US Deploys 3,000 More Marines, 82nd Airborne Deploy To IRAN, WE ARE GOING IN | Timcast IRL
Tim Pool and guests dissect the U.S. deployment of 3,000 Marines and the 82nd Airborne to Iran, debating whether this escalation targets Karg Island or signals a failed peace strategy amidst rising oil prices. The conversation explores deep-fried ice cream, Texas City refinery sabotage theories, and the political fallout of the SAVE Act's failure due to filibuster rules. As Boomer influence wanes and Millennials dominate future elections, the group analyzes shifting demographics, the decline of cable TV, and the potential for regime change in Iran through Mossad infiltration rather than direct American intervention. [Automatically generated summary]
Okay, maybe not, but there's this new report that they've increased the age limit for enlistments to 42, and they don't care if you've been convicted of marijuana or light drug possession.
So the 42-year-old thing is obvious.
They want older people to be able to join the military.
I wonder why.
They're also giving out steak and lobster to our troops.
And the best part is the marijuana thing, because I'm like, okay, now they're basically saying we need to open up the pool a little bit wider.
That one's targeting Gen Z.
But here's the interesting thing.
The real concern over the draft, immigrants are worried.
Not a joke.
This is the report.
Young people are kind of like, I'm undraftable because they're just like hikikomori.
If you know what that means, it means they sit at home and play video games all day and they don't go outside.
But immigrants are like, uh-oh.
And there's a lot of people saying, you know, it would be funny if Biden brought in 20 million illegal immigrants from Honduras, not for the economy, but to just unload them all in Iran.
And then as John Bolton would say, this time next year, we'll be eating pantanos and baliera in Tehran, which he never said, but would be absolutely hilarious if Iran just became like new Honduras.
But the big news, of course, is, my friends, if you've been following this show, you are not surprised to learn that we are deploying the 82nd Airborne Division, 3,000 more troops to the Middle East.
The speculation being this will be for the occupation of Karg Island, the key oil distribution hub for Iran.
And we had been talking about this.
We had heard rumors in the area about, you know, people who know other people, who see them packing up and getting ready to go, rumors of deployment.
And it appears that it's actually going to happen.
As many are saying, this is increasing the probability that we will see boots on the ground in Iran.
That being said, Donald Trump has said he's in peace negotiations with Iran, and they gave him a truly, truly wonderful gift related to oil and natural gas, but he's not going to tell you what it is.
And that's good, but I got to be honest, all the while we're being told that things are winding down, but all of the military action we see shows a dramatic escalation.
Several hours later, Donald Trump announced that he was canceling strikes on Iran.
At the time, I speculated: could this have been a cyber attack?
And Donald Trump pulled back on the attack to avoid an escalation of war between Iran and the United States.
I don't know.
Interestingly, yesterday, only a few hours after Donald Trump announced postponing the attack in Iran, an oil refinery exploded.
Now, that's just some wacky speculation, right?
Except a Saudi X account posted only a few hours before the explosion that just across the street, there would be an oil refinery explosion and then deleted it.
But it's too late.
The internet is forever.
It was captured and reposted, suggesting there was foreknowledge of this explosion at the plant, which makes one wonder: was this a cyber attack?
We're going to talk about that and a whole lot more.
Joe Kent says he's willing to testify in the trial of Charlie Kirk, which is being called betrayal.
We got a lot to talk about.
Before we do, my friends, we've got a great sponsor for you.
Yo, it is pockethose.com.
This is one of the best sponsors ever.
It's literally a hose and it shrinks and you hook it up and it grows.
That's all you need to know, right?
This episode is brought to you by Pocket Hose, the world's number one expandable hose.
Old-fashioned hoses get kinks and creases at the spigot.
But the Copperheads pocket pivot swivels 360 degrees for full water flow and freedom to water with ease all around your home.
When you're done, this rust-proof anti-burst hose shrinks back down to pocket size for effortless handling and tidy storage.
Plus, your super light and ultra-durable pocket hose copperhead is backed with a 10-year warranty.
The brand new pocket hose copperhead with pocket pivot.
It's a total game changer.
Richard Karn from Home Improvement did a TV ad with Pocket Hose, and I thought it looked incredible.
That's a script, but honestly, I actually did.
And my wife and I were laughing.
Like, look, they got the guy from Home Improvement.
He's back and he's selling hoses.
That's incredible.
The way it grows from pocket size to full size in seconds is amazing.
And when you're done, it just shrinks way back down for a limited time.
All of the listeners of this show can get a free pocket pivot and their 10-pattern sprayer with the purchase of any size Copperhead hose.
Just text Tim to 64,000.
That's Tim to 64,000 for your two free gifts you could purchase.
Tim to $64,000.
Message and data rates may apply.
See terms for details.
But of course, my friends, don't forget to also smash that like button.
Until I had a hard pivot when Donald Trump came out of the elevator, and now I'm firmly in the America First Camp, and I run a lot of different campaigns actually against my old friends within the Republican Moore establishment.
Pentagon prepares to send another 3,000 troops to the Middle East.
The decision to move the Army's 82nd Airborne Division to the region heightens the possibility U.S. troops will enter Iran.
No decisions have been made for troops into the country, according to defense officials who confirmed the planned deployment.
But the buildup of troops is a drastic escalation.
The 82nd has a quick reaction force that can deploy around the world within 18 hours, but it's not clear if that division will head to the region.
The troops increase comes a month into U.S. military airstrikes against Iranian military forces and infrastructure.
And amid spiraling gas prices, Iranian officials block access to the Strait of Hormuz, through which about a fifth of the world's oil passes.
U.S. Central Command, which oversees the effort, said Tuesday that U.S. aircraft and missile attacks have destroyed more than 9,000 military targets inside Iran since the attacks started February 28th.
Military officials have said the strikes targeted around missile launchers, Navy, and defense industrial base.
Strikes have also killed dozens of the regime's leadership.
The U.S. already has 50,000 troops in the region.
The increase suggests potential for more involvement, such as taking control of the strait by force.
So it is being speculated heavily that we are going to occupy Karg Island, a small island in the Gulf where Iran does most of its oil distribution.
Trump keeps saying things are getting better.
We destroyed them.
They're all but defeated.
This is the end.
We're having peace talks, but everything we're seeing from the military is suggesting an escalation.
So I actually want to throw it to Elad first because you're, I mean, you've been like dancing on the table, tap dancing, excited with joy about what's going on.
What do you think is happening?
Do you think Trump is nearing peace or do you think we are going to go in and just full-scale war?
Look, I knew the president was not going to allow this regime to get a nuclear weapon because he's been crystal clear on this issue for decades.
I know a lot of people like to project their politics onto the president and pretend that the president is flipping a new script all of a sudden, but he's actually been extremely consistent when it comes to this issue about Iran not being able to get a nuclear weapon.
And actually, I saw Michael Tracy actually quote this, the president talking about this 20 some odd years ago, saying how he would take Karg Island if it came down to it, if push came to shove.
So I don't know.
You must be a little bit conflicted.
It sounds like you worked for a lot of neocons in the past and now have kind of, I don't know, would be too supportive of an act like this.
It seems like John McCain's wet dream.
Maybe you would know a little bit more about that than I would.
Yeah, I'm conflicted on it, especially since I spent so much time working for, I feel like, that wing of the party.
And then I left it in like a kind of public breakup.
I did a lot of interviews about it.
And now I feel like I'm right back in it.
And I am very nervous about this.
Well, I didn't want any more foreign intervention.
I still don't fully understand what the purpose is of why we are there.
Also, Iran is an extraordinarily complicated country.
It's 90 million people.
You have 90 different religious factions.
And also, they don't care about human life.
So when you say that, like, if we take Karg Island, and yes, it'll hurt their economy, but like the Iranian regime doesn't give a shit about their economy.
Like, they can let their people starve.
And all they have to do to win the war is just outlast us.
And so we've seen this before when Donald Rumsfeld went on TV and told us that we were going to be going to Iraq for two days and then it was two weeks and then it was two months and Rumsfeld went out there and it's the exact same thing now.
They're telling us two days, then two weeks, then two months, then it's two years and then it's 20 years.
And so having said all that, I'm praying and hoping for the best.
And I do think President Trump is a wonderful commander-in-chief and a great leader.
And I do think it's preposterous that like Netanyahu can just walk in and tell President Trump to go do something and he would do it.
Trump is famous for bringing in a lot of different opinions, letting people duke it out, and then making a decision.
So I, you know, if there's, if there is an off-ramp at this point, I would love to see it.
But I don't see how there is an off-ramp.
I think that now is a good time to buy Raytheon or Palantir.
I mean, that is kind of, I think it's almost maybe a miscalculation.
I don't know if it's a miscalculation.
I think it's consistent with the Don Rowe doctrine, which is, again, when you're negotiating with these countries, you assume they're all self-interested.
They're all driven by economic, you know, economic gain, these sorts of things.
And that's worked very well thus far through both Trump administrations.
That's kind of the miscalculation, I think, with Iran, to your point.
They're driven by things that are sort of detached from like tangible assets, right?
We're talking like oil, energy, economics by and large.
Like they're driven by fanaticism.
I think that is the point that these really, like these Iranian hawks are making.
That's correct, is they are driven by fanaticism.
That's an argument against getting into a prolonged war with them because again, like you said, Iran, victory for them is just surviving.
But in a certain aspect, the 12-day war set us up for this war because Israel was able to take out most of Iran's air defenses.
So it set the situation up such that we could advantageously have this opportunistic war right now.
