All Episodes
Previous Next
Sept. 27, 2022 - America First - Nicholas J. Fuentes
01:11:49
MUSSOLINI MOMEMNT?? Italy Elects Fascist Woman Prime Minister | America First Ep. 1067MUSSOLINI MOMEMNT?? Italy Elects Fascist Woman Prime Minister | America First Ep. 1067
Participants
Main voices
n
nick fuentes
01:09:45
| Copy link to current segment

Speaker Time Text
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼
Well, today there was a major protest in Germany.
Thousands of Germans showed up and they demanded that Germany open up the Nord Stream 2 pipeline and let the Russian natural gas flow.
And they did that because there was a new forecast announced this weekend that Germany, the economy of Germany, would contract.
That this year the German economy will have shrunk and entered a recession and that is largely because of the increased energy prices which are going to completely disrupt German manufacturing in the winter.
So all these Germans get out and protest.
They want the natural gas to flow and then mysteriously the pipe was sabotaged.
And so there was a major disruption in pressure in the pipeline.
The pressure inside the pipeline decreased to almost nothing, which shows that somewhere the pipeline was damaged.
But it wasn't damaged in northern Germany where the pipeline touches land.
It was damaged in the sea.
And there's going to be an investigation.
They're going to get to the bottom of it.
But it seems awfully coincidental that in the middle of this energy crisis, When it seems that Russia's got Germany over the barrel here and can force Germany to use its clout to get NATO to back off Ukraine while Russia makes this big push, the United States came in and made it not an option for Germany ever to get natural gas from Nord Stream 1 or 2 in the foreseeable future because the pipeline's destroyed.
Maybe it was a total coincidence.
Seems to me like it was sabotaged though.
So we'll talk about that.
And it should be a pretty good show.
Like I said though, kind of a slow news week.
Not a ton going on.
It was a long weekend, too.
I wasn't here Friday.
Honestly, I just didn't really feel like it.
There was nothing going on in the news.
And I wasn't feeling so good.
I pet the dog.
I touched my eyes.
My eyes got all bloodshot, so I have like this red eye.
And I know that if I go live like that, everyone's gonna say, oh, you have pink eye.
My dad was like, oh, you're such a baby.
You're not going live because your eye's red.
I'm like, dad, like, do you not understand how this works?
I touch my nose too much and for five years people say I'm on cocaine.
If I show up on a stream with a bloodshot eye, people are gonna say, God only knows.
I said so.
I was like, you know what?
I'm not feeling it.
I said my eyes red.
There's nothing in the news.
I don't even feel like doing a show.
I'm just skipping it.
So I didn't do a show Friday.
Long weekend, but yet still not a whole lot going on in the news.
But that's okay.
It's going to be a good show anyway.
Before we get into the news, I want to remind you to follow me here on Cozy.
Smash the... Am I too low here?
Feels like my chair is a little bit low.
Okay.
Follow me here on Cozy.
Smash the follow button to get a push notification whenever I go live.
Also, follow me on Gab Telegram.
True Social.
Links are down below.
Make sure to do that.
And not too much else besides that.
Not too many other announcements.
Just the usual.
Remember to follow me and everything.
What else?
Is there anything going on?
I thought there was.
unidentified
Maybe not.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼
So anyway, that's all I got.
That's all I got for you for announcements.
unidentified
What else?
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼
Not too much.
Boring weekend.
Boring day.
I'm just so sick of the monotony.
Such a monotonous life lately without Trump.
That's what it is.
I miss him.
I miss him!
I miss Donald Trump.
A lot of you people who are younger, younger than me, if you came into politics after 2015, you don't remember.
This is what it was like before.
This is what it was like before Trump and it sucked.
Under the Obama administration during the Obama years, it was horrible.
And that was also really before social media and viral politics, online politics, the whole scene just sucked right up until 2015 when all these developments started happening with Breitbart and Milo and Trump and everything.
But before that it was awful.
And then Trump came and it was awesome for six years.
Totally awesome.
Always interesting.
Always funny.
Hopeful.
Optimistic.
And then after the 6th, just nothing.
Brutal.
Feels like before except WORSE!
Because I don't even have Twitter!
Do you understand me being banned off social media?
It's like I'm ostracized from society.
Because that's where all my friends were.
All my friends are online.
That's where I lived.
I lived more online than I do in real life, and I still do.
This country sucks.
But online is fun.
And so you hang out in the group chat, and you hang out on the timeline, and so not only does society suck and is boring, But then they made the internet far worse than it was before.
And so now we just got nothing.
Now we're just getting raped to death.
So it's a little bit monotonous.
Yeah, I don't have too much to report.
I did see that new movie.
I saw The Woman King over the weekend.
The movie about the black African female warriors you hear about this with Viola Davis, Viola Davis from The Help.
I saw that.
I went to the theater.
I didn't want to see it, but I was out and it was perfect fall weather.
I'm driving around.
I said I don't really want to go home and just be on the computer all night.
I said I want to do something.
I want to be out, but where do I go?
I don't even know where to go.
I don't drink.
I'm not social.
You know, I don't really have anywhere to go.
I already ate.
So I was like, I'll go see a movie.
Well, I go and take a look at the Showtimes and there's like no movies out.
There's nothing good.
There's this horror movie and there's this mystery movie.
I will never see a mystery movie.
I don't know what the appeal is of that genre.
So, I settled on this Woman King because I like the historical films.
I like the historical epic.
Genre and even though it's woke even though it's black people I'm thinking it's gonna be thrilling big set pieces that kind of thing some history, right?
unidentified
And I don't know I was sort of ambivalent about it.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼
It was ridiculous It's a movie and by the way, all the trailers are like this too.
All the trailers are about black people That's the other thing all the trailers for all the movies are about black people or women and About a black fighter pilot and a black this and a black that.
And then the movie is about these Africans in the 19th century and there's an African kingdom and they have an all-female army.
Okay, plausible.
I'm a little bit more, I'm a little bit more open than I think a lot of you guys to black and to women, paradoxically.
And that's because I wouldn't actually mind watching a movie with all black people in it.
I wouldn't mind that.
I like Do the Right Thing.
That's a great movie.
And Blood Diamond.
Now that had Leonardo DiCaprio in it, but there were a lot of black people in that.
That was good.
And there was a good Netflix movie about African child soldiers seven years ago, I want to say.
It was a Netflix exclusive.
That was good.
