Get 50% off Webroot Total Protection or Webroot Essentials when you go to http://webroot.com/pool
Start 2026 with better sleep! Try Beam Dream: https://shopbeam.com/TIMPOOL and use code TIMPOOL for up to 35% off—limited time.Show more SUPPORT THE SHOW BUY CAST BREW COFFEE NOW - https://castbrew.com/
Join - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCLwNTXWEjVd2qIHLcXxQWxA/join
Hosts:
Auron MacIntyre @AuronMacIntyre (YouTube)
Phil @PhilThatRemains (X)
Tate @realTateBrown (everywhere)
Ian @IanCrossland (everywhere) | https://graphene.movie/
Producer:
Serge @SergeDotCom (everywhere)
Guest:
Adam Johnson @LecternLeader (X) | https://unlicensedfurnituremovers.com/
Podcast available on all podcast platforms!
THEY CAN'T HIDE ANYMORE | Timcast IRL #1440 Show less
We've got a great show with a lot of great guests.
Hope you enjoy it.
Today, it looks like Bill and Hillary Clinton are finally going to have to testify when it comes to the Epstein probe.
They were trying to dodge it the whole time, but they've been threatened with contempt and they're finally going to comply.
We're also going to be talking about the Minnesota blockades.
Once again, Antifa is doing its trick where it tries to stop everyone moving up and down the block, taking everybody's license plates, making sure that they control the streets.
We'll also be talking about the leftists and the way that they are absolutely embarrassing themselves over Don Lemon, the Grammys, and deportations.
But before we get to all that today, guys, let's hear from our sponsor.
All right, my friends, I'm sure you've heard last week, TransGene confirmed a data breach that affects over 4 million people.
It's a prime example of why it's important for people to have products like Web Root Total Protection, which includes identity protection for up to 10 identities, up to a million dollars in fraud expense reimbursement, 24/7 U.S.-based customer support plus Elder Fraud Hotline, identity and dark web monitoring plus, you'll get antivirus VPN and cloud backup so you're protected holistically from all threats.
Webroot total protection is an all-in-one, is all-in-one device, privacy and identity protection that can keep you safe in the event that your personal data is compromised.
If your identity is stolen, it can take between 100 and 200 hours to resolve it on your own, but not if you have Web Root Total Protection.
With Web Root Total Protection, you have insurance for your digital life and personal data.
Let Web Root Total Protection give you your peace of mind back in the wake of these continued data breaches and evolving digital threats.
You'll get 50% off Web Root Total Protection or Web Root Essentials when you go to webroot.com/slash pool.
P-O-O-L.
No, E. Live better, live a better digital life with Webroot.
Again, 50% off at webroot.com/slash pool.
Got a great sponsor.
It is Beam Dream.
Go to shopbeam.com/slash Tim Pool, and you can get up to 30% off your Beam Dream.
No joke, I drink this stuff every night.
It is your nighttime blend to support better sleep.
Well, Clinton got away with it, I think, largely because the religious right or the Republicans at the time made the mistake of making it about the blowjob and not about the procedure.
Like, they made it a moral majority argument, and that actually, I think, fell down as opposed to a legal procedure argument of, hey, committed perjury needs to go to jail.
Because obviously we know the photos are out there.
We know his name is mentioned.
The question is, how bad can you make him look?
How much can you drag him through that?
How many places can you lead him where he might further indict himself or create some kind of problem?
I don't think there's probably going to be a lot of there there.
I think most of the revelations are already in the Epstein files, but putting him through that, making him go through that process is itself a punishment.
We learned this from the Trump administration, right?
It's not always what you're going to get.
Once you put people under oath and you put them up in front of Congress, they might come out and say things that are going to just bury them politically.
And that's ultimately what a lot of people are looking for.
Maybe not the most, I guess, upstanding way to conduct yourself, but it is ultimately the way American politics works.
It's a great way to call it a bread and circus because as I'm scrolling, like with the economy, what's happened with silver went up four times and then got 30% dropped.
All these people, they took people for a run.
Crypto dropped by 10, 15%.
Like this is the bread and circus is the Clinton, is the Epstein stuff.
That's what they want people to focus on and fight about when in the background they're like changing our economy into a crypto control state, it feels like behind us.
It's another conversation completely, but I do sense that.
There's some truth where like the entire Epstein thing, it hit a point, kind of like Pizzagate, where like when it first happened, you're kind of following it and you're like, yeah, yeah, that actually does make there might be something here.
And then there was, I remember it just hit a certain point where it was like just all the insane people flooded in and then it just became like completely untouchable.
This is kind of what's happening with the Epstein stuff now is it's gotten to the point where it's gotten so mainstream, it's turned into something that it never was, where now it's starting to become a toxic thing.
And it's going to make it more difficult to actually get any justice out of this because it's just been flooded with the retard right, for lack of better word.
And in addition, it's just, people are expecting different things as a result of like this entire investigation.
Whether or not there's anything that's actually actionable in there, people see a name, they're like, see, this name's in the Epstein file.
So of course that means that they were doing this thing.
And it's just turned into just a slop vest of people pointing fingers.
Of course, there are things that people should be prosecuted for.
I'm not making the argument that there aren't, but whether or not people have broken the law is irrelevant to most of the people that want to use this as a club on X to be like, this person was in the Epstein files.
So of course, blah, blah, blah.
There are people, again, like I said, there are people that broken the law.
They should be investigated.
They should be arrested.
If they're alleged to have broken the law, they should see the full extent of justice.
But there's a online phenomenon of saying, look, they're in the Epstein file.
And I found this and blah, blah, blah.
And it's just a slew of just an orgy of confirmation bias where people are pointing fingers and saying, your guy's bad.
Your guy's bad.
Your guy's bad.
Or you know this guy or whatever.
You know, any kind of tenuous connection they're going to use to say this person did this.
And it's just turned into something where you can't really find any clarity.
Well, I was just going to say, this is the nature of news cycles.
You know, when you had the Epstein files as a story out there that was unclear, you could build the conspiracy.
And there was a real conspiracy.
Like, obviously, these files were bad.
Our elites did not want us to have access to them.
They were embarrassed about what went on there and they didn't want those out.
But it was really what you could project onto this, what I think is built a lot of hype and interest into it.
Once it's out there in the open, once we actually have the files, that's actually less exciting because you can no longer just speculate about what's being hidden and what forces are working against you and who's hiding documents.
Now you have to actually sift through everything.
You need to verify.
You need to fact check.
A lot of this is going to fall away because it's unprovable or it was just salacious, but ultimately didn't go anywhere.
We are, I think, ultimately going to get facts that are important.
I think this really still matters, but I think the hype cycle with this is done.
Now it's more the drudgery of investigation.
Maybe something more will come out.
But I think Adam's ultimately right that what really matters is we're putting bad people in front of Congress, in front of questioning.
That's what people wanted.
That's what people especially want to see from the Trump administration.
He's supposed to be this guy from outside the swamp.
He's crushing the elites.
He's breaking through the institutional barriers that exist in Washington.
They wanted to see him make the elites pay.
And the fact that he did not do that initially with the Epstein files, I think, was a lot of what people felt betrayal about.
