Pastor Joel Webbin and co-hosts dissect Jeremy Carl's failed nomination due to anti-Semitic remarks, James Fishback's X ban following his refusal to visit Israel, and the stalled SAVE Act requiring voter ID. They contrast Fishback's grassroots "America First" surge against Byron Donalds' $45 million war chest, arguing corporate interests suppress white nationalism. The episode concludes by promoting their book "The Hyphenated Heresy," critiquing Judeo-Christianity as a heresy and calling for a unified Protestant revival to challenge global hierarchies and secure political victories against established foreign interests. [Automatically generated summary]
Transcriber: CohereLabs/cohere-transcribe-03-2026, WAV2VEC2_ASR_BASE_960H, sat-12l-sm, script v26.04.01, and large-v3-turbo
Time
Text
Jeremy Carr Hearing Fallout00:03:44
We have a jam packed show for you today.
This is NXR Studios.
I'm Pastor Joel Webbin, and I am joined by my co hosts, Wesley Todd and Antonio Griffith.
We're going to be discussing three major headline stories today.
Number one has to do with Jeremy Carl, who is the Trump appointee for Assistant Secretary of State, who right now has just gone through his hearing and very likely will not be passed for this appointment, not because of the Democrats, it's always the Democrats, but When you have Republican allies like this, who needs Democrats, right?
With conservatives like these, who needs liberals?
Ultimately, he will likely fail, and it will be because of a GOP senator, state senator in Utah, saying that he's offended by Jeremy Carl's comments about things that have been labeled as anti Semitic, things regarding the Holocaust, things regarding Jews.
And the irony in all of this is that Jeremy Carl is actually ethnically Jewish.
He is a Christian in terms of his religious affiliation.
I believe he's Presbyterian.
But this is somebody who is ethnically Jewish who is going to be ultimately probably fail in being appointed to this position because of a GOP state senator in Utah saying that he's too anti Semitic.
That's where we currently are in the discourse.
Absurd.
The second story that we're going to be covering today has to do with James Fishback, who is a candidate for Florida governor replacing Ron DeSantis.
He's going up against Byrone Donalds, and Byrone is the official Trump appointment.
He has the MAGA endorsement, but James Fishback has been running an incredible organic grassroots campaign, and he has been just continuing to increase in the polls day after day after day.
But He made one comment just in the last 24 to maybe 36 hours, where he was asked whether or not, if he's appointed, if he wins this election as Florida's governor, would he make a trip to Israel and would he pay homage to the famous wall?
Would he kiss the wall?
Would he wear the tiny hat?
And he said unapologetically, no.
Almost immediately after making that comment on social media, James Fishback was banned.
From Twitter.
Now, at first, we started getting, you know, hearing the rumor and people reaching out to us and getting a little bit of intel behind the scenes.
And it's like, okay, maybe it's just a tech issue.
You know, it's only been two hours, but then it was five hours and then it was eight hours.
And now, you know, here we are the next day and he is still officially in Twitter jail.
He is booted off of X.
And it's worth mentioning, I'm not saying that everything is a correlation, but just giving you the data points, this is also on the heels of Elon Musk, who is majority owner of X. Coming out and officially giving his own personal endorsement to Byron Donald.
So you have Elon Musk saying, I'm going to support the Trump appointee, Byron Donald.
And then you have James Fishback saying, I'm not going to go to Israel.
I'm going to stay in Florida.
I'm going to be the governor of Florida.
I'm going to care about Floridians.
I'm not going to go to Israel.
I'm not going to wear the tiny hat.
I'm not going to kiss the wall.
And then immediately he's banned off of the most important social media platform right now in the realm of politics.
The last story that we're going to be covering today has to do with.
The Tiny Hat Controversy00:03:37
The SAVE Act.
And we're going to break that down.
But in summary, to make it short and concise, give you the overarching 30,000 foot view, the SAVE Act would require for people directing the future of the country, it would simply impose the same requirements that are necessary to buy a pack of cigarettes, that are necessary in order to buy a six pack of beer.
There are so many things in our culture today that you have to show an ID for.
Or you can't do it.
But right now, the standards for voting for the future of our country, determining whether or not America is destroyed or whether or not it survives, when it comes to that, we have less regulations for that, for voting, than we do for buying beer.
That's where we currently are.
The SAVE Act is simply saying, no, you have to have a valid ID and you have to prove that in order to vote.
And so we're going to be covering that.
Will the SAVE Act actually pass?
There's Hope, but at the same time, it does seem a bit dicey.
That's the show for you today.
Tune in now.
This episode is brought to you by our premier sponsor, Nicknack Crush Your Vice.
Warning this product contains nicotine.
Nicotine is an addictive chemical.
Society, real society, has always stood on three magnificent pillars caffeine to kick things off, alcohol to smooth the edges, and nicotine, which is the true gentleman's secret weapon.
See, in its glory day, nicotine fueled the greatest minds, the boldest leaders, and the quiet legends who simply got the job done.
But somewhere along the way, we lost the plot.
Effeminacy began to creep in.
Men traded their duty for comfort, and now big tobacco sells us nothing but compromise.
Nicknack raises the old banner again.
This is nicotine elevated, honest, and intentional, manufactured here in the United States by.
A family owned company that refuses to compromise.
See, NickNack is a fully dissolvable nicotine lozenge made with just six premium ingredients.
They're all clearly listed on the back so you know exactly what's in it.
There's no smoke, no pouch, nothing hidden.
Essential oils for real flavor in three to six milligrams.
So get NickNacks at NickNack.com.
Again, that's NickNack.com.
And use code Joel20!
Joel20!
Exclamation mark to get 20% off, or use the store locator to find knickknacks near you.
Raise the standard, reject the slop, join the pursuit of the good, the true, and the beautiful.
Knickknack, crush your vice.
Radical Christian nationalist pastor Joel Webbin.
Joel Webbin.
Joel Webber is an accident.
Let's get right into it.
We're going to play clips now from the Senate confirmation hearing for Jeremy Carr.
Radical Christian Nationalism Exposed00:06:19
Listen to right now, Senator Booker in his own words.
What do you mean when you say that you believe in the great replacement theory?
Senator, thank you for that question.
This refers to the intentional demographic replacement of Europeans in Europe.
It was invented by Renaud Camus, who was a French scholar.
You think there's an active effort to, quote unquote, replace Americans right now?
Senator, I think the Democratic Party, through its immigration policies, has certainly shown signs of that.
And I don't understand that.
So you are saying that if more Americans are black or Latino Americans, that that somehow weakens America because it puts whites in a minority?
Very hard to get someone to notice something when their entire job and their entire shtick is based on not noticing.
He acts incredulous at this idea.
White people replaced white people, a people celebrating them becoming a minority.
Let's listen to the words from Joe Biden.
This is the Joe Biden C SPAN clip just about 10 years ago or so celebrating whites becoming a minority.
Non stop.
Non stop.
Folks like me who were Caucasian of European descent.
For the first time in 2017, we'll be in an absolute minority in the United States of America.
Absolute minority.
Fewer than 50% of the people in America from then and on will be white European stock.
That's not a bad thing.
That's a source of our strength.
And so we have been, we haven't always gotten it right.
I don't want to.
Wow, wow.
That's not a bad thing.
I love how it's like, oh, it just happened.
We did nothing to actually, it's just a natural occurrence.
It's just the way of the world, as if there wasn't immigration policies and a lack thereof, actually, an enforcement of immigration policy that contributed to this problem.
Well, let's play this clip from his ex.
This is what was from when he was actually in office, and he's stating the small business types that they're going to prioritize.
Let's roll this clip.
Our focus will be on small businesses on Main Street that aren't wealthy and well connected.
That are facing real economic hardships through no fault of their own.
Our priority will be black, Latino, Asian, and Native American owned small businesses, women owned businesses, and finally having equal access to resources needed to reopen and rebuild.
But we're going to make a concerted effort to help small businesses in low income communities, in big cities, small towns, rural communities that have faced systemic barriers to relief.
Think of the mom and pop owner.
With a couple of employees who can't pick up the phone and call a banker, who doesn't have a lawyer, an accountant to help them through this complicated process, to know if they're even qualified, or who simply didn't know where this relief was available in the first place.
We went through this, Don, when we were trying to bring Detroit back off its knees.
As we saw in this morning's job report, restaurants, bars, and hospitality industry have been slammed by this virus.
We're going to direct relief to those businesses and others that have been so badly hit, hit the hardest.
We owe them that support to help them get through the other side of this crisis.
Yeah, let me just say a couple words here.
So, number one, nobody was slammed by the virus.
