Matt Gaetz Withdraws As Trump AG, Russia Fires IRBM Strike, Says UK At War w/Ami Kozak
02:06:39 Share

The reality is guys prefer naturals. And if it's natural body wash you're looking for, Dr. Squatch has got you natural kings covered. The ingredients? Naturals. Scent options? Naturals. Around the clock moisturization? Naturally. Now available in store and online at drsquatch.com. Dr. Squatch Body Wash for men who prefer natural. ♪

It is a sad day for us here at TimCast, but I can't say I'm too surprised. You know, I bought champagne when we heard that Matt Gaetz would be potentially be the nominee or potentially be the AG. He was the nominee. He has withdrawn from the running for AG. Pam Bondi has now been chosen. So it really does sound like behind the scenes,

that this was the plan all along. Some have speculated that Matt Gaetz was Trump's big ask, a shocking and outrageous pick. So that way, when Matt Gaetz is forced to say, I can't do it, they bring in Pam Bondi, who is also great. But everyone feels a little more relaxed about someone who actually has experience and isn't as shocking as Matt Gaetz, maybe. So then we'll talk about what this means. Matt Gaetz resigned, but he is still the congressman elect for his district. So there's nothing stopping him from going back to Congress.

We'll talk about that and what it means. And then we get other other big news. In the wee hours of the morning, it was reported by Ukraine that Russia fired an ICBM at Ukraine. If that was true, it would be the first use of an intercontinental ballistic missile in warfare. However, shortly after the West denied this and reports now say that, in fact, it was an intermediate ranged ballistic missile, an IRBM.

You know, it's basically what they're saying is it was modeled off of a Russian intercontinental ballistic missile, functionally the same or similar, but it didn't have nukes on it. So, you know, we'll get into that to try and understand it. And then we're not just going to be serious tonight. We have a funny story.

The View says Joe Rogan believes in dragons. I kid you not. They actually did a segment where they were like, people listen to Joe Rogan, and he says dragons are real, and he believes dragons have existed in the times of humans. They're making all of this up once again. Joe has made fun of them. So we'll talk about that, plus a bunch of other stories. We'll talk about the Jaguar ad, get woke, go broke. But of course, we sponsor ourselves, too. Over at castbrew.com, you can pick up Stand Your Grounds or join the Cast Brew Coffee Club.

We've got a bunch of different blends, medium, light, dark roast. Appalachian Nights, of course, is everybody's favorite. But when you sign up for the Coffee Club, you actually save money because you get three bags and it's only $40 a month. So sign up today. And of course, go to TimCast.com and click Join Us. Become a member because we've got a Discord server and a massive catalog of uncensored members-only content. Last night, we had Milo Yiannopoulos on and it was...

raucous to say the least he's a very funny guy and uh he's very mean but i mean that in he enjoys being mean for the sake of humor but everybody gets it right right so check out that if you didn't see it smash the like button share the show with everyone you know joining us tonight to talk about this and so much more is ami kozak thank you for having me tim good to be here who are you what do you do i am a comedian musician impressionist and content creator

And more recently over the last year, I've been pretty outspoken on some political issues, which has gotten me into some interesting debates and conversations out there online.

Right on. Well, it should be fun. So glad to have you. Elad is back. Hey, everybody. What's up? My name is Elad Eliyahu. I am a journalist here at Timcast. Ami, it's great to have you. What's up, Ian? Hey, man. I'm just looking forward to putting Milo Yiannopoulos in the crystal. Bro, I'm coming for you, Milo. I love you, homie. It's good to see you. Thank you for all the nice things. Milo was like, he said something like, I'm quite upset that Ian's not here because I like being here. We get along. We text. We're friends offline. We both have online personas. Milo is one of the biggest hippies I know. So...

I'm really sad that I missed that show last night, dude. I'll be here next time, I promise you. And also, I think dragons may have been real. I'll tell you more about it during the segment. Well, if you'd like, I can channel some in a mile if you want.

Asterion, you mean. Dude, and I texted Milo during the show. I was like, I don't know if you actually realize how big of a deal Baldur's Gate 3 is. It's like the biggest video game maybe ever made. Yeah, it was probably Game of the Year. Game of the Year. Was it? Arguably Game of the Decade. But was it literally Game of the Year? Probably, I don't know. Larian Studios had Divinity 2, best studio. And so it's like really impressive that they modeled their iconic character off of Milo. Like, that's a big fucking deal. Well, but I also point out, too, if you watch The Boys...

It's very obvious that Stormfront is Laura Loomer. Right? Like, if you watch The Boys, I'm watching it and I'm like, it is crazy how these shows are just ripping off personalities and taking their personas. But anyway, we'll get into all that stuff. We got Phil hanging out. I am Phil Labonte. How you doing? I'm the lead singer of the heavy metal band All That Remains. I'm an anti-communist and a counter-revolutionary. Tim? Let's go from Fox News bad news.

Matt Gaetz withdraws as attorney general nominee. It is clear that my confirmation was unfairly becoming a distraction to the critical work of the Trump-Vance transition, Matt Gaetz said. Well, here's the tweet he put out.

He said, I had excellent meetings with senators yesterday. I appreciate their thoughtful feedback and the incredible support of so many. While the momentum was strong, it is clear that my confirmation was unfairly becoming a distraction to the critical work of the Trump-Vance transition. There is no time to waste on a needlessly protracted Washington scuffle. Thus, I'll be withdrawing my name from consideration to serve as attorney general. Trump's DOJ must be in place and ready on day one.

I remain fully committed to see that Donald J. Trump is the most successful president in history. I will be forever honored that President Trump nominated me to lead the Department of Justice, and I'm certain he will save America. Now, of course, the news is that Pam Bondi is the new Trump pick for attorney general. She's a former Florida attorney general and was part of Trump's defense during his first impeachment trial. Now, many people are speculating that this was always the plan. Matt Gaetz was going to come out as the big ask.

Then when they we can't get mad, I'll never get confirmed. They pull him back. Pam Bondi steps up. The argument being that if Trump come no matter who Trump chose, they'd send in the big guns. So if Trump came out first and we want Pam Bondi, they accuse her of everything. They call her a Nazi, whatever they had to do.

So he goes with Met Gates. Now, if they say the same thing about Pam Bondi, people are going to be like, well, hold on, hold on, hold on. Like, is every single person going to be like this? And then it makes it look bad on their side.

I can't imagine Matt Gaetz resigned from Congress without realizing senators were not going to confirm him. I don't I don't imagine a reality where Matt's in there being like there will be no contest. I'm going to get in. It'll be easy. Plus, there was a talk of recess appointments. I have to assume they had this planned.

I don't know about planned, but I do think that it should have been or would have been something that they were aware was a possibility. As for Pam Bondi, I'm not super familiar with her, but if she has worked on Team Trump before and she's willing to do the same job that Gates was, because, I mean, at the end of the day, as far as I'm concerned,

I want to see someone do the job, right? It's, it would have been cool if it was Gates. Cause you know, he's a friend of ours and all that. But at the same time, just so long as it's someone that will go after the people that have broken the law and investigate people that are suspected of breaking the law. If the, if, if she's willing to do that,

It doesn't really matter. But I want someone that's a bulldog, someone that's actually going to go hard and actually use the Department of Justice to hopefully root out the massive, massive amounts of corruption in the United States federal government. Because it's clear that there is a huge amount of corruption. I mean, all of the investigations into Trump, every last one of them is suspect. And Matt Gaetz. What? And Matt Gaetz. Matt Gaetz, yeah, fair enough. You know, so it's clear that

The the bureaucracy and the former DOJ used, you know, abused their power, or at least it's highly likely. But I won't get into definitive terms, but it's highly likely. And it looks like the DOJ abused the hell out of their power and really abused.

Have done a terrible disservice to the American people because your average person that pays attention to the...

The the inner world or the day to day stuff coming out of Washington, they're all looking at the stuff. They all look at the stuff that that was that Trump was accused of. And they're like, I'm not so sure that, you know, look, they went after Trump, but they didn't go after Biden and they didn't. They decided not to prosecute Clinton, but they're going to go after Trump. They raided Mar-a-Lago and all of these things.

that the DOJ did the entire time that Biden was president and all of these things that were going on while Trump was president, all of the Steele dossier, the, you know, all of the, the Russia gate stuff, all that stuff.

The average person has really lost faith in this justice system. So the five senators who I'm seeing floated that allegedly – I can't find it from an official account. It's only these parody accounts, so let's take this with a grain of salt. But the likely people would have been Susan Collins, the senator from Maine, who would have voted against Matt Gaetz, Lisa Murkowski from Alaska. Makes sense.

They're saying Mitch McConnell, and then I'm not very familiar with John Curtis from Utah. Matt Gaetz made a lot of enemies when he was in Congress, when he tried to overthrow the majority leader McCarthy. I do. Well, when he successfully overthrew McCarthy, and he made a lot of political enemies as a result. Didn't he say Trump's name instead of McCarthy when they were casting him?

At least at one point. And there's a lot of inside baseball going on about the timing of the resignation and all of this going down. Allegedly, Matt Gaetz originally asked McCarthy to sweep the House investigation into his... There's some ethics complaint against Matt Gaetz, allegedly sleeping with a 17-year-old, that he wanted McCarthy to sweep under the rug...

McCarthy refused. Matt Gaetz tried to overthrow him, upset the establishment, among other things. They've been enemies ever since. And this is some of the downstream effects we're seeing from there. Well, are you familiar with, like, Scott Adams' take on Trump's A-B testing strategy he used to talk about when he was—ever since he even started running? Explain it. In running in 2015, if you listen to Scott Adams, who wrote, like, the Dilbert comic strips and has been calling Trump's basic—

like, hero's arc story since the very beginning. He said in 2015, when everyone thought it was a laughingstock, that he would be running, that he would be winning, and he called Trump's victory all through, and he calls this the big third act. But his whole thing is that Trump has always had this strategy where people think he's just being a clown and being impulsive, but it's actually very calculated in that he'll say something that will be...

much more provocative or make choices that are provocative and everyone will react to it and then when he walks it back to the actual position he would was going to take to begin with it seems like a reasonable compromise and if he were to come out first with the appointment he has now people would have brought out the guns but in

But in doing so, it's like throwing out the A, see where people react, which is Gates, and then pulling it back and nominating her. So it's been a pattern all along that is much more calculated than I think people realize. He's famous for the big ask. That's it, the big ask. I make deals. I make so many deals. I mean, again, I don't know that there was a plan in it.

if Trump was familiar with her anyways, how, how, how could there not be? Well, I think you really said, I think that, I think that the situation was like, he probably had a backup because he, because everyone does know that Matt Gates is a, is a firebrand, but I don't know that it was his intent. Matt Gates coming out and being like, we couldn't get the vote. So I have to withdraw. And I'm like that.

Doesn't seem to make sense. There was also rumors, though, that the House was going to come out with the House Ethics Committees a couple of days before he ended up resigning. I think that's nonsense. Of course, they leak these things no matter what. Sure. And it did actually eventually get leaked to the New York Times. The report's been leaked? Not the full report, but they said there was a hacker who fed part of it. And now some files have already been released showing his Venmo transactions.

Matt Gaetz leaving. This is a talking point from Democrats. Oh, he's leaving. So they can't do it. What do you mean they can't do it? They're voting. They want to they try to have a vote to release it anyway. And it's going to it would come up in the Senate hearings for confirmation either way. So I don't think that makes any sense. I think the case closes once he resigns from Congress. And they still said they were going to vote to release it. So what are they going to do?

So this is generally Gates thought if there are four Republican senators that were going to vote no. Three. Then there's no way he could have been confirmed because the other side would have had the majority. He wasn't getting any from Democrats. And there's no way to re-vote or re-vote. There is a recess appointment. Well, they didn't vote at all, by the way. Right. They went and talked. He claims...

He went and talked to senators. Too many of them, I think it was like four, were like, we're not going to do it. And he's like, well, that's it. You can't do it. And so according to numerous reports, and I don't trust any of these people, I think it was Politico. I'm not sure. They said that a source familiar with what happened said Trump told them, look, you don't have the votes. That's not going to work.

I don't buy it because as soon as they said Matt Gaetz, everyone said it's going to have to be a racist appointment. There's no way Donald Trump and Matt Gaetz. And I know I know Matt and he's he's brilliant. He's a super smart guy. He's he saw this coming. Yeah. So my only assumption is he goes back to Congress. Maybe it's appointed to senator when when Rubio comes out. But they had to have seen this coming.

Look, I'm a huge fan of Matt Gaetz. I've told him this to his face. He's been on the show. Favorite member of Congress for standing up to the machine, standing up to Kevin McCarthy. You got Mike Lawler out of New York saying he risked our majority by siding with Democrats. I'm like, no, he sided with the people who are fed up with your whole corrupt Congress that cuts deals behind our back to spend trillions of dollars on garbage. And we're proud of Matt Gaetz for having done that. That being said.

My opinion is that he had a plan the whole time. I will say if the DOJ had the goods on him, I'm sure they wouldn't have any problem going after him for it. So there is something there with them not coming out. And again, it doesn't need to reach the threshold of being illegal to have done something that is bad or wrong. Does Rubio appoint his successor now?

I think, no, DeSantis does. Oh, Ron DeSantis. He could just be like Gates. You're the guy? Yep. He would never, though, because DeSantis ran against Trump in the primary, and then Gates backed Trump hard, and DeSantis probably took that personally. Maybe, but I think DeSantis does support the Republican agenda in general, and Gates is a good choice for senator. But what else could Gates do, like, in the Trump administration? Aren't there other roles in the Trump administration he could get? You mean Gates—

Gates resigned now, right, during this Congress. He was elected for the next Congress. So he could take his seat back because he was elected in January. He resigned for the, I think it's the 118th Congress. And when the 119th Congress goes in to take their seats, he can take that seat because he didn't resign saying, I'll never be in Congress again. He said, I'm resigning from the 118th Congress.