So, as long as it's historical, as long as it's not woke, I really don't mind.
Because, you know, black people are people too.
If there's a movie that tells a story about black people, that's fine.
I don't mind that.
The problem is when you get rid of the plausible deniability and it's injecting this narrative of, oh the white people are the villains and black people are the good guys and same thing with women.
I'm willing to give a little bit more latitude than other people.
Like the new Star Wars saga.
If the new Star Wars saga told a story about a woman Jedi Now, would I be in love with that?
No.
But, it's Star Wars.
It's a fantasy movie.
Could you have a female hero?
Theoretically, yes.
I think if treated correctly, if the story was right, I think you could get away with that.
So I'm a little bit more open-minded.
Those aren't my favorite movies, but okay.
But this movie was just ridiculous.
It was a movie about these women soldiers and they're better than the men.
That's just completely implausible.
The women soldiers are appointed in this African kingdom, and in the story it says because they're better fighters.
And I went on the Wikipedia page after the movie, and it turns out it is based on a true story, but the only reason they brought in the females to be in the army is because they ran out of men.
There was so much war and all the men were getting sold into slavery by the rival African tribes that they just ran out of them.
So they had to conscript the women because they just ran out.
Totally different.
And now that would be plausible if that were the movie.
Again, it was real.
It's plausible.
But when they say we have an all-women army because they're tougher, The movie is women excelling in hand-to-hand combat over men.
A six-foot-five, 300-pound African warlord getting his ass kicked by Viola Davis, by some old woman.
That's just ridiculous!
And I don't know.
I mean, maybe this isn't super edgy.
Maybe this isn't like really a novel take or anything.
But...
That's where I draw the line.
unidentified
You want to make a movie about black people, fine.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼
But if it were based on history, it would look more like Zulu than it would like The Woman King, this movie that I saw.
It would look a lot more like Zulu.
Because in reality, the real story, in the movie, they, and I'm going to spoil it for you because none of you should go and see this, they create this female black army and And their kingdom is based on the slave trade.
All the tribes in Africa are fighting with each other and they win a battle and they conquer their enemies and they sell their enemies as slaves to the Europeans and that's how they make money and buy horses and weapons and then they use that and it creates this vicious cycle is what they say.
So in the movie, the African, the main African tribe, they beat out the enemy and then they end slavery.
They create this all-woman army and they train the all-woman army and they make this announcement.
We're done with slavery.
We're going to make our riches by exporting palm oil and we'll be farmers.
And the Europeans say, yeah, that's not cool.
We're gonna empower all the other African tribes to go and kill you.
As all the African tribes get together and they're about to kill the palm oil traders and the all-female army, they use gunpowder and they blow them up and they kill all the soldiers in hand-to-hand combat.
They overpower the all-male army with their all-female army in hand-to-hand combat.
But that's not good enough.
They kill all the other African tribes, and then they go to the port city, where the slaves are being exported, and they kill all the white people!
And it was a little bit funny, because in the middle of the movie, I was thinking, you know what?
It's not so bad.
unidentified
It's black people killing black people.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼
There's no, like, anti-white vengeance narrative.
It's black people enslaving other black people, which is historically accurate, and they're warring with each other.
So if the violence is spread out, and it's not just hatred against white people, I'm thinking, well, it was a violent time.
Fair enough.
Well, I thought that way too soon because the end of it was they go to the port town and they just indiscriminately kill everybody.
They kill all the white people, and they kill the fleeing African tribes that they defeated before, and then they end slavery.
And this African tribe in West Africa ends slavery by killing all the Europeans and sacking their town and setting their ships on fire.
And then, of course, the real story is that it was true.
I guess there were these African female warriors.
They were called Amazons, but like I said, it was because they ran out of men.
And in reality, they did fight the French, but they all got slaughtered.
They got slaughtered in gun combat and in hand-to-hand combat.
And I read on Wikipedia that they tried to use guns, but they wouldn't aim them.
They would shoot them from the hip.
Flintlock pistols shooting from the hip.
So you might as well just not even bother with the gun at that point if it's... I don't know how that's gonna have any accuracy.
So they couldn't shoot guns.
And then it also said that in hand-to-hand combat they easily were crushed because the French had longer bayonets.
So the French would just cut them up with their bayonets before they even got close, and I guess the French killed like 500 of them and suffered like six casualties in two wars in the late 19th century.
And so there's that.
That's the premise of the women and the women army.
And also, as far as the politics of it goes, those Africans never ended slavery.
The British ended slavery.
But those Africans continued even after the British ended it.
And the tribe that is the subject of the film, they were the biggest participants in the slave trade.
So I'm not the guy that's going in there thinking this needs to be 100% historically accurate.
But it does need to have plausibility.
It's called the Suspension of Disbelief.
You know you're watching a movie.
You know it's a work of fiction.
You know they're going to take narrative liberties.
You know they're going to take liberties to make it an entertaining story.
And so you suspend your disbelief.
Some things are going to be a little out there.
Some things are going to be embellished.
But you suspend your disbelief so you can enjoy the film.
But that runs into the problem of the jumping of the shark, that something is so implausible it ruins the immersion, it's not a good experience, and this was one of those things.
Totally ridiculous, and propaganda, and not even a good movie.
I believe it was directed by a woman, and all these movies, liberals can't make good movies.
They have no subtlety.
They don't know what to put on the screen.
They don't know how to tell a compelling story on the screen.
And what I mean by this is I'm watching the movie and there's all these scenes And they're so contrived and so affected, women in particular, but liberals broadly, just have no eye for subtlety.
They think that they're going to create a very generic story and they think that if they create a scene where something is happening and everybody's got a frown on their face and there's crying, that that is drama and that that is compelling and that that's good film, that's Oscar worthy.
But it's not.
They don't know how to make interesting characters.
They don't know how to make complex characters.
They don't know how to tell a story that unravels.
It's really what it is, it's just bad.
It's really just immature and simplistic.
As opposed to, you know, I think it's as simple as that.
I don't think the women have a different perspective, or liberals have a different perspective.
I think they just are stupid.
It's that simple.
I think that the people that are making films now are just stupid, and I think their efforts are... It's not a different school of thought.
I think that they're just not as good.
They're just simpler, and they don't know how to create a compelling story.
Because I've seen this a lot of times now.
I see all these modern movies about various things and big budget and so on.
And they'll think that if you just put in, like Viola Davis, the whole movie, she's just moping around.
