America First - Nicholas J. Fuentes - TRUMP INDICTMENT IMMINENT: Dept of Justice Previews Classified Doc Charges | America First Ep. 1174TRUMP INDICTMENT IMMINENT: Dept of Justice Previews Classified Doc Charges

All Episodes

Previous Next

June 8, 2023 - America First - Nicholas J. Fuentes

01:34:48

TRUMP INDICTMENT IMMINENT: Dept of Justice Previews Classified Doc Charges | America First Ep. 1174TRUMP INDICTMENT IMMINENT: Dept of Justice Previews Classified Doc Charges | America First Ep. 1174

Participants

Main voices

nick fuentes

01:20:28

streamlabs matthew tts

05:20

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Show episode speakers

Speaker	Time	Text
unidentified		Americanism, not globalism, will be our credo in the future.
		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, from this day forward, it's going to be only America first.
		Amen.
		America first. America first. America first.
		America first.
		America first. America first. America first. America first. America first. America first. America first. America first.
		Thank you.
		Good evening, everybody.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		You're watching America First.
		My name is Nicholas J. Fuentes.
		We have a great show for you tonight.
		Very excited to be back here with you tonight on Wednesday.
		We have a lot to talk about tonight.
		Lots to get into.
		Big show!
		The imminent Trump indictment from the Department of Justice.
		We've anticipated this for a long time.
		It's been almost a year since the raid at Mar-a-Lago.
		And this is, of course, pertaining to the matter of the classified documents that are in his personal possession at his private residence.
		And finally, it looks like we're going to get an indictment from the Feds.
		Donald Trump's lawyers have gone out to Washington, D.C.
		to meet with the Department of Justice.
		Typically, that happens when they're about to charge.
		That's always how this unfolds.
		And so there's a rumor that Donald Trump was informed directly by the special counsel that he was going to be indicted, but today he's disputed that.
		So what we don't know exactly is that Donald Trump has been officially named as the target of the investigation, which means that they are at least considering him for criminal charges, and based on the meeting with the Trump legal team, it looks like that's almost a certainty at this point.
		So we'll talk about the charges and everything that means.
		We'll get into how that's going to affect his bid for the presidency.
		In our other story tonight we'll be talking about a major pedophile ring which just got busted on Instagram.
		There's a new report out from Stanford University which says that pedophiles are all over Instagram and Facebook.
		And they're using hashtags and they're actually using the term cheese pizza.
		From Pizzagate, if you remember.
		Now many usually using the term cheese pizza just like Hillary Clinton in the emails to talk about child porn.
		And so the new report from Stanford says that this is all over the place and they're actually communicating it out in the open.
		They're proudly brandishing the fact that they've got pedophilia on the platform.
		Pedophiles are publicly promoting child puppets.
		They say they have to do a better job.
		You think?
		So we'll talk about that tonight as well.
		Should be a pretty good show.
		Before we get into the news, I want to remind you to smash the follow button, get a push notification whenever I go live.
		Here on Cozy, that is.
		Follow me here on this platform, Cozy.tv slash Nick.
		Also, follow me on Rumble.
		I'm live on Rumble every night as well.
		Plays of all the shows on Rumble going back several months now, I think.
		I believe we have every show from 2023 on Rumble.
		Cozy, we only have five, I think, at a time.
		But Rumble, we've got everything.
		So check me out there.
		Follow me on Telegram.
		Link is down below.
		And with that out of the way, I guess we'll dive in.
		I'm trying to think.
		I feel like there was one other thing tonight, but I can't remember it.
		What was I gonna talk about?
		I should have wrote it down because I... I had something that I forgot.
		Oh yeah, well I wanted to get a little bit into, and maybe we'll talk about this more tomorrow, or certainly we'll talk about it later in the year, but the 2024 Republican primary, which I didn't even do a show about.
		I haven't talked about it yet.
		I just feel like there's not really even a point to doing that.
		But in case you missed it, the former governor of New Jersey, Chris Christie, jumped in the race.
		And Mike Pence, former Vice President, has also entered the race.
		So it's actually a pretty big field now.
		You've got DeSantis.
		Nikki Haley, Tim Scott, Chris Christie, Mike Pence, Vivek, Ramaswamy, Asa Hutchinson, and I think they're even expecting potentially more candidates, but I believe that's everybody so far.
		I don't know that any of them are polling particularly well.
		It is essentially a two-man race between Trump and DeSantis and even almost every state by double digits.
		Like 20, 30, 40 percent.
		He's leading nationally by 20, 30 percent.
		And it's also important to say that although DeSantis and Trump are the only candidates with double-digit support at all, and although it's theoretically a two-man race because probably they're the only two that could conceivably win DeSantis, but theoretically if anyone from the non-Trump category is gonna win, he would be competitive.
		But in effect it is not a two-man race because probably all of these candidates will get to the first primary next year or the Iowa caucus and they'll probably all last through at least Super Tuesday.
		So although theoretically it's a two-man race, it's not a two-man race.
	It's not actually a two-man race and I said earlier in the year that that's notable because it's really a one-man race.
	It's Trump and it's not Trump.
	And the more people enter the race, the more that that is going to dilute the non-Trump or the anti-Trump vote.
	That's why that matters.
	And I think this is the consciousness.
	It's really a Trump or a DeSantis choice.
	It's even narrower than that.
	It's a Trump or a not-Trump choice.
	And as I said earlier this year, that is going to create complications.
	Because in the Iowa caucus, in the New Hampshire and South Carolina primary, in the Nevada caucus, you're gonna have all the Trump supporters, you're gonna have at least four for Trump, and then everything else, it's the non-Trumpers fighting for it.
	So that 2% for Vivek, the 5% for Haley, the 5% for Mike Pence, the 1% for this one and that one.
	If there's 10% or 15% support, which maybe that's being generous, but if there's even 10% support for all the other candidates in the race that really hurt DeSantis.
unidentified		this.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		So strategically, I think that's the only thing that matters.
		But Chris Christie jumped in the race yesterday, and it was a disaster.
		I don't know if you all watched it, but he did a One of these really sad events.
		You remember just how pathetic politics was before Trump?
		Trump is like a rock star.
		He's like Taylor Swift.
		He's like to a stadium and he's got 20,000 fans screaming.
		He flies in on a giant airplane with his name on it and they've got a giant LED wall and they have American flags hanging from a crane and the optics are unbelievable.
		And people forget.
		I remember because I watched the 26th.
unidentified		I remember they do these little events.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		They go to like a Holiday Inn Express in New Hampshire and they get a little conference room with like 30 people and that's their event and that's it.
		They go up to the fifth floor of the Holiday Inn Express in a parking lot next to a Walmart in the middle of Iowa or in the middle of New Hampshire And they talk to like 50- And the production's terrible!
		Like, Chris Christie, so he's in this tiny room, there's no teleprompter, it's not scripted, he's not good at speaking extemporaneously, he's got like a microphone that's wired to a battery pack?
		He's got a microphone clipped to his lapel with a wire sticking out.
		And it's a black wire against a white shirt.
		So it's a black wire... And he's pacing around the room.
		He's like, 500 pounds.
		And I don't even care what comes out of his mouth.
		I look at that and that's just not it.
		Like, that's not gonna be the president.
		So I don't even take it seriously.
		That's why I don't even talk about it.
		Everybody knows that's not... that's not gonna work.
		And same thing with Mike Pence.
		Mike Pence did a town hall today.
		He released an advertisement.
		And it's more of the same.
		The exceptional Trump is.
		And I know I've been a very harsh critic of Trump in the last couple years.
		And I stand by the criticisms.
		I still think that he could be so much better.
		He could be so much more.
		Nevertheless, what he is, is still head and shoulders above literally everything else.
		Like everything else put together, times a million.
		Trump is, and we're not even really satisfied with where Trump is.
		But that's just what a gulf there is between him and the party and everything else.
		I watch these advertisements, I watch these speeches.
		One, every single candidate, Tim Scott, DeSantis, Christie, Mike Pence, thoroughly unimpressive as human beings.
		They're not funny, they're not lively, they're not engaging.
		And this was my big criticism of Trump recently, is that he's gotten boring, and that's a huge part of his appeal.
		But you put him next to these guys, and even now that Trump is a little bit older than he was the first time and gone through a lot, he's still more lively.
		So that's the first thing, is they have no, there's no charisma, there's no persightment and energy to the table.
		They don't have that look, they don't have the production, they don't have this cult following, the star power and the The notoriety that that attracts?
		But worse, worse than that, it's not just that they're boring, it's not just that they're all boring, predictable rubes that I hate, like I personally hate.
		Specifically, I hate when they wear jeans.
		I hate when they all go sleeves, and they go to some diner, and they do this folksy, alright now America, we're gonna make a comeback.
		It just sucks.
		But it's not just that.