So getting this done, getting elites in front of cameras, in front of questions, I think that's what matters to people more than the actual content.
And I'm not saying the content doesn't matter, but I think that's ultimately what's going to be cathartic for people through this process.
In 16, one of the great takeaways from the debates was Trump telling Hillary Clinton, because you'd be in prison.
You remember this, right?
And we all got riled up and said, man, that was the moment when I knew I was voting for Trump.
And then we had the 16 through 20 administration.
Hillary didn't go to prison.
And I think a lot of people were hesitant to vote for him again because they saw the first administration not actually carry the water and carry the weight of the things that they said they were going to do.
I think this administration has the ability and the time to get it done.
We're less that he airway from midterms.
And I've always held the belief that the reason we haven't seen sweeping arrests yet is because, one, when you go to start arresting people, it's all hell is going to break loose.
And to organize that without leaks, because people will flee the country.
They have dual citizenship.
They will go.
You need to be very precise.
You can't have leaks.
And for optics' sake, if you arrest someone at a high-profile level, you have to find juries that will indict judges that will take the case, not throw them out.
A lot of these things that we saw two people indicted, right?
It was Comey and Comey and someone else that charges got Letitia James.
I think it's also very clear at this point that the Clintons aren't going to jail.
Like they're just not going to put an old man in jail at this point, no matter how much he deserves it.
So really, it is about the truth and reconciliation.
It is getting him up there, getting to the bottom of this.
Is there anyone else connected?
Is there a wider conspiracy we need to understand, a wider network?
I think that's the kind of stuff that you're going to be driving at with the Clintons.
I don't think they're actually going to be looking to pursue a particular criminal case against them or try to drive deeper into getting these guys in jail.
Those optics aren't great for you at this point.
There was a time when putting Hillary Clinton in the jail was dynamic.
Like you're saying, the locker up chance mattered.
I think at this point, people have kind of moved on.
And you can't, you know, this is the upside and the downside of Biden stepping in there.
Biden is just simply not as nefarious a creature as Hillary Clinton, right?
Like he's just too, like I'm sure he's a bad person, but he's just too checked out.
He's completely unable to function mentally.
You can only really feel like you can hold him accountable for his actions for so long because of how senile he is.
And so people aren't there chanting, put Joe in jail.
It's like, you know, put Joe in the nursing home, right?
Like at this point.
And so he's not the person that their ire is really directed at.
You don't have that easy target to put away.
I mean, someone like Anthony Fauci would be far more relevant at this point.
So I just don't think the Clintons create that target that satiates the desire for people to have a nefarious character put behind bars, but they could lead us towards someone that is worthy of that.
No, but I mean, even if they put the Clintons, even if they put the Clintons in jail, that's not going to move the needle for actual policy in the United States.
It's not going to change, you know, the nature of government because they're out of the, you know, they're out of government.
They're just, you know, old people that have been put out the pasture.
So I'd be perfectly fine with them going to jail because I'm sure that, you know, Clinton and they both have broke plenty of laws, but it wouldn't change the forecast for the midterms.
It wouldn't change the forecast for the next presidential election.
And so at the end of the day, it doesn't change the circumstances for the right in the United States.
And the important thing is the right winning because that's how we save the country from what the left is doing.
I'd be much happier to see Tim Walz and Ilan Omar in prison.
That's right.
That's actually where we're at.
They're robbing the coffers from my grandchildren.
Like as we speak, and a lot of people are calling for Insurrection Act, these things like this.
I think stay focused.
Keep doing audits.
Go to California next.
Go to Ohio.
You start tearing open the books and you show where these people are actually robbing our country and bringing in these migrants who are ruining our culture.
I think you're both correct because ultimately we're in this scenario where we only have so much political capital.
You have to choose your targets carefully.
And ultimately, again, I think people do care about the Epstein files.
But as you say, moving into midterms, looking at the situation in the country would much rather see Democratic criminals currently being held accountable rather than trying to reach back 8, 12, 15 years to try to figure out and re-litigate how these people conducted themselves.
Even though the justice is critical, it really is about optics.
It really is about expending political capital.
And when you're in that scenario, you have to have a laser focus.
And again, as you guys were saying, someone like Tim Walz going to jail would just be far more important, far more critical.
And it would actually show that the Trump administration isn't just looking back, hoping to pull some skeletons out of closets, but is actively looking at Democrats today as political enemies who are hurting the country and is willing to step in and stop them and hold them accountable.
And to your point, like the, I've said this before, like they're not going to just go after people that are big names.
They're not going to just go after Donald Trump.
They're not going to just go after, you know, people that are, you know, influential on the right because those people are the people that normal people expect to get wrapped up.
When the guy down the street that did a little bit of canvassing for the Republicans goes to jail, then everybody that knows him is like, oh, I could be on the chopping block.
And that cools people's desire to be politically active in the future.
So they'll go after the big fish.
Sure.
They'll go after Donald Trump.
That's definitely going to happen.
But they'll also go after the small fish because if they get enough small fish and they're easier to get too, if you get some dude that's just in the GOP or whatever, that's like, you know, at a state level or even a town level, if those people go to jail, it doesn't cost them a lot of money.
They don't have a lot of money to defend themselves the way that, you know, bigger names do.
If you go after people that are, you know, average Joes, they're easier to put in jail and it does a whole lot more to cool off people's interest in being politically active.
You have more of your average people that are just like, I want to keep my head down.
I don't want to get in trouble.
I don't want them to, you know, I don't want the eye of Sauron to be put on me.
You know, so it's really important that we win in November and it's really important that we win in 2028 because it's not just the big names.
It's not just the people that you see on podcasts.
It's going to be people that you know, just like Adam said, you know, 1,600 people that were just at the Capitol and they didn't do anything particularly bad.
They were walking through.
They put a lot of people in jail.
And the reason they did that was to intimidate the right.
They're going to go even harder should the left win again.
They freaking intimidated everybody, like people on the left who are like, I better bow down to my servant master even harder because I see they're serious now.
Knowing what you know now, having been arrested for being at the Capitol, served three months in prison, basically, literally.
And I assume that had some sort of radicalization effect on your brain.
Like I'm never like you've changed, you're running for office now.
Like you've changed, you're like outspoken now on the on the internet, on TV.
But like knowing what you know about innocent people getting targeted or people that did very little and getting big sentences, how would you go forward against, like you said, the communist attempted communist revolution?
Like how would you deal with that in an attempt to not radicalize those people the way that some of these people of J6 were?
Adam, I feel like I've said this a thousand times, but I just get more and more manic every time I say it because it seems like people are not listening.
How am I still having to explain to people at this point that that's where we are?
Every time it's oh, Trump might take some kind of action, we might use some kind of power.
It's well, what if the Democrats get back in charge?
Like, how are we still doing that argument?
They've already done it.
It's absolutely nuts.
It's like you guys understand that you can just never let the left come back into power again.
That is the only answer.
The minute they are back in power, they will arrest everybody.
And they don't have your morals, they don't have your scruples, they don't have your principles.
None of this will stop them because they also don't have activist judges sitting there waiting to sabotage them.
They will have the full power of the government, they will run through you entirely.
It's ridiculous to me that we still have to make this argument.
