← Timcast IRL
Timcast IRL
Legacy Media In Full Freak Out Over Trump Putin Meeting, "Reached An Understanding" | Timcast IRL
02:02:41
SUPPORT THE SHOW BUY CAST BREW COFFEE NOW - https://castbrew.com/ Join - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCLwNTXWEjVd2qIHLcXxQWxA/join Hosts: Tim @Timcast (everywhere) Phil @PhilThatRemains (X) Carter @CarterBanks (X) Serge @SergeDotCom...
Loading summary
Transcript601 lines
- [00:01]
A
Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin met in Alaska for two and a half hours today to discuss an end to the Russia Ukraine war. Hillary Clinton says that if he's successful that she herself will nominate him for the Nobel Peace Prize. So I hope that he is and I hope that she actually has to go through with it because I imagine that would be really tough for her. D.C. attorney General is suing the Trump administration for what is looking like a very successful operation to help bring down crime in the D.C. area. So we'll talk about that. New York Times audio's coming through over there. Successful.
- [00:31]
B
Oh, what's up, everybody?
- [00:34]
A
New York Times opinion page still hates Donald or still hates America. They were talking about changing the or getting rid of the Senate, expanding the court, and all of the things that they would like to do to make sure that they get into power and stay in power basically forever. New Jersey is looking to charge parents for kids breaking the law. And the Marines are going to go to vac, go on vacation in Latin America. So we're going to talk about that. But first we want you guys to head on over to Cast Brew Coffee and buy yourself some, some coffee. Ian's Graphene Dream is still one of the top sellers. Appalachian Nights is available. We've got K cups, we've got, we've got Phil's Two Weeks Till Christmas, which is a gingerbread blend. It's really, really nice. So head on over to cast brew.com and get yourself some coffee. You'll love it, I promise. It's the coffee that I drink and I'm not just saying that I look like legit. I do. And then after that, head on over to Timcast.com and become a member so that way you can join the Discord and join us in the after show. Give us a call. You call in and talk to the panel, talk to the guest. Then when you do, after you do that, head on over to rumble.com and become a member there so you can watch the after show. You need to join Rumble to watch the after show and you need to join Tim Cast so you can call in if you go into the Discord. That's where obviously, like I said, that's where you join the Join the Discord so you can call in. But also there's a bunch of people in there. There's like 20,000, 25,000 members or something like that. A bunch of like minded individuals. There have been people that have gotten married because they met in the Discord. There's a bunch of podcasts that have Started because they met in the Discord and, and talked about things that they agreed on and, and got started there. So head on over to timcast.com become a member of our Discord. Head on over to rumble.com become a member so you can join the after show. But right now to talk about all of these things and so much more tonight we have Alex Lanes. Right?
- [02:23]
C
Yeah. All right, you got it.
- [02:25]
A
Who are you and what do you do?
- [02:27]
C
I am Alex Lanes. I am a part time commentator and hopefully soon to time musician. And for the past five years I've just been ranting on social media about everything from politics to culture, society, yada, yada yada and yeah, that's pretty much it.
- [02:47]
A
Are you a multi instrumentalist?
- [02:49]
C
Yeah, I play guitar and piano. I'm not the best at guitar though because I've got small hands. So it's. I, I'm not very skilled yet.
- [02:58]
A
That's all right. You know we, my band used to have a bass player that was a female about your size and she played a full size bass with little hands. So I believe.
- [03:05]
C
Okay, so it's possible.
- [03:06]
A
Absolutely possible. I have faith in you. Carter's here tonight.
- [03:09]
D
What's up? Yes, we have Alex Lanes here and very excited to be recording her tomorrow. We're going to do some music together. I'm the Tim cast music producer and Trash House records guy and so yeah, thanks for joining us tonight.
- [03:24]
B
I'm happy to be here too.
- [03:25]
A
Hi Carter. Everyone's happy that you're here.
- [03:27]
B
I'm happy too, Phil, thanks. Hi Alex, good to see you. And Sergio. So probably not going to say anything thing in. In this. Hi. Could you hear him laughing this beautiful.
- [03:34]
A
Look at this guy.
- [03:34]
E
I'll say what's up? How you doing guys? Good to see you again.
- [03:37]
B
Thanks for having me man.
- [03:38]
A
I appreciate that you're at least going to say hello to everyone. Serge, everyone loves you.
- [03:41]
B
Looking smooth.
- [03:42]
A
You're one of the most popular.
- [03:43]
D
You told me that his microphone only goes to our ears and not are.
- [03:46]
B
They gonna say his microphone only goes to 11 spinal taps coming out with a new movie. Let's get into the show.
- [03:51]
A
All right then. So the alt alternative press Associated Press is is reporting Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin meet for two and a half hours at Alaska summit to discuss possible end to Russia UK Ukraine War Joint Base Elmendorf Richardson Alaska President Donald Trump and Russia's Vladimir Putin met for about two and a half hours on Friday at a summit in Alaska that started with a handshake, a smile and a ride in the presidential limousine. It also had a, an overflight by a B2 bomber, two F35s and two F22. So that's, that's, that's something that they left out, and that's worth mentioning. An unusually warm reception for a US Adversary responsible for launching the greatest land war in Europe since 1945. They plan to hold a joint news conference after talk together with top advisors behind closed doors on efforts to end Russia's war in Ukraine. When they greeted, greeted each other, they gripped hands for an extended period of time on a red carpet rolled out at Joint Base Elmendorf Richardson in Anchorage. As they chatted, Putin grinned and pointed skyward where B2s and F22 military aircraft designed to oppose Russia during the Cold War flew overhead. Reporters nearby yelled, president Putin, will you stop killing civilians? That sounds like activists. Just want to point that out. And Russia's leader put his hands up to his ears as though to indicate he couldn't hear them. Trump and Putin then shared the US Presidential limit, known as the Beast, for a short ride to their meeting site, with Putin offering a broad smile as the vehicle rolled past the cameras. So we've got a possible scoop or not? Well, not scoop. We've got a possible. There's a possibility that Brett Baer or Sean Hannity will be talking to Donald Trump on Air Force One. And we'll get updates to you guys as soon as we get them. If they do, if they actually do do an interview on Air Force One, we'll cut to that for a few minutes. When it happens, probably around 9 o' clock because that's when, when Hannity shows run. But this, this isn't a historic meeting because it's the first time that Putin's ever been to Alaska. And it's, I think it's the first time that the U.S. has met with Putin in, I mean, since 10 years, at least 10 years, something like that. So rather earlier. So, yeah, so it's, it's possible that there will be some kind of peace development, but I don't think most people went in expecting an actual resolution. And I certainly don't think anyone expects Putin to withdraw from the areas that he's taken from Ukraine, and that includes the Donbass. There are people out there that think there's not going to be or there is no reason to have any kind of peace unless Putin promises to pull back, not just from the Donbass in the area, the areas that he's taken since 2022, but also if he has to leave the Crimea. The Crimea area and stuff, which I don't think that that's. I don't think that's even, even remotely possible. But I'm curious to know your thoughts.
- [06:43]
B
I'm very happy that this is happening. In general, I was kind of crying out for this a couple of weeks ago that we got to end this war somehow. And I think Putin's been pretty clear. Although the American media seems to have obfuscated his demands that he wants all the land east of the Donbass River. He's looking for a geographical border. It was probably the most stabilizing thing he can do. Because if you, you guys talked about this through the week. If you, if you draw arbitrary borders with just a straight line across a flat area, there's inevitably going to be conflict because it's an easy place to attack. When it's a river or a mountain, it's much easier just to. That's my border.
- [07:14]
A
I think that's dependent on the people involved.
- [07:17]
B
It is, too, because the northern US Borders with Canada. Yeah, I thought of that.
- [07:20]
A
That's exactly what I was going to say. I don't, I don't expect there to be a significant conflict between the United States and Canada.
- [07:24]
B
I don't expect it. But it's not along a geographical border.
- [07:27]
D
Neither one of us attacked the other one.
- [07:29]
B
Never has happened to this point.
- [07:31]
A
What are you talking about?
- [07:32]
B
The Canadians and the Americans never went to war.
- [07:35]
A
I guess it was technically the British, but there was fighting the War of 1812.
- [07:38]
B
It was for, you know, the jury's out on that border. But I thought about that, too, that, that arbitrary border between Canada and United States, like, it's not a defensible border. But anyway, the Donbass river is. So if Putin takes everything east of the Donbass, which they already have control of, and then they create a land bridge down into Crimea so that they have warm water, sea access, and they can improve their GDP by 30% because now they can trade into the Mediterranean. I think that's the whole purpose and the point. I'm all about it, man. I'm about just making an alliance.
- [08:07]
A
So is it your sense that it's just an economic place?
- [08:10]
B
100%. He's doing it for Russia's economics.
- [08:13]
A
That actually is contrary to what he said to Tucker Carlson, though.
- [08:16]
B
What do you say when he was.
- [08:17]
A
Talking to Tucker Carlson, he was bringing up the history of Ukraine and how to the Russians, Ukraine is part of Russia because. Oh, yeah. And Rus, I guess, were the, the original Russians, and they were from they were from Kiev and they went to Moscow and, and there's a long history between these two countries. Now, I'm not, not incredibly well read on the Russian, Ukrainian history, but I know Ukraine and Russia have got, you know, very, very deep history. Russia actually came from Ukraine. So it's my sense that, whereas I don't, I'm not disputing the argument you're economic benefit to him, but I do think that this is more than just an economic play.
