A (4:50)

Yeah. No, I think it's interesting. There's a few different angles to look at it. And like economics is, I've told you this before and you're well aware of this, and it's not something that I'm overly versed in, but I'm learning as I go. So I'm trying to figure out exactly what's happening and exactly what Trump's ideas are here because, you know, he would have known that this would shake up the market a little bit. And obviously the US has sort of been, you know, like, the way, the way that I see it is that the US has been kind of needing a recession for a while and they've been kicking the can down the road for a little while. And there's been a lot of money borrowing going on, a lot of money printing going on and that. They can't really kick the can down the road forever with a recession. So you think this could be a recession over the next few years?

B (5:32)

Well, no. I mean, we never, you never actually have to enter into a recession. There's going to be normal contracting, economic contracting, and then there's also going to be economic booms. It's going to be kind of a normal part of a boom and bust system which we've had for about 100 years. You don't actually have to ever enter into a recession. But the thing here is we, you, you do make some sense on this front. Like the United States can't afford the United States. Right. We just can't afford it. There's no if, ands, or buts about it. We don't, there's not enough money coming in versus money that's going out. And so you end up in the red. Right? And right now we're trillions in the red, right, in debt. And ultimately progressives just kind of tell us that's fine. They're like, yeah, it's fine. You know, we can, we can kind of run endlessly with debt without there being any, any sort of problem with that. And of course, we can't. So what Trump is doing, interestingly enough, it seems to be a three pronged attack. The first attack is he's shutting down backdoors from foreign nations by putting the tariffs on Canada and Mexico. So he's saying, okay, China can't Exploit free trade that we might have with these countries through a backdoor, because they're still going to get charged a huge amount in tariffs. And he's also going to bring in trillions and trillions of dollars in revenue. I mean, he's going to bring in just an astronomical amount of revenue with these tariffs. And they know it. They absolutely know it. The progressives know it. Everybody knows that that's coming, right? That there's going to be a huge influx of casually into the United States government. And what happens, what, like what happens if these work? This will be the, this will be the biggest black eye of the, of progressives ever. If Trump's tariffs, his massive hiking of tariffs works, what do you do then? What, what, I mean, what are they going to attack him on if it works? If he brings in just an astronomical amount of cash and then settles the deficits we have of these other nations, progressives are going to look real bad. I mean, they're going to look real bad, especially if IND back, especially if

A (7:44)

he's getting the money from big, big giant corporations as well.

B (7:48)

So he wants, Trump wants three things. He wants to, like I said, he wants to put in the tariffs to protect industry. He wants to offset the deficits which we have, these trade deficits, massive trade deficits with other nations. And he wants to use tariffs to strategically strangle our enemies, the enemies of the United States, to the point where their economies completely shatter and then we can begin to take advantage of them. That seems to be his three part plan. Could he do that in just a few years? Actually, it looks feasible that he can. These tariffs very quickly seem to drive other economies to their knees. You can see the kind of panic which is around it as there's a lot of people who stand to lose a lot of money ripping off the American people because they're on the side of these, of these tariffs going the opposite direction, where other countries can charge us whatever the hell they want, but we can't charge them anything. And so a lot of these people are part, like I've said before, of NGO groups, they're part of financial investment groups and things like this who put their financial investments in other nations who aren't stupid enough to, to not have tariffs. We're the only ones who are stupid enough to not have tariffs.

A (9:03)

Yeah, that's it. It's, yeah, I mean, it's, it's pretty interesting when you, when you look at it and when you, when you think about how widespread it is. And it's basically, it's Going to everyone. It's just around the board. You look at a country like Vietnam, for example, and Vietnam is what China basically used to be for America in a way, because when China, you know, started its economic growth, it was. It was just doing all of America's manufacturing for cheap labor. And then obviously, eventually China is going to have a. Get to the stage where they can't exactly do that anymore, so they need to go to a poorer country. And so they've outsourced this to places like Vietnam and to places like Africa, for example. So it's like closing off that back door as well with places like Vietnam, because now the tariff is on them, too. So China can't just get all of their business done in Vietnam and then straight over to America. So. Well, and there is really no way around it.

B (9:52)

Also, all the J. Spurgs on Twitter who have been like, Trump's, Trump's Zionist shield. He just did well kissing Zionist shill. They kind of got egg on their face right now, don't they? Because he put a big fat tariff on Israel and told him he ain't taking it off. BB Came down and he sat down, had a nice little lunch with Trump and he was like, hey, look, you know, we really like this tariff thing. It's. It's going to cost us a lot of money. And he was like, too bad, too bad, too bad. 17. He, he did the, the, the Darth Vader thing where he was like, pray I do not alter it more.

A (10:31)

Right?

B (10:32)

He did the Vader thing. So I think the Jaysbergs are a little bit in kind of awe of that. They thought that there was going to be nothing with Israel, and he actually slapped a pretty hefty tariff on Israel and that. And, and told Bibi to his face, well, you know, we send you billions of dollars, so, you know, we sent you billions and billions of dollars. So, so what? Like, what are you gonna do about it? And he said it live. Said it live.

A (11:02)

Interesting. Yeah. I mean, it would have been a little bit suspect if they had every country in the world and they had tariffs on them, but then they were like, Israel, zero tariffs.