They were slammed by the government shutting down all these businesses as well as churches, locking people in their homes, forcing the vaccine, or you get fired and lose your job, forcing masks, social distancing.
It was people were slammed.
Businesses were crushed, not by the virus, but by the idiotic, stupid policies of the government in response to the virus.
But notice what Joe Biden is admitting there.
He's saying the virus didn't actually crush anybody, we crushed them.
And what we did was, we actually did with equality, we crushed everyone, but we're going to uncrush everyone except for white male owned businesses.
So we use the virus as an excuse to come in and artificially manipulate and decrease and crush financially, economically, every single business in America, every small business.
The businesses that thrived, that actually grew, were businesses like Amazon.
Because they could continue to operate throughout the virus.
They're able to ship all these things and abide by all these codes.
But the small family owned businesses in America that did not have the resources and the deep pockets and the procedures and all these things to be able to abide by the government's regulations during this time with all the branch COVID restrictions, all those businesses were crushed.
And they were crushed in many ways equally.
If it was white owned, if it was woman owned, or male owned, or minority owned, but then What was selective, right?
So, equally crushed, not by the virus, but by the governmental policies in lieu of the virus.
But then, what was not equal is the relief.
The relief came and targeted every single business you can possibly imagine, unless it was owned by a white male.
That's what he's saying.
So, this is, it goes back to what you were mentioning earlier, Antonio.
This is, none of this is simply random or just the way of the world.
It's not just, oh, well, America, you know, is becoming less white, you know, and that's just the way things go.
That's not the way that things go.
All of this was designed.
It's been designed through mass immigration and bringing people here.
It's been designed economically with these businesses will get to thrive.
These ones will be artificially suppressed.
Welfare and Tax Farm Claims00:08:03
At every way, we have a country that is replacing economically, numerically, at every level, religiously, its native population, has been doing so for decades.
And the sheer gall and audacity of someone.
Asking Jeremy Carl, you really think?
You know, like, so you believe in the theory of the great replacement?
You think that right now, to ask that question on the heels of the Biden administration for four years, we're a flood of illegals and a flood of legals.
And notice how in that particular clip, it was emphasized, you know, black and Latino Americans.
And he even repeats and says, Americans, mind you.
Latino.
Oh, Latino.
Like, what do you mean?
So he's basically saying is, We brought them all here, but we call them Americans now.
We gave them a piece of paper, and so you're just being prejudiced against them because nationally there's no difference between them and you.
You're both American, and so you're just hating them because of their race.
Do you see how unfair, how manipulative, and deceitful, duplicitous this is?
You bring a bunch of people who have nothing to do with your heritage, nothing to do with your history, nothing to do with your God, your religion, your people, your economy, all of your traditions, all of your rituals, all.
Of these things that you hold dear.
They have nothing to do with any of it.
They come in immediately, get your tax dollars.
They get the funding that you're paying to your government.
They're getting a free handout.
They're not coming for opportunity.
They're not coming for a job.
They're not coming for hard work.
They're coming for free money.
Money, please.
They come, they show up, but immediately they're called Americans.
And so now it's like, well, you hate your fellow Americans.
No, what I despise is an artificially manufactured foreign invasion to replace my children.
That's what I despise.
And the fact that you just called them American and you think that that means they're the same as me and my kids and my forefathers and that all that takes place in 15 minutes simply by sliding a piece of paper across a table is so dishonest.
But they do this so that they're essentially in their minds, they're able to rob you from saying, No, these people are foreigners.
Now they're able to say, No, no, they're domestic, just like you.
Nationally, they're just like you.
So the only thing left then is.
Their race.
So you just don't like brown people, or you just don't like black people, or you just don't like.
No, what I don't like is being replaced by non Americans.
They're not American.
It doesn't matter how many times you call them American, they're not American.
They have been here for 15 minutes.
They share nothing of our heritage.
But to see Jeremy Carl questioned and just the audacity of like, you actually believe this crazy conspiracy theory of.
Of the great replacement, you know, it's never been proven.
And meanwhile, you can just, like we did, you can just go back to the prior president of the United States, Joe Biden, saying, Oh, this isn't a theory at all.
This is not only happening, it's already ingrained, it's mission accomplished, and it's great.
You guys have got to read on Substack the new Christian right, our new article on all of the ways that individuals that come from other countries here send money back.
I'm reading some of the stats from this article.
Guatemalans remit.
50% of their income back to Guatemala.
So, why is it we say, oh, you're not American?
They take all of their money and they send it back to where they're from.
That's right.
20% of Guatemala's GDP is all the Guatemalans that we've shipped here and them sending back 50% of their income to their family members still in Guatemala.
So, think about that.
When you think of the welfare state, right, I used to think this.
And it's funny.
I look back and all the black pilling that I had in the past was actually just.
Unbridled optimism.
Little did I know, I was far too optimistic when I thought, you know, that everything was going to hell in a handbasket.
Turns out I didn't know the half of it.
It's so much worse, guys.
So much worse.
So I thought we have a welfare state that just gives, you know, tons of free handouts and money to Americans.
Nope, that's not even close to the truth.
We are supporting entire nations, entire countries are propped up by our taxes.
You are a tax farm, not just for the poor.
In your country, you are a tax farm for pretty much the Western Hemisphere, for half of the world.
All these countries, your taxes are making up 20%, 30%, upwards of 40%, even close to 50% of that entire nation's GDP.
We are floating.
Half the world is being carried on the back of America.
And then when you get down into the nitty gritty, it's not America on the whole, it's approximately 50%.
Only half.
Of America.
Which half?
It's the heritage Americans.
It's the Americans who actually have been here, who have ties here, roots, history, heritage, religion, the Christians in America, evangelicals in America.
That small portion of our country, which is 50% and shrinking by the day, less than half, that portion of our country is not just supporting the other half here in America, but is supporting the other half of the planet.
Half of the planet.
That's where I'm like, okay, you know what?
I'd like Earth.
I'd like to stay on Earth.
I, you know, but good night.
Like, yeah, maybe, maybe we need to go live on the moon.
Like, I don't know if there's any other way than to take heritage Americans, put them in ships, leave everyone behind, and go live on the moon so that you can have some peace.
It's like the cons are you always have to wear a spacesuit.
There's no oxygen.
You can't breathe.
If you go out of your house and you're not properly suited up, you die.
All right.
Those are some pretty big cons.
But sadly, the cons of staying here is.
Someone sticks an IV into your veins and sucks your blood until you die.
Right?
So it's like over here, I live on the moon.
There's no plants, there's no air, there's no nothing.
Over here, I live in hell with vampires.
The problem with that, Joel, is the moon would quickly become the best place to live and everyone would.
No, it absolutely would.
But at least in that scenario, I'm thinking, and maybe not, but I'm thinking, like, hopefully we could have like a good vantage point.
So, like, every time.
You know, you see a space shuttle coming and that space shuttle's waving like a Mexican flag, you can just shoot it.
You know what I mean?
Just blow it to smithereens.
No.
The U.S. hemorrhages $200 billion in remittances annually.
And a lot of these increases, this is not 20 years, it's been like this.
Five, six years.
But think about $200 billion going out.
It leaves our country.
That's not money that's circulating within your local town, within your state, going back to people producing things.
It's just sent out.
We all saw Puerto Rico on the national stage with the Super Bowl.
Do you know over half of the population of Puerto Rico are on federal government paid food stamps, welfare?
We support so many places Haiti, Puerto Rico, Nicaragua, $200 billion leaving us.
I want to get to Stephen Colbert as well.
Joe Biden, President of the United States, it's kind of a powerful position.
But even listen to the non political elites and the way they talk about replacing white people.
Let's roll Stephen Colbert.
And speaking of comfort, I just want to speak for a moment to my fellow white people, if I may.
Rising Anti-Semitism Concerns00:14:51
What are you afraid of?
Violence?
Then you would get rid of guns.
Losing money to redistribution?
Then you would tax the rich who pay less than you do.
Reparations?
How much money have you lost just this year to the criminal mismanagement of the COVID crisis?
Loss of control?
We white people have no problem losing control when the wedding DJ plays Bruno Mars.
Uptown Funk gonna get you.
Don't believe me?
Just watch.
This moment won't end without demonstrable, quantifiable change.
New laws, new consequences for those who abuse their power.
Maybe that's why our government is afraid.
They know that representative government is powerless without the consent of the people.
Once it loses that consent, it's no longer representative.
It is, to borrow the words of a sad little man pretending to be his own lawyer, not real.
And white Americans will soon be a minority.
And that's great.
Our only spice is potato.
I'm sorry to ruin your guys' Friday.