On Friday, we talked to we had Cam Higbee on, and Lisa was here, and we were talking about Don Lemon being arrested.
And they both were kind of squishy on it because they're like, Well, you know, I don't want them to arrest, you know, me or you know, Cam was saying that.
It's like, guys, like you're not going to be able to say, Oh, we don't want to set the precedent because the precedent has already been set.
Like, the left will do this, they've already done this.
When they get back into power, they're going to do it again.
So, I understand that you know, you care about the First Amendment and you have, you know, you care about the freedom of press and you have principles and stuff.
They don't.
So, to behave as if they do, or to say that any exercise of power that the right does is going to give permission to the left.
Is we have had to hear about how unprofessional ICE is, how it's a bunch of thugs, and the Trump administration is just turning them loose, and how important it is that we have accountability for law enforcement.
But here we see that actually, nope, just completely unaccountable, untrained, you know, guys with no authority are getting out there and doing this.
Of course, it's going to create an incident.
We all remember the last autonomous zone, right?
Multiple kids ended up dead.
We had a warlord within a few hours.
Like, that's what happens when you actually suspend the rule of law.
Why is the left so obsessed with turning every place they control into a lawless, violent warlord war zone?
I kind of like the idea of maybe every town does have like a small chop just in the middle.
So it's like if you really are like a communist or something, you know, you can kind of just hang out there and then the warlord will sort things out after a while.
It's kind of a beautiful thing when you really think about it.
Well, it also looks like the Minnesota activists have put up a flag here.
They're trying to recreate the famous U.S. Marines at Iwo Jima scene.
And of course, we all know that the Minnesota flag has a striking resemblance to the Somali flag because the Somalis conquered Minnesota and made them change their flag.
So what we're seeing here is basically a declaration that they have conquered Minnesota, that the leftists now not only own the streets, but they own the entire state.
You know, a lot of people will say, oh, it's just a flag.
It's just a piece of cloth.
It's just, you know, a recreation, a ritual.
But I hope by now we understand that flags matter, that cloth matters, that ritual actually matters more than rhetoric.
And when we allow something like this to happen, when we allow people to take these actions, it's making a clear declaration that we are giving up sovereignty, that we are handing control up to foreign powers.
And this simply should not be allowed in the United States.
It's amazing that we continue to really allow any of this.
I think about that, like wearing shirts with words on them.
I'm like, dude, I don't even like, what does this read?
What am I, like, what am I promoting right now?
That's a good way to put it, that it's more powerful than rhetoric, like imagery, promoting imagery, especially with the internet and the ability to splash that visual all over the place.
You know, like you see these, but you see, like, was it Ronaldo came up and there was like cokes on the, on the, on the table, and he took them off because he's like, oh, I'll kill you.
I'm not getting paid to advertise this.
So it's like, same thing.
We should be getting paid.
If you're going to wear a brand on your name, you're going to get paid.
This was Somalia.
Yeah, this is terrible news.
This is terrible.
It's mocking Marines.
And it's the most Reddit thing ever to think you could emulate the Iwo Jima by what?
You just like sat on the streets long enough and the police didn't bother cracking down like that's conquering somehow.
Well, and the UK just got done with this big showdown over flags.
I don't know if you guys were paying attention, but they were battling over whether or not the St. George's Cross or the Union Jack should be displayed.
And it was being swapped out with Pakistani flags and everything.
And, you know, again, people will say, oh, this is tiny stuff.
It doesn't matter.
It's just some guy taking down a flag or raising it somewhere.
No, again, this is a symbol of conquest, especially in the UK context where these people are literally raping the daughters of the English.
Like, what does a conquering army do?
It sends military young men into your area.
They take control of the streets.
They rape your daughters and they raise their flag in conquest.
We should see this as the step down this road.
We should recognize that we are in no way immune to the things that happened in the UK.
When you let this kind of stuff happen, when you let this be permitted, the leftists are only going to exercise more and more power.
I think we've got another clip of somebody here stopping plates as they come in.
Well, and it blew up their whole narrative recently because didn't it just get leaked that both of the agents that were involved in the Paretti shooting were Hispanic?
There's something to first and second generation migrants that come here legally.
They actually believe the American dream.
They were given something they came here to actually have, and they worked hard for it, and they want to keep it.
So when they see everyone coming in, pouring it illegally and taking benefits, taking things, they're working hard to provide assistance for the family.
I mean, they have every right to be pissed off, and they should be.
To your earlier point, though, like, this is all like the laws that ICE are enforcing are all passed in a bipartisan way.
They were passed two decades ago or whatever, Democrats and Republicans.
Donald Trump was elected with a majority in the Electoral College and a popular majority.
The popularity of deporting illegals is something like 85%, or at least criminals is like 90% or 85%, and deporting all illegal immigrants is like 60%.
So these people are literally doing everything they can to go against the will of the people and against the law.
And then because of the media helping to characterize this as Donald Trump as being a fascist and stuff, there are people that are getting squishy.
But if you look at this just on the facts, like this is an extremely popular thing, getting rid of illegal aliens.
This is what Donald Trump was elected for, and we need to see more of it.
And as you might imagine, there was yet another very irrelevant awards ceremony.
I'm sure both people who watched it really enjoyed it.
I think it's called the Grammys.
Yes.
So, this obscure Grammys, there's a bunch of guys.
I'm old and I like metal music, so I don't know any of the people we're talking about here.
There's a Billy Eyelash, some kind of bunny involved.
I think we'll eventually get to a very short man giving a speech.
But ultimately, it looks like a lot of these people who showed up to the awards ceremony were trying to virtue signal.
Oh, Donald Trump, I can't believe ultimately that he was out there going after illegal aliens.
We see Bad Bunny here saying, Before I say thanks to God, I'm going to say Ice Out, Bad Bunny said while accepting a Grammy Award for Best Musical Urbana album.
Renee Holdgood, killed by ice on January 7th, 2026.
They say she is no more.
That there her absence roars.
Blood blown like a rose.
Ice wheels flinched and froze.
Now, bare riot of candles, dark fury of flowers, pure howling of hymns.
If for us she arose somewhere in the pitch deep of our grief, crouches our power, the howl where we begin straining upon the edge of the crooked crater of the worst of what we've been.
Change is only possible and all the greater when the labor and bitter anger of our neighbors is moved by the love and better angels of our nature.
What they call death and void, we know his breath and voice.
In the end, gorgeously endures our enormity.
You could believe departed to be the dawn when the blank night has so long stood.
But our bright led angels will never be fully gone when they forever are so fiercely good.
You know, I wrote a book called The Total State, and one of the big topics in that book is ultimately why we need to see politics just penetrate every cultural sphere.
A lot of people are asking, you know, the basic question: you know, why do I need politics in my video games?
Why does it have to be in my movies?
Why does it have to be in my music?
You know, there used to be, there was always some injection.
There was always one guy firing off his opinion and acceptance speech.
But for the most part, they at least put on the air of, okay, no, this is an event about the music, about the topic we're discussing.
But once you get to this kind of late stage of your culture where everything is a political battle, where the rift is just so large and the state needs more and more control over the population, what they're thinking, the only thing you can really do is just have that total state, have the politics penetrate into.