B (11:11)

Well, no, actually, that was the prediction. The prediction was that he was going to put tariffs on everybody except Israel with the. And he would say, well, it's because they're our closest ally in the, in the region and this and that. But he didn't do that. He actually put a really significantly large

A (11:26)

tariff on Israel, 17 wasn't it?

B (11:29)

And said that he's going to make it go higher. If, if need be. And then told him his justification. His justification was, well, we, we send you billions of dollars and you can't be ripping us off in trade where you put tariffs on us and we don't put any tariffs on you. He's like, screw that, we're not doing that. And bb, he looked almost as stunned as all of the Jaysbergs looked. Yeah, it's kind of fun to watch them all get all kind of retract, kind of back off on that there because they had predicted zero. Zero tariffs.

A (12:00)

Yeah, it was interesting as well. I mean, I've seen a really, a few really funny memes about this. There was one meme that was like this. It was basically saying that all of the people who are crying now are the ones who are telling everybody not to worry about it during the pandemic. So you've got the, the Wall street guy saying, ah, don't worry about it to the Main street person whose business is shutting down during the pandemic. And now you've got the Wall street guy crying. And the Main street guy's like, ah, screw you. So it's like the script has been, has been flipped.

B (12:29)

Well, no, nobody has gotten screwed by North American free trade and by free trade with other nations more than the working class. It's cost us. It's cost the blue collar their jobs. It's cost the working class their industry. It's cost our nation its security. It's cost us across generational wealth. It's cost us big. When you have a market that is so rich, so powerful that you, that other nations demand to have access to, for you not to take advantage of that for the benefit of your people, but instead let them take advantage of you by putting tariffs on your goods when you put a none on. That's insane. That's insane. Policy progressives have never been able to justify that.

A (13:13)

They.

B (13:13)

You. The flip. The script used to be the opposite. You know, it used to be the Bernie Sanders of the world who, who were saying, look, you know, these countries are ripping us off. I mean, they're charging us 90%, 80%, 70%, 60% on all imports which are coming in, and we ain't charging them, you know. Yeah, that's just, that's just crazy. That's crazy. So their, their country is gaining huge amounts of revenue and ours is losing. We're losing our ass. It's a, it's a really stupid policy. And when you look at how lopsided the deficits are in trade, yeah, we can easily do something about this and there's not anything they can do. So now the new, the new kind of battle cry from these elitists is, well, they're gonna, now, now they're gonna shrug off the dollar. You know, the dollar is not going to be the world reserve currency and you don't want that. And it's like, yeah, well what else are we going to use? There's nothing else that's there for them to use. The whole system is built on the dollar, even if there's tariffs.

A (14:18)

Yeah. So I think that Ray Dalio has done some really interesting work on this. Have you ever seen Ray Dalio's work about the global reserve currencies and about how they shift every hundred years or so and how it went from the Dutch and then there was a big conflict to the English conflict dollar, and then the, obviously the next cycle would be conflict Chinese yuan or, or something like that. So that, that could be feasible because if Ray Dalio is right with his calculations, US is coming towards the end of its life cycle as the global reserve currency.

B (14:48)

No, I don't think it is. I think, I think we'll have it for another good 50 years at least. Again, the entire system is built around it. And the problem that you have with the Chinese, the reason that you can't count on their currency is because their economy is all fake. It's all bullshit. They build whole ghost, ghost cities in all of this is to make it appear as though they're far wealthier than they actually are. The truth is, is that they are a slave builder class who builds our cheap. That's it. We want cheap ass made and you get to build it for us and then send it to us. It's still totally and completely dependent upon us. Chinese are totally dependent on us. And everybody who does a deep dive into the economic background of modern China knows about the ghost cities that they build, knows about how much they, they prop their economy up artificially. They, you hear this all the time. China cheats. They do. They cheat constantly and they rip off, they have to rip off everybody else's innovative ideas. They don't have any. They just rip them off.

A (15:51)

Yeah. Have you seen that guy, Sir Penza's channel? I think he's a South African guy, lived in China for a little while. He talks a lot about this and just a lot about how everything is just fake. And in China there's a fair bit of that going on in Asia. Like last year when I went to South Korea and I went to the demilitarized zone, With North Korea. It's such an interesting place because you basically like looking with binoculars into North Korea and they've got these little fake cities right on the border there to try and sort of like pretend that they're wealthy in North Korea. But, yeah, I think you get a lot of that sort of stuff around Asia as well. But it's all one more. Yeah, there's one more angle that I think is interesting. And I was watching these videos yesterday of these different sort of financial guys who were saying that, you know, they were kind of indifferent about the, the tariffs, but saying that Trump could be playing some sort of 4D chess where he is intentionally having a bit of instability in the market so that there's a little bit more uncertainty, so that it becomes a market where people are getting their money out of stocks and putting their money into government bonds, and then that brings in a bit of revenue for the government and it allows the interest rates to go down so that then the government can borrow at a cheaper rate.