I should have given you the warning.
I'll take that responsibility on myself.
The traitor is far worse than the invader.
You have to deal with your own first.
We have this problem.
This doesn't just happen naturally.
This isn't something that just takes place.
It's not as though all these other countries just loaded up ships and actually, through force, conquered America.
This is traitors from within that allow this to take place.
And yes, I'm aware that many of those traitors happen to be of Jewish origin.
But Stephen Colbert, as far as I know, he's Catholic.
Born and raised Catholic.
Born and raised white as the driven snow.
Joe Biden.
Catholic, not Jewish.
Chuck Schumer.
Bernie Sanders.
There are some.
There are some to be sure, but you just have to acknowledge that you're talking about people who are heritage Americans, in many cases, are Catholic, religiously speaking.
They are European, racially speaking.
And that's how it took place.
Nobody gets in unless your own people open the doors.
And you listen to that clip from Colbert, and it's so clear.
It's absolute animus and vitriol, true sinister hatred of his own people.
George Washington's talked about the traitor is the one that you absolutely cannot tolerate.
There will always be foreign enemies, there will always be those who would seek to conquer, seek to invade.
But what a nation cannot tolerate is traitors among their midst.
The traitor has to be.
Destroyed.
They have to be extracted, dismantled, punished, penalized.
Otherwise, we will never have any semblance of normality.
We will never have a healthy, thriving country ever again unless we can uproot this traitorous, contagious disease that's rotting our nation's bones.
I want to get to Fishback, but let's play one more clip.
This is the Senator Rosen clip, and this is her beginning to grill him on Jeremy Carl, the things he said about Jews as well as Israel.
I want to quote some of them.
The Jews love to see themselves as oppressed.
Another one Jews have often loved to play the victim, rather, accept that they are participants in history.
Here's another one Hitler is always the convenient kind of bad example.
Hitler is always a convenient kind of bad example.
Anyone who had family members who served in World War II, I would have them, I wish they were here to argue with you on that one.
I'm very critical, another thing you said, of overall political stance and sociology of the Jewish community, particularly in this century.
It's been very destructive overall.
Another quote You guys, referring to the Jews, are spearheading a lot of bad causes.
Okay.
Another quote We need to unashamedly criticize and critique them, referring to the Jews when they're enemies, without being worried about being called anti Semites.
And finally, in discussing the Holocaust, where six million Jews, almost half the population, Jewish population alive at the time, were slaughtered.
An event that continues to be denied to this day, you say.
The Holocaust kind of dominates just so much of modern Jewish thinking, even today.
Everyone has traumas in their past.
How much are we going to kind of re litigate them?
Say that to the memories of the folks who fought in World War II, fought and died.
So, speaking to my colleagues, a vote in favor of Mr. Carl is a full throated endorsement of any and all of these statements.
I know everyone.
Cares about the rise of anti Semitism here and around the United States and around the world.
And if you have empathy for the Jewish community, communities experiencing hate, simply tired of advancing nominees who I doubt will be respected on the world stage, you must vote against Mr. Carl's nomination.
Every single thing that she said is true.
He said this thing.
You can't vote for him.
He said this thing and this other thing and this other thing.
Every single one of those things are true.
She didn't even try to disprove them.
So she didn't say, You said this, but.
They will call you all kinds of names, but they cannot call you a liar, right?
One of the quotes from Jeremy Carl that she reads is that Jeremy Carl said that Jews, on the whole, speaking in generalities, not each and every single one, but Jews in America on the whole have spearheaded and endorsed many bad policies, or they're always pushing for a lot of bad issues.
That's true.
I mean, you can look at the voting records of ethnic Jews here in America, and it skews, depending on the issue, anywhere from 70 to 90% Democrat every single time.
Abortion, there are literally Jews who are chanting in the streets, saying, You can't be against abortion because that's a religious issue.
If you're against abortion, then you are anti Semitic.
You're against Jews because abortion is a Jewish sacrament.
And I'm not going to sit here and say that's deceitful.
They're just trying.
No, I'm going to say when your enemy is speaking, listen.
When they sit myself down and I listen, when a Jewish man or woman is speaking, I will absolutely sit down and listen.
When she says and when he says abortion is a Jewish sacrament, the problem is not that they're being deceitful.
The problem is they're telling the truth.
Abortion is a Jewish sacrament.
I believe that.
I absolutely believe that.
That's what the Talmud is all about.
The Talmud is about finding through endless.
Litigation.
It is loophole after loophole after loophole to be able to indulge whatever vice you want while somehow technically following God's rules.
Right?
Judaism, Talmudic Judaism, is a religion of lawyers.
That's what it is.
It's a religion of lawyers.
How can we claim to be obedient to God with our fingers crossed behind our back?
That is the religion.
So, when a Jew says abortion or sodomy, gay rights or this or that or mass immigration, all these things, these are not only important to Jews, but they're important from a religious basis.
These are religious sacraments, religious virtues to Jewish people.
The counter from us should not be look, they're lying and manipulating their religion in order to get their political.
No, the response should be they're telling the truth.
These things that are Sins and heinous in the sight of God, the murder of the unborn, sodomy, mass immigration, replacing a native population of a people who are the descendants of those who literally bled and sweat and died in order to build a country.
These things actually are religious.
And therefore, the answer is simply to say it's a bad religion.
And maybe we shouldn't have that religion tolerated in these United States.
So, everything that that woman says in that video, what should be the big takeaway from every Christian who's watching it, should be she did not say Jeremy Carl can't be appointed because he's duplicitous, because he's deceitful, because he's lying, because he's shrewd.
No, he can't be appointed because he said these things and it's just mean to say these things.
Well, wait a second.
Are these things true?
You bet they're true.
If they're true, then they should be said.
Adolf Hitler is constantly pointed to as the excuse for impunity with a whole host of vices from Jewish people for the last 80 years.
That's a true statement, right?
Jeremy Carl did not say Adolf Hitler is a wonderful person and he did everything right.
Notice that's not the quote.
No.
She can't say that because that would be an abject lie.
All she's saying in quoting Jeremy Carl is Jeremy Carl is not endorsing Hitler, saying anything positive about Hitler.
He's simply noting or noticing that.
Hitler has been used for 80 years as an excuse in order to garner a perpetual victim status of the Jews so that anytime they receive criticism for their wrongdoing, somehow they're absolved of any guilt.
That's a true statement.
Senator Rosen doesn't understand that criticizing, shutting down any type of speech like this, where you're even quoting Jews in their own words, how did anti Semitism grow?
Oh, because you From the highest levels of society, politically, culturally, economically, shut down and stifled.
We played just a week ago a clip, 14 minutes again and again, of the ADL, the president of Benjamin Netanyahu, prime minister of Israel, tons and tons, Shabbos Kestenbaum.
We are going to shut down these people's ability to have jobs, their ability to get married, their ability to be accepted in polite society.
Well, why?
And I can't believe it.
Why is anti Semitism on the rise?
Because you did it by making criticism of these people practically, for all intents and purposes, illegal.
Right.
Florida?
You did it in two ways, real quick.
It's by doing things that are bad and worthy of criticism, right?
So, one source of anti Semitism is Jewish behavior.
It's not all Jews, but when it happens, it is Jews.
So, one is doing bad things worthy of criticism.
That's the left hand.
And then on the right, suppressing or penalizing or oppressing anyone who does criticize.
So, it's doing things worthy of criticism.
And then suppressing anyone's ability to criticize.
Those two things, that accounts 100%, that accounts for any rise of anti Semitism that there may be.
And I would say that there is a rise, I don't want to forfeit frame and even call it anti Semitism, but there is a rise of critical analysis, criticizing Jewish people and their behavior, historic behavior, but mostly their recent behavior.
But when you're like, well, what accounts for this?
What's going on?
Oh, these sinister people that are trying.
No, it's really simple.
You committed genocide in Gaza and glassed an entire geographic region, and we can see the footage.
And then you did that on the one hand.
And then when people started noticing and criticizing that, you started calling it anti Semitism, immediately said, but Hitler, Hitler, and then started trying to pass anti Semitism laws in America that cherishes free speech.
That's the rise of anti Semitism.
How did it happen?
What's going on?
We need to do re education of World War II history.
Like, people have forgotten.
No, no, no.
It's actually really simple.
You killed millions of people, including women and children.
Then people criticized you for it, and you threatened to pass anti free speech laws in America.
That's the rise of anti Semitism.
Really simple.
What happened in the last two or three years?
That's what happened.
So, you don't want this increase of anti Semitism?
It's really easy.
One, stop trying to suppress free speech.