You know, she's this old woman.
She's the old female soldier.
And the whole movie, she's just moping around and making these faces and she's angry and everything.
unidentified
And it just sucks.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼
But liberals and stupid people, and I think women, that to them passes as deep and complex and drama.
And I'm reading reviews of the movie by women.
And the reviews of the movie by women are talking about how, oh, these characters are so complex.
They're complex women with struggles.
And I was like, they're not comp... this is like a storybook.
There's no complexity here.
It's all one note, one dimensional and just a total snooze.
So I don't know if you guys have noticed the same thing.
I'm not like a film critic so I don't really have the analytic power to really go all in on that but that's just my observation as I watch these movies and they really come up with just these completely contrived generic sequences and characters And they think that if it's slow, and if it's quiet, and if people are frowning, then that makes for good film.
That that's good acting.
It's not.
It's not interesting.
It's not good storytelling.
They're not good characters.
Totally forgettable.
The black stormtroopers in this movie, it looks like they plucked him out of Wherever he was.
The actor in real life.
It looks like they plucked him out of some bar in Hollywood or London.
I think he's British.
And they put him in the movie.
He's got this afro haircut and... So the whole thing just sucked.
And honestly, it's sad.
It's sad because it's not even just that it's political.
I would mind a lot less if they could make really good movies with a bad political message.
But the problem is that everything is just bad now.
Everything's just bad.
Everything is just not good and people don't care and people are not experienced or practiced.
I feel like more than the politicization of everything In general, there's just this loss of mastery.
There's just a loss of artfulness.
I don't think our society's producing great writers.
It's not producing great artists.
It's not producing great film.
It's not producing great anything anymore.
Because it seems like across the board, people just don't care enough.
The institutions are not there to create greatness.
The rigor is less.
The discipline is less.
People just don't care.
And I think partially that's because people are appeasing.
There's this political appeasement going on where high standards is now the subject of politics, where people say, you know, that's a violation of mental health, or we need to lower the bar for women, or we need to lower the bar for black people, or to have high standards or we need to lower the bar for black people, or to have high standards is Eurocentric, or I think partly it's political.
I think it's also just people have infantilized themselves.
People are just generally weaker.
Men are just generally weaker.
Women are just generally weaker.
The institutions don't have any authority to assert over anybody.
If there were a truly great art school or a truly great film school, someone would just go and complain on Instagram about how they got yelled at and there would be a bunch of dumb faggots online saying, Then we're gonna shut this bitch down and someone would get fired and then and the standards would drop.
Like that's what happens.
You know?
unidentified
In all aspects.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼
Like with fashion.
Now they say, don't bully the models.
If you bully the models and say get skinny, that's BS.
We need fat models.
And so now it's just a big free-for-all.
Anything goes.
And the lunatics are running the asylum.
It's like children are running the society.
Children with no discipline and no mastery and no experience.
They are the ones making the rules.
If you had a great film school, and you had a great master who was teaching The young film students and came up with some rigorous routine.
Like I said, you would get some black guy, you would get some black guy or some queer, some woman who would sit there and record it and then go on Instagram and say, My teacher's racist.
My teacher's doing harm to me.
We cannot possibly meet these standards.
And all these ADIQ people, all these Philistine ignoramuses would bombard the institution.
And I think that that is generally the revolution that is happening across the board.
And as a consequence, we just get stuff that sucks.
It just isn't good.
Lots of money, big budget, big production, hallowed institutions, but the product just sucks.
I don't know that Hollywood, no matter how much money it spends, is going to churn out many great pictures in the future because they just aren't making good directors.
You can't buy a good, inspired, creative, masterful leader that can create something, that can create a composition and from start to finish oversee that.
You can't buy that with money.
It has to be cultivated through institutions, through people.
So anyway, I didn't mean to get all into that, but that's my takeaway as I see these movies.
And you know, there's other problems with the film industry as well, but...
That seems to be an across-the-board thing.
We will never produce another great philosopher.
We will never produce a great director.
We're not even producing great actors.
Can you name one really exceptional mega star actor who's really good?
Who do we have?
We got that Jason Momoa who sucks.
We got Dwayne Johnson who sucks.
They're all brown.
They're all these brown juiceheads, which is anti-white, by the way.
That's who they pumped up as the actors.
You know, we used to have pretty boy swag.
We used to have what's called pretty boy swag, like Leonardo DiCaprio or something like that.
And now we get these juiced-up brown people to basically reduce the masculinity of the white man.
That's what that's about.
So we get these juicehead, uncharismatic oafs like Dwayne Johnson who sucks, and that guy's a faggot, and we get Jason Momoa, and all that, and then we get these extras.
And, you know, we're gonna be grateful that we had Iron Man.
We're gonna be, in ten years, we're gonna be grateful that we had Avengers, which is pure normie trash.
We're gonna be grateful that at least Robert Downey Jr.
was a compelling, interesting, white male lead, as opposed to the new outing by the Avengers, which is gonna be the orphanage refugee camp.
Superhero Squad, the X-Men, and the She-Hulk, and all that.
I'm just rambling at this point, but that's my review.
So that's my review of the African Queen, or what is it called?
It's the Woman King.
Not the African Queen.
That's the Humphrey Bogart movie.
No, this was the Woman King.
Don't see it.
Zero out of four stars.
Just lame.
Lame and contrived and about exactly what you would expect.
And I was the only one in there.
It was me and a black couple.
We were the only people in there.
It was me and a black couple sitting a few rows behind me.
I don't know.
I should have asked them what they thought about it, but it was... I thought it sucked.
Okay.
unidentified
Alright.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼
We're gonna dive into the news here.
We're gonna dive in and we're gonna talk about the news.
Not to my liking.
Right though, and this is the last thing I'll say.
The last thing I'll say then I'll get on to the news.
That is the biggest thing that's going on, is the loss of mastery.
And I see it so much more acutely now, now that I'm a little bit older.
Because I saw it in college as well.
But we need to create institutions that are going to harness the human capital.
Our real wealth as a nation comes from our human capital.
Think about that.
The real wealth of our country comes from the productive and creative capacity of our people.
And how do we harness that?
Well, we harness it mainly through education.
Education and training.
And the problem is this And you see it.
It's the schools at the primary level and then it's the secondary and the higher education which are just totally corrupt.
And it's the industries too.
unidentified
The industries too where people now are working from home.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼
People work from home and they create these campuses where people are on beanbag chairs.