So what you were saying before the show locked up, or what I was saying is I agree with you about inserting politics into culture and all these things because you have to.
You know, the world is politicizing, but to do it subtly, because some artists are so hit you over the head with it.
It's like, if I don't wear my MAGA hat, you're not going to get it.
And it's like, well, you know, you can be subtle.
I don't want people on the left to understand that I'm propagandizing them.
I don't want people on the right to know that I'm propagandizing them.
So one of the things that allows art to be subtle is a shared cultural tapestry, right?
And one of the problems, the reason that we're seeing everything become so obvious is we're losing that shared fabric that allows us to provide nuance.
They have to make sure that they kind of state outright what they mean.
Because maybe you're a red stater and you don't know all the blue code, or maybe you're a blue stater and you don't know all the red code.
Now, the conservatives have been bad at art for a while, but the fact that the left is getting like obviously very bad at it very quickly is actually a win for us overall because it means that the implicit left coding that allowed them to kind of suddenly massage their messages into our culture no longer works.
Not with you.
I'd rather have my art convey shared cultural messages.
But if the only shared culture messages are like chopping kids' genitals off, then it's okay.
Well, I mean, I've got some experience in this writing stuff that's like subtly political.
And if you write things that are subtle, people are going to understand them in their own way.
I've gotten a lot of people that they tweet at me or they'll post and they're mad when they find out that the songs that they thought meant something because it was subtle, they thought that it meant one thing, come to find out that I don't hold those beliefs or I didn't hold those beliefs and they are upset.
So yes, it is true.
It is better when you can be subtle, but if you want to send a message, you do have to be fairly clear.
And if you're not, you know, for a lot of people, if you're not specifically overtly saying something, they're going to internalize it as something that they relate to.
And honestly, that's kind of what you want.
Listen, when you write a song, you want people to listen to the song and you want them to think of it as their own, right?
When you listen to music that you love, you think about like, where did you hear the song first?
Like, what were the circumstances in your life?
There are songs that I love, and every time I hear them, you know, when I haven't heard it for a long time, I remember what it smelled like when I was listening to that song for the first time a lot.
And so those kind of memories are something that's attached to music, and you don't want to take that away from people.
But at the same time, if people find out or when people realize that you weren't saying what they thought you were saying, they get very upset and they feel like you've taken something from them, even though it was never something that was offered to them in the first place.
I think it comes down to is this, the connotation of words, right?
I mean, progressives will always progress their ideology, right?
Conservatives supposed to conserve.
What we usually do is actually concede.
And it starts with starts with connotations of vernacular, right?
It's the, it's, when we're like abortion, it's, you know, it's safe, rare, and legal.
And conservatives say, well, that's, that's fair.
You know, we don't want someone who was, you know, raped or incest to be forced to have a child.
And then they move that word, right?
It's no longer, you know, you know, now it's women's health care, right?
When initially it was just murder.
That's, that's where we all agreed as human beings.
When you take away the life of something, that's what it is.
We concede these words to the left.
And eventually we no longer have common ground because as they progress, they get further and further away from that common ground, that, you know, that soft working of words of, wouldn't it be cool if XYZ?
So like the right now, as far as I can tell, the internet is allowing cultures around the world to obliterate the American conservative nature, the nature, conservative nature of the United States, because it's just getting hit from every angle by so many things and then immigration.
And so there's like a rapid iteration redux, it feels like, going on right now.
So funny enough, Karl Marx was actually used to say that he was pro-free trade.
And the joke of why he was pro-free trade is he thought it brought down cultural barriers faster.
And the faster you dissolved cultures and traditions, the faster you could get rid of nations and create the communist utopia, the global order.
And in a way, what we're seeing with the internet is the vast increased democratization and velocity of exchanges of information in the way that we saw with capital previously.
And so all these things that used to give you shared culture are now like immediately dissolved by like this constant churn of information and everything.
And so I think what you're going to continue to see is like this destruction of existing cultures.
And it's the people who are ultimately able to control that process.
And again, I think we had this conversation last time we were on here, but this is why China and others are working so hard and so quickly trying to control internet and information as radically as possible.
Because if they don't, ultimately they will dissolve too.
Even these communist authoritarian structures will break down under the constant wave and increase the velocity of information.
So I think we've gotten pretty far away from the Grammys.
But the point being is like, I think that's why ultimately we're seeing the internet interact with kind of national identities and why the left is continue to break down who they think we are.
But in the same instance, they're breaking their own ideas and culture down just as quickly.
Well, we also want to talk a little bit about some more happenings in Minneapolis.
The left, of course, was talking for years and years about the need for body cams.
And all of a sudden, after finally getting what they wanted most, they've recognized that that's a huge mistake coming from CBS News.
All federal immigration agents in Minneapolis will begin by wearing body cameras.
Secretary of Homeland Security, Christine Noam, said on Monday, as the department faces intense scrutiny over a pair of fatal shootings by federal agents in the Twin Cities, effective immediately, we are deploying body cams to every officer in the field in Minneapolis.
Noam said on X, writing that she had discussed the move with the heads of immigration, customs, enforcement, and border protection.
So obviously, you know, we've been making this joke for a long time, but the call for body cameras has been the largest cell phone the left has ever had in history.
All the cops were racist.
All of them were brutal.
And of course, we do see that.
And I'm glad that ultimately we do have footage for when the police are stepping out of line.
But the majority of what we're seeing is actually the police are largely justified.
The body cams are vindicating most of the actions.
And so the fact that the left has seen what a disaster this is and now they're trying to actively fight against those body cams really is one of the just most beautiful things you've seen along the way.
Worth noting the fact that there are so many leftists that are saying, no, these are actually bad and they're contributing to stereotypes and we should stop this now.
Oh, it's an invasion of privacy because they're going to record these guys when they shouldn't even be interacting with them in the first place.
Trump said it perfectly.
It's just like, this is the best thing that ever happened to law enforcement was the body cameras because it just showed that they were justified every single time in paraphrasing what he said.
So it'd be the same thing with ICE.
It's like, okay, maybe these fatal shootings, who really knows what happens?
Because it's really the ICE agent's word versus the person that's not there anymore.
So with the police, or sorry, with the body camera, I think it's going to put away a lot of these high-profile deaths or whatever.
I do think that this is going to be a good thing overall because, like, you said, you know, when it does show that the officers or agents have stepped out of line, you know, we can do something about it because you do want police to behave in appropriate ways.
But I think that in the long run, it's going to show that the police largely behave in appropriate ways.
And the people that are, you know, people that are being arrested are the problem.
Look, the people that are going to say that the police are the problem are going to say that the police are the problem no matter what.
So funny enough, you saying they, you know, say, say his name, say her name.
Have you seen the left struggle sessioning all the white leftists saying, oh, no, say her name.
That's only for that's only for black women.
We only say the name of black women.
So even if you martyr yourself, like even if you literally die for the cause as a white person, you are still such scum to these people that they're like, no, we're not going to say, we're not going to honor you.
There was literally that guy, the guy that lit himself on fire for Palestine and in uniform.
And literally there was a viral tweet with like 60, 70k likes that was like, yeah, but this guy had no problem taking a paycheck from the institution that was like harming, you know, people in the valley.
