All Episodes
Previous
Feb. 19, 2026 - Tim Pool Daily Show
59:15
Trump Ready to Strike Iran THIS WEEKEND, MASSIVE Military Buildup | Timcast Noon LIVE

On today's show we'll talk about the potential of WAR with Iran, Prince Andrew's arrest and the 2026 midterms.Show more Host: Tate Brown @realTateBrown (everywhere) Guest: Adam Johnson @LecternLeader (X) | https://unlicensedfurnituremovers.com/ Trump Ready to Strike Iran THIS WEEKEND, MASSIVE Military Buildup | Timcast Noon LIVE Show less

Participants
Main
a
adam johnson
14:06
t
tate brown
43:20
|

Speaker Time Text
Mixing Timpool Brew 00:04:55
tate brown ▲ ● ▼
What is going on, Patriots?
This is Tate Brown here, holding it down.
I am back for another installation of the Tim Cast News Live Show.
I'm very, very happy to be back with you guys today on this beautiful Thursday.
It is February the 19th.
Oh my gosh.
This year has gone by like that.
You know what they say?
The days are long, but the years are short.
Well, I think both the days and the years are getting shorter because I don't know what is going on.
Things are getting wacky and wild.
We have some wacky and wild news for you today.
Apparently, we're going to war with Iran.
Is we going to war was the top search on Google.
It's getting really hectic.
It really does look like, you know, I'll say this, all signs are pointing to a war.
There's really no doubt about that.
It's getting chippy over there in the sandbox, as we call it.
And so we're going to get into all the latest happenings on Iran.
Are we actually going to go to war?
That's kind of the narrative right now.
I'm still a little bit skeptical.
I think I'm one of the few people in the conservative commentariat who is not quite convinced that we're actually going to go to war.
I'll give you my reasoning for that, but then I will give you the reasoning for why it does look like we'll go to war.
We'll take both sides and see what comes out on top.
Pause.
And we have some other news we will get to if we do have time.
And we will be joined at the half hour mark by the great Adam Johnson, the lectern guy.
He's going to give his thoughts on Iran, these sorts of things, and what the impact on the midterms will be, because I think he is quite in touch with the base.
I don't think there's any question about that.
So we're going to get into all of that.
But before we do, let's do some housekeeping.
We have a great sponsor for you today.
It is our very own Cast Brew Coffee.
Oh my goodness.
Do we love Cast Brew?
I mean, I have a glass of pool water.
As always, I don't leave the house without it.
You know, I have an emergency pool water at all times for immediate deployment.
It kind of reminds me of Space Jam.
I don't know if you guys are cinephiles, but if you've seen the great motion picture Space Jam, there was a scene where the Looney Tunes, they're playing against the Monstars.
They're about halfway through the game and they're getting completely blown out.
They're getting absolutely smoked.
It was really grim scenes.
Foghorn Leghorn was turned into a rotisserie chicken.
I believe Porky, I think he ended up in an iron lung.
Like it was really not looking good for the for the Looney Tunes.
And then suddenly at halftime, Michael Jordan and Bugs, well, Bugs Bunny, I think, was responsible for this.
He filled up a water bottle and wrote Michael's secret stuff or Michael's secret sauce on the bottle.
And when the Looney Tunes ingested this water with the placebo thinking that it was some sort of special concoction, you know, brought to you by Michael Jordan, they suddenly got these sort of supernatural basketball abilities.
And that emboldened them in the second half to make a comeback and to eventually beat the monsters.
It really is a tremendous thing.
And so I kind of view pool water the same way.
You know, as a political commentator, I'm still a little new to the game, right?
You know, I'm still a new fag, as people would call me in a lot of ways.
And so the only way I can really hone my ability is not by reading or presenting or writing or these sorts of things.
The only way is to use substances.
And I have found that pool water gives me the ability to channel Tim Pool in a lot of ways.
Again, it is just water at the end of the day.
Where is it?
It's from Hanover, Virginia.
But there's something going on at this label that really just unlocks something within me and helps me sort of channel that sort of Timpool-like ability.
So it really is something to be said.
So you can go to casboo.com.
I think we're sold out of pool water right now.
I think it's because I keep drinking it all.
I think it's the primary reason.
So as soon as I stop drinking all of the pool water, which I will start now for posterity, I'll say I will stop drinking as much as you guys can buy some.
You can buy some.
But we do have a new product that I am very excited about.
Cast Brew Vault Black.
This is Cold Brew Concentrate.
This is really something special here.
So you take, you just need a little bit of it.
You just need a little bit of it.
And you can mix it with water.
You can mix it with milk.
You can mix it, you know, if you're sort of swing this way.
You can mix it with urine if you're into that kind of thing.
And you can make yourself your own cold brew ready to go just from concentrate.
So this really is a tremendous product.
So I would recommend, personally, this is what I would do if I were you.
You know, I don't want to tell you to live your life, but you should head over to casbrew.com and you should get yourself a bottle of cold brew concentrate and see what you can do.
Tell me what liquids are you mixing the cold brew concentrate with to make up your own concoction?
Tell me.
Tell me on Twitter.
Tweet at me and say, hey, I mixed it with urine and it's actually not too bad.
That would be very interesting to me if you did that.
So please do that.
Head on over to casprew.com, buy you some coffee.
Why We Left Google 00:15:01
tate brown ▲ ● ▼
With that, I think we should just get right into the news.
On a very more serious note, I guess, you know, we were talking about cold brew urine cocktails.
I think this is sort of of the similar ilk.
We might be going to war with Iran.
We might be going to war with Iran.
It actually looks like it's getting quite serious.
Obviously, it would have been, it would have been, what's today, Thursday.
So Tuesday night, we saw reports that virtually anything that could fly that has a U.S. flag on it was heading in the direction of Iran.
And so a lot of people saw that and they said, okay, it looks like the buildup is occurring.
Now, there's a lot of different reports going on.
One thing we do know is a official told Reuters that the buildup was not expected to be completed until mid-March.
But every source that we have available, human sources, we would call it, you know, tracking airplanes, tracking ships, and then also sources that have spoken under anonymity to various outlets have said the buildup is effectively complete already.
We are ready to go.
So this is why this headline is very interesting.
This is from CBS News and basically every other outlet has picked this up as well, obviously.
Trump has discussed timeline for Iran strikes, including as soon as this weekend, but no decision yet.
So again, official told Reuters, I think this was yesterday, buildup won't be done until mid-March.
Well, top security officials are saying Trump could be ready to go by this weekend, which is really something.
So, we're going to read here.
This is from CBS News out of Washington.
Top national security officials have told President Trump the military is ready for potential strikes on Iran as soon as Saturday.
But the timeline for any action is likely to extend beyond this weekend.
Sources familiar with the discussions told CBS News, Mr. Trump has not yet made a final decision about whether to strike, said the officials who spoke under condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive national matters.