		It's the worse than that, although I really care about that stuff, worse than that is the substance.
		Trump goes out there, and even on his worst day, he literally goes up there and talks about totalitarian China.
		He goes, you know, in China they don't have a drug problem because they kill them.
		That means they kill them.
		He goes, so I was talking to President Xi And he says, we have no drug problem.
		Fast trial.
		You know what that means.
		They kill them.
		That's on a bad day.
		On a bad day he goes up there and says, we need to sh** policy.
		That's Trump policy.
		More death.
		More death penalty.
		We have a crime problem.
		Kill them all.
		And then you see the advertisements for everybody else.
		I watched the Mike Pence ad today.
		I don't remember a single thing from it.
		It's the usual stock footage.
		It's a black guy, naturally.
		It's a farm.
		It's a factory.
		It's with the button-down shirt.
		And he goes in and it's so generic.
		It's talking about freedom and runaway inflation and blah blah blah.
unidentified		The enemies of democracy are on the march.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		I swear, they all have the same speechwriter.
		Because they all...it's literally like It's like eyes wide shut.
		Now that I've told you that, go out in your life and listen for this.
		Listen for the next time you hear someone say, on the march.
		The enemies of America are on the march.
		I've been watching politics every day for like 10 years.
		That's always what they're on the march.
		On the march.
		What does that mean?
		Marching where?
		Marching here?
		How?
		Are they gonna do that?
		The enemies of America are on the march.
		When are they gonna get here?
		Like, marching where?
		Nobody's marching.
		What does that even mean?
		The idea that any country is mobilizing for war against America, we're mobilizing for war against everyone else.
		We're on the march against Russia, China, Iran, Venezuela.
		We're sending carrier strike groups to their border.
		We say they're on the march.
		That's not going to happen.
		But they'll always say that.
		That was in the advertisement today.
		I was watching it and it immediately pissed me off.
unidentified		The enemies of America are on the march.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		But you know what?
		It's even deeper.
		I don't just end group, focus group, tested, generic, reused.
		It's not just that.
		Let's use that as an example.
		They all say the enemies of America are on the march.
		The enemies of democracy.
		And I've said this before, I think, in some way.
		But there's a really toxic idea in that.
		When any other Republican talks about foreign policy, or even democracy, they're against it.
		They hate America.
		They hate democracy.
		And variously they'll talk about Iran, China, Russia, sometimes Venezuela, sometimes North Korea.
		You have to think about the frame that that sets up.
		A lot of people just accept these things, but think about the framing.
		Think about the idea behind that expression.
		Where we're supposed to feel anxiety, we're supposed to feel threatened.
		These other countries have antipathy towards us.
		We're in danger because we're in an ideological war.
		They don't share our values.
		But that's not what's going on.
		That's not how the world works.
		That's not what's going on.
		We are not imperiled by these countries.
		As a matter of fact, it's the other way around.
		We imperil them with our warmongering.
		So not only is none of that true, But even I would go further and say specifically that mindset is a product of CIA intelligence control over the media during the Cold War.
		This is a very Cold War fabricated idea where the intelligence age is paying for radio stations and paying public commentators and paying the media to go out and paint this picture of an ideological war.
		And it's the West and it's the free world versus communism.
		Now at that time there was a lot of truth to that because the Soviet Union was a pariah state and they were spreading communism and that was a geo-strategic goal of theirs.
		Europe fall to communism so they'd be allied with Russia.
		It doesn't discount the fact that that was something that the CIA pushed very strongly.
		This ideological clash.
		The totalitarians, the dictators, the evil empire against us, the free world.
		Back then, more or less it was justified, it was still inorganic.
		It's just not even true.
		We are not in an ideological war.
		China is not really an ideological state, neither is Russia, neither is Turkey, neither are Iran.
		What do these countries all have in common?
		They say it's the ideology of authoritarianism.
		Authoritarianism isn't really an ideology.
		They don't have too much in common.
		Islam.
		In Iran, they have a revolutionary Shiite Iranian government, which is anti-American.
		Turkey's a part of NATO.
		In Russia, Vladimir Putin is trying to recreate the Eastern Orthodox state religion in Russia, and it's growing slowly, but it's more about establishing identity for the nation and legitimacy for the state.
		In China, they do still endow, but they're also far more conservative than they were 50 years ago.
		Now they're pushing Confucian traditional Chinese philosophy in the classrooms.
		So, this premise that they all have something in common because they all have strong states, it's really quite the opposite.
		All these states have reverted to a non-ideological or an anti-ideological posture.
		Kamal Ataturk and they're becoming, once again, a Muslim power.
		Russia, the same way, is no longer communist.
		They are once again just becoming this Eurasian authoritarian country.
		China, same deal.
		They have an emperor.
		And so things are fundamentally different than they were back then.
		It's not ideological.
		And so this premise that they always come up with about there's this ideological war.
		It's America and our allies versus the totalitarians.
		We're at threat.
		We're constantly at war.
		Feel anxious.
		This is, one, the agenda of the intelligence community and of the national security apparatus for more war, for more foreign aid, more military aid to support these entangling alliances.
		Now they want to rebuild NATO.
	Remember Trump came in in 16 and said, we don't want to pay for NATO's military anymore?
	What do you think it means when Mike Pence and the rest say that the enemies of democracy are on the march?
	It means more money to Ukraine.
	It means we're gonna firmly... Your bills again.
	Pay for Germany, pay for the UK, pay for France, now pay for Australia.
	So, even a simple phrase like that, and I know that stylistically it's very cringe and played out, But the reason that they use that over and over and over again is because the framing behind it is so important.
	Freedom Crusader, at war with the world at all times, which is set completely against the Trump idea, which Trump as a businessman and as a true nationalist has been saying for 30 years, we just want to get along with everybody.
	They are our rivals, we are competing with them, and we want to be a strong nation But we want to get along.
	China, conflict is unacceptable.
	And the best way to defend ourselves against these nations is to develop a strong economy.
	Through trade, through manufacturing.
	And these are completely distinct and different worldviews.
	Trump was willing to cross into North Korea and shake hands with Kim Jong-un.
	Mike Pence and the rest would say, are totalitarian!
	An enemy of America on the freaking march!
	But Trump goes over there and steps across the border and shakes hands and takes a picture and says, conflict is unacceptable.
	It's bad for business.
	It's bad for America.
	A rival and clearly there's a deep distrust between the two nations.
	But the goal is to bring these people to the negotiating table So that we can establish peaceful relations and conduct trade in a competitive way but in a peaceful way.
	As rivals rather than as enemies or as opponents.
	Which is what this Cold War era, neocon, intel community thinking and that kind of language is trying to instill in everybody.
unidentified		So...
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		You know, I probably should have done a show, but now that I'm talking about it, I mean, it's actually good material for a show, but Mike Pence and Christie going in there, as I said, it just demonstrates that Trump is in a different category in ways that people don't even fully understand, in ways that may not even be perceptible to somebody who doesn't look at the details on this level.
		Which I wouldn't blame you.
		It's designed to get past your mental defense.
		It's designed that way.
		It's designed to get past the goalie.
		So we don't even think twice.
		But the Trump rhetoric is, make America great again.
		And the other slogans are about our relative role in the world.
		And I can't let China do that.
		And Trump says, let's make our own country great.
		Specifically, this is the last example I'll give.
		In his first speech in 2015, he went out there and said, our leaders are stupid.
		Their leaders are smart.
		He introduced a totally new concept.
		He said, what do you think the Chinese negotiators are going to try to do?
		They're going to try to get the best deal for China.
		They're the enemy.
		Our leaders are stupid because they're supposed to be representing us.
		If China's negotiators are representing China, and America's negotiators are representing Chinese companies, who's representing America?
		You can't get mad at China for that, and you can't get mad at their leaders.
		You have to get mad at our leaders for our Underperformance.
		Our ineptitude.
		Beframing to say, don't blame China.
		China is doing what it does.
		A nation will assert its self-interest.
		What we need to do is assert ours.
		And this is towards a very traditional, very historical vision of great power politics, which is that politics and politics is a tool for states to exert their will on the world.
		This is a very old idea, as opposed to this information, psychological warfare, Cold War stuff.
		Where, no, no, it's about freedom and stuff.
		It's like, we've got to get mad at China because they don't have enough freedom.
		So we've got to bring up Uyghur Muslims, and we've got to fund protesters in Hong Kong.
		It's not enough that we recognize that China is a legitimate nation that has existed forever, and they probably will exist forever, and they probably will be a great power in perpetuity, which is, like, obvious, which...
		We have to say, no, no.
		We have to hate them.
		We have to think they're evil.
		We have to think they're immoral because of things that they're doing.
		Because of things that are in, what is it, Xinjiang, where the Uyghurs are being rounded up and indoctrinated.
		We gotta get all the people on board.
		We have to manufacture consent for some war.
		Based on this idea of, again, their ideology.
