen.
Short of overthrowing the government and installing some kind of right-wing, like neo-Bolshevik government that's gonna nationalize Twitter and make it a telecom, make it a utility like the telecoms, it's just not going to happen.
And instead, it's going to be wielded against us every day to extreme effect.
Not only can we not use it, but it's going to be wielded against us in the most vicious way.
And there is nothing that's going to disrupt that trajectory, and it's getting worse all the time.
And people don't even have an idea of how that might change in the future, near or far term in the future.
And again, a guy comes forward with $280 billion and says, well, I'm not just going to shake it up.
I'm not just going to go in and change the leadership.
I'm going to introduce free speech.
And understand, this should be welcomed even if he didn't do anything.
Even if he just said that, it would be a positive development.
Because again, so much of our job is not necessarily knowing exactly what to do or how to do it.
It is about disrupting the status quo.
It's about recognizing how bleak the situation is, how few options we really have, And instead, just creating entropy.
Just creating chaos.
And if we can disrupt the status quo enough, and change the dynamics significantly, maybe we'll create a dynamic where there's a 1% chance that we can win.
That's the name of the game.
Because, ultimately, they are on defense.
You know, they're defending the status quo.
They're defending a very precarious system of control.
And the status quo is moving forward, marching forward, according to the same pattern.
It's got this momentum to it.
And all we have to do is throw the momentum off.
All we have to do is stop the momentum.
All we have to do is, again, disrupt the status quo.
It doesn't need to be anything.
It just needs to be not the thing that it is.
It doesn't have to be the ideal.
It doesn't have to be done just right.
It just has to be not the same.
Not what it is.
Because what it is gives us a 0% chance of winning.
And that goes with the whole thing, but strictly with social media.
With social media, there's a 0% chance that we can win.
So all we need to do is just, again, disrupt the course that we're on.
Try to fundamentally change the dynamic.
And again, we don't need Elon Musk to get there and say, this is the Groyper platform.
We just need him to kill the momentum, change the conversation, change the trajectory, Change the general situation in such a way that there's a 1% chance that we can win.
Where there's maybe a path forward.
Now again, I'm taking a very conservative approach to that.
I'm saying this is how little we need to be optimistic about this.
But he's not just disrupting it, he's saying he's the most powerful guy and he's coming forward and saying I'm not just going to disrupt it, I'm going to do exactly what you want.
And, you know, people should be satisfied if he said 90% less than that.
People would have a reason to be satisfied and excited if he said significantly less and committed significantly less than he already has.
But he's done so much more than we could have expected in such a short amount of time.
And in spite of this, people are going to turn their noses up and say, you know, I bet he's just doing this for money.
Well, I bet this is bad.
I bet this just, you know, it's probably not going to happen the way we want it to.
It's like, what is that attitude?
And it's the same attitude about Trump.
It's the same attitude people had about Trump when they said, Oh, you know, he's just like the rest of them.
Oh, he bombed Syria.
Well, it turns out he's not gonna single-handedly change everything like we expected him to.
It's like, just embrace chaos.
Embrace the disruption.
Just lean in.
When Trump goes up there and says, not these days, but five years ago, six years ago, when he goes up there and says they're bringing drugs, crime, and rapists, hey, just lean into it.
When they all hate this guy and they freak out about it, just lean into it.
When Elon Musk says, I'm gonna bring free speech to Twitter, yeah, maybe he won't do it.
He's a transhumanist, billionaire.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
We all know.
Yeah, yeah.
We got it.
You're way more conservative than him.
Yeah, we know.
Yeah, he's a liberal.
We're the most conservative.
That's great.
But what if he does lean into it?
Isn't that a good thing?
When Vladimir Putin invades Ukraine.
Oh, well, technically... Again, who cares?
Lean into it.
NATO's scrambling.
The West is freaking out.
Just lean into it.
Lean into the disruption.
Otherwise, what are we gonna get?
Election fraud.
Covid mandates, inflation, recession, Democrat, Uniparty, total demographic transformation.
That's what we're getting!
Don't you understand?
It's like people can't think in time.
Here's what we can expect in the future.
Total extinction and death.
That's what's on the table.
Your options are get killed by the government resisting or submit to the government and your race is extinguished and we can never win an election again and there's no political solution and there's no any other kind of solution.
There's just nothing.
It just gets gayer and blacker and worse forever.
And then somebody comes along and says, well, I'm gonna try and change that and people go, well, you know, you probably won't.
Really?
Just?
We just need to?
Again, just disrupt.
That's the name of the game.
That is enough.
But when you get people saying they're going to do good things, even better.
Even better.
That's just a bonus.
Honest to God, it is just a bonus.
So I'm fully embracing it.
I'm Elon Pilled.
I support it.
If the richest man in the world wants to be an ally, we should accept that.
We're looking around like, where's the help gonna come from?
I just don't see how we're gonna put it together.
I just don't see any reason to be optimistic.
Richest guy in the world calling.
He's liberal.
unidentified
He's not as conservative as I like.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼
He's probably kidding.
He's probably kidding.
I'm not gonna answer.
Really?
It just makes me lose my mind.
But that's the kind of thinking that we need to bring to the table.
And I always speak in these terms.
It's about fundamentally changing the dynamic.
It's about probability.
If there's chaos, there's more options.
It's that simple.
If there's conflict, if there's chaos, black swan, dark horse, events and people, You just open up the realm of possibility and there are more permutations, there are more possibilities, and you increase the odds that we get a favorable one.
Because right now, it's almost zero.
That's the bottom line.
So, that's my analysis on the move in general.
I think his denial, his rejection of the board seat, again, I think that means he's going to go further.
And I think it means he's going to buy more, and he's going to follow through on the free speech thing, because he didn't say he's going to modify the platform.
He said Twitter needs to be free speech to, you know, shore up democracy or whatever, which, again, I think that's a gay way to say it, but whatever you need to say, it doesn't matter.
Just say what you need to say.
And then, again, I think that even if that's not going to happen, why would we not get excited by this?
Why would we not...
Why would we not be eager to see somebody with that much power go up against Twitter?
I've always said we need the government because the government is the only thing more powerful than capital.
It's the only thing more powerful than big tech.
That's not quite true.
Because if you defeat in detail, a guy with $280 billion could take down a company with a $30 billion market cap.
Defeat in detail.
Yeah, Elon Musk can't take down Alphabet.
And yeah, he can't take down all of big tech.
But one guy on our side can take down one of the smaller but disproportionately influential companies on their side.
Defeat in detail.
It's been done before.
So I'm I think he can do it.
I think he wants to do it.
Hopefully he will but if not, you know, I'm not going to be too disappointed but Again, we gotta think on the bright side.
Glass half full.
And we have to meme these things into action.
Whatever happened to... It's a lot of this demoralization propaganda.
I'm a big believer that that's real.
Because I remember six years ago, people would see something like this and say, based Elon, you know, and they'd start memeing him and say, oh, he's gonna whatever.
And now these days we get this Blackpill stuff.
And I think there's a very real demoralization effort.
I think people are actively putting negativity out there to suppress us and to get everybody to be doubtful of good things.
