Erika Kirk CANCELS TPUSA Event With Vance Over SERIOUS THREATS | Timcast IRL
Erika Kirk's cancellation of a Turning Point USA event with JD Vance over threats signals a fracturing right and rising liberal attacks. The episode dissects foreign policy "5D chess" moves against China, critiques unproven Epstein blackmail conspiracies akin to Pizzagate, and analyzes media consolidation driving viewers to Rumble. Ultimately, the discussion highlights eroding trust in leadership, skepticism toward pharmaceutical immunity, and the urgent need for election integrity before midterms. [Automatically generated summary]
JD Vance is speaking at a Turning Point USA event, but Erica Kirk has backed out, citing very serious security risks, threats to her safety.
And many people are asking, well, then why would the vice president go?
It's not safe for you, but it's safe for him.
And there's a lot to break down here, but I think this story matters because it's the shape of our political landscape right now, what's going to come from this.
With the midterms coming up, Turning Point USA, basically a pariah, But the right is split with half the people who once supported it now attacking it, liberals joining in.
And this is the organization that got young people to support Donald Trump and the Republican Party in 2024.
And now they've largely lost this.
Even JD Vance saying at the event, I know that young people don't support this, they are losing this vote.
Trump is also sinking with white working class voters.
So let's figure out what's going on with why Eric Kirk is being threatened with death constantly.
I think most of you know why.
Then, of course, we've got the Swalwell.
Another accuser has come forward saying that he not only forced himself upon her, but he drugged her as well.
And LA has launched a criminal investigation.
So it looks like Swellwell's not just going to be dropping out of the California governor's race, not just resigning from Congress.
He may actually be signing up for prison, and not even in just in California, maybe even New York as well.
Holy crap.
And Tony Gonzalez resigned, but, you know, whatever about that.
So we'll talk about that, plus a bunch of other weird stuff's going on.
Guys, you know, in talking about this Erica Kirk stuff, I have to point out.
I don't know if it's a mass formation psychosis forming against Donald Trump or it's a coordinated effort, but there are a bunch of fake posts just lying about Trump in the weirdest of ways.
Not too dissimilar to back when, you remember when Trump threw the fish food into the koi pond with Shinzo Abe?
ABC, I think it was ABC, they cropped the image, zoomed in on Trump, so it looked like he just, of his own volition, threw it in.
Whereas the real story was that Shinzo Abe did it first, Trump said, okay, and then followed suit.
The media then attacked Trump for being uncouth.
Well, there's this weird claim that Trump was booed at UFC.
Every, I should say, but tons of people are repeating this.
Here's a story from the Daily Mail Erica Kirk backs out of TPUSA event with JD Vance at last minute due to unknown threats, vice president says.
The interview with Vance at the University of Georgia was part of the nonprofit organization's tour to excite young conservative voters out of the midterm elections.
Vance said Erica consulted with him ahead of time about these threats.
Ultimately, she decided to miss the rally.
Quote, I love Erica, and I know that she did get some threats, Vance said on stage.
About two hours ago, I was a little worried that we were going to have to cancel the event because Erica was not going to come, and she was very worried about it.
After Vance consulted with the Secret Service, he's had to go on with the event without Erica.
No further information about the threats has been released.
The Daily Mail approached the White House for comment.
Erica Kirk says, I was so looking forward to tonight's event at the University of Georgia with our Vice President in advance, but after our family is all.
All our family has been through.
I take my security team's recommendation extremely seriously.
Thank you to our amazing Georgia chapter for your support.
God bless you all.
And we've got this tweet from everyone's favorite, Candace Owens.
She said, Erica Kirk pulled out of the event last minute with Vice President Vance, citing threats.
This is PR horse ish, obviously.
He is now doing the event alone at the University of Georgia.
I mean, that's not true.
He's with Colvet.
What do we think is the real reason she pulled out?
Probably just security threats, to be honest.
There is a funny response, though.
Danny Diggs responds saying, Erica is getting threats, so let's not have her go, but let's definitely still send the VP.
What?
These people are, what's the right word?
I'm going to be polite.
Developmentally disabled or dishonest.
The reason why is right off the top of my head.
Ask me why Erica Kirk did not go and JD Vance did.
And I can give you a handful of reasons.
One, the threats are against her family.
She doesn't want her family to be involved.
She doesn't want to travel without her kids.
Million and one reasons.
Number two, the threats aren't targeting the venue.
They're targeting maybe her home, route of travel, her vehicles.
Maybe someone sent her a threat saying they put a bomb on her car.
So she says, OK, can we go?
And they're like, we'll have to get a different vehicle for you.
And she's like, we have to leave now.
She's like, screw it.
I think we better just not go.
This is weird.
Maybe there was a threat at her home.
And they said, Miss Kirk, we're going to have to bring you out and do a sweep of the property.
This has happened to us.
These people act like they have no idea what's going on.
It's like that Millennial Woes meme where he said, The problem with discourse is that leftists, what is the quote?
Leftists pretend not to understand things, thus making discourse impossible.
These people know full well there's a million and one reasons why JD Vance would go and she would not.
Least of all is that she doesn't have Secret Service protection.
But the obvious being, maybe they did not threaten the venue.
It's just, we are going to lose the midterms, and Candace Owens is doing it intentionally.
They're going to do all of these things that people have been freaking out about.
They're already bringing back weird woke garbage.
They know that they're going to move back in, and Candace Owens is personally responsible because several months ago, after Charlie Cook was murdered, and she started making insinuations that Erica did it.
I said, this is demoralizing.
It's pissing people off.
They're turning off.
They're tuning out.
They're not going to show up.
We're going to lose the midterms.
And she personally responded saying, We don't care about your midterms.
I kind of feel like the reason she said, What do we think is the real reason she pulled out is so she can find the craziest angle that you can imagine in her replies and be like, Well, that's the one I'm going to go with.
Because really, she's just looking to get viewers, to get people to watch the show.
I mean, just like you said, there are a million reasons why Erica Kirk would be like, No, I can't do it.
So for Candace Owens, she's just like, Well, here we go.
Now's my chance to bring Erica Kirk back into the conversation because that's when she got the most traction.
Very serious concerns about the safety and security of Erica Kirk.
Because I'll tell you a story.
I was on the old Instagram there.
And for those that use Instagram, sometimes it recommends threads to you because they want you to use threads instead of X.
So I'm swiping down and it gives you these little threads box.
And one of them was a veiled threat against Erica Kirk.
And I went, geez, veiled threat.
So I clicked it.
It brought me to threads where I saw the post.
And then it was something like Erica Kirk.
Wait till you get what's coming to you, something like that.
And I'm like, that's creepy.
Like, who's this lady?
I looked at her profile.
She's a random nobody, some random, like, you know, 30 year old woman.
And then I clicked back, and the entire threads feed of the algorithm was just tons of 30, 35 year old women, all like, you know, late 20s or whatever women, just saying Erica Kirk deserves hell.
Like, it was just all of this anti Erica Kirk stuff.
And I'm trying to figure out who these people are and why they hate this woman so much.
Listen, you don't got to like her.
You can call her whatever you want to call her, but this is psychotic.
You know, I'll tell you what I think.
I think that we have a mass formation psychosis due to avoid.
Right now, it has been reported, as I've said ad nauseum, that viewership is down for almost everybody in the political space.
Everyone's complaining about it.
This is what they do.
The weather gets warm.
People go outside.
They stop watching.
And then everyone starts freaking out like the world's ending.
We're also coming off a dead political year and moving into the midterm.
So things are going to start heating up.
Also, we've got riot season coming up.
But everybody freaks out right about now.
So after the assassination of Charlie Kirk, you can see it in Candace Owens' metrics.
Her channel's relatively stagnant.
Like, she's doing well, though, don't get me wrong.
I think she was doing like 70,000 concurrence.
And then she starts the Charlie Kirk conspiracy theory arc, and her subscribers and her viewership skyrockets.
And she's maintaining this.
What I think is that woke is routed.
After 2024, the Republican suite, liberals were freaking out.
Even right now, they're attacking Hassan Piker, and there's a civil war over whether Hassan should be allowed to campaign with Democrats.
They're tearing each other apart.
The right won everything the House, the Senate, the presidency.
And it seemed like for the average person, Pack it in, boys.