And I mean, I said this at the top of the show.
All things considered, I think this is a good use of American power.
And fortunately, the casualties have been extremely low.
And I hope they continue to be.
I think we have a kill-death ratio of something like one to 100.
Still, obviously, all these deaths are too much.
But I went to a Pentagon briefing with Secretary Hegseth the other day where he said he went to the dignified transfer for a couple of soldiers that were killed.
And the families told him to finish the job and not let his death and these service members' death be in vain.
So just, you know, that's where my mindset's at.
I know you guys also represent a wing of the party, an emerging wing.
It's hard to say what exactly is going on, though, because according to many of these polls, people, Republicans, at least, are trusting the president's plan and are letting him cook.
That's true, but he needs independent voters, and the Republicans need independent voters if they want to win in November.
And this message that keeps going out, like, well, Republicans are behind Trump.
It's like, congratulations.
We always knew that.
Democrats have always been opposed.
Republicans always support.
It's the very thin middle that you need to convince, and they are not being convinced.
Now, you can call it whatever you want.
I honestly believe a good portion of these quote-unquote podcaster personalities would say whatever the advertiser dollars direct them to.
And I'm not going to call it anybody, but I'm not talking about Tucker Carlson.
I don't know what his deal is or what he believes or why he's doing what he's doing.
A lot of people have accusations, but he's got something going on.
Like, I mean, and I don't mean negatively.
I mean, like, whatever it is he's doing, he's doing.
But there are certain personalities that have no business in politics that I guarantee you, if you went to them with like a $10 million deal and said, just, you know, don't be mean to the president, support him, they'd say yes.
They'd say, okay, in two seconds.
Because these guys, these middle door guys, don't know anything about the region or politics or otherwise.
I'm not saying they're right or wrong.
I'm saying when someone who doesn't know where Iran is tells me what they think about this war, I question their motivations.
Well, I mean, I'm not tuning into like the Theo Vaughn show for like a nuanced take on geopolitics, but like it is worthwhile.
Like, I think the useful polling that we would need to see is what did first-time Trump voters, what do they think about the war?
I think that would give you an indication of like the status of the coalition.
Because, you know, everyone's declaring that the 2024 coalition is dead, et cetera, et cetera.
And you do see polling like, within MAGA, it has 100% support.
It's like, yeah, because that's what it selects for.
It selects for people that are in favor of decisions Trump makes.
So again, if you're against the Iran war, then you're probably not considered part of the MAGA polling group anymore.
And that's when you would need to go back and look at that initial batch of 2024 Trump voters, really determine how popular is this war.
And then again, it's like, I think even President Trump is starting to realize that this might have been a miscalculation you're seeing on his truth social feed.
It's kind of like he's a little upset.
It's kind of clear.
He's saying, we're just going to bomb all their energy fields.
And then he'll come back around and say, Israel shouldn't have done that.
That was a mistake.
Like, I think he's starting to realize that we might have undercalculated what's going on here.
Army raises enlistment age to 42, removes waiver from marijuana possession.
Hey, that last one, that's for you, Gen Z.
So, they want to make sure they can get as many people as possible in.
And so, I can imagine they're having a meeting.
Like, what do we do?
Well, why don't we allow older people to join?
Hey, look, 40 is the new, you know, was it 40 is the new 30, right?
These guys can still fight.
And they're like, What about young people?
Well, why can't we recruit young people?
They smoke too much weed.
Let them in anyway.
So, it looks like when you get a story like this and they're saying they want to increase enlistment, and so they're changing the rules instead of offering incentives, it sounds like they're really trying to get a lot of people in right now.
And of course, there have been concerns.
At least I would argue they may be fake, but the left liberal media has been reporting fears of a potential military draft over this conflict.
What people need to understand about Iran: 90 plus million people.
This is not Afghanistan.
If you think it was hard, if you know that it was hard enough for the U.S. to deal with goat herders with AK-47s in a desert country, imagine what it's going to be like going to a mountainous, 90-million-person strong country.
They can take out military targets, but you do not get regime change with 90 million people without occupying that country by force.
I'm saying, let's say we've stretched our physical force to its limit, and the president says we need any able-bodied man who fits this category, whether you're trained or otherwise.
I'm just imagining, you know, it's like the boat crashes on the shores of Iran and then like Elad runs out and he looks to his left and there's Lindsey Graham and Lindsey Graham's like, I can't believe I'm fighting alongside you, Elad.
I don't want to romanticize war, but isn't there something so romantic about, you know, you and the boys fighting against the ops and like, Tate, if you got hurt, shot in the arm and I'm holding you in my arms and saying no and then like avenging your injury.
To come full circle for a second, back to this story.
I think this was on the list of like three different things to increase military recruitment.
And like that was way overdue.
Of course, expanding the age range, but also like this waiver for marijuana is very overdue.
I think there's a lot of people who could serve despite having minor possession convictions.
I think there was also one other thing and that's the grooming standards.
As I understand, like there's a strict grooming standard in the military and black people deal with this differently than other people because their beards grow in differently and it's very curly and like it causes.
I was at a meeting in the Pentagon recently and this marijuana thing came up because they were actually talking about the context of how Trump has been talking about how he wants more shipmaking in the United States.
But like to build ships, there's not a labor force here in the United States.
And even to build out the ports to have to do it.
They were struggling with it.
And really it came up with me like the biggest problem was marijuana possession or use.
If you like when you become a contractor for the Department of War, even if it's just to build this facility or to enlist, you have to say that you've never smoked marijuana before.
And so that takes out almost all of the workers that you would have to do like some construction jobs like this.
And so there was really no way to proceed with building these huge new bases and things Trump wants to do without removing that waiver.
I think it's more so just we want to get as many people as possible to sign up and we're going to remove the restrictions.
I wouldn't be surprised if like, look, if we actually did invade Iran and we were in full-scale war with 90 million people, I know that's not the entire size of their army or whatever.
No, what you do is you fly over Iran with all of the addicts, and then you give one like, you know, carrier with a bunch of crackheads, one with a bunch of meth heads, one with a bunch of heroin addicts.
And then what you do is, as they're all like sitting there, like freaking out, you walk up to like, you know, they open the hatch or whatever, and then he dangles a bunch of baggies and says, you guys want this?
And he chucks it out, and they all run full speed and just jump out to go get it.
A rise in online searches related to U.S. military drafts is revealing growing anxiety among immigrants and non-citizens following recent changes to federal law that automate selective service registration.
A new report from Mendoza Immigration Law found that Google search activity in March of 26 spiked dramatically, with some searches increasing by as much as 5,000%.
The data suggested growing concern over how personal information collected through draft registration could be shared across federal agencies.
If Joe Biden brought in 20 million illegal immigrants and the play was to send them all to Iran, I ain't even mad.
See, when you caramelize the plantains, they are sweet and delicious, but bananas would melt and break apart.
So, anyway, the point is: could you imagine if like the Israelis, the Israelis finally go into Iran to like finalize the occupation after the country's been conquered?
And when they get to Iran, it's just basically Honduras.
There's like just burrito and taquitos everywhere, and everyone's speaking Spanish.
Well, you're connecting some dots for me because if this was a long game by Biden here, then lifting the marijuana restrictions would make sense for Hunter to be deployed.
If this is a Biden family operation here, yeah, Hunter goes.
So they've already, there was already a couple legislators a few years ago that were trying to get a bill passed to grant citizenship to illegal immigrants if they serve in the military.
I would not be surprised if a big reason that Biden was like, bring as many as possible in, is because they're going to go to them and say, you go fight for us, and when you come back, you're a citizen, knowing that a lot of them ain't coming back, if any at all.
An illegal if they served our country patriotically over, I don't know, let's say the course of four years, then they could have like a pathway to citizenship.
Yeah, I think it would have to be an extended service, like eight years, not a single, you know, four-year.
So, and uh, and you got to consider that there, there's, there's, there's a darkness to this question because what you're basically saying is most of them aren't coming back.
If we said we got 10 million males of fighting age, as everyone was pointing out, and we're going to just drop you in the country and just take it over, like we got narco gangs.
You know, why is it that Joe Biden wants so many rapists and murderers?
I know, no, no, we need to keep them because we're going to drop them in Iran and let them just do their thing.
It's kind of like if you took a cat and threw it into a like a rabbit pen and just like watched what happened, yeah, that cat would go nuts.
It'd just be mauling everybody, and the rabbits would be freaking out.
Now, honestly, the rabbits might actually kill the cat, but 10 cats.
So, the challenge there is some bad people might come back.
I get it.
But while I would like to say yes, understanding that what you're saying is, you know, six million are probably going to die.
If we actually, like, this is a country of 90 million people.
And if you do, like, a foreign legion, you also have this problem.
The French Foreign Legion had this problem is since they were, you know, they're having activities in Western Africa, a lot of Western Africans would go and join the French Foreign Legion and then come back and start settling scores right away.
You just have, it's like, where did Emmanuel go?
And he's like burning down like a rival tribes village with a French double Asian problem.
Yeah, we'd probably have like a similar issue with like these guys just going back to like the Middle East and just settling scores.
That's the argument is by Greenland because then they go and fight, and then you give them at the end of the war, they get a plot of land in Greenland, and they get to live in the United States.
Iceland is starting to build some too because they've got geothermal, which is actually a great source to use energy instead of taking it from other things we're using, geothermal.
It'd be like the arcade where everyone, they give you a ticket and then you go to the counter and you can exchange for your plot of land or you can get a penthouse in Gaza City.