Oh, a good thing happens?
Well, here's a million reasons why it's a bad thing.
And then there can be no good things.
And we're never making progress and there's never victories.
And then there's no movement, you know?
So anyway, but that's Elon Musk.
I'm going to skip the Gretchen Whitmer story.
I'm going to go straight to the chemical weapons story.
Because we're running out of time here.
So I'll just go straight to this one.
This shirt is too tight and it's choking me.
So I'm going to loosen my tie here.
And it's too hot in here.
I wish I wore shorts instead of pants.
Okay.
So now we can talk about the chemical weapons.
Can you see me moving around?
I'm dying here.
I can't do the tie.
Vince was right.
I was wrong.
Vince was right.
Because I always used to give Vince a hard time.
I'm like, would it kill you to put on a shirt and tie?
Because he goes to these events in a hoodie and shorts.
And I'm like, really?
Really, Wigga?
And he goes, no, I wore a suit and tie every day for 10 years.
I can't do it anymore.
And I'm like, come on.
It's not that bad.
I'm at that point.
Maybe my neck is just getting bigger.
Maybe these shirts are getting smaller.
I don't know, but I can't take it anymore.
Anyway.
But we're gonna move on to our story here about chemical weapons.
Big deal.
Big deal.
At this point you guys know what's up.
The war in Ukraine rages on.
The Russians are almost ready for their major offensive against the remnant of the Ukrainian armed forces in Donbass.
But there may be a little bit of a sign of trouble here because the chemical weapons false flag that we've been talking about for the past two weeks may be starting.
And this is the report from Axios.
I'll just jump right into it.
It says, quote, the Pentagon is closely monitoring social media reports claiming Russian forces deployed chemical weapons in Mariupol, Ukraine.
Defense Department Press Secretary John Kirby talked about this in a statement on Monday.
Moscow has a long history of using chemical weapons and the White House has warned that Russian forces may be preparing to, quote, use chemical or biological weapons in Ukraine.
The original report was made on Telegram, where the far-right nationalist group Azov Regiment posted a message alleging that Russian forces used, quote, a poisonous substance of unknown origin.
John Kirby said, quote, we are aware of social media reports which claim Russian forces deployed a potential chemical munition in Mariupol.
We cannot confirm at this time and will continue to monitor the situation closely.
These reports, if true, are deeply concerning and reflective of concerns that we have had about Russia's potential to use a variety of riot control agents, including tear gas mixed with chemical agents in Ukraine.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has not confirmed the reports, although British Foreign Secretary Liz Truss also said her government is working urgently to verify the use of chemical weapons.
She said any such use of weapons would be a callous escalation in this conflict and we will hold Putin and his regime to account.
And this is really bad news.
Because I told you the setup for this two or three weeks ago.
They've been saying Very deliberately and in a coordinated way, with no proof by the way, with no evidence, they've been saying for weeks that the Russians are preparing to use chemical weapons in Ukraine, which would make no sense.
It just wouldn't.
If Russia wanted to win this war quickly, the way to do it would be to bomb the population centers.
Level the population centers where the Ukrainian Armed Forces are hiding behind civilian shields, right behind human shields.
They would use heavy artillery and they would use their air power to level the major Ukrainian cities and they would just wipe out the armed forces and there would be tons of civilian casualties and they would destroy lots of infrastructure, but they would bring a swift end to the war.
But they're not doing that.
And they're not doing that because they're actively trying to avoid civilian casualties.
They're trying to avoid major collateral damage in terms of infrastructure and property.
And they're doing that partially, I think, because they're fighting the war in a way that is ethical.
I also think that they're doing that because they know that there is intense international scrutiny.
And the Russians know that if there is a high civilian casualty count, they know that if there is an unacceptable level of destruction, if there's an appearance of a disregard for human life, that that will invite more intervention from the West.
Keep in mind that the Russian military spends $67 billion per year.
Or that's their annual budget.
The annual budget for all the NATO countries combined is like $1.2 trillion.
$1.2 trillion!
And the Russian defense budget is less than $100 billion.
It's $67 billion.
So you're talking about a differential that's about 20 times, 2,000% larger on the other side.
So the point is to say that the Russians desperately do not want a conflict with NATO.
Desperately.
In fact, strategically, it is imperative that they do not invite escalation from NATO because Russia cannot respond in kind with conventional means.
If NATO were to intervene directly in Ukraine, Russia would not be able to repel the intervention.
They would have to resort to a nuclear attack, and they wouldn't do that.
So they know, again, it's strategically imperative That they do not do anything so provocative that it would give a good reason for the West to intervene more than they already are.
That's why they're not hastening an end to the conflict in the way that everybody knows they could, which is to use the full might of their air and artillery power to bomb the population centers, which is where the Ukrainian Armed Forces is hiding.
And the Ukrainian Armed Forces, they're using human shields in residential neighborhoods, in the population centers, for that very reason.
Because they know that Russia can't go all the way, they know that they can't bomb those targets, because they know just as well as Russia does that they could go and tell on Russia in Brussels, they could go and tell on Russia in Washington, and bring the United States and Germany and France and the United Kingdom into the war.
So, that is why it makes no sense for Vladimir Putin to use chemical weapons.
It does not hasten an end to the conflict in a way that would be resolved in conventional means.
Artillery and air power are conventional.
Chemical is considered a weapon of mass destruction.
It's considered, in a wholly different category, far more provocative.
In fact, it is explicitly a provocation against the United States because the United States frequently draws a red line in these exact kinds of conflicts when it comes to the use of chemical and biological weapons.
So, it makes no sense for Putin to hasten the end of the conflict with a disregard for human life in the form of conventional means with air and artillery power, and then it doubly, especially, does not make sense to hasten an end to the war with a reckless disregard for human life with a chemical agent, with what is considered a weapon of mass destruction a level above air and artillery, a level above all the conventional means that they're already using.
It especially doesn't make sense after Biden has said for weeks that if chemical weapons are used, then we're going to have to do more.
All that logic is perfectly sound, but then add to that that it was made formal.
It was made official and explicit by the National Security Council, the State Department, the Pentagon, the NATO Secretary General, and the White House.
They all said chemical weapons are a red line.
So why then?
Russia has all but won this war.
They have destroyed the Ukrainian military.
They have destroyed all its equipment.
This week they are about to engage in a battle which will destroy the remnants, the remaining personnel in the Ukrainian armed forces.
The war is over.
Zelensky has abandoned hope of ever joining NATO.
He's talking about peace and neutrality.
The Germans and the Americans seem to be urging him to do that.
The sanctions have backfired.
The West has mounted everything that they could short of direct intervention and hasn't succeeded on the battlefield in Ukraine or in defeating the Russian economy.
So why then, at this juncture, when the war is somewhat tenuous but essentially on its way to being over on favorable terms for Putin, Putin's weathered the worst of it.
Again, it's strategically imperative they don't invite the West in.
Why at this point would they use chemical weapons?
It just doesn't make sense from a tactical, strategic, diplomatic, political point of view.