		This ideological thing is a historic... It's gotta go.
		And anyway, that's... I'm getting a little sidetracked, but that's just another rich example of where Trump is so different.
		When have you ever heard anyone say something like that?
		DeSantis and all the rest, they say about Putin, he's a gas station attendant with nuclear bombs.
		What a juvenile way to look at the world.
		He also happens to be the leader of the 11th largest economy, massive oil, biggest nuclear arsenal in the world, second biggest conventional, third biggest conventional military in the world, leader of a rival block of nations.
		To talk about the sovereign of a great nation like Russia with a rich 1,000 year history, They call it the Tsar, the third successor of Rome.
		A new Caesar.
		And they say, here's a freaking gas station!
		It's such a low, crass, vulgar way of speaking and symptomatic of, like, all the language is being utilized for psychological warfare.
		When we talk about Russia, when we talk about China, it's meant to demean, it's meant to ridicule, it's meant to humiliate.
		This is just not mature.
		This is not in anybody's best interest.
		It's not sensible.
		It's not even really a real foreign policy.
		What that is?
		is a information war against everybody.
		That's just like this nut job neocon like we're at war with everyone always with constant propaganda.
		Everything.
		Our war is going to be made to degrade other countries.
		Right?
		We're going to spy on them.
		We're going to attack their proxies.
		We're going to foment revolution.
	And then when we're on the debate stage, we're gonna emasculate their leaders.
	It's like... That kind of thing has to go.
	Only Trump understands that.
	And the rest of them... I don't think the rest of them is...
	I think they're just as not conscientious of that as your average person.
	I think they just want to be president, they get their talking points from a think tank, from some all-in-one consulting firm.
	I don't think there's really a lot of thought in most of these politicians.
	They just say it because they're representatives of this machine.
	Anyway, so point is, is grandma on the stage talking about slavery?
	Get real.
	Then you got Nikki Haley, who's a joke.
	Then you got Chris Christie.
	And this guy gives a speech.
	Did you watch the speech?
	And Trump pointed this out, but I watched like, I don't know, a half hour of it.
	And the theme of the speech is that the establishment wants us to think small, but we need to think pretty mediocre messaging.
	Maybe that might work on somebody else.
	But I don't know how anybody, not only is that pretty blatant when you're a morbidly obese man, like that's the central messaging is about size and you're 500 pounds, like I don't know how you would think that's a good idea to say that once.
	But he said it over and exaggerating.
	I couldn't believe it.
	I watched the speech and just kept coming back and back.
unidentified		Small and big, small and big, small and big.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		Like, what a disaster, but this is the kind of stuff that politicians are just known for.
		They're just idiots like this.
		Like, who thought that was a good idea?
		Did nobody raise their hand and say, um, Governor Christie, you're huge.
		Like, don't you think candidates can't think big and you're fatter than everyone?
		Nobody said that?
		And then nobody said, don't say it a thousand times in the speech to make it even more obvious than it is?
		So that's dead in the water.
		And then the Mike Pence, I mean, that guy's just such an asshole, I just can't even believe it.
		So, neither of them have a chance of winning the Manoff votes from DeSantis.
		I don't think anybody is going to be won over.
		They're both going hard against Trump and it just simply doesn't work because they all work for Trump.
		Nikki Haley worked for Trump.
		Chris Christie worked for Trump.
		DeSantis even endorsed Trump.
		Mike Pence was Trump's vice president.
		How are you going to go and run a campaign saying that we can't have Trump?
		So I don't think any of them, clearly none of them, have a shot at winning any state or any delegates or even going to come close to winning the nomination.
		And if anything, I think they really only help Trump.
		They're shaping the race to Trump versus anti-Trump.
		And here's the dynamic.
		All it's going to do is make anti-Trump people towards the others.
		It's going to make DeSantis have to be more anti-Trump to compete with these other guys.
		Because the real Trump haters in the Republican Party, they're going to want to go for Christie or Pence, who are really gunning for him.
		Or they're going to go for Haley, who's a total moderate.
		And so, I think DeSantis is gonna get squeezed.
		All the Trump guys are going for Trump.
		All the extreme people are going for Trump.
		Hangover.
		What is he fighting for here?
		The people that are very conservative, but don't like Trump, but like Trump enough that they like what he's saying, but they just don't like him as a guy?
		I think that's a very small constituency.
		The very anti-Trump people and the moderate people are going to go for the other candidates.
		That's why you can't call it a two-man race.
		It really is a one-man race.
		And in a lot of ways, just like the 2016 primary, it worked out exactly the same way.
		So, anyway.
		So that's that.
		But I want to move on.
		I want to get into the news.
		Man, we're already 45 minutes in.
		I don't know if I'm going to get to everything.
		But I'll try.
		You know, maybe I'll just cover the DOJ because yeah, I mean, here's now.
unidentified		I've already been live, well, I don't know, 37 minutes?
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		I guess I could get to both.
		Okay, I'll do both.
		I always do this.
		So our first story is about this child pornography, which is apparently all over Instagram and Facebook.
		And by the way, this is a well-known problem on all of the major social media.
		Several years ago, talking about how child pornography was a persistent problem on Twitter.
		And Twitter's a platform, by the way, which allows pornography.
		Unlike Meta, unlike Instagram, which do not allow nudity, which do not allow sexual pornographic content, Twitter does allow it.
		And so that platform was scrutinized years ago for having this very important problem.
		But now there's a new study from Stanford that says that Facebook and Instagram, both meta companies, despite not allowing pornographic content, are rife with child porn somehow.
		And it's not hidden.
		It's not even being obscured in any way.
		They're out there advertising it publicly.
		And this is the story of a report from Stanford.
		It says, quote, Instagram, the popular social media site owned by Meta Platforms, helps connect and promote a vast network of accounts openly devoted to the commission and purchase of underage sex content, according to investigations by the Wall Street Journal and researchers at Stanford University.
		Pedophiles have long used the internet, but unlike the forums and file transfer services that cater to pedophiles, Instagram doesn't merely host these activities, its algorithms promote them.
		Instagram connects pedophiles and guides them to content sellers via recommendation systems that excel in linking those who share niche interests, according to the Wall Street Journal and academic researchers.
		Although out of sight for most on the platform, the sexualized accounts on Instagram searchers found that Instagram enabled people to search explicit hashtags such as pedo whore and hashtag preteen sex and connected them to accounts that use the terms to advertise child sex material for sale.
		Such accounts often claim to be run by the children themselves and use overtly sexual handles.
		Instagram accounts offering to sell illicit sex material generally don't publish it opens of content which invite buyers to commission specific acts.
		Such as for example videos of children harming themselves and imagery of the minor performing sex acts with animals.
		This is on Instagram and Facebook.
		At the right price children are available for in-person quote meetups.
		The promotion of underage sex content violates rules established by META as well.
		Questions from the journal META acknowledged the problem within its enforcement operation and said that it has set up an internal task force to address the issues raised.
		META said it has in the past two years taken down 27 pedophile networks and is planning more removals.
		Since receiving the journal's inquiries, the platform said it has blocked thousands of hashtags and sexualized children, some with millions of posts, and restricted its systems from recommending users search for terms known to be associated with sex abuse.
		So I saw the story and my first reaction is something like this, okay?
		There are two and a half billion active users on Facebook.
		There's over a billion active users on Instagram.
		Difficult to police the whole platform?
		You know, I like to give the benefit of the doubt and say maybe there's a lapse in enforcement.
		It's pretty tough to catch all of that.
		Then again, you read the details and it says there's millions, millions Of entries for these hashtags, and the kind of depravity that's going on.
		I don't understand.
		The volume of that is incredible.
		So clearly, and I think maybe a normal person, I think an average person who's not as conspiratorial, who's not as right-wing, would say something like, well, they can't catch everything, they're not perfect.
		But we're talking about millions of posts.
		I understand maybe you don't get everything, but you don't get millions of posts?
		It's a hashtag!
		And Peddo, if you're on the Facebook back end, if you're an enforcer, if you're a moderator, they're openly advertising it with a hashtag.
		Nobody thinks to look up a hashtag that says Peddo and find the millions of posts?
		That's pretty hard to dismiss as negligence.
		That's hard to dismiss as some The fact that the algorithm is promoting it and helping people find more of it, that's just what the algorithm does with anything.
		The algorithm amplifies content that people see.
		So if pedophiles are on the platform and they're looking for that, the algorithm is going to show them more content like what they search for.
		But if you're Facebook and you see that the algorithm is helping proliferate this content, all the rest, they have to be aware of that.
		That's sort of the whole point.
		The algorithm is meant to intensify a user's engagement with the content.
		It's supposed to get more of it.
		So people can find it and people can create it.
		It's a social network.
		So it's rallying people around these nodes based on interest.
		So the algorithm, as a consequence, it's creating this massive problem Through the algorithm, through the hashtag system, such that it's now massive.