So I was like, you literally could light yourself on fire and they would still dunk on you.
Part of the reason why I remember it is I have a great little clip about it where it's just totally demolishes his performance, and I'll send it to you guys later.
Like, does the body cam, regularity of body cams create a scenario where you're giving away techniques, giving away information intelligence, right?
Like, that's something that you worry about constantly in a warfare scenario.
You don't want to think about our urban environments like that.
But that is a real concern to think about ultimately because we see that these guys are operating their autonomous zones.
We're running your plates through the system.
They're already mimicking all the things they think ICE is doing.
What if they're just using that body cam footage as some kind of game film to figure out how they should behaving or how they could trap, you know, trick an ICE agent, lure them in to a bad situation because they've watched how that film is played out before?
I think that's a possibility that a lot of people haven't considered when it comes to the body cam.
So this is a really thing, like, this is a very Baudrillardian moment.
Like, what happens when you have your first riot for a fake victim?
Not in the civil rights, you know, yeah, sure, I'm sure that guy got knocked down in the 1980s, but like an actual completely computer-generated human being from the ground up.
What we do is we blackbag the commies and then we put their admissions of their loyalty to Trump out like Winston from 1984, except it's just their AI representation, right?
Like they disappear.
But, oh, look, before he went off to that island in Tahiti, he definitely endorsed President Trump's name.
That's what we can do for any events we don't have holdouts left is we could have Maduro singing the I Will Vote for Donald Trump song, which the Cubans sang, and then just plastered on a Goodyear blimp and fly it over Caracas.
And any loyalists will come out and be like, oh, well, clearly I'm being bamboozled here.
So Jean Baudillard was a French philosopher who wrote Simulation and Simi Lacrum, which is the book that the Wachowskis read before The Matrix, before they did that.
But it's also like a much deeper study on the nature of creating false realities and hyper-reality is a term you might have heard that came out of Baudrillard.
But because in war, you don't know who's going to win, right?
In a real war, you don't know who's going to win.
There's a chance that one side will outsmart the other.
But there was no chance that Iraq was going to win the first Gulf War.
Like everyone knew it.
The United States was going to go in and do what they wanted.
So it wasn't really a war.
So the argument was it was a simulation of a war.
The Iraq war never actually happened because there was no war because it looked like war and there were more things, but real wars are not predetermined.
Well, and it's also not experienced by the wider population.
They only see it on the television screen.
It's all abstract.
And in a way, you could say the protests in Minnesota never happened, right?
Because how many people really are experiencing them?
How many people really understand what's going on?
All of your reality is being absorbed through social media, through clips, through out-of-context understandings.
You don't know anybody who's been there.
You know people who, if you were alive in the 1950s, you knew people who went through World War II.
You could talk to people.
You probably experienced it.
Everyone you knew experienced it.
It was a real war in the sense that people you knew had direct experience.
When it came to different civil rights struggles or nationwide protests, they were real in the sense that everyone saw them happen.
But when you have these small, focused, hyper-media-concentrated scenarios, it's all abstract.
It's all removed.
Nobody has direct understandings of what's going on.
So what do we end up doing?
We all end up debating the hyper-realities we're experiencing rather than actually discussing the facts on the ground and what we have experienced as people.
Like everything is a simulation of reality to some degree nowadays.
Or for the most, the vast majority of people's lives now are a simulation of reality because we experience it through screens as opposed to going out and doing things and experiencing it firsthand.
But in the year, all of a sudden the Catholic Church was like, it's the year 1000 and there was a guy named Charlemagne that was your first Holy Roman Emperor and we've always controlled this land for 400 years.
I don't know if it's real.
But it's like considering the simulacrum and just like foisted history.
Well, we also want to talk about other deportation efforts.
There's been rumors that the Trump administration is going to ramp up its efforts, not just towards the Somali population in Minnesota, but also looking at the Haitian population.
Over 300 groups are asking Donald Trump and his administration to reverse course on ending the Haitian temporary protected status.
Hundreds of organizations, including civil rights groups, labor unions, immigrants' rights advocates, and faith leaders nationwide are urging President Trump and leaders of the Department of State and Homeland Security to preserve temporary immigration status for Haitians.
The calls come amid a growing fear and anxiety over the fate of more than 300,000 Haitians who could lose temporary protected status benefits as of 1259 Tuesday if a federal judge does not intervene.
Now, the most impressive part of this has been the hilarious Democrats who have been going out there and warning, giving press conferences.
Like it was the revolution because it was a French colony, right?
And the Haitians were working as slaves at the time.
So you can understand why they were a little angry at the French given everything that was going on.
But the reaction was, let's say, John Brown-esque in its disproportionality, except they did it to the entire white population of the island at the time.
It's really something that they're just like, this country is so unbelievably violent that even the people that flopped out of the country while accounts. wouldn't be able to go back.
I mean, it's absolutely, that's the whole thing.
I think it was Matt Walsh.
He made the point where he's like, usually people coming from the third world are the ones that actually flopped out of the country.
Like they're not like the top performers.
These people that couldn't cut it in Guatemala.
So now they're coming to the U.S.
And it's the same thing with the Haitians.
It's like, these aren't like the top performers making it over here.
Those guys are running things in Haiti.
These are the people that are literally at the bottom of the barrel and they're like out of desperation to try and sneak into the U.S.
Even if you were just an agricultural country and based on just that, they should be able to produce enough not only to trade with other countries, but to feed everybody in Haiti.
It looks like a federal judge temporarily blocked the end of protections for Haitians in the U.S.
The ruling pauses the Trump administration's plan to end a program that allowed more than 350,000 people from Haiti to remain in the United States.
A federal judge on Monday temporarily blocked the Trump administration from ending a humanitarian protection for more than 350,000 Haitians who have been able to live and work in the United States under what is known as temporary protected status.
So no surprise there.
Another activist judge says, of course, you can't deport people who shouldn't be here.
That would mean you have some kind of, I don't know, executive power.
So the temporary protected status here we see in the article is a designation that's created by the U.S. government and can give to countries grappling with natural disasters, armed conflicts, or other acute crisis, make conditions in their country particularly dangerous.
There's only one problem.
That's just Haiti all the time.
That's just an excuse to move all of Haiti here all the time.
And guys, we were talking about this a little bit in the behind the scenes, the green room beforehand.
But I think this is a big shift because previously when we talked about immigration, conservatives, Republicans, they were always terrified even to talk about immigration restriction.
But one of the things they were very careful about was to always make it about the individual.
It's about the individual person.
We can't judge groups.
We can't talk about groups.
We can't prefer groups.
We have to judge each individual on their own.
And instead, what we're seeing is increasingly conservatives are comfortable saying, no, there are countries.
peoples, religions, traditions that are not compatible with us, that are not ultimately going to help the U.S. is not going to contribute to the overall well-being of the American people.
So whether it's Somalia or Haiti or whatever country we're looking at, if ultimately we deem that country to not be worth our time to not be contributing, it's okay to just say blanket, no, we are not interested in having people from that country here.
And I think that's actually a monumental shift in the rhetoric and framing when it comes to the immigration issue.