But yet, the West has said for weeks and weeks that this is some kind of major concern.
And like I said, they've all said without evidence for weeks, Putin will use chemical weapons, Putin will use chemical weapons.
And then they finally came out on Friday, and this was the last story I covered on Friday, Some unnamed intelligence officials came out and said that it turns out that we were right.
We were completely right.
Putin was never considering using chemical weapons.
He wasn't moving chemical weapons to Ukraine.
The West made it up.
And this is reported in all the mainstream media on Friday.
This is reported in NBC, New York Times, Washington Post, all the big ones.
Anonymous intelligence sources came forward and said there is no intelligence.
There is no...
Evidence that Russia is doing this.
They admitted it.
And they said that the US regime and the NATO regime is only saying that Putin will deploy chemical weapons to deter Putin from considering doing that.
And so they admitted that it was misinformation.
They admitted that they strategically put that narrative out there to change the outcome of the conflict in Ukraine.
To change the decision-making calculus at the Kremlin in Moscow.
Now here we are a few days later and they're coming to us and telling us we found evidence of chemical weapons.
And I've said for the past three weeks there's no evidence, it doesn't make sense, and what they're going to do, the reason why they're saying this, it turns out it's not because Putin will use these things, it's not because Putin has moved chemical weapons to Ukraine, and actually Unlike what they said on Friday, it's not about deterring Putin at all.
They did not say that Putin might use chemical weapons to deter him from using them.
They don't need to deter Putin from using chemical weapons.
There's already a deterrent, based on precedent, because Putin knows full well what happens when these so-called rogue regimes use chemical weapons, or when the United States says they do.
It always results in American intervention.
So that didn't need to be said.
That didn't need to be made explicit.
They did not lie and say that Putin would use chemical weapons to deter him.
That in itself is a lie.
They lied about their lie.
They said, well we lied for this reason.
They didn't lie for that reason.
They lied about chemical weapons because they're setting him up.
They're framing the conversation so that When they accuse Putin of using chemical weapons falsely, it will fall into people's expectation.
And I've said this for weeks, this is just how they operate.
This is the Defense Department, the State Department, this is 101, this is straight from the playbook.
They did the same thing a year ago when we pulled out of Afghanistan.
They said for weeks, Well we're really concerned about ISIS-K.
Do you remember ISIS-K?
Go back and look at the news headlines back in July and August of 2021 and everybody is reporting about ISIS-K.
You had never heard about ISIS-K ISIS comes around in 2013 and you don't hear about this mysterious splinter group until 2021.
It just so happens the month when we're ending our 20-year war in Afghanistan.
Then you heard about it non-stop for weeks and they said ISIS-K is on the rise.
The United States leaves, ISIS comes in.
And they're going to do a terror attack.
And that's going to justify why we were still in Afghanistan.
That's going to justify why we were there for 20 years.
And it's going to make the pullout look like a disaster.
And it's going to make it politically less feasible to pull out of other conflicts because it just gets so messy and violent.
And then there was a terror attack.
And then you never heard about them again, right?
So we had never heard about this.
What we're talking about is a tripwire.
What we're talking about is an illusory threat, an atrocity.
That's what we're talking about.
A pretext for intervention.
We had never heard about this.
Ever.
I think they talked about ISIS-Khorasan at one point in like 2015.
But it was hardly ever.
ISIS comes around in 2013.
We don't hear about him for 8 years until Joe Biden executes the withdrawal from Afghanistan.
Then we hear for weeks and weeks ISIS terror attack, ISIS terror attack in Afghanistan, ISIS-K, Splinter Group.
Read all about it.
Here's your VOX explainer on ISIS.
Okay, here's a vice video.
We traveled to Afghanistan, we shook hands with ISIS-K, whatever, and they're gonna do a terror attack.
They do their little terror attack, and then you never heard about them again after withdrawal was complete.
Then you never heard about it again.
They plant the seed, they execute, they create a false flag, they create a fake atrocity, they point the finger, and that is supposed to Mold American public opinion in the direction of perpetual intervention and American empire.
That's what it is.
And that's what they're doing here.
They seeded the idea about Russian chemical weapons.
They weren't talking about that in January.
When the military buildup began.
They talked about the blood that was on the border, remember that?
They said, oh they're bringing warm blood, which means they're gonna invade.
They talked about the heavy military equipment, they talked about the 200,000 troops, but they never mentioned chemical weapons back in January.
And then when they invaded in late February, never talked about chemical weapons.
And then the war went on for weeks, and they never talked about chemical weapons.
And then all of a sudden, one day, All the organs of American foreign policy began to say the exact same thing with NATO.
Chemical weapons.
They just decided one day, we just think he's going to do it.
You know, we're in the middle of the war and we applied the worst sanctions ever and they just, you know, and by the way the sanctions happen to not be working and Putin happens to be winning and there's nothing we could do within our menu of options that are available in the current Sort of DEFCON level, so to speak, the current climate of the crisis.
There's nothing more that we could do within reason.
And then all of a sudden, all the organs of American foreign policy started to say, oh, well, we just think he's using chemical weapons.
And people said, well, that doesn't make any sense.
And they said, oh, we lied.
We only said that because we might.
And, you know, we're trying to deter him from doing that.
And then they find the chemical weapons.
Really?
Did they find chemical weapons?
Did they use chemical weapons on three guys like Azov Regiment is claiming?
Azov Battalion is claiming that three guys got sick.
And they're saying that's indicative of the use of chemical weapons.
So I guess these Russians are just retarded.
Because in Bukha last week, they go in, and then they leave the city, and then I guess they sneak back in at night, and then they massacre a bunch of civilians for no reason and leave again, because they discover all this evidence days after they leave.
And then there's no investigation.
The United Kingdom vetoes a Security Council investigation.
And then the week later they use a chemical weapon on three guys.
The one thing the United States said would guarantee escalation.
Of a variety that they will not, which they will not discuss.
They said, well, we're going to respond in kind.
What does that look like?
We're not going to say.
We're not going to say what that looks like.
So, the United States is writing a blank check and saying, we're going to fuck your shit up.
We're not going to tell you what we're going to do, but we will just, writing a blank check to escalate this conflict as far as we want to.
If you do this, and Putin was like, oh yeah, I'll just do that to three guys and, you know, bring it on.
No, it makes no sense.
I reject this completely.
This is garbage.
This is fake.
Anything you see about chemical weapons now or in the future in Russia is fake.
They are not using chemical weapons.
They were not talking about this three weeks ago.
They were not talking about this in February.
They were not talking about it in January.
They haven't been talking about it in the eight years that the Civil War has been raging in Ukraine.
They didn't use chemical weapons to take Crimea.
In fact, they didn't need them because the Crimeans welcomed them in.
They didn't use chemical weapons in the Civil War between Kiev and Donbass.
And they didn't need them in the initial push, and they don't need them now.
Certainly, it's strategically imperative that they don't use them.
And there's a coordinated misinformation campaign from Washington that is trying to convince people that it is plausible that the Russians are going to do that.
And that is to shape public opinion in such a way that the United States can escalate the conflict, can initiate an escalation themselves, and blame it on the Russians.