The conversations have been described as fluid and ongoing as the White House weighs the risks of escalation and the political and military consequences of restraint.
One moment.
I need some cold brew concentrate mixed with urine.
I think that would be the solution here.
Over the next three days, the Pentagon is moving some personnel temporarily out of the Middle East region, primarily to Europe or back to the United States, ahead of potential action or counterattacks by Iran if the U.S. were to move ahead with his operation, according to multiple officials.
It is standard practice for the Pentagon to shift assets and personnel ahead of a potential U.S. military activity and doesn't necessarily signal an attack on Iran is imminent, said one of the sources.
I'll keep reading here.
Contact by CBS News on Wednesday afternoon.
A Pentagon spokesperson said that they had no information to provide.
Secretary of State Mark Rubio plans to visit Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in about two weeks for further discussions, according to one of the sources.
Carolyn Levitt said at a White House press briefing on Wednesday that there are many reasons and arguments that one could make for a strike against Iran, but diplomacy is always the president's first option.
And she declined to discuss whether a potential strike would be coordinated with Israel.
But she told reporters a very successful operation in June that targeted Iran's nuclear facilities, obviously referring to last summer when we were kind of in a similar situation where all signs were pointing towards a potential war with Iran.
We saw the strikes and I think the immediate reaction from everyone was, oh my gosh, we just started another war.
And then that didn't actually turn out to be the case.
We conducted an operation which at best incapacitated Iran's nuclear program.
Iran responded with a strike on our base in Qatar, but this was like premeditated.
They actually told us the strike was going to happen so we could evacuate personnel.
It was more of an attack to save face.
This is actually quite common on the international scale.
I'll read here.
The USS Abraham Lincoln aircraft carrier group and its flotilla of warships are already in the region and a second carrier group, the USS Gerald Ford, was en route to the Middle East.
As of Wednesday, the Ford was off the coast of West Africa, according to maritime vessel tracking data.
And as we know, today is Thursday.
The Gerald Ford is now in the neighborhood.
So things are getting hot.
And the question really is, you know, what exactly is the goal for the Americans here?
Well, I actually think Carolyn Levitt is accurate when she says, of course, the first goal here is democracy.
I'll start by saying I think President Trump and the Trump administration, by and large, really would not like a war in this situation.
Again, people will point out that war with Iran has been the goal of the United States and a lot of shadowy figures within the government for quite some time now.
But I think Trump, the admin, et cetera, has the wherewithal to understand that, look, starting a war right before the midterms is not a very good idea.
There's also something that's worth considering, and people don't actually consider this, but something that is worth considering is that, and this sounds crazy, but this is true.
This is actually reflected in geopolitics, and it's not being reported about the media.
There's been zero questions asked about the Trump administration to the Trump administration on this, but this is truly, this does play a role in geopolitics, is the Winter Olympics are currently underway.
And again, you might roll your eyes at that and say, well, who cares about the Winter Olympics?
We've actually seen historically that powers do not want to start wars during international events.
This is just not something that's conventional.
It doesn't play well.
Italy is an ally.
That's where the Winter Olympics are currently.
And that could potentially throw a wrench into things if a war is started, an international war is started during that event.
Don't believe me, look back at the Ukraine-Russia war when that broke out.
Russia actually waited for the Winter Olympics to be wrapped up in China before they actually conducted their military operation, whatever you want to call it.
So again, these actually, these international events do play a role.
They do play a role in the decision-making process.
And again, no one's talking about this, but that's something that should be considered as far as timeline goes.
This is why I actually suspect that that official that told Reuters the buildup won't be complete till mid-March, I think he was basically saying that's the timeline.
Where right now, as we speak, I'll just go ahead and pull this up because I think this will be useful.
It would be sorry, I got my jumbled, I got my pieces jumbled here.
This is from Al Jazeera.
Iran says good progress made in nuclear talks with U.S. and Geneva.
So this is why I think it's, I don't think this weekend would be the time where we would see an action taken.
Who knows?
I could be eating crow at some point in the next few days.
But I don't suspect that it's going to happen this weekend because we still have many rounds of negotiations with Iran taking place in Geneva right now.
There's, in this piece, Oman is the one that is brokering these talks.
I'll just read very quickly here from Al Jazeera.
Iran's Minister of Foreign Affairs, Abbasi.
People say the name on the news, and I always forget how to pronounce it.
I'm just used to reading it.
Has said that, quote, good progress has been made in indirect nuclear talks with the United States, as Washington warned, that military action remains an option if diplomacy fails.
The talks mediated by Oman were held in the Swiss city of Geneva on Tuesday against a backdrop of increased military flexing by both sides in the Gulf region.
And we were told that the talks were still continuing.
Ultimately, we were able to reach a broad agreement on a set of guiding principles based on which we will move forward and begin working on the text of a potential agreement.
This is what he said.
Good progress has been made compared with the previous round in Oman earlier this month.
He said, adding, we now have a clear path ahead, which I think is positive.
And then he said on Wednesday, Iran was drafting a framework for future talks with the U.S.
So this is interesting for a variety of reasons, but this is why this is important is because if you go back and you look at the nuclear talks prior to the attack on Iran last summer, is what the Iranian officials were saying, because they had talks in Oman, actually, prior to the run-up to the war, Witkoff was meeting them in Oman.
He met them in, I believe he met them in Italy as well for these rounds of talks.
And the Iranians were not happy.
What they were telling the press in the run-up to the attack was Witkoff at some point, I believe it was the discussion in Italy, they claimed that he left early.
He showed up late and then left early.
And he actually left the meeting early to meet with the Israelis, which was quite funny.
And so the Iranians were, the messaging that they were telling the press in the last year's nuclear discussions was not good news.
They were saying there was zero progress being made.
We weren't being taken seriously, et cetera, et cetera.
Now, this was all reporting from the state media on Iran, so who knows?
But this is from Al Jazeera, which is a slightly more reputable outlet than Iranian state media.
But it is encouraging, I will say, it is encouraging that the Iranians are not sounding the alarm bell.
Encouraging for the Americans.
And so I'll read here.
Messages from the U.S. were mixed.
Speaking to reporters, Carolyn Levitt said a little progress had been made during the talks, but we're still very far apart on some issues.
Iran would be very wise to make a deal with President Trump and this administration.
I believe this was the headline from the BBC: White House pressing Iran to make a deal while ramping up military progress.
So, this is the posture of the White House is there, openly saying maximum pressure is being put on the Iranians to make a deal here.
A lot going on.
There's a lot of moving parts.
This is my assessment of the situation, and a few people that are geopolitical experts, military experts, et cetera, have shared this sentiment.
This is the point I made on the show last night.
So, Amber Duke was on the show, obviously, at the Daily Caller.
She's fantastic.
But she made an interesting statement.
She was saying she was on Facebook, and one of her, I guess one of her friends or something had posted that her husband, she was upset because her husband was supposed to be deployed in a few weeks.