I think in worst case, there would be a special election and he'd definitely win the seat. I'm not sure. Why go through this roundabout? Like I said, the point. He doesn't need a special election. He's the congressman-elect for that district. That means come January 3rd, he's just in. So was this more of a favor to Trump or vice versa? Why go through this roundabout process from his perspective? Favor to Trump. Part of the plan, part of the mission, you know? Maybe he's senator. You guys don't think that Rubio would do that?

I don't know if Rubio, I mean, DeSantis would do that. I think he would.

I don't see who else he would appoint. Well, I don't know. The thing is that the Democrats have no credibility when it comes to any of these alleged sexual assault cases, especially when there isn't any criminal complaints. They did the same thing to Kavanaugh. And I think the Republicans are, I think it's an important thing because they're going to come with similar allegations against Trump's other cabinet picks like Pete Hegseth, which is the next guy. Republicans can just say, look, this is standard procedure.

Right. Like Republicans can actually say that Hegseth, Kavanaugh, Gates. I mean, you can go down the list of at least probably if I if I sat and thought about it, we could come up with at least five different people that are that are Republicans, Republicans.

They've all been accused of some kind of sexual misconduct. Right. Like that's that's Donald Trump. You know, that's that is normal. And I think that because there have been no there's been no arrests, investigations have gone nowhere. You know, with with a massive majority, significant majority of these accusations, you can safely say, look.

You know, that's just what the Democrats do. I think that it's more likely or it's more the more important factor is what is Gates relationship with with DeSantis? You know, because if DeSantis does like him and they get along, then it's you know, it might be more it might be more likely. But I don't know. But.

There are White House positions that you could get appointed to and you don't need to be confirmed to by the Senate. There's bad blood between them from the primary, I believe. DeSantis and Gates? Between DeSantis and Gates, yeah. Why? Because Gates was a hardcore Trump backer and DeSantis thought he had a chance against him. But in a post-Trump victory world, a lot of stuff gets washed under the bridge. Look at little Marco now next to Donald Trump. A lion's head.

Little Mark always called him, and now he's Secretary of State. I still think Trump's holding a grudge against— Trump is holding a grudge? Trump does not hold grudges. Trump doesn't hold grudges. Yeah, Trump famously doesn't, and I think it's a problem. He's saying of Micah and Joe showing up to Mar-a-Lago, he's like, well, you know, I'll give people extra chances. He says, I'll give them one, two, three, but I won't do four. Trump is so likely to not hold a grudge that even Cenk Uygur—

had made a tweet, you know, one of the good things about Trump is that he doesn't hold grudges. Like, it's so... You will not speak over me. It's such a thing with Trump that, like, even people that are considered far left have to acknowledge, yeah, he doesn't hold grudges. As long as they're deferential. He's not going to hold a grudge against anyone. Do you think there's any other cabinet people who are going to be held up here?

Pardon me? Do you think there's any other cabinet position that's likely to get held up here? I think that they're going to go. I think the two that are most likely going to see the most resistance is Tulsi for DNI and I think... Bobby Kennedy. Kennedy. Because they're Democrats. Pardon me? Because they're former Democrats. No, because... I think it would be difficult for Republicans to vote to confirm somebody like Tulsi Gabbard. No, no, no. I think that... Kennedy is a different thing entirely because it's not a political thing. It's more about his unique kind of position. Yeah, well, Kennedy... Kennedy, it's because of his views. Kennedy, it's because of his views.

And Tulsi Gabbard, it's because of her outlook on the intelligence community overall. We'll keep our eyes on those.

The thing that's difficult is that the, you know, Trump, when he said it on Rogan, that when he first got in, he's still surrounded by insiders and establishment people. And it was very hard for him to sift through that. And now he has sort of the authority to go outside that. But you still need this confirmation process. So it's this fine line of getting confirmed by people who are establishment while bringing people in who are from the outside. It's normal for a couple like one or two to not make it. Yeah. But the.

At some point, like, they do say, look, the president gets to select his cabinet. And they are the people that the president prefers. It's like a customary thing. Well, the thing is, it's with the consent of the Senate. But the Senate, like, the Senate...

is generally considered it's like normally they're like well we may not like him but the president gets to make his cabinet full of people that he likes and it would be it would be unprecedented if they were like four people that that you know if that were to happen in the senate didn't confirm anybody and then trump gets in office what happens well they have to they had the

Positions have to be filled. By who? No, I mean- It'd be recess appointments until they eventually- Right, but during Trump's first administration, famously, many of these positions went unfilled because they would not- They were obstructing Trump every step of the way. There would be acting- There would be like an acting AG and an acting secretary of defense- Appointed by Trump? Appointed by Trump for a limited amount of time or something. So, so, Gates could be the acting AG. But they don't have all of the privileges of the true AG. This was the point. They were talking about racist appointments. Yes.

Mike Johnson would call for an adjournment. Senate would say no. Trump would say you're hereby adjourned. And then he can resus appoint all of these people. But let's jump to this next story from Lone Star Live.

Trump advisor calls CBS producer effing dummy after false alarm about ambulances leaving Mar-a-Lago. This story is fascinating because earlier today, I don't know if you guys saw the breaking news. Two ambulances were seen leaving Mar-a-Lago surrounded by Secret Service. Everybody was losing their minds. This was it. Some people on Blue Sky were actually posting these liberals that Trump had passed on. Well, as it turns out, this story is absolutely hilarious.

What actually happened is these are part of a normal motorcade. They were not, as we know, in use, according to reports. Journalists have formed an unofficial press pool swarming outside of Mar-a-Lago. So a press pool, for those who don't know, is a pool report is, and I may be wrong about this because I think their whole practice is stupid, but there will be

Say there's an official government event. They'll say we're only going to have a pool reporter. It's one person who goes in and they film or whatever. And then that is relayed to all the agencies so they can all use it. Something like that. So they've created an unofficial pool where they're just hanging out outside of Mar-a-Lago waiting for news. And because they're stupid and don't fact check when they saw ambulances leave, they reported as this big breaking story when literally nothing was happening, causing a panic and then getting roasted.

Stephen Chung, advisor to Trump, dismissed concerns about ambulances, saying the CBS producer overreacted. Pray for Trump. Pray for President Trump. Again, trending on X, 3.30 p.m. Central. This is 4.30. After a reporter tweeted a tip, he said he received from a CBS producer about several ambulances and Secret Service vehicles seen entering and leaving Trump's Mar-a-Lago residence in Florida. What really happened? J.D. Vance showed up.

That's it? The press has set up a fake unofficial pool because they want to feel important about themselves. In this case, some idiot at CBS overreacted and set off the fire alarm for no reason, thinking they were going to get the scoop of a lifetime effing dummy. So CBS is the new CNN? Hmm.

Oh, they're all bad. Yeah. They're anti-Trump network and eventually going to get divested in the next four years if they keep acting like this. It's not so much that they're being anti-Trump. It's that they don't do anything substantial in terms of reporting. Everybody assumes these reporters must be telling the truth or should say the default libs do. Meanwhile, the rest of us are like, I don't believe what you're saying. You got to show me a video and prove it. And so this is what happens when you take people who have no idea what's going on.

Put them outside. This is a perfect example of what would trigger a gal man amnesia effect. Even in us. Even in us. Because what do you do, right? You look at this story and you're like...

Oh, wow, that's crazy. Ambulances were leaving. Then it turns out, according to officials, the ambulances are a normal part of the motorcade. It's nothing special. It's like they're there for a variety of reasons, whatever it may be. Emergencies, maybe. And you're like, oh, but I didn't know that. That's where Trump sleeps in the next season. The next time the CBS reporter reports something, taking a nap. The next time the CBS reporter reports something, we're going to say, oh, wow, look at that.

See, the CBS guy is going to say, oh, I just saw a giraffe leaving the property. I'm going to go, wow, a giraffe. Instead of saying, this guy's full of it, and he's probably lying or wrong. It wasn't a giraffe. It was a zebra. I'm a little more on guard against CBS now. I know that CNN's been apt to say weird things, MSNBC, even, I don't know about Fox News lately, but.

CBS seems like they're more neutral, I guess. They're all owned by, I don't want to say the same people, but a lot of the same companies, I think, own these media networks. I should check out who owns CBS. I'll do that.

Well, there's been a big humbling effect on a lot of the on the legacy media outlets. So they're just kind of looking for anything they could point to to like, you know, tip the narrative somewhere else where like things are not going. Well, I mean, anything, anything. They're craving crumbs of like, oh, something wrong. Anything that's like I mean, look, if it were true, it would be a big story. Yeah. So the guy got got out over his skis and that's fairly normal, right?

you know, with reporters. Like if they, if they see something, they're just like, Ooh, you know, I want to go and, and blah, blah, blah. Especially if it's, you know, if it's Donald Trump, if, cause if something had happened, you know, the guy that breaks the news, like, look at me, I broke the news I got, you know, but I mean with, with X and stuff, the way that it is, like if you report something and, and,

People can confirm that your reporting was right. And that's really all that happened is he reported this happened. You know, ambulances left with a bunch of Secret Service cars around it.

And then that picked up on X and then blah, blah, blah. Now what went on in blue sky, that's a whole different thing. But the stuff that I, that I was seeing on X was all just people reporting what he reported. Ambulance, two ambulances and multiple cars of secret service, two ambulances and multiple cars of secret service. There's multiple accounts that were reporting that.

The fact that people on Blue Sky took it and did a whole lot of the, what's it called, fan fiction stuff they do. Jumping to conclusions. Not just jumping to conclusions. They want bad things to happen. So over at Blue Sky, they're going to be like,

Oh, man, wouldn't it be great if Donald Trump died? Wouldn't it be great if this happened? Wouldn't it be great if he broke his leg? Anything bad that can happen to Donald Trump, blue sky is going to be throwing a party about. So, I mean, like I said, when you were over here on X, it was fairly...

accurate reporting. These, you know, it was, it was every, like I said, everything was a couple ambulances and a bunch of, uh, a bunch of secret service. I didn't see blue sky cause I don't have a blue sky account. And I think I might have to make one just to, to go and collect some lols. But, uh, but yeah, it, it doesn't surprise me that the, that the factual stuff went around. And it also doesn't surprise me that the people like, you know,

Spun it into something. Especially on Blue Sky, man. They really want him to be a bad guy. They believe that he is the worst thing ever. I mean, there's even still some of the far left that are on X that are consistently saying things like, oh, look, you guys are going to regret it. There are people that are... There's a couple specific accounts that are already saying things like, look, you guys asked for this. You guys asked for this. You asked for this. And it's like,

Well, yeah, literally, we know. Like, what are you saying? What are you... They're implying that there's terrible things happening. It's like, the man hasn't even been inaugurated yet. Like, this is all just, like, setting up stuff. And yes...

everyone knows that most people in the country are comfortable with deporting people and stuff. The funniest thing about Trump winning is you get, what was it, Joe Walsh saying, Attorney General Matt Gaetz, that's what you voted for when you voted for Donald Trump. Congratulations. And literally all of us are like, yes. As if it's like, I gotcha. Literally we did. We actually are very happy with that choice. It's a bummer to see that he won't be, but yeah, we did vote for it. They don't seem to understand that

We like Trump. Yeah, we like Matt Gaetz. Yeah, they're like, you must think the same way as me. So you are you. This is what's happening now. And we're like, oh, thank heavens. That's always here's the other thing, too, about like Trump is going to use the military to deport people. When the when the when the migrants were shipped to sent to Martha's Vineyard, they called the National Guard to round them up and bring them to a dorm housing and a military base. You mean a camp?

That's right. I'm being polite. But the National Guard rounded up these legal asylees. Biden's America. That's right. That's Biden's America. And unfortunately, there'll be other Republicans that block Trump from accomplishing things like this. We kind of, I don't know if we've mentioned this before, but Rand Paul broke with Trump. And actually, I think he came out against using the military for mass deportations, calling it a huge mistake. If Rand Paul thinks that, there are going to be many other senators.

I don't know about many other. Rand Paul's, remember, Rand Paul's very libertarian. And so... We could start with Murkowski. We could start with Susan Collins. They're barely Republicans. They're the people that are... I mean, I think Collins is independent now, isn't she? I think she's still a Republican. Okay. But the argument would be that she's the only one...

who could win in that area as a Republican. I think it's from Maine for Congress. Sure, sure. Rand Paul has the unique civil liberties standpoint. Yeah, that's the thing. It's like Rand Paul is going to do the libertarian stuff. But still, most of the, and I genuinely believe this, most of the people that are, most of the Republicans, they see what happened on Congress

you know on november 5th with the election they know that donald trump has a mandate and they also know that if they are pushing back against the president too much and they're up for election i mean senators are every six years so there's some time time in between it but like they know that the republicans want to get stuff done there are things that need to happen and it's good for the country just like i'm i'm sure you're you're aware of the or maybe you're maybe you're aware of the um

One of the rules changes that they want to do so that way you can get amendments back in to, uh, to, uh,

bills that are brought to the Senate right now everything is a is an up or down vote on a huge bill whatever it is right like that's a bad thing you have to be able to put amendments into bills and change stuff around so that way you can take stuff out as well as put stuff in and that's that gives power to the Senate like these things are important and the Senate will if the Senate has that power they can actually help to do good things and Donald Trump is a deal-maker but

So if he gets what he wants and the senators can put amendments in and they get what they want, then you can see actual actual progress being made, being made with with some some serious cutbacks on the in the bureaucracy. And that's that's something that the Republicans have been giving lip service to for ages.