Americans don't want the war to escalate.
Americans don't want more inflation, more sanctions.
They certainly don't want a war.
But the United States is going to use the chemical weapons false flag to blame it on Russia and say, hey, well, we were forced to respond.
We drew a red line, they crossed it, and now we're slaves to this sort of escalation pattern.
We just must respond.
We didn't get ourselves in this situation.
We said they crossed the line.
I mean, we're merely responding.
No, they're initiating.
They want the escalation.
They drew the line, and then they created the provocation across it, and then they're going to get the escalation they wanted, blame it on the Russians, and do it in a way that's clean in terms of public opinion.
And in order to do that, they've just got to hammer it every week.
War criminal, butcher, chemical weapons.
War criminal, butcher, murderer, dictator, chemical weapons.
And then when they come out with the false flag people go, oh yeah, just like we've been hearing for weeks.
I think I remember they talked about that on the news.
I think they said something about, you know, they've been saying that he'll do that and now he did.
Oh, it's a shame.
And that's going to justify whatever it is they need to do to prevent Russia from winning in Ukraine.
It's unacceptable to the Pentagon and the State Department.
That's what's going on here.
So I said it for weeks.
It seems like it's coming to fruition, unfortunately.
And it's in Axios.
Axios is like a, not a great, I mean it's like a subsidiary I think of NBC if I'm not mistaken.
It's not like a, it's not as big obviously as like NBC.
But it's being reported on by mainstream outlets.
Mainstream outlets are picking up evidence of chemical weapons use.
And the British government is investigating and other governments are investigating.
So it seems like they're telling Putin, like, hey, we can come in and win this war when we want and maybe you should just think twice about really winning.
And I think they're trying to push Putin for a face-saving peace negotiation with more modest terms.
I think that's really what's going on.
I think they're saying to Putin, like, hey, okay, you won the war, but we can take it away from you, so why don't you make peace?
You know, maybe Ukraine won't join NATO, but there'll be no eastern Ukrainian state, there will be no Novorossiya, you're gonna have to compromise on these things.
And it's gonna give him an off-ramp in a relatively face-saving way.
Maybe that's the approach, I don't know exactly.
Or they could be insane, and they're gonna do the chemical weapons anyway, and we're gonna go to war with Russia.
I mean, it could be that.
It could go that far.
I don't think it's likely it'll go that far, but you can never underestimate how insane these neocons are and their hubris.
It just knows no bounds.
So it very easily could go in that road.
When you start talking about escalation and these types of red lines, that's when you got to be worried.
Because that's when things like Pearl Harbor, 9-11, Gulf of Tonkin, all that kind of stuff, that's how all these big wars start.
Nobody ever wants them, but a ship blows up, you know, the buildings go down, a base is bombed, whatever, maybe they saw it coming, maybe they did it, maybe we did it to ourselves.
But that's always how it starts, is it not?
Nobody ever gets an award because of like, hey, Russia's doing some messed up stuff.
It's like, no, Russia blew up the ship.
They flew planes into the buildings.
They bombed the base.
The terror attack happened.
Whatever.
They killed people in broad daylight.
Here's graphic footage.
Because that's how people are acclimated.
That is how they get people to buy in.
And it's no different here.
False flag, chemical weapons attack in Ukraine is no different than, like, letting Pearl Harbor happen and getting the war that Roosevelt wanted.
Fake a chemical weapons attack, get the war that you want in Russia.
So, we're gonna keep a close eye on that.
We're gonna monitor these developments on what's going on there.
Mariupol is still not won.
There's still three holdout areas and And like I said, the big battle is about to happen in Donbass.
So we'll keep an eye on that too.
But that's it.
That's our news.
We're going to move on and take a look at our Super Chats and we'll see what you guys have to say.
My voice is a little hoarse here because I did a stream before my show.
Also, I didn't really sleep last night.
So I'm tired.
My voice is sore.
I was on the phone a lot today.
Then I did a stream.
Then, you know, then I had to do the show.
So I'm a little bit tired, but we're gonna try and get through these super chats as quickly as possible.
We have a lot of them because I didn't read my super chats from my casual stream earlier.
But let me just get my bubbly out.
I'll take a sip and we'll just get started.
might as well okay all right my My ass is sweating.
It's too hot in here.
I'm tired.
I'm falling asleep.
My voice is sore.
My throat's sore.
I'm dying.
unidentified
But all right, we'll read these super chats.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼
Okay.
Reactionary retards.
My grandpa told me yesterday that I was an asshole for supporting the Russians because they apparently are gang raping 10-year-olds.
Total fantasy land for boomers right now.
People wonder how anyone can believe this stuff and yet they do.
Yeah, I don't know man.
It's just, it's so convenient.
Oh, the enemies of the government are like raping kids?
Really?
Come on now.
How stupid do you have to be to fall for that?
Do you just believe everything the government tells you?
The government says this should be your enemy.
Why?
Well, because our enemies, they're pure evil.
unidentified
Excuse me.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼
They're pure evil.
Oh, okay.
That's really convenient.
So yeah, I don't know man.
It is a cartoon.
It's a big, like I said, it's Harry Potter, it's Star Wars, it's Iron Man.
Every war is about Iron Man versus Thanos.
That's not how wars really are though.
Because the world is a complicated place and all wars are fought over interest.
They're all fought over security, land, money, commodities, religion, power, and that goes for both sides.
Never in the history of the world has a war been fought over altruism.
It's never happened.
Never in the history of the world has a war been fought over altruism.
Just doing the right thing, it's always been fought ultimately over power.
And that goes for both sides.
You know, liberal democracy, why do you think we want to support that?
It's the same reason the Soviet Union wanted to support communism.
Yeah, they believed in communism, but also a communist regime was a friendly regime.
Same thing with liberal democracy.
So you could say, well, liberal democracy is better.
Okay, but it's very cynical.
We support it where we can, and then we also do 500 billion dollar arms deal with Saudi Arabia, you know, and then we support their war in Yemen.
So is it really liberal democracy that's the common denominator, or is the common denominator that we do what's good for us?
And where it is liberal democracy, well that's great too, But it has to overlap with our interest.
And when it doesn't, guess which one has to go?
It's not our interest.
It's liberal democracy.
We back Ukraine becoming a liberal democracy.
Do we back that for Saudi Arabia?
No.
And what's, again, what's the common denominator?
We abandon our so-called principles when it suits our interest.
We did that in Chile.
We did that in Saudi Arabia.
We did that in Iran.
We did that in Greece.
We've done that in Many countries for many years.
And liberals used to understand this.
Did liberals, like, forget about the Cold War?
You know, liberals used to say, oh, it's so hypocritical.
The CIA backs fascists and all this.
And it's like, you know, it's the same CIA, right?
It's the same guys.
It's the same institution.
You know, they fully understand now the United States would overthrow the governments and do proxy wars and back unsavory dictators.
And now they just believe everything that the State Department says.
Now James Comey is on CNN with James Clapper and all the others.
It's like, where'd the liberals go?
So... But they're just naive.