		They just don't see that.
		They just can't find it.
		Again, they're aware of it.
		They said they've taken out 27 pedophile networks.
		They know it's going on.
		And clearly, based on Wall Street Journal's reporting, they could very quickly identify it.
		And the sheer volume of it?
		I imagine that's hard to ignore.
		It's a platform of billions of users, but millions of posts?
		Pornographic?
	Illegal?
	Involving children?
	You're not aware of that?
	Now add to that that the Wall Street Journal brings their findings with Stanford to Facebook.
	That easy?
	All Wall Street Journal had to do was say, hey Facebook, remember that pedophiles exist?
	And then Facebook said, oh yeah, we forgot to enforce rules against that for years apparently.
	We'll just ban all of it now.
	That's the other part that doesn't really fit.
	So this story is pretty bad.
	It's one thing to say, and I want to differ, because I think a lot of people look at things like this, people that are not suspicious of the regime, they're not suspicious of the big corporations or government, they say things like, or maybe they don't say this, but unconsciously their idea is this.
	There's a problem in the world.
	Of course, powerful structures are not able to preemptively solve every problem or anticipate consequence.
	So it's the media's job to find these sorts of things and bring them to the attention of the public so that they can be rectified.
	And so I think some people might see that happening here.
	And see, well, there's this issue.
	The Journal reported on it.
	Facebook took action.
	But that just doesn't square with the nature of the problem.
	The fact that it's already- I mean, pornographic content isn't allowed.
	This is illegal pornographic content.
	With massive volume.
	Add to that, there's hashtags with the term in the name.
	So like I imagine, for example, and this is going to get me to the next point, I imagine that when Facebook is looking to ban right-wing extremists, what are some terms they're going to look for?
	Maybe white nationalists?
	Maybe Q?
	And I imagine that they would use keywords like that, I'd imagine they'd use those categories or terms to locate accounts, groups, hashtags, again, They'll find where people are getting more content from the algorithm that is like that using that kind of method.
	Now that have pedo in the name.
	They have pedo pedophile in the name.
	So how can you say oh oopsie we didn't have it when there's hashtags with the infraction in the name?
	That is just like criminal negligence at that point.
	You've got a vast moderation team.
	This is a $500 billion company.
	It's the top fucking about meta, which controls both Instagram and Facebook.
	They've got thousands and thousands and thousands of content moderators.
	They've got artificial intelligence.
	You're telling me they really wanted to get rid of this content?
	But the AI, which they work with these universities to build, they've got the finest AI detection.
	Although it's not always perfect, but they're at the cutting edge.
	And their thousands of contracted human moderators, they didn't think to look up hashtag pedo to find the pedo content and delete it?
	I find that hard to believe.
	And then there's the response.
	Wall Street Journal brings us attention, hey, you got all this content on your platform, and Facebook says, oh, okay, we'll just delete it.
	And it's like, that's easy, why didn't they just do that before?
	Why would people outside Facebook working at the Wall Street Journal have a better knowledge of the regulatory and oversight environment on Facebook than Facebook?
	Why would a journalism company Have a better idea of what's happening on Facebook than that tech company.
	I find that hard to believe.
	And I don't think it's a coincidence, and I'm trying to be as precise as possible, but I don't think it's a coincidence that the sexualization of children and child porn You always find it at the highest levels.
	You always find it.
	You find references to it with John and Tony Podesta and Hillary Clinton.
	You find references to it in drag queens with their penises hanging out in front of kids.
	And then it's also all over Facebook and Instagram?
	I don't know.
	I don't think so.
	I think maybe there's... there may be more to the story there.
	Another point which I think is important here is this.
	We know that Facebook and Instagram are some of the worst when it comes to policing right-wing content.
	That's the landscape.
	It's not just Facebook and Instagram, although they're some of the worst, but YouTube and Twitter and all the rest, TikTok, Reddit, Discord, they're very severe about enforcing their restrictions and guidelines against right-wing content.
	I've had this experience in the past where I'll make an account on TikTok And it gets banned in 30 minutes.
	I make an account.
	They know it's me.
	They ban me in 30 minutes.
	I've had the same experience on Instagram.
	I've gone through 20 accounts on Instagram.
	Somehow they ban it before I get 100 followers.
	They ban it before I make one single post.
	Twitter.
	I'll make a new account.
	I get locked out of it instantly now.
	You go on TikTok, you can't even search my name if you view results at all.
	It'll say, this is hate speech.
	My name.
	So let me get this straight.
	I can't make a Twitter account and it lasts more than 15 minutes, but there's child porn all over the platform.
	I can't make an Instagram account that lasts a day, but there's millions of posts depicting child pornography on the platform.
	They can clog me in 50p based on my Based on this sort of fabricated device ID, this inferred digital identity that they'll get, based on your keyboard settings and other things, you know, they're going to come up, in other words, with these extremely sophisticated methods.
	Of tracking for the purpose of moderation as well as for advertisements.
	They can do all that at the Capitol and they can get everybody that believes in QAnon and they can get everybody in the Nick Fuentes Twitter space or who's a griper or who says the n-word, but you can't get everybody that's posting kids having sex with animals?
	Like, how does that even make any sense?
	If you're a right-wing person, And you post a conspiracy theory.
	You talk about Jews on these platforms.
	They have a way of finding you.
	You go out there.
	You think you could do it in a way where it's going to evade the algorithm.
	It's going to evade detection.
	And somehow they find it.
	They always do.
	But you've got millions of posts depicting menus where people can purchase content of kids having sex with animals or harming themselves.
	That eludes them somehow.
	And here's the kicker on how actually Twitter is struggling with advertisers because of the right-wing content on the platform.
	This is a story from several months ago.
	It says, quote, Twitter's ad sales staff is concerned that advertisers may be spooked by a rise in hate speech and pornography on the social network, as well as more ads featuring online gambling and marijuana products.
	This month will be down at least 56% each week compared with a year ago.
	Now they say, well it's not just hate speech, it's also porn and marijuana and gambling.
unidentified		Really?
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		Because Twitter has always allowed that.
		Twitter has allowed pornography for a long time and the first time that they really got a major influx of porn was years ago.
		Tumblr had all the child porn several years ago.
		Why didn't Twitter lose 56% of its advertisers when that happened?
		The pornographic content on Twitter exploded when they shut Tumblr down.
		It was a big story.
		I don't remember a commensurate decline in the number of ad revenue dollars.
		And the same goes for the marijuana, the rest of it.
		As a matter of fact, I was being organized at the end of last year by the ADL as a direct response to hate speech and to the increase in the number of anti-Semitic posts on the platform.
		I don't recall it having anything to do with porn, gambling, weed.
		All of this is to say There's a bigger story here.
		There's a big picture here, which is this.
		How does all media make money?
		How do they pay for Fox News?
		How do they pay for Twitter?
		How do they pay for Facebook?
		A lot of people don't think about this, but it's important.
		What's the business?
		You use these platforms for free, but they're not free to operate.
		So how do they make money?
		Almost universally, it's ad revenue.
		That's the big money.
		This is supported.
		That's how print and radio are supported.
		That is how Twitter is supported.
		That is how Facebook and Instagram and TikTok are supported.
		It's all through ad revenue.
		It's all through, specifically, major companies.
		Major companies.
		I'm talking about big corporations.
		Have a discretionary budget.
		And there are studies that say- Actually, the jury's really out on that.
		But they have such a large revenue, they have such a large budget, and such a large discretionary budget, that they can spend exorbitant amounts of money on nothing but advertising, which may or may not even be profitable.
		And it is that raft of money that comes from Wall Street, which supports television.
		It is that raft of money from Wall Street that supports Facebook.
		The other thing that supports these tech companies is contracts from the federal government.
		A lot of the tech companies, they'll have their hand in a lot of different kinds of business, and some of their big business is with these government contractors.
		And there's a big overlap.
		There's like a real triangle here between Silicon Valley, Wall Street, DC, and I guess the real universities.
		And so they all share the personnel, and the money flows around like that.
		The money flows From Wall Street into Silicon Valley.
		From the federal government into Silicon Valley.
		And of course, these media companies use their power to amplify narratives that are politically beneficial to both Wall Street and the government.
		They censor what the government and Wall Street do like.
		They create a general climate in the society that is predictable, that is within a specific parameter.
		That's their relationship.
		So when Elon Musk takes over Twitter, and he allows all this political dissent on the platform, suddenly the advertisers pull out.
		Now Twitter's insolvent.
		Suddenly all the major corporate budget is spent on unprofitable advertising.
		They revoke the money.
		And they say, I don't think so.
		No more advertising money for Twitter.
		Nobody is making the connection.
		Nobody is saying, I'm not gonna buy a Hyundai because I saw an anti-semitic post on Twitter.
		It's not happening.
		Like, that's not a real concern.