You open a Korean barbecue, but everyone's dressed in like North Korean jumpsuits.
And then when you order like a pound of brisket, they give you a half pound.
They go, that's a pound.
And then like, when you walk up to it, we're going to do a trick with the windows where inside looks really nice, but when you walk in, it's actually dingy and gross.
Or it's actually, I don't want to, you don't want it to be gross, but it'll be like plain.
Like from the outside, we'll do, like, have you ever seen those screens?
They're see-through with like a mesh.
I don't know how they do it, but like at our cades, they have this thing where it's like, it's glass you can see through, but this is a touch screen as well.
We'll do that.
So from the outside, it looks like there's candles and a nice TV.
No, what we do is every like every hour we stage an error where like the like a guy will run out from the from the back of the kitchen being like, I'm so sorry, I messed up your order.
I'm so sorry.
And then he gets dragged to the back room and you hear screaming.
So shortly before this, Donald Trump announced he was postponing strikes on Iran.
Seven years ago, June 21st, 2019, Donald Trump came out and said he was stopping.
He was calling off an attack on Iran because the casualties would be too great and it was disproportionate to Iran had shot down a U.S. drone.
So he's like, no, no, no, we don't want to kill that many people over this.
We're not going to do it.
However, a few hours before Trump made the announcement, a refinery in PA exploded.
At the time, I speculated this could be what's called ICS sabotage or industrial control system sabotage.
That is, we know for a fact our adversaries have hacked into our industrial control systems to destroy them.
We do the exact same thing.
And it's largely viewed in cyber warfare as a mutually assured destruction moment, a Mexican standoff.
Every country's got their finger over the button that would destroy the critical infrastructure of adversarial nations.
Now, here's where it gets interesting.
This morning I speculated saying, look, I really don't know.
Probably just a coincidence, right?
Except I was unaware of, not this post, this post here from at Amuse, who tweeted, a Saudi X account posted a specific threat against the Port Arthur Motiva refinery one hour before the nearby Valero explosion in the same city.
He deleted the post and all 4,739 of his previous tweets immediately after.
This account is a Saudi X account created in April of 23, connected via Saudi Android app, posted a specific warning that Motiva Enterprises in Port Arthur, Texas, the largest U.S. refinery at up to 720,000 barrels a day, would be destroyed within a week.
The post went up about an hour before the Valero refinery explosion rocked the same city.
But I went through, he wiped all of his tweets, but all of his, when he tweeted at someone, you could still read it.
So I just put in his, and like, he was, I don't know if he's like a terrorist or something, but he's just always talking about foreign policy and stuff.
But this could be one of those things, like, you know, the people that will like tweet the prediction of a sports game like a year before, but they tweet like 100 predictions.
So one of them, when it does hit, they delete all the other ones and they're like, see, possibly I got that right.
And I think he may have been seen as a tweet of different predictions.
We don't know how much damage has been done, but if that facility were to go down or offline in what is already a very delicate oil market, it would be very bad.
Well, it exploded, and that is going to cause problems.
It wasn't the Motivo, but it was right across the street from it.
And I believe there is a very strong probability that these things are ICS sabotage.
This is basic cyber warfare.
This is the first level of cyber warfare.
It's rudimentary.
I've seen demonstrations.
It is not hard to do.
I think one demonstration I saw at the Black Hat convention in Vegas, security researchers said only a couple lines of code can blow up any, any refinery, any industrial chemical plant, water processing.
They use the same pumps.
And you can do a couple of things.
You can set the pressure limit high so that the pressure keeps building up until a pipe bursts.
And Valero, from what I understand, people could fact check this, but this is from what I understand.
They're headquartered in San Antonio.
San Antonio is military city, USA.
There's like four bases there.
And Valero is also the primary defense contractor for like energy supply for a lot of the Air Force specifically.
So I did see people speculating that, look, if there were going to be a foreign attack on refinery of some sort, this would be the number one target.
This is like, it would be kind of obvious almost as, again, you go for Valero because Valero is a domestic oil producer and they are the defense contractor of choice.
They also, this refinery process is heavy crude, which is what Venezuela has, which is kind of interesting because Venezuela and Iran had some deep ties.
And so if Iran wanted to retaliate against Venezuela's new, like working with the U.S. government, then hitting this facility would make sense.
And it seems largely like the very pro-Iran war, pro-Trump factions are the most, I don't know what the right word is, a combination of skeptical and offended.
The response that I've seen are that the most Arduino Trump supporters are like, this is ridiculous.
It never happened.
Because the implication is that we are being attacked.
And they don't want the narrative to be that Trump gets involved in this war and then the U.S. is paying the price domestically in any way.
It is much more than a buck or two, though, because it's going to be a buck or two.
It's going to go to, I think, $175.
If you saw the United CEO put out a press statement yesterday that they're preparing to raise all flights by 20%.
So you start to do your flights and then also oil prices.
That involves everything from, you know, you driving to work, planes, machinery that you work.
But then on top of that is 70% of the world's fertilizer supply comes from there.
Fertilizer is food.
It will decimate our food supply.
Not only, you know, in the United States, we're a little bit more insular to that, but allies across the region, across the country, the fertilizer is like just as you could see a massive famine from this in places like India.
I've become less and less concerned with our allies as it becomes more abundantly clear that they are just spineless and not willing to help us when it matters.
It seems as though they're more of a burden and drag us into things more than anything else.
I think Scott Bessett put it most succinctly, though.
He said, we're going to have to deal with 50 days of higher prices for 50 years of no Iran nukes.
So I think that's the current pitch from the administration.
I think there are things that we could do to help curb the issue of high gas prices in the United States that we should look into.
As an exporter, if I saw an autist gaming out on Twitter, he was just saying, like, best case scenario is what Trump is doing, which is you ease sanctions on Iran.
And I went down to Venezuela not long ago, actually.
And I was initially against it, mainly because I was against the narrative that we were doing this because of drugs.
And I'm like, that doesn't make sense.
No drugs come out of Venezuela.
The drugs come out of Colombia.
Like, Venezuela doesn't need to launder drugs.
They launder oil, like, in gold.
And so I just felt like we were being, we started blowing up boats, or I called the canoes.
I'm like, I don't really understand what we're doing there.
And I think there were two different, again, this is why I love Trump.
He'll bring in different factions to come and debate, and then he chooses the course to take.
There were factions that wanted a full regime change there, which was to go in, take Maduro, and then bring in MCM, who is the opposition party leader.
I thought that would be a disaster.
And especially because Venezuela is 23 million people.
They're in our backyard.
They already had a massive migrant crisis that led to them all flowing here.
And so if you start a civil war and just take out the leader and regime in Venezuela and then just abandon it, then like you could see real famine, inflation, and then migration.
But what Trump ended up doing is he took what the real hawkish, you know, my South Floridians wanted, which was to topple the Maduro regime.
But then by putting Delcey Rodriguez in charge, he was the vice president there who I've met.
She's very smart and stuff.
And then basically he owns her now, right?
She has to do everything they said.
He was able to do it where there was no protesting in the streets, no loss of life, really.
So he kept the regime intact.
But we got the objectives we wanted, which was to neutralize what could be a threat there.
I mean, they were close to the Iranians and Russians or other.
They were selling all their oil to like pennies on the dollar to China.
And now we really get to be the ones to export all that and secure that.
And there's also a lot of other natural resources that Venezuela has.
So I think it was flawlessly executed by President Trump.
And I think he took several opinions and meshed that together.
And I was a skeptic, but I'm very, very pleased with the outcome.
There is some chatter now about something similar being done in Cuba.
I know you're a little bit reluctant to support what the president is doing in Iran, but what do you think of a potential regime change or similar to Venezuela move in Cuba?
I know you have those again, those Florida connections.
You could give us a tidbit about why this matters so much in Florida and the influence of that in Washington.
Yeah, so I just reread Marco Rubio's book because I was trying to get inside of his head as we were going through all these Venezuela negotiations.
Yeah, his father's dying wish was for him to liberate Cuba.
I think for Rubio, this is like very, and even Venezuela, Venezuela, it was weird.
Like Maduro's security guards were all Cuban.
And so the Cuban intelligence, they were directly linked.
So I think Rubio's thought was if you, you know, take down Venezuela and cut off Cuba, that was their only financial resource and lifeline.
So for me, I'm just, I'm less interested in Cuba because they have no natural resources.
Yes, they have beautiful beaches.
It's a cool tourism spot.
But like Venezuela was a strategic, incredibly important country of like 23 million people on a coast with a ton of oil.
And more importantly, they have a lot of gas.
Cuba, you can build hotels at the end of this.
So I'm like, but for Ruby, I get that it's deeply personal.
You could topple the Cuba regime in like eight seconds.
I don't like, we went in and captured Maduro, no problem.
We took out half the Iranian regime, no problem.
We can't find Nantikon three, so that's confusing.
But I'm assuming they could find and take out the Cuban leadership.
But I think that that is on pause right now because I think it's taking a lot of our, whether or not Secretary Ruby or high-level State Department folks, their time away from like Iran is now what everyone actually should be focused on or working.
But I think Cuba will fall fairly easily.
But it's really just South Floridians.
It's about 700,000, I think.
And maybe even, actually, maybe unless that might be combined with Venezuelans who live in South Florida.
And this, I mean, that's what they really care about.
But it's been so long that any of them have gone back.
A lot of their families have passed away.
Like a lot of people grew up with their parents came over here.
Like they've never been.
And so I do think it is that loudness about liberating Cuba has really died out on a national stage.