Two, stop being demons.
Stop killing babies.
And stop telling people they can't talk about it when you do kill babies.
Really easy solution.
Don't be dicks and don't tell people they can't say that if you still act that way.
Problem solved.
Everyone, give it enough time.
Everyone would love the Jews.
It's a really easy solution.
Stop being jerks and then stop punching everyone in the mouth if they have the courage to say that you're a jerk when you're clearly behaving that way.
That's all you have to do.
Problem solved.
Will that happen?
Probably not.
Well, I mean, certainly nobody's getting kicked off of social media just hours after saying they're not going to go to Israel to kiss the wall, are they?
Florida Governor candidate James Fishback, we're coming up on about the 20 hour mark that he's been unable to log in to his ex account.
He has about 220,000 followers and he's running one of the most exciting campaigns in politics that we've seen in a number of years.
Fishback, in many ways, you could compare him to Zoran Momdani, who won, ran for, and ran mayorship of New York City.
And one of the ways Momdani did it, you're going to be an idiot if you don't.
Look and see what he did and why he appealed to people.
He went to the bodega owner and he said, Why is it that this wrap costs this much?
They said, Well, I have to pay this tax, I have to get this permit.
He says, Great, as mayor, I'm going to get rid of all of that.
He went to the working class, he crossed over the lines, and he said, I'm going to appeal to the working person.
Now, Zoran was never censored, Zoran was never canceled.
When he couldn't even bench 135, that was the moment he should have been.
Fishback Campaign Fundraising00:13:11
We're talking about real reasons.
You should be kicked off of social media.
You try to bench 135, you can't even do it.
That's an actual good reason.
He never faced censorship, is the point.
Now, here we have a right wing populist.
He is very much so right wing.
We've had him on the show.
It was a great interview.
Very much so right wing on issues of culture, issues of church, issues of religion.
However, in many ways, he's transcending some of the typical barriers, some of the typical boundaries that you see in politics.
Reaching across and saying, hey, I'm actually somewhat anti corporate.
I don't think that AI data centers should be plopped right in the middle of your community to take electricity, to take water with no guarantee to the citizens that are there.
I don't think that.
These huge corporations should be allowed to buy single family homes and rent them out in perpetuity.
I don't think immigrants should come in from China, take positions of Florida natives in these universities.
And so he's kind of transcending these barriers and running a very exciting campaign, surging in the polls.
He was 2% beginning of January, went on a generational run, now polling around 23% to the establishment favorite, Byron Donalds, right about 37%.
So he is serious.
He has a great chance at winning, and the establishment is quivering in its boots.
And one of the issues.
That he has made a center point as he said, I don't know why Florida, a state in the United States, is buying bonds as investments in Israel.
I'm going to divest those bonds.
I'm going to bring those investments back here.
Another thing he said is, I'm not going to go to Israel and kiss that stupid wall.
And is it a coincidence?
Hours, just a couple days after he says that?
Right after that.
He can't log into his account.
Now, the account is still up.
It's strange.
And there are a couple other events that go with it.
Someone tried to set his home on fire over the weekend.
Yes.
So he held a rally at his home.
Here's where I'm at.
Came out on the porch with an AR 15, held it up, and said, If you threaten me or any of my staff, this is what's going to happen to you.
First of all, based.
That could be another reason why.
And as you alluded to, he also, Elon Musk, endorsed back in November his current opponent, again, Byron Donalds.
Are we seeing censorship as someone tries to make a grassroots movement?
Hey, here's issues that both sides care about.
I'm going to be the candidate that runs for the average Floridian.
Literally kicked off of social media?
Nope, that threatens the establishment.
That threatens the status quo.
You are not allowed to do that.
Without any other evidence to the contrary, I think so.
This is not just an hour.
This is not just.
X is down.
I'm trying to get back into my account.
Hey, here's a candidate with a quarter of a million followers that's surging in the polls.
Shut it down.
Right.
At the time that we're broadcasting, it's been almost 24 hours now.
And that may not seem like a really big deal, but that is a huge deal when you're talking about somebody who is running for governor of the third largest, numerically largest state in the union.
This is a tight race.
He's already massively disadvantaged, right?
Elon Musk has given his endorsement to Byron Donalds.
From the very start, Byron has 45 million.
Exactly.
So, when you think of the war chest, so you have Elon Musk's endorsement.
You also have the MAGA endorsement, Trump's endorsement.
That's what he had from the very start.
Elon came a little bit later and is a more recent development.
But you have the richest man in the world and the current sitting president endorsing Byron Donalds.
And he also has a war chest of $45 million.
And part of that, I think, is also from Miriam Edelson.
I believe that she has recently given to his campaign.
Very curious.
It's not curious at all.
It makes perfect sense.
The Adelsons are a Jewish family that are seeking to set up a casino in Irvine, right in between Dallas and Fort Worth in Texas, which would absolutely be detrimental to the state of Texas.
They also gave $100 million to Donald Trump with his campaign for this second term back in 2024.
And Marion Adelson, she said publicly, said outright, that because of James Fishback and some of his positions, Especially regarding Israel and wanting to hate Israel, no, wanting to prioritize Floridians, saying, No, I'm not gonna.
If I'm the governor of Florida, I'm gonna spend my time in Florida, I'm gonna be concerned about these people and these issues.
I'm not gonna be hopping on a plane going to Israel on sponsored trips, and I'm also not going to use Florida capital money and taxes in order to buy worthless bonds for Israel.
That no, I'm not gonna do that, I'm gonna prioritize.
My people.
And as soon as he started saying those types of things, and Mariam Adelson, she actually publicly posted that she was going to go and begin funding and contributing, donating to Byron Donald.
So you have the Trump endorsement, MAGA, which we all know, sadly, I'm not excited about this, but at this point is much more MIGA, you know, make Israel great again than it is MAGA.
So the Trump endorsement, then a recent development is the Elon Musk endorsement, and he is the majority shareholder of X and James Fishback conveniently just kicked off of X, and then Miriam Adelson, massive, massive wealthy individual, the Adelson family, billionaires, saying, We're going to give even more to Byron Donald.
So Donald's is already at like 37%.
Fishback is 23.
But here's the thing he started at two.
Nobody thought it was serious.
Nobody thought there was a chance, a snowflake's chance in hell, that James Fishback could actually contend in this race.
But he's climbed the charts from 2% to approximately 23%, depending which poll that you're looking at.
Byron Donalds is at 37%.
He's got 45 million Donalds in his war chest.
And I believe that Fishback, I'm sure some people have come in now and are starting to donate and help the campaign.
But even as recent as just a few weeks ago, the update of his funding was $900.
$900,000?
I think that was through December.
About $200,000 now.
Now he's got some support, but still, imagine that $900 to $45 million.
Or let's go with what he has now $200,000 to $45 million.
Was David and Goliath a bigger mismatch or not?
Right.
But that's the thing God can do those things.
God actually delights in taking the underdog and overthrowing the giant tyrant.
And just for you guys who maybe aren't, you're not up to speed on Florida politics, and that's totally fine.
We all have lives to live and we can't be up to speed on everything.
But the reason why Byron Donalds is not a good choice is because he's not Florida first.
He's not America first.
He is a bought and paid for, Israel first candidate.
He is a major Zionist.
He was stolen H 1B visas just a couple years ago.
We need more of them.
Exactly.
So, major Zionists, but then also on the ground, he wants all the data centers, all the tech right billionaires to be able to set up their kingdom in Florida and then flood it with cheap labor and H 1B visas.
He wants, James Fishback wants to make Florida great again.
Byron Donalds wants to make Florida Indian again.
And there is a massive difference between the two.
And so.
It's like, wait, but Florida's never been majority Indian.
No, no, no, no.
Go all the way back.
Indians, the white man, and it's like, we got to run it back.
We get to fight, our ancestors fought Indians.
We also get to fight Indians.
Like, born too late to fight Indians, born just in time to fight Indians.
Yeah.
It's also not lost on me.
You talk about censorship in comparison of like Zorhan Mamdani West, which you made, and to fish back.
And to your point, running the same campaign.
And if you remember during the mayoral debate, the question is asked of what will be your first international campaign?
Trip and Zorhan Mamdani says, I'm here for New York.
I'm not going to go to Israel.
There was no censorship there.
You're right.
That's a good point.
And we converse that to James Fishback, and we can see the censorship that I think it's reasonable to suggest that's connected to that comment, the very same comment.
Absolutely.
But here's the deal, though Fishback, he's running a campaign, and it really is just state of the art in the sense of I'd actually, the campaign I'm running, I don't need a lot of money.