I think if you live your life in whatever bubble you live in, you'd have a pretty good idea of who you surround yourself with and the actions of those around you.
And if you formulate opinions based on your own bubble, and those opinions happen to be what some people call racist, I would say, well, you go live in those places and live around the same people.
But there is a reason why people do self-select and self-sort throughout the entire country.
There is.
There is.
People like to be safe and like to be around like-minded people.
This is like the whole thing is because it's great that we're able to address Haitians and Somalians and stuff.
But it's downstream from the real, like, you know, I guess the real conclusion that we should be coming to, which is like the demographic composition of your country is like a very valid, like the very valid discussion to have.
And for whatever reason, like people in the West aren't allowed to have that, but pretty much every other country is allowed to have a conversation.
Like, what do I want my culture to look like?
What do I want my country to look like?
Like the actual composition of the country.
You always in the United States have to predicate it with like, you know, some economic argument or perhaps that they're just extremely violent, which is true.
And those are arguments that I use myself.
But even if like they were just top performers, I should still be able to say, like, for example, like the Chinese, maybe, I'd be like, well, yeah, but that still changes my country.
And I would like my country, my kids, my grandkids, the country to look like my country.
Yeah, I mean, look, I think the Chinese argument or the China argument is a little different.
I think it's a bad example because China's an adversary and every single Chinese person that has family in China, every single Chinese person here that also has family in China is a could be compromised because they will apply pressure to their family, throw them in jail to get the people that are here.
So I understand the point you're making, but when it comes to China, they're absolutely an adversary.
And the idea that they're in any way should be partnered with or anything, it is a terrible idea.
Every single Chinese person with family back home is compromised currently.
And it should be completely obvious to any serious government that that's the case.
So we should do everything we can to make sure that we send Chinese people back to China because they will absolutely be used against us by their own government.
That's the real question is everything has been half measures up to this point.
As Phil is even saying, how can we even treat our government as serious if they're not going to expel Chinese students, Chinese nationals who are here?
We know for a fact we just busted a few Chinese nationals smuggling things in and out of the United States, scientific secrets, bringing diseases.
Yeah, yeah, bringing biological weapons or biological material that's dangerous in the United States.
This is not some isolated incident.
This is a common occurrence, and yet we never address it because we want the money.
That's what Trump said, right?
Straight up.
We need them to fund our universities, which is garbage because obviously we want Americans to go to our universities.
And it's fine if a few of those collapse because ultimately they're just teaching children to hate their parents and to hate America anyway.
So ultimately, that wouldn't be some travesty if we lost it.
But we can look to a different example.
We could look to someone like Japan, who is a true ally, who I think most people would feel very comfortable saying is an advanced and honorable culture.
I would say that's a culture worth admiring, but it's still not my culture.
I want Japan to be Japanese in 50 years.
And I want America to be American.
And that doesn't mean I don't love Japanese culture.
I don't think they're awesome.
I don't respect it.
It just means I respect it so much, I want it to exist.
And the same thing's true of the United States.
And as you're saying, we should be able to say that.
That's okay.
We are a people in a place living in a certain way.
And there is no reason to pretend that we're the only civilization in history that's entirely abstract, entirely ideological.
You can just change out the people and nothing matters.
No, I'm sorry.
Our culture is great.
Our principles are great.
Our way of life is great, but it comes from the people.
It comes from the tradition we have grown up in.
And you cannot simply bring someone from Haiti or Somalia in and just slap them into some American university, give them a social security number, and call it a day.
Like, you bring these pieces and parts into the pot, but if it's too many too fast, you got a chunky mess.
So you have to spend, people need to homogenize.
They come in.
That's why we say about the individual, you bring one person in, surround them with Americans that are indoctrinating them, 10 years, 15 years, they're probably going to be pretty American.
But if you bring 500 Haitians in and they're surrounding one American, it's a completely inverted scenario where this one guy potentially develops sympathies or become Haitian-minded, you know?
And like we even had this problem with Ellis Island immigration, like when the Ellis Island wave of immigrants came in, these are coming from countries that were like very close to the United States, culturally speaking, as far as like, I mean, you had Irish, Italians, the only like big, massive difference they had from other Western European countries that they're Catholic, not Protestant.
And even they had like a lot of issues assimilating.
Like they would create these massive ethnic enclaves, these gangs.
They would have, they basically took over the Democrat Party in a lot of ways.
And so we have these massive problems with Ellis Island and we make it out on the other side.
And instead of like rubbing our brown and be like, wow, we made it out of that one piece, we're like, no, make it worse and just like expand the definition of who should come here.
Well, the problem is every time we bring that up, the left treats that as like, oh, oh, we can assimilate people.
Like, that's proof we can assimilate people.
No, that's proof that you could just barely assimilate people close to you.
We forget the fact that the Germans had to be forced to break up many of their ethnic neighborhoods.
They often had to, their kids had to be sent to schools to learn English because they did not want to assimilate.
There was an active, like just Germans who we think of as pretty American at this point in the United States were put in internment camps along with the Japanese during World War II for the fear that some of them might be traitors.
That's how it wasn't that long ago where these were very foreign people.
I was in like that liberal mind spiral in like 2006, 70, 8.
And I was very much, I like culture bonding.
I like going to a neighborhood that is not my culture and becoming the culture of that neighborhood and then meeting all the locals and they look up to me and they want to be more like the American.
And I love doing that.
But now I'm realizing like, so do other people.
They love coming here and they love just changing Americans the way I like to change whoever in little Italy or whatever.
Now you're American.
So it's a double-edged blade, that desire to change people's culture.
Yeah, I was reading online about a Japanese tourist who came to Los Angeles and was really disappointed to find that there was like virtually no Americans at the places he was visiting.
And that made me pretty sad because I'm like, I'm so proud of the United States and so proud of my culture and et cetera, that I do want tourists to come here and be like amazed by what we are, what we have and sort of our people and that sort of thing.
And I found that story really heartbreaking.
Like, you know, black people laughed at this.
They're like, wow, that really shows the state Los Angeles is in.
I'm like, yeah, because they're not going to, I mean, no offense, but they're not going to visit Nebraska.
Like, they're going to visit Los Angeles.
They're going to visit New York City.
They're going to visit Chicago.
These places should be dripping in American culture to where a Japanese person, you know, whoever arrives to visit for a week and they're like blown away by how rich and deep our culture is.
You got to remember that even the phrase the melting pot is accepting leftist propaganda.
Like this was a phrase that was worked out by a Jewish playwright and was adopted by a lot of culturally influenced people.
But ultimately, even though Teddy Roosevelt took a look at it, he decided to reject it.
He said he wanted something that understood that America was more of a consistent culture.
You could still add people to it.
It was never the idea that no one could join, but understanding that these people are assimilating to your culture.
You're not bringing their culture in.
They have to completely immerse themselves.
They have to be completely willing to become part of your group.
That's what matters.
And so that's the thing that you need to keep in mind.
This is why classic immigration, classic assimilation was always considered to be multi-generational.
Aristotle and I think Aquanas eventually talked about three-generation immigration and how that allows you to ultimately vet whether or not someone is absorbing the culture.
They're going to contribute.
They're interested actually assimilating and not just creating some kind of ethnic beachhead.