And honestly, it would be a good thing for America. So I don't know that there's going to be a lot of people that are going to fight Trump just to fight him. And when it comes to, you know, specifically like using the military to help Trump,

get, you know, deport people and stuff. That kind of stuff is something that Rand Paul would always be like, nah, man, nah. I've got to cap it off of CBS owned by, it merged with Viacom in 2019, then it merged, Viacom CBS merged with Paramount Pictures in 2022, and it's owned now by a company called National Amusements.

which is owned by a guy named Sumner Redstone. National News. At some point, there's going to be one media company called News. Yeah, dude. Sumner Redstone's daughter, Shari Redstone, is the chairwoman of National News Corp. Right. It's News Corp. Yeah, but it's not as big. Let's jump to this next story. Speaking of fake news.

Joe Rogan mocks the view after co-host accused him of believing in dragons. Okay, the first thing I want to do is show you the clip from these loot. I'm almost like, you know, if I was going to show you a bunch of clucking hens, we can put on Chicken City, but I'll give you the view instead as they disparage Joe Rogan.

People want us divided and they aren't just here in this country. They're foreign adversaries who are infiltrating our social media because it is prudent for us to stay that way. So when you see something that really pisses you off, you should triple check that one. But I think that that's why people like our show, because they know that we are checked by ABC News. We're checked by everybody. Yeah, I mean, if we're wrong, we have the legal note here. Oh.

That is a new development. We went from Walter Cronkite, basically, to this guy, Joe Rogan, who believes in dragons. I checked it. He believes in dragons? He believes in dragons. Did you triple-check that? Yes, I did. And he also thinks that dragons, I guess like dinosaur-y type of animals, roamed the Earth when people did. So this is the type of really, really bad information that's going out there. Isn't it funny that she just said...

We have legal disclaimers and we're checked by ABC News. Also, Joe Rogan believes in dragons. And so Joe Rogan changed his Twitter bio to dragon believer. And that's my new official X description. Rogan said changing his bio to to dragon believer. He posted the clip.

Where do they, oh, I want to know what he said about dragons that. He probably didn't say anything. There's like terror. No, there's terror dragons. Probably. They probably found one of those meme clips where it's, some people will edit podcasts to make jokes. And you know, was it joy? It was pink trip or something. They believe. Yeah. And they believe it. And they go, wow, he believes in drag.

Or he was talking about animals. They're like, dude, these are legit. It's crazy. Or he was smoking weed and it was called like- Dragons. Really? It's a strain of weed called dragons with humans. It's like, oh, didn't you know chickens are still considered dragons, man? And then he's just like, oh yeah, totally. I believe that. There we go. They're like little dinosaurs. Little dinosaurs. Maybe look that up. The whole tone of these shows, it's amazing because they spend most of their time post-election asking themselves, what's wrong with the country? I don't understand. What's wrong with everybody? And not, what's wrong with us?

Oh, yeah, I know. I mean, that's something that I've said a bunch of times. They hate America. On PCC today, we were talking about Ellen DeGeneres and her wife are leaving, and it's like, well, you know, they hate America. They hate the fact that Donald Trump was elected by a majority of the American voting population, and

by, you know, the electoral college. It's an elitism, a disdain for those. That's why they keep saying, listen, college-educated women voted for Kamala. I mean, sort of. That's the facts. And I'm like, well, maybe college doesn't educate you. That's true. Sort of. But it's not just, it is elitism, but there's also, like, there's people that don't feel any connection to, like, the United States. They hate this country. People that tend to be in...

that tend to live in cities. You can live in London, or you could live in Paris, or you could live in New York, or you could live in LA, or you could live in any number of cities in the West, and it mostly feels the same. You'll get most of the same stuff. You'll get a little bit different food maybe, but otherwise it's the same thing. But if you live in the woods or outside of the major cities...

It's real different. Like if you live in the desert, if you live outside of Phoenix in the desert, it's totally different to living in New England outside of the city. So like that kind of stuff makes a difference. And people that are cosmopolitan, they're just like, whatever, it's all the same to me. I live in a city and I live in the city in the U.S. or London or whatever. And it's like, it's all the same. They don't have any connection to where they're from. I'm doing some fact checking on Rogan's beliefs on dragons. Rogan's dragon beliefs. This is from an episode of his podcast with Adrian Lappalucci, if you want to look into it in the purple.

According to the snippets, he talked about ancient cultures like the Chinese, Japanese, ancient European cultures. He suggested dragons might have been real flying lizards or like flying crocodiles. He said he doesn't necessarily, he's not sold on the fire breathing aspect, but is convinced that there were large reptilian creatures that were referred to as dragons. Now, I'll take a step further and suggest it is possible that they had like

flammable saliva and maybe it was like they clicked something in the back of their throat and could like make a spark. This dragon believer. Just wait till Joey Behar comes after you. Now you have this guy Tim! Pool! Maybe they didn't breathe. They're talking about saliva! Joe Rogan spitballing as, uh, you know, I bet there probably were stuff like this and then to turn that into he believes that dragons... He suggested that these dragons might have been real. Might have been. Kimono dragons are real, like...

There's literal dragon. There are giant lizards that are bad. Birds are like flying lizards. I mean, at some point, we had dinosaurs. Mika and Joe ended up making up with Donald Trump. Do you think there's any potential for The View to also make up with Donald Trump? 100%. Trump doesn't hold drugs. Whoopi's a comedian. I could totally see her going on the show. But I don't know. At this point, it's too far gone. It's a real betrayal of sort of the comedian's...

understanding of things. She comes from that world. We forget because she's been on the show so long. Joe's point is actually really, really simple. You go back 2,000 years or whatever and you've got a village of 100 people and let's just say it's...

I don't know, Rome. And what's a Rome? What's that old Latin name? I don't know, like Lucius or something. Is that Latin? Yeah, Lucius. There you go. And he's like, in Latin, I'm going to go travel to the next town over to see if they've got metal of some sort. And as he's walking, he's like, boop, boop, boop. And he sees a big lizard. And it's like, it's huge. It's like, you know, probably a meter.

And then he goes back and he's like, I swear it was as big as this. You know, it was massive. And then some guy was like, did you hear what Lucia said? There was a lizard. It was like six feet tall. Oh, yeah. And then some guy's like, I hear there's a six foot tall lizard walking around. And then someone's like, yeah. And it was spitting and screaming, spitting. Wow. Yeah. Spitting fire, they say. And it didn't mean literal fire. But my point is, you know, when you hear these stories about monsters, like the story of this, like where does Cyclops come from? They found an elephant skull.

And the nose socket or whatever looks like one. Yeah. And they thought it was a cyclops head. And so then they draw pictures. Yeah. So you go back far enough and someone's going to be like, I fought a giant beast. It was seven feet tall or they wouldn't say feet or whatever. And it was like a black bear, you know, and then Minotaur was like actually just a bull. Yeah.

Yeah, it was a bull that stood up and trampled somebody. Did you see Richard Dawkins? A bull in a maze. Did you see the conversation between Richard Dawkins and Jordan Peterson? He's like, do you actually believe in dragons or not? You talk about dragons as if they're biological creatures. Do you believe in dragons? What did Jordan Peterson say? He went to the mythological. He was like, take the most terrifying things you can think of. It's like, well, fire and wings and teeth that can soar through the heavens and destroy you. You've had your own dragons in your life.

to Richard, but he went to the mythological. They were talking cross purposes. And Jordan Peterson did say that you're a chimpanzee full of snakes. I wouldn't be surprised if there was glandular fire making. I do not believe that. I don't think there would be any fossil records of the glands. So I don't know. All that stuff would decompose. Maybe stuff literally could spit flammable fluid. More disturbingly is like they're conflating the idea and they're so threatened by, they're presenting it as if it's this threat that people have conversations.

Okay. And talk loosely about things. And the fact that they're like, we have to be the controlled center of what is true and not true. We are the ones who tell you and the authority. There's this appeal in this clip that you could see this sort of elitism to. They're so threatened by the popularity of conversation. I don't want to hear anyone on The View telling me that they're going to judge Joe Rogan because he believes in dragons. Because I bet at least one of them believes in astrology. Yeah.

Or that men can get pregnant. There you go. But wouldn't it be funny if just like a couple thousand years ago there's some like Chinese dude and he was like walking between towns and then there's like, I don't know where the Komodo dragons are native to, but let's just say there's like a big lizard somewhere and it runs out of the bush after having just tried to eat

a piece of flaming refuse because a lightning strike happened. And so it runs up and just barfs and this ball of fire falls out. There are, the bombardier beetle is a real animal that spits flammable liquid called hydroquinone. It's not flammable. This says, it's boiling. Yeah, it's a toxic boiling substance. Which,

And it doesn't spit. Well, there you go. The chemicals mix in the air and undergo the exothermic heat release and chemical reaction. I was literally just looking at a bombardier beard. Boiling hot. Yeah. Irritating, boiling hot fluid. So if there was a flying lizard that spit this hydroquinones. What's that shrimp that can snap so hard it creates a plasma blast? Yeah. What is it? What is it?

Pistol shrimp. Yeah, it's like it snaps its little claw so fast, it creates a vacuum, which creates a burst of light. It's like street fighter shrimp. Yeah, it's like a Hadouken. It's a plasma. Hadouken! Yeah, that's right. You sent us down a rabbit hole. Dangerous shrimp.

But this is the nature of the media. They don't like Joe Rogan, and they sit here telling how we tell the truth. Meanwhile, they just spit lies all day to the point where they have to have legal disclaimers. When she's like, we have a legal notice here, the human legal notice, I'm like, that's not a good thing to have to have. Did you see their second one? That's indicative of how many lies you have. They just released another one. They did another one? Yeah. Today. Disclaimer? Yeah, another one. I don't think that it was about... Oh, it was Hegseth.

Oh, Fox News. They're just like, hey, you'll be hearing from our lawyers, Sonny. Doesn't seem to be working, whatever they keep doing, because judging by the way the cultural tides have turned. I think the other thing about Gates, they're going to go for Pete Hex, Seth Hicks, by the way. They're only interested in getting, they're after the awfuls. They're after the awful viewership, just affluent white ladies. It's siloing itself off more and more and more the more they double down on it. So just.

It doesn't seem to be. But I don't think that it matters. I don't think that like obviously they don't they don't want to get sued. But beyond like legal ramifications, they don't have to say anything that's true.

Well, they don't want to get Alex Jones to our Fox News. So here's the video. This is from today at 1 p.m. Sunny Hostin has to read another correction on air for false claims she made against Matt Gaetz and Pete Hexeth. Here you go. I have a legal note. Matt Gaetz has long denied all allegations and has not been charged with any crime. Gaetz previously dismissed allegations that he paid for sex, saying that, quote, someone is trying to recategorize my generosity to ex-girlfriends as something more untoward.

Another legal note, Pete Hegseth's lawyer said he paid the woman in 2023 to head off the threat of a baseless lawsuit. He has denied any wrongdoing. Just call the show Legal Note from now on. It is. I just got to point this out. We we don't have to do this. Like.

Like, we don't have to have a legal notice over the fake things that we say on this show because we don't say fake things. Yeah. In fact, if a fake thing gets said on the show, we'll actually shut the show down for the integrity of the show or correct it in real time. But there have been instances where we've actually terminated the process because integrity is more important than— We have never shut the show down for being wrong. Well, making baseless claims, I think I've done that once when you were like, it's over. Yeah.

I see what you're saying. This, okay, I'm looking a little bit more at... They're trying to avoid a lawsuit here, and they're covering their basis. Obviously, it's horrible to say wrong things about political people and not give their full comments and statements, but they saw what happened to Alex Jones and Sandy Hooks. They're seeing what's happening with Dominion and Fox News. I think there's another polling company that's also suing Fox News.

So they don't want a multi-million dollar lawsuit from these very litigious, you know, I'm sure Matt Gaetz and Pete Hetzoff have some of the greatest lawyers around. So we have a correction. Official Lucid Traveler says it's the mantis shrimp. And if a human had the arm strength relative to our size, we could launch a baseball into orbit from a standing position. It's cool. You're going to get sued by those pistol shrimp now for lying about them. So it creates a vacuum underwater. It forces the water away from each other. So there's a vacuum and then there's a burst of light from plasma or something. It's so powerful.

For cavitation? Everyone in the ocean is going to think these pistol shrimp are a threat now and a threat and a danger because Tim was spreading fake news. Apparently there are huge hawks in Australia that carry smoldering sticks and their beaks are closed to intentionally spread brush fires. Everybody knows they'll carry flaming things. Everybody knows, Ian, that

Australia is a high-level zone for endgame players. Maybe people mistook flying hawks with carrying flaming sticks as dragons that fly down in light brush on fire. The United States is basically Elwynn Forest. Okay.

It's like there's boars everywhere. They can't hurt you and everything's fine and you're comfortable and you can just run around and it's very easy. That's the starting zone for the Alliance and World of Warcraft. You're going to get Joy Behar tomorrow just going after you. Talking about pistol shrimp. Tim Pool thinks that there's a forest of boars where you get experience points and well, it's called World of Warcraft. Then they're going to read a legal note. We have to say Tim Pool did not actually say. I do want to just mention as we get into the next story too, like World of Warcraft has become a hodgepodge of nonsense and you know,

You know, all of the, like everything has become hodgepodge nonsense because they're trying to interconnect it. Like the Marvel cinematic universe, there's a funny meme where it's like the first movie comes out and they're like, wow, a billionaire in a flying suit. And then it's like 2024 and the multiverse is collapsing. Gods are fighting on the planet. There's a giant hand reaching out from the ocean because the earth is an egg. Like none of it makes sense. The,

The governments are collapsing. There's bombs. Just nuts. And then you get games like World of Warcraft where they're like... The new expansion comes out and they're like, now we're underground. And I'm like, you've gone to other dimensions. You've gone to the past, to the future. Now underground. Like at a certain point, it's just... You're not expanding the story. You're just...