But, you know, Pam Bondi is from Florida and got elected from this crowd.
Susie Wilde's White House Chief of Staff is from Florida.
But Vote Hub is projecting that the Democrat has won the Florida State House District 87 general election.
This goes along with the other story that we have from Media.
Yikes, yikes, yikes, seen in poll experts stunned by Trump's massive plunge with young men, showing that Trump is down on with men 40 points on the cost of living, a 40-point swing to minus 30 from plus 10 on cost of living.
And generally seeing he's minus seven among men.
I believe that the conservatives who are telling Republicans Trump is with, like, Trump is enjoying 100% support.
You know, CNN ran that story.
The goal of this is to trick conservatives into losing.
If you are actually trying to win a war and someone came to you and said, my liege, we've won on every front.
What are your orders?
And he's like, oh, okay, I guess maintain position.
And then what's actually happening is everyone's just getting brutalized and slaughtered.
The king loses.
A week later, they storm the gates and he's like, but I thought I was winning.
And they lived in this bubble where the rest of us living out in the country were like, yeah, he's going to lose.
Like, if you go talk to your neighbor or whatever else.
And this is why these polls are so dangerous.
And I think it is a form of suppression.
And I always say that I think polls are for strippers and firemen.
They're not for predicting elections.
And the problem with these is when you go ask the MAGA question where I was on CNN of like that question, the way they phrased it was: if you were a consider yourself a MAGA voter, if that's how you would check the box when they asked you that, which like a MAGA enthusiast, that that's the wing of the party that you're in, then it was just asking, do you still of Trump's approval?
Like I'm a MAGA voter and do I approve of Trump?
Yeah, like, of course I do.
I would walk over glass for that man.
But that doesn't mean you can't disagree with certain things.
And also, I do think, especially for someone like me who works in this field, I'm very vocal when I do disagree on things because this is what I like about Trump.
He listens to a lot of people.
So it's just Lindsey Graham on the golf course with him telling him to bomb Iran all day.
And the rest of us are just clapping, saying you have 100% support.
I don't know if it was discussed in the show previously, like while you guys are in Austin, but do you think there's any credibility to the idea that the Republicans don't want to pass the SAVE Act because they would just be getting primarily left and right?
Because a lot of these primary votes are propped up with probably a lot of shady tactics.
That's a fair point, but I view it more likely that Republicans and Democrats share the ethos of we here in Congress are smarter than you, and we know it.
And so they don't want people to vote.
Oh, I'm just imagining like Thune is sitting there with Democrats and he's going, oh, God, could you imagine if people voted for us?
And so, to be fair, I actually don't like the popular vote for the Senate, and it should be through state appointment.
But I think the actual view is we want procedural elections, not popular elections.
We want to win by the numbers of the machine, not by the whims of the people.
So if they pass the SAVE Act, you're going to actually have people making decisions.
So long as they don't, Democrats get elected by just convincing morons to vote who don't know what they're talking about.
What I hate most about this is that it feels so just theatrical.
The whole time, the president knew the SAVE Act wasn't going to pass.
John Cornyn knew the SAVE Act wasn't going to pass.
Chuck Schumer knew the SAVE Act wasn't going to pass.
Everybody knew that you needed 60 votes to overcome the filibuster.
And the Republicans don't have that.
They weren't going to flip, what, eight some odd Democrats to do that.
John Cornyn was never going to get rid of the filibuster.
Senators like the filibuster because it makes them more powerful.
It makes each individual, individual senator more powerful because now if you want to reach that 60 vote threshold, you need to compromise.
And that allows more people, more senators to stuff more pork in each bill to bring back home the bacon.
So it just, it feels like a dumb waste of time.
It feels like some people were let on.
This was used as a sort of pressure release valve for some people who thought we were going to get some form of voter ID ID, but it was never going anywhere.
And, you know, I felt like I was taking crazy pills for a moment because it was like, I don't know, am I missing something here?
See, I always, I always, you got to trace the money on these things.
First of all, a 60-vote threshold is not in the Constitution.
So that was a rule-making decision, I think, in 1913 that then kind of sprouted.
But it is like nowhere in the Constitution, it says you have 51 votes.
So it is ridiculous.
We have 60.
60 vote threshold came along with lobbying.
Why?
Because corporations did not want, think of your big pharma company and Elizabeth Warren or someone just goes and gets to drop a bill that says that like we need to lower insulin prices and you only need 51 votes.
And all of a sudden these senators actually really do have to be on record on a vote like that.
When you do the 60 vote threshold and there's never, you know, no one's ever had more than I think 56 or 57 of one party, then you can always blame the other side or whoever else and claim this bipartisanship.
But really it's a massive corporate lobby trying to keep this filibuster to exist because these senators would not be able to survive in their jobs if they were actually taking votes that we, the people, wanted them to take on things such as an 80-20 issue like voter ID.
So then it goes to the Democrats said we will lift the filibuster.
This was to pass HR1.
That was Nancy Pelosi's big their election bill, basically the same thing, that now they're saying you can't federalize elections.
It's like, okay, you all, all of you went on record saying you would nuke the filibuster to pass your HR1, which was federalizing elections in the way you want.
Two senators didn't, and that was Joe Manchin and Kirsten Sinema.
They are no longer senators because of that one vote alone.
Democrats only had 52 seats, so they couldn't get it passed to nuke.
You have to actually vote and get 51 to nuke the filibuster.
And in fact, Sinema couldn't even go to like a wedding in Arizona.
She would be booed out of it.
The Democrat base was so pissed.
So the Democrat Party has made their decision.
When they take power, the filibuster is gone.
Now we, Republicans, are in power, and we have all three branches of government, and we can't get Trump's agendas passed.
And I think it's sane that we're holding on to this filibuster rule that is not even in the Constitution.
And this is an incredibly important vote for them to take.
And at minimum, I think we should take a vote on the filibuster so they won't tell us which senators are against it.
Well, this would be if the Democrats take power and get enough seats and stuff.
So if they were in power right now, they would.
Schumer has already come out.
And then in fact, when Schumer, they were criticizing this talking filibuster.
The talking filibuster is different from nuking the filibusters.
The talking filibuster is basically you just talk exhaustively until that party, the other party goes home or has to leave.
And then they don't have a quorum until you can technically pass it with 51.
This was Mike Lee's idea.
And they all, everyone's like, we've never, John Thune came out and said, I've never even heard of this.
Well, I found a video from two years ago of Chuck Schumer calling to use the talking filibuster to pass HR1 when it was right after Sinema and Manchester have voted against nuking the filibuster.
So Michael E's idea was not wrong.
He was right to push for this.
And it's not nuking the filibuster, like using the talking filibuster is better.
But I think that these Republicans, like they just, they, I don't know, they don't want to do anything.
Like, and it's not that they're against voter ID or some of these senators, but they are so obsessed with the institution itself.
But now they're lying to us today and came out and said, oh, we can pass it through reconciliation.
I think, no, you can't.
The Senate parliamentary will never allow it.
You couldn't even get illegals who are on Medicaid.
We tried to get the Senate parliamentarian to, we tried to ban that in the big, beautiful bill, and the Senate parliamentarian stripped it out.
And the idea that you're going to get any part of the Save America Pass through reconciliation is a joke, but they just want to fundraise on Hannity and tell us that it's going to happen.
I think this is largely why young men especially are sour on Trump.
And I think just dudes in general are checked out.
I think the polling data shows exactly what a lot of people are suggesting right now in the space.
I'm going to go there.
I know that guys don't like to hear it, but this is why you've got a lot of people Kirk posting.
Erica Kirk content is massive female viewership, and guys have checked out.
They're just, they're over it.
I think the Iran war was a massive kick in the balls to a lot of guys.
And I think I feel like we got a one-two punch of mass demoralization right at this exact same moment.
And that is the Save Act failure, as well as the Iran war, told a lot of guys you've been wasting your time with this.
And so they're probably like, guys, let's go watch football.
What's the point?
We struggled, we screamed, and we clawed for years, and we're back at square one.
It's almost like you ever play a video game, and then it's like you forget to save, and you fight a boss and lose, and then you realize you didn't save, and now you got to go start from the beginning, and you're like, oh my God.
And you just throw the control down.
I'm not playing anymore.
That's what it feels like for a lot of people.
And then, so at the same time, there are in the metrics, a lot of behind the scenes, I'll tell you guys a secret.
A lot of people are pointing out, like, we're friends with some of these people who have been, you know, talking about Erica Kirk quite a bit, though we disagree with it.
Their viewership is skewed almost entirely female the moment you start talking about Erica Kirk and it makes a lot of money.
Your RPMs triple.
Your female viewership skyrockets.
Male viewership is massively crashing.
And that's what everybody's pointing out right now.
Even Joe Rogan had a viral clip where he was talking about Erica Kirk because everybody in the history knows this.
And what I will say to everybody is that behind the scenes, these conversations, like I had like an hour-long phone call with someone in the industry that you guys all know who it is.
I'm not going to say who it is, talking about how viewership is collapsing right now.
Everybody's experiencing it.
And the one thing I often hear is like, obviously, for those that are watching on Timcast IRL, between Rumble and YouTube, we have, I think, 32, 32, 33,000 concurrent viewers.
And we were hitting like 45, 50K two months ago.
Now we're down to like 33K.
It's not bad.
It's better than where we were comparably to the previous election cycle.
We have seen some growth, but it is seriously down.
And everybody is having conversations wondering what's going on and why it's happening.
And I think it's fair to say that men have checked out.
That's it.