And she was upset because his superiors had told them, actually, you're being deployed right now.
Like, pack your bags.
It's time to go.
And it was funny because then Amber caught that.
And she was making the point that, look, why would he be needing to be deployed suddenly, immediately, when the timeline was set for quite a long time in their anticipation for his deployment?
So that does indicate that, again, the United States is really ramping up a lot of pressure here on Iran.
So that's interesting.
That's a, I would say, a bad indicator.
But a good indicator from my point of view, and then a few other people have shared this sentiment that I've seen, is that the fact that officials are talking to the press, right?
You're seeing report after report, you know, the Reuters, even CBS has had some reporters saying that officials are speaking to them.
That's actually kind of a good sign that we're not going to have a war because think about this.
Think about at the beginning of the year with Venezuela, the Venezuela operation.
Happened overnight.
No one knew it was coming.
We didn't have a single leak.
There was no reporting in the press that we were actually going to conduct an operation like that.
You know, we had seen that there was a carrier strike group in the region.
Obviously, we had seen the vessels being struck, the drug boats or whatever.
But there was no indication that we were actually going to conduct an operation in Venezuela because, again, the Pentagon had completely locked everything down.
You know, there were zero leaks coming out, zero, certainly zero officials talking to the press about what they think is going to happen or what their assessment is, these sorts of things.
Now we're seeing that this buildup in Iran, every news outlet in America is getting officials speaking to them.
That's actually a good sign because that indicates that the Trump administration is actually letting information be released.
Okay, because these officials, perhaps some of them are just speaking out of line and they're reporting confidential information.
But again, we see with Venezuela that the Pentagon has demonstrated that they've gotten everything pretty airtight and that officials will not speak unless they're sort of allowed to or permitted to or at least like encouraged to.
So the fact that we're seeing senior official Reuters are saying they had a senior official talking to them.
That indicates that the Pentagon is allowing information to be released on what our plans are in regards to Iran.
And the reason for that is because as soon as it hits the press, the Iranians are seeing that.
The Iranians are now seeing that the Trump administration is serious about striking them.
And that will give us leverage in negotiations.
So all this to say, the fact that we are seeing officials talking indicates that the Trump administration is seeking to maximize pressure to get a deal.
And we are seeing negotiations are happening in Switzerland as we speak.
Again, this is the issue, though.
This is what the issue is.
Fundamentally, this is what the issue is.
Let me see if I can find my mouse.
There it is.
Stumbling blocks.
Al Jazeera outlines it here.
I could outline this myself, but I think it'll be useful to use their writing here.
Iran, for years, sought relief from sweeping sanctions imposed by the U.S., including a Washington-imposed ban on other countries buying its oil.
Tehran has said that the ongoing talks to focus its uranium enrichment program, insisting that any deal must deliver tangible economic benefits to Iran while maintaining its sovereignty and national security.
Meanwhile, Washington has demanded that Iran forego uranium enrichment on its soil and has sought to expand the scope of talks to non-nuclear issues such as Tehran's missile stockpile.
Iran has said that they will not accept zero, they will not accept zero uranium enrichment and that its missile capabilities are off the table.
So again, this is the issue.
Where's the brinksmanship here, right?
I mean, if Iran and if Tehran and Washington are just seeing two completely different situations and what their conditions for a deal would be, I don't really know where the deal is.
It's very unclear here.
The Ayatollah Khomeini, he actually came out and he gave a speech where he was saying, you know, under no circumstances are we surrendering our nuclear program.
If they're not going to surrender their nuclear program, they're certainly not going to surrender their missile stockpile.
That's very obvious.
So again, it's just very unclear what specifically we can actually accomplish here at the negotiating table.
So while I said there are encouraging signs that the Trump administration is prioritizing a deal here, the Trump administration, by all accounts, does not want to go to war for a variety of reasons, including the upcoming midterms.
What's the deal going to be?
Because Iran, you know, their line is completely out of step with ours.
Things are definitely heating up.
This was, again, in Reuters.
Russia warns of escalating Iran tensions amid U.S. military buildup.
Iran Nuclear Negotiations Unclear 00:15:51
tate brown ▲ ● ▼
This was quite interesting.
So I made the point on the show last night that Russia, they really provided Venezuela with nothing to no sort of relief whatsoever.
And I suggested that this would occur again in Iran.
And I do think that that probably is going to be the case.
But this is interesting.
This is reporting from Reuters out of their Dubai outlet.
Russia warned against, quote, unprecedented escalation of tension around Iran on Thursday and urged restraint amid a U.S. military buildup in the region that a senior American official said should be complete by mid-March.
That was the reporting that I had seen.
U.S. threats to bomb Iran with the two sides far apart on talks in Tehran's nuclear program have pushed up oil prices and a Russian corvette.
So this is really important here.
A Russian corvette on Thursday joined planned Iranian naval drills in the Gulf of Oman, a vital sea route for global energy.
About 20% of all energy in the world passes through the Gulf of Oman.
So that's a very big deal that the Russians are joining the Iranians for joint naval drills in the Gulf of Oman.
That is a very, very big deal.
Now, again, I don't think that Russia is going to get involved if this is a military operation, but if this becomes a prolonged war, Iran has a lot of proxies.
They have a lot of proxies.
They have the Houthis, they have Hezbollah, they have Hamas.
These are all proxies of Iran.
Russia is going to provide some assistance here.
They're going to provide some aid.
The question is, what do they have?
Because, again, they're tied up in Ukraine right now, and that's probably not going to stop anytime soon.
But the munitions and whatnot that would be required for a defense of Iran or that would be useful for their proxies.
Those are different munitions and the munitions currently being utilized in the Ukraine operation, the Ukraine war.
So I wouldn't count, necessarily completely count out Russia here.
Obviously, the Kremlin just would really not like to see a war because this ultimately puts Russia in a really bad situation if the U.S. and Iran go at it because they're going to have to weigh in.
They're going to have to, again, sort of pick a side here, for lack of a better word.
If they sit on their hands when Iran is going down, how else is any other country supposed to trush Russia as a potential ally, as a potential partner, geopolitical partner?
It's very unclear.
So, this was four days ago from Reuters, but this was the initial reporting that I remembered seeing.
And I was like, that's kind of interesting that this is in the news.
And now we're seeing the context come out.
This was an exclusive that they got.
The U.S. military is preparing for potentially weeks-long Iran operations.
So, again, you know, people are suggesting that this could be like last summer where we just conduct a single operation, a single, you know, instance, and then it's over.
Same thing happened in Venezuela.
Well, the reporting that we're seeing from Reuters, again, this is officials telling Reuters this, indicates that potentially this could be a prolonged conflict.
I think this would certainly classify as a war.
The U.S. military is preparing for a possibility of sustained weeks-long operation against Iran.
If President Donald Trump orders an attack, two senior, sorry, these aren't senior officials, two U.S. officials told Reuters, and what could become a more, far more serious conflict than previously seen between the countries.