I scrolled through TikTok and or I saw on Twitter recently too.
Now they create these campuses where they go there and they talk about, oh there's this cafeteria, and there's a beanbag chair, and we have table tennis, and this and that, and I'm thinking, how are these people getting any work done?
How are they getting any work done?
This doesn't look like a place of business.
This looks like a daycare.
They got freaking, they might as well be doing the special ed activities with the rubber cushion and the Play-Doh.
I see these TikToks where they're like, I'm at my business campus and here's our cafeteria, here's our gym, here's the beanbag, here's the Xbox, here's the this and that.
We come when we want, we come and go as we please.
unidentified
How does anyone get any work done?
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼
And so without the male autism and the leadership and the toxic work environment and the rigor And the intensity, we just can't make things anymore.
Like Grand Theft Auto.
We had Grand Theft Auto 5 in 2013.
And then there was a big scandal about how all these game studios had to crunch.
And it was stressful work conditions.
Oh my gosh, we had to crunch for 3 months to get this game shipped.
And we haven't had another Grand Theft Auto in 10 years.
And they just don't make games anymore.
And they're not good anymore.
And that's because nobody gives a shit about anything anymore.
Nobody cares.
Nobody's trying.
That's why the real revolution is not this vain girlfriend and all that.
Somebody on my Super Chats the other week, the most revolutionary thing you could do is get a girlfriend.
No.
The most revolutionary thing you could do is try your best and become a master at something useful.
For all the men out there, yeah, you know, you can have a girlfriend, get your wife and all that, fine.
But the real revolutionary act in a world of apathy is to try your best.
Do something really hard, okay?
Become a master at something.
Become a master at your craft.
Put in the 10,000 hours.
Demand more of yourself.
Demand the most.
If you're really exceptional.
If you're not, you know, go get a job somewhere.
But if you're really exceptional at something, if you really have potential and talent, develop it.
That's the revolutionary thing.
And for everybody else, just start to try.
Start to care.
Nobody cares about anything anymore.
People wear sweatpants to the store.
And you go to a fancy restaurant and people got shorts on we got these ghetto black people in t-shirts and ripped jeans and their sneakers they pull up to a nice restaurant.
There's a nice restaurant in Chicago it's so funny and they might as well just say no n-words because there's a sign that says like no no shorts no baggy clothes like all the all the typical things and they throw people out still.
And that's the kind of society that we need to get back to.
Not that it's racist, but it just has standards and class across the board.
Alright, okay.
So with that being said, we're gonna move on.
No more Woman King.
We need a new class of artists who are inspired.
and don't don't just try don't don't be a put-on we really need these we really need genius I'm so sick of seeing everything other than genius in this new generation just all these It's all these goofballs.
Goofball country.
I hope we get destroyed, honestly, because we're a goofball country.
We need a country to prevail that's going to create something great.
As opposed to us.
And they can teach us.
And then they can maybe motivate and inspire us.
We need China to land on Mars.
We need China's GDP to overcome ours.
We need them to take Taiwan.
We need them to bitch us out so that we can have a moment of introspection and say, we suck!
And then people can start trying again.
That's what we need.
Instead of this free-for-all monkey society where people are just hootin' and hollerin' and it's a total free-for-all and they're flingin' their poo everywhere.
It's what it is.
Okay!
Alright!
We're gonna get into it, but we're gonna get into the news and our first story is about Nord Stream 1 and 2.
And so, in case you missed this, a major gas pipeline from Russia to Germany Malfunction this weekend, mysteriously.
And the pressure on the pipeline went to almost zero after the pipeline apparently suffered irreparable damage in the Nordic Sea.
And many people are pointing the blame at NATO.
So this is a story, it says, quote, authorities in Germany are trying to establish what caused a sudden drop in pressure in the defunct Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline, with a spokesperson for its operators saying it could have been a leak.
The pipeline has been one of the flashpoints in an escalating energy war between Europe and Moscow since Russia's invasion of Ukraine in February that has pummeled Western economies and sent gas prices soaring.
Nord Stream 2's operators said pressure in the undersea pipeline dropped from 105 to 7 bar overnight.
The Russian-owned pipeline, which was intended to double the volume of gas flowing from Russia under the Baltic Sea, I was saying Nordic Sea, I guess it was the Baltic Sea, to Germany, had just been completed and filled with 300 cubic meters, 300 million cubic meters, I think, of gas when the German Chancellor Olaf Scholz canceled it shortly before Russia invaded Ukraine.
European countries have resisted Russian calls to allow Nord Stream 2 to operate and accuse Moscow of using energy as a weapon.
Russia denies doing so and blames the West for gas shortages.
The German economy ministry said, We are currently in contact with the authorities concerned.
In order to clarify the situation, We still have no clarity about the cause and the exact facts.
So, the Nord Stream 1 and 2 pipeline deliver Russian natural gas to Europe.
And these are very important strategically.
The Nord Stream 2 pipeline was just completed last year to the chagrin of the United States.
The United States and NATO had lobbied for a long time.
Well, certain NATO powers had lobbied for a long time for this pipeline project to be shut down.
It's being paid for by Russia, built by Russia.
And with the completion of Nord Stream 2, it brings Russia and Germany closer together, and it increases European energy dependence on Russia, and broadly increases the interdependence of Europe and Russia.
And we've talked in recent weeks about how important that relationship is, how important the Russian energy is for the central European economy, but also how important the sale of that energy is for the Russian treasury.
Russia's a petrostate.
They get virtually half of their revenue from the sale of commodities.
Not just energy, but other things too.
And the sale of natural gas to Europe is indispensable for them.
And then on the flip side, of course, the European powers rely on Russian natural gas for a large percentage of their energy mix.
There's no energy in Europe.
There's no oil.
There's no natural gas.
And so they have to import a lot of it and they get it from the infrastructure which already exists.
And that infrastructure is Soviet-era pipelines which go from Russia through Belarus.
to Europe and through Ukraine to Europe as well as these now two recently completed pipelines Nord Stream 1 and 2 under the Baltic Sea.
And Nord Stream 2 is a game-changer because again it increases this relationship it doubles the amount of gas moving from Russia to Germany through these pipelines And the United States campaign against that because there is really this proxy war going on not just in Ukraine but between the United States and the Russia-China axis for control of Europe.
There's the energy interdependence.