Women don't care about this stuff and never did.
That's why our audience has always been 80% guys and 20% female.
And now you can see with the approval ratings of Trump among men dropping, they're not interested in this.
But the people who are hanging on are Trump supporters.
So they're saying, no, what's the problem?
They stand with Trump.
Then, of course, you've got the libertarians.
They were never going anywhere.
They were always going to be in politics complaining about something, right?
But the regular people that got on board when politics became pop culture, I think, are checking out.
And so I'll give you an example.
For my morning show, viewership's pretty dang good.
Like, it's fairly stable.
But I do like, I did a video about the woman getting a car accident.
It's general interest.
And then the videos that do the best are UFOs, aliens, space weather, like totally non-political stuff.
I think dudes have checked out of politics right now, and it's going to be apocalyptic in November for the Republicans.
I think it's going to be worse than people realize.
If this trend continues, we're not looking at Democrats just taking the House.
We're looking at a supermajority.
We're looking at like a 30-sweet, 30-seat swing or something absolutely insane with these numbers.
Yeah, you're kind of just seeing, you know, it retract back to the politicos, where it's just the people that are interested in politics are the ones tuning into political content.
I mean, to Tim's point, like, you know, I'll do uploads occasionally on his channel.
And by far, my best performing video was one of HOMAF.
And I like, I put out these different videos, and it's fine.
Like, I'm not, it's whatever, but I put out these videos and I bring all these different experts or whatever on like politically focused content to get like 10,000 views.
When I have like congressmen on it, like it's like 10,000 views, but then you start talking about like stuff that men are really at the top of their mind dating.
That's why we'll get into it later, I suppose, is the discourse right now again.
But this is the point: guys got heavily involved in politics.
Politics became pop culture.
And I think now I'll tell you, my honest feelings was like with the Iran war kicking off.
I was like, so Trump was, he was wrong about the 12-day war.
We did not disable their capabilities.
Now we're going back into war and it just, it feels like a one-two punch of demoralization.
You've got the SAVE Act failing, despite it being extremely popular.
And I think people are completely demoralized.
Like, oh, it was fake the whole time.
Trump's giving us war.
We didn't want that.
And I know, I know the Trump supporters are saying they're for it, but it's fascinating to see Trump supporters all of a sudden being like, a lot's right about everything.
Bro, come on.
Like three months ago, they were like, we don't like a lot.
He's wrong about everything.
Now they're all agreeing with him.
Hey, I got no problem if you're going to stand behind Trump the whole time.
I think Trump still is the best president of my lifetime.
I think we've had a bunch of miserable presidents and way better.
But my point is for young men, they're like, oh, Trump's doing the exact same thing.
What was the point?
Oh, the SAVE Act isn't getting passed.
What was the point?
Why were we spending time doing this?
Bro, I'm going to go order a pizza and go kick back and fish or something.
You know, I think we're also coming off of a high of like the pre-Trump era or like the early Trump era where all of the left was freaking out about everything that the president would do.
There was a ton of these women marches and Tifa and then there was the George Floyd riots and like media was really hitting a high then and the left was going crazy and there was transgenders everywhere.
And everybody was non-binary or gay.
There was every new what form of gay of LGBTQIA, CB.
And a lot of that stuff seemed to be dwindling down.
Yeah, like it was a lot.
There were a lot more.
There's a lot more much click more clickbaity stuff.
I remember five or six years ago, there were like these transgender protests every day and Tifa every year.
They were constantly failing against the president.
And it was like, it was crazy.
And then they would even write against the president, especially in the first term.
Well, I think the left just like realized how disastrous the resist lib like era, how bad optics that was.
Because you think about all the characters that to a lot of point, they're freaking out all the time.
Trump, too, they're actually things are happening that they were saying because nothing happened in the first term, but the things that they were saying were happening in the first term are actually happening now.
Like there's ice goon squads and everything.
And they're like not really freaking out.
I mean, Moeller just died.
You remember like the first term, like Moeller was like the superstar and they were glazing him like crazy and they had like you know effigies and these candles forming everything.
And then he died and they just kind of like quietly were like, okay, because they're almost embarrassed by how crazy that period.
But that, to me, that part is like kind of, one, it's just everything is so formal now when you're president Joe's law and he's also had multiple assassination trips.
But I just find in January, the White House was saying, all right, we're going to spend, said the president out and we're going to focus on a like affordability tour.
And now we're in March and I'm like, okay, but, well, I think I saw him go to Memphis and like one other place and we've invaded Iran.
And then, again, second-term presidents have a history of being more unrestrained, especially when it comes to the— And he's got Mark Levin in his ear, who's like—there's a literal Nazi group in Iran.
And if you take them out, you can like be in the history books forever.
And Trump's going to like respond to that.
And also, to be fair, like the people that are slamming Trump for like being friendly to Mark Levin, keep in mind that these guys are like constantly supporting the president and encouraging him and like putting out these like really pleasant posts about Donald Trump.
And then all the guys that they're like mad that Trump won't listen to are like constantly like ankle biting and like being nasty to him.
It's like, well, why would Trump listen to these guys who are like undercutting him, even if they're like more based?
Trump's going to respond to the guys that are like glazing him all the time.
It's going to be interesting if the progressive Democrats lose, the Republicans lose, and we get corporate Dems taking over.
I wonder how that's going to change the culture in this country because, I mean, the polls are not good for Trump, but the corporate Dems have not been in control of their party for some time.
The progressives have been.
That's why we were saying they're protesting in the street every day.
I think the whole debates in 2028 are going to be about this and about Israel and support, and both parties are going to have it.
And so I think, you know, if you have Ruby a run or even JD Vance, I think you're going to have an MGG and a Tucker and a Thomas Massey and people all on the stage in these primaries.
And this is going to be a declining question.
I agree.
I think on the left, too, you saw even like the Pennsylvania governor distance himself from AIPAT.
We're looking at boomers now that are split between 70 to 80 years old.
So in the next six years, we are expected to see what's called the mortality shelf.
This is where two-thirds of boomers are going to all die because they're all hitting life expectancy on average.
It's the goes down.
That means they will be a minimal voting block.
They'll be important, but they'll be much, much smaller than Gen X, Millennial, and Gen Z, which each are going to be around, I think Gen X is like 70, then Millennials and Gen Z are 80.
Gen Alpha is microscopic, so they're not going to play a role.
Millennials are going to dominate politics in this country as the largest voting block.
Indeed, with boomers out, Israel's got no support.
Cable TV is done.
It's cooked.
And so I wonder if, and this has been some of the speculation, the reason why we went to war with Iran now is that Israel knows if the war doesn't happen now, the U.S. will not be involved six years from now.
We've got this tweet, massively, massively viral tweet.
Trevor Sheets, he's got 32 million views because he said, my wife was formerly promiscuous.
I was a virgin.
She was then radically born again, committed to church, evangelized constantly, puritan books in her bedroom, prayer journals, grief over past sexual sin.
We got to know each other well for over a year, dated for four months, engaged for two and a half, and didn't sin sexually with one another.
Our first kiss with each other was at the altar on our wedding day.
Reaction, pick attached.
We've been married for over five years now, and she's been the most wonderful and godly wife, mother to our three children, and homemaker.
You could imagine.
He's saying she's been the most wonderful.
That's what he's saying.
She's more pure than most virgins as biblical purity has less to do with past sins and more to do with one's current posture.
I'm going to speed through this because you get the point.
He says, a woman or man's past sexual sin matters, but what matters far more when it comes to deciding who to marry is if the person is truly born again, if their repentance is real, if they truly have a heart for Christ, if they truly follow Jesus and obey his commands.
And then he quotes the Bible.
He's got this beautiful picture of his marriage.
And of course, it is blowing the F up with 12,000 replies, 7,000 retweets, and 31.5 million views.
I mean, like, let me just clear this because again, people just don't understand.
Like, I think people are being intentionally obtuse.
We're not really critiquing the concept of redemption.
Like, yes, in Christianity, I'm speaking as a Christian.
When you do admit to your sins, right?
Like, you are a new creation in Christ.
There's no doubt about that.
Like, no one is debating that.
What we're having contention with is two things.
One is the bizarre public declaration where you just air your dirty laundry on the internet and then somehow package it as if it's like a testimony and that it's somehow helping somebody.
Because that's like the primary issue I would say with the entire thing is it's really just presenting to women the concept that it's more of a bailout than an actual like there's not a there's not a proper there's not proper indication to these women that like it's actually a really bad thing to be promiscuous it's just saying like it happened oh well you know it's like it was like a phase of her life you know it's like Like some people are emo, some people sleep brown.
Yeah, well, that's and that's effectively what he's telling.
And again, it's like this isn't a novel testimony.
This is probably like half of marriages where like the woman or the man had like a really promiscuous background.
Because unfortunately, the world that we live in today is like the concept of chaste, like the concept of saving yourself for marriage is basically laughed at.
So it's like, it's really rare this actually happens.
So again, I don't know why he's packaging this.
Like this is some unique testimony that we are desperately needing.
It's like, no, young women understand this.
And for young men and young women that are pursuing like a Christ-like marriage, this is just unbelievably demoralizing and frustrating to see because it's like, yes, we know young women who are women that like sleep around, get bailed out all the time.
We know that.
And then in addition to that, it was just no repercussions.
No repercussions.
And then it was insulting where he says, she's more pure than a lot of virgins.
I think he might have said most virgins.
That's just absurd on the face because it's like, one, that has a definition, what like pure means.
And two, it's like, screw you.