The disclosure by the officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity due to the sensitive nature of planning raises the stakes for diplomacy underway between the United States and Iran.
And then they go into the discussions in Geneva.
The reason why a weeks-long conflict is kind of concerning-well, it's very obvious why that's concerning, but another reason why this is concerning is because, again, if this is a we're in, we're out, it's done in four hours operation.
That's one thing.
But a weeks-long Iranian operation, what that does is that has, again, large impacts for the region.
That activates the Houthis, that activates Hezbollah, that activates Hamas.
Again, that draws Israel into the conflict.
So, Israel is going to get involved here, and that's where it's going to turn into a regional war.
We already saw Iran and Israel trade missiles last year.
Israel has unfinished business in Iran.
Iran feels like they have the capabilities to destroy Israel.
So, we would have to see if that's the case.
Who knows?
Granted, a few of their missiles did penetrate the Iron Dome, which is worth considering.
If the U.S. military enters a prolonged conflict with Iran, the Israelis will get involved.
Now, Levitt, a few others have said we aren't really coordinating with them right now, but that's a little difficult to believe for a variety of reasons.
One thing that was interesting, this was an interesting tidbit that was in the news.
And this is what sucks because anytime you bring up Israel, because the discourse right now is so toxic, immediately everyone just starts reading between the lines.
I'm just right now, I'm giving reporting, right?
I'm giving like reporting.
This is what we know.
Again, this is far removed from any other context.
I'm just trying to determine the situation on the ground here.
I'm not making any grandiose political statements, et cetera, et cetera.
I'm just saying it's an objective reality that Israel would be involved with a war with Iran.
That is their number one global adversary.
Of course, they would.
It's obvious.
Something that was interesting was Tucker Carlson yesterday went to Israel.
Apparently, he didn't leave the airport or something.
But he went to Israel, he interviewed Mike Huckabee, that sort of thing.
Well, what we had heard is that Tucker Carlson was under pressure by the Trump administration to, I guess, tone it down on Israel.
That was what the reporting was saying.
Again, this is neither here nor there.
What is interesting is that the Trump administration is sort of trying to tighten ranks around commentary and whatnot surrounding Israel, which indicates that they know that if we enter a weeks-long operation, Israel is going to be involved and that they want the best possible press as possible pertaining to Israel being a partner in a geopolitical skirmish.
So, that was quite interesting.
This was a truth social post by Trump last night, or it was yesterday afternoon.
Again, this indicates that the Iran rain, Iran, the Iranian situation is getting serious.
This was the truth social post, and I'll explain why afterwards.
I have been telling Prime Minister Kier Starmer of the United Kingdom that leases are no good when it comes to countries and that he is making a big mistake by entering a 100-year lease with whoever it is that is claiming right, title, or interest to Diego Garcia, strategically located in the Indian Ocean.
Our relationship with the United Kingdom has been strong and powerful.
In our opinion, they are fictitious in nature.
Should Iran decide not to make a deal, it may be necessary for the United States to use Diego Garcia in the airfield located in Fairford in order to eradicate a potential attack by a highly unstable and dangerous regime.
An attack that would potentially be made on the United Kingdom as well as other friendly countries.
Again, the UK has assets in the region.
Cyprus, I mean, they have massive bases in Cyprus, obviously the Chagos Islands.
This is where Diego Garcia is located.
You know, we've seen with their missile range that the United Kingdom themselves might be within range.
I don't know if that's what Trump is suggesting here.
President Kira, President, Prime Minister Starmer should not lose control for any reason of Diego Garcia by taking a tenuous, at best, 100-year lease.
The land should not be taken away from the UK.
And if it is allowed to be, it will be a blight on our great ally, etc., etc.
Do not give away Diego Garcia.
So this is Trump going back on initially the reporting was he was actually okay with the deal that Keir Starmer was making with Mauritius, which would turn over sovereignty of the Chagos Islands to Mauritius.
It's irrelevant.
Mauritius is irrelevant.
This is a decision made out of wokeness.
The United Kingdom is questioning their ability to govern any land that is not their own.
And so they're saying, well, this is a form of decolonization.
It's absolutely retarded.
And it has massive geopolitical implications because Diego Garcia is a massive base.
This is where we conducted a lot of our operations during the global war on terror.
And this is where, if we were to conduct an operation in Iran, it would be primarily based out of Diego Garcia.
So the fact that they're trying to give away that land is a massive problem for the Americans.
Who cares what the implications are on the British here?
This is a massive problem for us.
So the fact that Trump initially was a sort of like whatever, it's a stupid idea, but whatever.
If you want to give your land away, you can.
To now, he puts out a statement yesterday saying, actually, no, you cannot give away this land.
This belongs to the United Kingdom and it should remain that way.
That tells me that, again, he's this Iran saga is serious here.
He understands that we are going to need an asset in the region for long-term purposes.
Again, if we were just thinking in-and-out strike would be pretty irrelevant because the strike conducted last June, I believe, that was, I think, from Leavenworth.
I believe that's where it's like from Kansas.
So we literally sent a bomber from Kansas all the way over to Iran, bombed them, flew all the way back to the United States.
Well, if we're entering a prolonged conflict with Iran, we are going to need a base, and that's going to be Diego Garcia in this instance.
So very, very interesting from President Trump.
This is why I think what specifically set him off.
The UK blocked the U.S. use of RF Fairford and Diego Garcia for Iran strike, citing international law.
And then this is what Trump, this is why Trump put that true social post out.
This was just a retarded situation.
The United Kingdom, just total idiots.
I mean, Starmer's at like 15% in polling, so he's very unpopular.
So he doesn't even really have the right to turn over this land right now.
This is what led Trump to withdraw support for the previous deal with Mauritius.
So senior UK officials privately called the situation bleak.
That is very fair to say.
So there's still a few more things here, the Board of Peace, et cetera.
But I think we are running out of time on this opening monologue section.
So we do need to get into our interview with the great Adam Johnson.
And I will do that right now for you guys.
Will bring him in and I will see what he has to say.
Um, because I think this will be interesting.
I'm curious what his opinion is on all of this.
So, let's see here.
Hey, Adam, can you hear me?
adam johnson ▲ ● ▼
I can hear you, sir.
unidentified
How are you?
tate brown ▲ ● ▼
What is going on, big dog?
Well, I imagine pretty, I mean, you're a friend of the show, so I imagine most people in the audience are familiar with who you are.
But for those who aren't, could you give a quick intro of who you are, what you do?
adam johnson ▲ ● ▼
Sure thing.
My name is Adam Johnson.
I am running for Manatee County Commissioner.
You can help me win my campaign by giving some small dollar donations at votesadamjohnson.com.
I am formerly known as the lectern guy from January 6th.
Did some federal prison time, learned a lot, and now getting involved and kind of change our backyards.
tate brown ▲ ● ▼
I love it.
I love it.
Well, thank you so much for hopping on.