- [08:58]
C
Yeah, I think this is a more surface level opinion, but it's just nice to see a president who's not a house plant basically get together with a world leader and assert dominance. I feel like if this was Biden meeting with Putin, he probably would have agreed with everything that Putin wanted in exchange for like an ice cream cone. So it's just nice to see Trump be able to come together. I think it's very monumental. So I'm, I'm curious to see what was decided.
- [09:30]
A
Yeah, we're gonna, we're gonna jump to this right here. This is Putin departs Alaska after historic summit. Right. What is it from earlier?
- [09:39]
E
No, this is just part of, I just want to say it's just part of the story. Like they've basically taken all of.
- [09:45]
D
Hold on.
- [09:45]
E
They've taken all the area they said they were going to take as far as, like they want that they wanted. People have argued because they have the lithium, the coal, the offshore gas, all that stuff. They've currently occupied the areas that are like rich in this rare mineral earth. And I just bring this up.
- [09:58]
A
Are these the, are these the areas that the United States was looking to make the deals with Ukraine about, like the rare earth minerals and stuff?
- [10:05]
E
Like what I understand this, this map right here, from what I understand this is what I saw as well earlier. This is from an article from Fox News from two days ago, I think. But this map right here also shows all the areas they've taken, including north here. But this being the men are the highly wealthy, like oil mineral rich areas. Mineral areas. I just want to bring that up.
- [10:25]
B
You got that map on, on screen. See that red, the red border along the left, I believe is the river. That's the Donbass River.
- [10:30]
A
Sure. All the way up. Yeah. I mean, look, that's.
- [10:33]
B
Stop it on a river. That's the way to do it.
- [10:34]
A
I mean, that's.
- [10:35]
B
Should have done that in 89 when they split it up. Sorry, Phil.
- [10:37]
A
Well, that, that's the, the point that we were making earlier. Like, I don't see Putin giving Any of this back.
- [10:41]
D
Right. Because I'm looking. It seems like Ukraine was actually part of Russia. I knew this. But yes, in 1991 was when they declared their independence after.
- [10:51]
A
Well, that was, that was the Soviet Union falling apart.
- [10:53]
B
And then the oligarchs came in and kind of split it apart as far as I can tell. I think they intentionally took that area away from the Russian part of the split up because they didn't want to give the hegemony to Russia. They didn't want it to just become another Soviet Union right away. So like too much economic power if we give them Mediterranean access.
- [11:09]
A
There is like, there is a distinction between Ukrainians and Russians. Right. The language is not the same. They're is an actual Ukrainian language. There's. They are different people. Russians think that the Ukrainians are, are Russian, whereas Ukrainians are more like weird Ukrainians. And so the Ukrainians feel like they would be subjugated. The Russians feel like they would be bringing the Ukrainians back into the Russian fold. I mean this is again, this is something that goes back hundreds of years. I don't know. I'm not, not at all claiming to be some kind of expert on this, but I know that it's a very, that it's a very deep history these two countries have. And all of the times that there's been invasions of Russia, the two major times, which would be Napoleon and Hitler, they went right through Ukraine.
- [11:58]
B
Yeah, we're talking before the show I was talking with about this and it was the Germans had three armies when they went east into Russia. The northern army, the center army and the south. The army south group had very little problem going through Ukraine. That was the easiest the Germans had was in the south because it's so flat, you know, in the north they're up there at least. It was very cold, very, very messed up in money.
- [12:18]
D
What time period? Because I mean they were like in the middle of a full out controlled famine by Stalin at the time. So they probably didn't have much trouble going through Ukraine like Holdemir.
- [12:28]
B
The Holodomir. Yeah, they starved out.
- [12:29]
A
I don't think the Holodomir was during World War II.
- [12:32]
D
No, it was like that five. Part of that five year plan of getting socialism into the countryside.
- [12:39]
A
But to your, but to the point of, of the Ukrainians feeling like there's a distinction between the Russians. Right. The Russians are like, well, they're part of Russia, but according to the Ukrainians, the, the Soviets, the Russians starved them. Right.
- [12:51]
D
I was thinking the part of Russia that they don't want that.
- [12:55]
A
No. Well, they.
- [12:55]
D
Good recent memory for Ukraine.
- [12:57]
A
Yeah, the Ukrainians don't want it at all. I mean there's, there's, there's a reason why there's so many Nazis in the Ukraine or in Ukraine is because according to Ukraine, the Nazis kicked the Russians out.
- [13:08]
B
Yeah, Soviets at the time.
- [13:09]
A
Soviets. Well, I think, yeah, I think they.
- [13:11]
B
Were, they might have been Soviet Russians.
- [13:12]
A
Now that's not, that's not really, that's not intended to be a defense of the, of the Nazis. But the reason that there are so many that they have a positive view of the Nazis as opposed to the Communists is because the communists did the holodomor. You know, they, they killed millions of, of Ukrainians and the, the Nazis kicked them out. And I don't know. Again, I don't, I'm not the most, I don't have the most deep knowledge of this, but the Nazis were actually less brutal to the.
- [13:41]
D
That's kind of what I have.
- [13:42]
A
The Russians were as well.
- [13:43]
D
But like, I only know as much as I've read. So.
- [13:46]
A
Yeah.
- [13:47]
B
So Soviet central planning was nasty. And you see it in China right now. It's disgusting. I mean, I don't, I don't like it. I don't think anybody in Russia wants. Well, I would imagine most sane critical thinkers don't want another instance of centralized planning because that's where the holder mirror comes from. When you have a central government that can decide that 80 people aren't going to get fed tonight, you got a real problem. Those 80,000 people should be governing themselves. I know you want to work together with your federal government and stuff, but local government. So, you know, I don't think those Russians, I don't think they want it. This is another. I'm done.
- [14:16]
D
No, it's a huge. And we could go down.
- [14:18]
B
Yeah, yeah, that's.
- [14:20]
A
Yeah. So let's, we're going to jump to this, actually. Let's see, where is it where Hillary Clinton decided. There we go. Hillary Clinton, the. From the post Millennial Hillary Clinton would nominate Trump for Nobel Peace Prize if he ends Ukraine Russia war without Ukraine having cede territory. If Donald Trump negotiates an end to Putin's war on Ukraine without Ukraine having to cede territory, I'll nominate him for a Nobel Peace Prize myself.
- [14:43]
C
He gets under her skin so bad.
- [14:46]
A
Oh, yeah.
- [14:47]
C
I mean he is in her head rent free.
- [14:51]
A
Yeah.
- [14:51]
C
247 all the time.
- [14:53]
B
Did they know each other back in the, back in the day?
- [14:55]
A
Oh, yeah, like, well, they knew each other well, she went to his wedding. Really? Oh, yeah.
- [15:00]
C
I didn't know that.
- [15:01]
A
Yeah, they were friendly because Donald Trump, before Donald Trump got into politics, Donald Trump would donate money to everybody because he wanted to be friends with everybody, and he also wanted to be able to get in touch with everyone.
- [15:12]
C
Loved him back then.
- [15:13]
A
Yeah, everyone did. And so he would just say, like, he went to. He invited the Clintons to him and Melania's wedding. And Hillary Clinton said, oh, yeah, of course we went. He's a. He's a ton of fun. Everybody that meets Donald Trump and talks to him, unless they go in intending to hate him, and they're rude and they are, you know, looking to start a fight with him, everybody comes away and they're just like, all right, the guy's nice. He's great, he's funny. You know, he's just.
- [15:40]
D
Bill Mar said. I think he went into his meeting thinking he was going to hate him, too.
- [15:43]
A
He's. He's a charismatic guy. Look, and for the most part, to be honest with you, when you meet people that are that well known in politics and that well known, just overall, they do have a really amazing amount of charisma. I remember when I met. What's his name, the guy that runs the Blaze?
- [16:02]
B
Glenn Beck.
- [16:02]
A
Glenn Beck. I met Glenn Beck and I was like, okay, I understand why this dude is like the. The big guy at. What's it called. He's just very charismatic. When he talks to you, you feel like he's gonna remember you next time. You're the only person. And you hear people talk about Bill Clinton like that all the time when they would meet Bill Clinton, Obama. Yeah. When. When you meet these guys, they have the ability to make you feel like you're the only person in the room and to remember small things about you if you've met them, if they've met you twice. That's something that politicians in Western countries particularly have. That's part of why they end up in positions of. Of, you know, high positions in. In government. And it's. It'll be the same thing with people that are, you know, senators a lot of time. You probably don't see it as much with all Congress people because there's so many Congress people. But, you know, real that we were talking last night about the people in Texas and whether or not the Democrats that are looking to make hay about what's going on in Texas, if they can get arrested, like, are they going to be able to actually capitalize on that? And do they have the political talent to really make something of it. Because of course they want to get arrested. Of course they want to get picked up and get on, you know, make social media posts about it, get on TV and stuff. But only certain people, the really politically talented, could take that opportunity and turn it into something that gets them not only, or gets them from not only being a state representative, but gets them onto the national stage and gives them influence nationally. And it's not easy to like, you can't fake.
- [17:35]
D
If you don't do it the right way, you could just get arrested and that could be the end of your career.
- [17:39]
A
Well, I mean, you got a mugshot.
- [17:40]
D
Now, you have a record and you're not going anywhere.