We've done everything we can.
Now we leave it to our representatives to solve these problems.
And what did they do?
Well, they did some stuff.
USAID getting shut down, I think, was good.
It was a nuclear bomb.
But the big things people were expecting Epstein, we got it's a hoax.
We got the stupid binder campaign.
Talk about a misstep.
Dan Bongino coming out saying, no, Epstein killed himself.
People were very disappointed on all that stuff.
But that was largely Politicos.
Then you get the war in Iran.
Trump's support base among white working class people has been going down.
So now, what happens?
You have this MAGA coalition, which included libertarians, moderates, conservatives, et cetera.
It's fractured.
You've got a bunch of libertarians.
Now they're just calling Trump the Antichrist.
They're making up lies about him, all this other weird stuff.
So they're gone.
They're not watching this content anymore.
For these creators, for these YouTubers, for these Twitter personalities, I had someone come to me.
I'm not going to name who they are.
They said, Hey, is your Twitter engagement down?
Because I'm not getting anything anymore.
And I was like, I don't know.
It seems the same to me.
And they're like, I'm not getting anything anymore.
And I'm like, no idea.
Well, what I see here is a lot of these personalities immediately go Israel is bad, Trump is bad, Erica Kirk is bad.
So when you look at some of these liberal channels, all they do is spam blast why Trump is bad every single day.
It's every video, five times a day, a picture of Trump looking weird, and then a title like Trump actually did it.
You know, Trump is gross, he pooped his pants, all nonsense.
I hate Trump content.
Everything else has been decentralized.
If you were in the mega coalition when, at the peak of the culture war, right before Trump was to win, everybody who was angry with Democrats was watching, saying, Are we going to win?
Trump wins.
And now the libertarians are gone.
The moderates are gone.
The comedians are gone.
The MAGA Republicans are yelling at the other conservatives.
So that's decentralized, meaning each one of these areas, they're no longer watching the one channel.
They're all watching a bunch of different channels.
That's why Candace Owens has gone like lib, like weird.
Liberal space.
It's just kind of just female drama content.
Charlie Kirk was murdered by his wife, and Brigitte McCrone has a penis, all this weird nonsense that just is entertainment, infotainment.
People are following suit because it's the last.
Imagine the flood is happening, and they're all just trying to go as fast as they can to Everest where they can at least get some dry land.
That's what it seems like.
So, anyway, rant over.
What this means for the midterms, of course, is that Candace is rallying everybody to abandon the Republican Party.
For her, I mean, I think the Occam's razor is that she's just clawing at whatever she can get traction on, and it works.
A lot of these libertarian guys that some people that I thought were friends are posting lies because it's getting them retweets.
And so now I see a whole bunch of Trump is bad, Trump is retarded, and Israel is bad, and Netanyahu's controlling the world.
And I'm like, well, it's the last place these people can get money.
So at least the Democrats, with their infighting, are going to unify to a certain degree around their weird, culty nonsense.
But let's pause real quick and just say it's not Candace bashing Erica, it's Candace bashing Turning Point and fracturing the organization that was rallying people to go vote, particularly young people.
She's not, it's not about Erica Kirk.
This started with her accusing Turning Point USA of killing Charlie Kirk.
Or being involved in some way.
And it evolved into now Erica is in some way a part of this.
So when she's saying these things, what she is doing is going to her show and telling everyone, do not support Turning Point.
And this means the biggest voter initiative that the right has is now smeared, defamed, and fractured.
For me, as someone who has only a couple times shot 30 out of 6, I had a SEAL team sniper tell me before the news even came out that when he saw the video, he knew it was a 30 out of 6 because that's what he used and that's what he saw.
And this is just a random guy who was doing security for me.
So I've talked to a handful of people who do.
I'll be very careful how I describe it.
Let's just people who go overseas for certain reasons.
And I've had three or four people say to me, like, oh, dude, that was a 30 out of six.
It's not relevant to a court, nor is it admissible.
But they will now argue for it, and the defense is going to try and use it in the court of public opinion to say the federal government did not do their job.
The issue is that he's the deputy director of counterterror, or he was the director of counterterror under Tulsi Gabbard.
It's the FBI that handles these things.
He said that Cash told him not to investigate.
Well, yeah, why would the counterterror director be looking up an assassination?
Well, my point is, you're asking to prove a negative, right?
So, how about this?
How about in the Swalwell case, why isn't the FBI allowing the counterterror to investigate whether Swalwell was raping these women because it was for China?
I mean, I could just make up a million and one things.
And so it's possible that Joe Kent goes to Cash and says, Hey, I want to investigate if Israel did this.
But I look at these people who are claiming that Israel is behind everything all the time.
And I'm like, okay, this is retardation.
This is like your brain is broken.
We on this show have been tracking foreign policy for a long time.
We've covered all of these stories.
We had a woman recently on who said that Zelensky is a Jew who was put in power by Netanyahu because Netanyahu wants a corridor from Israel to Ukraine.
And I'm like, yep, you made that up on the spot.
That's just completely not true.
And I don't know why you get it.
People like Candace make these things up because people get all freaked out and then they watch these things.
So when Joe Kent is like a foreign nexus, we get what he's saying.
He's saying Israel.
So if Cash is like, my God, dude, are you kidding me?
Like, listen, you want to know what makes the most sense?
Let's do Occam's Razor.
Occam's Razor is a wackaloon lefty guy, the likely suspect in the assassination of Charlie Kirk.
I don't think he acted alone.
There were wackaloon lefties on social media who seemed to have foreknowledge of the event.
So if there is a conspiracy, and there may be, who is likely behind it?
These messages between him and his lover seem to be fabricated.
And they keep spinning it around to Israel did it.
What this does is it disrupts any actual investigative journalism into who may have done it.
So, when Joe Kent from the intelligence agencies joins in, And says a foreign nexus, I'm like, they're intentionally disrupting any chance at really looking into what happened.
And so, what you would do is you take the evidence you have, and then from each point of evidence, you'll advance one step to check where does this lead?
And where does that lead?
Transgender furries, Democrats.
Liberal leftists, it would make the most sense, in my opinion, that if there was a conspiracy to kill Charlie Kirk, it came from Democrat donors, elite pedophiles.
We know these people who have been funding Democrat politicians, don't get me wrong, also a lot of the uniparty Republicans that Trump went to war with.
And how do you stop regular people online from actually looking into the donor class that really wanted to stop Charlie Kirk?
You have a counterterrorism director come out and claim it was Israel, or at least insinuate.
And then instead of investigating the trans furries on X who were claiming they knew something was going to happen, the Discord groups, you're now getting people like Candace Owens screaming Israel did it.
But that statement, what it does is now you've got the people who are, the young people who once were curious about going to a turning point event now will not do it.
Tom, it's a little bit amazing to me how, like, I feel like you're willing to grasp at these straws of evidence of foreign nexus operations that I think are more or less baseless, but then completely disregard, I think, the quality evidence against Tyler Robinson.
The Illuminati made a mistake, and you on the internet just found it out.
So I think he's spot on when he points this out that all of these internet sleuths have been saying the most psychotic things from the get go.
One of which was that Charlie was shot from behind, and I was told to my face simultaneously that Charlie was actually shot from behind by a guy in the bushes in front of him.
And I'm sitting here being like, hold on.
You show me a picture of a guy.
It's a grainy green picture.
Like, that's a guy on a balcony pointed at Charlie in front of him.
Then you told me that he was actually shot from behind because it's all garbled nonsense.
What I really think is going on for the most part is that nobody knows what happened.
Nobody wants to believe what happened.
And people are also desperate for something to latch on to.
But let me do this.
I want to jump to this story from Raw Story to exemplify everything we're talking about.
Raw Story wrote this last night.
They're getting sick of Trump.
Ex GOP operative in awe as Trump booed at UFC Miami.
Trump was not booed at UFC Miami.
Never happened.
How does this headline exist?
It's like we're back in 2016 all over again.
So I began digging into it.
And here's a video from Eric Doherty of Donald Trump.
unidentified
Here's the full video 45th and now 47th President of the United States of America, Donald J. Trump.
Everyone's just holding their cameras up and filming.
Nobody's booing.
They're waving, smiling, he's smiling back.
I was at a UFC event not that long ago when Donald Trump was there.