And that's what allows you.
It's the time.
It's the investment.
It's the multi-generational effort.
That's what shows that you're somebody who wants to be part of a culture who wants to be an American.
And this is why you still see the Dutch in certain parts.
This is why you still see, you know, these different cultures still manifest themselves in the, you know, the, the, the, the Midwest or, you know, the, the, the Northeast.
You can continually see the kind of the ethnic imprint.
But the difference is, you know, America was forming at that time and we had to fill a lot of land.
We had to conquer.
We had an entire nate or entire continent basically that we needed to take over because if we didn't, some other European power was going to do it, right?
And so we had to fill that land.
That's why you saw so many large waves of immigration, especially as we pushed west, because if we just simply didn't put physical bodies in those areas, I mean, think about what's still happening near the Mexican border, right?
We never truly populated those areas.
And so in a way, kind of just whether we draw these kind of artificial lines or not, the natural barrier of the people who live there actually dictates who owns what area of any given nation.
So we were that way when we were forming, but we're beyond that now.
And it's okay to say, this was the way we had to be when we were becoming a nation.
But now that we've done that, we're something else.
You know, Rome started as a collection of thieves and criminals who came together originally.
I don't think that's how they ultimately define themselves a thousand years later saying, well, we were founded by thieves and criminals.
So that's just who we are.
They understood that there were different moments in their history.
They went from being a kingdom to a republic to an empire.
And it's okay as Americans to realize, okay, there was a moment where large-scale immigration and kind of these ethnic enclaves were a part of who we are.
But now we have to unify and we have to become something else.
And we no longer need to bring in, you know, 20, 30, 40 million people to conquer the frontier.
That would be kind of exciting if like the moon just turned into like the Battle Bots TV show and it was just like all the countries dropping in robots.
I was like, seeing who can be like, like, who does like the Czech Republic defends like a rock star robot?
So the only other thing I'll say about mass immigrant, because I think we might be going to super chats pretty soon.
The last thing about the immigration, one thing that we could, we could do with these people as if they're slave servants to be used is replace the birth rate decline.
If we're suffering actually a birth rate decline that some of these people that come here could be used for menial labor or just earn your citizenship through work or something.
So the problem is that that fails every time because the immigrant population's birth rate drops immediately after a generation or two.
So bringing those people in makes them low birth rate faster than they replace your lack of birth rate.
So this is always like a temptation, an understandable logical temptation to solve this problem, but it reliably produces the opposite results because not only do these people become less and less likely to replace themselves, even though they had a higher fertility rate when they came in, they also depress the fertility rate of the native population.
Studies show repeatedly that higher immigration reduces the native fertility.
So not only are you making a devil's bargain in the fact that these people are going to tank their own fertility rate, they're also going to tank yours in the process.
Yeah, we shouldn't be like, this kind of counters like a lot of things we say here at Temkist, but like, as Americans, we shouldn't be forced to have 10 kids apiece just to compete with foreign invaders.
We should be able to deport them.
And so if someone has two kids, it's not like the end of the world.
I'm just saying, it's kind of crazy.
Some of the messaging online is like, let's have a ton of kids to compete with them.
And it's like, if you're having kids for political reasons, it's not a good reason to have a kid.
Like you said, the mass importation is one of the things that drives down fertility rates.
It increases the cost of health care.
It increases the cost of housing.
It reduces the ability to properly educate.
The school systems get worse.
The neighborhoods get more dangerous.
Fewer and fewer people are willing to pay the additional cost to move their children out of a suburban area or to educate them in a good school in those areas.
It's just everything.
It is the fix everything button.
Deporting the illegals just fixes everything.
All we have to do is have the will to make it happen.
The people that were critical of it were mostly, you know, kind of Lalbert style people or the left.
And I mean, essentially he's right.
You know, the people that voted for Donald Trump voted for deportations.
They want to see this.
So the idea that it's like, oh, you know, you're going to get the boot.
Like, no, we're not going to get the boot.
All we're asking for is, again, laws that were passed about immigration in a bipartisan manner to be enforced.
That's it.
It's not like there's some new laws that have been passed.
It's not some crazy, weird policy.
This is mundane stuff that countries do.
There are other countries where if you go into the country illegally, you go to jail for 10 years.
There are some places where you get killed.
Like if you go to North Korea and they catch you and you're there illegally, they will kill you.
Like deporting people, offering to pay people to leave the country is one of the most magnanimous things that any country has ever done.
So the idea that this is somehow beyond the pale because we say we want to actually have border enforcement and make sure that people that are here are only here legally, it's totally ridiculous.
The idea that the Trump administration is the boot is actually clown world.
And he's just like, look, libertarians are bad on this because they see any action by the state as a violation because it's just all ideological abstraction.
His point was we are doing real libertarianism by ensuring that we have borders that keep out people who won't want to be libertarian.
We have our own policies that drive people away, that disincentivize them to be part of this.
He recognizes the importance.
You could have a libertarian structure inside as long as you kind of have a nice little authoritarian structure on the outside, keeping the libertarians safe to do their thing.
I'm trying to walk this line between, because like I voted for Trump because I wasn't going to vote for the imperialist suggested candidate without any election, you know, Kamal Harris.
The thing about Franco is he gets to decide whether or not he went too far in getting rid of the communists because he's still around to think about what would have happened if he hadn't gotten rid of the communists.
I mean, like I'm saying, if you deport people, you see now that prices for housing are going down in places across the country because there are fewer people competing for those resources.
Everything in basically everything in the United States is a finite resource.
There is scarcity.
And so the more people that you have competing to buy things, the higher prices go.
The more people you have competing to occupy space, the higher prices go.
Part of the reason why health care is so expensive is because there are more people that are trying to get the health care from the hospitals.
You wait longer in the emergency room.
There are people that need services that can't get it because there are more people here trying to compete for them.
As soon as you can start walking or talking or something, like I said, I tell every baby this that's watching the show, get on Twitter, just start letting some tweets fly.
Jay Hamblins says, should they release body cam footage each week under the reason of transparency, so the normies get a taste of what ICE goes through on a daily basis, not just when they're being scrutinized?
So i'll say this, I have heard I cannot confirm but i've heard there might be an ice version of cops in production somewhere.
Uh, so we might get that regular body cam footage.
You know some, some of the best of the best out there.
I think that would be very entertaining.
Yes, we get transparency but, more important, just like a bunch of meth heads in Florida, we get to laugh at them being arrested and that's really what it's all about in the United States.
Till then, we're gonna play clean ball, though we're gonna make sure, you know, like that's great Movino's out of Minnesota coaching Carousel, this one lost a fingertip.
Here he says, can we deport the activist judges that went to block the end of the Haitian uh protected status to Haiti and keep the uh I don't know how to pronounce that of a woman here uh, pretty please.
Uh yeah, I mean obviously uh, activist judges can just head on out with the rest of them.
I think that uh ultimately the the, the Trump administration is probably going to come to that moment where they have to make a decision to break with the courts.
Uh, and that will be a very difficult moment.
Obviously, they want to stay within those bounds as long as possible.
They need a very egregious action by a judge to make any of that in any way justifiable, and that's something that they're going to have to choose, probably at some point, but I think they're going to play it inside the lines.