- [17:42]
A
Yeah. I mean, even if it's not the end of the career, it's like you won't be able to capitalize on it. It's really being able to take the attention that you're getting from that and turn it into something tangible. And that's, that's the really politically talented people can do. And, and you know, that's why someone like Donald Trump, I mean, he was a massive star beforehand, but the reason he was a massive star is because he's got that very deep political talent that's really, you know, it's part of his personality. He's got the ability to just charm people's pants off. So that's why Hillary Clinton wanted to go to his, his, his, his wedding. But anyways, from the post Millennial. In a podcast appearance on Friday, Hillary Clinton said that President Donald Trump for a Nobel Peace Prize. If he brings an end to the war between Russia and Ukraine without Ukraine having to cede any territory to its eastern neighbor. Clinton told the raging moderate podcast. I understand from everything I've read, he very much would like to receive the Nobel Peace Prize, honestly, if he could bring about the end to this terrible war where Putin is the aggressor invading a neighbor country, trying to change the borders, if he could end it without putting Ukraine in a position where it had to concede its territory to the aggressor, had to in a way validate Putin's version of Greater Russia, but instead could really stand up to Putin, something we haven't seen. But maybe this is the opportunity to make it clear that there must be a ceasefire, there will be no exchange of territory, and that over a period of time, Putin should actually withdraw from the territory he seized in order to demonstrate his good faith efforts, let us say, not to threaten European security. If we could pull that off. If President Trump were the Architect of that, I'd nominate him for a Nobel Peace Prize. Now I think that she's alluding to also Crimea. I don't imagine that she would, I can't imagine her actually nominating him. I would love.
- [19:27]
C
Just wants to see him fail.
- [19:29]
A
Yeah, yeah. I mean you were saying she, she's got it in for him and look, she thought that she was going to walk into the office of the President without a problem. She thought up till probably 10pm on November 6, 2016 she thought that was going to happen. So when it turns out that it wasn't, I, I can understand where her deep, deep hatred of the man comes from. But that doesn't change the fact that she really hates him and she doesn't want to see anything good happen for him. So I would, I, I would love to see her have to make this like, you know, throw his name into the, into the hat.
- [20:06]
D
Haven't they already seated land though?
- [20:08]
A
Yeah, well, the crime in Crimea. Yeah, they see the Crimea.
- [20:11]
D
I just feel like it's a non starter though.
- [20:13]
A
Like of course that's why she's saying it. She doesn't want to do it.
- [20:16]
B
Right, yeah, it's a zero percent chance of happening. Well, it's never zero. You know, there's always a chance that alien monkeys are going to fall down out of the sky. But they already own the territory. I mean they de facto control it. Own it, whatever you want to call it, they control it. Asking them to leave their own territory. I mean once you control land and it's yours, it's yours. Someone asking really wants him to kill peace deal, like why would I leave my land? It's mine.
- [20:41]
A
And not only that, like it's really, it's Russian speakers in Crimea now. Like the, one of the things that, the arguments that Putin made about when he moved into Crimea was like, look, these are Russian people. These are Russians, they speak Russian. They're Russian people. They've actually had votes. Now some people, the, the argument that the people in like NATO and in Europe say is like, they're like, well, you know, Putin actually started moving Russian speakers in there and, and put the people in there so that, and, and, and skewed the votes so that way he could, he could justify taking it. Now I don't know the truth of that. I don't know if, if it was actually something that Putin planned. You heard stories, I don't know if you remember, but back in, in 2013 or 14, you heard little, little green men was a phrase that you heard a lot There were dudes that were in military guard, but they didn't have any, any identifying patches, they had no insignia. They were basically paramilitaries carrying out paramilitary operations, but they weren't aligned with anyone. So there was rumors of Russia planning this, and so it could be that was the case, but it doesn't change the fact that, but it's been part of Russia now for over a decade. And I think that when the US went to Crimea for the, or actually when the whole world went to Crimea for the Olympics, I think that kind of sealed the deal. If they, if the, if the international community really didn't want to acknowledge that Crimea was part of Russia, they would have stayed away from the, the Olympics. They'd have all boycotted and said, we're not going. You stole this, this, this, this land from the Ukraine. So we're not going to, to validate it by going to the Olympics. But that ship has sailed, right? Like the US and every, all of the, the Internet, you know, the whole international community went to Crimea. They held the Olympics there, they validated it. So I, I can't imagine any way that anyone could possibly think Crimea would be going back to Russia. And I don't think that, that Russia is going to give up the Donbass either.
- [22:35]
E
No, I think they're trying to do this just to like tarnish the record that Donald has so far. Like, they're just trying to make it so that all the victories he's had recently are just gonna seem like nothing. Why? Because, oh well, he was unable to save Ukraine. He wasn't unable to get the land back to Ukraine. So they can say, okay, well, he didn't end the war in Congo, he didn't end the war between Thailand and Cambodia. He had nothing. It's like all. They're just trying to use it to besmirch his name. Of course they're gonna set this crazy goal pie in the sky that no one can reach.
- [22:59]
A
Yep.
- [23:00]
D
He wants, classic.
- [23:01]
B
I looked up, I was like, what are Putin's demands? Because I asked this question a couple weeks ago and no one really knew. I think that's by design from our media. Cuz they're not that extreme. His demands. There's like he has six. Two of them in particular are that he wants the land obviously east of the Donbass and the Crimea and the freeways, but he wants guarantee on paper that they're not going to put Ukraine in NATO and Ukraine's not going to seek NATO. They want Ukraine to be a neutral territory. It's neither controlled by the right or the left, you know, whatever you want to call it, the east or the West.
- [23:32]
A
Do you believe that, though? Because the counter argument to that is if Putin takes the, or if Putin is allowed to stay in the Donbass and, and the Russians take that, that land, then it's a, it becomes a staging area for Putin to actually build up troops, have, build military bases and then later on take more of Ukraine. Because there are the argument that, that people that are very anti Russia have is they're saying, look, he's going to eventually take all of Ukraine. He may not take it all right away. He probably thought he could. But if he could have taken Ukraine when he first invaded, taken, gone all the way to Kiev and taken the whole country, he would have. Now there are people that will make the argument, oh, and then he's going to go for Poland, then he's going to go for NATO. I don't believe that at all.
- [24:17]
C
Yeah, I don't think he's going to.
- [24:18]
A
I don't think that he wants that smoke. Honestly, I don't think that he wants to go after Poland. There could be an argument that he wants to take or there is an argument that he wants to take back the former Soviet states.
- [24:29]
D
Yeah, I think that's kind of what like, like you were saying with this Tucker interview way back. He just, I think it seemed like he came away wanting to just have what he originally had back in the day.
- [24:40]
A
But remember, some of those states are now part of NATO.
- [24:43]
D
Yeah.
- [24:43]
A
So I don't think that he's willing to take on NATO, especially seeing how badly, honestly, I mean, all things considered, how badly he's performed in Ukraine. Ukraine is not a heavily armed country. It took a lot of the, of NATO sending weapons and, and military assets and money to Ukraine for them to stop him. And I think that people expected more out of, or people anticipated more out of Russia's military capability. Now he could activate more troops. And I don't think that, that it's, it's something that or it's a situation where Russia is totally, you know, a paper tiger. But if you look at the, the situation, Russia's not going to take on NATO. Russia doesn't want to fight the United States. You know, the, the only thing Russia has is nuclear weapons. Right. They do have nukes. But when it comes to conventional war, they don't want to fight the US because the US Would stop a mud hole in them.
- [25:44]
C
Well, not after that introduction into the meeting in that, that meeting that they had.
- [25:50]
A
Well, I mean, you know, like look, the United States, if they wanted to, it's likely they could fly B2 bombers right over Moscow and they would never know. Right. It's likely that, that Moscow would have no way to stop them. You know, it's something, it's not something I want to test. No, we don't want that. We don't. I don't want to test it. But the idea that Russia is going to take on NATO so that way they can get Poland, I think that's far fetched and I think that that's just an argument to get people afraid. But it is likely that they would use the Donbass as a staging area to take more of Ukraine in five, 10 years.
- [26:31]
B
Well, that, that likely. I don't know. Potentially, yes. For sure. It'd be like if you have a neighbor and you're like, well why would I improve my neighbor's quality of life? It's just going to make him more able to destroy me later. You're like, well my neighbor's not going to destroy me. So maybe if you.
- [26:46]
D
Unless he owned your house.
- [26:47]
B
What's that?
- [26:47]
D
Unless he wants. Owned your house.
- [26:49]
B
Unless he wants my territory east of my river and then control into the Donbass. So it's really a state of mind. Do you trust it or not? Are you willing to empower your neighbor with the threat, the potential threat that they're gonna use that power to destroy you later? I don't know. This is the human conundrum through all space time and that's we have civil society where you empower your neighbor and then we have military society where you make sure that you're the strongest of all. Whether that means you gotta knock them down a peg or lift yourself up, it's irrelevant. In the military, almost not totally, but, but you know, you still have, you still gotta be careful about doing excess damage anyway. Civil society trust. If we really want to make peace, then we're going to have to trust. Because I mean I'm also like a common sense, there's no other way they own the territory. What are you going to do? Unless we did a counter invasion and lost hundreds of thousands of. Then we're the attackers going into the defensive entrenchments and it's like, I don't.
- [27:43]
C
We don't want that.
- [27:44]
B
No, I'd rather be allies apparently want that.
- [27:47]
C
But what's it. The protesters apparently want that, but common sense people don't want that.
- [27:51]
B
People that are like, just take it back. I'm like, have you been to a front line of a military in a trench in the wool with the artillery going on?
- [27:56]
C
I only see the movies and you.
- [27:58]
B
Don'T get the artillery. Have you ever hear a building get demolished next to you? Like the vibration in your gut that will change you forever just from that for these dudes that are in there for months at a time. You know, fortunately, we've kind of evolved away from trench warfare now we've got drone warfare.