And I was in the VIP section.
And this is exactly, I think this is the end of 24, like right after he got reelected.
And this is exactly what it looked like.
He walked out slowly.
Everybody was holding up their cameras.
I was holding up my camera.
Why is it that people on X are claiming that Trump got booed over and over again?
The original video from Eric Doherty is just the man is in his element.
Love that Marco is here.
People have taken this video.
Started just reposting it everywhere saying Trump got booed at UFC.
And prominent personalities that I know, friends of the show, are agreeing and saying Trump is getting booed.
This is mass formation psychosis.
These people are grifters.
They are just saying these things because they want to get clicks and views.
That's people are concerned right now that they want to get followers and they're going to burn the whole thing down and do it.
I don't know what's going on.
What I can say is everything is psychotic and insane and it's impossible to work through.
And maybe that is the intended condition.
For a while now, the prediction has been that the machine state could not allow decentralized podcasting and information spaces, and so they'd need to destroy it.
And one of the theories was that they would flood the zone with fake news to make it impossible to figure out what is true.
And they use human vice against the people who claim to want otherwise, thus proving a tremendous point.
When some of the people who I'm going to leave their names out, who have shared this video claiming he was being booed, which he clearly was not, either just did not watch the video and lied anyway because it gets them clicks.
Or they did watch it, no, he wasn't booed, and said, who cares?
We're going to share it anyway.
It stands to reason that the machine state has proven its point to me and many others.
From the right to the left, it's grifters all the way down.
They were never honest.
They were lying the whole time because they wanted clicks.
And by the way, I don't disregard any of the evidence in Skyler Robinson.
None of it, right?
I have no problem with any of it.
Most likely thing is most likely what happened.
I'm just saying that we need to dig into everything because I don't trust anybody.
At this point, I have watched our government lie to us, both parties, endlessly.
I don't trust a single person in our federal government.
And I want to investigate everything.
I don't care if there's a sliver of a chance.
I want to dig into it.
You know, they also told us that there were no Epstein files, right?
They also told us, I mean, if I went through the list of the lies we've heard in the last year, I'm not an anti Israel guy.
I support Israel.
I support the Jewish people.
I don't like Netanyahu.
But I do think that if someone's going to make accusations at this point, I'll give some of these wackadoodles as much of a chance as I will some of the credible people.
I'm not so sure about that because the people that are specifically critical of the Charlie Kirk narrative, critical of what's been done about the Epstein files, those people aren't going to come back because the economy's good.
But the kitchen table issues, the things that will get the normal people that don't pay much attention to this kind of stuff, get them out to the polls.
Is do I feel like my dollar is going as far as it did five, six, seven years ago?
I think that we've got, with people like Candace Owens, you have mass formation psychosis.
I have met what I would describe as default libs.
This is the way Andrew Breitbart described these people.
They vote Democrat, they don't really pay attention to politics, it's just normal for them.
And I've met many of these people who are anti Trump and anti Israel.
Because of Candace Owens.
And you ask them about politics, and they'll tell you, I have no idea.
A good example is this woman we had on the show who said Zelensky was put in charge of Ukraine because he's a Jew and Netanyahu on a corridor to Israel.
And I'm just like, you literally made that up right now on the spot because you have no real justification for why you think the Jews control Ukraine.
This is mass formation psychosis.
I don't think the economy matters.
I really don't.
I think we are looking at a demoralized generation.
Millennials and Gen Z are largely demoralized.
They're not concerned about buying houses because they don't think it's possible, so it's not a part of their worldview right now.
They are not seeking to attain home ownership.
Some do, don't get me wrong, but I think largely as generations, Millennials and Gen Z and soon to be Gen Alpha just don't even concern themselves with it because it's not something that you can do.
These people are not motivated by needing to make more money, they're quiet quitting, what's one of the big trends.
These are people who think they're deserving of anything.
They should burn down warehouses, and their motivation is ideological.
Here's a really funny story.
There was a post.
Did you guys see the guy who burned down the warehouse in Ontario, California?
$23 an hour was the listed online wage for working in that factory.
It was a contractor for Kimberly Clark.
$23 an hour.
The rumor is he was making $27 an hour.
Thought he deserved more.
And after the fire, another employee was interviewed and he said, It's a bummer because I just started making good money.
So the point is, this guy is not motivated by the money.
He's motivated by the communist ideology telling him that no matter how much he has, it's not enough and he should have more.
Whereas other people were like, Wow, this is great.
I'm finally making 20 bucks an hour.
I got a job that I can actually live on.
This guy said, I deserve more and burned it all down.
I don't think the economy changes much.
I think it is going to be a factor, maybe three to five points, which Can be dramatic, but we're looking at a major swing from right to left right now, and it's about 10 points.
Actually, I think I have the, I've got this from Rich Barris.
He says Republicans lost the nonpartisan but really is partisan Wisconsin Supreme Court by 20 points, the largest Democrat margin in the modern history.
Lazar lost iron.
Here's why we collect ethnicity details.
Lumberjacks were Trump 1 and pre Trump 2, BB version crushed, worse than Mitt Romney.
I think what we're looking at is they back off 24 to give Trump just enough rope, as the saying goes.
And now, prominent Trump supporters have broken from Trump and are effectively liberals.
They're at least spoilers.
Democrats are going to sweep in, they're going to take everything, and they're going to ram through their agenda.
So I got to be honest, I think a lot of these pro Trump personalities that are now anti Trump, and a lot of the reason why a lot of these personalities are just saying anti Israel is because they fully expect Democrats to get in and they don't want to go to prison.
You look at some of these guys out there that Trump now has problems with.
Like he loved Massey, now he hates Massey.
He hated Lindsey Graham, now he loves Lindsey Graham.
I mean, isn't the problem that what we thought we were getting is not what we've gotten?
I mean, at the end of the day, listen, I want Donald Trump to come back to the guy that we thought we were voting for in 2024, because if he does, it saves our country.
I mean, this is exactly who Trump has always been, especially with the we're not going to let Iran get nuclear weapons talk.
It's like, yeah, we wanted, I think Trump's foreign policy in the Middle East has still been largely better than ever the president because they all started wars in the Middle East.
I think if you remove wars in the Middle East, you get Trump with the Abraham Accords and other policies I think have been beneficial.
Not that I'm not a fan of him going to war with Iran, but I do think there's a bigger component there that actually maybe we should just jump into right now while we've got a lot sitting here.
We got this from the Wall Street Journal.
Sanctioned Chinese tanker makes U turn in Hormuz after trying to exit Strait.
This is crazy.
So Donald Trump announces a blockade of any ship trying to go into or out of Iranian ports and through the Strait.
This morning, the reporting was that a Chinese tanker made it through the strait, but then at the Gulf of Oman turned around and went back into the Persian Gulf, indicating, presumably, that the U.S. said no and they weren't able to pull off whatever they were trying to do.
Now, here's where it gets interesting.
I think, I now believe more than ever, the shuttering of the Strait of Hormuz was the intention in the war.
Take a look at all of the factors at play right now.
I don't care what anyone says, I care what we see.
And we see a few things.
China is pissed.
They have been issuing public statements that this is disrupting the global order and it should not be allowed to stand.
They've been cut off from around 20% of their energy imports, which is damaging their economy massively, and they're in serious trouble if this persists.
But also take a look.
At Trump going into Venezuela beforehand, securing Western oil assets, then starting a war in Iran where the strait was already open and then it gets closed.
Trump goes, Oh no, the strait's closed.
I swear, if you don't open that strait.
Now, why would he be saying that again?
I don't care what he says.
I care about all I look at is the math of it.
Let's calculate everything based on simple data points.
Venezuela captured, U.S. gets access to the oil assets, the largest oil hub, basically production and distribution in the world.
It's ours.
Trump goes to war with Iran, causing the Strait of Amores to shudder.
Trump makes a statement ensuring Iran keeps it closed.
When Iran reopens the Strait as a toll booth, as a tollway, Trump orders a blockade of the Strait for any tankers, particularly this Chinese one.
When you remove the we're trying to get the Strait open talk, that's PR hubbub.
The end result is all of the actions we have seen thus far seem intended to stop.
US adversaries from getting access to Middle Eastern oil.
In the meantime, the Gulf is exporting at record levels.