Reactionary says the Azov niggas are off the goop in Ukraine.
Yep.
Reactionary retards seeing people on gab meltdown over destiny joining cozy is retarded.
How do people not get it at this point?
I don't know man Spence says 630 in the evening is so perfect for a stream.
Thank you Nick for rescuing another boring day.
Yeah, you got it Quebec Roy versus a big guy ever played fallout New Vegas.
I feel like you'd be a fan Yeah, I've played fallout New Vegas Pepe the Frog says, she'll be superchats more for retards like me who can't remember.
Yeah, you got it.
I only do them every night on the show.
APG says, hey here's a superchat because I love and appreciate you.
Hey, I love you too, King!
Love and appreciate you too, King.
Lancus is you're my favorite super chat victim.
Oh seven.
Thanks Basterisk says sorry nigga.
I'm saving my money for when you do a $500 per plate AFF pizza party at Pequod's or something Yeah, okay, thanks a pizza party, I don't know if I'll ever do a pizza party And if I did, I wouldn't call it that.
Niggas make everything sound so cringe.
I love pizza, but you make it sound gay.
I love pizza!
And I love having pizza with friends.
But for some reason, the way... Maybe it's just me.
Maybe it's you.
But reading that, being forced to read that, I'm averse to it.
I have an aversion to it now.
You make it sound awful.
You make it sound cringe and gay and LARP and try-hard.
And you're making it sound horrible.
But thanks, I guess.
Treehead says, maybe I'm just... You know what I think I am?
I read something on polls.
Somebody said I'm schizoid.
Somebody said I have schizoid personality disorder.
And you know, I definitely have something like that.
Avoidant schizoid.
There's definitely something going on there that's abnormal.
I'm undiagnosed, but certainly there's something like that.
Because I mean, why would I have such an averse reaction to such an innocent little super chat?
Other than that, I have some dysfunction going on.
Anyway, Treehead says, here is gas money.
I don't know how much you spend, but this is what I just spent.
I tried to get to the next dollar, but it went a cent over.
I always try to do that.
Yeah, that's good times.
Yeah, thank you.
I appreciate it.
It's not cheap.
It's like $4.50 a gallon here, which is just absurd.
And I have to get my tire fixed.
I was gonna go out last night and my tire is leaking air, so that's awesome.
So I gotta go and get that fixed, but thanks.
I appreciate the gas money.
Pepe the Frog says, what turn are you on?
I can't read it on stream.
I don't remember.
Spence says, love to see slimy, dirty, greasy, unshowered Nick doing a 6 p.m.
stream.
That's a great, thank you for that.
Spinefish says, did your high school marching band participate in competitions?
No.
Charles is sending my obligatory $3 to let Nick know I don't hate him and in fact I love him.
Thank you for this internet live stream.
Yeah, you're welcome.
Derek says, thank you for creating this platform, Nick.
You and I are making the world a better place.
Keep up the good work.
Derek Chauvin, that's hilarious.
Charles says, sending my obligatory.
Okay, it's duplicate.
Awesome.
On Yo Mama says, hey Nick, see, I love streaming.
I hate super chats.
I love streaming.
Hate this part.
AnyoMama says, hey Nick, not sure if you read my super chat the other week, but I asked if you could unban me.
I sent four duplicates.
Okay.
TejanoGroiper says, you'll never know how much you've changed so many lives, including mine.
You're only just beginning.
Yeah, thank you.
I appreciate that.
StemPie says, hey King, love you.
StemPie, really?
Because, you know, you're rooting against me in Valorant.
You're in Jaden's live chat rooting against me and viciously trash-talking my team.
And then when we won, fair and square, then you were...
Trying to tell us that our victory didn't count so you could say that but when it mattered where were you huh?
Where were you princess?
When it really mattered you were cheerleader for the other team you were in a skirt and pom-poms cheerleading for the other team UX was on my team UX My BFF was on my team.
He was fighting alongside me.
I was healing him and We were fighting shoulder-to-shoulder, killing and being killed like brothers in the trenches, and you were a hot little piece cheerleading on the other team.
You were on the other team in your XXXL cheerleading uniform, big girl, jumping up and down for the enemy team, and then
You were trash-talking us, so... And you could come on the show and super chat the minimum amount and say, hey King, love you, but when we were out there being cut down by by carries, by their three carries, and you were cheering it on with bloodlust, while UX lay dying in my arms, while I lay dying in UX's arms, you were cheering it on
unidentified
So, do you love me?
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼
You need to prove it to me.
You need to show me, okay?
A lot of people like to say, Nick, Nick, I'm such a fan, oh I love you, you know?
People need to show how much they love me every day, you know that?
You know that?
People need to show the love a little bit.
I'm getting tired of hearing it.
I need to see it.
I need you to prove it to me.
I need you to cut yourself.
unidentified
No.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼
No, that's a joke.
That's a joke.
You love me?
unidentified
Prove it.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼
Would you kill for me?
Would you kill yourself for me?
Would you kill yourself for me?
Would you kill and be killed for me?
Don't tell me you love me if you're not willing to kill and be killed.
For me?
For the love of me?
No, kidding, kidding, kidding, kidding.
Kidding!
Kidding!
Kidding, of course.
Kidding, of course.
Everybody calls me a cult leader.
That's definitely not helping.
Oh, you love me?
unidentified
Prove it.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼
Why don't you cut yourself?
unidentified
No.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼
Joking.
Jokes.
It's all jokes.
Dark humor.
I kind of like dark humor.
There's a little dark humor for you, okay?
For all you dark humor millennials.
Just jokes.
But I am serious.
StemPie, total fucking traitor.
Total dual loyalist.
I can't believe it.
That was a high stakes match, okay?
And they were trash talking, and they were trying to dox our teammate, and you're in there cheering the other team on?
How dare you?
I've been nothing but nice to you, and I've known you longer.
Bitch, I've known you.
Don't act like you don't know me.
I know you.
I've been known, you nigga.
And you go and cheer for the enemy team?
Unbelievable.
You barely even post about me.
You post about everybody else on Gab.
You hardly even post about me anymore.
People think they do a little loyalty thing and then they're like good for life.
So yeah, okay STEM.
Really appreciate it.
But you got a lot of explaining to do, pal.
Why don't you go play Apex Legends with Brainstick Blaze while you're at it?
You go and cheer for the other team.
You play games with other people.
UX would never do that.
unidentified
So... He says, hey King, love you.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼
Stempi.
I'm not feeling the love, frankly.
Words.
Words are words.
Actions speak louder than words and I'm frankly I'm appalled at your whole situation Cracker Groy versus what would you do if you was overtaken and cozy followers?
Oh, no, I don't know that might happen with destiny But maybe not I'm competitive so we'll see Donald Trump's is willing to be a full-time cozy gamer streaming five days a week, 12 hours a day.
I'm sure there's a lot of people that would do that, but we're not accepting just anybody that wants to stream.
A lot of people want to stream.
But, you know, why don't you try streaming on YouTube or something first?
So thanks for the super chat, but yeah, everybody's always coming to me like, hey Nick, can I get a cozy thing?