		Nobody is saying, I'm not gonna go and get McDonald's breakfast on McDonald's ad on Twitter, and I've also noticed an increase in the number of anti-semitic messages on Twitter.
		That's not real.
		It's political.
		They are removing the funding because Twitter is no longer a project as mass media.
		As mass media which controls the thinking and the thought process and the attitudes.
		That is no longer conducive to the agenda of these major companies and of the federal government.
		As such, they're not going to fund it anymore.
		So it's going to disappear.
	That mass media, which is very expensive, is no longer going to be operable for that reason alone.
	Now think of this, those kinds of posts and that they're gonna defund Twitter, Like, that's what's happening.
	They're going to defund Twitter as a political mechanism.
	So that is what the Wall Street, Washington cabal does not want, is anti-Semitism and white, you know, white identity.
	Any semblance of a white consciousness or an anti-non-white consciousness, that is inimical to their agenda.
	That's their agenda.
	Pornography.
	No advertisers are going to pull out of Facebook and Instagram and Twitter because there's too much pornography.
	No advertiser is going to pull out of these social media companies because there's too much child pornography.
	I haven't heard of a steep drop off in advertisement revenue.
	Have you?
	I recall in July 2020 the ADL took conspiracies and it worked.
	I recall in November 2022, ADL did the same thing to Twitter.
	They called for an advertiser boycott in response to Elon Musk's promise for free speech.
	And it worked!
	They lost half their ad revenue.
	I don't recall any sort of similar detrimental fall off in ad revenue when all the pornographers took their porn from Tumblr.
	I don't recall it happening any time recently when many stories like this have been published on Facebook and Instagram or when they promote homosexuality or when they promote outright porn and other vulgarity.
	So it's really more about how our society is run.
	That they think anti-semitism is a bigger threat, it's a bigger problem, that's a bigger priority than prepubescent children being raped.
	Like, that's who's in charge.
	And the only society that could create a dynamic like that is one that isn't Christian.
	Only a society that is probably run by Jews, as a matter of fact, would think that Holocaust denial is a bigger problem than child rape.
	Who else would be a bigger priority and a bigger target and a bigger advertiser problem than kids getting raped?
	Who else?
	And you could say, maybe it's... I mean, that would be the group that cares about anti-Semitism, which it is.
	That was the advertiser boycott in 20 against Facebook.
	That's the advertiser boycott that's ongoing against Twitter.
	Led by the ADL.
	Led by a... But, conceivably, there's other instances of this where it's maybe not necessarily Jews, but they're not Christians.
	That's the society that we've created.
	We're being a real Christian, literally believing in God, having self-confidence as men, or as white people, or as Americans, believing in the truth, believing in the classics, believing in anything that is transcendent and anything that is unitive, is a political problem for the regime.
	It is more odious to the regime than child rape.
	Think about that.
	And it's not to say that the regime isn't against that.
	I mean, I'm sure there's a lot of sex trafficking, but I always think about Mastercard.
	Mastercard threatened to defund OnlyFans and Pornhub years ago because of the platform.
	So, I don't know that you can really... I think it's important for people to keep a level head about that sort of thing.
	But, their priorities speak for themselves.
	That at least as far as these platforms are concerned, you're going to have a bigger problem being an anti-Semite, and so-called anti-Semite, and saying we don't want to give money to Israel, than raping a kid.
	And case in point, they just don't care about the latter.
	The former, they've had that dialed in for seven years.
	They've been perfecting it for years.
	The child porn thing, they just haven't, they literally just haven't even gotten around to it.
	What does that say?
	What does that say about the people in leadership roles and their responsibility to the public?
	You own and operate this mass communications platform.
	...political dissent against their agenda that they neglected to talk about the safety of kids.
	So I think that's the big story.
	I don't know how you look at this without regard for the censorship angle for the last seven years.
	So, that's that.
	And I'll clarify, you know, people have been critical of me over the last couple weeks because I said that people should get married when they're 16.
	On a serious note, I do want to differentiate.
	There's all the difference in the world between saying that people should get married as adolescents or as teenagers and child sex abuse that is happening for prepubescent children.
	That is unacceptable.
	People that do that should obviously get the death penalty.
	That sort of thing has no quarter in a decent society.
	And without getting into a big protracted discussion, we may end the Super Chats, but a lot of people have said, well, you're a pedophile to me because I've said, well, hey, 17-year-olds are kind of hot and probably it makes sense to not Have the age of consent be as high as it is.
	Maybe it should be 17, 16.
	If you're talking about whether we have to get back to a society that views sexual morality in terms of marriage, not in terms of consent.
	Because that gets rid of every problem.
	Let's talk about marriage.
	Now it's a different conversation.
	But that's totally separate from what goes on here which is literal children, actual children who are not in an age of sexual maturity being straight up abused maliciously forever for their entire lives.
	People that do that should get their heads cut off and obviously that should have no quarter.
	So I just want to put that out there because I know people have said, oh, you know, you're for teen marriage.
	Yeah, not really the same thing.
	But anyway, I just thought I'd throw that out there.
	Because that's been a hot topic lately.
	I've been talking about it a lot.
	And you know what?
	Like... But it... But that's a... But it's very critical.
	Why?
	Well, we've gotten into that enough, but... Look, we want people to have sex within marriage.
	When do people start wanting to have sex?
	When they're adolescents.
	Is it sensible for a society to expect teenagers to go fully through puberty when they are most, when their sexual appetite, their libido is at its peak?
	Hormones start to go down and they don't have a high libido and that just doesn't even make biological sense.
	It doesn't make moral sense at all.
	You cannot reasonably expect people to not want to breed like rabbits when they're at that age.
	They're going to do it anyway.
	Do it within marriage.
	Don't say, you know, we're going to have a marriage-only society, but we're also going to have a society we're bearing until they're 30.
	It doesn't work.
	And the same goes somewhat for men as well.
	So you got to totally transform the society.
	I'm not saying 16 year olds should be being pimped out.
	I'm saying they should be getting married.
	I'm, you know, I'm not saying they should be being turned out like everybody is now on dating apps and hookups and all that.
	It's revolting no matter what the age.
	But marriage at a young age is a beautiful thing.
	It's a different kind of society we're creating.
	But this is altogether different than this sickness and abuse which should be eradicated.
	But anyway, so that's that.
	I want to move on.
	I want to get into the Trump charges.
	You know, it's going to be a late show here.
	But I did promise I would finish.
	We'll dive into the Trump indictment.
unidentified		Okay.
unidentified		Okay.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		So I want to get into the imminent Trump indictment which As I said at the top of the show, we've been expecting now for over a year.
		Already one indictment.
		Trump was indicted in Manhattan earlier this year in a civil matter, I believe, for falsifying business entries.
		He's expected to be charged in Fulton County, Georgia this summer for interfering in their election.
		And now the Department of Justice appears to be bringing imminently charges against Trump, federal charges.
		And this was the subject of the Raid of Mar-a-Lago last August.
		You remember, last summer, the FBI rolled up at a pre-dawn raid of Mar-a-Lago with 50 FBI agents.
		They broke in, they locked down the bedroom, the storage room, the office, and they took 50 boxes worth of things out.
		And they claimed that they were executing a search warrant because they had reasonably obtained into the improper handling of classified material.
		That was last year.
		Since then, the DOJ has been working on these charges.
		They've been investigating.
		And the news today is that the Trump legal team is now meeting with federal prosecutors and that imminently they'll be bringing a real indictment against him for this.
		So this is a story from New York Times.
		It's this quote for former President Trump that he is a target of their investigation into his handling of classified documents after he left office.
		It remained unclear when Mr. Trump was told that he was a target of this inquiry, but the notice suggested that prosecutors working for the special counsel, Jack Smith, had largely completed their investigation and were moving forward bringing an indictment.
		In court, they were scrutinizing whether Mr. Trump had broken laws governing the handling of national security documents and whether he had obstructed government efforts to retrieve them.
		Mr. Trump was found to have had more than 300 documents with classified markings in Mar-a-Lago, his private club and residence in Florida, including some found in a search there by FBI agents two months after lawyers for the former president said a diligent search had not been carried out.
		Identifying a potential defendant that he or she is a target is a formal way of indicating the person is a direct focus of a criminal investigation and often preceding the filing of charges.
		On Monday, three of Mr. Trump's lawyers met for almost two hours with Mr. Smith and others at the Justice Department in what people close to Trump described as a final effort to stave off charges and alert top prosecutors to what they believe in this investigation.
		So I can tell you from personal experience that this is how it works.
		I was a target of an FBI investigation.
		I may still be.
		The thing is about these is that you actually don't know.
		They don't tell you you're under investigation.
		They don't tell you you're no longer under FBI investigation.
		And that's by design.
		Cops, they use a lot of really messed up tactics to make you vulnerable and to cultivate an air of unpredictability.
		They can lie to you.
		They do all sorts of things.