Which makes Germany and France and Italy and Eastern European countries reluctant to be as antagonistic towards Russia.
But there's also now the subversion of Europe by China, with China competing for 5G with American companies in Europe.
China's Huawei is building 5G all over Europe.
And China's investing in other ways to get access to European markets.
And so there's a real battle in the 21st century over the strategic posture of Europe.
Of course, throughout the Cold War, continental Europe, and specifically the United Kingdom, were under the thumb of the United States.
The United States led NATO, and NATO controlled the foreign policy of Europe, with some exceptions throughout the Cold War.
And then, after the Cold War, the United States became the unipolar power.
It was the triumph of liberal democracy and capitalism.
And now with the rise of China and Russia becoming a junior partner to China in this eastern axis, now Europe is sort of in contention.
And Nord Stream 2 is a big part of this.
So when the Ukraine war broke out in February, The new German Chancellor Olaf Scholz said that he would not bring in natural gas through the Nord Stream 2 pipeline into Germany.
And that was at the best of the United States.
Well now, there's a major energy crisis on continental Europe as we know.
And the forecast just keeps getting worse economically.
The gas prices and energy prices are going to go up.
It is going to cause a recession.
Inflation is going up in America, but really badly in continental Europe.
And so this is a major problem for businesses, British businesses, German businesses.
It's a major problem for individual consumers in Central Europe.
And it just so happened that today there was a major protest in Germany demanding that the German government allow natural gas to come in from Russia through the Nord Stream 2 pipeline.
And that was the specific demand.
It was thousands of Germans out there saying, we want the natural gas from Nord Stream 2.
We want our manufacturing to thrive.
We do not want to enter a recession.
We want to be warm in the winter.
And so on.
And this joins a lot of other recent protests in Eastern Europe, like in Prague or elsewhere in Italy, where they're protesting the high cost of energy and general inflation and demanding an end to the sanctions.
parents.
It was in the context of all of this that today the Nord Stream 2 pipeline was apparently sabotaged.
And it says the pressure went to almost zero in the pipeline meaning that there was some kind of rupture or some kind of damage to the pipeline under the sea.
Not in Germany, not in Russia, but the pipeline was damaged in the relatively shallow Baltic Sea.
And they're going to conduct an investigation, and there are some theories.
They say it could be an old World War II mine that was accidentally detonated, or that it was an underwater mudslide, essentially, and that sediment has destroyed the pipeline.
Others say that a team of tactical operators or a submarine could have deliberately damaged the pipeline in the Baltic Sea.
And that would seem to make a lot of sense because, as we've talked about, there's going to be this renewed pressure now for Europe to de-escalate, Europe in particular, to de-escalate the conflict because they're entering a very cold winter and they will be more acutely affected by the rising energy costs than America.
And in particular in Central Europe, it's going to affect their manufacturing, which is the core of their economy.
It's going to affect their businesses.
It's also affecting individual consumers across the board.
In Poland, they're talking about burning trash to stay warm.
They're talking about putting in measures to make it more environmentally friendly to burn garbage.
Talking about the pollution that'll be caused when they all start just burning their trash because they won't be able to afford energy.
And so, as we've said, the coming winter and the Russian sanctions against Europe in the form of cutting off their gas is going to cause a lot of problems and may create a pressure within NATO to back off and maybe ease the sanctions on Russia or ease the support they're giving to Ukraine while Russia makes this renewed push with their conscription of reservist troops and their annexation of these four territories in the southeast.
And so where you see the United States motive come in for rupturing the gas pipeline is to say, now you can't get the natural gas, even if you wanted to.
Even if a new government got elected, even if the same government capitulated to the protesters, they couldn't turn on Nord Stream 1 or Nord Stream 2 if they wanted.
Because now you can.
Now they're blown up and destroyed.
Some people have said curiously that Russia did this.
It would not make sense for Russia to do that.
Russia controls the flow of the gas.
If they didn't want Germany to get the gas, they could just stop sending it.
And they paid to build the pipelines.
And an exorbitant cost.
And it took a long time.
And under a lot of political pressure from the United States.
So Russia wouldn't destroy their own infrastructure.
They wouldn't need to.
And Germany already had a policy that they banned Russian natural gas.
Or stop Russian natural gas from coming in.
Why would it behoove them to take the option off the table to even have it? - Yeah.
It would appear that that's a NATO-United States move to keep Germany on board.
In a discreet and subtle way.
Oh, the pipeline got damaged by an old World War II munition.
Oh really?
That seems a little bit coincidental.
The pipeline's been under construction for years.
It got finished last year, was set to go into operation.
You forced Germany to stop taking the gas from it.
And then right before the winter, right when you had protests across continental Europe about energy, And as Russia conscripts more soldiers and there's a fork in the road about whether to escalate or de-escalate, suddenly both the pipelines get sabotaged.
Both the pipelines totally malfunction.
Not on the German or the Russian side, but in the shallow water where any diver could reach it.
Go figure.
And the big picture is that the entirety of Europe is being completely cut by the United States.
This war, if it's not in our interest, and it's not in Ukraine's interest, it is least of all in the interest of the Europeans.
They are the big losers here.
There's not a lot of winners in the war, but they are certainly the biggest losers by far.
And that's because they're the ones that are getting hit with the extreme energy inflation.
They're the ones getting hit with food inflation and other inflation.
The governments are getting rocked by this.
The people are in revolt in the East and in Central Europe.
And then add to that the fact that because of the rise in costs, now they're talking about putting their manufacturing in the United States.
They're saying that the energy prices are so high they're going to have to push their manufacturing over to the United States.
Additionally, now they don't benefit from the actually advantageous position of China and the United States entering a bidding war for their allegiance.
Of course, the United States assumes that Europe is under its thumb all the time.
But maybe Europe can extract some benefit from allying with Russia or China.
Maybe there's some benefit in being a part of a new rising axis and having these other technologies or other companies come in.
But instead now they're being closed off.
Any collaboration with China and Russia is now off the table.
And in something like this, this is a clear cut of just straight up sabotage.
Clear cut example.
So, the Ukrainians are, I mean, they're probably the biggest loser because they're just, I mean, they're literally getting murdered.
They're literally just lining up to get shot by the Russians and it's just not going to end well.
There's no way that's going to end well for Ukraine, even if they achieve a somewhat favorable settlement.
And then probably the next biggest loser is Europe, who's going to come out of this with less strategic autonomy than before.