- [28:11]
A
Oh, they haven't evolved away from trench warfare at all.
- [28:14]
B
Shelling people in trenches.
- [28:16]
A
There is still. That's the majority of what's going on. On. And it rains.
- [28:20]
C
Ukraine.
- [28:21]
A
In Ukraine right now, boots get all wet. You get French, French foot. French warfare amputated. That's why they, they don't. That's why they. The, the lines haven't moved because trench warfare is brutal and that's exactly what's going on.
- [28:33]
B
They go underground.
- [28:33]
A
Yes, of course there are, There are drones now, but. And, and it does change the battlefield, but trench warfare is still the, the, the combat method of the day.
- [28:45]
B
It's impressive that. I mean, I'm not, I'm still thinking World War I in two terms that the Russians actually were able to take that much territory. Thinking can, but I guess we have modern airplanes and things that can take out the back lines and.
- [28:57]
A
Well, not only that, Russia has far more military capability than Ukraine. And, you know, Ukraine doesn't have a significant air force.
- [29:05]
B
And Russia was probably preparing for. To do this for a while.
- [29:08]
A
I mean, I'm sure they were Asian. They put up the, you know, they started massing military assets on the, on the border. And no one thought that Russia was actually. Or a lot of people were like, russia's not going to go in. Russia wouldn't. They wouldn't go into Ukraine. There's no way they would.
- [29:23]
B
But when Biden was like, surge the border, Putin was like, he's talking to me. Time for my invasion.
- [29:29]
D
Can you just walk a military exercise into someone else's country and have it not be an attack, too? Because that was like, originally what he was saying. Like, that's kind of weird.
- [29:38]
B
In the Crimea, they marched in.
- [29:40]
D
Well, no, no, just. Were they. I forgot exactly where.
- [29:43]
A
I think 2022, when they actually made. Started the.
- [29:46]
B
He expected that they were going to be like, we welcome you as heroes and liberators. And then they opened the doors and there was. I think that's what he wanted. He was trying to create that narrative with people. I don't know.
- [29:55]
A
He. Like, Like, I Said he was, he was looking to take the whole country. He was trying to get to Kiev. He did say that there was, there was. Well, there was a, there was an actual attack that was. Or there was a convoy of, of military vehicles that were, you know, made a run for Kiev. They were looking to take Kiev. They were looking to take the whole country. Because he does want to take the country, like, overall. And that's part of why the argument against allowing them to stay in the areas that they've taken is a strong argument. It's part of why it's such a compelling argument. Because it is likely that he will just try to take another bite once things cool off a little bit.
- [30:29]
B
And, like, if they neutralize Ukraine and it truly becomes a neutral territory, what would that.
- [30:33]
A
That be? What would that, what do you mean, neutralize?
- [30:35]
B
Like, they want it to be neutral. Like Spain was neutral in World War II. You know, that's what no wants. Putin wants Ukraine to be a neutral territory as part of his demands. Meaning it's not beholden to.
- [30:46]
D
I think.
- [30:47]
B
Yeah, yeah. Or Russian influence. But, like, how do you guarantee that's actually happening? Because there's still going to be massive influence underneath the surface if they say.
- [30:54]
A
Okay, yeah, I mean, as long as. Well, because of the location, Ukraine is going to have either influenced by, by the east, by the, by Western countries or influenced by Russia. Like, that's just kind of the way that it's going to be. And the reason Russia doesn't want NATO in Ukraine is because, you know, Russia, Putin wants to take more of the country. They.
- [31:18]
C
They like any deal that's going to make him happy or is he just gonna.
- [31:22]
A
Personally, I think that what he'll do or what he might do. And I'm not, I'm not, I can't predict what the guy's gonna do. I'm not nearly educated enough to do that. But what it. What he is, just say, okay, I'll make a deal for this area here and let, let us stay here, and then we'll stop fighting. There will be a ceasefire, and then it'll be a couple years, and then I'll try again.
- [31:45]
B
I'll have it.
- [31:46]
A
That's what he did with Crimea. He took Crimea. Then a couple years, then, you know, whatever, eight, nine years later, when, when the situation was favorable, when we had a president that wouldn't fight back, that he looked at as weak.
- [31:58]
C
A house plant.
- [31:59]
A
A house plant, like you said earlier. Exactly. When, when Joe Biden was the president, when he thought that he could get away with it, he's like, all right, well, now's the time. And he went in. Who the president is does matter, and what the president says does matter. There's a lot of people that blame the United States for Russia taking Crimea. And you can actually go back to when Barack Obama met with Medvedev and said, tell Vladimir that I've got. This is, I think in 2012, tell Vladimir that I've got thought I will have much more flexibility after my election. And what Vladimir. And what Vladimir Putin and what, what Medvedev heard was, you can, you can invade and take Crimea after my election. So that way I don't have to worry about the political repercussions. I won't fight you. We won't have significant problems or you won't see significant resistance from the US And NATO if you go in after I'm reelected. Just don't make this problem for me before my election. Now that was naivete on, on President Obama's, you know, part. He thought that, oh, everybody wants the same thing and all, everybody can just get along and be happy and he'll understand that. I'm just saying, you know, don't do this now and we'll talk about it more later or whatever. But what Putin heard was, don't go in until after I get reelected it. And that's exactly what happened. So that was, you know, that was. Some people would say that that was the President of the United States giving Vladimir Putin the green light to do it. And consequently he did. So it does matter who the president is and it does matter how you deal with people like Putin, because it is true that, you know, Putin is a, you know, is a warmonger. He does kill people that criticize him. Like he, he shot a missile at the, the run leader of the Wagner group and blew his helicopter out of the sky. There was a coup against or going to be a coup against him. That's how things are done in Russia. So the idea that, that things in Russia are done the same way that they're done in the United States is a gross misunderstanding of how things are done or of the reality of the situation.
- [34:09]
B
So I was thinking about Putin, you know, naive. Bukele. They just, in El Salvador, they just repealed presidential term limits, so now he can be president for life. Bukele.
- [34:18]
D
Really?
- [34:19]
B
Yeah. They did this a couple of weeks ago. I don't know if you guys have reported on it. It's pretty stark news, to be honest. Yay. He wrote Bukele. Now he's the dictator. So the thing is.
- [34:28]
A
No, no, no, he's not a dictator because he, Just because he can be elected.
- [34:32]
B
Right.
- [34:32]
A
Doesn't mean he will be reelected.
- [34:34]
B
And just because he's president doesn't mean he's influencing the elections. But he can. Doesn't mean he is, so. Well, why, anyway, that, what's that?
- [34:41]
A
Why do you think that he's. I mean, he's got an approval rate of something like 80%. Because he's cleaned up the country and made it safer, people. I mean, he, if he gets reelected, it will be a legitimate. It will likely be a legitimate reelection.
- [34:56]
B
Exactly. And I think they like him and they will. And the problem is, I think he looks around Bukele and he's like, all right, no one is going to be able to do this. Like me, If I give this control over to the next president, he's going to fuck this up. All these things are going to fall apart. Everything I've worked for is going to fail. I think Putin has that same mindset after he left office in like 2003 or four or something.
- [35:14]
A
Well, he went to. He was the prime minister.
- [35:16]
B
Yeah. He was done. And then all of a sudden it was like he couldn't go.
- [35:19]
A
He was the prime minister. He didn't, he wasn't done. He just made, he just went into a different.
- [35:23]
B
And he made his number two guy the number one and then switch.
- [35:27]
A
Yeah.
- [35:27]
B
But I got this feeling that, that it was like he's a. He doesn't want to let go because he thinks the next guy's going to screw it all up. And until he sees someone competent that he believes can do it better than him, whereas good. He's gonna, like, he's just gripping and.
- [35:38]
A
Gripping and I, it's my sense that it's more he's. He's looking to retain power than actually worried about who the successor would be.
- [35:47]
B
Because, like, he'll get slaughtered as soon as he's out of power.
- [35:49]
D
And that's a possibility.
- [35:51]
A
I think that, I think that he just wants to stay in power. I think he's going to stay in. He's a dictator and he's going to stay in power until he dies.
- [35:56]
D
Also interesting. My mom just texted me and said Russia took Crimea on Clinton and Obama watch.
- [36:01]
A
So, yeah, I mean, Obama was the president.
- [36:04]
D
Yes.
- [36:04]
A
Like, just, you know, like we said Obama kind of gave. Some would argue that Obama gave him the green light. So we're going to jump to this story here, bring it back to the United States from. For Washington from NBC, Washington D.C. police chief remains in charge after federal hostile takeover attempt AG says D.C. chief of police remains the chief of police, the District Attorney's general said after a court hearing on what he called a hostile takeover attempt by the federal government. He called the judge's decision a very important win for home rule. Less than 12 hours after the Trump administration seemingly replaced Washington DC's police chief with a federal officer, the District was in federal court on Friday to try to block the move. Attorney General Brian Schwab filed a lawsuit against the federal government claiming President Donald Trump far exceeded the authority granted him in DC's Home Rule act, in the Administrative Procedure Procedure act, in the US Constitution. I don't know that that's correct about the Constitution, at least, because the Constitution does lay out that the, the, the District area is not an actual state. It's not, it's, it's a, an area that is actually controlled by the feds, if I understand correctly. So I don't quote me and I could be wrong.
- [37:15]
D
I think you're right, but I, I don't know.