I'm running a social media campaign, a TikTok campaign, an Instagram campaign.
And he's really, Carving himself out just with his, the way that he's connecting with voters, the way that he's doing it through social media and understanding memeing and understanding short form content and all of these things.
It's clearly the weapon that equalizes.
You can have $45 million and run traditional 60 second ad campaigns on TV or whatever the case is, but it really can't compare, especially if you look at how Fishpack's polling with younger generations.
It's incredible.
It's like 50% of Gen Z or age 18 to 25 supporters.
He's capturing the youth.
Exactly.
And so, Really, what we're seeing is okay, 900,000 to 45 million, but a massive social media, what would you say, IQ, intelligence, application, execution presence.
And the censorship is what really makes it an unequal race, as far as I'm concerned.
Because despite the establishment backing by Ron Donald, I think Fishback would still win and has a great chance of winning because of what he's doing on social media.
So if they take that away from him, I mean, it's truly just.
Knocking him out.
It's knocking him out of the race.
Well said.
Very well said.
Real quick, quick interjection.
I'll keep it brief.
But some of you guys have reached out to us and we really appreciate this.
And you've said, what's one of the best ways to support you guys?
There's a lot of, you know, Zionist, mega people out there doing podcasts.
You guys seem to be, you have integrity.
You seem to be authentic.
You're saying something that's true.
One of the easiest ways to support us is simply by supporting, patronizing our sponsors.
And it doesn't require any extra money from you.
If you're somebody who doesn't use the products from the companies that sponsor our show, then it may not make sense.
But I know I have on.
Very good authority.
It's reliable intel that a great percentage of our listeners are nicotine appreciators.
And I am personally, and so is Antonio, and so is Wes.
And so, one of the sponsors that we're really excited about is Nicknack.
Nicknack is exciting to me because they're American mate.
Even when you look at the logo, it's like a picture of a foot that's crushing the head of a serpent.
These guys are based, these guys are Christian.
They're America first and they're willing to sponsor us.
And let me just be honest, there's a lot of guys who aren't.
A lot of people are not willing to sponsor us because of the kind of things that we say, like the things that we're saying right now.
So if you're somebody who's already using nicotine, right, instead of sending a donation to us or paying money directly to NXR to keep us in the fight, one of the easiest things you can do is buy the products that you're already using on a subscription on a monthly basis, but just switch over to one of our sponsors instead of a different company.
That's not willing to sponsor us because they don't actually support the message that we're saying, the message that you're listening to because you agree with us.
So, Nick Nack, if you want to support NXR Studios, all you have to do is get your nicotine from Nick Nack instead of somebody else.
And you can do so.
You got to make sure, though, that Nick Nack knows that we sent you there so that Nick Nack then says, oh, you know what?
NXR is worth continuing sponsoring.
So, you can actually, instead of giving us money and losing money, you can actually save money.
Because you will get a pretty sizable discount.
Right now, NickNack is offering to all of our listeners 20%, not just 10, but 20% off.
All you have to do is go to their website, NickNack, not NickNacks.
It's confusing.
NickNack, don't pluralize it, NickNack.com.
Or you can use the link in our show notes in the description of this video down below, but NickNack.com.
And then you got to use the promo code so that they know that we sent you and also so that you can save literally 20%.
The promo code is Joel.
I actually forgot it.
It's Joel20!
And this has been tripping people up.
We've got guys matching us saying the promo code doesn't work.
The exclamation point is part of the promo code.
So there's no spaces.
It's all caps, J O E L 20 for 20% off!
You do that, you get your nicotine that you're going to buy anyways, except you get it from an America First Christian, distinctly Christian company.
So you're supporting them.
You get savings, so you spend less on your nicotine than you were already going to spend.
And then you cue in Nick Nack, where Nick Nack now thinks, I should continue giving money to NXR.
So you're literally supporting us, supporting as an American Christ is King media company.
You're supporting the America First Christ is King nicotine company, and you're saving money on your nicotine.
Voter ID Restrictions Debate00:15:01
It's the easiest thing known to man.
You should do it.
Where James Fishback fits into the larger point, there's been a number of political movements on the right here in America in the last 25 years or so.
You had the Tea Party movement, you had the alt right.
But what you have to do, For a movement to be sustained, for it to matter, is you have to win.
And to be honest, you have to win early.
I don't know how many of you have seen the meme where there's a ruler with a whip and he's keeping the crowd bowing down.
He cracks that whip.
The first one stands up.
And that's the point it all hinges on.
Can that first one who stands up and says, hey, the emperor has no clothes, can he remain standing?
Can he stand up with courage?
Because once he stands up, two or three more stand up.
And then once two or three more stand up, it's impossible to crush it.
And in many ways, we're in that moment.
America first as a political ideology, a political doctrine, still is being developed, still is being understood.
We don't have a governor.
We don't have a senator that has explicitly billed themselves as, I'm for the American people.
But it's possible.
The election is in August.
It's possible that within months, You could have someone.
He's willing to appear on our show.
He's willing to reach out to young white men that have been disenfranchised.
I mean, he's explicitly pro white.
Think about this a GOP governor, GOP senator from Utah, is killing the nomination of the man who wrote The Unprotected Class about anti white racism.
That is the GOP right now.
We will kill the nomination of a man who speaks out for white people.
Talking about Jeremy Carl.
Jeremy Carl's book, The Unprotected Class.
Right there.
James Fishback, if he gets into office, would be the first of just about anyone I know in a major political seat.
That says, Hey, I'm explicitly pro white.
White people are being replaced.
White people are being discriminated against.
White people, and especially white men, are being disadvantaged.
And if one man and one governor stands up and says that, there will be another in 2028 and five in 2030.
And you lose your control over an entire populace when that one man succeeds.
And James Fishback is working his ass off, too.
He is out there meeting people.
He's not just on social media, he is on the ground.
And if this model succeeds, it literally spells death to billions of dollars.
That go to India or go to Israel if this movement succeeds.
It spells the end of all this immigration that comes in through our universities that get student visas because he says, no, these slots are for Florida students.
He represents the death blow to the establishment.
And I'd like to go even further the death blow to corporate interests in politics.
I mean, how much do we talk about politics essentially just being who can raise the most money, what corporate interests are at work, what foreign international interests are at play, giving money to campaigns so that they can get ad placements everywhere?
So, they can just become a ubiquitous household name.
And really, what his campaign, in my view, would represent is a death knell to that concept.
It's no longer a $100 million burden to run for office and make a compelling case to citizens, in particular young citizens, to say, I have your interests in mind at heart.
My policies are targeted toward you, bringing prosperity back to you, bringing jobs, wage growth, all of these things back to you.
And you don't have to give me money.
All you have to do is give me attention.
He ripped up a $100,000 check because he wouldn't support Israel.
Someone said, Look, I'm going to give you money, $100,000, to a campaign that is self funded.
He said, Nope, I don't want that.
I'm staying pure.
And so that's why censorship, I don't think X is going to be the only example.
Say he gets his account back tomorrow, that will not be the first attempt to say, This guy cannot be allowed to run.
He cannot be allowed to meet voters.
He cannot be allowed to reach people because if he does, his message will resonate.
Right.
And then there'll be thousands more.
What you said is insightful, Wes, that just.
If he wins, he would be the first.
And the reality is, when it comes to change, all it takes is one.
The moment that you get one, and this works in both directions, right?
But the moment that you get one guy who stands up for something that's true and good and beautiful, and that message actually wins, then it signals to everyone else that this is a winning message, that this is a viable platform, and there will be countless others.
And if he doesn't win, that's why it's kind of this full court press against him right now from all those who are both Democrats on the one hand, but also those who are conservatives, but who are not actually America first.
All of them are linking arms and joining forces against Fishback because they know that if he wins, it's not just one governor in Florida.
It's not just one race.
It's not just one man.
That will set the tone and signal to everyone else an entire new generation of America first politicians, and their power will crumble.
So it is imperative that he wins.
He may not, but it is imperative that everyone do everything they can to.
Try to ensure, if at all possible, that he wins.
Like that, that might be, you know, some of you, your question like, aren't you guys based in Texas?
Yes.
Yes, we're based in Texas.
Yeah, we're in Texas.
But we know that Texas will have more of a hope for a future if Fishback wins in Florida.
We know that it matters.
Yeah.
And like you said, it's about creating a playbook, if you will, that can be run again and again in states across the United States.
Candidates looking at Fishback and seeing his strategy and saying, hey, this can work, and building grassroots campaigns that are predicated on, I think, especially reaching young voters.
It's going to be so important, especially as demographic shifts continue to happen over the next five to 10 years.