B (16:59)

Well, people have traditionally invested in the bond market for safety. That's true. When things are volatile. Right. They're trying to basically keep themselves, you know, inflation proof. And so they, they do when, when people panic, they do invest in bonds. However, I'm not sure that that's Trump's intention. That could be a side effect of this, but I don't think that's his intention. I don't think it's even 40 chess. I think it's just straight chess and we just haven't played it in so long that everything becomes 40 chess, you know. Oh, it's. This is very clever, that. No, it's actually pretty straightforward. We're getting ripped off and we're going to stop getting ripped off. That's it. That's right. I mean, is it really. Is it really more complex than that? I mean, people try to make these things into being these vastly complex lab. And this is. By the way, you see this with economic jargon all the time, right? From economists constantly, who are always wrong, by the way. They're wrong about almost every prediction they make. Their models are stupid. They make no sense. Right? All designed with a bunch of academic fluff talk. And it turns out that none of them have a clue what's going on. Anyway, here's what's going on. Bunch of countries have massive deficits in trade with us and we want to offset that. It's that simple. And other ones have huge amounts of tariffs on us and they're. They. We don't have reciprocal tariffs. With them. And we're trying to take care of that too. Seems like it's totally reasonable and straightforward to me.

A (18:25)

Did you see the people making the videos about how they actually calculated the tariffs and how it was the trade deficit divided by. Divided by something and then halved. And that's how they actually got to the tariff number. And they were saying that this is, you know, that Madagascar only has an 8% tariff. But we, but America imposed this much larger tariff on them. But it kind of seems a little bit silly because Madagascar would have all of these different size tariffs for different industries. Like we saw in Canada for example where it was like poultry was up to 200% and then. But America just did a flat tariff rather than just having, having to match every single tariff from every single different

B (19:05)

industry, which makes sense. And also they put these tariffs on Canada because they didn't want Canada to be used as a back door and some free trade agreement they might have had with somebody like China. So they wanted to make sure that there is no back door. So I mean nobody's escaping these tariffs. There is no escape. I saw this morning that Trump is moving ahead with a plan to put 102% tariffs now on China. So they're already maxing them as fast as they can. The trade war is here. So instead of us fighting, right. And, and crying about it and whining about it, I think we had better get unified and win it. Why don't we just win it? Because here's the thing. Couple years of moderate amount of you're not being able to get your Velcro at 50 cents and you have to pay a dollar. Fine. Fine. If we cripple China's entire economic system and bring them down to their knees, you're going to find that the industries that end up having to spring out of the US again because they can't take advantage of the system going to bring in massively high paying jobs and people who are workers at those jobs can spread a lot of money around and people in the middle class going to get really rich. And that's the whole point is bring back the middle class.

A (20:23)

Even the reality based store might have to go American made now. You know, because you know the tariffs, yeah even the reality based we can't

B (20:32)

escape these damn tariffs. Right?

A (20:34)

That's the big story. That's the big story here is a reality based store. But you know, I would tell you what I find funny. A guy like Michael Moore, I think that he's so just, he's so such an embodiment of the sort of liberal change over the last 30, 40 years. Where they, where they went from, from, you know, being all about the working person and, you know, going to Flint, Michigan and looking at the tap water and, and going to all of these places and saying, look how the, the working man is getting ripped off. But then as soon as somebody's actually doing something about it, he's up in arms saying he's like he's a fascist or whatever.

B (21:09)

Well, Democrats have become elitists and the left has become elitist. They, they very snobbly believe that they're educated in science. They don't even know the scientific method. How many times have I shown that, by the way? Yeah, that the people who are trying to express to me what is and is not scientific don't even know the scientific method. They can't even tell you what the scientific method is. This very, very short process. They can't even explain it over and over and over again. What we, what we find now with the left is that they're social elites. They believe that they're in a different class than the conservative right. They think, wrongly, by the way, that due to degree and pedigree, that they're in a class above. And because of that, they have like this idea that they can basically socially engineer society and that they're the ones to do it because they're in the upper class. And you peasants, you blue collar worker, peasant lunatics who work on their electrical boxes and oftentimes make more money than the day trader does. And you know, you're, you're out there working on welding and you're working on oil rigs and you're working on, in steel mills and you're working all over doing jobs like this. They think that you're stupid. They think you're an idiot and that you need to be socially engineered into the new, forever tomorrow, the transhumanist future, whatever it is that they want. And so they become class elites. Michael Moore is a great representation of somebody who became a class elite. Used to be a guy who really seemed to care a lot about blue collar, the blue collar worker. And now they care about what does the science say? What do the sociologists say? What? You know, they think that they have a methodology for figuring this stuff out. And they don't. They don't. And they're not that smart. That's the funniest part, right? Is most of these social. How many times have I exposed this? You do a debate within 15 minutes. You realize that the Other guy who has this kind of posh, pedigreed nature to him. Within 15 minutes you find out he's a complete fucking idiot. His worldview makes no sense. Takes. It takes a few minutes. Takes a few minutes and it's like. But they have become. They think that they're part of the social elite and they have completely disconnected from what's going on with the mainstream. They. They've disconnected with what's going on in the male woman dynamic and dating and marriage, family.

A (23:32)

Oh, yeah.

B (23:32)

What it is that people care about. They've disconnected from the idea that people still, still actually do have faith in God, that Christianity is still a thing which has to be contended with. They've just completely disconnected from the reality of the situation and become a bunch of social elites who think they're really high IQ and need to socially engineer society and they're terrible at it.