And it's like, no.
unidentified
Like, I don't want to watch your content.
Who would want to watch your content?
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼
Nobody wants to just see some random guy play games, you know So you want to stream on cozy go and stream on another platform get a following make some content And if it's good, you know, then I'll let you on but it's not like hey everyone come and do a stream hey everyone come join and Hell no Yeah, no way
Chrome Groyper says I laughed my duck ass off when I saw that Destiny is now on Cozy knowing he probably has some hesitation but limited options.
I can't help but laugh at the idea of you forcing him to become who he's meant to be.
Let's go!
Let's go!
I'm gonna.
I'm gonna force him to become a Groyper.
I will force him.
Spinefish says super chats are gonna go through the roof when we get our own lemon system.
Yeah, you're right Jordan says saving the rest for the main show loving the content.
Thank you Cal says just eat in the UK has the problems like DoorDash.
Oh, thank you for telling me that Dusty time says tea time groper for the Brits.
What do you think?
For what tea time go for one?
What does that even mean?
Super Lionheart says content withdrawal is real.
Excuse me?
I feel like I was going to die this weekend without a new Nick stream.
Yeah, so true.
Hidecap says the Italian Parliament walking out on Zelensky's speech was awesome.
Everyone's getting sick of him lecturing the world every day.
He accused the Russians of mobile crematoriums in Mariupol last week, Holocaust style.
Yeah, go figure.
What does that tell ya?
Foy says, I know he's kind of cringe, but Jocko Willink had three survivors of the USS Liberty on his podcast last week.
I originally thought the video thumbnail was a joke, but the nigga really did it.
Jocko redemption arc?
He believes it was a deliberate attack and potential false flag.
Yeah, it's pretty based.
I saw that.
So maybe he will redeem himself.
No, I think that's ridiculous.
Of course your environment influences you.
Of course your human nature influences you.
What a ridiculous thing to say.
is not a Catholic belief because if someone has a propensity to do something, this cancels out the free will that God gave them.
Do you agree with this?
No, I think that's ridiculous.
Of course, your environment influences you.
Of course, your human nature influences you.
What a ridiculous thing to say.
That has nothing to do with free will.
Of course, certain people have a propensity to do things for a variety of reasons, and genetics is part of it.
Race and sex and all of that is part of it, but just like every other environmental factor, you're talking about propensity.
So Someone who's addicted to nicotine has a propensity to consume more nicotine means there's no free will?
Give me a break.
unidentified
That doesn't make any sense.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼
Midnight Sun says, Groipers, for future notice when Nick is rolling during a live speech, please do not blurt out telegram.
The day after he gets banned from everything.
Yeah, it's funny.
Matt Mance says, literally haven't checked Twitter since you got banned.
Was so hyped for the old Nick tweets account and got back on Twitter.
Now the account's gone.
Now I'm sad.
Well, hopefully there'll be a new Nick Fuentes Twitter account.
New Nick Fuentes tweets.
Because I'll be back.
That would be huge!
I would rather do a show with Destiny and Lauren Southern.
Not that I don't like Dave Smith, but I just think he's too agreeable.
I think the show is more fun when it's contentious.
It would be kind of boring, because me and Dave Smith would just agree on most things, and the disagreement would just be too, like, intellectual.
Not even intellectual, but just, it wouldn't be, there'd be no sparks.
Where's the fire?
Where's the, where's the sex appeal?
You know?
Me and Destiny and Lauren Southern would be a guaranteed ratings hit.
Guaranteed drama reality show content.
Hidecaps says, would Eggy be welcome on Cozy in the future?
Yeah, I just don't know if he's interested.
Winston says, congratulations to Styx and his wife Liz for having their baby daughter born today.
Yeah, big congratulations to them.
Line Rider says, I just think that's a retarded argument.
saying men failed at protecting women from some external source.
We failed at protecting women from themselves.
Left to themselves, they will always create a ginocracy.
I just think that's a retarded argument.
You know, I mean, it's always just a cop-out.
That's really just besides the point where people say, don't blame women, blame men.
It's got nothing to do with blame.
Let's just call a spade a spade.
That's always just such a diversion from the main point.
The main point is, Hey, women shouldn't be running society, and frankly they really shouldn't be running anything, and that's because they're childlike, like they're fucking goofy.
You know, they have big problems, and like, that just can't happen anymore.
And then you get these faggots that step in and they go, Well hey hey hey!
Don't blame the women, it's our fault!
Hey, if women are so dumb, it's on us!
It's like... I don't think anybody was blaming women, we just said, hey, like, this is the state of things.
It's never been about blaming women.
It's not about blaming anybody.
It's just about telling the truth.
But people, at the end of the day, people just don't like hearing criticism of women.
Because people are simps.
That's it.
That's the bottom line.
Um...
You know, and that's something I don't think I've addressed is I hear that argument all the time.
And I was thinking about that the other day.
You get these, you get these pussy boys.
unidentified
They come in and they say, hey, well, you know, it's our job to take care of them.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼
Okay, we're the, it's like, yeah, obviously if I get a girlfriend ever, I'm going to be the man and I'm going to be the man and I'm going to lead.
But it's like, what does that have to do with ginocracy?
What does that have to do with total female domination of society?
I was born in 98!
I was born in 98, I had a helicopter mom, you know, I had these female teachers from preschool all the way till I was adult, and they tried to moralize me, and they tried to tell me, oh, you're too mischievous, Oh, you know, you're out of control.
You're talking back.
You're doing this and that.
You know?
And it's like, so what does one have to do with the other?
Generations have been raised by these dominating females and you say, hey, this is unacceptable.
This is not okay.
The system's fucked up.
You know, the no-fault divorce, the affirmative action for women, the welfare, all of it.
We point out how wrong it is and how it needs to change and people go, whoa, whoa, whoa.
Don't, don't talk badly about the women.
And that's really what, don't blame the women, they say.
Blame the men.
You know, you want to know who I really blame?
unidentified
You all know who I really blame.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼
Democrats.
But it's got nothing to do with men or women.
Policymakers and revolutionaries transformed the society.
Ain't got nothing to do with me or men or women.
It's got to do with the revolutionaries and the policymakers that have created such a society through propaganda and entertainment, this radical stuff in the universities, policies which are drafted by think tanks and pushed in Congress, And these revolutionary protesters out there in the streets, these are the architects of the system, and then the system generates the society.
The system's incentive structures and norms then create these kinds of households that produce these kinds of people, and the people produce the current order.
That's the flow of things.
But, I mean, the society was changed by a determined group of ideological revolutionaries, And then the system created the rules that form the society.
So it's got nothing to do with, you know, men didn't do this, men didn't do that.
It's like, what the hell are you talking about?
It's like if I get married and, you know, my wife suddenly decides, hey, I, you know, you know what, I want to, you know.
I'm not happy anymore!
And she divorces me and takes all my stuff.
What has that got to do with me?
Oh, I didn't lead enough or something?
It's totally random.
And women have all the leverage in the society.
It's a female-run country.
It's got nothing to do with men didn't do this.
There's a deficit with men.
The society was acted upon from outside.