More beholden to the United States, poorer, and probably the governments that presided over the beginning of the war will be out before the end of it.
And the big winners are the United States and China, it would seem.
And to some extent Russia, depending on what the outcome is.
It looks like Russia may have some favorable settlement, but it's hard to ignore the fact that China seems to be the real power in that relationship, and they'll benefit from the grain that Russia will get from Ukraine, they'll benefit from the oil they get from Iran, from the energy that they get from Russia, and all the other minerals and materials that Russia has
And the United States will benefit from bringing Europe back under its control as well as they're going to be the economy.
I mean, we don't have a great economy, but they're going to have a better economy after all is said and done than they'll have in Europe.
So that's the state of the conflict.
I almost feel bad for the Europeans because it felt like for a short time after Trump won that Europe was going to be able to split from the United States.
And there was a lot of talk about strategic autonomy and certainly the construction of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline was a big part of that.
Nord Stream 2 pipeline was completed without the approval of the United States and should have gone into operation.
But now, as you see, the war has taken that off the table.
And that was a major demonstration of Europe's autonomy.
And they're able to chart their own course without necessarily the domination of Washington.
They built a pipeline and obviously the State Department, the Defense Department did not want that to happen.
It happened anyway.
But this war has taken off that table.
It's hardened the fault lines between the East and the West.
unidentified
So it's kind of a shame.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼
And the other thing is, it completely destroyed the anti-NATO, anti-European Union movement.
At the same time, back in 2016, there were movements across Europe that were rising up that wanted to see the European Union disbanded, or wanted to see countries pull out of the European Union.
Italy and France.
They wanted the European, even in Greece, they wanted the European Union to be dissolved.
Some of the founding states as well as the delinquent states like Greece.
There were serious right-wing populist movements call them Euroskeptic or people that just wanted to pull out and that came on the heels of the Brexit.
Now after this war, that's never going to happen.
Now the most that you could get is people that are critical of the European Union but still fundamentally support the project.
And none of them are critical of NATO.
They all support NATO.
So the point is this Ukraine war has some real losers and the real beneficiaries are Washington, it would seem, and Beijing.
NATO and the EU sticking together, it's good for Washington.
And all the consequences of this war falling on Europe, again, benefits Washington.
And whatever gains that Russia gets from this, they're paying the price.
They're paying the price.
They're the ones getting sanctioned.
They're the ones losing men.
They're the ones losing equipment.
They're the ones having to mobilize.
And China seems to be getting the benefit.
And it will be China that will inherit Russia's influence in Central Asia, which is extremely important.
In the Caucasus and east of the Caucasus and all those countries Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan and all those.
So that seems to be the international effect of the war.
Of course it's not just any longer a particular local conflict between Russia and Ukraine but now this is having far-reaching economic, geopolitical, geostrategic implications for how the whole world order Works.
Whatever the outcome of the war will be, the world will be different after it.
The entire world and how all the different capitals relate to each other and where the poles of power are.
Probably by the end of it, it'll be the completion of China and Washington having this bipolar world order and then competing for the rest.
Because that's what it is.
China and the United States alone are not powerful enough to achieve world domination.
But China plus Russia or the United States plus Europe, that may be a formulation where they'll be able to maintain, or in the case of China, grow their influence.
That's why the United States is hanging on so desperately to its allies.
That's why you hear all this stuff about the allies.
Our allies like Japan, and South Korea, and NATO, and Australia, and they're creating all these international groups.
AUKUS, and ASEAN, and NATO, and the TPP group, and so on.
And the whole point of that is to add to the U.S.
power projection to prevent China from displacing the United States.
That's what it's all about.
And to some extent, the Russian war, Washington is playing this very effectively to stall that.
So that's that.
And that ties in nicely with our featured story about the Italian Prime Minister, who everybody's calling a fascist, but honestly, she looks like a globalist to me.
And in case you missed it, I'm not gonna... I don't follow Italian politics very closely.
I don't really follow European politics, but there was just an election in Italy.
They called a snap election.
The elections were due for later this year, but they called them now.
Or actually, I think they were next year.
And this far-right party, which was relatively obscure before, in the last election got 5-6% of the vote, has now become the number one vote-getting party in this new election, with 26%.
And it's called the Brothers of Italy, and it's led by this woman named Georgia... Georgia?
Georgia Maloney is her name.
And she's a relatively young woman and she's leading this party which they say is the spiritual successor to Mussolini's fascist party.
Although she disavows that.
She says that we're not fascist, that's over.
And she says we're not racist and we're not anti-democratic and we're not anti-semitic and we're not any of these things.
But this party has grown from relative obscurity before and a junior partner to Forza Italia and Matteo Salvini's Lega Nord, or The League, to now become the biggest party in Italy and will lead the creation of a center-right government with the Lega Nord, Forza Italia, and the Five Star Movement.
So this is the article from the BBC.
It says, quote, Far-right leader Giorgia Maloney has claimed victory in Italy's election and is on course to become the country's first female prime minister.
Ms.
Maloney is widely expected to form Italy's most right-wing government since World War II.
And this will alarm much of Europe as Italy is the EU's third biggest economy.
However, speaking after the vote, Ms.
Maloney said her Brothers of Italy party would govern for everyone and would not betray the people's trust.
She said, quote, Italians have sent a clear message in favor of a right-wing government led by Brothers of Italy.
Holding up a sign that said, Thank You Italy.
She is set to win around 26% of the vote ahead of her closest rival Enrico Letta from the center-left.
Mr. Letta told reporters on Monday that the far-right victory was a sad day for Italy and Europe, but his party would provide a strong and intransigent opposition.
unidentified
Ms.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼
Maloney's right-wing alliance, which also includes Matteo Salvini's far-right League and former Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi's center-right Forza Italia, will take control of both the Senate and Chamber of Deputies with around 44% of the vote.
Four years ago, Brothers of Italy won little more than 4% of the vote.
But this time benefited from staying out of the national unity government that collapsed in July.
The party's dramatic success in the vote disguised the fact that her allies performed poorly, with the league slipping below 9% and Forza Italia even lower.
Their big advantage, however, was that they were able to put up one unified candidate in a constituency.
Their opponents in the left and center could not agree on a common position and stood separately.
Earlier this year she outlined her priorities in a raucous speech to Spain's far-right Vox Party.