Like, there's a lot of young women specifically that are waiting, that are trying to be obedient.
And like, this woman's stolen valor because, like, what this guy married her and now she's more pure.
He says, you know, when you've never driven a car before and then you scrape money together for an old shitty vehicle, but you think it's pretty good because you've never driven another car?
I remember that feeling.
Mine was a VW golf and the engine didn't even fire from one of the cylinders.
The salesman told me it had been reworked and was good as new.
I didn't know it wasn't.
I had no point of reference.
Now, this isn't about the physical driving sensation.
That was enjoyable enough, despite the wear and tear.
But the reliability and soul of the vehicle was expended.
What Tristan's getting at, and like, you know, I'm trying to approach this from like a Christian standpoint.
But what he is hitting on is valid, and this is a problem, is this like scarcity mindset.
So it's specifically with young men because the dating market is so bad for young men right now that as soon as they find a woman that will like show them love and affection, especially if like this guy, I think he's a little older, he's like 30 when he got married, they're just going to jump in with both feet because the reality is for a lot of young men right now, especially Christian young men, there is this sense that like there's really not that many eligible spouses and they have a really difficult time finding eligible spouses.
So if they finally find someone that at least ticks a few boxes, they just go all in and like worship this woman.
It's the scarcity mindset and it's a big problem with the evangelical community.
If you're a young guy right now and you're seeing this, like I agree with what you're saying, it's basically like this, this guy is a weak man.
I'm not trying to be a dick.
And this is the narrative that's been pushed on the internet for some time by like the red pill or like men's rights guys.
Maybe not men's rights guys is that way to describe it, but like dating advice that women are going to go for the Chads, the Alpha Chads, and they're going to get used and abused by them because these guys have no reason to settle down because everybody wants them.
Then once they're older and hit the quote-unquote wall, they'll look for a weak man who says, I'll give you anything you want.
I'm just saying, like, let's not prescribe this as like a model to follow.
And that's what this guy is trying to do by airing out his wife's dirty laundry.
I mean, she's spoken about this testimony publicly, but it's like, dude, stop the way he's portraying this.
Again, it's not, I believe her.
I believe her at face value that she truly is redeemed and she's not going to fall in that lifestyle.
Some guys are trying to, you know, dig into her lifestyle.
I don't really care about that.
What I'm saying is, stop presenting this like it's a model because it's not.
And the reality is the way that marriage works in 2026, I'm saying this as a Christian, picking your spouse is not something you can screw up.
You got to get that right.
And so it's like you need to interpret it, interpret whatever data you can to determine you're making the correct calculation for the same reason why you wouldn't have a born-again pedophile like babysit your children because it's like that's great.
It's just like there's a reason why, because this is like it just epitomizes like what a lot of young men are feeling, but specifically young men that are Christian, the young men that are like specifically in the evangelical are young Christian men seeking a virgin woman?
Well, the problem isn't that we're like seeking that every man, it's going to be ideal for them.
Like, let's not pretend like men are actively seeking out women with a high body.
Well, it's 100% a consideration for a lot of men who are like serious about marriage.
You want to make sure they get it right.
And then like the message from like evangelical leaders, I'm seeing it all over the timeline.
Is like, not only is it like you're wrong for thinking that it's like they're basically saying you don't have the right to like desire in Christianity, nobody's beyond redemption.
And I agree, but it's like, again, it's just the way things work with how broken the dating scene is.
It's like men have to be a little caught.
And women too.
For the record, women should also have the right to want their spouse to like be at least on the same footing as them, the same level of experience.
Because this doesn't apply to sexuality.
Like it applies to multiple realms.
Education, like you could, it's fair to say you want your spouse like at the same level as you.
But for some reason, men, for some reason, evangelical leaders are dead set on removing all the consequences of like sexual degradation, sexual degeneracy.
I don't know why, but they're just so intent on it.
This is like a serious word on a minimum, and no one talks about it.
I'm like, we lost seven people, and I, and then it's like, war so far, I'm losing my mind.
They're literally like, it's wild.
This topic that did remind me, and maybe it's the picture, but I um, I used to work for Turning Point, and I know Charlie from like original and helped with fundraising for him.
And Charlie and I were flying to New York, and he was that night having his first date with Erica.
And he was so nervous.
But earlier that day, I won't say who, but there was, I was with Charlie and some guys.
They were all making fun of him, saying, Charlie, like, you're 26 years old and a virgin now.
I know we're pushing a little late, but let's grab this one from Media Betrayal.
The Charlie Kirk show utterly disgusted after Joe Kent says he'd testify at alleged assassin's trial.
Now, Joe Kent has made the claim that he was not allowed to investigate any foreign nexus which may have been involved in the assassination of Charlie Kirk, which, of course, presents a little bit of doubt.
I'm not saying it's, you know, beyond a reasonable doubt, but the outrage here is that Joe Kent is insinuating there may have been something else involved and they were blocked, which will allow the defense for the alleged Charlie Kirk assassin to say this was not a proper investigation.
And with this statement already in the public, how can the FBI say that their investigation was thorough and complete and correct if you have the testimony from a counterterrorism director saying they weren't not allowed to investigate?
That's going to create reasonable doubt for the jury.
They're going to get this guy found not guilty because at least one or not to mention the amount of jurors that are probably watching a lot of these podcasts and these shows.
So this is interesting, but I will just say, you know, I haven't seen the evidence.
You know, we've only seen what's in the public.
I think the trial should be public.
We should be able to see what the evidence is.
And I think that the official narrative on Tyler Robinson is not correct, but I think Tyler Robinson is likely the person who did it.
We'll see what the evidence bears out.
I think Tyler Robinson did not act alone, and there's evidence that other people had foreknowledge of what was going to happen.
And that is being effectively, and I don't know if cover up is the right word, but you've got people claiming Israel did it, which seems ridiculous because Charlie held a seminar to convince Gen Z to support Israel.
Like even Nick Fuentes is like, that's crazy.
Like if Ben Shapiro died, people are going to be like, Israel did it.
That's insane.
That being said, they are really downplaying all of the evidence suggesting other people were either assisting or involved with this assassination, such as the vehicles outside of Robinson's house, the social media posts from individuals saying something is going to happen.
They had foreknowledge something was going to happen.
Well, he's the director of counterterrorism, which, by the way, this is an organization that was founded post-9/11 because there are many people say that if the CIA FBI had actually been coordinating on the intelligence that they have, we could have prevented that attack.
So that is what his role is to be at the intersection.
He has access to every single piece of sensitive data that comes through our country from both the FBI and CIA.
So the idea that Joe Kent, he's saying that they tried to obstruct him.
Nobody extrupted you, Joe.
You were in that job.
You could have investigated anything.
You were the director of counterintelligence and you were counterterrorism.
You were Senate confirmed.
No one is able to go into the computer system and block Joe Kent from having access to that data.
So one, I think he's a liar.
And I think that this is pretty outrageous as to what he did.
And by the way, you were in that role for a year.
So, what the hell did you do about anything other than run away and then go debate Mark Levin where I learned absolutely nothing and what was the worst like 47 minutes of my life?
Yeah, and if he's fixated in all this, this indicates why there was so much inaction on like the NT facilities following the Charlie Kirk assassination.
If he didn't even think it was them that conducted it.
But if Andrew Clavelt sends you a private text message chain that they want to keep private, and your job is to go investigate that, you have access to literally every single piece of intelligence the United States government has access to.
And instead, you give it to Candace to say on her podcast.
So he denied leaking it, but Colvett, and I can corroborate this, said that he said that he gave that text where Charlie said he was he would be being forced to leave the pro-Jewish cause.
He gave that to Joe Kent, and then sure enough, the next thing you know is it leaks to Candace Owens.
Joe Kent's denying it, but then it would be Joe Kent gave it to somebody.
He shared with somebody after he said it needs to be made public.
What I can say is that I had spoken with guys at TPUSA, including Colvet, and what they're saying now is true.
That this is my understanding before any of this became public when the text came out, I was told this exact story.
And so the fact that Joe Kent is now, you know, in the spotlight and Colvet is saying he's the guy that was given it and it got leaked.
Even before this was public, I knew.
So I don't say anything because if someone tells me to keep things private, I'll be like, okay, because they're like, we don't know who leaked it, but I'm like, yep, I don't know.
Well, I will say this.
It would seem, at least as far as my understanding of these conversations, Joe Kent did leak these texts.
Now, whether he leaked it to Candace Owens, I don't know, but somebody was given it and it got to Candace.
Now, the problem is the problem with the selective release of a text message like that and what Candace is doing with these texts is that she can just put out whatever message she wants to frame the picture any way she wants.
And Charlie can't speak up to defend himself or to correct the context.
And so I just, you see it endlessly where people are like, this proves Charlie was anti-Israel.
And it's like, yes, but at the same time, like around the same time, he did a seminar with Gen Z to convince them to support Israel.
So that's context too.
And it sounds like to me from these texts that he was basically venting, not that he was saying he was changing his stance, but he was like, man, you know, it very much reminds me of the, oh, won't someone rid me of this meddlesome priest?
Not a direct statement of, I want him dead, but I'm just so frustrated with these people.
And then it's taken to be construed as that he was anti-Israel.
The people who threatened to kill me are not Israel.
It's the craziest thing.
It's just literal whack-aloons.
The people who have swatted us, and we believe we know what it is, they are leftists.
There has never been an instance where, like, it makes no sense that Charlie Kirk would be killed by Israel.
Maybe some other foreign country, I suppose.
But it is wild what has become of the political space in this country.