		And so, for example, in my case, they froze my money, didn't say anything, and then after many weeks, my bank gave me contact information on my account, and these were phone numbers for U.S.
		attorneys at the Department of Justice, and so I immediately contacted a lawyer, and my lawyer contacted the feds, they contacted the DOJ, And the DOJ confirmed to my lawyer that I was a target of an investigation.
		And the way my lawyer explained it to me was like this.
		He said, if you're in trouble, he said, they are going to tell your lawyer and the lawyers are going to go to Washington and the feds are going to put up on the whiteboard the case against your client and that's when they're typically going to talk about a deal.
		They're going to talk about a Some sort of a plea deal.
		He said that's how it works.
		Now, fortunately, knock on wood, in my case, that never happened.
		So, uh, that's good.
		That's the procedure.
		Because they want to make a deal.
		The thing is about the Department of Justice is they do not bring charges unless they know they could get a conviction at a trial.
		They have a 95 or a 99% conviction rate.
		They're very good.
		And the reason that that is so Is because they don't bring charges unless they got you.
		Unless they got you.
		And when they got you, that's how they get everybody to plead guilty.
		And then they got you working for them.
		This is what happens to a lot of rap artists.
		This is what happens to a lot of political people.
		It's what happens to a lot of career criminals.
		As they bring them in, they tell them what's up, and they get them to plead guilty and cooperate.
		And so, that helps them get what they want.
		But they only get that if they have leverage.
		And leverage is, we've got a case against you.
		We've got a case against you, and if you want to risk it, we go to trial and we're going to throw the book at you.
		We are going to lock you away forever.
		That's the program.
		So they want to get plea deals.
		They want people to plead guilty.
		That's part of it.
		And so them bringing Trump's lawyers out to D.C., this all but confirms they will indict.
		That's a very clear sign that an indictment... Don't bring the lawyers out to D.C.
		to look at the stuff if they're not bringing charges.
		What would be the purpose of that?
	They don't bring lawyers in to clear your name.
	They don't bring lawyers in to say, here's why my client is innocent.
	If you're innocent, then they, you know, they don't mess with you.
	They might question the person.
	But it doesn't play out like this.
	So it's pretty evident how much damage that's even going to do.
	Trump can still run even if he's charged.
	They're likely not going to send him to jail.
	And depending on the timeline, he may win the Republican primary before he even goes to trial or before any of it's even binding.
	So we'll have to see.
	Exactly how this plays out, but I don't think that this imperils him even a little bit which hunt against the president and you know the thing about this is You can safely assume that every leader Breaks laws because the legal code is so complex.
	It is so intricate intricate and this is something where Maybe Donald Trump makes a mistake.
	You know, there's so many documents.
	You're the President of the United States.
	You're running a presidential campaign.
	Pathetically, if we're going to be charitable, Donald Trump accidentally takes many, many boxes of classified documents from the White House to his private residence.
	It's conceivable.
	The federal government's a massive enterprise.
	The executive branch, the White House, is a huge deal.
	He's running a campaign.
	What if Hypothetically, he accidentally takes a lot of documents that are classified.
	Do you think he's the first person to fudge business entries, do a payoff of a prostitute, if that's true?
	Do you think he's the first person to make a phone call like he did to Raffensperger?
	A lot of people, when a person like this gets charged or gets accused of wrongdoing, they clutch their pearls and they say, oh, I don't like that.
	Oh, you know, there's something wrong here.
	Say, I wonder if he's guilty.
	Here's the way that I look at it.
	There is a minimal level of lawbreaking happening with anyone with power, anyone that runs a major organization.
	If you went through their stuff with a fine-tooth comb long enough, you would find lawbreaking.
	If you run a very large business, if you are a billionaire, if you are a politician at the national level, if you had enough resources and enough time, you would find false business entries.
	You might find a phone call which could be considered Dubious.
	You might find a payoff.
	You might find a fixer lawyer somewhere.
	You'll find something like that with everybody.
	When somebody gets charged with low-level stuff like this, he took some documents, he paid off, he made a phone call.
	All this says, it's not that Trump is particularly criminal.
	It's not that his conduct is particularly criminal or disorganized or unethical.
	All this says is that that's the guy that they went after.
	Because they could go after Biden with literally the same stuff.
	Biden's kid is taking payoffs from China and Ukraine.
	Hillary Clinton was doing the same thing with the uranium at the time.
	She had official emails the Secretary of State on her home email service and then deleted it.
	So clearly this stuff happens with great regularity and it's mundane and it happens all the time.
	High levels of corruption, low levels of corruption.
	There's a minimal level of law-breaking crime that is just like static noise.
	Because, like I said, you have such a sophisticated and complex code between tax law and campaign law and state laws and you name it.
	This man is a billionaire, a real estate developer, TV host, politician.
	They went through with a fine-tooth comb and you know what they found?
	They found that he fudged numbers about like that, which is really minor in the grand scheme of things.
	They went through with a fine-tooth comb all of his documents, everything.
	You know what they found?
	A couple hundred documents.
	A couple hundred confidential classified papers.
	They didn't find evidence that he colluded with Russia to steal the election.
	They didn't find evidence that he threatened to withhold aid to Ukraine to investigate Hunter Biden.
	They didn't find treason.
	They didn't find any other kind of high crime.
	They found a clerical error on his business.
	They found a sex cover-up.
	Okay, big deal.
	They found a phone call.
	They found some documents that were improperly categorized.
	Okay, big deal.
	And so I reject people that go out and say, there's very little you could tell me about Trump that would turn me, that would even make me consider being against him.
	I wouldn't even consider this.
	If somebody said, we're charging him with improper handling of documents, I'd say, go kill yourself.
	Go kill yourself.
	I don't care.
	Even if it's all true, even if it's all true and it was totally criminal, do you think I give a shit?
	Do you understand that there's levels of corruption seen and unseen going on in every level of government and every level of business and finance everywhere?
	This is only the guy they chose to prosecute.
	Because at that level, it's not like cops catching you speeding.
	It's a matter of who they take interest in and why.
	Who does a prosecutor at the DOJ, who does a prosecutor at a state like New York or a city like... and why?
	Who do they apply the microscope to?
	Who do they apply the magnifying glass to?
	And based on what standard, then, do they start filing their charges?
	Oh, he mishandled material?
	How about Clinton?
	How about Obama?
	How about Biden?
	And it's not whataboutism.
	It's just to say that this is not about justice.
	If it were, other people would be held accountable.
	If it were about a scale that has a fixer, if we're talking about the standard is any sort of clerical error, you can't have these documents, then you would see a lot more people going down for more and less.
	But you don't.
	It's unheard of that this stuff happens.
	It's really unheard of that this stuff happens.
	More often than not, somebody becomes a... That's when they hit him with the sex scandal.
	That's when they hit him with the rape case.
	That's when they hit him with the improper business entry felony charge.
	That's when they hit him with the mishandling of classified documents charge.
	Who do they take an interest in and why?
	And that's when they come up with these creative prosecutions.
	And you have to inoculate yourself from this stuff by saying, I support who I support.
	I support what they're doing.
	Some things, but Like, if Trump was a real treasonous traitor or something, if it turns out that he was born in China and he was a double agent or I don't know, something like that.
	If he was secretly eating babies at night, like, okay.
	Maybe I wouldn't support him.
	But you get the stuff where, well, we're gonna charge him with mishandling of classified documents.
	This isn't even entertaining.
	I don't even care about the details.
	You can see right through it, based on who they prosecute and who they don't, that it's a witch hunt.
	So, I don't know if that's totally groundbreaking that it's a witch hunt, but you do have to think about it in these terms.
	Do not even evaluate these things.
	Do not even, because what they're counting on?
unidentified		Each.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		They have been attacking this guy for seven years.
		And they attack him every day in the media, from every angle.
		And if every time they say something about Trump, you stop and think, is that true?
		I don't know how I feel about that.
		It's attrition.
		After doing that 1,500 times over seven years, eventually people are going to say, you know what?
		I don't like Trump.
		I'm tired of him.
		I'm fatigued with all of the drama and all of the All of the apparent corruption.
		I'm done supporting him.
		And so it's this death by a thousand cuts that happens, even to the ardent Trump supporter.
		They say, I like this guy.
		He says it like it is.
		He says it like I say it.
		He's a nationalist.
		This guy's way better than the rest.
		He's not a politician.
		He's an Islamophobe.
		He's a sexist.
		He said, grab him by the pussy.
		His crowd size wasn't big and he lied about it.
		Well, he didn't build the border wall.
		Well, he did this.
		He did that.
		He said shithole country.
		He stole the election.
		We should impeach him.
		It's Russia.
		It's Ukraine.
		It's this.
		It's the 6th.
		It's the documents.
		It's Stormy Daniels.
		It's... And so people get... People get...
		You don't have the mentality of, I support Trump unless he does something absolutely heinous.