Well, I brought you on for a pretty heavy topic here, but the reason I wanted you on, and I think why you would be the guy to talk to, is because I think you are uniquely in touch with the base, the Trump base, the MAGA base.
And so, I think you would really be able to articulate what sort of how they're going to react to this situation.
Obviously, the situation is this military buildup in Iran.
You know, again, the reporting, who knows?
I was going through all the reporting before you came on.
You know, Reuters is saying there's auspices for a multiple week-long campaign.
You know, a lot of people are saying, well, this could look like the strikes in June last summer.
All this to say, we have midterms coming up that we're worried about.
We're not looking too hot and polling.
What would be, what do you think would be the reaction for MAGA from the base if we did sort of kickstart a military campaign in Iran?
adam johnson ▲ ● ▼
Well, if I look at the past couple of months, what we've done in Venezuela, what we've done, you know, geopolitically, I think that people are very happy with incursions if they are very isolated, very short, very quick in and out.
The bombings we did in June seem to tidy things over for a little bit.
But, you know, a full incursion, bringing in a military, talking about bringing in aircraft.
And now we've got Russia and Tehran doing naval excursions together.
I don't think people want to see a long war.
Half the reason I voted for Trump was because he promised no new wars because he started no new wars.
So I think a large percentage of his population base is on board with the same idea.
We don't have time, energy, resources, manpower to start a 20-year war again.
So I'm hoping that's not the push and the drive for this.
But I don't think Trump's interested in it either.
If you look at his rhetoric, you look at the people that he's brought on, we're not looking into sending our boys over and getting things done.
So hopefully that message stays consistent.
I know Lindsey Graham's probably not going to eat Viagra tonight.
tate brown ▲ ● ▼
Yeah, absolutely.
So true.
Well, something that's interesting to me is we saw last June with the strike.
There was reporting at the time that Tulsi Gabbard was like ejected from the situation room.
That was reporting.
Well, a lot of the Trump officials came out and said, no, that was false.
Like we're, Tulsi's great.
We love her, et cetera, et cetera.
Obviously, Tulsi, the fact that she is not only still around, but still director of DNI, she's DNI, that's a big deal.
I think that indicates that where the Trump administration's head is at, is that they are still sort of dissenting from the previous, I guess you would say, neocon consensus on our geopolitical strategy.
Again, the fact that figures like that are around, the fact that JD Vance is obviously the vice president, I think that indicates that, okay, yes, we are seeing pressure on Iran, but it's not obvious to me that this is going to turn into an Iraq war style quagmire, these sorts of things.
The fact that these figures are still around is an encouraging sign that diplomacy is still the priority for the Trump administration.
adam johnson ▲ ● ▼
I think so as well.
And just like Venezuela, the people are cheering on for regime change.
And it's not something that I believe that the MAGA, the America First movement, is comfortable with.
That's a term that's got, you know, very negative connotation.
But I don't think that regime change and the way that Trump has done things historically, at least in recent history, is going to be a 20-year war.
So I'm not very apprehensive.
I'm tentatively optimistic that if you give the Iran people what they want, you don't destabilize the entire country.
You put people in power.
I don't want to see what happened the last time we got involved over there where, you know, we took someone out and then we got, you know, a military encouragement 20 years and we basically created all the Taliban.
I don't want that.
And I don't think the Trump administration wants that either, coming this close to midterms.
I do think that a lot of what's going on right now, you know, in all these countries is they understand that Trump is working in restoring America to its greatness.
So a lot of this tomfoolery, as it is, is basically to destable the midterms.
I think a lot of it is intentional.
I think it's very well connected.
tate brown ▲ ● ▼
Yeah, I agree.
And we'll get into that, some of these other sort of impacts on the midterms that I believe is actually the Democrats really seizing on it.
But before we get into that, I do have one question.
It may come off as a loaded question just because that's where the discourse is, but it's really not.
My question would be, you know, what do you think is the motivation for the Trump administration right now to be maximizing pressure on Iran?
Because, you know, a lot of people in the base are saying, why do we like, what is the active threat of Iran at the moment?
Again, there's kind of a variety of reasons, I would suspect, but I was wondering what your thoughts were on this, sort of the Trump administration's considerations in regards to Iran.
adam johnson ▲ ● ▼
It's all about the benchmarks, man.
It's about resources.
It's about trade deals.
It's about saying, listen, you're not going to sit here and have trade deals and good relations with Russia, with China.
You're not going to come in here and tell us how we're going to run our country, how we're going to build our economy.
I think just like Venezuela, just like Greenland, Iran is, it's all about trade deals and making sure that America is fortified for the next hundred years in our economy.
tate brown ▲ ● ▼
Absolutely.
So this is what's interesting.
So you brought it up is you're bringing up the fact that sort of bad actors are seizing on these moments to try and, you know, I guess for lack of a better word, kneecap the Republicans before the midterms.
A lot of people will roll their eyes at that, but I think we can lay out why that seems to be the case.
In this instance, we're seeing amplification of rhetoric that Trump is, you know, indistinguishable from John Bolton.
Rumble Among Streamers 00:06:11
tate brown ▲ ● ▼
And a lot of people making these points are people on the left, but then a lot of these people are making these points are like streamers online.
And then those people are being amplified by the left and they're saying, see, MAGA's turning on Trump.
You know, MAGA's dead.
You know, the whole movement is completely coming, you know, is being derailed and these sorts of things.
And from my perspective, I'm like, I think it's very obvious what's going on here.
But again, I know you're probably seeing a lot of these same things.
And from my perspective, it seems like just a political ploy by the Democrat Party is to try and amplify this idea that there is increased dissent within the base.
Because on Rumble, I love Rumble.
It's great.
But the audience on Rumble is very different from the base.
People in America are really just concerned about the state of the economy.
Do I have a job?
How's my 401k looking?
They're not really hyper-fixated on our geopolitical strategy.
I don't know what your take is on all of this.
adam johnson ▲ ● ▼
Well, the Dallas look for $50,000.
We really should be focusing on that, right?
That's what I heard.
It's a joke.
So what I think it comes down to is you have to look at what the Trump movement was, what the American First movement is.
It is a populist movement at the core of it.
And because it is a populist movement, what we're talking about is centrists.
We're talking about independent voters.
We're talking about libertarians, maybe first-time voters showing up and saying, holy cow, maybe we really can change things, how things are going on.
But within that populist crutch, things that become unpopular in the vernacular, in the large-scale internet speakings, right, dwellings, people will then start to say things like, I'm not sure this is the popular thing to do.
I'm not sure if America First, you know, MAGA is the right thing to follow because people are saying it's unpopular.
And I really do believe it is just that type of information push.
If you tell people who aren't really engaged in ingesting and regurgitating, you know, political talking points hour by hour, you can convince them that what you're doing is unpopular.
And I really do think it is just that type of information warfare.
But if you talk to most people who are following along, we have a handful of grievances, but For all the all the negative things that have happened, this administration, there are a handful more positive things absolutely that come out of this.