Fundamentally transformed.
We're picking up the pieces.
You try to call it what it is and say, hey, like these women, they're the problem.
And you want to know why they're the problem?
Because they're running this stuff.
And that's a problem in itself.
It doesn't mean that there's something fundamentally wrong with women, but there is something fundamentally wrong with women in these roles and with this kind of treatment from society.
And then you get these faggots that come in and go, oh, hey, hey, don't attack the women.
And that's just because they don't like to hear negative things about girls.
But, you know, we have to just be honest.
We have to just call it what it is.
So, you know, I hear this stuff all the time.
And at the end of the day, people just, I don't know what it is, they just are in love with their women and, you know, that's a big conflict of interest.
It's a big conflict of interest.
You can love your women and all that, but like, I just, I don't, I just don't get how it compromises you, you know?
I just don't understand how that would compromise you in any way, right?
Like, I understand, okay, you're, like, so in love with your wife.
Okay, congrats.
You don't know the deal with women?
Like, don't, like, I'm not married, but I love my mom.
Love her to death, right?
One of my favorite people in the world.
Love my mom.
We get along, and we're so similar, and we have such a great relationship.
But, at the same time, like, I know she's a woman, you know?
I love her, but I also know she's a woman, and I know sometimes she's in like a certain mood, and I'm like, all right, I'm just not gonna engage, you know?
I still know what she's about.
I love her, but I, you know...
She's a woman, and I'm a man, and she knows I'm a man, and she knows what that means, and I know she's a woman, and I know what that means, and it is what it is.
Just because I love my mom doesn't mean I'm not, like, gonna... doesn't make me un-understand, like, not understand what's going on.
So I just don't understand how that infatuation corrupts you.
I mean, for me, I'm able to kind of compartmentalize it.
Maybe it's because I'm not a very emotional guy.
Maybe it's because I'm not very, like, Personable?
Maybe that's why?
But I just don't understand how that clash happens.
Same thing with, like, Kathy Ju.
I like Kathy Ju.
I talked to her back at the Miami event a few years ago, and she's coming on to me and everything, and I straight-up told her, I'm like, listen, like, I want to have white kids.
unidentified
You know?
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼
I'm like, hey, listen, you're great and everything, but, um, I will never, it can't happen, because, and for anybody, for any non-white woman, you know, same thing, because I want a date to get married, and I want to get married to have kids, and I want to have white kids, so it's just a non-starter.
I don't understand this, like, corruption that happens.
Maybe I'm just, like, autistic.
Maybe I'm just so one-track-minded, but some of these guys, they just, like, They're consumed by this shit, and they can't, uh, they just don't even know what's up anymore.
unidentified
Okay, this hair is just not...
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼
Talk about something that's not happening tonight.
unidentified
I don't know, man.
I hate the way it looks.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼
on Always.
I really do just want to shave my head because I'm never happy with it.
Why can't my hair just look like Leonardo DiCaprio or Timothee Chalamet, huh?
Why can't my hair look like Timothée Chalamet?
Me fucking crying.
My hair doesn't look like Timothée Chalamet.
unidentified
I don't like it.
I don't like it.
Whatever.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼
I fucking don't like anything.
I'm just not happy with anything anymore.
unidentified
Miserable.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼
Yeah, so I hate when people say that.
And no, it's not about protecting women from themselves.
What are you even talking about?
What the fuck are you even talking about?
unidentified
No, no.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼
It's about not protecting women from themselves.
It's like protecting women?
We gotta protect us!
Protect women?
The women are just fine, okay?
Like the simping knows no bounds.
No, no.
We don't gotta protect them.
We gotta protect them from themselves.
What about us, nigga?
What about the boys?
The boys are being castrated.
Do you know boys are being turned into these I don't even know what.
They're like Shabbos goy, but for women.
You know how you get these Gentiles that do all the work for Jews on Saturday during the Shabbos or whatever?
That's what they're turning men into, but for women.
They're turning all these boys, they're turning them into Shabbos boys for girls.
And, you know, we're just being turned into these beasts of burden for women.
And guys are like, the problem is that we need to protect women from themselves and their penchant To turn us into, you know, trans, freak, whatever.
They want us to all be like James Charles.
And niggas be like, but we gotta protect him.
Gotta protect him from me.
We don't need to protect him, we need to put the fear of God in him again.
Say, hey listen, back off.
You gotta put the fear of God in him instead.
Protect him!
I think they're too protected.
If you want to know the truth, I think they're way too protected.
They're untouchable.
Literally and figuratively, they're untouchable.
And they know it.
And so they act with impunity.
So if anything, they need to be less protected.
In my opinion.
So anyway.
Tyler says, was feeling like crap this evening just laying in bed and out of nowhere a voice came through my laptop.
It was Nick.
Blaring over the airwaves like a 70s DJ with tunes and everything.
What the fuck?
Reminded me of those early Good Morning Kruiper episodes.
It's true, there's something special about the radio format.
Thanks for all you do for us, buddy.
Hey, I'm glad you like me blaring through the airwaves like a 70s DJ.
Hey, thanks a lot.
I appreciate it.
Glad you like the show.
Glad you like that.
Thank you so much.
With the tunes and everything.
And it's got the tunes!
You're like my mom.
I give my mom a hard time.
My mom will say shit like this to me and I'm like, really?
Stewie says, seeing Destiny's subreddit makes me grateful for all the gatekeeping here at America First.
All these know-it-all faggots.
Nobody's trying to tell the successful streamer what is a good business and what isn't.
Yeah, it's so disrespectful.
The egalitarian nature of their community.
America first is ruled with an iron fist.
Sometimes it's too iron and people don't like it and they go, Nick, you're too mean, you're too volatile, you're too vicious.
But you see the alternative.
unidentified
You see the chaos that you get on the other side.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼
And so thank God that America First is run in this way, autocratically.
I live my values.
I live my values.
I don't believe in democracy.
I don't believe there's any value in equity or, you know, this like everyone has a right to their opinion stuff.
So yeah, it's so true.
We're Putin-like, okay?
Tsar-like, Russia-like.
I run this show like Putin runs Russia, and Destiny runs his community like we run the gay West.
And, you know, that's why he's coming on my platform and not the other way around, I guess, right?
That's why there's unity and cohesion in this movement, as opposed to the chaos and the Dissent that's tolerated on their subreddit.
People openly defying the leader.
Could you imagine?
You have these people openly saying like, Destiny, excuse me, I think this is a bad business decision.
And like hundreds of people are backing him up.
That needs to be crushed.
We would never tolerate that.
We would never tolerate that here.
We would put that down.
That post would be banned.
Nobody would even think about that.
You dream about saying that?
You better wake up and apologize to the nearest moderator.
That's not how we do things here.
So... Yeah, Destiny gets cucked by his girlfriend.
He gets cucked by his community.
It just doesn't fly.
It just doesn't fly here.
This is Russia.
This is China, okay?
This is the Soviet Union.
And you're my comrade, from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.