Now, here's what I think.
Trump can't come out and say, we started a war with Iran, bombed them, and killed their government because we're trying to cut off China's energy access.
Because then China would say, okay, that's a declaration of war, right?
What the US comes out and does and says, no, no, we're trying to get it open, trust me.
So what happens?
When Trump says, you better open the strait or else, The Iranian government goes, I'll show him.
I'll keep it closed.
Then Trump's like, oh no.
China gets pissed, issues a statement.
Then Iran comes out and says, okay, we're going to reopen it and we're going to do a tollway.
When you take a look at the Venezuela stuff, plus the new defense agreement or cooperation agreement with Indonesia regarding the Strait of Malacca, when you look at the big picture, it's a significant effort to change China's.
Basically, their energy policy because the Strait of Malacca, the Gulf of Hormuz, and the issues with Venezuela sending oil illicitly to China.
And then you toss in the issues with the, what's it called?
So I made a video about this because there's something called Game Theory 18 by that Chinese professor.
Some people don't like him.
They call him a CC professor.
I don't know anything about him.
All I know is he said Trump is doing this intentionally to cut off China's access to energy, which comes from Iran, comes from the Gulf.
He cut off Cuba.
He then threatened sanctions against anybody.
So Trump just shut down oil distribution from Venezuela and from Iran to our adversaries while also destroying the governments of Venezuela, Iran, and now Cuba.
This looks like a coordinated play on the part of the U.S. to basically wipe out our adversaries and make the U.S. the dominant hegemonic power.
And speaking of Cuba, Cuba was uniquely positioned to make trouble for any kind of ships that are going into the Gulf of America, where they're now going to.
And even if they try to get it through, Trump gets an appeal, gets an injunction, they're not going to be able to get anything through.
And that could, I mean, that would be nuts.
What I will say on the international stage stuff, as we're talking about, you want to pull up the map and we'll take a look at all this stuff.
I'm going to just say it like this.
I don't care the opinions of anybody, myself, none of that matters.
Ignore everything I've said, ignore everything the anti Trump people say and the pro Trump people say, and just calculate data points.
Venezuelan oil under U.S. control, Cuba strangled on the verge of collapse, Iran, their government's completely gone, the strait is closed, and Gulf oil distribution has shut down with a U.S. blockade on Iranian ports.
China's access to energy has been cut by what, 25%?
Ignoring everything else, this is one of the most massive victories for Western militaristic power that I've seen in my life.
And again, you want to call it an accident and say Trump's an idiot.
You want to say this is never the intention, whatever.
I'm only bringing up the data points that are factually confirmed.
I've made several videos talking about the current.
Stage of events that's happening around the world.
And I've had these former conservatives calling it cope and seethe.
Then I'm saying Trump is working a plan here.
And they're like, you're coping.
Trump's failing.
Israel made him do it.
None of that aligns with any of the foreign policy that we have watched over the past 20 years.
The Qatar Turkey pipeline, perfect example.
I love bringing it up.
You know I do.
It's my favorite story.
That the US wanted to build a pipeline through Syria from Iraq, Syria, Turkey into Europe.
And Syria said no.
So, what happens?
Syria falls into civil war.
We're on the side of the people who want to get rid of Assad.
Assad told us he will not allow the pipeline because it will disrupt Russian energy and they're allied with Russia.
That had nothing to do with Israel.
It had only to do with Israel, and that Israel is an ally in the region who is bombing Syria because we wanted them to.
Ukraine, perfect example.
Gazprom, Russian natural gas, runs through Ukraine, providing 20% of European natural gas.
So what happens?
Western assets, NATO, the EU, start courting Ukraine.
Vladimir Putin goes to Ukraine and says, Do not join NATO or the EU.
If you do, it starts here.
Putin says to Ukraine, If you open your borders to European trade, and we have open borders trade with you as part of our trade agreement, European goods will flood our country and disrupt our economy.
Now, here's my ultimate point with all of the stuff on Ukraine, Qatar, Turkey, Syria, et cetera, they wanted to build a pipeline from Qatar up through Iraq, et cetera.
I'm being told by everybody Trump's retarded, he's screwing the whole thing up, and Israel made him do it.
That does not align with everything we've already tracked for the Syrian war, for the war in Ukraine, for the war in Afghanistan, for Trump's negotiations with Russia, the Nord Stream 2 bombing, Germany filing an arrest warrant on a Ukrainian.
It all lines up with this is a plan to shut down the BRICS nations and create Western dominance in energy.
But back to that point, the issue of immigration, I think Trump came to a harsh reality is that our economy is in trouble because we don't have babies.
We don't have the workers to come in and take these jobs right now.
And so I think we talked about it to a great deal.
Donald Trump's plan for mass deportation and immigration restrictions means that the economy may get worse because we don't have new workers to come in.
And my response is so be it.
It is the responsibility of the people to persist.
And that means we need to start having babies.
And so we have people in our chat constantly super chatting us, being like, we're having a baby again.
However, I think that Trump's advisors probably went to him and said if we're going to defeat our enemies and we are going to put America on top, We have to slow down with anything that would curtail us domestically while we put greater pressure on China.
And I think this is exemplified by the gas prices right now going up.
So is the other nations that are holding our debt.
They're taking substantially more damage.
So we're all getting hurt, but we're getting hurt the least.
I think that's what.
I'm going to say this.
We need to stop giving Trump credit.
We just do.
The problem is, you say Trump did this, Trump did that.
It's the Trump administration, it's the people who work with him, it's Pete Hegseth.
It's JD Vance.
It's Tulsi Gabbard.
It's all of these people.
And not just them, there are other guys working at Intel that we don't even know their names that are working with Trump.
The issue is you say Trump did this thing, and then the anti Trumpers, who in their mind believe that Trump can only be retarded, because that's not true, here Trump may have pulled off this plan.
And then they're like, that's not possible.
Trump's too stupid to do it.
And then I'm sitting here being like, yeah, or the intelligence agencies have been working on this for a long time and got Trump in on it.
And this is part of the problem.
Or Trump came in, saw the pieces on the chessboard, brought in advisors, they discussed it and moved some pieces around.
And this is the play they're making.
I don't think, I think it's very easy to say Trump did it.
I really don't think so.
I think these ideas come from like Stephen, like domestically, Stephen Miller's telling him what to do.
And there were China hawks in the administration that had plans like this, that knew about these situations.
They got together and came up with a, I think definitely the cabinet is giving the president a lot of different options and those inform a lot of his decisions.
Obviously, former Senator Marco Rubio, now Secretary of State, was known for being very hawkish on China, on Cuba, on Venezuela, on Iran when he is in the Senate.
I will say though, I think I know him from reporting to be the actual trigger man, to be the actual decision maker.
I think a lot of this stuff goes to him and he is making the final decisions.
I think people who think that he's being, you know, misled or manipulated, particularly on the Iran stuff, are misunderstanding the president completely.
I don't think the president was confused about his decision.
I think he did so.
He had, it took a lot of chutzpah and audacity to do something that no other of the five prior presidents were willing to do.
And that's obviously attack the Iranian government and take the shout and attempt at regime change and, you know, strangleholding different oil channels and trade channels here.
I think this is really a flex of power.
He's willing to pull the trigger on Venezuela.
I suspect he's going to be pulling the trigger on Cuba soon as well.
He's continuing to support Ukraine, which is bogging down Russia further there.
So, you know, I think people, they like to project onto Trump what their political beliefs are.
But he obviously has agency and I think makes his own decisions.
Is it your assumption that this wouldn't be considered America first?
These kind of foreign policy moves that set up the United States as basically taking the power of OPEC basically away and putting that power on the U.S.
So AOC is asked at the European Security Council meeting or whatever should the US defend Taiwan if China moves on it?
And she gives this long, rambling non answer that everyone made fun of her for because she's trying to look.
Presidential, and she has no idea what she's doing.
With cutting off China's access to energy, there's no concern at all now about China going after Taiwan because they don't have the energy to do it.
They're in trouble that Trump made this move, and Trump did it in a way where it's an oopsie daisy, I made a mistake.
That's how it looks.
Oh no, they shut it all down.
So again, I'll say it like this you don't have to agree and you don't have to like the foreign policy moves that Trump is making.