And I'm going to say this too.
I think another reason why young men may be dipping out of politics, you do have a break from Trump.
And this could be a combination of factors from demoralization.
Also, many of these people are probably fans of Tucker.
Tucker is probably driving a shift as well.
But I also wonder if there's a lot of people that have just Checked out because of the psychosis of politics.
Because you've got, you go on X, and what happens?
I love this.
You're either a Nazi or a Jew.
Like, that's that's the polar extremes at this point.
And then somehow I'm both simultaneously.
It's amazing.
So I got to tell you, it's demoralizing and it makes it like, why would I want to be involved with any of this insanity?
Why would I want to be party to the grifter class who are just saying whatever they have to say because they're scared their views are going down?
And that's what's happening.
And, you know, I'll say this to everybody watching.
I told this story before.
There's a fitness influencer.
He made videos about fitness.
After October 7th, he made a video about October 7th.
And he was like, you know, I don't really talk about this stuff, but the things that we're seeing are really horrifying.
And everyone's talking about it.
And the comments were asking me my thoughts.
So I decided to make a video.
And, you know, it's like everybody gets in this moment, this cultural moment.
Well, all of a sudden, he goes from getting like 30,000 views on fitness videos to 150,000 views.
And he's like, wow.
Then he gets more comments being like, have you heard what's going on?
Can you update us?
Can you tell us what you think?
And so then he's like, well, when I do, when I last video I did, it got six figures, right?
There's another video on Israel.
All the comments are anti-Israel critical saying, I don't know, man, this seems fishy.
Did you see this story?
Did you see that story?
Slowly over time, with more and more comments and more and more money, his channel is now nothing but anti-Israel content.
He is nothing but an anti-Israel influencer because his RPMs went up, his viewership went up, and he says, I've become successful.
It's when you look at Mr. Beast, look at his early YouTube videos, playing Minecraft, giving people money.
And then that's where he found his success.
Now he's doing game shows.
You know, he's just become a generic personality.
He just chased after whatever built him up.
Dylan Mulvaney, another great example.
Dylan Mulvaney's original TikTok videos were gay safari.
Then Dylan made a I'm non-binary video, 4 million views.
Gay Safari, no one's watching.
Then I think I'm trans, 4 million views.
Then I'm going to do a trans thing every single day and millions and millions and millions and millions of views.
People are driven in this direction because they're chasing after what gets them money.
And what I will tell you right now is behind the scenes, the business, the guys selling ads, the people know this.
I don't know if this next thing is true, but I'm going to say it anyway.
A lot of people have pointed out.
I was talking to a guy who does ad sales and he says, you'll notice the Hodge twins on Facebook and the Hodge twins on Twitter have inverted political opinions.
And what I was told, it's because the marketing company that does the posting does not care about politics.
They care about engagement.
So this is a guy sitting in a room who has no idea what Trump is doing or not.
All he knows is that when he says Trump here, he gets 4X impressions.
When he says no, Trump here, they get 4X impressions.
So they just set the machine.
It keeps going.
People have been saying this all over X every time the Hodge Twins post.
They're like, on X, they're pro-Tucker, they're anti-Israel.
On Facebook, they're pro-Trump.
Why?
Facebook is largely boomers who like Trump.
X has something else going on, whatever that may be, different audience.
So all of a sudden, these people, they start shifting what they normally talk about.
They're talking about geopolitics, talking about taxes, to Erica Kirk's leather pants.
100,000, 400,000 views, you know, 100,000, 200, 300, 400,000.
I'm like, why is this guy who used to talk about politics that I actually liked watching and cared about now just complaining that you wore the wrong pants?
So by all means, we can have a show here where we talk about whether Trump is doing good or Trump is doing bad and be honest about our thoughts on it.
But that's not what makes the most money.
And then something else happens.
YouTube is going to algorithmically promote whatever generates the most viewership and ad rates.
And for some reason, right now, RPMs on Erica Kirk content have passed finance.
Finance is the number one RPM.
It's like 20 bucks.
And now Erica Kirk posts are rivaling or beating finance.
I was talking to these people who are running this behind the scenes, and they're like, oh, yeah, Erica Kirk content, $20, $25.
And I'm like, what?
News media is $6, $7.
That means for every thousand views you get, you'll get $6, $7.
Not if you're talking about Erica Kirk, you'll get $25.
That means not only do you get more views, you get more money.
And the reason you get more views is because YouTube is like, if the RPMs are higher, promote these videos more because we'll make more money off ad sales.
So who the is advertising intentionally on Google ads targeting Erica Kirk content?
That's the weirdest thing to me.
But it's happening.
It is.
She is completely irrelevant on the world stage.
And I'm not trying to be a dick, but she is.
She's running a student organization for politics.
She's not telling Trump to bomb Iran.
She's not involved in any of that.
And if you really want to influence what's going on, you need to be talking about Pete Hegseth or Donald Trump or our Mark Wayne Mullen right now.
Nope.
That's not where the money's at.
And there's a bunch of conspiracies about it, but it could just be that people chase after what gets the viewership.
They struck a gold mine with this because women are interested in it and men.
So if you've got 80% male viewers, but you add so many female viewers that you shift to 60% female, your audience is skyrocketing.
Your RPMs are going to go through the roof and you're going to be rich.
Share the show with everyone in your life you've ever met.
We got that uncensored portion of the show coming up in just about 11 or so minutes at rumble.com slash Timcast IRO.
I will briefly mention that we have this post on X where they're announcing they are now going to RevShare based on your home country to stop foreigners from talking about American politics.
Same old man says, Tim, go outside and talk to people in town, cities, and so forth.
They will give you a better idea of how popular Trump is or not.
Indeed.
And that's literally what I do all the time.
I go out every weekends to various poker rooms, of course.
And one of the things that I and everybody loves about the poker table is sitting down with usually seven other people because a lot of casino, a lot of poker rooms, they make more money if they do eight Macs instead of nine seaters.
And then you're sitting with a random group of people and everyone's talking.
And it's a lot of fun.
And that's why old guys do it.
They call them old man coffee.
You go to a poker table, there's going to be three old retirees and they're there because they want friends.
And all their friends are dead.
So they can sit down and they can talk with people and have some social engagement.
And it is very nice.
It is very nice, you know, to play with these guys.
And then you talk and you find that I got to be honest.
I find that most people I talk to similarly agree with what I've been saying.
Even the people who are like, I like Trump, like me, I like Trump.
I think Trump's the best president of my lifetime.
I think he's had a series of blunders and he's hurting really greatly among moderates.
I sit down with some young guys, varying ages, old guys, and they all say the same thing.
Yeah, Trump's a lot better, but man, this is not looking good, and the economy's not doing well, and young men are struggling, and they're frustrated because all of these hoes are getting bailed out by these Christian guys.
The original purpose of this show, Timcast IRL, was I have a van that I had built, and I had talked about this on Rogan.
It has solar panels.
It's actually outside.
It still works and everything.
It's got electric.
It's got so much juice from the solar panels that it will never run out of power because it's just somewhat.
And I had actually produced my morning show from it when I was on a road trip to go to Texas to join Joe Rogan.
And Timcast IRL in real life was going to be, I would do my show from this mobile sleeper van and then pull up somewhere and say, hey, guys, I'm currently in this place.
Come hang out and we're going to do a real conversation where I put up a table and anybody can come and we can have a conversation about anything.
And then COVID happened.
So the channel had like 78,000 subscribers on it because I was like, check out the van.
And like, you could look at the first videos.
I was like, I got the van.
COVID happened and it was like, okay, well, now we can't go anywhere.
So then the idea was I have nothing to do with the other half of my day.
So I wake up, I do my morning show, everything's great.
And then I'm playing World of Warcraft.
You know, I was playing World of Warcraft the Legion, I believe, at the time.
And then I was like, you know, the easiest way to do more segments would be to just do a live stream with my buddy.
And then we would just do 10 minutes, 10 minutes, 10 minutes, and we can pick anything.
And the original idea was going to be weird and wild, wacky, interesting stories and conspiracy.
And then because of the nature of COVID, it turned into news, politics, and commentary.
And that's how we ended up where we are with this show.
I will say, to be fair, he probably did find people that were just not entertaining.
You stop somebody and you ask them, because I did this.
We tried this.
When I was working for Fusion, we had discussed like, okay, we should go do some men in the street stuff and talk to people about what's going on politically.
And we found that every single person we met was actually of moderate intelligence.
And I was like, these fucking people.
We met no one this dumb.
People, most people, it's like we're in Times Square.
And what year was it?
It was like 2014.
I forgot what we were talking about.
We're talking about like Occupy protests or something or like tax the rich.
And you'd go to a random person and you'd say something like, you know, you'd ask him a question about modern politics at the time, which 2014, I can't really remember because I wasn't.
You'd ask them about something like the Supreme Court, and they would just go, you'd get a lot of, well, I wish I was you'd stop like a young woman, and you'd be like, what do you think about the current makeup of the Supreme Court and the ruling Jonathan Obergefell?
And they would go, which one was that?
And you go, this is the ruling on gay marriage.
And they go, oh, yeah, yeah, that's interesting.
You know, honestly, I haven't followed it enough to give you a fair opinion.
So I just feel bad if I said something.
And I'd like we go, okay.
Like, what are you going to do?
So you try to find dumb people to make the video work.
But most people, it's like, I was like, dude, I'm not going to sit here for four hours trying to find three dumb people.
The Savannah Guthrie story is where we really saw the total breakdown in politics as pop culture.