As long as they can yep, All right, let's see what else we got here.
We've got Wolf saying all the solutions are TOS violations and yet our supposed base patriots won't even risk those TOS violations, let alone actually enact said solution.
So funny thing about the last election, guess what?
The border is closed.
You have basically zero immigration happening right now.
You have deportations that would never be happening under Kamala Harris.
The J6ers are free.
I hear some people in this room might care a little bit about the election.
So I don't know.
Like, I hear you.
Like, I'm an anti-democracy guy.
I think democracy is stupid.
I can't wait till it goes away.
But while it is still our legitimating, like, you know, the way that we ultimately decide who's going to be in charge of the government, at least theoretically, then we do have to care about elections.
It doesn't change everything.
It's not a fix-all solution, but it still matters.
And it's a relatively low effort way to like use your political power.
So at the very least, get out there and vote for the guy who's going to give you deportations, a closed border, and freed political prisoners.
Maybe he doesn't give you everything you want.
Maybe he does some things you don't like.
Maybe you go around saying those things and telling people why those are bad.
But I just don't understand why you'd say, no, those things just don't matter at all.
The thing is, there are not people in shackles right now.
That's really the thing.
Like they look at the situation with J6 and they're like, well, they had a bunch of people in chains right away.
Why hasn't Donald Trump done that?
And whereas I understand that frustration, if you just arrest people without having all of the evidence put together, especially if you're talking about RICO charges or something, some big stuff, if you just arrest people and you don't put, you know, they get found not guilty, you can't arrest them again.
We have a law that says in the Constitution, it says you can't be tried for the same crime twice.
So if they fail, if they arrest people and fail, they lose the opportunity.
And I understand there are people like, oh, they're not going to do anything.
Like, I get it.
But just like Oren was saying, this is like things are night and day better than they were under Joe Biden.
Things would be incredibly terrible if we had Kamala Harris.
It would be everything that Joe Biden did on 10.
So I understand people being frustrated, but there have been victories.
And to blackpill when we've had a lot of victories kind of seems silly to me.
I go to church and I like Christians, but I'm not a man of faith.
Why do you have faith?
I feel too angry to believe.
Well, let me tell you this, man.
I'm very lucky.
I grew up in the church.
My parents had us there every time the door was open.
The faith is the faith of my fathers.
I've believed since I was young, and I can't imagine anything else.
The world has always been enchanted for me in a way that I know it isn't for a lot of people in modernity.
And that's not something I did or I achieved.
That's just a blessing that God gave me.
That said, if you're wondering how can you believe, you know, C.S. Lewis was a brilliant man who ran from God for a very long time.
And it wasn't until JRO Tolkien and several other very intelligent guys at Oxford came together and told him about how important it was that he pursued a relationship with Christ, that he believed in Christianity, that he ultimately found that it wasn't just the idea of some kind of, you know, academic problem, that actually those solutions came very quickly.
It was ultimately his resistance to faith, his wanting to fight against God, that was keeping him apart.
And I just think that, if you know, Tolkien and C.S. Lewis ultimately can believe in God, you can too.
They're pretty smart guys.
So it's it's both an intellectual journey and a philosophical journey, but most importantly, it is a journey of real faith.
It sounds like you're in a church.
It sounds like you want to learn and you want to believe.
Those are the first steps man you, you know you you, you walk, and then you run, you ask god for you know that faith and eventually, I believe, it will be delivered to you.
Yeah man, i'm not a Christian, I don't adhere to earth religions, but God seems to be real.
I don't know what it is, but it's like the spiraling vortex at the center of every proton and galaxy and universe, like it's this fractal re, you know resonation reverberation refractation, whatever.
It's just repetitive cycle that's reversing entropy, as far as I can tell, I don't know, seems to be real.
Most of the electricity in the United States is generated by coal or or whatever, but there are places that that have nuclear and and.
Uh, if you have like solar panels on your house and a battery in your house, or actually just solar panels on your house and you plug your car in, then that'll be getting it directly from the sun.
Yeah uh, handy man here says, uh tax, Tax incentives in Hungary, let's see, tax incentive is what Hungary did to increase birth rates.
Yeah, and there's mixed results on that.
Some show that you see a bump, but it doesn't create long-term benefits.
I think that we should economically orient ourselves to having families and having children.
We should stop treating Americans as the individual being the most important unit, instead recognize that families are what create the future of the country and we should make our investments there.
That said, all the tax code fixes, all the financial fixes, they're great, but nothing replaces a people who sees a future for themselves, who understands themselves as a collective entity working towards something.
They want to see themselves reflected in the future.
That's what ultimately gets people to have children.
Oswald Spangler said that once a civilization has to ask the question, should we have children?
Civilization is basically over.
Because once children stop being a natural rhythm, a natural outcome, the telos of your civilization, it starts to find reasons not to have them and ultimately dies off.
So I agree with you that the tax incentives are a good move, but they're not a final way to fix this issue.
They're ultimately something that is only a stepping stone to understanding that you should be working to further your nation and your understanding of the future as a people who want to see their way of life continue.
And I mean, Hungary might have been an exception because, I mean, South Korea, Japan have been trying similar strategies and their birth rates are continuing to decline.
But it's, again, a question of political capital, as I think many different gentlemen on this panel pointed out simultaneously, bagging somebody like Tim Walz, but I think send a far stronger message.
Someone who's in the zeitgeist, who's obviously guilty of being involved, very likely, allegedly, in fraud and all of these things, facilitating that behavior.
I think that ultimately that's what we should be aiming for.
I get the frustration, but the Trump administration is taking action.
We encourage them to take more action, just sitting there and go, nothing ever happens.
I think that's just a way to blackpill.
I think that's a way to try to be right all the time instead of invest in things that should actually be happening.
Yeah, perma bears are right once in a while, but they're just still just perma bears, right?
You know, if you're constantly saying that the sky is falling, then eventually, you know, when something bad happens, you can just be like, oh, see, I was right, I was right.
And you never have to deal with the fact that you're wrong all the time until you're right, you know.
You know, NASA is just days away from its first chance to launch Artemis 2, the first astronaut mission to the moon since 1972, and will attempt a critical test for the lunar flight on Monday, February 2nd.
So that was today.
Ahead of the first launch window for Artemis 2, which runs from February 8th to February 11th, NASA will complete a mission countdown simulation to power on and fuel the Space Launch System rocket.
Operators were called the station Saturday evening, about 49 hours ahead of simulated T-Zero, currently scheduled for Monday at 9 p.m.
See our complete coverage for critical test here.
So it's been a long time since we've been to the moon.
If you believe in that sort of thing, I do.
Don't get any weird ideas.
But do you guys think that the United States building a base on the moon?
Because that's what this is in preparation for.
They're going to go travel around the moon, and they're going to land again.
They're going to start building a base on the moon in order to be a launch point to get to Mars, right?
That's the idea.
We get a base on the moon.
It's easier to launch from the moon to go to Mars than to launch from the Earth.
Do you guys think that this is a worthwhile endeavor?
Do you think that this is a new frontier that people should, that the United States should be pushing, or do you think that this is a waste of time?