- [37:17]
A
The federal judge overseeing the lawsuit said the law doesn't allow the federal government to name a new police chief, but the city can't completely keep them out either. Ann Reyes asked the two sides to hammer out a compromise, but promised to issue a court order temporary blocking the administration from naming a new chief if they couldn't agree. I am encouraged by the judge's remarks and the federal government making the changes that were suggested and the judge's willingness to rule if that's not satisfactory, mayor Muriel Bowser said after the hearing. How D.C. enforces federal immigration laws in response to homeless people are key issues. D.C. and federal officials are expected to keep talking over the weekend about the general orders that Drug Enforcement Administration boss Terry Cole rescinded. Now, how they deal with homeless people is something that legitimately is for D.C. to, to discuss, you know, decide on its own. But they do have to deal with home homeless people. And, but when it comes to things like immigration, that's ice, and it's always ice. It's always Homeland Security and, and Immigration and Customs Enforcement. There's no, there's no gray area about that. The, the localities, when they're sanctuary cities, all that means is our local police forces aren't going to help the federal officers. But that doesn't mean that the federal officers don't have jurisdiction over, fed over Immigration and Customs and stuff. So when they're dealing with illegal immigrants, it's always isis, you know, it's always ISIS jurisdiction.
- [38:50]
C
Yeah.
- [38:50]
A
So I don't know that there's. That there's an argument to be had about that.
- [38:54]
B
Well, the gray area I would argue about, I think that because it's like, this is a thing about being a human. You're told law and order are the most. Are very important. Law and order, uphold the law. But then it's like, you watch what happened with the Nazis persecuting the Jews and like, people hiding Jewish people in their homes and lying and protecting them overtly. And they were the good guys in the story. From where the way I heard the story were the people that violated the law and that were like, no, we're doing what we believe is right for our people, for our neighbors. You're some federal cop. Get out of my house.
- [39:25]
A
Do you believe that it's compared. That hiding Jews from the Nazis is comparable to hiding illegal immigrants from ice?
- [39:35]
B
Technically, yeah, comparable. Not. Not the same at all. Not the same at all. And different levels. Of course, the, the immigration thing is way, way less abhorrent than persecuting a religion, religious people or a culture in your society. Much, much worse. But the motions behind it of, like, I'm protecting my neighbors from the federal people that are in here from D.C. like, that's a real. And we've been encouraged as Americans to do that. When the king comes and tries to take your land, you're like, get out of my land. This is our country now. We govern this. Us.
- [40:09]
A
What?
- [40:10]
B
This is what we told the British to kick rocks when they tried to come in and find our terrorists and arrest our terrorists. George Washington and John Adams. These guys. Guys. So this is just the thing. You see both sides of the mind working.
- [40:23]
A
I think that it's a significant. When you're talking about illegal immigrants versus, you know, an actual rebellion of, Of Englishmen against Englishmen. I think it's a different thing. And I also think that it's a very different thing when you're talking about Jews being hidden by Germans from the Nazis.
- [40:44]
B
What the reason the thing is, it's is law and order isn't always good. Sometimes law and order is evil. And if you have evil law and.
- [40:50]
A
Order to deport people.
- [40:51]
B
I don't. I mean, I don't think so.
- [40:52]
A
Then what. What I'm not. I'm trying to.
- [40:54]
B
I think some people do think it's evil. So they're. They're going through this moral thing of, like, I need to protect my neighbors from the.
- [41:00]
D
Yeah.
- [41:02]
C
Of ignorance. If you think, like, ignorance of, like, the law and like, what did you say?
- [41:07]
D
If you think Trump is Hitler.
- [41:10]
B
Yeah.
- [41:10]
A
I mean.
- [41:10]
C
Oh, yeah.
- [41:11]
A
I mean, everybody's.
- [41:13]
D
That's the, that's the cause.
- [41:14]
A
Yeah.
- [41:14]
D
When, when the Nazis took over, the law became determined by the objectively bad guys. And so to break the law was good in that situation. So I guess if you think Trump is, Is like, that is Germany, you know, after the beer hall putsch and all that stuff with Hitler in power, then you think breaking this law is good or.
- [41:38]
B
Which is, I think, is devoid of, you know, reason to do that because the media has been pushing that on people, too, like saying Trump is Hitler and things like that.
- [41:46]
D
Right.
- [41:46]
B
So there's this. And then they get the woman crying as the baby's being taken out of her hands in a picture.
- [41:52]
A
Oh, look at baby crying.
- [41:55]
C
It's. It's out of not knowing, too, and ignorance and not paying attention.
- [42:02]
D
Right, right.
- [42:03]
C
No, no, I know. Yeah. Yeah.
- [42:04]
E
So even if they don't know.
- [42:07]
C
Yeah. Oh, 100%. I'm just saying, like, guilty until proven for some of them, they're. They might actually just be genuinely stupid.
- [42:15]
B
Might I. I mean, the moral dilemma is just, it's concurrent. It's going to have come up again in the future in a different way.
- [42:21]
A
I don't see it as a moral dilemma because I think that it's immoral to allow people to stay here if they're illegal.
- [42:27]
B
Right.
- [42:27]
A
The other thing is it, it is a problem for the existing people. If, if, if only because of the stuff that we talk about with the census. Right. If you're going to count all of the people, not the citizens, but all of the people. The people. And then that's how the apportionment of representation in the federal government is. Is. Is calculated. That means that all of the illegals that are here are diluting the political power of the citizens. Right. This is a little. This is, this is. Is an. It's a few degrees removed, and it takes being able to think of downstream consequences to actually really re. To. To understand how this matters. But it's not moral to take the power of the voting power away from the existing population, the citizens, the people that have lived. That have lived here their whole lives and, and dilute that power by counting people that are not citizens. That's an immoral act, too. So I understand there is a care argument. Well, we need to care for these people. They're here. We want to be care. We want to be compassionate, and we want to see these people live productive lives. And it's mean to deport them, and it's mean to. To have ICE pick them up, and it's mean to make it hard for them to live here, here. And we want to be nice, but that does not. That does not mean that it's moral to allow them to stay here. It's immoral to allow them to stay here because they came here and broke the law. And. And people that try to come here legally that have been waiting, that have spent money, it's immoral and does them a disservice. It's immoral to them. It's moral to get the people that are here trying to. That have broken the law to get here and that are violating the law by being here. It's. It's actually moral action to round those people up and send them back home or make it difficult for them to live here so that way they leave of their own volition.
- [44:33]
B
I think it's a group of both positive and negative morals. It's immoral and moral. There's a lot of different moralities happening at once. So it would be like, if you yell at your kid to stop doing something, is that moral or immoral? Well, one parent might argue it's the moral thing to do because now they're not gonna do the thing anymore, whereas the other parent's gonna argue it's immoral because now the kid's traumatized.
- [44:52]
A
What's the kid trying to do? Because if one kid's punching his brother.
- [44:55]
E
Is he running to the street?
- [44:57]
B
Conversation gets more nuanced. What are these people trying to do here? Like, just their presence is diluting the voting base. That's a problem. A big immoral problem. To allow. I agree with that. Now grabbing them in the middle of the night, dragging them out by their hair and sending them to a Salvadorian prison, also immoral.
- [45:11]
A
Okay, so. So hold on.
- [45:12]
B
How's it happening? So you're.
- [45:13]
A
You're dragging them out by their hair. You're coloring the conversation here.
- [45:18]
B
I'm just adding nuance to.
- [45:19]
A
That's not adding nuance. That's.
- [45:21]
B
That's coloring the instance of a possible immoral way to deal with an immoral situation.
- [45:26]
A
The point is, you're making. Making the. You're trying to make the action of rounding the people up that are here illegally. You're trying to make the action of doing it a violent, aggressive, malice, malicious action. And it's not malicious. The ICE agents that are going to get people that are here illegally, they're not doing it out of malice.
- [45:50]
B
Yeah.
- [45:50]
A
There is not a situation where they're like, let's go hurt the them. It's not about hurting them. So grabbing them by their hair and yanking them out of bed, that is adding malice to the action. That is you coloring what the. The. The. What's going on. So that way people feel bad for the people that are here legally and feel like the people enforcing the law are the bad guys.
- [46:11]
B
Less about grabbing them by the hair, more about taking them without their stuff.
- [46:15]
A
Leaving.
- [46:15]
B
Leaving their stuff behind like that. They don't. Ice doesn't have a. I mean, they might have to go get their stuff eventually and send it.
- [46:21]
A
That's why they should leave of their own volition. I agree with that.
- [46:24]
B
I do agree with that. That's a nice way to kind of create a moralistic, you know, solution, because there are lots of ways to solve this immoral problem in an even more immoral way. So we got to be careful about. About in. In introducing. Rounding people up at gunpoint, having them stripped down and, like, you know, marching them naked through the street, whatever. Like, you're dropping it down naked through the streets.
- [46:48]
A
Can't do it.
- [46:48]
B
I'm telling.
- [46:49]
C
If they're doing that to, like, illegal gang members, and I'm okay with it. But are they actually doing that?
- [46:54]
D
I. I haven't seen. I. Well, it just. I keep thinking about Sin Frontera, the documentary that 67 Kevin just made about, like, how these people get here in the first place and how horrifying it is on their way here, and some don't make it, and most of them get assaulted in all terrible kinds of ways. And it kind of sends a message like, hey, hey, we're not incentivizing you to continue to do it that way, because if you did it that way, you're going back. It is a tough moral thing to think about because I don't like hurting.