My view in 2016 with Hillary Clinton was if you wanted to be a fat American who does very little work for a whole lot, Hillary Clinton was your candidate because she was willing to go to war with Russia over Syria.
She wanted a no fly zone over Syria because of the Qatar Turkey pipeline.
She was told by our general that would be a declaration of war on Russia because they have a naval base in Tartus and that would restrict their movements.
And so she said she did not care.
I said that's crazy.
Trump said that was crazy.
And we voted for Trump because we wanted domestic policy.
And again, we've talked about this ad nauseum over the past several years.
China was actually expected to take over, I think, in 2027, was the original date, some like 10 years ago.
And then it kept getting pushed back for some reason or another.
2032 was one of the later projections.
Now that's pushed back even further.
My view has been for a while, and again, I don't know everything, guys.
My opinion might change based on new information.
But we had talked about how Hillary Clinton, Democrats, were concerned about Thucydides' trap.
That is, if China was going to supplant the US as the dominant global power, there was fear that a war would break out.
12 of the last 16 historical events where a new empire has supplanted the old one resulted in war.
So the theory is that Democrats began colluding with China.
Bringing their assets over to China, expecting a wealth transfer.
The US is on the decline.
China is ascendant.
Instead of going to war, the elites of the United States will sell off their assets to China.
You've got Chinese birth tourism.
You've got Chinese buying up all our property.
You've got China stealing our IP.
You've got China coming to our universities and taking our IP.
And the elites let them do it because when the shift finally happens and China is the global order, these people will live like kings.
They'll retain their wealth and they will want for nothing.
Trump says that's never going to happen.
Comes in to reverse that, domestic policy is difficult.
More importantly, if China does take over, none of it would matter.
So, what we're seeing right now, I don't know what's true or what's not.
I can only say this I don't care if it involves Trump.
I don't care what Trump, Vance, Hegseth, or Rubio says.
We can just nail the point by point of what is true.
We own Venezuelan oil.
Cuba is surrounded and their government is collapsing.
Iran's government has been wiped out.
There's a new government there.
Don't get me wrong.
But all top 40, 50 people in their leadership have all been killed.
And the new Ayatollah is reportedly in a coma and has not been awake since.
I think he's dead.
China just lost access to half its energy, as has all of our adversaries in the region.
And the U.S. is exporting record levels of crude.
Outside of whatever you think happened, whether it was intentional or not, these are tremendously powerful benefits to the United States in the long run.
And we will see short term benefits to that.
The exporting of massive crude, we are seeing, I think the average gas price right now across the country is up 50 cents.
A lot of people are pissed about that.
Hopefully, Trump gets a handle on this.
But I got to say, I said this before.
If Trump, if this is actually the play, the Trump administration, should they succeed in this endeavor, will go down as the greatest administration in American history.
Whether it's Trump, the Democrats, or otherwise, the intelligence agencies have this plan in place and they were going to do it regardless of who is in power.
And members of Congress can't even talk to us about what's really going on, nor can they actually pass any real laws.
So maybe what's actually happening is that the Hillary, Trump, the Democrat deep state, all of that's been fake the whole time.
If Trump had been honest about other things, if he'd been honest about Epstein, if he'd gone after some of these global elites, you know, I mean, listen, some of these guys that are, you want to take down WEF?
What I know is that Todd Blanche specifically said there were 6.5 million pages.
We released about 3 million.
And most of those were redacted very poorly.
Pam Bondi said there were tens of thousands of hours.
And then later says, well, it was just porn from the internet.
Okay, sure.
The stuff that was in the original.
Listen, we need transparency.
And here's the thing had they not said, had Dan Bongino not outright lied and said there's no Epstein files, and then tried to convince us that Epstein killed himself, which I believe about as much as I believe that Tyler Robinson did this with no help, no one knowing.
I was going to say, Tom, actually, although I believe that the Epstein files were suffering from being too hyped up, I think the administration burned itself by hyping up.
The files so much prior to getting in.
So, people like Kash Patel, who's now the FBI director, or Dan Bongino, hyped these files up so much that it's hard to really blame you for being dissatisfied with what's coming out following all the hype that's been around this from the people who ended up in the administration.
So, although I believe it has turned into a witch hunt, when you have people like Pam Bondi, who contributed with these Epstein file binders to make people believe they were getting new stuff when they weren't actually, it was botched.
All of this stuff was botched.
So, like, at the same time, I just want to say, I just want to say, You know, it's hard to blame you when, you know, they really messed up this rollout.
And Bondi and Kash Patel and Dan, they all over promised, under delivered.
And now with the redactions, they didn't want it to come out.
Imagine a scenario where the intelligence agencies together are stupider than I am as a single individual.
For example, I've said it over and over again.
If Dan Bongino came out right after he got in the FBI and when he was asked about Epstein, he just went, Oh man, you know, we're going through these files, guys, and it's going to take some time because if we want to get the bad guys, we got to do it right.
Otherwise, they get away, but we're working on it, so hang tight.
Trump should have literally taken a goat, brought it out to the White House lawn, and then shown Epstein files the picture of the goat in it and be like, the goat did everything.
So let me ask Can anybody in this room, we started hearing about Epstein in the 90s, right?
And first of all, I'm going to diffuse this.
Anybody that wants to say, Well, did you ask about it during Biden?
No, I voted for Trump because I expected more.
I knew Biden was a piece of crap.
I voted for Trump.
I fought for Trump.
I campaigned for Trump because I wanted more.
So, no, I didn't expect that Joe Biden, whose son was bringing crack to the White House, was going to do anything about this, allegedly, allegedly bringing crack to the White House.
But here's the thing this starts in the 90s.
Allegations of the Clintons, allegations.
I mean, we got the Bill Gates thing.
I mean, he's slipping his wife antibiotics because he got God knows what from some Russian hookers.
Does anybody in this room seriously believe that Epstein wasn't running a blackmail ring for elites?
Well, I think it was only at the end of the 2000s when they brought the first charge against him for soliciting underage girls.
What had happened was two young girls were fighting with each other.
And then when they went and separated the girls, they found a bunch of money in her purse and said, Where'd you get it?
And she said, I work for Jeffrey Epstein.
Here's what we do.
And they're like, He's hiring underage girls to be hookers.
So he gets charged for it.
But the theory that he was blackmailing people, I believe, became particularly prominent after 2012 when people started asking why Epstein was granted, like, where'd he get his money from?
He was a teacher.
None of it made sense.
And so theories started to emerge, again, largely based off of circumstantial evidence, speculation.
Things like that email to Bill Gates where he said, you know, I gave you medication to give your wife.
There were things like that.
I don't know that we've seen any evidence.
That Epstein was actually an intelligence asset that was blackmailing a ton of world leaders.
That's not to say he wasn't.
I think that Epstein was likely tied with intelligence agencies that was doing something in this space.
But I'm only saying this to be careful on I don't want to have them throw a bone for us to chase in the wrong direction when we're trying to figure out what it is that Epstein was doing.
And so there's a lot that's involved.
The blackmail is certainly one of these theories.
But for now, the only evidence we have of it was that he wrote a draft email to Bill Gates saying he wanted $30 million.
Don't you remember when you drugged your wife with antibiotics because some hookers gave you an STD?
I think a lot of this story, the truth is already bad enough.
And for people to continue chasing and exaggerating certain portions of the story takes away from that.
And for example, the legitimate parts of the story, I mean, Howard Lutnick, currently in the administration, even after Epstein was convicted of running around with these underage children in Florida, still hung out with him.
And still was willing to meet him multiple times.
And Lutnick still allegedly went to the island following that.
Bill Gates, his relationship with Bill Gates was all after he was convicted of this behavior with younger children.
So, like, there's a lot of evidence of very bad behavior, not particularly illegal for these other guys, just unbecoming for people in power.
And I think, you know, people chasing other parts of the story that may or may not turn out to be true or fleshed out by the evidence is really overshadowing a lot of that bad behavior because, I mean, I know there was a short little witch hunt for Howard Lutnick, but nothing came of it, although there is a lot of pressure allegedly right now in the administration for his ousting.
Like, instead of focusing on some of these other points, people are saying, you know, they're unsatisfied because they aren't getting so called scalps from whoever may have allegedly been in these videos that they're saying is just, you know, online videos or whatnot.