A (23:53)

So true. And you, you meet these people or you see them online and, and you just see it almost like, just permeating like out. Out of their body and, and into the screen. Like. Have you ever seen Malcolm Gladwell and, and any of his debates?

B (24:05)

No.

A (24:06)

Oh, he's a shocker. I've got to send you some of his stuff. But he's this sort of New York Times columnist. You know, he writes a column for New York Times and he's written a few, a few books and everything. And he did this debate with Douglas Murray where. And Matt Taibbi, where the contempt that he had for these guys was just absolutely palpable the whole entire time. And he's this New York elitist. And it's just. Yeah, I'm beginning to think, like whenever I watch these debates and stuff, it just makes it more clear to me that, you know, the working person out in the countryside is actually the Ubermensch and the, the liberal elite, sort of like snooty. Snooty, like trust the sociologist. People are just like. There's. There's a sense of resentment there. I pick that up a lot.

B (24:51)

Well, it's dogma versus dogma, and that's what you're after. The elite class has its own. Its own form of dogma, which antithetical. They. They call it humanism. They call it all sorts of different things, but it is a dogma. And never forget that these are dogmatic people who believe dogmatically in things which are not scientific, like psychology, like sociology, like things like this. And they say, because you can implement the scientific method for some minor aspects of data gathering around these fields that, that then makes them science. It's like. No, no, it doesn't. It doesn't actually make them science. The data collection can be considered scientific, but it's the study of the mind. It's the study of behavior. It's the study of things which are not material things. And so, you know, like, they make these whole predictive models around human sociology that are wrong. And they do it all the time, terribly. They're terrible at it. In fact, psychologists haven't cured anybody of anything ever. They don't cure anybody because no disease to cure. It's not. It's not a disease. Right. Mental illness, not a disease. So ultimately, these people are governed and most of them are governed by sociology more than anything else are governed by sociology. They don't know anything about applied science at all. Nothing. They don't even know the scientific method. They don't know what a solenoid is. They don't know how to use a wrench. They don't know how to do anything. They've never done anything except read my studies on sociology and psychological, you know, sociological and psychological papers. That's it. That's all that they do. And then economists, same thing. Soft science. Oh, we can make predictive models on this. And they're wrong. They're constantly wrong. It's just like they're so dumb. In the main street, though, the people have to deal with the effects of their policies. Are pissed. We've had enough. We're like you. You people suck and you're stupid. And more and more guys like me are. Are taking them to task. We're debating them live. We're literally dragging them out in front of the masses and just tarring and feathering them and making them look exactly like what they are. A bunch of pseudo intellectual, midwit, elitist idiots who don't know what the. They're talking about. They need to get dragged. They need to get dragged more.

A (27:00)

Dude. Yeah. I could sit here and on these people all day. That would be fun. Yeah. Last thing I wanted to speak about with the. And like, maybe not, but we'll see where it goes. But tell you what, I think the best example of this is, or the most egregious example of this is the way that the. That farmers get targeted around the world these days. And it's like when you look at farming, anybody who knows anything about farming will know that oftentimes the knowledge that's acquired from farming is actually generational. Like your, your grandfather and then your father and then you, you've learned exactly how to tend this land. And it's not an easy thing to do. But these, like, liberal elitists will come in with their climate change policies and they'll say, you know what, your cow farts are actually making the sun more hot. And, you know, you have to stop using methane emissions. Exactly right. And you have to. You have to stop using these certain fertilizers. And these certain fertilizers are the things. Are the things that actually allow us to feed the population of our entire world. And when you look into the science of the fertilizers that they use and how that's actually impacted the way in which we do farming and just how difficult it is and how small the margins are that these farmers are working with, to have these. These sort of impositions put on them by the government is actually crippling for them. And oftentimes they can't keep their land and they can't keep farming. So I think that's the worst example of it. But there's two camps that you can be in there. It's, the first camp is that they want you to eat the bugs. And then the second camp is that these people are actually just retards who think that they can have these solutions for farming because they've read a few papers and they actually have no idea in the practical world how farming really works. And they don't know what they're doing.

B (28:35)

You ever heard of the bucket of bolts analogy?

A (28:38)

No.

B (28:39)

So every man in his garage, he has a bucket of bolts, and they're all misshapen, right? Well, not misshapen, but of various sizes, right? And all the little nuts that go on them and little washers, they're all of different sizes. And when you need a bolt that day for whatever it is that you're trying to find it for, you for sure not going to be able to find it. You're going to have every size inside of this bucket than the size that you need. But when you do find the right one, it's the Eureka moment. You have found Excalibur, right? You think to yourself, and every man does this who has a garage, has ever worked with his hands. You think to yourself, that's exactly why I keep that bucket of bolts there for the. And you'll even say it out loud as an affirmation. That's exactly why I keep that bucket of bolts here, just in case something like this happens. And I need a bolt and I need, you know, the right size nut. I have all of them right Here and I can dig and I can find it and this and that. The farmer is a little bit different. The farmer has 20 buckets of bolts and he, the farmer is the only man on planet Earth who will actually use every single bolt inside of those buckets. They're always doing more with less. Well, you have here in Michigan, for instance, bicentennial farms. You have these all over the United States, by the way. That means cross generational farms been in the same hands for multiple multitudes of generations for well over a hundred years. These guys, they know every part of their land. They actually have diaries from their grandparents which show them where they're supposed to farm, where they're supposed to plant, why they're supposed to plant, which crops work the, the best, what the PH balance needs to be. I mean, down to every last nook and cranny of their land, they know it. They know where the ducks are going to go. They know where the chickens are going to be. They know which are the deer runs for hunting. They know everything, right? But they also know how to keep costs down because you only get to bring in the harvest a couple of times a year, right? So you get these two fat paydays and in the interim time, guess what you're doing. You're making sure that your equipment can work with less and less and less seemingly every year available to you. And these guys go through every single bolt in their bucket because they need them. The farmer is a welder. A farmer is a scientist. A farmer is a chemist. A farmer is a person who has to know many, many, many trades. In fact, if you want to see the best handyman in the world, you find a farmer. They know how to do all of it because by necessity.