This is how we do it.
unidentified
So... Man, that's funny.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼
um evildoer says destiny is way smarter than other liberals and i think he argues in good faith he's not married to a side and often splits from the liberal platform what are the last respectable leftists online yeah something like that i guess uh jay roxer says after january 6th he said trump didn't cross the rubicon but big tech did I did say that, didn't I?
I think I even talked about Elon Musk buying Twitter at some point.
Yeah, it's true.
I'm very... Listen, my foresight knows no bounds.
I'm tapped in.
I see the future.
I see the vision.
I just, you know, I'm just tapped in.
I just get it.
So it is, it is what it is.
You're right, I don't get enough credit.
I'm really a pioneer, a visionary.
Everybody steals my shit and then they act like it's their own.
You know, people like steal my shit and then they're like, oh, we can't associate with you.
Like seriously?
unidentified
I'm the original.
I'm the original.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼
I'm the OG.
Okay, I'm that nigga.
Eric says, hey Nick, Jordy Jordan, the leader of National Socialists of Conway, South Carolina wants you to collaborate with him.
He's on YouTube, 400k subs, and is a wife abuser.
He loves your content.
Would you be down?
I don't know who that is, so no, I don't think so.
Chicagolandgroper says, Grubhub driver pulled up to my house today in a U-Haul rental van after driving 20 minutes off-route.
Starting to think you're onto something with your tipping strategy.
What's my tipping strategy?
Computer Zoomer says, can you tell Zoomer Dev to change Destiny's cozy Avi to this photo of him dressed up as a skinhead holding a gun?
Yeah, let me just tell him to do that.
For the Ghosts says, shout out to Chief Trumpster.
I hope some of chat got a load of the Sunday LGBT sermon stream where we got those people to seethe over their heresy.
Fighting the good fight for God sure is fun!
Yeah, thank you.
ComputerZoomers says, for most of Destiny's viewers, this is their first time visiting a website more extreme than Reddit.
On Destiny's subreddit, they're shocked that there's people named racist incel.
That's funny.
Spinefish says, do any of your friends from college support what you're doing?
Yeah, like one of them.
I only had like three friends though in college.
Proud independence is what do you think about the news that Switzerland and Finland will be joining NATO in June?
Russia just issued a warning against it, but it's already set in motion.
I think it's a terrible idea and I'm interested to see how Putin will counter it.
That's the thing.
I don't know that invading Ukraine was the best move.
I mean, don't get me wrong, I support it, and I think it's defensible, and I think it's justifiable, and I love it, and I'm all for it, but, you know, I've said from the beginning that I think it's a very dramatic move, and I was surprised when it happened.
I didn't think Putin would invade, because I am extremely conservative, and I think a move like this is very dramatic, and you see the results.
It's something that's so Shocking and provocative and and obviously the consequences were swift and you know outside of just the sanctions and the ostracizing of Russia from the West But then you also have this as a consequence now.
They're deploying 40,000 troops Permanently in the east and Finland and Sweden might join NATO and you know reasonably what can Russia do to counter that?
I'm curious to see what what the game plan is there.
I don't know what the game plan is, but I I imagine Putin had to have suspected that that might have happened.
And, you know, so what exactly was he thinking?
Did he think that wouldn't happen?
Is there a plan?
I mean, he's threatening them, but what really does he have to threaten them with?
I don't know.
So, you know, that's why, again, I think the war is reasonable, defensible, justifiable, limited in scope.
I support it.
I support its sort of meta-political aims about resetting the world order and all that.
But yeah, but I think it is, it's a very, it's a big move.
You know, it's a big play.
High risk, high risk, high reward.
So we'll see.
Kappa Mikey says, we should go to Chuck E. Cheese for a Groyper pizza party.
Or maybe Five Nights at Freddy's phase-bearer pizza.
Yeah.
Spinefish says, thank you for making my day so bright.
Yeah, you got it.
Middle Class White Guy says, evening.
Hey, good evening, man.
Thanks for the big super chat.
Good to see you, man.
Kel says, would you consider getting rid of super chats if these super chats got too horrible for you to read?
They're already that horrible, actually, so...
Bob says, I wonder how many old dudes like me watch your show.
Shout out to the 40 and over crowd.
The Groyper movement is by far the most interesting thing happening in conservative politics.
The only group calling for a truly Christian country.
God bless the Groypers.
Hey, thanks a lot.
Yeah, I don't know.
It's a pretty young audience, but there's got to be some boomers in there.
Johnny Bravo says, I have good news for you.
CounterPoint, a centrist neocon who is friends with Destiny, said he'd be down to debate you on the Russia vs. Ukraine issue.
I DM'd you the link on Gab from nickernatgroip.
Oh, you set up a debate on my behalf?
Wow, that's great news for me.
Yeah, I saw that on Twitter.
unidentified
I'll do it, but I'm not, like, excited about it.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼
Because that guy doesn't have a big platform, does he?
Is that guy a big streamer?
Because I don't really know who he is.
And he seems like a faggot.
I saw him on the Odyssey game stream and he seemed like a total goof.
Hey, I have good news for you!
I, on behalf of you, set up a debate with some nobody.
Oh, thanks.
unidentified
I'll do it, I guess.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼
But I don't know, I don't know really what he's about.
unidentified
But yeah, whatever.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼
I'll do it.
We'll do it.
Good news.
Thanks for the good news.
Kel says, things are getting better for me every day when I decided to not care what insignificant and irrelevant people think already writing a book.
Yeah, that's what matters, honestly.
unidentified
That's a big part of success.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼
I bet Donald Trump wouldn't be too above a pizza party fundraiser.
unidentified
Is that supposed to be a joke?
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼
Is that funny?
says Elon Trump, Donald Musk.
Bastarisk says, I bet Donald Trump wouldn't be too above a pizza party fundraiser.
unidentified
Is that supposed to be a joke?
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼
Is that funny?
Kappa Mikey says, Nick, you should go Pedro mode like a Napoleon Dynamite.
I would vote for you.
Again, like what's the punchline?
Kyle says, just $5.
Well, and the comment, too.
Kel says, we have the Alex Jones' right jar.
We need the Nick Fuentes' right jar.
Oh, I see what you did there.
Yeah, true.
GodEmpress is 07.
Thanks, PrettyFlyWhiteGuy says, hey Nick, I'm a little late, but it's day 14.
Have a good night, friend.
Hey, thanks a lot.
Okay, alright.
Wow, that's really some good stuff towards the end there.
That's gonna do it for me on the show.
Thanks for watching.
Big shout out.
Hey, thank you guys.
Remember to follow me on this channel.
Follow me here on Cozy.
Follow me on Gavin Telegram.
Links are down below.
I'm on the air Monday through Friday, 8 o'clock Central, 9 o'clock Eastern Standard Time.
As always, thanks for watching.
Thanks to our Super Chatters.
In particular, thanks to our Top 3 tonight.
Jordan, Treehead, and Tyler.
Big shout out.
Thanks.
Can we get some 07s for our Top 3?
unidentified
We appreciate you guys.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼
But thanks to all of our Super Chatters, thanks to everybody that watches the show, we love you, and I will see you tomorrow.
▲
Export Selection