Throwing random things into the mix. But anyway, I digress. Let's jump to this next story from ABC News. Russia launches new IRBM at Ukraine. Zelensky says Putin is terrified. Officials in Kiev initially said an ICBM had been launched towards Dnipro. Now, here's what's interesting about this. The initial reports were that it was a MIRV, a Multiple Independently Targeting Reentry Vehicle.

That's an intercontinental ballistic missile. If that's true, it's the first use of an intercontinental ballistic missile in war ever. The U.S. later came out denying it, saying it was not an ICBM. It was an intermediate-ranged ballistic missile. They say it's modeled off of

an ICBM that Russia has, but it's not a nuclear weapon. It's an intermediate range ballistic missile strike. So it's much, much less powerful, but it may actually be very comparable if it is modeled off of, I think it's called like the RES-26 or something like that. It would carry four warheads. So it's a smaller yield weapon, but it's a ballistic missile strike on Kiev. That could explain why Kiev thought it was an ICBM because it looks very, very much like an ICBM. However, I'll also add the West,

to, to,

NATO, US could be lying because they are scared that this would be a direct escalation. So let me put it this way. Russia keeps saying, Ooh, if you do this, I'll nuke you. But then they don't. The West similarly does not want escalation outside of their control. So if Russia actually did this time launch a, an, an, an ICBM, the West not wanting to enter a for enter the fray on their terms, it's Sun Tzu would say, no, no, don't worry. It's not an ICBM. It was a ballistic missile. It could be. Hold on. Um,

An IRBM is essentially the same thing as an ICBM. It's just for a different range, like it says. An IRBM is a type of ballistic missile with a range between 3,000 and 5,500 kilometers. This category falls between medium-range ballistic missiles and intercontinental ballistic missiles. IRBMs are designed for regional targets and often used for military and strategic purposes.

Payload capacity, several hundred kilograms. Speed of around Mach 20. A guidance system, often using inertial navigation or terrain reference systems. And the ability to carry conventional or nuclear warheads. So it's the same thing as an ICBM. It's just that it doesn't go as far. The differential of ICBM and IR is not about payload capacity. It's not about does it have a nuke or does it not. Because you can have an ICBM without a nuke on board. Right. But it's about how far can they travel. That's all this is. So the question is, have ICBMs...

have IRBMs been used in war ever. Not that I'm aware of. The reason why they haven't, well, the R part, I don't know, but I think this is significant because ICBMs, or I think for IRCBMs, they're supposed to be nuclear. It was a conventional attack, but not nuclear. Sorry, the Department of Defense is saying this is the first time this weapon has been used. Oh, no, no, no, they're saying on the battlefield in Ukraine. Come on, get specific, guys. This...

Both ICBMs and, yeah, they're the same thing. ABC News outright says that IRBMs can carry nuclear payloads. It's the RS-26 Rubez missile, not RES. And technically, from Southeast Asia to Australia, you could hit it with an IRBM, so it would be intercontinental. It's just a different term. I think this is a message to us, not to the Ukrainians. This is overkill. The Russians didn't need this missile to hit Ukraine. They were just showing that they had the ability to. This legit was a MIRV.

I'm telling you, the West saying it's not an ICBM, calm down, is to control public sentiment towards the war. If they come out right now and say this is no different, this was a MIRV, this is the first time they've used it in combat, a multiple independently targeted reentry vehicle. It's a ballistic missile that shoots in the air and then ejects several payload that can target independent things. So depending on the power of a MIRV, you can get one that can carry 8 to 12 warheads, which

One rocket. It has a ridiculous amount of power. And I want to stress this. People need to understand the bombs we dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki are incredibly, incredibly weak compared to technology that was developed in the 60s.

So modern nuclear weapons have around 1,250 times the explosive potential of a little, was it little boy and fat man? And those were gravity bombs. Right. Those were, those were, those were gravity bombs. That's a bomber flies over the target and drops it and whistles. Then the kinetic impact, boom, modern weapons.

are rockets that drop payloads that airburst and then spread all over and just, it's nuts. And the megatons are way, way, way, way more. Right, and the RS-26 has a payload range of 150 kilotons to 300 kilotons, which would, if a missile of that power, just one of its warheads, unless they're multiplying by four, but assuming that each warhead is going to be in that range, between 150 and 300 would eliminate the entire metro area of Washington, D.C.,

I don't want to mince words. This is obviously an escalation. I will say, though, I do think Russia is treading lightly, though, because according to Reuters, at least, a U.S. official said Russia notified Washington before its strike, while another official said the U.S. has briefed Kiev and its allies to prepare for the possible use of such a weapon. They did not want the Americans to confuse this for an attack on them. Exactly. They did not want them to. Well, the whole point was they didn't, because the U.S. and other countries, obviously, but because the U.S. does have advanced monitoring systems,

A missile like this, when it launches, it took like five minutes was the actual travel time. But a missile like that, within one minute, I read a book by, I forget the woman's name, but she was talking about what happens in a nuclear war. Just on Joe Rogan a couple months ago or whatever. A nuclear war? What can happen? So I read her book and it's really good. But

They know about the launches within 30 seconds. They have a trajectory within the first few minutes, I think seven minutes or something like that. So the Russians use the existing communication lines for nuclear launches and

to connect with the United States and say, hey, we're going to do this just so you know it's not a nuke. And it's not coming to you. Yes, yes. It's hitting Ukraine. Also, it sounds like it was a warning shot from the Russians saying, this could have had nukes on board, by the way. Well, yeah. It's a dry run. It's a flex of capability.

to just show what they're capable of doing. Well, that's all Russia has left, this kind of nuclear saber rattling. Conventionally, I think they are failing to achieve what their initial military goals were in Ukraine, and now Putin's best weapon right now is trying to scare people into thinking that he would use nuclear weapons. Yeah, and hold off for two months until Trump's in office. I just did post a thing. I wasn't able to confirm or deny it, but that

Putin's basically saying when Trump's in office, I'm open to discussing the ceasefire. Let's get this over. I don't think it's so interesting because I hope Trump will be able to come some sort of agreement between Putin and Zelensky in Ukraine. But I just don't see the interests aligning up like that. I don't think the Ukrainians want to give up any of their sovereign territory. A lot of pro-Ukrainian people still think they want to liberate Crimea, which I don't think is ever happening. While on the other side,

I think it's within Putin's geopolitical interest to continue pushing West. He didn't think he got enough of Ukraine. I think he wanted to go up until at least Kiev early on in the war. I think that was his objective. If he kept pushing, I would advocate for war against the Russians. Oh, I think he was successful. If he kept conquering West, that's crazy. Wait, wait, if he got to Kiev...

I mean, I think that was his goal. If he needs the Donbass, I understand that he wants access to the Black Sea for portage. You think he just wants up until the Donbass, though? Yeah, I think they want to transport steel through the Black Sea into the Mediterranean. You think he'd be satisfied with the Donbass? 20% to 30% enhancing their GDP as a result of trade. Ian and Elad, there is a reason that NATO exists, right? Ukraine is not NATO. Oh, I didn't say go to war with them. Okay, so, but...

Poland is a NATO country now, right? And it borders Ukraine. You do not need to go to war for Ukraine. You do not need to go to war with Russia, like direct war with the United States and Russia for Ukraine. If they were to attack Poland, then things are different because of NATO. You think we should go to war with Russia if they were to invade Poland? Because I think for most people, you say Ukraine, you say Poland, you'd have to...

They don't even know the difference. The treaty alliance would require it. Yeah, but that's on paper. People understand the difference between NATO and non-NATO countries. At least I think. Isn't that the crux of the issue? Yeah, that's the whole point of me saying this. Like Ian said, go to war over Ukraine. The whole point is Russia doesn't want...

NATO expansion into Ukraine. Doesn't want the United States to go and be defending Ukraine. That's what Russia said. I agree. And so, like, to go to war over Ukraine, that's insane. It would be about the belligerence. If he was actually trying to conquer Europe, which I don't think he is, if he showed his hands like, look, I really do want to conquer, then it's like, no, no, no. We're not going there. That's what I said, though. That's what I said when I said, it doesn't matter.

if Putin wants to conquer Europe or not. The wars that we're facing are not just some evil guy twirling his mustache, Vladimir Putin sitting in his chair being like, we will take all of Russia now. No, he's saying we need access to Crimea. We are not giving up a multi-billion dollar industrial port and where our Black Sea fleet is stationed. And this is where we do a lot of our trade. And we will secure a land bridge and we will secure the Sea of, what is it, the Sea of Azov? Is that what it's called? Yeah. So, and he says, we're going to have that. Then what happens is,

The U.S. gets involved in supplying weapons. Then we blow up their flagship. Then Russia says they're attacking us when we're trying to secure this resource. How do we stop them? We're going to have to push them beyond the borders of the regions we have to control. Then you get Belarus involved. Then all of a sudden, Lithuania, Latvia, Poland are saying Belarus is mobilizing their transporting weapons in Belarus. So Poland starts mobilizing. Now you've got Germany calling up 800000 troops. It's not because any one side is trying to conquer. It's because there's one point.

where both sides bump into each other and then they keep saying, I'm going to win. No, you're not. It's a game of chicken that both people are going to crash into each other. You don't need Putin saying, I want to take over Europe to get full scale World War III. Putin can say to China, look,

If we lose access to Sevastopol and to this base, it's going to decimate our economy and it's going to give NATO too much control. Give us weapons and troops and we'll end this quickly. China, now they've detained a Chinese vessel in the Baltic that Denmark is accusing of severing communications cables, which people fear may be a precursor to a larger scale attack. If China is involved and trying to grab some plausible deniability,

This could escalate then with the U.S. saying, now we're going to put sanctions on China because you did this. All of it is dominoes falling over. Nobody wants war. War is a last resort. And this is a fact. There's a lot of people who say, no, the war machine, they want war. I get that. I get that. The war machine makes money by selling weapons, all these things. What I'm saying is for governments, what they want is money. For the military industrial complex, they don't necessarily want war. They want sales. And

And so for Russia, they're thinking we want to increase our economy. We want to get more for our people. Putin's saying largely for himself. And how do you do that? Well, we need access here. NATO is saying Russia's charging us too much and we need cheaper energy to Europe so that we can get cost down and expand the European economic block so that we can compete with China. So they claim both sides are fighting over limited resources and it's going to be dominoes falling over and it could potentially bubble up into something crazy unless and this is easy.

Donald Trump intervenes in two months and says, we are done. We it is better to accept the loss of Luhansk, the Nets, Mariupol and Zaporizhia. And and I guess what is that also, Kerson? If it means no World War Three, we don't care about Ukraine. Give step back. Russia takes this this territory.

There's sanctions, there's penalties, whatever it might be, but there's no reason to do a tit-for-tat that expands to the point where they're going to start firing more ICBMs or IRBMs. Do you believe that Russia would be satisfied with just the Donbass and Crimea? Okay. Do you think there's some kind of...

like aspirational goal of Soviet bloc dominance that motivates Putin to have some sort of regional... I think they want defendable borders. 100%. This is like greater Rus ideology. Soviet empire. 100%. Very much into that. Vladimir Putin is mad the Soviet Union collapsed. He didn't think it needed to happen and he's been trying to rebuild it with the Russian Federal... It's the Federation Trade... What is it? Whatever it's called. The Russian Federation Trade Bloc or whatever. The conflict in Ukraine, as complicated as it is, one component is that before Yanukovych was ousted...

NATO and the EU were offering up deals to Yanukovych saying, hey, open up trade with Europe. Do these things. We're going to normalize your economy. It's going to be able to join the EU, the Schengen zone, all that. Your citizens will come and go as they please. Vladimir Putin said, if you open up trade to Europe and you have free trade with us, that means Russian goods are going to flood into Russia and displace our manufacturing base. We can't have free imports. There has to be some controls on it. European goods? Into Ukraine? So...

Let me rephrase. You might have misspoke. You said Russian goods will flow into Russia. Oh, sorry. European goods will flow through Ukraine. And then because Ukraine has free trade with Russia, into Russia. Russia is basically saying, if we make a T-shirt here and they start making it cheaper over there and then it comes into Russia, we lose jobs. We can't do that. So they said to Ukraine...

You're going to have to choose whether you want free trade with Europe or free trade with us. Yanukovych then says, oh, boy, we got some leverage. The West then says, yeah, and we've got the CIA. So you get bubbling up protests. I'm not saying the CIA directly orchestrated this. I'm saying they have soft power and manipulation telling Ukraine you're going to go this route. Yanukovych tried playing both. He gets ousted, flees to Russia. They install a more West positive government that

you know, favors NATO and the EU. Vladimir Putin says, okay, now we're going to lose access to our industrial port and our Black Sea fleet staging area, which is the naval base in Sevastopol. They are not satisfied with a single bridge

in the Kirch Strait. That's east, yeah. Right. And so that got bombed recently. So Russia's thinking, we need stronger control and access to this region. So of course, they're going to take these regions so they can secure Sevastopol. Many people have said, but Tim, why don't they just build in Sochi and build a naval base there? You're telling Russia, abandon military technology engineering and a base they've been using since the Soviet Union.