One other thing that I think is connected, we'll zoom out here, we'll change topics, if you will, to the SAVE Act.
So on Wednesday, the House passed, I think the votes were 218, largely along.
You know, party lines, 218 votes from the Republicans against 213 votes from Democrats to pass what's called the SAVE Act.
And so the SAVE Act is essentially, I think it stands for Safeguarding American Voter Eligibility Act.
It essentially amends the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 by creating this category, if you will, of what's called proof of citizenship.
So anyone who's voted, they all know that when you go to vote, you have to present, and in most states, actually, this isn't true in all states, but you have to present a proof of identity.
And so this would essentially just be.
When I register, I have to give my photo ID, my real ID, my driver's license to demonstrate that I am who is registering to vote.
The SAVE Act would essentially introduce another obligation, if you will, for the voter to have to also present a proof of citizenship.
And so this would look like something like a birth certificate or a passport.
And so, Republicans, I mean, coming out of the 2020 election, particularly Republicans have been really focused on voter integrity.
It's no surprise, 10 million at minimum illegal immigrants, largely, likely, probably something closer to north of.
20 million illegal immigrants have come to the United States.
And everyone should be concerned about when people go to the polls is this a person who should be voting?
Are they a U.S. citizen?
Are they who they say they are?
And this act is essentially just targeted to be able to provide protections from national level down to the state level to say we need to make sure that illegal immigrants aren't voting in a look.
And it's worth mentioning this is vastly popular among all Americans.
Yeah, 73%, according to Pew Research, requiring all voters to show government issued photo identification.
Yeah, purely.
83%.
83% of U.S. adults.
I think it's also like 76% of black adults.
It's 73% of Democrats support this kind of legislation.
And yet we see.
Well, thankfully, our representatives represent us and our interests, right?
Oh, hang on.
So, and we're getting all of the same arguments that we've heard.
We've had this conversation around voter eligibility.
It's been happening for at least the last five years, but even before then through the 90s and through the 2000s.
And the Democratic argument's always the same thing.
Oh, this is a poll tax.
You're putting an unnecessary burden on the voter.
To be able to vote.
And they'll cite things like 50% of US citizens don't have a passport, 11% of people don't have access to a birth certificate.
And you're putting all of these unnecessary burdens are just going to disproportionately hurt poor people who we know as Democrats vote for us.
And so let me read between the lines here.
Oh, black people are too dumb to get IDs.
That's what, no, that is literally like that's the message.
You can't vote for this because we know they're too dumb to get IDs and vote for us.
And here's the reality if somebody is too dumb, whether they be red and yellow, black and white, they're all retarded in his sight, like regardless of the color, regardless of the race, if there's a white person who doesn't know how to get an ID, Then they shouldn't be able to vote.
They shouldn't be able to vote.
It's a self contained IQ test.
And I'm not of the position that only somebody who's a genius should be able to vote.
There are plenty of people who are really smart, but they're so smart that they're dumb.
They have terrible policies and want the world just to burn.
There are plenty of smart Marxists, plenty of smart communists.
But to say, OK, there is at least some kind of prerequisite that has to be met in order to simply validate whether or not you are, in fact, an American citizen.
It's perfectly reasonable.
And if anyone can't do it, it's like, well, this person, you know, is just not capable of doing it.
If they're not capable of doing it, then they shouldn't, they're not suitable.
They're not fit to have a say in the future of the country.
They're just not.
And they don't actually believe that.
It's just political fodder.
They don't think people are too stupid to be able to figure out how to get a birth certificate and send in a form.
And there's all of these third party sites that you can go into and order a birth certificate to your door within three to four weeks.
So they don't actually believe that.
Of course, it's just, It's just another way to bludgeon.
And this is, even if I zoom out, this is just what Democrats do.
This is what the left does.
And they're so disingenuous and they're gaslighters in the way of creating a problem.
And you see this time and time again.
Create a problem.
And then when the right is forced to solve the problem, complain about how they're solving it.
And so you just open the gates, let millions and millions of people into your country.
And the right comes and says, yeah, that actually sucks.
And now we do have to have additional burdens on voting so we can make sure that you're not.
Falsely or inappropriately influencing elections.
And they'll say things like, Why wouldn't you just do it on the back end?
So, this is an argument that's been had.
You have front end verification, you have back end verification.
And so, what this specific act does is it puts it on the front end.
In other words, it puts the burden on the voter to actually go and say, I am who I say I am.
The Democrats are actually coming in and saying, You should just do it on the back end.
Let the government, let the local state officials verify people through.
By marrying all of these government databases and figuring out whether or not people live at the addresses they say, they actually that it is a real birth certificate.
And so, again, the Democrats know that this is a losing issue.
You can look at the polls and see everyone largely supports this.
And everyone, for the most part, is willing to stomach for the sake of election integrity.
They're willing to stomach to say, yeah, it's going to be a little bit more painful for me to register to vote in my county if I've moved.
I'm going to have to go through an additional step.
If I'm married, for example, this is one that's come up.
When you present your proof of citizenship, which is going to be for most people their birth certificate, women who have been married and changed their last names will have to present, oh no, a third document, which is just your marriage certificate.
Oh no.
Oh, that's just so terrible.
And so they're trying to make this point of, oh, but that's going to cause so many women 20%, 25 million.
I saw a representative say 39 million women will not be able to vote when I was like, I didn't know the SAVE Act was this awesome.
Right.
40 million women are being disenfranchised.
I would prefer it to be single women.
With married women, like, I'm there for it.
I'm here for it.
Yeah.
Yeah.
So that's what it is.
The reality is that we just have to confront what we're facing as a country, as the demographic shift.
We're going to have to do things that are harder.
Trump did this interestingly.
You remember when he did this with the tariffs?
He says, Oh, yes, the tariffs actually will hurt you in the short term.
But Americans, you have to be able to stomach it.
It's going to take short term suffering to emerge out of this system, this globalist scheme.
And that was true.
And that was true.
And it's true here as well.
Yes, there are people, including myself, who are always already like, Yeah, it's going to take a little bit more time.
But here, but or for.
It's true with tariffs.
It's true with mass deportations.
It's true with voter restrictions.
At every level, we've created a problem.
And when I say we, I mean Democrats have created a problem.
And the right has to have the stomach to fix it.
Yeah.
And just not care about either one, the individual burden that it places on you as a voter, and two, the emotional arguments, the gaslighting emotive arguments that the left makes about.
Oh, just the disenfranchised people.
Like, we're sick of hearing these arguments.
We want our country back.
And I will take one day out of my week to go to an election office to say, look, I have my certificate and I'm willing to present it.
And I want everyone else to present it as well.
That's what it's going to come down to.
And now here's the thing if we just move on from what the act is itself and what it's trying to do, which is very common sense, you look at research polls, if you look at how Republicans feel about the topic.
But the next part is can this actually pass?
So it's passed in the House.
As people know, it now will go to the Senate and it has to pass in the Senate before President Trump can sign the bill and put it into law ahead of the 2026 midterms.
But here's the political reality you've got 49 co sponsors of Republicans who are supporting it in the Senate, and you need a threshold, as it turns out, due to the filibuster, of 60 votes just to be able to pass the bill.
And so, what that means, practically speaking, is you're going to have to have, I think it would be seven Democrats move on the issue, be willing to support the SAVE Act.
For it to pass and become law.
And that's going to take constituents in those districts speaking up and calling their senator and saying, hey, I'm a Democrat, you're a Democrat, but we need this bill.
And that's where it's going to go.
And there has been talk of not nuking the filibuster entirely.
Remember, Biden tried to do this, and there were two holdouts from West Virginia and Arizona.
They refused to nuke the filibuster.
There has been talk among the Republicans to not in the full nuke the filibuster, but for the purposes of this, there's at least been conversations with the Senate majority leader.
Would we be willing to relax the filibuster for this so we can get it passed?
Evangelical Political Implications00:12:41
And it's actually, we were arguing about it before the show.
What's different about this?
Because there's always talk the filibuster, the filibuster, the filibuster.
Well, here's the difference the House has passed it, and there are right now 49 GOP senators co sponsoring the bill.
We have a 53 47 majority, and JD Vance, who is the tie breaking vote.
So this is a real bill with a real possibility of passing.
And there's been signaled interest in, and Trump wants it done, would we relax the filibuster for this one as well?
And I think that would change elections so much for the future, even the midterms.
Republicans are facing, you look at all the odds, they're facing wipeout.
They're facing being wiped out in the midterms, Democrats getting control of the House, taking back several Senate seats.
What do you have to lose?
Well, we might lose in the elections.