I think that people, the evidence that people beat around the bush and use innuendo around was that he was convicted for relations for somebody under age.
Again, I'm not saying there isn't, that he filmed this and then used it to blackmail these individuals to make money or to control them or something like that?
The victims, I don't believe the victims stated that Epstein used video footage from them to blackmail princes and world leaders and politicians or anything like that.
I'll give you that we can't prove because we haven't seen the documents or the other three and a half million pages that they're hiding or the other stuff that they're hiding that he was doing that.
But you know investigating the wrong thing because you don't know Well, of course I could, but if we did it, that's the problem I have with people who are asserting something.
This is the issue I always had with 9 11 truthers.
They would come to me and they would say, Did you know that a professor found thermite residue in the base of the World Trade Center after the fact?
I said, okay, now hold on there a gosh darn minute.
If you want to come to me and say it's strange that the plane that crashed into the Pentagon seemingly vaporized itself and the jet engines are gone, I'm going to be like, that's an interesting point.
Now, from there, where do we go?
We are lacking information.
Something's not being told to us.
So I have no issue with Luke Rutkowski, for example, where he just says, we want a proper investigation into these questions.
I say, that's a great point.
But then you had people who would say it was an inside job.
Implying that the Bush administration was involved in it occurring, which is a massively different thing than the official story is not correct.
With Pizzagate, we see something similar.
You get these emails leaked by WikiLeaks, which are questionable, and instantly, unfortunately, for some reason, everyone just starts making things up.
And they claim that pizza means boy and pasta means girl, fabricated out of thin air.
And I say, whoa, whoa, hold on.
These people are weirdos.
They're doing something strange.
These emails are coded.
But if you start with the evidence and then just jump to the other side of the room, We're not actually investigating what may be going on.
I think, for instance, one of the emails released by WikiLeaks where they say, is it more fun to play dominoes on pizza or on pasta, was about doing drugs.
I think they were emailing being like, hey, when you're in an orgy, would you rather be on Coke or MDMA?
I think they were coding it because they're sending emails to each other's accounts and they didn't want to overtly say it.
There's also the email where they're like, I found a handkerchief with a map on it.
And it's like, yeah, clearly these are coded in some way.
Unless there's literally like a handkerchief that just looked like a treasure map and we're misconstruing this.
But instead of asking what these things could mean and connecting the emails, trying to figure it out, everybody immediately said there's a pizza place where they're hiding kids in the basement.
Turns out there was no basement.
A guy showed up, fired a bullet into the ground, and it was like, now you're done screwed up.
My concern with the Epstein stuff is that the people who are adamant they know exactly what he was doing are hurting the potential investigation and decentralized investigation into what he could have been doing by claiming and asserting.
I think that the reason that the Epstein files are absolutely essential that we deal with is because there is a reasonable possibility, not that we can prove, but a reasonable possibility that if Epstein was running this child rape ring for a long time, that he was using it to blackmail rich and powerful people.
And that if that's the case, that could explain a lot of the corruption that's occurring in this country.
It could explain a lot of what's happening.
And by opening up a full transparent investigation into this, wherever it goes, what that would allow us to do was to restore certain trust and allow us to ensure that there's a little bit more faith in the institution.
I think when you decide the conclusion before the investigation and then your investigation does not reach that conclusion, you will lose all the trust.
If you say that Epstein did this, and then we say we're spending, Trump gets in and goes $100 million, and they find nothing, what's going to happen?
People are going to say, we elected you to solve this problem and you didn't do it.
And then what happens when the people are like, we don't know that Epstein did this?
What if they find something else?
What if he was an arms dealer?
What if his actual money was coming through is that he was smuggling weapons to various factions and rebel groups?
What if Epstein was actually arming rebel factions so they could blame it on foreign countries as a casta's belly for the U.S. to go and engage in war or Israel for that matter?
And then you go in and say, let me put it this way.
Let's go to the extreme end.
What if Jeffrey Epstein gets in contact with Mossad through Ghislaine Maxwell, whose dad, of course, was an honorable Israeli citizen and is believed to work for Mossad?
And they say, we need you to send weapons to Hamas and Hezbollah so they'll attack us and we can use it as a casus belli to bomb them and wipe them out.
And Epstein's like, let's go.
And then someone else comes along and says, actually, Epstein was blackmailing politicians.
So, the people go to Donald Trump and say, We want you to investigate Epstein blackmailing politicians over child rape.
Trump says, Okay, goes in, and there's nothing there.
And he says, There's nothing here.
What do we do?
And then the people who voted for him say, Trump's not giving us what we asked for.
What if Epstein was actually just setting up rebels so that Israel could justify its expansion of greater Israel?
Now, again, I don't believe that's the case.
I'm using one more extreme conspiracy theory that is entirely plausible.
And I could say, Well, if that were the case, because he is believed to have been working for Mossad and Maxwell's dad did too, then we should investigate that.
But no one's asking that question.
That's the problem I have with drawing the conclusion before the investigation begins because now people want Trump to produce evidence that may not exist because they've already decided it did happen.
What if it turns out that Epstein was an arms liaison for powerful interests for the United States to engage in foreign wars?
They would provide, removing Israel from the picture, they would provide enemies of the U.S. with weapons as patsies so that, say, the Houthi rebels would attack things that Trump could then justify and say, okay, now we can go in and say they attacked us.
We can, like, basically setting up false flag attacks.
What if the reason they won't release this stuff is that Epstein was actually more of an intel military asset for global affairs and war?
And the reason they're not releasing this is because it would disrupt U.S. foreign policy plans.
I'm saying that if you are told to search a house for a weapon and the guy says it's for sure in the basement, we have to go to the basement, and you don't go upstairs because you're damn sure it's in the basement, you'll come out of the basement with nothing and then everyone outside screaming at you, why didn't you find the weapons that are in the basement?
Because, listen, when you go, if you're a police officer and you have a reason to investigate someone, you investigate them, right?
So when you have a guy that is allegedly trafficking children to rich people around the world and he's got cameras in his houses, there's probably a reason for all that.
The principal issue I take with these constant claims, like the same thing happened when we had this other woman on, is that it absolves to a certain degree the responsibility of the people that were being accused.
Instead of saying that powerful individuals were using Epstein as a pimp for underage girls, you're saying he tricked them into doing it to blackmail them.
For the sake of our children, I think there's a decent probability that Donald Trump, we talked about this a couple weeks ago, knows that it's a foregone conclusion at the midterms.
And so the reason why we're seeing Venezuela, Cuba, Iran, China, all this stuff now is because he's like, okay, boys, we've got seven months to pull it off.
After the midterms were cooked, so let's go out with a bang.
He's going to jam through as much as he can to prop up the United States and then hope the next two years where he's jammed up and can't do anything, we will be able to set up a new.
Republican who would come in and then carry on and continue the plans that he's that not just him but his administration has made.
And what if what if the other side let's because we're talking a lot about Trump's strategy and Trump, you know, but maybe he's brilliant, maybe he's not, we don't know what he's doing, right?
But the same, remember for any 4D, 5D, 6D chess he's got, the other side is trying to counter him, right?
So maybe with all of these things you're doing, you know, are they setting him up to look bad, to look worse, to look this so that they can undo it?
I personally think.
I personally think there's a huge, huge movement to try and destroy.
I think what's going on is the mega, the division.
I think the only thing he needs to do is end the war in Iran, and people need to see gas prices return to what they're used to.
And I think that that will, I'm only saying that will save the Senate.
I don't think the Republicans can win the House unless, yeah, I don't think the Republicans can win the House at all.
Unless the economy is going gangbusters.
If there's a massive increase in economic activity here because of what happened in Iran, right?
Because of what we're talking about with China, there's a big boom in the U.S. and people start making money in the next six months, then I think the Republicans can, not will, can.
It still comes down to the people that are running.
It depends on the campaigns that they run.
If the U.S. doesn't have a big boom economically, the Republicans cannot.
The only way they possibly can is if there's a big boom.
If Trump's executive order already on the postal service that they can't transport mail in ballots for ineligible people, the game may be changed right now.
And the question is will Trump deploy ICE and DHS into key swing areas to inhibit any potential illegal voting activity or things like that?
It's all going to play a big role, and we got to see how it plays out.