They're just going to say, no, it's hundreds of millions of dollars and it's control and access. They're not just giving up the technology. They're not just giving up the infrastructure. They're giving up this regional control, this regional port. So then they're going to try and take this. Now, it's possible Russia tries to push in for more. I doubt it. And I think the issue is that

Already, you have Estonia and Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, they're in NATO, and Ukraine now is inching towards it, and they're saying they want to do that. Russia's basically like, okay, so on our entire border is one military alliance.

As many people have said, we would not tolerate if Russia started arming Mexicans and the cartels were fighting and stuff either. I'm not saying Russia's right. Russia's invasion was wrong. I'm just saying they may stop with taking the Donbass. And it's not just that. It's Luhansk, Donetsk, Mariupol, Kherson, Zaporizhia, and then they control Crimea already. Russia's so big, man. They have all that other stuff. They need energy. They got all that.

You ever look at the globe and be like, man, Russia's big. Yeah. You know what I mean? Some of those maps are. This is a counter to what you just said. But most of it, there's a lot of it that's frozen, man. Russia's like big. It's like big. No, I know. It is big. It's got more surface area than Pluto. Yeah. So I read on the internet one time. Well, let's do this. Possibly true. As I'm talking about Russia and the conflict.

We have this story from Fox News. Caravan of 1,500 migrants forms in Mexico. They hope to reach the U.S. before President-elect Trump takes office in January. My proposal right now is...

any one of these individuals, in fact, nay, any individual from the point that Trump was formally declared the winner should get an aggravated criminal charge for entering the United States. Yeah. Because it is apparent now by popular mandate that immigration is a problem that people want stopped. The entire Rio Grande Valley, all the southern border counties said, voting Republican, major shift, make this stop. These people...

have outright said to themselves, the American people have rejected us. We better run full speed to kick the door in before they can stop us. I say, okay, you want to play hardball? Aggravated charges, escalated charges to some degree for knowingly coming in at this point trying to bypass the popular mandate of this people. It feels like we're at a crossroads when it comes to this immigration issue. Either we have a serious border that legally you cannot cross –

and there will be penalties for crossing, or you do not, it's the biggest insult. It is such a spit in the face to every legal migrant that ever came to this country. For you to just cross the line and then get privileged access to what you come to New York City, you're going to get a free hotel. You're going to be well fed. Come with your entire family. We'll treat you very well. Not only that, you want to leave to another state, even though you may have shoplifted or committed a crime in New York, we'll buy a bus ticket.

for you to leave the state and go to, I don't know, some random Midwestern state where you could go and assault and then murder a jogger, a young woman, a young female jogger, and you know, nobody cares. This is the case of Lake and Riley that has been so pivotal and significant in this past election. - That video they released of the mom being informed.

It's worse than any horror movie you've ever seen. It's a little off. Daniel Penny also. We can talk about that maybe on the after show. His interrogation got released. That was a different story completely. Yeah, the Lake and Riley thing. The guy got found guilty on 10 counts. He was found guilty of multiple things before this. He came here illegally. He was given all of these accommodations in New York City. He committed crimes in New York City. He was given a bus ticket to leave New York City to I forget which state he eventually went to. Georgia? Yeah.

I think it was Georgia. No, I do believe it was Georgia where he was living next to a college campus where a jog in Lincoln Riley was. And now the American girl's dead.

Because of that, I think what's the ultimate deterrence force, a force on the border? You know, it's just about can the American people. I don't want to spark a revolution inside the country because people like you can't harm them. Can the American stomach a mass deportation effort from Donald Trump? The Associated Protesters find out. Well, here's the thing. You have to also understand like that. You can make.

easily common sense distinctions between criminals and violent criminals and prioritize who you're going to deport. Sure. And because even practically speaking, there's only a certain thing you can do before you start. Not to say that crossing the border illegally is not a crime, but there is a prioritization of violent criminals and going and being able to have that conversation honestly. I think we're at a point now where you can do that. What's interesting is that during the campaign,

Kamala Harris was trying to out

performed Trump on her stance on immigration out of nowhere. Remember, what was interesting was back in the day, 2016, 2020, Trump's views on immigration were seen as totally controversial, xenophobic, racist. And then the common sense meter moved in his favor and the Democrats are trying to say, we're good on it now. And now that he's won, but Biden's still president, what's happening? It's really interesting. Like, did they just drop that as a talking point? You sort of show your cards when you do. In 2016, when Trump first started talking about immigration, I had no sense that immigration was a problem.

I was like, really? There's a problem with immigration? I mean, being from New England, it wasn't something that touched my area, part of the country, at least very obvious. He spoke about it rather provocatively. He did. They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. The truth of the matter is he was right.

and not only was he right then, the Democrats doubled down on all their policies. And I talked about this multiple times, but I'm going to talk about it again. The HHS, the Department of Health and Human Services, has a program called the Refugee Resettlement Program. You can go to their website and look it up. The last time it was updated was 2021. And this program is the program that they use to take people that

come to the country and say, I'm looking for asylum. And they put them on planes and put them on buses and they send them to places that are purple states. So they send them to, they were sending them to Ohio. That's why Springfield, Ohio got all the attention that it did. Because they were sending the, they were sending people using the, using tax money, using federal dollars to

to relocate these people to places with the intent, with the goal of turning them from purple to blue. And that's what Elon Musk has talked about. And people were saying, oh, that's not true, not true. And if you are interested in looking to find out about the program, like I said, you can go to the HHS website. It's called the Refugee Resettlement Program. It is as real as all of us sitting around the table. And this is something that they...

The government is doing not just Democrats, but the government is doing because the government is run by Democrats, essentially. And most bureaucrats are Democrats. It was 95 percent of D.C. voted for Kamala Harris. It is so unrepresentative of the United States. But it's because the Democrats want to have a permanent one party democracy.

one party control of the United States and the means that they're trying to do is by changing the makeup of the states. And it's funny because they may have accidentally done the inverse. Yeah. Hopefully. Hispanics voted for Trump. Right. Maybe we don't deport him. They've created this Republican coalition. Yeah. Well, the people here who are Hispanic and can vote don't get deported.

But the Democrats are literally making that argument. They're saying Trump's going to deport legal Latinos who live in this country. It's like, what? He's not going to deport Americans. They see everything through the lens of identity and not the lens of people who are just thinking ideas generated. But here's the best part. Democrats, we were terrified. We're trying to secure a permanent majority single party rule. But they have gone so insane that now there's a debate inside the Democratic Party that they're either too woke or not economically populist enough.

And both sides don't agree. Turning on each other in the law. They've basically split into two parties. The far left party that says we we should be more woke. We should talk about helping people. And the more moderate side of traditional Democrats saying we need to focus on union workers. And the Republicans are like, you know what? We already do that. And we're not crazy. So we're good.

And we just won. That's why. I know there are illegal immigrants that – some of them that are just super legitimate humans who would make great citizens, have they come in the right way, that are like, there are too many illegal immigrants in this country. I bet it's gotten to that point. It's unlikely that illegal immigrants are people that are, like, extremely skilled or whatever. Most of the people that are here – that are coming illegally –

are coming illegally because they don't have money, they don't have means to get here, they don't have connections. If you're a really smart person that excels in your home country, you have some kind of means. The people that want to come here legally, the people that come here legally are the people that are doctors and have either...

a business mind or they own property in their countries and they want to move from there to here. But the people that come here illegally, they're not... But isn't there sort of a tongue-in-cheek, like it would be a funny sketch for Seamus to do of a guy who came here illegally in 2015 who's like, I can't take all these illegal immigrants. Like he's just... Because he's actually like...

Because not all of them are obviously stupid, dumb, idiot, useless. Well, no. No, they're just average. You don't want to generalize. But isn't there something to be said about anyone who wants to leave the conditions of a country that they don't like is resourceful enough to say, like, motivated enough to say, ambitious enough to say that they want better for their families? Is it incumbent upon us to take them in without, you know? No, I'm not making the argument. You've got to go through legal ports of entries and go through the process and respect the process. But in general, someone who's willing to uproot themselves and leave does possess...

More likely than not, a certain drive or motivation to improve their situation. It did seem like that over the decade, you'd think, but then when there's NGOs that are ushering them along and kind of making profit doing it, I wonder if they're just actually being trafficked. It also just... Immigration is a very... There's plenty of trafficking. The term immigration...

immigrants, depending on where they come from, are completely different people and it's a very complicated subject because immigrants and immigration is not a monolith. It all depends on the culture that people come from, the backgrounds, the things that they bring with them and you have to assess that on a case-by-case basis. So to

I think we're in a period now, which is the good thing is that in a post woke world, people can like express opinions and not presumed to be malicious. They can express like their concerns without people presuming, you know, we need a moratorium baby. I think we need a decade long assimilation period for everybody. I used to have a negative view about that. I'm, I'm, I'm,

more and more, I've warmed to that view significantly. I think we also need to address, it's not only mass deportations that need to happen. Big business is in cahoots with illegal immigrants because they are the ones who pay them. So if we went after the big businesses who were paying these illegal migrants, they wouldn't have as much incentive to come here. They wouldn't have the means to stay and remain here and they'd have to leave.

So I think there are multiple methods that we have to adjust this from. We won't be able to mass deport everybody. We need to change the incentive structure around them. We've been we've been allowing big business to, frankly, take advantage of these illegal migrants. And that's why they come and stay here. We need to stop that incentive structure. And also, if you have a welfare state, you have a problem if you have mass immigration plus a welfare state, which can which can.

Even without the welfare state, though. But I agree with you, it makes it worse. What is it, $3,500 a month they get on a credit card of federal dollars? No, but in general, you do need an enforced board for a nation's sovereignty. If you're an illegal migrant and you come to New York, you will have all accommodation provided to you. And if you want to leave, they'll also provide accommodation for you to leave. Let's jump to this story from Fox Business.

Lifelong Jaguar customer troubled by baffling woke rebrand going in a very sad direction. What I really love about this commercial, if you guys haven't seen it, is that it's, I don't know if it's so much as woke as it tries to be like futurist, post-modernist art style and just not Jaguar. So they've got a bunch of different people wearing weird clothes with weird makeup and I guess no eyebrows. Some have eyebrows.

And this image, for instance, is really funny because it says break molds. There's a U in molds, but we get it. You're British. And there's another tag that said copy nothing. And everyone's showing this image alongside the Apple 1984 ad where it's a woman wearing orange and white with a sledgehammer and blonde hair. And they're like, it's like the same thing. I think that's a man. Okay. Well, perhaps. So the issue now is, oh, and they're complaining.

comparing it to Bud Light. So here's the thing. I kind of feel like we should watch this video. It's a three minute and 50 second long video. And this is tough because I'm like, I can't show you the context of Volvo's commercial because it's a it's a three 50 minute long story. But perhaps we should just watch right now and react to it. This commercial. OK, so let me break it down.

The Jaguar commercial was weird, cringe and probably produced before the election. Now they probably regret it, but they launched it anyway.

Everyone is singing the praises of this Volvo video. This guy, Julián Huynh, says Volvo posted a three minute, 46 second long ad on Instagram shot by Hoyt Van Hoytema, the cinematographer of Interstellar and Oppenheimer. It goes against every single rule you can think of about think about as a social lead length format overproduced. Every comment under the ad said it immediately put Volvo in their consideration set. It's effing fantastic. Now, it's an ad that's

And if I got to say it normally, I'd say let's play some clips so you can understand it. No, no, no. I think we got to watch this in full because the context around this is extremely important. The video is a short film. It's tremendously important culturally.

for what the future of this country and the countries it's advertising to, what it means. And it's a car commercial. So just watch this. And I will say this, when I first saw it, I'm going, yeah, yeah, okay, I get where they're going. I get it. And then the ending hit and I went, holy crap. Check it out. Hey. Hey. You okay? Yeah. For those that are just listening, she pulls out a pregnancy test. Hey, love. Hey, mom. How are you guys? How are you doing? Yeah. Yeah, we're good.

We're good. Something wrong? No, no, no, no, but we've actually got something to tell you. Kate's pregnant. I'm joking. You're gonna be a grandma. How does it feel? I'm scared, Mum. Why are you scared? About it all, you know? The nights, the responsibility. We're gonna need a bigger place. I know, bless you, I'm so sweet. I've got this feeling that we're gonna have a daughter.

Just as stubborn as her mum. Hopefully not the family's house. That's a legacy she might have to live with. She might be the reason we're tired or not. What if I don't do good in class? I just want to say and do the right things, you know? I want to see the world with her. Also be happy staying home, doing nothing, letting her be a kid. Are you awake? Number 32. Thank you. I want to see her fall in love.

But I also know what that means. And I know she's gonna bend the rules, just like I did. And one day, I'll have to let her go. I'm excited to hear what she learns about the world herself. She adores. She hates. I hope she likes the name we give her. It all depends.

It says, "Sometimes the moments that never happen matter the most." And he's in a hospital. And he's with his wife, she gave birth to their daughter. And then it shows the accident that didn't happen because Volvo has good brakes. This is so good.

It's really, really good. Choked up a little bit. Yeah, when I first started watching this commercial, and the reason why we had to play it in full, the context in order for us to comment on, we can't just tell you what happens. You have to sort of experience. I know for people listening, it was much more difficult. But it starts off with, we're having a kid, and I was like, I get it, I get it. I know everybody likes it, because we saw that one other commercial where the guy and the woman are having the kid, and everyone celebrated it.