- [47:29]
A
If you make it difficult to live here and you make there be significant repercussions for coming here illegally, that is to deter people from coming. The point is you have to have. Have negative consequences for coming here illegally. It can't just be, oh, they were. They were picked up, they got processed, sent back, and then they decided they just want to come back and they snuck through again. You have to make negative consequences for coming here. You can't come back ever. You'll never be an American citizen if you get picked up. You should. We. I. And I've talked about this multiple times on the show. You shouldn't be able to rent a. A place to live. Live. And if the people that are. If the people. If there's someone that owns property that's renting to an illegal, they should face significant fines, jail time, and possibly loss of their property. Same thing with people giving jobs to illegals. If you employ an illegal, you should face jail time, significant legal repercussions, possibly loss of property.
- [48:29]
C
Yeah, because right now they're not afraid of the law, so they're not listening to the law. Yeah, you have to make them afraid.
- [48:34]
A
And it should be something. There's, you know, the Democrats say this all the time, and they're actually right about this. They're always like, oh, you know, well, the, the people that H room never get in trouble. You're right. They should. They should lose their. They should lose their property. They should lose their businesses. If you. It should be too scary to hire illegals. And illegals should have a hard time finding a job, and illegal should have a hard time finding a place to live. And that way they'll say, it's not worth coming to America because I. There's no benefit for me anymore. I can't. No one can find a place to rent. You know, I can't find a place to rent to me. I can't find a job. No one will hire me because it, because if they do the, you know, if the, if the police place gets raided by ice, then they might lose their business and, and remittances to other countries tax that at 90, you want to send money to.
- [49:19]
B
To a.
- [49:19]
A
Send money back home, you can only send 5% of what you've made, and all that money goes to the federal government, so they can't send their money back. So they stuff their.
- [49:29]
B
How would that one work? That's a.
- [49:30]
A
Tax remittances. I'm not sure exactly the, the, the method, but they can do it. You know, whether it be wiring money, it's possible that people would do things like buy crypto and, and get around it that way. Um, but again, to buy crypto, there's a lot of crypto companies where you have to, you know, KYC rules.
- [49:45]
B
It's all tracked on the network too. Eventually that stuff's coming back. You know, all your crypto trades are public, so.
- [49:50]
A
And it should be difficult to come to the United States and take advantage of basically loose liberal immigration laws. And if they, if you do that, then you don't have a situation where people are getting ripped out of their homes by their hair and traipsed through the streets naked. You know, it just doesn't happen because they're like, f. This I'm going to, going home. You know, I'm, I, I, I can't get a job here. It's not worth coming to the United.
- [50:15]
B
Is it happening?
- [50:16]
C
It's worth it if you do it the legal way.
- [50:18]
A
Yes.
- [50:18]
C
My dad did it.
- [50:19]
A
Sure.
- [50:19]
C
My dad, my dad came from Africa.
- [50:23]
A
Serge did it. Oh.
- [50:25]
C
And it took him, it took him like 10 years and thousands of dollars. Not saying it's easy. It's not easy to become an American citizen, but if you think it's worth it, it, then do it. But don't do it the illegal way, because just like you said, it undermines the people that come here and they do it the legal way. The people that wait years upon years upon years and spend hundreds and hundreds and thousands of dollars. It's a slap in the face to everybody. And then it's also a slap in the face to the actual American citizens and it disrupts our safety, our resources. It's just like, yes, it's, I can see the point in like, morally immorally, but I don't think it's immoral to take, take law breakers out and put them back where they came. And it's also, it's the same thing too with, like, how people like to blame ICE for, you know, taking parents and their children and, like, putting them back. And it's like, why don't you blame the parents for putting their children in that situation in the first place?
- [51:26]
A
Yep.
- [51:26]
C
How do you think they got there? Probably through the cartel. They, they risked their own child's life to come here the illegal way when they could have done it the right way. It's possible.
- [51:36]
B
What was your dad's experience like? Did he talk about it much explicitly?
- [51:40]
C
No. I was young, so he, he came to America before I was born because he met my mom here. He was actually born in Mozambique, fled during the communist regime. My Volvo, got a job with the US Embassy. And then him and his brother, my uncle, they came to America separate times, but they both came. Green card. And then he met my mom and he wanted to become an American citizen. And again, it took him like 10 years.
- [52:13]
B
Did they get married and then he got his citizenship?
- [52:16]
C
Yeah, they got, yeah, he, he got his citizenship when I was in like fourth grade.
- [52:20]
B
And then so they, they move here. They get a green card upon entry. I mean, this is basic question.
- [52:25]
C
Yeah, yeah, yeah, I believe so. I believe that's what he, what he had. And then he went through the process of getting a citizenship, but he was never here. There was never a point where he was here illegally. Like, he was always making sure that his card and whatnot, you know, never expired and. And everything. And. And it's. It's tough, and it's hard, and you're gonna spend a lot of money, and I don't think the system is perfect. I do think that there needs to be some sort of reform. I'm not saying it needs to be, like, easier in the sense, but just, you know, I was talking. I can't remember his name, but I was talking. Talking about it out there. And it's like, the system isn't perfect, but still, it doesn't mean that it gives you a right to come here illegally when hundreds of thousands of people are coming here and doing it the legal way and they're waiting.
- [53:10]
B
I've heard that some of the people that are the most upset with the illegal immigration are the legal immigrants.
- [53:16]
C
Yeah. My dad is pissed. Rightfully so.
- [53:19]
B
I would be so.
- [53:20]
C
Rightfully so.
- [53:21]
A
How. It's.
- [53:22]
B
It's, what, a violation of so much because he was.
- [53:25]
C
He has a. He has a. I'm telling all his secrets. He has a bald eagle tattoo on his shoulder, and that says a American citizen or whatever. And he's like, I want to. I want to laser it off.
- [53:37]
A
No, hold the l.
- [53:40]
C
He's like, no, he. He loves America. He loves America. He said he doesn't want to see it turn into the country he fled from.
- [53:47]
A
In a way.
- [53:48]
B
People that come here legally obviously love this country. To put yourself through 10 years of not agony.
- [53:53]
C
He has his own business, his own construction business. He made a great life for himself and his family. It's possible. It's hard work, but, like, if you really want to be here, it's possible. You can't take the easy way out.
- [54:07]
B
I guess maybe what immigration, some people say, like, put a total freeze on immigration for the moment, Whatever that would look like. I don't know. There's people waiting.
- [54:13]
A
Yeah.
- [54:14]
B
And then what? Like, digitize the process so that it happens faster?
- [54:18]
A
Is that.
- [54:18]
B
You said that needs some reform.
- [54:20]
C
Yeah, Yeah. I mean, it does suck to wait 10 years to get citizenship, especially when it's. It's most likely. Of course, the ones that are doing it the legal way are the ones that really love this country and believe in the American dream and want to make a life for themselves, and they know that they can do it. And America's, you know, the great. They think America is the greatest country in world. The world. And it sucks that they have to be the ones to go through this long process of Spending a bunch of money and waiting a bunch of years to do it. I don't know. I don't know what the reform should be, but I, you know, it's not easy.
- [54:58]
B
So I want them to know English.
- [55:01]
C
Yeah, well, my dad knows English, so that's good.
- [55:04]
B
He knew it before, while he was.
- [55:06]
C
Yeah, well, because my Volvo worked at the US Embassy in Portugal.
- [55:10]
B
So that's your grandfather?
- [55:13]
C
No. It's funny. Volvo is technically grandfather in Portuguese, but when I was younger, that's all I really knew how to say was Volvo.
- [55:20]
B
So is your dad.
- [55:21]
C
No, it's my grandmother.
- [55:23]
A
Oh.
- [55:23]
C
Yeah. So my dad's mom.
- [55:25]
B
Yeah, she worked at the embassy. Oh, okay.
- [55:27]
C
Yeah.
- [55:28]
B
So they were Americanized. I could go on and on, man.
- [55:31]
C
Yeah, I know. Well, maybe you guys can have him here. He'll talk all about it, all his story and everything.
- [55:38]
D
It's not a bad idea.
- [55:39]
B
Did you, I think that come from South Africa to America and then get your citizenship? What was your process?
- [55:45]
E
Yeah, it's roughly the same as that.
- [55:46]
B
You just sat in a waiting line for.
- [55:48]
E
Yeah, I sit in IRS lines for like 10 hours. It was crazy.
- [55:51]
D
Over and over again in California, back.
- [55:52]
E
When Democrats didn't want me in this country. Democrats used to hate coming to the country because we, like, added the tax base, you know, I mean, we were more people that. Where they didn't, they didn't, like, they weren't like, super cool with immigrants. Remember Obama was like the deporter in chief. Everyone forgets that.
- [56:07]
A
Like, oh, but we suddenly need open borders.
- [56:09]
E
No, dude. Since when.
- [56:11]
B
Since when was it like.
- [56:12]
A
It's worth, it's, it's worth noting, like, the difficulty of becoming a citizen is a feature. It's not a bug. Like, you should have to work hard to become an American. And one of the reasons is because. Because the people that will put the effort in actually care about the ideals this country was founded on. People that will go. Will come to the United States and go through all of the stuff, pay all the money, you know, show up for their. Their hearings that they have to do, do all the things that you're supposed to do to come here legally. Those people care about being Americans. They, they care about being Americans more than most Americans that are born here because they see the value in it. They know what it's like to not be an American. One of the things that, like, we talk about, you know, I think that you shouldn't be allowed to come to the United States if you don't believe in the values the United States Has. So if you're a communist, you shouldn't be. Like, it should be perfect.
- [57:13]
B
It should be to visit or to move here. You mean either let me up.