But I guess the question is is Trump ready to go to actual.
War, like political warfare.
Yeah.
Meaning the use of law enforcement for control of elections and things like that.
And Tim, my follow up to that is going to be this.
We all hope that Trump is the guy that we fought for, and we all hope that he's playing 16D chess, but we've got a lot of lies.
Did I really trust the deployment of troops in a federal election?
Did I trust that sort of a thing?
And I got to be honest, when I'm being lied to about so many things, when I'm seeing a lack of accountability for any of these bad people that are doing it, why aren't we putting some of these guys in jail right now instead of waiting until this last minute, which could turn into an absolute war in this country?
Evidence because we, I think, I think we agree that to indict someone and fail at putting them in jail is worse than not indicting them.
What if they just don't have enough, not saying that they are good people or that they didn't break the law, but what if they don't have enough evidence that the people that have made accusations are not credible enough or they don't think are credible enough to a jury where they feel like they're going to actually put people in jail?
Because that's something that people don't talk about, right?
There's people always say, We need to put these people in jail, we need to put these people in jail.
As if just saying, you should go to jail, you should go to jail, you should go to jail, as if it's an authoritarian country where you can just say, well, you're accused, you're accused, you're accused, and we think that there's a preponderance of evidence, so we're just going to put you in jail.
That's not how our government works.
That's not how the DOJ works.
If they don't believe they have the evidence to convince a jury, they're not going to indict.
What if the situation is they just don't think they have the evidence?
I watched Pam Bondi throw the Comey case and the Letitia James case, and I'm going to tell you that it is my opinion as an attorney, she threw those cases intentionally.
She, under the black letter of the law, this wasn't an activist judge.
This was the black letter of the law, was very clear that Halligan, who may be a great attorney, I'm not ripping her at all, she may be amazing.
She did not have the authority to appoint Halligan into that position.
She took the most important case.
In our country, and gave it to someone who it was very clear does not have the authority to prosecute it.
That isn't a mistake that someone who's been a state AG and then is a U.S. Attorney General, that's not the kind of mistake they make.
That to me was 100% intentional, just like letting Maureen Comey, of all people, get involved with the Diddy case.
And by the way, there's a friend of mine, his name's Mike.
He's a podcaster, also a smaller podcast, great guy.
He went to high school in Palm Beach when Epstein was doing this.
It was common knowledge that they were recruiting from that high school.
Yeah, but again, I don't consider myself a Christian.
We were just having a conversation the other day about, and I was talking to my wife about whether or not we need to start going back to church.
We're lapsed Catholics.
And I still don't consider myself a Christian, but every single Christian has been like, just come anyway.
And so we've talked about the importance of community and discussions of just faith and theology with our daughter as it is, but also the importance of being around good, trustworthy people because.
To be honest, when you know the story that it tells, I went to meet up with Seamus after he went to a Latin mass, and everyone there is as prim and as proper, you know, traditional, respectful, good moral values, all that stuff.
And that's the kind of people that you want to be around.
The main reason I think we didn't do it is I just said, um, I don't want to be fake, I don't want to impose myself on people who are going to worship when we don't share those beliefs necessarily.
I do believe in God, but uh, the response from literally 100% of people is come anyway, they don't care whether they really want to convert, like, not convert, of course, no, yeah, but you know, they they.
The idea is like if you come, maybe you will start to believe or something.
But for us, it's more so about being around people that we believe are good, honest, trustworthy, and things like that.
And having our daughter grow up around people that we think are good and trustworthy.
And I also think that there's value in learning the stories that are taught in the Bible as well.
Whether you truly believe in the afterlife and resurrection, the general moral structure, I think, is a good thing.
But let's read some more.
Swanson says, I know there's conservatives saying Trump betrayed you.
If the left gets in power again, illegals come back.
J6 will look like child's play if the left gets full, unfettered power.
So he comes in, and I'm thinking, like, remember when Beto said he could skateboard?
And then he jumped on the.
Trust me, every single skateboarder saw Beto get on that board and knew he was lying.
He could stand on a board, sure, I'll give him that, but he did not know how to ride the board properly.
And so Riley comes in and throws his board down.
And immediately, at first, I'm thinking, like, I'm sure he skates, you know what I mean?
Like, come on, I skate.
But then he throws his board down and jumps on it.
And I was like, oh, okay, he actually knows how to jump on his board.
And then he just, without warming up, did a half cab nose slide on the box.
You probably just have no idea what I said.
It's not the hardest of moves.
I would describe it as an intermediate move.
So, when you're a kid, there's a trick called a nose slide, and it's where you jump off the board, turn it sideways, land with the nose of the board on the edge of a rail or ledge, and slide.
A nose slide.
A half cab nose slide would be you ride backwards, jump sideways, backwards, and to your right, and land on the ledge and go forward.
Slightly more advanced, but not.
Too much more advanced.
It's more like intermediate.
Maybe after you get your basics down, you might learn that trick.
But doing it as a 40 something year old man who did not warm up, I immediately was like, Riley used to be really good when he was younger.
Like you can tell, like we're old men.
I'm 40.
And so I still got some moves.
You know, I skate decently well, not like I did when I was 19.
But, you know, when Riley shows up and he does a trick like that, I was like, wow, he must have been pretty dang good at skateboarding when he was like 19, 20 years old.
Now he's a dad.
He doesn't really skate that often.
But to hit a ledge like that at 40 something without warming up is.
I think a quick point on that I saw on Monday that there was a Chinese tanker that did go through.
It's a fascinating game of chicken, though, because in order to actually enforce a blockade, you'd have to embark on the Chinese tanker.
And that would be a gigantic escalation, obviously, and something that the president would have to consider before actually moving forward and doing.
And who knows if he would actually want to move forward with that, given that in one month he's supposed to be visiting China and having a face to face meeting with Xi.
So it's an interesting game of chicken, right?
Like, was the U.S. military really going to board this Chinese tanker and enforce this blockade?
What is Trump's evidence that there were nuclear weapons?
Things he said.
What is the evidence that Epstein was blackmailing powerful petitions?
Things people have said.
So when Trump says we're going in for nuclear weapons, I say sure, buddy.
When people say Epstein black people, I say sure, buddy.
See, I don't believe it is conducive to success to live your life based on.
A simple linear perspective on how things are going to be.
What I mean by that is when I'm assessing whether something is true or false, it's in probabilities.
Trump says we're going in for nuclear weapons.
I think, considering all the facts, it's like 17% likelihood.
I think that there's a lot of higher probabilities in other areas.
And so, as we get closer to trying to figure out what these things are, we don't just say, well, there's five variables.
I've decided this one is 100%.
I say, there are five variables, and here's how I weigh each of them against each other.
There are some people who believe we went to Iran to free the people who are being oppressed by the Iranian government and massacred, which I put it like a 0.1%.
Like, very unlikely that's the case because we'd be invading Sudan and Eritrea.
We'd have taken over.
We got to grab a couple more.
I don't want to leave people hanging.
Let's try and get a couple more in here.
All right.
Antipathy says, can't wait to see Tim around midterms blaming Jew hatred for Republicans losing and not for the Kirk investigation or Trump replacing MAGA with Zionism.
I don't believe that Jew hatred is going to cost Republicans the election.
Well, here's the thing the Earth is round, and the ice wall surrounds the inner Earth from the greater Earth, where Atlantis and Tartaria control the seven continents because we're actually slaves locked in.
If you want to read about the stuff that Tim and I were talking about, I wrote an in depth thing with a bunch of citations about why China was the actual target of this foreign policy that we have going on now.
You can check that out on my Patreon.
It's patreon.comslash Phil That Remains.
All That Remains is going on tour.
We're going to be going out with Born of Osiris and Dead Eyes.
We start April 29th in Albany.
You can get tickets at allthatremainsonline.com.
You can check out the band's music at Apple Music, Amazon Music, Pandora, YouTube, Spotify, and Deezer.
Don't forget the left lane is for Crime Carter.
unidentified
Phil, we're going to miss you while you're gone.
Hopefully, you come back soon and have a great tour.
We'll see you all over at rumble.com slash Timcast IRL right now.
thanks for hanging out
so we were just talking about how yesterday's episode of Tim Castile on Rumble has about a million views between Rumble and YouTube's got about a million which honestly like tracks comparably to where we were several months ago So, I'm wondering if Swalwell being accused of rape was big news, everybody wanted to watch it.