Yeah, so I always say stay focused, stay fixed, you know, don't buy into the lies.
There are a lot of positive things happening.
You know, the joke that I made $50,000 dowitz, you know, while that, you know, wasn't terribly poor taste, it never should have been done from someone who has no, you know, active power over the economy whatsoever.
tate brown ▲ ● ▼
Yeah.
unidentified
Yeah.
adam johnson ▲ ● ▼
It is a true statement.
It is, it is showing a clear path to getting our economy back on track.
And, you know, I'm not, that's a longer conversation.
I'm not excited about the Fed putting in $13 trillion back into the economy.
We tried that back in 2020.
We saw the outcome of that.
unidentified
Yeah.
adam johnson ▲ ● ▼
You know, when I know the Supreme Court's supposed to be hearing about the tariffs in the next few weeks.
And when I measure all of that, you know, and a lot of people going back to the centrists, that those middle ground people, we need to know that we're going to be okay.
And part of that is making sure if we are dealing with Iran, if we are going to get into tariffs, that we are seeing the good result of that, that a Supreme Court's not going to kneecap us and tell us that we now OV the tariffs back.
We need to see that the housing market's going to stabilize.
We need to see that our taxes are coming down and our, you know, our applicability is going up.
So I think if we stay focused on making sure those points are talked about at a White House down level, I think we can still win the midterms.
tate brown ▲ ● ▼
Yeah, I totally agree.
I mean, evidence for this, I think, is after every sort of, I guess you would say, Trump scandal with like the online right, like every time something happens and then the online right kind of freaks out over it.
And I'm not saying that these are, I'm not trying to downplay.
I mean, a lot of these are like, they do suck.
But when these things happen, like the Epstein rollout last summer or the Iran strike last summer, you name it, sort of these, seems like when people come out and declare MAGA's dead, you go and you take a look at his approval rating and it doesn't really budge.
That's like the interesting thing is the approval rating doesn't really budge.
It's always hovering, correct me if I'm wrong, from like 38 to 41, just depending on the day, really.
unidentified
Yes.
tate brown ▲ ● ▼
So it's like some of these things feel like the end of the world for us in the commentary class and the commentariat and people that are really kind of dialed in on this sphere.
But again, you just kind of look around at Middle America.
I mean, there's the stat people always cite is what?
It's only like, what, 5% of Americans, 10% of Americans even have a Twitter account.
And the proportion of those that are active is infinitesimally small.
So it's like, again, a lot of these things kind of feel like the end of the world for us.
And then you go and ask people in Middle America how they're feeling.
They're like, well, I just got a job.
So that's great.
I think I'll vote for the Republicans.
adam johnson ▲ ● ▼
It is that.
I think the only dip we've seen in polling is with the younger generation, the younger population.
And I think they are the ones that are chronically online.
So the information war is working with them, you know, at minimum.
But even to that, when these right-wing influencers do go online and they do say things like, you know, we don't like the Iran war, the binder rollout was terrible.
If you look at the response in the White House afterwards, it has historically been, we do see you, we do hear you, and we are addressing it.
tate brown ▲ ● ▼
Sure.
adam johnson ▲ ● ▼
So I would encourage that the right-finging leaders influencers continue to speak because obviously the White House is listening.
So if we have an issue, we want something resolved, something fixed, they are listening.
They are trying their best to do something about it.
So I would encourage people to bring things up and speak your piece.
unidentified
Yeah.
tate brown ▲ ● ▼
And it's vital to speak up in a way that makes sense because there's this issue where people have an issue with something the Trump administration is doing.
And instead of like applying pressure in a very serious manner, they just start spurging out on the timeline or they start spurging out.
And it's like when that happens, I promise you, any sway that you had within the admin, because it's not Trump, like Trump's not responding to any of this.
He's watching Fox News for the most part.
It's like, it's admin workers.
It's people that work for the admin.
I guarantee you, as soon as they see you spurging out, they're going to mute you.
They're going to unfollow you.
These sorts of things.
It's like, there's a difference between applying pressure, you know, giving calculations, giving, you know, here's, here's an alternative and laying out the case.
There's a difference between that and then literally just coming unglued on the timeline, yelling MAGA's dead, Trump's a pedophile, these sorts of things.
It's like, that's a good way to ensure that you're never taken seriously ever again.
Discarding MAGA: A Mistake? 00:03:42
tate brown ▲ ● ▼
You know, I just think that's pretty accurate.
Again, if you have a goal in mind, you need to be prudent and whatnot.
Because like to your point, the Trump administration does respond to the base with a degree of agility, I think, that we've never seen before.
adam johnson ▲ ● ▼
I agree.
You know, I brought up a couple of points.
I got quote tweeted by Margaret Taylor Greene a few weeks ago.
And that's a death sentence for your MAGA following because no one likes MTG anymore.
I got the Dilly, Brandon Dilly came out against me.
Cat's heard unfollowed.
It was this whole fallout.
And all I was simply bringing up is like, we, I understand that there are people whose entire livelihood depends on tweeting for the tweeting for the administration.
And I've got no hate for you.
You know, get that dollar and make your money.
But if I'm bringing up legitimate questions and to suggest that I'm not America first or I'm not a MAGA friendly person, I literally went to prison for this administration.
So go fuck yourself all the way through.
You know, this is ridiculous statement to even utter.
But all I brought up was, you know, people voted for A, B, and C.
And when they see A and B done, they're going to talk about C because they've not seen C done yet.
And that C is we want to see sweeping arrest of high-profile people who, you know, have done very terrible things, have done very terrible things to children and to our, and to our country.
And there was nothing wrong with speaking about that.
And if you're not speaking about that, because you're more worried about your paycheck, I would say you were unprincipled and that you would sell out the next administration for a dollar more.
tate brown ▲ ● ▼
Yeah, absolutely.
I know that's, I think that's completely fair.
And I thought like, for example, Viva Fry, friend of the show, you know, like, I'm sure me and him disagree on things, but he's, I'd say he's a friend.
I value his opinion very highly.
I think he's a brilliant, brilliant guy.
And then he was just, again, asking a question to Harmee Dylan.
And then she responded, like, crashed out on him.
So it's like, I understand these people are under tremendous stress.
I'm not downplaying that.
And I actually cut them, I think, more grace than probably most people in the space.
Like I'm at the point where I think, you know, I'm willing to go to bat for these people on a lot of instances, but it's like when you see stuff like that, like just crashing out on Viva Fry.
I mean, I'm sure you know him or aware of him.
He's like one of the nicest guys.
adam johnson ▲ ● ▼
Good friends.
tate brown ▲ ● ▼
Yeah, one of the nicest guys in the business.
He's Canadian.
That's like their thing.
They're nice.
And so the fact that like you crash out on him, I see that and I'm like, okay.
adam johnson ▲ ● ▼
I've also spoken with Harmeet before a handful of times.