She said yes to the natural family, no to the LGBT lobby, yes to sexual identity, no to gender ideology, no to Islamist violence, yes to secure borders, no to mass migration, no to big international finance, no to the bureaucrats of Brussels.
unidentified
And that all sounds great.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼
All sounds good.
She's anti-gay marriage, anti-gay adoption, anti-gender theory, anti-mass migration, anti-Islam, anti-bureaucracy.
Here's the rub, though.
And here's the issue.
She is stridently pro-NATO.
And after Russia invaded Ukraine, she was sympathetic to Russia, but then she switched over and supported sanctions.
So, she supports sanctions against Russia, she condemns the invasion of Ukraine, and she says that she totally supports NATO.
She also supports the European Union, although she's critical of the European Union.
And she's also a staunch supporter of Israel.
And she compares herself to Bibi Netanyahu's Likud Party, and she wants to strengthen the ties with Israel.
And so this is a little bit of a challenge here.
Because if you notice, this is very different than Donald Trump.
And I'll say this much.
Not everybody's going to be perfect.
Some are going to be better than others, of course.
And we like people for the meme a lot of times.
I like Bolsonaro.
I don't know that much about Bolsonaro, but he's funny, and he's brash, and he's a right-wing populist.
He's a big Zionist, and his kids are big Zionists too.
And I like Viktor Orban.
I like a lot of what he has to say, but he's also got a very tight relationship with Israel.
And...
And we like Putin and we like Trump and we like people that are not perfect.
Trump supported the vaccine and other bad things, right?
Putin supports the vaccine as well.
But there is a big difference here because we like Trump because in 2016 he really represented the antithesis of the establishment on nearly every issue.
And in particular on the three big globalist issues, which are global population, which is mass migration, global commerce, which is free trade, and global government, which is our entangling alliances with NATO and all the other countries.
And so, you could say that Trump wasn't perfect on all the issues when he ran, but he actually was perfect on all the issues that mattered.
And he did represent a truly anti-establishment figure.
He was pro-Israel too, although even in the election, not as much as once he got elected.
He said that he was going to make a deal that was good for Israel and Palestine.
Could you imagine?
And then he got in and he told Bibi Netanyahu at his first press conference, stop settling the West Bank.
And then he changed his tune a little bit after.
But he was basically perfect on the three issues that matter the most about globalism.
Global population, global commerce, global government.
And that's what Hillary Clinton described in the WikiLeaks leaked emails, which was the common market, open movement, and free movement of goods, services, and people, which would be on the entire Western Hemisphere.
And Trump opposed all of it.
He opposed NAFTA.
He opposed the TPP.
He opposed NATO.
He wanted South Korea to pay us.
He wanted the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan to end.
And he wanted to build a wall on the southern border and stop the immigration.
This one is a little bit different.
She's a part of the Aspen Institute, which is a Washington, D.C., think tank.
And that's just like any of the other ones.
It's just like any of the other ones that you could find.
It's just like the Atlantic Council.
It's just like the Manhattan Institute.
It's just like Endowment for Democracy.
It's one of these think tanks.
It's one of these groups.
It's like the World Economic Forum.
It's just like the rest of them.
So that's a big red flag.
She's in the Aspen Institute.
Co-signed by the Mossad, co-signed by the Jews in the form of she's giving an interview to the Jerusalem Post and she compares herself to Laikud and Yair Netanyahu, Bibi Netanyahu's son, is retweeting her and she's got the support of Dave Reboy and all the other Zion Jews in the American conservative movement.
And although she's against the migration and against the other things, she's pro-NATO!
And NATO is the mechanism, as I just explained, through which Washington DC, and by proxy Israel, achieves world domination.
She supported the bombing of Libya in 2011, and now she supports NATO's war against Russia in Ukraine.
But she's against Islamism, but she's against migration.
I mean, those things are good, but we'll have to see what all of that is going to look like.
Because to me she looks a lot like Ron DeSantis.
She looks like the Ron DeSantis of Italy.
Ron DeSantis is Italian so it's a little ironic.
She said in an interview to an Italian newspaper, I have this cited here, She insisted there were, quote, no nostalgic fascists, racists, or anti-Semites in the Brothers of Italy DNA, and she always got rid of ambiguous people from our party.
In other words, anybody that could be misconstrued as an anti-Semite or a racist.
I'll thank God for that.
And as I said, she, in trying to champion herself as a moderate, said that she actually has a lot in common with the Republican Party, and with the Conservative Party in the UK, and with the Likud Party in Israel.
Really?
The GOP, the Conservative Party, and the Likud Party?
That's who you compare yourself to?
Why that?
We know why.
So I'm not that excited about it.
She says she's not a fascist.
I believe her.
She says she's not a racist, anti-Semite, fascist.
Unfortunately, I believe that's true.
She's not any of those things.
And for that reason, I don't know how much I can support her.
Joking, of course.
I'm not any of those things.
But it tends to be the case that people that run from those labels are running from them because what they really are is liberal.
Racism and antisemitism are fake.
Those are fake words.
It's racist to want to have a country made up of your countrymen?
That's not racist.
There shouldn't even be a word that describes that.
Antisemite?
Jews and Christians have been fighting for 2,000 years.
And you want to know why that is?
It's because Judaism and Christianity are incompatible.
So as far as antisemitism goes, I don't know what you mean.
If it means beating up Jews for being Jews, then I'm not an anti-Semite, and I oppose that.
But if anti-Semitism is like what the CIA describes it as, if you go to the CIA World Factbook, if you go to the FBI's website, if you go to the DOJ website, they have a very different definition.
They say that if you think Jews have an allegiance to Israel more than their own country, that's anti-Semitic.
But they do!
And they say that if you believe that Jews conspire internationally, that that's anti-Semitic.
But they do!
They do all the time.
They have a PR campaign.
It's called Hasbara.
And there's not even a translation for that word.
It means we're going to go out into the world and try and make Israel look good.
And they do that in every way all the time.
And they work together in all kinds of multinational and domestic groups, federations, and congresses, and things like that.
They just do.
It's a fact.
But if you say it, it's according to our government, anti-Semitic.
So when people say they're not anti-Semitic, which definition do they mean?
They mean the definition created by the Mossad, which says, I will obediently go along with the Zionist occupied situation?
Or does it mean that you really just don't want Jews to be mistreated for who they are?
In which case, okay, yeah, nobody's an anti-Semite, really, other than blacks and Muslims.