A (31:15)

Yeah, it's so true, man.

B (31:16)

They're referenced as being like, oh, the dumb peasant farmer. It's like, no, those, those guys are real smart and they know how to do an awful lot of. You can't even imagine. Can't even imagine.

A (31:27)

Yeah, and just put it this way, right? Like you take in America, you take a thousand farmers and a thousand people who are full time farmers. That's their job. That's what they do. They've been doing this for generations. And then you take a thousand people who are sort of like bureaucrats on the UN on the UN Council or sort of New New York Times columnists, you take a thousand farmers and you get rid of them or you make them, you know, change their occupation and you get a thousand of those guys. You feel the effects of the farmers but with the bureaucrats and the columnists, like, we just. We would never notice that they're gone, so.

B (32:01)

And the Supreme Court, by the way, upheld the thousands upon thousands of temporary federal workers being fired by the Trump administration. And there isn't a damn thing the left can do about it. Except cry, right? Yeah, except cry. Because he's going through and gutting exactly as he promised he was going to do. He's gutting all of these organizations from top to bottom. He's going to continue to gut him, and he's going to continue and continue and continue to gut him to the cheers of Main Street. Who wants to see him gutted? Who? We. Nobody hates bureaucrats more than the working class. We just hate them. We hate them in all aspects of our life. We hate them at the dmv, Right. We hate them at the Social Security office. We hate them everywhere we experience them. Because they suck. They suck. And they get paid way too much money for way too little work.

A (32:50)

Yeah, completely agree. All right, next story. The thing that. One of the things I love about this show, Andrew, is that I can ask your take on these situations in public instead of on the phone. And I've been wondering about what you'd think about this story ever since it came out. So you've got UFC legend Kane Velasquez sentenced to five years in prison for attempted shmurda. So he was sentenced to five years in prison, as it says in this article, because basically what he did was he had his son in daycare, right? And then the daycare worker that was meant to be looking after his son basically fiddled him, fiddled the kid, right? And then Cain Velasquez. You know, if you're going to fiddle someone's kid, probably not Cain Velasquez, but Cain Velasquez sees this guy and he chases him down with a handgun and fires some shots, and he hit the guy who was actually like, driving the pedo around. And apparently that there was, like, a school nearby. So there's a few different aspects to this that I want to get your take on. First of all, is it, can there ever be any sort of leeway given in the justice system to people who do this? But they're actually. But it's to a pedo, you know, but he's trying to get a better but. And then the second one is, is there ever a point where as a father and as a protector and all these sorts of things, your sort of inhibitions go out the window in a way, and that you. You go into just do whatever you can mode without fearing the consequences. So we'll start off with those two. Is there any leeway that you can ever give to these? And is there ever that situation?

B (34:29)

Well, let me answer as though I was a juror and I was trying to sway a jury. Let's say I was a jury foreman and I just heard all the evidence, and it turns out that Mr. Vesquez, the evidence is overwhelming. He even basically admitted to the crime in court. I might tell a jury that I still don't find the evidence particularly compelling. And since I don't find the evidence particularly compelling, I could not in good conscience deliver back a guilty verdict. And neither could you. After all, you know, there's all sorts of. I'm sure I would find all sorts of holes in the story.

A (35:08)

Right.

B (35:09)

And I just could not in good conscience deliver a guilty verdict. You know, now I might even think he's guilty, but I need to be a hundred percent sure, because I'm just not willing to send a man who potentially might not be guilty of a crime off to prison. That would be an awful thing to do. That might be how I would view it if I was on a jury.

A (35:31)

Yeah. Have you ever seen 12 Angry Men?

B (35:34)

No.

A (35:35)

It's like a. It's an old sort of. It's an old picture about a courtroom, and then the 12 men go into the back and they're the jurors, and they have to decide. And it's basically just the process that they go to. To arrive at a verdict. But then there's that one stubborn guy who won't. Won't budge because he just thinks that the person's innocent. And all the other guys, like, oh, quickly, it's lunch break. Let's get out of here. Let's just say he's guilty. But then the one. All you need is one brave man. So it sounds like you'd be that one brave man in this situation.

B (36:02)

You ever heard of a term called jury nullification?

A (36:05)

Yeah.