		You're never going to go that far with him.
		And we're never going to win if we don't have allegiance to a leader like that.
		Because that is the nature of the fight.
		That's psychological.
		So if you don't have a faith in Trump that is like... I don't want to be blasphemous here, but it's got to be... It's similar in the sense that You have to have real faith in the person.
		And faith means you know they're imperfect, you know they're not, they're not, they're still a human being.
		But you back your horse.
		That's your guy.
		And you recognize the nature of the situation.
		That is one guy against the world.
		And you say, I support that guy.
		And people go, well do you support the crime?
		Do you support this, that, and the other?
		And the only reason all that stuff is happening is because they're over the target.
		The only reason that that person is being singled out, targeted, attacked, is because of the nature of what they're doing.
		And until there's concrete evidence that there's something so outrageous that what they're doing isn't worthwhile anymore, then they have the support.
		And that's how I've always felt about Trump.
		And a lot of people didn't understand that in 2019 or 2021.
		But that's the kind of support that he needs.
		And you see what happens.
		He gets betrayed by people near him.
		It's legal stuff.
		He's hit from every angle.
		People do the same thing with me.
		And people go, oh, you know, a lot of people, a lot of people have betrayed you.
		It's like, yeah, because I'm subject to more pressure than anyone I know.
		Me in the same way.
		And they've lied about others that have come before, like in the last century.
		That's why you gotta support the cause.
	And the cause is Trump.
	So I don't care about the documents at all.
	And I don't think anybody else does either.
	And this is not going to prevent him from running.
	If anything, it's just going to help him.
	Because it... I think that this... It only gives credence to that.
	It gives him more credibility.
	But there's going to be no legal problems.
	So, that's that.
	But we'll watch and see what happens in the coming days.
	If there's going to be an indictment, we'll probably cover it.
	But that's that.
	I want to move on.
	I want to get on into our Super Chats and see what you guys are saying.
	What are you guys...
	Think about all this.
	I'm gonna get our Super Chats set up and look here.
	You guys have been really on a roll with the Super Chats lately.
	I've been loving it.
unidentified		I've been absolutely loving that aspect of the show. - Wow.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		Let's see.
unidentified		Let me do this.
unidentified		Let me do this.
streamlabs matthew tts ▲ ● ▼		Punjabi grow a percent three dollars.
		Could you go over how fascism manifested itself distinctly in different European countries?
		You mentioned that in a previous episode.
		Also, would you consider UAE or Saudi fascist due to the monarchy?
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		So the thing is about fascism, it's actually hard to define because there are so few case studies.
		There are so few case studies and they're all different from each other.
		So, Francisco Franco's fascism was different from Benito Mussolini's fascism.
		And Benito Mussolini's fascism was different from Hitler's fascism in Germany.
		And Hitler's fascism was different from Oswald Mosley's fascism in the United Kingdom.
		And Oswald Mosley never even ruled.
		So you've got in every case it took on a very national flavor.
		And so for example there are some Anglo historians like AJP Taylor who say that National Socialism could have only come from Germany.
		That National Socialism was very Specific to the character of Germany, very specific to their national identity and national economy.
		Now, he didn't like the Germans, and so he said that in a negative way.
		But he said that no other country would have produced the Third Reich, no other country would have produced National Socialism, but Germany could have only produced National Socialism.
		They couldn't have produced anything other than that.
		And so, Just to compare and contrast, like Franco's fascism was very clerical, and obviously lasted much longer, was much more conservative than National Socialism.
		National Socialism had more of a pagan influence, and in my opinion had some commonalities of progressivism and liberalism.
		But that's just a quick rundown.
		They all took a slightly different form and they had common attributes.
		They all had common attributes like opposition to communism and a strong central bureaucracy and the subordination of the private sector to the state.
		Where they varied was the character of the regime and I guess the role of religion.
unidentified		So...
unidentified		That's what I meant by that.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		And United Arab Emirates and Saudi, are they fascists?
		No, I don't think they're fascists.
		They're monarchies.
unidentified		They have a king.
unidentified		So by definition, they're a monarchy.
streamlabs matthew tts ▲ ● ▼		Although Tucker is obviously not on our team, why did he do the shows on demographic replacement, the ADL and Israel?
streamlabs matthew tts ▲ ● ▼		He'd avoided these topics.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, I get that a lot and I hear that, but you have to keep in mind the breadth and the totality of his show.
		He's done a show for 7 years.
		He talked about the ADL one time.
		One time.
		One segment.
		So you do a show for, what is it, 6 or 7 years?
		He did one 10 minute segment on that.
		I liked that.
		I thought it was great.
		But...
		So what?
		I mean, respectfully, so what?
		He did that because the ADL was attacking him and the ADL tried to cost him his job.
		So... He punched back against the ADL because they were attacking him once and then never talked about it before or after again.
unidentified		I don't... I don't think so.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		He said he's for more... He has said that he is in favor of gay marriage more than he has talked about the ADL.
		So...
		And as far as demographic replacement, he's not really talking about that.
		He's talking about how they're voters.
		They're going to vote for the Democrat Party.
		That's not the same thing.
		And that's an important distinction because they'll go on other shows and say it's got identity as evil.
		And anyone that claims to represent white people is evil.
		And they're just like Hitler and I will not support that.
		So he's not really talking about the demographic reality.
		He's talking about the changing political landscape.
		He's talking about the fact that these millions and millions of non-white immigrants who don't speak English and don't have anything and smell bad are going to vote for Democrats.
		It's got nothing to do with race.
		That's hardly Speaking to the heart of the demographic issue.
		And as a matter of fact, he's going against the fundamental premise.
		He is explicitly saying the fundamental premise is the opposite of what it is.
		So, I'm sorry.
		That's just not good enough.
		Going out there and saying race doesn't matter.
		Race politics is evil.
		It has nothing to do with race.
		It's all about civil rights.
		I want a race-blind meritocracy.
		And I don't recall him talking about Israel.
		You'd have to show me that one.
unidentified		So, it's just not good enough.
streamlabs matthew tts ▲ ● ▼		Yeah.
unidentified		Like a bot or something.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		Who even takes this guy seriously?
unidentified		Not me.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		And I'm never gonna debate him.
		Because he's just an unserious person and probably not even real.
		He's probably just some troll.
		Some bot.
		Nobody should take him seriously and everybody should unfollow him and stay away.
unidentified		Because he's clearly a faker and a fraud and a liar.
streamlabs matthew tts ▲ ● ▼		Pretty underscore fly underscore white underscore guy sent three dollars.
		Cruz and Juan have service for a few days, but I'm keeping the streak going for him.
		I would have gone with him, but Cruz's are disgusting.
		I'd rather die.
		Great show.
unidentified		Who is this?
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		His wife?
		Or his friend?
		Either way, kind of endearing.
unidentified		Thank you.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		I appreciate it.
unidentified		Thanks for keeping the streak alive, even though he technically broke it once, but that's okay.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		It's still going on.
streamlabs matthew tts ▲ ● ▼		Jews stay killing Christ sent $3.
streamlabs matthew tts ▲ ● ▼		Memorial Day is to honor those who suck Memorial Day is to honor those who suck at war and got sacrificed to Moloch for Israel via kosher memes.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		Can we not?
unidentified		Okay, thank you.
streamlabs matthew tts ▲ ● ▼		Victor Lala sent $5.
		Thank you for doing this show.
		You really get me giggling like a little girl when you tell your jokes.
unidentified		Oh, thank you.
streamlabs matthew tts ▲ ● ▼		You know, I take it back.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		You're not a pedophile faggot.
		You're actually extremely loyal, so thank you for doing that.
		I encourage everybody to do the same thing.
		If you could post the timestamps and the links, everybody should be doing that.
		If I can't have Gumroad, Jews can't either.
		If I can't have Gumroad, Zionist Jews can't either.
		So you should report all of it, yes, 100%.
		Go in there, and he's a Jew, and he's a pedophile, and he sucks.
		And if anyone defends him, I'm going to say you're defending a gay pedophile, because you are.
		This guy should be run out of town.
		He should go back to Jutton, Massachusetts, and shut the fuck up forever.
		Or he should go back to Romania.
		Either way, give us the timestamps.
		This guy's a bitch.
		Make him go crawl to his brother for money.
		Dan, uh, Dan, uh, group.
		Anyway, thank you for that.
		I appreciate it.
streamlabs matthew tts ▲ ● ▼		- I appreciate it. - Jews stay killing Christ sent $3.
		Two CND thought as I value IQ and EQ less than JQ.
		The USS Liberty was butt pirated by homos and murdered by Jews.
		A win-win.
		Celebrate the event with unkosher memes on the official name.
		- All right, thank you. - Devin Higgison sent $10.
		The human and his companions is about as Talmudic of a sacrifice as you can get.
		Satan loved that one.