But I have a strong suspicion that when people say, I don't have any room for ambiguity and I'm not this and that, it's probably the former.
And when they talk about they want to visit Israel and all this, and they compare themselves to the Likud Party and they're friends with the Yair Netanyahu and Orban, I think it's the former.
So here's the thing.
We just need a real opposition.
Okay?
We need a real opposition.
With no, like, I will never be a part of the Aspen Institute.
You might say, because I'm a little bit skeptical, some people say, oh, she's in the Aspen Institute, she's disqualified.
Oh, so-and-so is in the World Economic Forum, disqualified.
Putin was in the World Economic Forum.
So some people say that the presence in those organizations means they're necessarily not based.
I don't know, I think there may be an argument that you could still be based.
Here's what I do know though.
I'll never be in one of those groups.
I know Donald Trump will never be in one of those groups.
I know nobody from this platform will ever be in one of those groups.
So why then should we accept as our own somebody that, for some reason, is deemed acceptable by those groups?
And by all the American neocons, iocons.
And by the Israeli Mossad and children of their corrupt government.
We need a real opposition with none of these or at least not as many of these red flags.
Like I said, I support Trump because Trump wants to rip apart the whole post-Cold War world order.
He wants to tear asunder NATO and the European Union and he wants to blow up the State Department, metaphorically speaking.
You know, fire 50,000 people, that's the new program.
I'm on board with that.
That's why I'm for Trump 24.
When Trump says schedule F, fire 50,000 people, that's what needs to be done.
When Trump says build a wall and end globalism as we know it, when he on his way out says we're gonna end the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and send the troops home from Germany and South Korea, that's my guy, still.
Somebody that's a NATO shill in comparing themselves to Likud and getting cheered on by American and Israeli Zionist Jews, and they're in the Aspen Institute, I'm a lot less excited by.
And she's a woman.
I don't know how I feel about that.
I'm not as confident.
So I hate to rain on everybody's parade.
I know some people really like the speech she gave, but look, People give a lot of good speeches and guess what?
Everything stays the same.
People have given a lot of really based and red-pilled speeches over the years and then stuff is just the same.
Joe Biden in his State of the Union earlier this year said that he was going to shut down the border and he had a great record on illegal immigration.
Yeah, except for one problem.
Five million people came here in the last two years.
So he could say whatever he wants in the speech, it's totally different.
So I'm just tired of all these offerings that we're getting which are not really supportive of what we want.
NATO is a far bigger problem, I think, at this point than even immigration.
And maybe Europeans may disagree with that.
But the point is, It's the same institutional rot which is trying to put band-aids on.
It's a NATO shill who says, okay, okay, all right, we'll end the immigration, okay, the gender thing went too far in this government.
Not really good enough.
I don't want a NATO shill that's against LGBT and immigration.
I want a real American patriot, a real Italian patriot in that case.
I want a real patriot, a real nationalist that's against globalism from start to finish.
How can you be in favor of NATO, but you're against all these other things?
It really doesn't make sense.
How did you get the migrant crisis?
The intervention in Libya by NATO caused the migrant crisis.
She supported NATO bombing Libya in 2011 and deposing Muammar Gaddafi and Libya became a failed state and that was the vector through which all these sub-Saharan Africans came pouring across the Mediterranean and got picked up and brought to Italy by NATO.
It was NATO's intervention in Syria which caused the migrant crisis in 2015, the NATO proxy war with Saudi Arabia and Turkey and Russia and China and every power in the world That tore apart the Middle East and brought all these people through Turkey and Greece and into Europe.
So how can you go and campaign and say you don't want migrants, you know, on Islam, but at the same time you're in favor of NATO which caused the migrant crisis?
Seems a little bit contradictory.
And how can you be against LGBT and all this and support NATO when NATO is going around the world trying to spread that ideology and takes its order from Washington where that is THE ideology?
I don't think it works that way.
And I don't think you'll find a whole lot of patriots at the Aspen Institute cheering on NATO's war against Russia and Ukraine or The bombing campaign against Gaddafi.
She seems like a politician.
And I'll reserve a total judgment.
We'll see what she does.
Maybe she's infiltrating.
Yeah, maybe she's infiltrating and maybe she's going to be really effective at governing because she won the election and you could say if the ends are good then they justify the means.
We'll see.
But my hunch is that she's going to demonstrate the whole problem with this infiltration approach is that nobody's infiltrating anything.
It is we who are being infiltrated by the system.
If someone from the Aspen Institute who's a NATO shell wins as the Brothers of Italy and throws fascism on the trash heap of history along with racism and anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism, That's not...that doesn't sound like a Patriot infiltrating Zog.
That sounds like Zog infiltrating the Patriot movement to me.
And I think you'll find that what we see happen with her in Italy is what you can expect from DeSantis in America.
Or from any other analog in these other countries or whoever they may be in the Republican Party or conservative movement in America.
People got to be on their guard about what's really going on here.
Which is that the security state and the foreign intelligence agencies and these underground things, they're making a concerted effort to get in the driver's seat of our movement and steer it back towards where they want to go.
And what would that look like?
It would look like somebody saying all the right things but fundamentally coming from the same place as all the other establishment people.
And that's what we see over and over and over again.
With populist ink and all these ink movements and now some of these types in Europe like Boris Johnson or This Georgia Maloney?
I want to see an Italian Prime Minister that pulls Italy out of the European Union and criticizes NATO.
Not somebody that's pro-EU and pro-NATO.
Oh, but they're based on the family.
Yeah, that's great.
That's great.
But it's not good enough.
And that's exactly what you would sound like you were infiltrating the movement for.
unidentified
Zog.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼
So that's that.
We'll see.
Again, I'm not going to totally judge.
We'll see what happens with her.
But I have a strong feeling it's going to be more of the same.
All of these international efforts are bound up with the Zionists.
Bolsonaro and Orban are tight with the Zionists.
And now so is she.
So what does that say?
Same with DeSantis.
A global white populist uprising but with the permission of Mossad.
Okay.
What could go wrong?
Alright, well let's take a look at our Super Chats.
Let's see what you guys have to say.
Agree?
Disagree?
Am I wrong on this?
Am I missing on this?
Italians, feel free to weigh in.
My fellow Italians, feel free to weigh in.
What do you think?
Is this a hit?
Is it a miss?
Do you agree?
Am I being too hard on her?
Is she gonna be the next Mussolini?
What do you think?
But that's my take.
▲
Export Selection