B (36:06)

Yeah. If people knew more about jury nullification, they would know that while it. That jurors can actually deliver guilty and innocent verdicts. Right. That's what they do. You're the one who gets to decide the innocence and guilt. The judge can only advise as to what you're supposed to do. You're supposed to find them guilty or innocent based on this evidence or whatever, but it's actually up to you. You can nullify the very law itself if you want to. As a juror, you can say no. I just don't find it compelling and give an innocent verdict and let people walk away, even for crimes which they have obviously committed? Would I recommend that people do that? Yes. I think that that's what the process is there for. And also, I think. I think in extenuating circumstances, it might be good for you to say something like, I just don't find the evidence compelling enough.

A (37:02)

Yeah, fair. And then the next. The next angle is, you know, as a father and a protector, is, is there ever this situation where you have to just go into this sort of mode without worrying about the consequences for yourself, or do you always have to have that. That temperance and worry about the cons?

B (37:17)

I think you do. I think that you need. You do have social obligations where you can't rush yourself to judgment and engage in vigilantism and various things like this. I think that that's, generally speaking, a bad idea for society, that we have the rule of law and that the rule of law should be followed. Right. But occasionally there are crimes which are so egregious towards the innocent that you can understand how a person might temporarily lose their faculties and not be responsible for their actions. One such example that I could think of off top of my head would be if somebody had diddled one of my children. I could see how I might temporarily not be Andrew Wilson anymore, but might be the Grim Reaper himself. So. Because I can. So, because I can envision that for myself, and you can likely envision that for yourself. Just imagine in your case, I know you don't have children, but when your brother was. Your brother's younger than you. Right. If he. He was in the position where that was happening to him, you also would. Would be extremely. I'm. I'm sure, volatile towards that situation. You could lose your faculties, and I would just be very understanding about that is all.

A (38:31)

Yeah. And then the third angle with this, which is. I think the most interesting thing to speak about is just daycare itself, because how many times have you heard story. Like, I heard this story the other day. It was on this YouTube channel, and it was like the darkest YouTube channel channels, one of those really creepy, creepy videos that they do, and it was saying that there was this transgender. This guy who thought he was a woman and he was a transgender, and he opened up a daycare center. He obviously had this mental health problem. Then he opened up a daycare center, and then him and his weirdo boyfriend who acted like he had a girlfriend, they got. They got arrested for diddling, like, 80 kids in this place. And I'm like, first of all, the negligence of the parents who would drop their kids off there is just. Should be almost criminal. But like, what the hell did you think was going to happen? And how common is this for these daycare centers? And like, is it even, like, should you ever leave your kids at daycare centers? That's what sort of begs the question for me.

B (39:27)

I mean, generally it should be avoided. The truth is, is that predators go where there's children. It doesn't matter if that's in a church function, it doesn't matter if that's in daycare, public school, they're going to go where there's children. That's where predators go. And so since we know that that's the case. Right, because they need one thing, access, and they have one barrier in front of them. You. And so all you have to do is think about how would a predator remove the barrier, me from the access to child. Right. Well, daycare is the perfect front for that, isn't it? Completely removes access from parents. Right. And gives complete access to the predator. So should you be leaving your children at daycare generally? No. No, you shouldn't. Now do I understand that there's not a lot that a lot of people can do about that? Yeah, all you can do is vet the daycare, vet what's going on, you know what I mean? Try to use sound judgment. But generally speaking, it's a really terrible idea to not have mommy at home raising your children. It's a terrible idea if you have to make every sacrifice possible, including no vacations, you know what I mean? And less and less for yourself so that you have more and more for your children's upbringing, which requires moms stay at home with kids. You should probably do that because ultimately you set your kids up to be victimized. And the amount of victimization that's going on, it's not talked about nearly enough. The truth is, is that it's a chronic issue in these areas and. And it's not going away.

A (40:59)

Yeah. One of the things I think about a lot when I think about having kids is that I want to be right near my mum because my mum would just like love to look after them whenever possible, if ever. Like, you know, my wife needed a break or something or just anything like that. And I just don't really feel like we have the same sort of family structures in place in, in, in the west, where you've got the grandparents nearby if you ever need help looking after the kids. It's like we're so much more fragmented so do you think that that's another thing? And like in other countries, like Israel, for example, they have that, and they've got that in the Arab countries where you don't trust. It takes a village.

B (41:35)

A lot of times you don't trust your parents, like millennial. A lot of times the zoomers, like, zoomers who are going to be in the child rearing, you know, they already are. They're already in the time to have children generation. Right. I don't think they're going to trust their millennial parents. Right. I don't think they trust them. A lot of times they have very contentious relationships. They don't like them. Same thing happened with millennials and boomers. They don't even trust their own parents. They think their parents are stupid. Right, that's. And, and sometimes they're right about that. But not only that, generally speaking, it's a, it's become a very, very selfish dynamic where, you know, I don't want to be burdened with grandkids, I don't want to be burdened with kids. They consider it a burden. And you can't get the type of cross generational health that you used to have in the past. You know what I mean? It just doesn't exist. Families are too fragmented now. The idea of having families stay in one spot, in one geographical location is becoming more and more and more difficult.

A (42:37)

Dude, my mom couldn't be more hyped about the thought of, like, you know, her having grandkids. So that's kind of sad when I think about it, you know, to have families that aren't, like, excited to see, you know, the next generation of their, of their bloodline coming through.