So I'm actually friends with both of them.
And I think my takeaway from it is you're allowing them to win.
You are being baited into drawing sides within your own party.
tate brown ▲ ● ▼
Yeah.
It's fair.
adam johnson ▲ ● ▼
And you're doing a disservice to all of us by doing this publicly.
You know, when I had a couple of right-wingers come out against me, speak out against me, I took it immediately to the DMs.
I'm like, this is going to hurt me, but it's going to help.
I'm all about having destructive criticism, but you coming here and doing this is just for clicks and likes and to grow your brand.
And that, again, that you are selling out, you are selling out an opportunity to actually win our country back by doing that, by causing division.
tate brown ▲ ● ▼
Absolutely.
Yeah, it's twofold.
It's like, yes, that.
And then B, throwing the baby out with the bathwater because you have a gripe with the Trump administration and then declaring it's dead.
It's like, hey, by the way, this is probably the best political vehicle that we've had, certainly in my lifetime.
Certainly, I think in pretty much anyone alive's lifetime.
And you're going to throw that all away over, again, even if it's a very valid disagreement.
It's like, okay, do you want to go back to Jeb Bush?
Is that the solution here?
Because we're not going to get an upgrade, right?
It's not coming.
If we truly just completely throw MAGA out of the window, do you think the consensus from the GOP in 2028 is going to be, hmm, maybe we weren't right-wing enough?
No, they're going to be like, well, I think we should just go back to the Bush era politics because clearly that was politically viable.
Doj's Redacted Evidence 00:09:26
tate brown ▲ ● ▼
We were winning elections.
No, so that just to me seems so pie in the sky.
This idea that like somehow by discarding MAGA, we're going to get an upgrade.
I'm like, MAGA's, to your point, you said earlier, I think we're notching far more victories than L's.
I think that's very obvious.
So when I see that kind of rhetoric, I'm just like, this is just more of a demoralization campaign.
And then the evidence for that is it's amplified by people on the left.
You're seeing it all the time.
So I think a great example of that was yesterday.
John Ossif, a senator from Georgia, lived hard through and through.
He put a tweet up.
I can't remember what he said verbatim, but it was something along the lines here.
I'll just pull it up real quick because this was so egregious.
He said, the Epstein class is ruling our country.
That was his statement.
So I'm like, we're getting to the point now where there's a demoralization effect happening on the right.
And the left sees that and they're capitalizing it and they're trying to exploit that tendency, which is a fairly, I mean, that's a well-meaning tendency, but it's like getting to a point where I'm like, all right, I think it's kind of obvious what's happening here.
adam johnson ▲ ● ▼
Well, they're doing it because it's working, right?
They're doing it because it's working because it is.
Look, the largest fault I find in the Trump administration is their messaging.
And for the amount of wins that they've had, their messaging has been just, I think, abysmal.
We are doing so many positive things that we're not focusing in on those things.
And when the left is taking these, these clips, these sound bites, these things they use, and then they're being shared at large.
Again, it makes the populist movement look like, oh, it's unpopular to believe in these things, even though it's exactly what they voted for.
It's exactly what they voted for.
Even by the popular vote, which is, I think, even a more important metric than electoral vote.
When the larger population of America comes out and says, we voted for mass deportations, we voted for a strong economy, voted for no more wars, and you don't deliver on those things.
Like, that's when you know your campaign's dead in the water.
But they have done those things.
Even if you polled people back when Trump was running in 24, Epstein was never in the top 10.
It never was.
And that's probably why we're not actually seeing a dip in his likability in these polls.
But people online are very concerned about Epstein.
And what I try to bring up is Epstein's not new.
This has been around for 20 years.
This is not something that happened overnight.
Why isn't anyone asking why the Clinton DOJ didn't do anything?
Why is anyone asking why the Biden DOJ do anything?
Why didn't the Bush DOJ do anything?
We've had plenty of time to do things with this.
And in 16, Trump was not running on Epstein anything.
So when they say, why did he do something from 16 to 20?
Well, he was arrested.
So I think of all the administrations that had their time with Epstein and everything, I think Trump was the only administration that actually went forward and did anything.
They needed to release everything.
And, you know, Trump's not sitting there clicking black boxes over information files and emails.
That's the DOJ.
tate brown ▲ ● ▼
Yeah.
That's kind of my concern with the Epstein files, the Epstein sort of saga.
Is I think the Trump administration is having to be prudent here for a reason, because if they were to just enact what the solutions are that people are proposing online, which is like, you know, arresting like Lex Westerner, my problem with that is we don't have anything to charge him with.
Like if we brought him into a courthouse and all we have is the Epstein files, that's going to get tossed out double jeopardy.
He's done.
Now he's free forever.
So I'm like, I think there's this tendency that people want to see scalps, and that's a very good thing.
I think ultimately everyone, I think, here wants to see justice because I think we all kind of know what it went down.
I'm just really afraid that people are just completely blackpilling on the Trump administration.
I'm like, what do you want them to do with what we have right now?
Or at least, you know, Trump himself.
I mean, again, to your point, the DOJ, maybe they do still have some tools in the toolbox we don't know about.
But I'm just like, there's this really bloodthirsty tendency on the right right now.
And I'm just like, I don't think that's going to get the results that we want, at least as it stands right now.
adam johnson ▲ ● ▼
This is it.
And you also, so there's a couple of things you have to consider to be true.
And if you live in reality, I mean, you have to accept them as fact.
If the Epstein documents were in possession of a rogue DOJ for the past, you know, 12 years, you know, because I don't think during 16, the DOJ was doing any better than they were in 2020 either.
A lot of these industries, a lot of these agencies have been co-opted for a long time.
What does this suggest that anything they do currently have is not already redacted when they get there?
Maybe the emails the FBI has right now were redacted by previous administration.
They don't actually have the real legitimate files that have those names unredacted.
There's a lot of things you have to show to be true in order for you to be able to make a statement saying the FBI is doing this.
The DOJ is doing this.
Now, I think people's concerns are the doubles feed that come from Pam Bondi.
Pam Bondi saying she's seen thousands of hours of videos, but Jeffrey Epstein trafficked to no one but himself.
But yet and somehow, I don't know, man.
Like that's, that's probably the thing that hangs me up the most.
tate brown ▲ ● ▼
Yeah, we agree.
adam johnson ▲ ● ▼
There are other people.
There are names.
We do know people.
And, you know, I think there is this, I talked about this probably six, seven months ago, where the only reason that we're really not going out to these people is it really has to do with the economy.
If you arrest some high-profile people that are in charge of some of the largest publicly traded companies in the USA, you will cripple, you will cripple the economy overnight.
You will.
And a lot of people say it's worth it.
And I'm on that side as well.
You know, if we're at a point where our bank accounts are more important than doing the right thing, I'm on the side of arresting people.
Now, in that, you have to understand it's not just the economy that would be crippled.