But they literally turned it into this A-B plot where he's talking about how happy he is to finally have a child and how he's scared of the responsibility. And then the B plot is his wife who's pregnant, buying food, about to cross a street, and then a car is about to hit her, and it's a Volvo, and the brakes are so good she doesn't die, and his child lives.

And the reason why I think it's so powerful is you take a look at what Jaguar is doing with this weird, creepy, futuristic art garbage. You look at these companies that are telling people that families are bad or that you should be guilty for having kids. And Volvo is like, let's do a commercial that's a short film celebrating having a family and showing you that our vehicles are safe as the twist. And it's like, that's what commercials should be. And so we should encourage more commercials like this. No.

Now I want to buy a Volvo. Let's show the Jaguar commercial back now. Now that we have some reference. This is what you're up against. Yeah, let me pull up the Jaguar commercial. The first thing I thought when I saw the Jaguar commercial was Grace Jones from the 80s. Yeah, exactly. Copy nothing. Yeah. Looks like Grace Jones. Copy nothing, but it's like, well, this is just...

Androgyny from the 80s. What are you talking about copying? You'll see it early on where they make a statement like, it's all about joy and happiness and everyone looks miserable. Is it 30 seconds? Is that it? Yeah, it's a short one. All right, here you go. And it's painfully bad. It's just, it's painfully bad. Here we go. Very exuberant. That's it. And everyone looks miserable. Live vivid. Delete ordinary. Break molds. Should have done the V up. Otherwise, people listening just hear weird music. And then it's a bunch of weird makeup people

Copy nothing. On Mars. They changed the logo. I don't necessarily think it's fair to call it woke.

You know, people are saying go well, go broke and all that. I'm like, well, there's nothing in it that says anything about gender ideology or race or anything like that. It's just cringe. I got choked up from that too. I'm still choking. It's like the end of the end. The people in the comments were like, where's the car? What does this have to do with cars? When I first saw it, I didn't know it was for the car commercial or for the car company. I thought Jaguar was going to be some like other brand thing. I thought it was going to be like an art pop. Yeah. And then they're like, no, like people were like, look at the old logo. I was like, wait, that was the car?

So apparently what's happening is they want to go all electric vehicle. Or they say a fully realized electric fleet or something. The language alluded to the fact that they're just going to do EVs. And so they decided this is the route to go. They should have put a car in it at least. I know. Driving by in the background or something. Meanwhile, and you know, I do kind of feel bad for them. Because they probably put a bunch of money into this from before the election. And then I wonder if after the election they're sitting there going...

do we still run this ad? Meanwhile, Volvo was producing theirs well before the election and they were like, look, people want safe cars because they have children. We should, that's the commercial. If you pull it up on Twitter, the comments from Jaguar in response to the comments of like, what is this car? They keep responding. Do you sell cars, Elon? That's

That's funny. Elon Musk has got incredible trolling. We'd love to show you. Join us for a cuppa in Miami on 2nd of December. Warmest regards, Jaguar. Hello, thanks. Crusaders has boycotted Jaguar along with any other business that still doesn't get it. They said, thanks for the feedback. We'll be sure to pass on to the team. Best wishes. This is surely a joke that's at a pivotal moment. Let me just jump to the replies. Maybe it's brilliant.

Oh, good. I saw all the vibrant colors and you're thinking, oh, maybe they're bringing one of these weird colors to one of the cars. You know, maybe they're doing something interesting. Maybe they're breaking the mold with like a weird, vibrant orange or yellow. No, they're just I don't know what's what mold are they breaking? They should have had some indication of what they're doing.

It should have been the opposite of the Volvo thing where they all get hit by a Jaguar at the end instead of the brakes. You know, look at this. Look at this image. Look what they're doing with this vehicle. Like, is this really what they think they're going to be selling? Fine. It was like a Porsche from the 80s. But I'm telling you, you know what happened? Some millennial women came into the marketing department and they said Jag...

The company said, look, sales are down in this area. What can we do to revitalize the brand? And they brought in some woke millennial woman with big glasses, the huge oval frames, and she pushed them up and she's like, we're going to go...

He's postmodern. Neo, postmodern. Andy Warhol all the way. What would Andy Warhol do? He would tell us to copy nothing. Let's copy him. It's going to look like a TV. It's going to look like what they thought. Okay, how he says it. It's going to look like what people in 1950s thought a TV in the year 2000 would look like. Uh-huh.

There you go. You got to wonder if this stuff's bait nowadays. Retro companies know they're going to get a ton of attention. There's going to be a bunch of news stories written about it. Oh, Jaguar's new car breaks the mold. And there was anti-LGBTQ commentators say that, oh, no, they're still in the mold. We are talking about them now. Jaguar electric vehicles. Maybe it's brilliant. Maybe it's like an answer. We're being psyoped. We're taking the bait. I will tell you this. The one thing they have going for them is that Democrats and liberals will do whatever the right... They'll do the opposite of whatever the right is doing. So...

When it came to like RFK Jr. being like, I don't think we should eat poison. They're like, oh yeah? Now they're advocating for McDonald's as much. You guys go to the gym? No, I'm going to stay home, eat a bunch of hamburgers. I just want it to be subject to a blind study non-placebo trial. That's exactly it. And so now you've got... There's beef jerky here, but it's processed. And I think we should subject it to a blind study non-placebo trial. But now you've got Chris Mowry...

who is doing this video is being like, "It's not the chemicals in the food that are making people fat, it's that you're eating garbage and not exercising. It's because I'm in a box that makes small explosions in the back that propels me forward." And it's like,

Okay, dude, you are so incredibly wrong on all of this. But why are you defending butylated hydroxy toluene in our food? You don't even know what that is. I don't even know what that is. All I know is I don't need to eat it. And if you come to me and say, but the studies say it's safe. I don't care. How about I just eat, I don't know, meat and rice. Just simple things. And they're going to be like, but you know, there's a chemical compound called this. Yes, I know. But it came from the ground and I know I can eat it.

They've got Democrats and liberals defending eating weird chemicals that are lab made like that New York Times fact check against R.K. Jr. So what's likely going to happen is a bunch of liberals are going to be like, I'm buying a Jaguar now. Like these these who was it who said these celebrities tweeted they sold their Tesla's.

Yeah. And then they bought other EVs. Ellen DeGeneres? She's moving to England. Yeah. Did you see the Shane Gillis Bud Light commercial? The what? The Shane Gillis new Bud Light commercial? Better, but I'm not a fan. What did he do? No, I'm of the commercial, what they're trying to do. Yeah, so it's like Shane Gillis sitting on a chair and he's like, I think I'm in the wrong commercial. And they're like, aren't you? What did they say? Aren't you like this other guy? And he's like, no. And they're like, oh. And then there's another guy going, woo, and drinking beer. And I was like, okay. Yeah. You know, I got to chuckle out of it because Shane's just going like, uh.

what's going on? But there was no heavy joke. I feel like, I'm sorry, dude. Look, Shane Gillis is super funny, but they are desperately trying to rescue this dead brand. And they think they're going to get by without actually addressing the fact that, hey, look, I said we should own it and take their money, but it doesn't matter what I think. I'm one guy. The right has said never unless they apologize and they think they're going to get through without apologizing. It's more about what

doing a commercial like that means about the culture because what they're trying to appeal to is what people actually resonate with whereas like in the woke advertising world in a lot of situations it's not like these people really ideologically believe this stuff they're just like we think this is the the trendy resonant idea so we're going to try to do this

nonsensical, far postmodern approach, thinking it will resonate. And I think we're in a time now where they're realizing it's being rejected. It's funny when you see SNL trying to go edgy, more right-wing, and being okay with certain things. And I don't buy it because it's like,

You're just, you know, you're trying to say, oh, you were like self-critical and self-aware the whole time when you weren't. So it's this pandering kind of thing, but it more reflects that they're trying to appeal to what most common sense people feel. Volvo deserves to just make a billion dollars for doing a good ad that celebrates family and safety.

They made a very basic commercial. There's no weird colors. There's no ideology. It's just literally a guy who's excited to have a kid, which is a normal human experience. And then there's like the brakes work and you're, it's going to keep people safe. And you're like, that's all we care about. That's that. That's it. You've, you've sold me. So I hope, I hope we reward marketing campaigns like that. And Jaguar, I,

You know, look, I want Jaguar to do what Volvo did. So I hope they do lose money and realize this is a terrible campaign. I think it's fair to say it's not woke necessarily just because it's weird art stuff. It's just cringe. It reminds me of like...

of an 80s movie that had an advertisement in the movie. It's something that you would see as a commercial in RoboCop 2 or something like that. Dystopian 80s future. Exactly. Demolition Man portrayal. Exactly. Where everything is just messed up. Look, it's so futuristic and crazy and blah, blah, blah. Isn't it cool? And it's like...

Yeah, that's the movie I was thinking of.

I don't know who the demographic that they're after is. I thought Jaguars is like for like, you know, sort of dads who want a sportier car or like a fancy, like, I don't know. Yeah, I thought it was supposed to be like an upscale, you know, six-figure guy who's looking for a high-end car so he can be like, I got a Jag. And you're like, oh, wow, that's a great vehicle. Now it's going to be this weird...

like sleek, solid pastel. It's owned by Tata Motors, an Indian multinational automotive company. So that's interesting. I'm getting David Bowie vibes from the person in the dress. I think in the dress. The dude with the sledgehammer? Yeah, yeah, yeah.

Right? With the hair and the colors. Yeah, the whole video was David Bowie. I don't know. Was David Bowie gay, too, or LGBT? Bisexual, I think. I don't know. I couldn't name three of his songs. Mick Jagger had a thing, allegedly, I believe. Is that true? I don't know. I'm a Jackson guy, not a Bowie guy. I think that's what they wanted society to believe. I'm going to do just a—before we go to Super Chats, we'll just do a quick little snippet so we have time for a full segment. But Nick Sorter is reporting that Donald Trump is considering Mike Rogers for FBI director with Kash Patel as deputy director.

The plan could please both Senate Republicans concerned about Trump's plan to disrupt the FBI and also appeasing the MAGA orbit who have been frustrated about why more of their allies have been placed in top jobs. Cash Patel. All right.

You know, right now there's this clip from Tim Kast IRL going viral with Kenneco the Great tweeted it, Elon Musk himself tweeted it, and it's Cash explaining about the two-tier system of justice and these things. It's got like 20 million views or some ridiculous amount, and I am honored to have hosted the show where Cash came on, but Cash has proven exactly why in that segment why he needs to be the FBI director. Literally looking me in the eyes on that clip. That was...

he was looking at me, telling me that info. That's me listening to him while we were all listening to him. He is beyond deputy, bro. He's the man. Cash money. Mike Rogers has not come near the depth of conversation and context on the issue that Cash Patel has. I love that guy. Cash is so cool. And the concern, of course, because this should have been announced a long time ago. Cash Patel is clearly the guy. Trump had praised his book. Cash has been talking about it for some time. And

There's concerns about the Senate saying no, and I think that's ridiculous. I think it would be a confirmed position. That's probably why they're trying to do deputy. And then he's not confirmed. No, no, no. I think they're trying to put him as deputy because it'd be hard to have him be at the top. But doesn't deputy have to be confirmed as well or no? Yeah. Deputy would have it. So not as this not a senior position. Yeah. Right. Senior. Yeah. And then it's going to restrict what he can do. And you're going to get Mike Rogers going to be like, well, let's not rock the boat too much.

I think cash, look, I'm not going to be surprised if this is what happens. Okay. We got RFK Jr. and HHS. I hope he gets in because that is still a nuclear bomb on the beltway and in the industries of this country as it pertains to food, preservatives and all that stuff. It's still great. Tulsi has DNI is great. I think it's fair to say we want to win everything, but the reality would be, I suppose if we get a handful in, I'll take what I can get, you know, um,

I still think it's a tremendous gain. Even though... What I'm saying is it should be cash. Yeah, go for cash. Make them vote. Do it. Make the Senate do its job. If they say no, then appoint somebody else. But do cash, dude. Appoint Matt Gaetz. Like, what? Make them do their job.

Go make them say no. Put it on record. The reason that they don't want to go through the confirmation process if they know they're not going to get in is that it just wastes time in the Trump administration. So, you know, the first 18 months is when you actually get to do stuff because the midterms are already around the corner. So if you're not in the first three months, if you're only acting as the acting AG or what have you, you're not going to be able to really affect as much change than you'd be able to do if you were confirmed quickly. Moreover,

Once you're done with confirmation, Senate could start confirming judges and get on to other business. If they're stymied and stuck on these confirmation hearings that aren't going anywhere, it's just wasting Congress's time. You're actually right. You're taking the non-purist view, which is probably the right way in politics. The other idea is appointing the wrong guy is a waste of time. But I think you're right. Just like he said, 18 months is all they've got.

And there's a lot of stuff that they want to get done in the first. And they can do it if they get people in place that are going to do the job. They can do significant damage to the bureaucracy. If he was to appoint a guy, Mike Rogers or whatever, and then wasn't happy with the way he was doing it, can he remove him and then appoint somebody else? That happened in the first round all the time. Trump...

All of these guys will likely get fired within... They're not going to serve all four years in the cabinet. Nobody usually makes it all the way through. And then it would be the same process? Would he remove Mike Rogers? There would be an acting... He might have someone lined up right away. And then they'd have to go to confirmation, and that could take, what, a month?

a two week? Do they go right into the Senate like a week later, five? It depends on what the Senate has planned on their slate. If they're going through other things, you know, um, God willing, Trump might get a, another Supreme court appointment in this term. Um,

Sotomayor's got diabetes or something. Yeah, Sotomayor, allegedly, there was something going on with her. And a lot of libs were hoping that she didn't pull another RGB where she would die. I think she's only in her 70s, but she apparently has some health issues. Apparently. I don't know for sure. I don't want her to die, but it'd be nice if she stepped down.