That's going to happen anyway.
That's what we're facing.
And so this is something that has to be passed.
And Republicans, especially, they have to grow a spine and say, well, but the Democrats could do it to us when they're in power.
Yeah, they already tried to do it.
They're going to do it regardless.
You do it to fight for yourself, to advocate for your own side.
Yeah, well said.
Okay, some of you guys probably are very much aware of this because we have talked about it somewhat ad nauseum, but some of you are new to NXR Studios and may not be aware.
But we recently published a book at the beginning of this year.
The book is called The Hyphenated Heresy Judeo Christianity, talking about this idea of Judeo Christianity.
It's more than just a misnomer, it is actually a heresy.
It is a massive problem with huge religious implications, negative implications, but also.
Political negative implications.
And so we have a commercial that we want to show you in regards to this book.
It's been a hit.
We've already sold over 3,000 copies, and the book has been incredibly helpful to everyone who's bought it.
We've gotten tons of emails and messages, people reaching out to us, talking about how blessed they've been by the content in this book.
And we think that you should see this commercial and that you should consider getting this book as well.
So here is our book, The Hyphenated Heresy, Judeo Christianity.
If you had told Stephen, as stones were crushing his body, that he was dying for a shared Judeo Christian foundation, he would have called it blasphemy.
The first martyr died proclaiming Christ alone, not a hyphenated faith shared with those who killed the Lord Jesus and the prophets, and who drove out the apostles, and as the apostle Paul declared, opposed all mankind.
Learn why the church has always stood apart in the hyphenated heresy.
Judeo-Christianity.
Reclaim the faith of the martyrs and pick up your copy today at Amazon.com.
Okay, we are landing the plane now.
We've got a couple super chats that we want to honor.
This is from JNRD or JNRDoyle86.
He gave us a super chat on Rumble.
We appreciate that.
He said, Joel, you mentioned recently that the weakness to Protestantism is that there's no central authority with final say.
I agree.
Are there any efforts being made to remedy this?
Could we start one?
Well, that's the thing about being Protestant.
You can always start something.
Many Protestants have started that.
Yep, you could start anything you want.
As a Protestant.
But let's just be honest.
If we tried to start something, it would just be another subset of a subset of a subset of a subset within the larger banner of Protestantism.
And this is point and case in regards to the inherent weakness.
I am a Protestant because I believe that doctrinally, Protestantism is true.
There are plenty of Protestants that are absolutely terrible, atrocious.
The mainline Protestants, at least here in the West and European countries, and certainly here in America, They are almost universally pro abortion and pro sodomy.
And so the mainline Protestant churches, denominations in the West, I would say, are not even, they're not just bad churches, they're not even true churches.
They are false churches with false teachers.
They have women pastors who are not pastors.
So you have illegitimate, invalid clergy teaching heretical doctrines.
That's the mainline Protestant.
Then there's the subset of that.
So if you think Protestant banner, There's the mainline Protestants, they're gay and they kill babies in the womb.
Then there's the evangelicals, right?
That would be a lot of Baptists, some Methodists, some Presbyterians fall into the evangelical category.
And the evangelicals, politically speaking, you have to acknowledge this.
You know, we would fall into that banner.
We think there are plenty of problems.
I'm very critical of evangelicals.
That said, I am one.
And the evangelicals, politically speaking, they are the lone bulwark against the moral insanity of America.
You look at the voting patterns, evangelicals, White evangelicals, to be specific, right?
The black evangelicals, not so much in terms of voting patterns.
But in terms of voting, white evangelicals, they vote more conservative against abortion, against homosexuality, against mass immigration, all these things, more than white Catholics, more than white mainline Protestants, more than any other group, religious group that you could name.
And so white evangelicals have truly been the lone bulwark for.
Whether it's electing Trump or whether it's voting against abortion or whether it's voting against mass immigration or desiring mass deportations, all these kinds of things.
The Catholics, we love our Catholic friends.
We are grateful for them.
But Catholicism, I do believe, is one of the weaknesses with Catholicism is that it is inherently global.
It has a global headquarters.
Catholicism cannot, in its ecclesiastical polity, encompass nationalism.
In the way that Protestantism can.
You will always have a Pope, a vicar of Christ on earth, who is ultimately of one nationality in terms of his origin of birth, and therefore will favor one nation over others, and who will be geographically located in Rome, but yet speaking for the Catholic Church in Ethiopia and America and Canada and Uganda, and there are inherent weaknesses that are baked into.
That pie.
So, the strength of Protestantism is that it can be national in its polity, but in terms of having an ecclesiastical polity that really is a true hierarchy, an episcopal polity would be the technical word.
You would need within Protestantism certain denominations, one, to return to conservative biblical traditional views, and then two, to beat out all the others.
Predominantly, what I have in mind would be Episcopalian or Anglican.
I don't think it's a coincidence that certain Western countries, such as England, if they weren't Catholic and they were Protestant, but they still had a monarchy and a hierarchy within their political polity, they also happened to have, during their Protestant phase, a Protestant stream, particular denominational stream, that coincided with an episcopal polity, a hierarchy.
So they had a political hierarchy of monarchy.
And then they also happen to be on the Protestant side, Baptist, no Anglican.
And there's a reason for that.
There is a hierarchical ecclesiastical polity that Anglicanism holds, Episcopalianism holds, that Methodists do not, that Baptists do not.
Presbyterians would be a little bit better, but ultimately do not.
So to me, the only hope would be that within the Protestant realm, you would have to have first the Anglicans, they would have to agree to stop being gay.
And that's a big if.
That's a big ask for Anglicans and Episcopalians.
They love themselves some gay sex.
They really do.
You would have to have the Anglicans say, okay, we promise to stop appointing women, feminist women, gay affirming, esteeming women as archbishops of Canterbury.
Like, that's a big ask.
So you would have to have the Anglicans and Episcopalians beat out the Baptists.
Here's the thing, even though I think their polity may be better, I'm going to stick with the Baptists because at least the Baptists aren't homosexuals and the Anglicans are.
So, for this to happen, there's so many contingencies, so many if this, then maybe that.
But ultimately, what it would have to be is you would have to have the historic Protestant denominations, like the Anglicans, like the Episcopalians, actually become, actually experience some measure of true spiritual revival, repent of their progressive ideologies.
Return to true biblical virtues and traditions and stop being gay, stop being feminist, stop being globalist.
And then they would have to, over time, through the richness of their traditions, actually win people over to where they leave the independent fundamental Baptist church to go to the Anglican church because they hold the same conservative positions, but they actually also have the liturgy and the traditions, the transcendent nature, even just in their buildings, the architecture, the vaulted ceilings, the stained glass.
Um, and all that is going to take time.
Is it possible?
Um, I think it's possible, but it's not going to happen overnight.
Okay, our next super chat.
All right, we've got a cool dude who sent in $5 and said, Mitt Romney, John Curtis, Evan McMullen, et cetera.
Why do Utah Mormons produce some of the worst politicians ever?
They do because they're white liberals, and the white liberal is a terrible thing.
It's your Joe Bidens, it's your Stephen Colbert's, it's your Mitt Romney's.
They suck.
Yep, Mitt Romney, another Mormon.
The problem is, I think, in some sense, there is a lot of white people struggle with white guilt, but Mormons, I think, especially because there really was a time within official Mormon doctrine.
That they believed that black people were like black because then they looked at BYU's athletic program and they're like, We've got to change something.
We want to win some championships here.
We can win some championships.
God has given us a new revelation.
Yep.
So, Mormon theology, you can watch the old videos from like the 60s and the 70s, animated cartoon videos that, quite seriously, it's not a joke.
They believe that black people were like fallen angels or cursed, particularly cursed in some way or whatever.
And I think that they have kind of a chip on their shoulder.
They still struggle with that guilt.
And really, what it is to be consistent, it's not that they were this way and now they feel sorry, you know, and so they've gone to the opposite end of the spectrum.
Really, what Mormonism has always done is because it's not rooted in divine revelation, because it's a novelty, Mormonism has basically just adapted to whatever the cultural winds are at that given moment.
And so it's like, why are the Mormons so.
So weak on some of these issues.
It's because that is kind of inherent to Mormonism because it's not tried and true, because it's not old, it's not settled, it's not solidified and stable.
Mormonism is a novelty that just follows the cultural winds of that moment.
So, because of that, I think Mormons are pretty nice people and make for nice neighbors, but you're not going to be able to count on the Mormons to go against the grain.
To go upstream.
Very, very true.
Yeah, I would even argue they're the quintessential white liberal in the sense that their interpersonal, inter societal relations are all predicated on the concept of niceness.