Our national security would also be, and people are like, oh, God, he's bought.
He said national security.
It actually would be.
You cripple our economy.
You don't think that China's going to come in here and buy up everything at half the price?
unidentified
Yeah.
adam johnson ▲ ● ▼
And then on half our country.
These are legitimate questions and concerns that we do have to have.
So when we talk about arresting these people, we need to talk about the actual fallout and how to navigate those things.
And having overnight arrests, I think would be, I think would be a very foolish thing to do.
If you are planning on doing this, it has to be calculated.
You need airtight cases and you need to be able to fortify the economy in the case you do arrest people who are in charge of large publicly traded companies.
unidentified
Yeah.
tate brown ▲ ● ▼
Well, I totally agree.
And to your point, I mean, a lot of this extremely incriminating evidence, like you said, it's been in the hands of really corrupt DOJ for a decade now at this point.
I mean, most of the Epstein files that we've seen, that was a lot of information that was available already from the Podesta drop.
So I think the most incriminating elements, like if we're talking about truly elite level people, do you think they're just going to let that sit on a hard drive somewhere in the DOJ?
It's like, no, that's probably expunged or at worst, probably been destroyed by now.
So that's just my fear would be, again, if we just started throwing these people handcuffs on them and bringing them into a courthouse and then it gets tossed, now we're really screwed because then these people get off with total impunity, effectively.
I agree.
There are names there that, again, maybe the DOJ has something.
I think the DOJ, for what it's worth, has been forthright with like, this actually is pretty much all the evidence that we really have.
To your point, I think a lot of it was probably redacted beforehand anyway.
And this is where messaging comes in.
Because if that is the case, just tell us.
Like, I think everyone in this space that is extremely fixated on the Epstein case, again, for good reason, I think they would actually be somewhat satisfied if the DOJ just came out outright and they said, hey, look, most of the stuff was destroyed.
I think that would play well politically too.
I mean, it makes the messaging here is just, instead, the messaging has been ignore this.
Like, this is irrelevant.
And I'm like, I don't know if that's really satisfying for everyone.
I don't think it's satisfying at all.
adam johnson ▲ ● ▼
Well, it's because if you come out and make that statement, then the secondary question then arises, who destroyed it?
Why are they not arrested?
And then it's the same conversation again.
tate brown ▲ ● ▼
Sure.
adam johnson ▲ ● ▼
You know?
tate brown ▲ ● ▼
Yeah, no, yeah.
But, you know, you see that.
But then, you know, the Trump administration has already demonstrated that they want to go after Biden officials for the Auto Pen.
So if anything, the way I see it is like, this just gives you more ammo.
Again, you could.
get whistleblowers involved.
Okay, I saw someone shredding this or I saw that.
These are all, these are what would be documented to a degree if like massive destruction of files was occurring.
Because again, the idea that like there's incriminating evidence, like a video of Bill Clinton, you know, doing something evil and it's just sitting on a hard drive and Pam Bondi has it right there.
Like that's just obviously not the reality.
unidentified
Yeah.
adam johnson ▲ ● ▼
And so to kind of bring some things together, the last DOJ was willing to put Trump in prison.
They were willing to do that.
They were trying to do that, actively doing that through Jack to Jack Smith, through Asia James.
It was like multiple lawsuits.
They were literally trying to throw him in prison.
We need to have that same type of energy as well.
We cannot sit here and walk around and say, well, we can't play by those rules.
That would just destroy things.
No, there is not a line the left has not crossed.
We need to be playing the same game, but better and more calculated with a good plan.
And I think, and I've also said this, look at what happened to Prince Andrew today.
I look at this and, you know, I'm excited it happened.
Might Even Read If Accused 00:02:31
adam johnson ▲ ● ▼
That's fantastic.
A lot of people are questioning why it wasn't about, you know, the unscrupulous behavior with Jeffrey Epstein.
And I think it's for two reasons.
One, I don't think the UK are necessarily our friends.
Their country has been co-opted by Muslim extremists who have just taken over the entire country.
I mean, they've got roving rape gangs that aren't being prosecuted.
But listen, we did get one of the, one of the royal family members, not for the Epstein stuff, but for the, for the documents that he released.
tate brown ▲ ● ▼
Yeah.
adam johnson ▲ ● ▼
And I think they're doing that to actually thumb their noses at our current DOJ to see like it's very easy to arrest people.
Why don't you arrest people?
unidentified
Yeah.
adam johnson ▲ ● ▼
And I think we should play that same game.
We don't have to arrest people for the trafficking charges that they had with Epstein.
There are dozens of other things that are incriminating within those files that we could also be going after.
This is the Hunter Biden laptop.
People want to fix on the cocaine and the horrors and some of the terrible pictures.
I want to know about the business dealing emails.
I want to know about his author being implicated in those.
Those are the real meat and potatoes.
You showed that that is literal treason, not just immoral behavior.
tate brown ▲ ● ▼
Yeah, I totally agree.
That's a great perspective on the Prince.
I think that actually could very well be the case is that they're just saying like, ah, see, we can arrest our royals.
Like, that's a great point.
Well, Adam, we're running out of time here.
I really appreciate you coming on.
Well, we obviously got to get you back on here because there's so much we didn't cover.
So I really appreciate you coming on.
Where can people find you?
adam johnson ▲ ● ▼
You can find me on Twitter at Lectern Leader.
Having a lot of fun over there.
And then again, I'm running for a campaign for Amanda County Kishner.
And if you can help me with small dollar donations, it is votesadamjohnson.com.
We want to get, I want to be in office.
I want to make a change in the backyard.
So help me get it done and looking forward to it.
tate brown ▲ ● ▼
I love it.
Well, thank you so much.
And we need people like you in office.
It's a breath of fresh air that, you know, guys like you are actually going.
And you can just do things, right?
You really did.
You really can.
You can just do things.
So thank you very much.
We'll catch you next time.
adam johnson ▲ ● ▼
Thanks, guys.
unidentified
All right.
All right.
tate brown ▲ ● ▼
Well, that was a great, man.
Lectern leader is a must follow on Twitter.
It's like one of the best, one of the best accounts probably ever made.
It's great stuff.
So with that, we got to wrap here.
I'm just doing some housekeeping.
Follow me on X and Instagram at RealTate Brown.
And we will be back tomorrow for an installation of the live show.
And we're going to do a mailbag.
So get your questions ready.
I'm going to be in chat.
We're going to be chopping it up.
I want you your hot takes.
I want you to argue with me.
So if you've ever had a problem with something I've said, get ready.
Get ready to let it fly.
I will be no holds barred.
Unless you like accuse me of a crime, I will read it.
So I'm very excited.
I might even read if you accuse me of a crime.
I might even read that.
Who knows?
unidentified
Yeah.
tate brown ▲ ● ▼
X Instagram, Relate Brown.
Come back here tomorrow for the show.
We'll be back tonight for Timcast IREL at 8 p.m.
Export Selection