Because you could see it in Laura Ingram's face.
She did not want to be talking about this.
Like, who the fuck cares, bro?
Like, honestly, who cares?
But the viewership was fucking nuts because women were just locked in, staring at the screen.
And I was watching, because, you know, we start pre-production here.
Call time is 6:30.
Pre-production starts 7:15.
And so that means the first 15 minutes of Laura Ingram, we got on the TV and she was talking the slowest I've ever seen her talk with just abject disinterest.
And I don't judge, I don't, I feel like I can't blame people for being misled by them, though, because a lot of the pictures are extremely convincing.
And if you don't know that the president wouldn't take a picture like this, then I could see somebody thinking like, oh, the president met with one of his supporters and it is just some with her cleavage out in this really odd way.
Like, I think it's convincing a lot of people online.
And then it's also hard to differentiate real pictures from AI pics because people are also editing their pictures in weird ways that make them look like AI.
So it's, you know, I don't know, but I get fed a lot of those pages.
I mainly just consume like current events and political news.
I don't really watch TV and I don't watch sports, but I will say the Savannah, Savannah, the Savannah Gunthri, Nancy Guthrie thing, like locked me in.
And to where my, I had like massive family text with cousins I'm in spot two in seven years and we're all like out here like investigating this woman's kidnapping for like 10 days of my life.
I lost 10 days of my life just like investigating.
By the end of it, I'm like, Bridgette is not only a man, but also It's very scary how people are very impressionable and like easily misled, particularly by documentaries that are very selective in what they show you.
A documentary, a well-put-together documentary could leave out the most things.
Bridget McCrone isn't a man, though.
And like the fact that I think people like you are.
But also, if you think that the country is being marched into World War III, that could potentially lead to 20 million deaths, as we all discussed, then should you even be talking about anything else?
But this is why I don't personally lump Tucker in with the rest of him.
I say he's a guy with opinions.
He's always been married.
He doesn't need to do this.
But Candace, I think it's narcissism and sociopathy.
I think she likes to be, she wants people staring at her.
But I do think it's interesting that she's married to a British lord.
Her lawyers work in a building with federal agents and she's casting doubt on Tyler Robinson, which if he really was a Patsy in a foreign government really did prop him up, then this would be the way you get your Patsy out without going to prison.
But there's a handful of other personalities that now do what I call Israel posting and Kirk posting.
And Jamie Doer is doing it.
And they're just chasing after this machine.
Trump is going to lose because of this.
And when I said this in December, if this is the route that we are going and she is pushing this and she gets followers to track this stuff, we will lose support for the Republican Party.
Democrats will win and we are fucked.
And she personally responded on her show to me saying that, saying, we don't care about your midterms.
She's not a conservative.
So we're watching this happen.
We are cooked.
Republicans are going to win.
A lot of the people who pushed for Trump that she's been attacking are going to go to prison and she's got a smile on her face about it.
Meanwhile, her lawyers work in a building with federal agents.
He's married to a British lord.
And I'm like, oh boy, if that's not WEF, I don't know what is.
If I may start out with my shout-out, I want to shout out the great Seamus Coglin for his return to the internet after two months, two-month disappearance.
I want to talk a little bit about some domestic terrorism and the good old Virginia AG Jay Jones.
So I doubt anyone's surprise at the rise of Islamic terror attacks at home, given what's happening overseas.
My concern is the local prosecutors who would charge those patriots that are willing to defend themselves.
We know the Austin DAs are required by law to present evidence to any police shooting to a grand jury.
Question for the panel: Do you foresee confessed domestic terrorist Jay Jones taking legal action against the old Dominion ROTC candidates who defended themselves from a jihadist with nothing more than a pocket knife?
I was just thinking, you know, there's been so much fear-mongering around Jay Jones, and I've been keeping a close eye on him, but I feel like he hasn't.
I don't know if anything's come up yet so far into his term.
Because you saw like, look, you saw like not to go World War II, but like in World War II, we started bombing the Germans because we were like, we're going to demoralize them.
And all it did was like consolidate support around the, well, the Third Reich was on their last legs.
And also like they also did this anticipating that like people would come out and protest against the regime.
But all that happens is people are like, wow, a foreign country is bombing us.
I guess I'll take the devil I know or the devil I don't know.
And that's what's happening in Iran is like, again, it was just a miscalculation is they thought that since there were protests occurring, that once we started bombing Iran, that then these protesters are feeling bold and they go and they'd storm the capital and like pull them out like a Disney movie.
Not only are they not protesting, but there are demonstrations now for pro-regime move, like a pro-regime movement are the ones that are out in the streets of Tehran.
You can just look at the videos.
Like, that's just the reality on the ground.
So it's just a miscalculation.
I think that was the main thing that they were trying to do is they thought that if they just sort of provided some breathing room for the protesters, took the boot off of their neck, that they would go in and then they would do the regime change without us having to get involved.
That didn't happen.
And I think that's why we're in this situation we are in now.
I don't think they were trying to acquire a nuclear weapon.
I think they just wanted to maintain enriching at 60% and tell people that they were trying to obtain a nuclear weapon because they learned the lesson from Libya.
Like, look what happened to Gaddafi when you take the nuclear weapons, like the country gets toppled and stuff.
So that's where I just think that they wanted to maintain a status quo and tell people they were enriching.
They were like, and just maintain right in there so that they have a lot of regional problems with Saudi Arabia and others.
And they were never actually going to obtain a bomb or drop it on New York City or any of that.
And I just don't understand why we couldn't just let that status quo continue.
Look, I think in 20 years, we'll look back on this and say, wow, the president really reinvigorated American hegemony in the Caribbean with Cuba when we eventually invade, which I think is a fargone conclusion at this point, in South America, with Venezuela, and with Iran, which, God willing, will be a democratic ally.
We're going to leave the Persian Gulf, but there's a realistic situation in which we just withdraw completely from Iraq, which I think a lot of people in the audience will enjoy.
But the reality is that does mean that, again, our footprint in that specific sub-region of the Middle East is now shrunken completely.
Imagine you're a high-ranking military commander in Iran, and you want a more pro-Western government to replace the regime, but you risk being assassinated if you're too public.
You have control over, let's say, tens of thousands of troops who just want a paycheck.
How do you start talking to and convince the Israel-U.S. alliance that you are the real deal and have the power to effectiate regime change in Iran?
Perhaps the alliance suggests hard evidence that you can do what you say you can do.
So, you suggest firing some missiles that aren't supposed to exist, that have a range twice than what everybody knows you have, capable of hitting London.
So, Trump suggests they, you know, that they knew they were speaking to the right people based on things that have happened, but he didn't say what that was.
And that was shortly after those missiles were fired at the UK Diego Garcia base.
So, my question to the panel is: yes or no?
Were these missiles that were fired a signal that Mossad or pro-Western actors in control of large enough segments of Iran are in a position that can help affect regime change?
So I don't believe that they're getting commands from the top and organizing in a meaningful way strategically with one another.
So if anything, I think it was a small segment of whatever command group that had access to these weapons that just said, F it, let's try to get a hit on them.
I think the reason for them not actually being able to hit the island is because their weapons suck, not because this was like sort of a like, yeah, we're in power or we have some influence here.
So if that kind of makes sense, I don't think there's like a really good plausible deniability for the people in the regime, but how does that explain what Trump said?
We're talking to the right people because of things that have happened that we've seen.
Well, I think what he said, who they're talking to is the like basically the head of the parliament there.
But the problem with the military or how to deal with this in a regime, and this was the same thing with Venezuela, is what they do is they decentralize their military very much.
In the United States, it's top-down.
You know, exactly everyone's rank, and that reports to that person, that person, that person.
Instead, they give you a little fiefdom that you control.
And it's very decentralized.
That way, if that military leader gets struck, someone else just comes in and replaces them.
And also, you can't organize a military coup, most importantly.
It is very difficult to start a coup when you have a decentralized military system like they had in Venezuela, like what they have in Iran.
And so, to your question of like, if you control 10,000, then I don't think I would step up if I'm in Iran because your head would get chopped off.
And then probably all 10,000 of the soldiers that followed you, which I only think a few heads would also be chopped off.
And so that's why they killed the Ayatollah.
But I think it's going to be a harder mission than just that.
Because I think that Israel's willing to take the backlash, which is horrified scary.
But if you're the one who actually said, and so for the United States, that's why we try to distance ourselves.
But the idea that Trump doesn't know, like he does know what's going on, but Israel is literally willing to be martyrs in this type of fight.
I mean, this is the war that they know they've been have to have.
It's their intel.
And I think they actually are the ones who fire the weapon and stuff.
But especially those weapons they have where the hum just go around and went literally into someone's apartment window and killed them and left the whole apartment building intact is the most amazing thing I've ever seen.
The Senate under the spineless fuck, John Zoon, is the most pathetic, flawless, Olympic failure of an entire history of the United States at this point.
Why are we barreling towards another midterm ass whooping, staring down at another lame duck session of President Trump?
And we're just getting blushed down the toilet because they're bubbling at this point are still bent over, eagerly sucking off the Democrat cock.
Do you know like how much bandwidth Horowitz got out of like 15 years ago going to like the Bronx and asking black people about IDs and then going to that college campus?
And everyone cites it on every podcast for 15 years.
Like, bro, can we do this video again and see if they've learned?
I bet, I bet most of the people would be would most of the people are going to say something like, oh, yeah, yeah, I heard about the Iran strikes, but to be honest, I'm not well versed in it, so I wouldn't have a good answer for you.