And we've talked about this before with respect to Minnesota and Minnesota Nice and how white liberals can get caught in that schema.
Scripture vs Tradition Authority00:10:01
And I think Mormons, more than anything, predicate their evangelism on the concept of let me give as much as I can to someone who disagrees with me in order that I might.
Emotionally manipulate them through my character, how I treat them, becoming their friend, that I might actually get some concessions from them.
And so we've seen this time and time again.
It's embodied again in people like Mitt Romney who have exercised this kind of practice, I guess you could say, throughout their political career.
Yeah, so I agree.
Mormons, yeah, like you said, Joel, you can never really count on a Mormon to have some spine and be willing to be considered not nice in order to achieve something.
Yep.
Caleb Gleason wrote in and said, Why are Reformed bros, right?
So, Reformed Protestants, so big on expository preaching, exegetical preaching, having the text of Scripture and exegeting, reading out of the text, an interpretation, what we believe that God intended, rather than exegeting, reading into the text, the opinions and preferences of men.
So, why are they so big on exegetical or expository preaching when none of the preaching or letters in the Apostolic Church were expository?
One simple answer, twofold answer.
Number one, I would say that the book of Hebrews is expository, the entire thing.
It is the apostles' exposition, much of the Psalms, many Old Testament texts, saying, you know, Jesus is greater than Moses, Jesus is greater than the angels, Jesus is greater than this, the Jewish, Abrahamic, you know, priestly sacrificial system.
And, you know, and with each chapter, many references to Old Testament texts and using the Old Testament and those particular texts, whether it be Isaiah or Psalms.
In order to exegete, to read out of those texts the meaning that the New Testament apostle is conveying under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.
So I would say, number one, there are many letters.
Romans would be another example, Hebrews would be an example, Galatians to some extent is another example where these New Testament apostolic writings actually are expositional.
So, one, I would just fundamentally disagree with the question.
But number two, I would say that if you disagree with me and you're like, nah, I don't really think that's expositional, I would just say that the apostolic writings are revelatory.
So when you say, well, you know, Reformed ministers and clergy are preaching expositionally, but the apostles weren't.
Well, one of the major differences, a simple answer to that, is that the apostles were still receiving new revelation.
So the Holy Spirit was actually revealing to the apostles new revelation.
And that was the basis of their letters and the basis of many of their teachings, was that God was still revealing something.
But As Reformed Protestants, we believe that the canon is actually closed, and we do not believe that the church has actually contained within it an inherent authority equal to the scriptures.
So, if you're not Reformed and you're not Protestant, then you may hold to a position that says that scripture and tradition are two equal streams, equally authoritative, in which case there could be new revelations and new traditions that are added.
They're not added to the canon of scripture, but they carry.
The same weight and authority that's equal to the scripture.
But within Protestant theology, that's simply not the case.
So we believe, you know, the idea of sola scriptura is not that scripture is the only authority.
Church tradition is an authority and it's a significant one.
But we believe that scripture is the only infallible authority.
All other authorities can be credible, can be valid, can be significant, but they're not infallible.
They can err.
So scripture alone is the only infallible authority and it's also the highest authority.
So, tradition can err, and also tradition, even when it does not err, is subjugated to Scripture as the higher authority.
So, within the Protestant framework on the Reform side of the aisle, historic Reform Protestants, the reason why so much of the preaching is expositional or exegetical is because we believe that God's revelation has ceased, that there is no new revelation, that God is not continuing to reveal new things, that the Bible is not only inherent.
Inerrant, but it's also sufficient.
So it's the sufficiency of Scripture, believing that God has revealed all that is necessary for life and godliness.
And so we're going to constantly be going back through the Scriptures again and again, whereas the apostles and apostolic teaching and letters, that wasn't the case.
The apostles were actually adding new revelation from the Spirit during that particular segment of the church age to the canon.
The canon was not yet closed.
New revelation from God was coming in, and we believe that that simply ceased today.
So that would be my answer to that.
We have one more super chat on Rumble.
This is from Tweller 1776, and they wrote in follow up from JNR which is more achievable reconciliation with the Roman Catholic Church and reformation of their occultic practices or unification of many Protestant denominations to recreate the central governance of the church?
That's a great question, Wes and Antonio.
Do you have any thoughts?
I mean, we've talked about this before, and we've had this.
Question over on the right response side.
I think we've done an episode on Rome and Reformation and what our hopes would be.
And I would just reiterate that here that my hope is that the Reformation, and just in short, if I had to have a sticker, I would say, I hope that the Reformation works.
That's my prayer is that we don't lose sight of the gospel.
And I think the Reformation was right in its attempt to re emphasize the right theology, if you will, the right soteriology.
And we will not sacrifice that as Protestants to reunify with the Catholic Church.
And my prayer is that.
They come to realize that in God's providence in time that we should have unity on that and that the Reformation, as I said, would be successful and Protestants would be reintegrated.
Yeah, it's a great question.
Like in terms of the likelihood, I haven't thought of it quite like that.
We've always hoped, like you said, Antonio, that the Catholic Church would actually repent.
We don't want it to be removed, we want it to be reformed.
But let's just assume for a moment that it would be that in God's providence that the Catholic Church repents of the Council of Trent.
It repents of Vatican II.
It repents of certain doctrines.
It still wouldn't be perfect, just like the Protestant church is far from perfect.
But let's just say that it repents of those things that are outstanding.
And it becomes doctrinally sufficient and getting rid of some of the most errant doctrines that is held.
If that be the case, I like the framing of this question because it is interesting in terms of just likelihood predictions.
I think that there is, if I had to answer, There's probably a greater likelihood of if the Catholic Church repented, it would be much easier for Protestants to fold into the Catholic Church, a repentant Catholic Church that already has the structures, than for Protestants to figure something out that they have not yet been able to figure out in 500 years.
Like if I'm just thinking of the likelihood, the Catholic Church has a structure, it has the polity.
Now, the problem, though, is that I still think, in terms of nationalism, that you would have to do something about the Pope.
So, it's not just that the Catholic Church would have to not anathematize salvation by grace through faith in Christ alone, certain things within Trent, but the Catholic Church would also have to maintain its hierarchical polity, but no longer hold to a singular pope who has a global geographic location but speaks for all the Catholic Church in all nations.
And so that would be tough.
But.
It feels like if the Catholic Church did reform, if it did repent, then I think that many Protestants would just say, okay, that was our hang up.
That's what was holding us back.
And yeah, we'll fold in.
There would still be some that would not, and they would continue doing their thing.
But I think that over time, that would probably fade.
And so if I'm just thinking of what's the probability, it seems more probable of having some sense of order and structure within the Catholic Church repentant.
Than Protestants somehow doing something that they have yet to be able to achieve in half a millennium.
Peter Lighthart makes the point.
He said there was a time when someone like Luther or even Wycliffe would never be able to see what would happen that would escape the grip of the Catholic Church.
You could almost phrase the question like, will Democrats come to their senses and back off of wokeness and immigration, or will the right be able to coalesce?
And the answer is actually probably neither.
There will probably be a movement or something that supersedes that dialectic tension between the both of them.
And so, necessarily, I'm not necessarily bullish on Protestantism as it exists right now, Catholicism as it exists right now, but that in the future, God's going to do something that right now, None of us could anticipate.
None of us could predict a new schema that hopefully incorporates the best things of Protestantism, the best things of Catholicism, and forms a new tradition that actually lasts and has the integrity and is robust in a way neither of these traditions are right now.
Yep.
Well said.
Podcast Platform Algorithm Strategies00:01:14
Thanks for tuning into this episode.
We really appreciate it.
If you are new, make sure you subscribe and click the bell on YouTube.
You can just search NXR Studios on YouTube, on Rumble, and you can also find all of our broadcasts live on X, my handle on X, where all this is broadcasted.
Live right when it's happening.
The handle there is at Joel Webbin.
We broadcast three times a week on Monday and Wednesday and Friday, all at 12 p.m. Eastern Time.
And all this stuff, just a couple hours after we're done with the live stream, it lands on Spotify and Apple.
Make sure that you're following us over there.
If podcasts is your favorite venue, if you like to listen and consume content that way, please leave us a five star review if you're listening on Spotify or Apple.
It helps us tremendously in triggering the algorithm.
Algorithms on the podcast platforms to get this content out to as many people as possible.
But if you want to catch it live as it's happening, we broadcast live simultaneously on three platforms YouTube, Rumble, and X.
So make sure you subscribe and click the bell.
And again, we will see you.
It's Friday today.
So Lord willing, we'll see you again on Monday at 12 p.m. Eastern Time.