During Trump's. That's nice. Yeah. That's nice. What about age limits? This is a whole other conversation. Age limits? Or just term limits. Well, term limits he talked about. No, no, no. The point of not having term limits is so that way they're not political. Yeah. They get appointed for life, so that way you don't have...

people step out and then you have political appointments. Do you think they're not political? They are to a degree. They don't need to be to the whims of the public. They don't need to worry about, oh, I need to... They won't be political in deciding their cases because they don't need to worry about their political future. I'm going to be in office forever.

What if it was just one long-term per justice, eight years? That's what life is. I think it could be 20 years, but I guess the idea is to have it be long-term. And if you want to have change, go to the House of Reps. You want to keep the judiciary as far removed from the executive and legislative as possible. It is political under a particular administration. The problem is when one president appoints half of the Supreme Court. No, that's not a problem. That is a big problem. Why? Because it biases the court towards the whims of the president. The president picks

It doesn't bias to the whims. You're supposed to have... The court is not supposed to have politics. But no, to be fair, if it's a Republican president, they're going to pick more right-of-center judges. Yeah, but then they need to get... The president's elected, then they need to go to the Senate and they need to get confirmed in the Senate as well. They're going to pick...

Textualists. Constitutionalists. Originalists. Constitutionalists. And that's what they're supposed to be. You're not, listen, the court is not supposed to make law from the bench. They're supposed to read the law and say, this is what the law says. Well, this is the, yeah. That's the whole point. So all the people that are like, oh, well, the Constitution needs to be interpreted. No, the hell it doesn't. There is, it's.

Right. So the issue is the Democrats go judicial. It says a well-regulated militia. Well, as we know, regulated means government control. And then the originalists say, no, regulated back then meant well-equipped, like your guns are working and are in proper order. And they're the same throughout the philosophical disagreement. Right. Right.

Well, I don't think— Living, breathing document? No, no. It's not philosophical. I think it's evil people lying for power. The best argument against a living document is in the Constitution itself. The fact that there is a stringent and rigorous amendment process indicates strongly that it was not intended to be interpreted. If it was intended to be interpreted, they wouldn't have put an amendment process in there at all. Right.

And the fact that it's so stringent indicates that they wanted it to be very hard. They knew that it would be interpreted, which is why the Second Amendment doesn't. So Second Amendment, easy argument. Anybody just read the original article on what they were intending, and it's all written there. And the founding fathers wrote the intentions. They wanted people to own guns. That's it. There's a variety of reasons why they should. It's not just about government tyranny. It's about foreign invasion, foreign and domestic. The idea is, okay, if a government becomes tyrannical,

tyrannical to these ends and people are being abused, citizenry need to be able to defend themselves. Most importantly, however, if we are invaded, militia is a strong portion of our defense. The regular citizens need to be able to defend their homes and rise up if they're conscripted.

Then they said, well, let's put in there then that you don't need to be conscripted to have a gun because we want everybody to have guns. So they originally did. Then they were like, whoa, whoa, wait a minute. If we include this portion that says it is not a requirement to serve in order to bear arms, people will argue that the intention of the amendment was to make it so that people could dodge conscription.

People have to be conscripted. OK, let's take that out. Now it's vague, but they knew interpretation was likely. That was the best they came up with because all the articles from the original there was 17 were incredibly wordy. And funny enough, the salary apportionment and the size of Congress, I think, were the first two. And.

I think the first article didn't get amended until like the 90s or something. Something on salaries. It's kind of funny, actually. There was a show talking about constitutional interpretation. I was watching the show last night. People were talking about whether or not the U.S. Constitution was insinuating that the U.S. was a Christian nation. We talked about that. Oh, yeah. It was this show. Yes.

That was a good argument. And the answer is that it is. Well, we'll go deeper on that. I wanted to fact check real quick. Earlier I said the deputy director of the FBI did need Senate confirmation. I believe they don't actually need Senate confirmation. For a deputy. That's why he's trying to make sure cash can get in some capacity. I wanted to get that right so we don't get sued by the government. I'll make one quick point on the discussion that we were having yesterday on the U.S. as a Christian nation to clarify because a lot of people don't understand.

The founding fathers did not intend for the United States to be a theocratic government. That's what I was watching. Right. And what people keep saying is, is it a Christian nation? The Democrats take the most direct and single-ordered thinking imaginable by saying a Christian nation is a theocratic government where the church has say in government. No, they want a separation of church and state. Okay, guys.

A Christian nation, what they meant was it was founded upon morals and teachings in the Christian faith. Jefferson may have been a deist, but his morals were largely built upon Christian faith. You know, my take was that they understood that religions evolve and that we may in the future have a religion that is even more moral than Christianity and that

the country will still function as long as there is a more religion behind it. That's, I mean, I think they're pretty wise. So very simply put, Hinduism was a religion they knew about at the time and it did not have a right to a jury trial or a belief in the protection of the innocent. So when they said a moral and religious country, they weren't referring to any religion. No, but I think the difference, what I was confused about watching last night was there was like a, like,

The idea that it's been informed by religious principles is different than Milo was saying that it's being prescribed to specific groups and only those groups. Like it's for Christians rather than the principles themselves being animated and informed by and influenced by Christian principles, which is different. And then the separation of church and state. In other words, we do not have an enforceable religion that everyone has to subscribe to. There is no formal separation of church and state.

What do you mean? The separation of church and state is a written intent. It's not in any documents or anything like that. Okay. But the principle of a separation of a church and state, that we don't have an official church of the United States that people have to pay to? Correct me if I'm wrong. I'm fairly certain they did not write down, we hereby separate church and state. I think it is written down. I don't know. It could be wrong. It was a letter. There's no official thing. But that principle is a healthy one because it allows for peaceful religions to exist under a bedrock of...

principles that are informed by Judeo-Christian values. Right, so the point that Milo made, which I agree with, is that when you have a set of values that are rooted in Christian moral teachings that 99.9% of the country follows, and you say these rules are for a moral and religious people, they're not talking about Buddhism. They're not talking about Hinduism. They're not beefing with them, but they're saying the idea of...

the right to avoid self-incrimination, a speedy trial, to jury lawsuits, to the sovereignty of states. These are rooted in the Christian moral tradition. And it all stems back, obviously, because of the structure of European government and how it came to the United States. And it was very much informed by Christianity. So my point was, while Milo may be saying it's prescribed for Christians,

Which to me sounded exclusionary, which was odd. Perhaps it's too much, but I think his point is correct, that when you apply these things to people who have no moral virtue and do not abide by these, they're postmodernists of a different ideology, they weaponize them against good moral people.

I think a lot of people would have said that our founding fathers were. Like, these guys didn't accept Jesus Christ. A lot of modern day Christians wouldn't. George Washington? Thomas Jefferson? A couple of them. George Washington, our founding father, first president of the country, he didn't believe that Jesus Christ was a messiah. That's right. But they were deists. The distinction was they didn't believe God was intervening in governmental affairs like many other countries did when they thought the heads of state were appointed by God.

They still believed in the Christian moral teachings. That's why Benjamin Franklin expanded upon Blackstone's formulation, which is rooted in the story of Sodom and Gomorrah. Are any of our modern day Christians calling George Washington a Christian? He didn't accept Jesus Christ. I don't think any of them. Right. But he wasn't a Christian. We're really talking about the where do individual rights and the concept of sovereign individual rights come from a Christian. That's informed. You need to make this a culture war, as you could say.

But it is factually correct to say it was a Christian God. They said that we have rights bestowed to us. They are unalienable by God. I feel like the Christians backpacked off of the Jewish God. I think Christianity is like a Jewish God. I think it's about monotheism more than anything else. One God is what's important. It's because the country was 99.9% Christian.

Are you a Christian if you don't accept Jesus Christ? No. Okay, so I don't think 99.9% of the country was Christian. Literally, just look it up. It's true. We're talking a little bit about semantics here. The deism, this idea of like... A small handful of founding fathers were deists does not negate that the entire country was Christian. I don't think it was 99.9%. Look it up. Google it right now. The issue that I'm pointing out is they are saying, here's a list of rights that we believe are unalienable that God has given us. They're not talking about

you know, Krishna or something, or Shiva. They're talking about the Christian God. They believe that these... What is a Christian God? Do the Muslims have a different God than the Christian God? No, because I think it's about monotheism here. They believe in the one God. Muslims have a different directive than Christians do. I don't think that the Founding Fathers were entertaining a religion that instructed its people to kill Jews.

Do you think that the Founding Fathers were like a good moral and religious person who would follow the words of the Hadith and attack Jews? That's what they were referring to? No. I don't think so either. Muslims would say that it's a different God too because they say that the Christians are, they say that they're polytheists. They say that because they believe Christ...

the Holy Spirit and God. They say the Christians believe it's a trinity. Let's go to Super Chats. Yeah, we're going to do it. Okay, here's what we're going to do. We're going to go nuts in the members only where we can get deeper dive into this stuff. So smash that like button, share the show with everyone you know. Right now, you can go to TimCast.com. You can click join us to become a member. I see that on YouTube, we got 53 new members, but that's YouTube membership. And if you want to watch the uncensored show, that's at TimCast.com.

where you'll sign up for the website, become a member, and you'll get access to the Discord server where there are 21,000 people currently hanging out. And you can join the movement and be friends with them, and they'll be friends with you. There's meetups. Some people got married. I don't know. I'm not trying to, you know. And they were in a Volvo commercial. Not in a Volvo commercial, but we've had, I think, more than a few people who joined the Discord ended up meeting up and getting married. So that's very cool. That's very cool. So TimCast.com, but we'll grab your Super Chats right now.

Alpha Turkey says Mike Lawler say goodbye to Congress. Well, put attack in that note because we can't forget we got two years. Mike Lawler is gloating over Matt Gaetz stepping down and Elon Musk said anybody who's disrupted the Trump's agenda, you get the primary.

Can I say a tidbit on Mike Lawler? He was a, I think he's a sophomore now in Congress from, I believe, what was it, the 17th District of New York. He's so revered by the establishment right now because he won in the New York 17th District against, who was this, Sean Patrick Mahoney-

Maloney, who was like a 10-time or 7- or 8-time elected congressman in this seat. He turned a blue seat red. And this was kind of the idea of a future type of Republican in the sort of northeast blue-purple areas that could really change the game moving forward. So I don't know if any sort of MAGA candidate would be able to win in this district is kind of what I'm getting at. Jason Dixon says, hey Tim, please shout out the Discord.

Can you please point out the discord is not a freedom of speech platform and no one is free to jeopardize the community because they want to say stupid ish. The discord is a community. Community has rules and those rules exist because we want to preserve and sustain this community so people can meet up. The founding fathers met in bars and pubs. That's how they were able to come to these ideas and these conclusions that ultimately birthed this once this this now great nation. I was going to say once because we're going to make it great again. But I want to correct myself and say it is great. It's been great and it's going to be greater than it's ever been before.

And that was because of the meetings, the Finding Fathers had. So we've got the Discord server. For those that don't know what that is, it's a chat room. You download an app, you sign up, and you're in this chat room with live shows, pre-shows, meetups. And there's actively right now, I think, 21,000 active people who are in it. So it's massive. And you're probably going to find friends in your local area. I think it's very important that we link up, we make friends, we stay involved, and that's how we build these cultural bonds. Let's grab some more.

Is this Dom says Bondi is a Kushner hire. She's from the AFPI, which is run by Brooks Rollins, Kushner's pal and Linda McMahon. Makes sense.

AFPI, America's First Policy Institute. Sounds horrendous. Yeah. All right. Mike Moe says, nuclear war is bad for kittens. Indeed it is. It is. We have Seamus III on the property. Maybe Ian should capture him. Seamus, sir. Well, you know, because we named the cat Seamus, you know, he's Seamus I and the cartoonist is Seamus II. We just don't have names for any other cat. So another cat popped up on the property and we just call him Seamus. So now he's Seamus III. Oh, my God.

Oh, my gosh. Seamus, the cartoonist, can keep number two. I do like cats. So maybe Ian should capture number three. That's a lot of responsibility for a guy. They're eating the dogs. They're eating the cats. You've got to be careful. You do indeed. All right. Let's see. What's we got? Jacob Hawley says...

Pam Bondi is a never-Trumper. The lady was on Fox a year ago saying the party should do anything to stop Trump. She was also the AG of Florida that pushed Epstein stuff under the rug and let a lot of the crime limitations lapse. She's a deep neocon. She also served on his first impeachment as his defense attorney. I did read something about her being a lobbyist for Qatar in between serving in office. Is that the AG nomination? Yeah. The shoo-in for

Lobbyist for Qatar? Lobbyist for Qatar. Early days gigs, you know? You gotta take some money. I've never lobbied for Qatar, but who says I wouldn't take the money? Serge, my agent over here, maybe he could, hey, any Qataris want to reach out to Serge? What do you think about Qatar? Qatar is an Islamic nation. No, I think it's bad. I think it's bad that any of our

Politicians are taking money from Qatar. I think it's bad to be in bed with them. I think they hosted the recent FIFA World Cup. Nobody cares about any of their human rights abuses of anybody in the Middle East. It's really swept under the rug. I want to point this out. There is a difficult contradiction for platforms like YouTube in their hate speech policies in that the Islamic faith

following the Hadith, the Hadith literally says that they have to kill Jews. That's insane. I'm sorry, I'm not going to... What's the context? I'm just kidding. You know, I assume. It says that the end will not come until the rocks cry out, there is a Jew hiding behind me. It's in the Hamas charter, article 7. Exactly. There is a Jew behind them, oh, come and kill him. How do you reconcile this like, oh, you can't disparage a religion when the religion calls for death and murder of another religion?