B (42:52)

Yeah, but you, you, you probably had like, you know, a good relationship with your mom and she probably genuinely loved you and she was probably very nurturing. And I, I can tell that probably all of that is true, considering that you're not a completely deranged psychopath and seem to be fairly sure of yourself. Right. So, you know, that speaks a bit to upbringing. So of course you're like, if I, if my kids are going to have that same type of experience, that's going to be a good experience for them. Right?

A (43:21)

Yeah.

B (43:21)

Not everybody has that, man. Half the time, half the time I talk to people, they're all up because their parents sucked.

A (43:28)

Yeah. I don't know. I mean, like, you know, you've met my brother and everything and just know that, like, I couldn't be closer with anybody than my family. And.

B (43:37)

Yeah.

A (43:37)

I mean, if I Find that. I find that it's like something that I'm used to though, you know, my dad was the same. But like just being close to your family is so important because you know, at the end of the day you can make friends and everything and you can have pals and you can have work colleagues and everything, but it's not the same. None of them, none of them are going to be there in your darkest hour, you know. So anyways, speaking of things that are a little bit greater than self, there's a bit of a trend that's been going on recently that I would like to share with you. I'm sure that you're well aware of this, but just as one example, we've got Joe Rogan here saying that he's fascinated by the deep dive into the Shroud of Turin. And that was, I can't remember that guy's name, that old professor guy who was really good during COVID but can't remember his name. But he did this sort of deep dive into the Shroud. Now I find this interesting, promising guy like Joe Rogan. He seems like an open minded fella, very much into the like inter conspiracies and all these sorts of crazy things and probably looks at the Shroud of Turin as this like, sort of like wicked cool mushrooms sort of thing that he can look at. But you know, you do have pretty high level converts as well over the past few years. You got like people like Russell Brand etc. And do you think that there is like a trend where we're going to be seeing these former atheists like Ion Hershey Ali is another one who's like pretty based now, just, she just says it how it is and she was like a, one of the, you know, main figures of the new atheist movement. So do you see this cultural shift happening or do you sort of take it with a pinch of salt?

B (45:14)

No, it'll happen. The problem is, is it. It already is happening and there's a lot of perversion that comes with it. So the idea you got to think in terms of power in terms of power instead of in terms of faith. I know that that seems counterintuitive, but churches collectively have a lot of power. They have a lot of power over the parish, they have a lot of power over the community, they have a lot of power. And when that sort of power is there, which can challenge the establishment of institutional power from elitist intellectuals, what do you think they do? Well, they go to go, they go to war with the church. That's what they do. When they find out that they can't beat them, they join them. But they don't join them by sitting in the pews quietly and learning. Right. They join them instead by trying to offer their own form of power brokerage or alternative. Right. Either spiritualism is one aspect of it. Another one is just slowly, through money and time, perverting the religion itself so that you have female pastors and female priests and new dogmas and new doctrines and things like this to muddy the water, and they kind of institutionally corrupt it, but as long as they see it as a power base, yeah, they're going to try to pervert it by any means possible.

A (46:33)

So when you talk about perversion, when you're looking at the. Because, you know, I've known people in my life and I've been like, when I first sort of started really exploring Christianity, I went to a hillsong church which was.

B (46:45)

Oh, God.

A (46:46)

I didn't really. Yeah, I didn't really know any better. I was thinking, oh, this is. This is how people do it. I was. I was. I was, you know, raised in a Catholic school, and I remember going to the. To the Catholic mass and everything, but I was like, oh, cool. Like, this is. Must be how Christians are doing it these days. They've got the skinny jeans and the bands playing, like, Love My Boyfriend Jesus songs and stuff, and I like. But for me, though, it was deeply uncomfortable. Like, I couldn't quite put my finger on why. I was just thinking, you know, maybe I've just got to get used to this. But when you've got all of the men there near you who are like, hands up in the air and sort of like. Like humping the air, I guess, and almost in tears and, oh, my loud Jesus. I found it very weird. And I was like. At times I was like, should. I, like, should I don't do it. But yeah, yeah. And I just stopped going because I could. I just couldn't handle it. And I was thinking, okay, I'm just going to sort of explore this in my own time. And. And this thing, whatever is happening here feels really uncomfortable for me. And then looking into Orthodoxy, when I went to. When you took me to the Divine Liturgy, for example, I was thinking, this makes so much more sense. This is serious. And I feel like I'm in the presence of holy people right now when I'm looking at these. These priests and stuff.

B (48:05)

You mean you're supposed to take your religion seriously? You're supposed to show up in a serious way and you're supposed to show God, that you were serious about your faith and things that you're adamant about and it's not about having fun songs and dances, and that's not what it's about, has nothing to do with that. Yeah, it makes. It makes a lot more sense. But that's why those religions tend to stay on the more masculine side, because it's a serious endeavor. The Protestants stay on the feminine side. Right. That's why there's far more women who are in Protestantism than men. And it's all about that. It's all about events and baking cookies and accepting and, you know, all this has nothing to do with what the message of Christianity is. Nothing at all to do with it. Right. But it's becoming more and more and more perverse because it is a power structure. That's why you see gay priests and gay. You know what I mean? Even though they're not real priests, Catholics don't commission that stuff. Or, you see, you know, female priests. Again, Catholics don't commission that kind of stuff either. But you can just make a church out of whatever you want. In Protestantism, nobody can do anything about it. And what you're. What these. What they're trying to do is they're trying to tap into the. Well, this doesn't really work for you because it has all sorts of rules that you don't like, Right. And so you're disenfranchised. So we'll make a new church which is based around whatever this disenfranchised group is, Right. And then we'll cater to whatever their needs is by bastardizing the Gospel. And that's what happens over and over and over again. But those people do become. They can. They can begin to entrench themselves with community power, community authority. And it happens time and time again. So the perversion of the church is the number one goal because it becomes a power base. Remember, it's about. It's the idea of power is something which Christians miss all the time. If we don't have it, somebody else has it over us.