		RIP Mussolini.
unidentified		Absolutely.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		Absolutely.
		BASED?!
		BASED?!
		That was freaking Talmudic!
		Absolutely.
		You're so right.
unidentified		so right.
unidentified		Hang on.
streamlabs matthew tts ▲ ● ▼		Devin Higgison sent $10, also went to a Detroit college graduation ceremony.
streamlabs matthew tts ▲ ● ▼		They opened with a female pastor and on about Jan 6 election deniers and being a racial ally for 25 minutes.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		Hang on, you're telling me your college, your college had a female pastor and then they talked about liberal themes at the commencement speech?
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		Are Are you kidding me?
unidentified		I swear things are getting out of hand.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		Liberalism is out of control.
unidentified		This.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		Somebody call Fox News.
		Call the media.
		They got to hear.
		They got to.
		We got to do something about this.
		This is outrageous.
unidentified		We got to tell.
streamlabs matthew tts ▲ ● ▼		Hey Steve Franson, you're a smart guy, but what's up with all the anti-Sam Hyde venom?
streamlabs matthew tts ▲ ● ▼		Has a comedian not a priest?
unidentified		I don't know, why don't you ask Steve?
streamlabs matthew tts ▲ ● ▼		Jim Statues sent everything else is gay.
unidentified		Boo sent $3.
streamlabs matthew tts ▲ ● ▼		In some ways you're like Osmosis Jones, and America's immune system has been compromised by cancer, viruses and bacteria and you're trying to wake up the other white blood cells before it's too late.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		Who's the big pill then?
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		Who's the big pill head?
unidentified		Is that Keith?
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		Or is that... Who's the... Who's the pill sidekick?
streamlabs matthew tts ▲ ● ▼		Killing Christ sent three... Hey, you know what?
unidentified		Like, you're just too fucking crazy.
streamlabs matthew tts ▲ ● ▼		Boo sent three dollars.
		Someone told me that you hate me.
		I hope you don't hate me.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		I don't really know you yourself.
streamlabs matthew tts ▲ ● ▼		Farid Lukovic sent twenty dollars.
		My boo-oy.
		Let's go.
		I keep missing the live shows, but I finally caught one.
		It's biblical.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		Hey, thank you, man.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		I appreciate it.
streamlabs matthew tts ▲ ● ▼		Farid Lukovic sent $100.
		So me and my friends came out.
		And while I was playing I was listening to you talking to Sneeko about Kablamagic and Lilith.
		The hair stood up on my arms because that's the name of the antagonist of the game heavily used in promotional material.
		Is this just coincidental?
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		Probably coincidental.
unidentified		But who knows?
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		It's synchronized so maybe there's something to it.
		But hey, thank you for the big super chat.
		I appreciate it.
		That's a pretty freaky coincidence.
		I don't know how much you could read into that stuff, but I pay attention to those things.
		Thank you for the big super chat.
		I appreciate it.
streamlabs matthew tts ▲ ● ▼		Farid Lukovic sent $20.
streamlabs matthew tts ▲ ● ▼		Google Lilith Diablo 4 and tell me this somehow isn't some kind of Kabbalah demonic stuff.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		Well, they made a video game about the devil, so... I think it would track that they would use, like, devil themes.
		They made a video game about... Included the name of a demon, like...
		It seems actually apropos.
		Now, if they're promoting it, yeah, I suppose that... I don't know the plot of Diablos.
		I don't really know what the message is, but it seems like it tracks.
streamlabs matthew tts ▲ ● ▼		Virginia sent $3.
		Yo, O7, Nick, sorry about yesterday.
		God bless.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		Hey, that's alright, buddy.
streamlabs matthew tts ▲ ● ▼		Nolan Taylor sent $3.
		Columbus sent $3.
		What are your thoughts on the Knights of Columbus?
		I'm Catholic and a 3rd degree Knight.
		They have gone woke.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		I don't really know anything about them.
streamlabs matthew tts ▲ ● ▼		them i'm not in there crab goblin sent three dollars i heard if peck is no longer in july will something take its place i was hoping to finally meet you and joe the boomer is it true he is going uh well i haven't made any announcements about that so stay tuned funny when destiny would collab with you thinking he'd take a percentage of your audience i can't fathom how anyone could go from watching you funny charismatic and red-pilled to watching a blue-haired cuck
streamlabs matthew tts ▲ ● ▼		surely it's almost impossible for destiny to convert a growiper unless he's not christian Yeah, that's always the case.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		Whenever you see... And I don't think it really happens, but to the extent that a right-wing person becomes left-wing, it's almost always the case.
streamlabs matthew tts ▲ ● ▼		Dirk Diggler sent $5.
		Thanks for all you do.
		You're the best person to ever do political commentary media.
		I really can't think of anyone comparably at your level from now or any other era.
		Can you?
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		I don't know.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		I don't really... I don't really compare myself to other people.
unidentified		I don't think about it that way, but I appreciate it.
streamlabs matthew tts ▲ ● ▼		I think Lin Wood's a little crazy.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		I think he's funny.
		I like him.
		But, uh, seems like kind of a nut job.
		And, I mean, look, whatever reason he doesn't name Jews, is it because he's a boomer?
		Is it because he's controlled off?
		Who knows?
unidentified		Either way, I don't think anyone has time for that.
streamlabs matthew tts ▲ ● ▼		Farid Lukovic sent $20.
streamlabs matthew tts ▲ ● ▼		Sorry for the retarded esoteric questions R. Nikolai Fuentovsky.
unidentified		Hey, you're fine.
streamlabs matthew tts ▲ ● ▼		Michael LaDuke sent $15.
		Hey, thanks for all you do.
		Thanks.
		Boo sent $3.
		I 100% agree on making the law no sex before marriage, would solve a lot of problems with degeneracy and would probably your hood.
unidentified		I didn't say that.
streamlabs matthew tts ▲ ● ▼		John Dave Irving sent $99.
		I'll make a Nick Fuentes AI voice and we, yes we Nickka, will start a bunch of Fuentes Twitter spaces on Bernergs.
		They can't take us all down, they couldn't even sink the USS Liberty W-5 torpedoes, although they did get better with 9-11.
unidentified		Yeah, just don't do that please.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		Why would you do an AI?
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		Why would you just play my real voice?
unidentified		Why would I want that?
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		Why would I like that?
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		Why would I like that idea?
unidentified		That doesn't even make any sense.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		Thanks for the big super chat, but don't do that.
streamlabs matthew tts ▲ ● ▼		Baguette Grow I percent $3.
		Thoughts on Neuralink being approved?
		Is it immoral beyond your aversion for lab goats?
unidentified		I don't know.
unidentified		The theology on Neuralink.
streamlabs matthew tts ▲ ● ▼		Boo sent $3.
streamlabs matthew tts ▲ ● ▼		The pill is the red pill cuz it's a pill.
unidentified		$3.
streamlabs matthew tts ▲ ● ▼		Cringe incoming.
streamlabs matthew tts ▲ ● ▼		Could you change your background to Gotham City for Halloween?
unidentified		What's wrong with you?
streamlabs matthew tts ▲ ● ▼		I don't know what's wrong with you people.
		Bobakali sent $20.
		God bless you Nick, doing the Lord's work as always.
unidentified		Hey, thank you, I appreciate it.
streamlabs matthew tts ▲ ● ▼		Booglywoogly sent $7.
		Hey Nick, how was your day today?
		Did Chicago resemble a scene out of Blade Runner 2049 or was it a normal day?
unidentified		I had lunch.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		I had candy.
unidentified		I worked.
streamlabs matthew tts ▲ ● ▼		Farid Lukovic sent $20.
		Forget all the other superchats.
		Nice hair is what I really meant to say.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		Hey!
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		Okay, much better.
unidentified		Well, thanks a lot, Farid.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼		You're putting the show on your back, buddy.
		I appreciate it.
		We got some superchats on Cozy Anthony.
		You will be in our prayers.
		Thank you very much.
		Okay, that was pretty quick.
		That was pretty quick and painless.
		Well, quick and painful.
		Trumpster with a heart thank you very much chief Trumpster we love you buddy Okay, that's our last super chill.
		Okay.
		That was pretty quick.
		That was pretty quick and painless well quick and painful that was extremely painful, but thankfully very short so That's gonna do it for me tonight or Remember to follow me here on Cozy.
		Smash the follow button to get a push notification whenever I go live.
		Follow me on Rumble and Telegram.
		Links are down below.
		I'm on the air Monday through Friday, 9 o'clock Central, 10 o'clock Eastern Time.
		As always, thanks for watching.
		Thanks to our Super Chatters, in particular Farid Lukovic and John Dave Irving.
		Special thanks.
		We love you and I'll see you tomorrow.
		Until then, have a great rest of your evening.
unidentified		Americanism, not globalism, will be our credo.
		It's going to be only America first.
		America first.
		The American people, then.

▲