I mean, I got no beef with any of the individuals, but that in and of itself is dangerous and it's crazy. I think Qatar is a very bad actor on the world stage. Well, that's fine. My point is that writing that was in the Hamas charter, that is in the Hadith, that targets a religious group for death and destruction is not good. And the contradiction is... It's not great.

How is YouTube supposed to handle this, like, don't disparage a religion when the religion instructs its people to kill other people? If someone went on YouTube who was a Muslim and read that charter from Hamas, and they read that line from the Hadith, what's YouTube's reaction?

Are they going to be like, oh, it's a religion. We can't do anything about it. I don't think they give a crap. You know, you never see any of like the right wing watch ever going after like Muslims or any of their extreme rhetoric. No, they're left wing. You mean left wing? Yeah. No, no, no, no, no. Right wing watch. Yeah. Right wing watch never goes after otherwise misogynistic, transphobic. But this is my point. These these right wing watch groups and leftist groups consider Muslims left wing, despite the fact they're religious fundamentalists. Yeah.

Anyway, anyway, we'll talk about this in the members' hud. One more thing on Qatar, though. We need to keep our eyes on Qatar, especially with their mass media project, Al Jazeera. They have a ton of influence, and they're using it to undermine our values here in the West. I think that's just something to keep an eye on. They employ media. They'll hold us to double standards. AJ Press will talk about our human rights violations, won't mention Qatar. Let's grab some more super chats. We've got Craig Charlton says, Bondi should appoint Matt Gaetz as special counsel.

That's a good idea. And maybe maybe that happens. Yeah. With with cash potentially being deputy director. So he doesn't he doesn't need to be confirmed for that. Is that what it is? Yes, he does. And then then Mike Rogers might be a figurehead and then cash actually gets to run the show. I mean, maybe I think I think Trump wants cash.

And I think the reason he's weighed is because he's like, they're going to launch attacks against them. How do we do this? Maybe that's the play. Maybe they let Rogers in the seat for a year or so. Trump eventually gets rid of him. And it looked like, oh, the deputy now. He's been serving for over a year. Isn't it time to promote him? He'll be acting director. We love cash. We got cash. And non-remotely inflammatory. That guy, I don't see any problem with him being...

- I think the left paints him as a guy who would go after, like a retribution type character is how he's viewed on the left.

All right, let's go. Saravia says DJT can draft invaders for war in Ukraine, asserting jurisdiction over them. Invaders will self-deport. Donald J. Trump will get sued. SCOTUS will rule invaders and their children are not under U.S. jurisdiction. Mega. Is he speaking about illegals, that is? Yeah, illegal. So, I mean, Democrats want that. Democrats have been saying we should conscript invaders.

undocumented migrants as a path to citizenship. In the fall, too many empires, man. Yep. Through military service. The story of Rome. Yeah. It's a way to grow your empire, but once your empire is established, it's kind of like asserting your downfall, bringing in foreigners and then elevating them to position of citizenship without assimilation through generations. All right. Death Magnet says, on the topic of college educated, just because you're educated doesn't mean you're intelligent. There's a viral clip going around where this woman is like,

She was saying something like all of the liberal areas are from people who have college degrees. Yeah. And she's like, did it ever occur to them? It's because people with degrees are smarter. And so that's why they're voting that way or whatever. And it's like, dude, listen, I got to tell you, if you took out 40 to 80 thousand dollars in loans to get a degree, that's not going to get you a job and you can't pay them back. And 25 years later, you're still in debt. I'm not going to call you intelligent or educated. I'm going to say you were a Rube.

They are very low interest loans, though. They're like 3% interest. So if you need $20,000 and you're in college, it's way better to take out a student loan. My point is, it's a very stupid thing to do. How are they low interest loans? And at the same time, people are saying that they'll pay back their entire principal and still owe more. It's because they're paying the minimums.

Yeah. And so are they really only like three percent? I believe. Yeah. Dirt cheap. But dirt cheap. But the problem is you take out 40, let's say 50K in loans. You get out. You can't find a job. You go work at Starbucks. You're like, well, I got to defer my loans again. And it keeps racking up and racking up. That's why these people look, if you can't afford to go to college, you shouldn't. Intelligence is different than wisdom. That's right. So I'll tell you what I did. Hey, let's talk about this. When I was 14, I stopped going to conventional high school and started getting homeschooled.

I completed the entire high school course. We were doing two weeks of high school courses in one day.

And it was a waste of my time. I completed all of my credits, submitted them. And then they said, if you would like to get your diploma and formally graduate high school, I said, they said, submit a letter writing it out for your, you know, your final. I said, nah, not interested. And my dad got mad at me for not doing it, but I was like, what do I need? This is stupid. And then I went to a community college because you don't need a high school diploma to do it. And then I had some college on all of my applications. And I did, I had like a, like two credits or something. And what happened was,

When I turned 18, I started looking at the math. And I said, okay, how much is it going to cost me to go to college? What do I need? And my dad was like, you definitely got to go to college. My mom said, you got to go to college. And then I said, wow, if I go get a job right now, I ended up reading this article from an economist who worked in the Bush administration who said, if you go to any investor and say,

Make an investment over four years. And when you leave, you will owe me $40,000 with, you know, three or 4% interest. They would laugh in your face since it's the stupidest thing I ever heard. So what you should do is at 18 is get any job you can and work there for two to four years and save up as much money as you can. And then consider if you want to advance. But the reality is if you do a job at McDonald's at 18 and worked for four years, four years later on average, I can't remember the math at the time, but it was like

And this is 20 something years ago, 20 years ago, actually. And it was like, you'd be making $24,000, $25,000 a year. You are leaving after at 22, you are going to have, you know, $20,000 in savings at this rate. You are going to be an assistant manager making $2 more with an opportunity for moving up in other companies. You could reapply somewhere else, get training in advance. It

If you leave college at 22, you're 40K in debt with no work history, no experience. You're only going to be able to get an entry level job somewhere. Most likely, if you can, your salary prospects will likely be lower and it'll take you an average of 10 years to climb out of that debt where the person who worked at McDonald's is going to be net worth positive the moment they take the job.

On average, and this was a few years ago we talked about on the show, the average net worth of a 30-year-old in this country is $1,000. It is the first time in the life of a millennial that they actually had a positive net worth. So these women who are like, this lady's like, I'm going to go to college because I'm smart. And you got these stats where it's like men aren't graduating college and women are.

Because men are doing the math. You know what looks really promising is the Peterson Academy, the Jordan Peterson. Ha! Well, you know, yes. Super cheap. Sign up. Yeah, exactly. That's what I would say. Michael Malice. Step into the abyss. There he is. Malice did a course on the history of communism, I think, just recently. That's super cheap. So what is Peterson Academy? It's like a school. Oh, I wish I could sell it. I don't know. It's cheaper version. It's an online school, basically. It's not accredited, but it gives you everything you need to get a college education, and it's cheap.

And it's through legitimate people like Jordan Peterson, Michael Malice. Or were you going to say something too, Phil, about it? I just said that Michael Malice is on the Soviet Union. On the Soviet Union. It's probably like Masterclass, but in the world of various subjects. Look, if you've ever seen the Tom Morello Masterclass, Jordan Peterson is not selling anything like that. Yeah, yeah, yeah. I mean, the idea is like an online university that actually teaches you how to think and not what to think. It gives you stuff you won't get at the...

Neo-Marxist post-modernist universities, you know? But does he believe in dragons? Oh, I hope so. Of course. But mythologically speaking. Yeah, those that challenge your father. Mythological truth is just as valuable to the West. I met Jordan a few weeks ago, and we talked about him coming on the show. He did briefly join us when we were on election night. Yeah.

But I said, we do Tim Kast's IRL or The Culture War. IRL is Topical News Stories. Culture War is Long Freeform Discussion. He goes, the culture war seems like it's the good idea. And I've been in it, you know, so it's not simple. It's not, you know. But he was basically saying, like, he and I having a philosophical conversation on...

how we see the world. And then, you know, I think he could teach me a lot of things and throw a lot of things at me, which would be really interesting. And I was like, that sounds like a really great psychoanalyzed by Joe. Yeah. We got to have Ian there for sure, because I think Jordan Peterson might get flustered and confused and Ian might win. I'll let, I'll calm him down. Yeah. Yeah.

Well, I don't mean, I'm not saying when, as in like Ian will come up with a more cohesive sense of reality. It's that Jordan Peterson will not understand how to navigate the ideas Ian's throwing at him. Ian will break Jordan Peterson. He had such a good time on election night. Ian, you broke Dr. Peterson. What's going on? I'm glitching, you know? Ian, I don't,

Don't know how to answer that. He's really one of my favorite people on earth. He's such an amazing, inspirational dude, man. I'll tell you the amazing thing. Done well for me too, but what's he doing? There are a lot of people that I've met who I don't know if they're politics and it's like some people I know. And then they say like they're huge fans of Jordan Peterson and I'm like, oh, okay, you know, we're cool. They listen to the guy, they understand what he's trying to say and the left has been trying to smear the guy relentlessly. And he wears banging suits. Oh, yes. Yeah, when I met him, he had the

dual color. Oh, yeah. You know, they're made for me. Half red, you know, it's for the fine line between order and chaos. When I saw him live in Miami, by the way, the thing I noticed the most was the lines out the door and every kind of person you can imagine going to see Jordan Peterson. As much as you buy into this narrative that it's, you know, lonely incel white man, you know, it's actually everybody, all ages. It's like the most diverse crowd I've ever seen. It's absolutely wild how powerful that, like,

that voices and how clarifying it is for so many people. It's a deeply impressive. Yeah. Let's, let's read this. We got Mary Evans says cash FBI, Bongino secret service, Brandon Herrera, ATF director, Ken Paxton, AG great attention to the Trump justice league. Well, likely not Ken Paxton, but that would, would be a good idea. Uh, I do not see a reality where Dan Bongino takes secret service director. I've heard rumors already. Dan Bongino has the biggest live show in, uh, I, I,

I think he has the biggest live show, period. He got half a million live viewers during the election. Half a million. Yeah, he regularly does like 170,000 concurrent viewers on his show. I don't know that. And so you can only estimate the amount of money he's making. I mean, IRL, we do. We had, you know, 56, 57,000 tonight. We've had we've been averaging around 60 or so. And people have a general idea of what we do. Bongino is doing triple that. Hmm.

I don't know how he gives that up for a, you know, $300,000, $400,000 a year. Not even that. It's probably a $280,000 a year government job. He has a bigger political impact in media using the bully pulpit than he would have as a Secret Service guy. But I could see him advising Secret Service for sure. Sure. I think I could see him advising something higher up the chain. Secret Service is important too, though. He obviously served as a Secret Service. George Washington was a Christian.

Eric. But he didn't believe in the, what is it of Jesus Christ? The divinity? He wouldn't be a Christian. So it's like maybe Matt Walsh could do what is a Christian next.

Oh, that's a good idea. What is a Christian? What is a Christian? I didn't want to say what is a Jew, but...

And we usually go about 20 minutes on the Uncensored segment before we jump into you guys as members calling in and talking to us and our guests. So we'll have more debates and more conversations, and they'll be a little unfamily friendly, but as I mentioned, fun. So smash that like button, share the show with everyone you know. Word of mouth really does help out. So if you like the show, tell people about it. You can follow me on X and Instagram at Timcast. Amity, do you want to shout anything out?

It was great to be here. Great talking to everybody. Love the conversation. And yeah, if anybody wants to find me, I'm on Twitter at Ami Kozak, on Instagram at AJ-Comedy, and YouTube at AJ-Comedy as well.

And, yeah. You got a comedy special out? Comedy special. I perform stand-up all over New York City and, you know, stuff coming out. I'd love to see one of your comedy specials. Thank you, sir. It's pretty hot. Yeah, yeah. Maybe I'll do like a Peterson tour or Alex Jones tour or RFK Jr., a variety show with everybody coming out. Come to my show. It's going to be amazing. We're going to turn the frogs gay. When's your next show? Live show.

Keep following me. Follow on my social media. I post dates there regularly. So that's the best way to do it. I've got a podcast called Ami's House, a band called Distant Cousins. You can check all that stuff out. Absolutely. Ami, it's been very fun talking to you guys. Thank you. Trump supporters, do not despair. Although Gates did have to withdraw, there's still a lot to be optimistic for and a lot of big things coming with the Trump administration. My name's Alaud Eliyahu. I'm a journalist here at TimCastNews.com.

You can find me at Twitter at Alad Eliyahu and then on Instagram, Barely Informed with Alad. Ian. Resident alien Ian Crossland reporting in for duty. Hello, everyone. Teleporting in from the ethosphere. Good to be here. I like to make up words in case you didn't know, like Shakespeare. I read a lot of that. Hey, follow me at Ian Crossland. Have a beautiful night. Take care of yourself. Heal your body. Let yourself regenerate. And you'll have a better day tomorrow.

I am PhilThatRemains on Twix. You can go and subscribe to me there. I am PhilThatRemainsOfficial on Instagram. The band is All That Remains. You can follow us on, or you can check out our new videos, Forever Cold, Let You Go, No Tomorrow, and Divine. They're all available on YouTube. You can hear our music on Amazon Music, Apple Music, Spotify, Pandora, and Deezer. And don't forget, the left lane is for crime. We will see you all over at TimCast.com in about one minute. Don't miss it. We'll see you all there.