- [57:16]
C
Right, Either.
- [57:17]
A
I don't care. I mean, it should be a privilege to come to the United States. States. So, yeah, if you're a communist and you're only coming because you want to visit, like, I don't. I don't see any reason to grant you a visa. I mean, if you're looking to escape your communist country and you want to become a citizen, you're looking to defect or what? You know, I don't know. I don't even know if there are countries where you can defect from anymore. But if you're looking to escape a commons country and you want to come to the United States and you. You hold our values in high esteem, like, then. Okay, you got an argument, you know, then. Then maybe we can. We can figure something out. But there's no reason to be like, oh, yeah, you're. You're from a commun. So it's fine that you come here to.
- [57:54]
B
They're like, I just want. I want to learn about democracy. What's the problem?
- [57:57]
A
You don't care. The Internet. The Internet works.
- [57:59]
C
That's what Google's for.
- [58:00]
A
Yeah, exactly.
- [58:01]
B
I don't want to immerse myself in the culture.
- [58:03]
A
No, no, no, no.
- [58:06]
B
We like Northeast Asia.
- [58:08]
A
We don't need it. Like, the point is, like, it should be a privilege to come to the United States because the United States is the greatest country in the world. In my opinion, it should be a privilege to come here. It should be hard to become a citizen, and it should take significant effort. So that way we don't just have people that are like, well, I'm gonna get there and I'm gonna get a job, and then I'm gonna act like all the people in California that were protesting ICE that were, like, waving Mexican flags and. And saying, you know, we hate America. Well, you live here.
- [58:38]
C
Okay, then go back.
- [58:39]
A
Get out. If you don't love America, don't let.
- [58:42]
C
The door hit you on the way out.
- [58:43]
A
Absolutely. We have, like, if you're in America, American. And you're born here, and you're an American citizen and you want to. If you hate America, we can't do nothing about it. You're an American citizen. It's just like. Like, you. If you have, like, a crappy relative, so they're your relative, deal with it. You can't do anything about it. But if you have a crappy neighbor, you don't have to let that crappy neighbor come into your house and tell you how crappy your house is. You don't have to allow it. You can just be like, get out of here.
- [59:09]
B
Then you know something? I also is sort of of a through line is. I feel, I believe, and I hope that in the future, when people move to a state, they don't get voting rights until they live there for three years.
- [59:20]
A
I'd love five years. Five years.
- [59:22]
B
Some amount of time, a long time. That now you're a resident, you've been here, you know the land, you know the people. It's three years, at least five years. So I think extending that to immigrants also would be fine. Especially those ones that are here illegally shouldn't be counted on a census. First of all, it's in. Makes absolutely no sense.
- [59:37]
A
Completely logical.
- [59:38]
B
And then I'd like to.
- [59:39]
A
That would probably take a constitutional amendment. Amendment, though.
- [59:42]
B
Which one?
- [59:42]
A
We take an amendment because. Because right now, the way the, the census rules are written, it says count the. It just says count the people. It doesn't say count the citizens. So if you live here, it's. Unless you're, Unless you're Indians not taxed. So it, it's possible that the Supreme Court would read it and would, Would, would, Would say that the re. There's a way to read it that says they're not talking about people that are here, like legally, but the letter of the law now it says they count the people, not including Indians not taxed.
- [60:19]
B
And then three, four. Three fifths.
- [60:20]
A
That has totally different thing. That's totally different.
- [60:23]
B
That was not a census thing. Weren't they counting bodies?
- [60:26]
A
Yes, it is, but that's not the same. It's a different thing. They're talking about slaves. 3. Slaves are 3/5. There are no longer slaves. So no one is counted three.
- [60:35]
B
And then that led to someone being like, well, what if we treat the people that are here illegally as 3/5? Count towards the census until the bodies are sent back home?
- [60:43]
A
Yeah, I don't, I, I don't imagine that the SCOTUS will find that. I mean, it's possible. Look, and, and this, all this is just me pontificating. It's not law. It's, you know, so what the SCOTUS would actually say is what would really matter. But I, it's my sense that the way that SCOTUS would rule is. Well, it says in the Constitution, count the people. So you have to count the people. And I think that that's part of why you should be make it super hard for illegals to live here. There's nothing, there's nothing in the Constitution that says you have to force b. You know, you can't punish businesses or punish renters for renting to illegals or for, you know, and, and you have to pro. Provide ID to rent. In most places, you have to provide ID to get a job. So there, there are plenty of means to make it difficult for illegals to stay here. But I think that when it comes to the actual census, what you have to do is get them to leave, because I don't think that we're. We're going to be able to say we don't count people that are not citizens. I think that the way the Constitution is written, you'd have to actually have an amendment to, to fix that.
- [61:45]
C
Yeah. On the voting thing, too, I follow a girl on social media who. She's from America, but her husband is from Scotland. So she actually ended up moving to Scotland. I'm assuming got a citizenship or card or something. I don't know. I don't know how it works, but she still has her citizenship for America. So she literally lives. She does not live in America anymore. She's been in Scotland for like, over a year. She lives in Scotland. She voted in the 2024 election. She voted Kamala. But she's not even here to, like, experience the new president. So I just find that so crazy that there are people that who don't even live in America anymore and can still vote in the election and then not even, like, reap or sow the benefits of it.
- [62:30]
B
Maybe if they're in the military. At a military.
- [62:32]
C
Yeah, she's not in the military. She's literally a social media influence influencer and she.
- [62:37]
B
It's a primary.
- [62:38]
A
Yeah.
- [62:39]
D
Does she pay taxes in America?
- [62:41]
C
I don't. I don't know. I don't. I don't know how it works. Probably it literally her job is social media. It's like Instagram and YouTube and stuff. And her husband is Scottish and she lives in. In Edinburgh, Scotland. And she literally, during the election was posting and like, people were asking her, like, are you voting? I know you live in Scotland now. And she's like, yeah, I flew. I flew to America. A vote.
- [63:02]
D
At least she flew to do it in person.
- [63:04]
C
Yeah, but like, still. Yeah, rather not. She's a major liberal.
- [63:08]
B
You travel a lot and you have your primary residence in the US but you're overseas 10 months out of the year traveling.
- [63:15]
C
Yeah, but that's different. She literally Lives full time house, husband, dog in Scotland.
- [63:21]
B
And then I wonder she has a full time residence in the parents. Oh yeah, the threads are being pulled.
- [63:28]
D
It's tough because like my sister was working full time in Japan and she still was able to vote because she was going to come back. I mean they were not going to be like, oh, you can stay here forever because they don't let you do that.
- [63:40]
A
I mean, I still vote in New Hampshire. You know, I've got a place down here, but I spend enough time in New Hampshire and I have my primary residence in New Hampshire. So, you know, I think that you are, as long as you don't give up your citizenship. Yeah, you, you're, you're, you know, you're going to say, look, I live, I'm an American citizen, I have a place in whatever state or whatever. So that's where I live. I'm not sure the details of it and what the, the legalities are for that location. Like I pay taxes here in West Virginia because I'm here so much, but when it comes to where I vote, I go back to New Hampshire to vote. You know, it's about where your, your.
- [64:21]
B
Residence is, which is kind of nice that they, because they, they, I think what, what the, you know, the overmind wants is to, to know where your body is and where your paperwork says your body is and make sure it's all the same so that you're not violating the system's tendrils.
- [64:34]
A
Well, the thing is like states want their tax money, you know, like, so West Virginia, because I'm here so much, they want to, they want to cut on my pay. Right. Because I'm here doing the show and stuff like that. So they want their tax money. There's no income tax in New Hampshire, so it's not a problem. Problem. You know, I pay my property tax and New Hampshire's like, I don't care, you know, just like whatever, you know, there's no income tax, there's no sales tax, whereas down here there is income tax. So I got to take care of that. In, in West Virginia.
- [65:02]
B
If New Hampshire had income tax, would you be paying income tax in both states or do you pick the one.