And the people who hate Democrats have migrated off YouTube and they're now largely on Rumble.
That's what Rumble has always been.
It's basically been the anti establishment right.
I think YouTube's just dying.
And here's what I think too one thing that we've seen is every time YouTube has an error, We tell people, well, we're still live on Rumble, and people then go and go on Rumble instead of YouTube.
So YouTube viewership's been going down while Rumble's been going up.
You know, they just, you know, it comes down to the fact that I was, you know, big in the health freedom movement and, you know, I did all the work there.
Listen, we're at a point now where it's like, you know, thanks to Bobby and some of the other people out there, and, you know, because of the work that we did, we've got, you know, we've got a hard ton, we got a ton of hard evidence backing what we're saying.
So, you know, back in 2020, 2021, I was bringing evidence that I could put in a courtroom.
And they were telling me, yeah, but the mainstream disagrees.
Well, it doesn't matter if I can put it in a courtroom under penalty of perjury.
I'm clearly not lying about it, right?
I got something to base it on.
But they would, they would sense me anyways.
Now, It's like they can't even say that because now, even the mainstream, I mean, there's mainstream peer reviewed science back in the stuff we say.
I'm sorry to pivot like this, but as I understand, you have a lot of your background in medical freedom advocacy.
A lot of people in that space were very critical of the president because of Operation Warp Speed and developing these vaccines.
Did you have any reluctance supporting him?
Sounds like there's so many things that you would, you know, are inclined not to support him based off of, but this sounds like almost a red line for you.
Despite that stuff, despite Operation Warp Speed, despite putting Anthony Fauci in a place of position during his first administration, you know, how did you support him despite that stuff?
And at the end of the day, here's the deal I'm an issue guy, right?
I look at each individual issue.
I don't know Donald Trump, okay?
I've met a couple of his family members and I know a lot of people around him.
I've never met the president.
To me, he's a politician, he works for me, right?
And I know that that's a crazy thing to say.
And people are like, what do you mean he works for all of us?
But he does.
He works for all of us, right?
On balance, there was no question who the better bet was.
We were hoping, we were hoping, especially with bringing Bobby in, that when he came in, he was going to take Maha very seriously.
Frankly, we were betrayed.
I'm going to speak, I'm going to speak, you know, and I know Bobby's doing a lot of great things and I support Bobby, but we're continuing to support the development of mRNA.
Oh, it was one of the most just absolutely absurd things you could do.
Followed by what we now have in Congress and supported by the president, legislation to essentially provide immunity, the same sort of immunity vaccine manufacturers have for pesticide manufacturers, chemical manufacturers.
We've seen the approval of all sorts of new things.
We're seeing more and more gene therapy.
We're seeing manufactured meats, which I actually did a full breakdown and laid out the manufactured meats that they're growing in these tubes.
They literally meet the scientific definition of cancer.
Even when I travel abroad, I'd say, Doc, what do I need to get?
Right?
COVID hit.
And, you know, if you follow my work, you know, it was, we fought hard.
We fought hard.
You know, I led a lot of that fight.
We get through the COVID stuff, and as I'm going through, I start researching.
And what I was doing is I was looking at the science, and I was finding garbage in the science, right?
And so a little bit at a time, I would chip away and I would research.
And I start out with the science behind masks and lockdowns.
Okay, this is all garbage.
I look at the science behind the epidemiology related to COVID.
Okay, this is all garbage.
And I'm putting this in courtrooms, I'm putting this out there, and it's indisputable, right?
It's just facts.
We then move forward, and I said, well, wait a second, if there's all this corruption, shouldn't I look further?
So I did.
And, you know, Aaron Seary and Bobby Kennedy and my good friend Sherry Tenpenny and some of these people who are long, long, long time health freedom advocates that have been anti vax, you know, they've been talking about these things.
I start looking and literally without going into what would be an hour long conversation, right?
When I look, there is not a single vaccine on the market that was approved using what I would say a true gold standard study initially.
So, when we look at health, One of the problems is when there are cheap alternative solutions that show a statistical signal, there's never any funding to study them, right?
When we see a natural product.
So, for example, there are certain types of mushrooms that are mainstream treatment in Japan.
I think the profit motive is what makes our medical system the most, I mean, depends on how you define productive, but effective in producing new medicines for people that wouldn't exist otherwise.
If these companies weren't making a ton of money, they wouldn't be putting a ton of money into research and development, and then we wouldn't have the pipeline of individuals going into the healthcare industry.
I think as a whole, The fact that there are a lot of dollars at play is what helps drive modern medicine further.
And that's my understanding of the industry.
If these companies weren't making any money, there'd be no incentive for them to produce newer and newer drugs.
That's a big part of why the United States is the only country that continues to produce newer and newer drugs because everybody just rides their coattails around.
I think a pharmaceutical company would make a killing if they developed the cure for cancer and then they would have the IP over that cure for, I need to look at the copy.
It would be at least 10 some odd years.
This would probably be the most successful company.
In pharmaceutical history, if they were to develop a cure for cancer, in my understanding.
Well, if you consider natural selection or, you know, selection modification, you know, breeding plants, that's one thing when we start talking about modifying.
So, for example, you know, to survive glyphosate, All of the seeds are modified, right?
Because glyphosate kills plants.
Why is it that it kills everything in the field except for the food we eat?
Because the food has been modified.
Now, did you know that that limits, that means those seeds are now the intellectual property?
They have an intellectual property right in those seeds, the companies that make them, right?
So, I mean, I think you need to take GMOs in the totality of what they've done throughout history, though.
As I understand the reason that we are able to feed so many people on this planet, Is thanks to genetically modified foods because it increases survivability, increases yield, it makes crops much easier to grow, increases the yield essentially.
And we wouldn't be able to have a population and feed everybody that we do now if we didn't have the GMOs.
You're probably not going to get the same yields as some of these chemically altered poisons, but I mean, you're also not going to be eating glyphosate.
Regenerative farming has come a long way.
I got a great friend, Howard Vlieger, who is a, I mean, he's got one of the most incredible regenerative farms I've ever heard of.
He, you know, he talks about this lecture.
There are solutions out there and things that we could move.
But instead of creating an executive order where we're going to enshrine glyphosate poisoning for the rest of eternity and then make sure that the farmers who get cancer from it.
I want to bring up something about the 30-aught six conversation that I've never heard anyone else speaking of.
Not that they aren't, just haven't heard it.
And it leads into a question for the guest.
So, you did say that you didn't believe that it was 30-odd six when you first saw it because you know what 30-odd six does.
And I believe I heard you say when Phil brought it up, or I concede to Phil's point, that bullets do weird shit when they enter human flesh.
And so, credit to that because it does.
We've got countless stories of that, both soldiers and non-soldiers.
But one of the things, so the rifle is purported to have been Robinson's grandfather's.
And it's very likely, if that's true, that the ammo came from his grandfather.
It's an antique Mauser.
Grandfather probably takes care of it.
It's probably not current modern production high pressure 30 odd six that you would shoot in a modern 30 odd six rifle.
It's probably either current production low power, something for like an M1 Garand, or it's hand loaded or it's surplus.
So it's probably lower pressure than what people are typically used to.
And we see all these videos on YouTube with shooting water jugs and brute and meat targets.
Shout out to Paul Harrell, rest in peace.
And we see what it does to fake flesh, or not flesh, but dead flesh.
None of that really tells us what happens in human live tissue that's going to react at the stimulus, yada, yada.
But like I said, you did concede to Phil's point earlier that bullets do weird shit.
And I just never hear anyone talk about, well, is it modern production, higher pressure 30-odd six, or is it more like the stuff that was produced around the time that that rifle was?
Because if I was that person owning an antique Mauser, I'd want to take care of it like I take care of the M1 Garand.
But my point is, though, is that I agree with what Tim said.
The story does not sit well with me.
It doesn't sit with me as accurate.
And I point to the 30 odd six because I've got experience with that gun.
I can say firsthand, and that seems like the most likely or the single biggest smoking gun.
But if you look at all of the different things throughout the story, I was being quick earlier when we were talking about it, but I think that just in totality, it doesn't add up.