A (50:02)

Yeah. Yeah. 100. So when you're looking at these converts, and I know that you've had some stuff to say about Russell Brand on Twitter, like. Like baptizing people. I don't really know what's going on there, to be honest. I don't know what he's doing. I don't know what denomination he's following. He's following. So, I mean, so you. When you see that, you think that that is a negative thing. When you have. When you have him doing things like that with and the masses.

B (50:28)

Well, first of all, Russ, Russell Brand's big conversion to Christianity is happening for the same reason. So many prostitutes are doing it. Not because of this great and glorious faith that they have in God and some, you know, like revelation that they had, but rather because they think it buys them a new reputation. And Russell Brand desperately needed a new reputation. He tried to buy it through conversion. You see this with a lot of reform prostitutes and things like this. They want to have a reformed reputation rather than having a reformed spirit. So that's why a lot of them gravitate towards it. And it's no different with him.

A (51:09)

Yeah, but you can see though how the new age would, would lead you there. And like I've seen a lot of people like even like one of the most interesting ones I, I listened to is David Patrick Harry, who I know is a friend of yours. And he obviously didn't need a new reputation because he's got a good reputation as it is. But it's really interesting when you see people go from that new age and filling that sort of void within themselves that is just me, me, me, self love, self love, Kundalini, yoga and all this sort of crap. I see it absolutely everywhere where I'm living in Bali and then eventually realizing how vacuous that is. Almost like a, like a Hollywood celebrity who's just been had that like smoke blown up their ass their entire life.

B (51:47)

Well, David Patrick Harry is an example of a. Rather than the alternative like Bran Dave Patrick Harry had a huge channel which was oriented around psychedelics and oriented around spiritualism and new age. And he was the perfect poster boy for that crowd. He's very good looking, very, you know, very buff guy has his together very well educated and a great orator. He gave all that up for the Church of the Eternal Logos. He said, no, I'm wrong, this is incorrect, this is wrong. And he gave up what would have likely amounted to a small fortune for him and he just walked away from it in order to promote the actual ideals of Jesus Christ and the church and gives lectures on it, often taking a loss financially to himself. I've always had great respect for the guy because that took a lot of balls to do. And he did. He got rid of the, the other channel. He got rid of all the new age. He said this is all nonsense. All the psychedelics are nonsense. I can't believe this, that I have the wool pulled over my eye. He's a great example for, for how real reform is supposed to Operate. He didn't do it for new reputation. In fact, it hurt his reputation more than it helped it. And he knew it and he didn't care.

A (53:12)

Yeah, yeah. It says he's a fascinating story because like the guy is like, his lectures are awesome. I listen to them all the time. I think he might be one of the most underrated channels out there because he just, he, he dives deep in this stuff and, and that I, I really like the pipeline from new age to Christianity and realizing that that sort of like self fulfilling void eventually just, you just realize that it's just garbage and it's just a path to misery. And. Yeah, no, I, I do like seeing those transitions, but I guess with, with Russell Brand, you, you see it as more of a buying a new reputation.

B (53:47)

Yeah. And I see no evidence to the contrary. And you can see that all of this transformation towards forgiveness and I'm sorry and this. And that came right around the time there was also accusations of sexual assault and other things that he wasn't supposed to be doing. It sure seems like he wanted to kind of rally a base to get behind him from the spiritual community. And you see this in Hollywood often. You know what I mean? This, this happens all the time. Time to buy a new reputation, convert over to Christianity, convert over to some spiritualism, convert. And what it does is it gives you a rallying base that'll support you out of their good nature because they think that now you're part of that in group when you're really not. You're a chameleon, you're a snake. And then you've worked your way in there in order to steal its credibility and steal yourself a new reputation.

A (54:39)

All right, Andrew, well, that's all we've got time for today. Good to speak to you as usual, man. Got some interesting stories in there today and any last parting words?

B (54:50)

Yeah, I have some parting words for you. Make sure you get over to the Crucible and you watch it and you send me all your money. Make sure that that's what you're doing. Because the grift must continue as we continuously eviscerate and destroy every leftist in our path, which I do with not nearly enough humility, but I do in the most entertaining fashion possible, which I think, I think I'm going to continue because I just love doing it. I just love. Don't. Okay, let me ask you this, Jake, right? If you had to choose between destroying a left wing ideology in the most entertaining way possible or destroying it in the least entertaining way possible, which would

A (55:34)

you choose most entertaining, most entered away?

B (55:38)

I mean, you have to, right? Like, those are the rules, aren't it? Yeah, I thought so. I thought so. Other than that, thanks for. Thank you, everybody, for coming in to the N1SB episode six. We're gonna get this back on track for regularity and hope to see you guys.