- [65:06]
A
And wherever you spend your most, most of your time is probably what it's got to be. So we're going to go ahead and jump to this next story. Let me see here, here. Where did it go? New from the New York Times. The Democrats hate America and they continuously want to remind you that they hate our, our representative democracy. So from The New York Times abolish the Senate and the Electoral College Pack the Court. Why the Left Can't Win Without a New Constitution. After the great rebuke of 2024, many Democrats seem to think their party needs to become more modern, moderate. But there's another theory potent on the American left that believes Donald Trump's election shows not just that American democracy is in danger, but that it doesn't really work at all. What the country needs isn't just a new policy agenda. It might need the kind of constitutional revolution from adding new states to packing the Supreme Court that some Democrats already flirted with under Joe Biden. That's the kind of argument that my guest today, Osida Nuwana, makes in this new book, the Right of the People, Democracy and the Case for a New American Foundation. Founding Nuana is a, is a contributing editor, editor at the New Republic and the Democratic Institutions fellow at the Roosevelt Institute. So this is a, an hour long podcast where Ross do that and this fellow who wrote this this book get into why the Democrats actually don't want to protect democracy. They want to change our democratic republic so that they can retain power. All of the things that are proposed here would actually make it impossible or incredibly difficult for the Republicans to win at a national level, which there was a time and this is probably back in 2013, 20 well, 2014, 2015 leading up to Donald Trump. They the Democrats really did think, think that the Republicans were going to be a regional party from for as long as they could see the de the Republicans were not going to have a national influence anymore and the Democrats had kind of just taken over everything. And then when Donald Trump won, they, that's part of why the Democrats, you know, kind of freaked out about everything. You know, they, they really thought that they had control of everything they had control of of and they were going to forever have control of the, the White House and the Senate. Maybe they would lose the House of Representatives for a bit, but they would lose by have, you know, maybe five or 10 members and they would gain them back. And they really thought they had essentially a permanent one party rule. And that's exactly what they want. They want to change the, the, the way that our government is, is organized in order order to make sure that Republicans don't win ever again. And they, you know, they outlined that right here. Now this is not something that is actually surprising to anyone on the right really. You kind of knew if you pay attention to politics, you kind of like understood that that was the situation that Democrats don't really care about democracy. When they say, when they would say things, things like, you know, we're going to lose our democracy. Donald Trump is going to destroy our democracy. What they were talking about was their power base, their, their bureaucratic power base. And there are people that'll make arguments. No, that's not what they meant. They don't mean that they didn't. They don't really think that the Republicans are, are evil, et cetera, et cetera. But there are more and more people that are coming out and saying the quiet part out loud and making arguments. And, hey, we need to make sure that Republicans can't. We need to do these things that will make sure that Republicans can't win. And these are terrible ideas. Adding states. I mean, D.C. constitutionally is not supposed to be a state. Right. They want to make Puerto Rico a state and they want to make DC Estate. At the best, if they want to continue to have a, a constitutionally, you know, a constitutionally correct situation, they would have to give, have most of D.C. back to Maryland and there would be, you know, just a very, very small portion of D.C. capitol Hill, you know, just the Capitol Hill where the White House is and probably where, where the Supreme Court is. Like, they would have to make that right there, just the small area, D.C. and the rest just give it back to Maryland. So that way you're not adding states, you're not adding senators. But they do truly believe that it is perfectly legitimate to expand the, the court. So that way they have more judicial power because they want to use an activist court. And they're floundering that they don't have the ability to influence the court. But it is worth noting, like the Democrat, the three progressives on the court, they always vote the same way. There's three of the conservative justices that you're just like, I have no idea how they're going to vote. Yeah, they're not reliably conservative because they actually look at being a judge the way that a judge is supposed to be. Right. They're supposed to judge the issue on the merits. You will never, ever get Kajenti, Brown, Jackson to, to come down with a ruling that is anything other than exactly what is progressive orthodoxy. Always, always, always. You won't get Sodom, you probably won't get Sotomayor to come down on anything other than, than progressive activism. And that's just the way that the left behaves. So the Democrats aren't happy that they might get things their way because maybe Amy Coney Barrett or maybe John Roberts or whoever will come down on the side of the progressives. They are, they want to make sure that they have enough people on the court to guarantee that they always have a progressive victory. And that's what the adding people or adding states is for. So that way they have two more, more or four more senators. They want to have two ostensibly Democrat senators from D.C. and then two Democrat senators from, from Puerto Rico. And that way they'll have what they believe will be a permanent, you know, permanent majority in the, in the, the Senate. They want to add the, they want to change the way the electoral college works. So that way it's a direct, direct election by popular vote because they believe that the states or the, the cities that are, are the, the, the concentration of population, they should be dictating to the rest of the country who the president would be in those situations. Those would all produce a, a, a Democrat out. Essentially the, the argument is that those things will always produce an outcome that is favorable to democracy. Democrats, but they don't care about democracy. They care about power.
- [72:03]
C
No, it's rules. Rules for the. Not for me.
- [72:06]
A
Aren't.
- [72:06]
C
They're the same people that have been fear mongering others that Trump wants to change the Constitution. Right. It's like I'm pretty sure I've heard that claim like countless times already that Trump's gonna change the Constitution or he's gonna get rid of the Constitution or he's gonna rewrite the Constitution. And it's like they're accusing us of exactly what they're planning on doing.
- [72:25]
D
It's right out of the rules for radicals police.
- [72:28]
A
Mm.
- [72:28]
C
Yeah. It's like number one.
- [72:30]
D
Also it sounds a lot like socialism because like all the people that I had talked to on the left that want it, it's because they think they'll be at the top like controlling it. So if the Democrats want that, it's because they want to control everything. Like Phil was saying with power.
- [72:50]
B
Dude. Communism's so insidious though. People, we can all do this. That rhetoric of all of us together and it's so like someone looks around a room and says we all and makes eye contact with everybod everybody. That's a bonding human for humanity, for families it's important. But for politics it's so dangerous. Cuz as soon as we all get together and put that thing, I'm on top. Now I get to decide what happens. And I know it's all about all of us, but I gotta take care of me first so that I can take care of you and who else is in my tight. And that's how it always has gone with these dumbass centralized authorities, man. But unless you know that ahead of time and you see it, it's tough. Cause it feels so good to say we're all in this together and it's empowering.
- [73:29]
A
You're. Essentially what they're proposing is what the situation in California is. Right. There's. There's a one party rule in California. There's no represent or very little representation at a state level for any Republicans in California. And you see it in the, the exodus of people from California, you know, after Covid, California lost. I mean, I don't know exactly how many, but I want to say it's like half a million people, something like. Like that. So. And California's never lost people because California's like the geography and the weather are just so attractive.
- [74:06]
C
Oh, it's a beautiful state.
- [74:08]
A
Gorgeous. Gorgeous. It's wonderful. It's absolutely beautiful. Like the only place that I think in the whole United States that's actually more beautiful is probably Hawaii. Or at least that I think is nicer. I love Hawaii.
- [74:18]
C
I love Hawaii so much.
- [74:20]
A
The Texas, huh?
- [74:21]
D
Yeah, you know, I like Texas.
- [74:23]
B
Texas is flat, but I didn't see state. Yeah, I liked San. I was gonna be like, well, San Diego is pretty nice too, Phil. But I was like, oh yeah, that's California.
- [74:32]
A
It is.
- [74:33]
D
I was thinking San Diego when you said California.
- [74:34]
A
San Diego is probably my favorite part of California.
- [74:37]
B
So nice. I mean the Los Angeles Valley. The Los Angeles. Los Angeles, the Angels.
- [74:42]
C
That's what they said when I actually been to California.
- [74:44]
D
Really?
- [74:45]
A
Really?
- [74:45]
C
Yeah. I know I, I want to go, but it like scares me me.
- [74:49]
A
What part?
- [74:50]
C
I don't know, any part.
- [74:52]
B
I think that southern coast is the way Big Sur down to San Diego.
- [74:56]
C
Yeah. Oh, I want to check out the national parks.
- [74:58]
A
Oceanside's great.
- [74:59]
B
Up north into the Redwoods.
- [75:01]
A
Yeah.
- [75:01]
B
I've never been that far north, but I heard the red.
- [75:03]
C
It's such a. From things that I've seen, it's such a beautiful state, but just the, the policies are absolutely horrendous and it just completely ruins it.
- [75:11]
B
And it's controlled by the metropolitans. I wonder if tech. If. If California should be split in half and it'd be like a northern state and a southern state governed by Los Angeles and San Francisco because it's so big and so different.
- [75:22]
C
Is there like a conservative area in California?
- [75:25]
D
Orange County?
- [75:26]
A
Yeah, Orange county is very, Is fairly conservative.
- [75:29]
C
Okay.
- [75:30]
A
And there are other parts, like once you get off of the coast, like into the interior there. It's, it's a lot of conservatives, but there's also not a lot of people. It's desert. Like once you get, once you get, you know, an hour and a half from the coast or so, two hours from the coast, like it's, it's pretty, it's pretty much like Texas. It's very, very hot all the time time. Or at least not all the time.
- [75:50]
D
Did you have like a natural cool that rolls through at night?
- [75:54]
B
LA or California?
- [75:55]
D
Just California in general. From what I've like I heard they don't have a lot of air condition, like air conditioning.
- [76:00]
B
You don't need it in Los Angeles.
- [76:01]
D
Right.
- [76:02]
B
It's, it's 95 in the sun and then you step into the shade, it drops 20 degrees because the air is so dry. That's 75 in the shade.
- [76:09]
A
I mean it depends on where you are because if you go up into the valley, it's like 105 degrees. And I, I spent the whole summer out there when we were doing the madness record and it was, I mean 110 in, in, in the Valley. Yeah, man.
- [76:21]
E
Did you say you didn't need AC in Los Angeles?
- [76:24]
B
I didn't need AC. I was thinking windows were open 24 7.
- [76:26]
E
Oh well that's.
- [76:27]
B
Maybe it's a breeze, a constant breeze.
- [76:30]
E
Okay.
- [76:30]
A
If you're on the water.
- [76:31]
B
Yeah.
- [76:32]
E
If you're.
- [76:32]
B
Actually I was just in the city in LA and the breeze was enough. The second floor, second story breeze. If you're fortunate to live above the, the dark, the heavy metals of the, the ground floor where all the brake dust is hovering. You know, get about 18ft up and then you start to be. It's pretty beautiful and fresh. I don't answer California.
- [76:52]
A
Well, I mean California is great weather wise. It is, it is. It is completely and totally run by the Democrats and your politics, you know, your politics really do affect how your lifestyle is. Again, they lost at least half a million people after Covid. Massive amounts of, you know, many businesses left. Tesla left their, their, whatever their headquarters was there. Joe Rogan left.
- [77:19]
C
I know there, there's isn't in and out leaving.
- [77:21]
A
In and out. Are they leaving? They're there. I think they're going to Nashville.
- [77:24]
C
Yeah.
- [77:24]
A
You know, so look, I mean I would love to see in n outs open up all across the country, but that's a totally different story. But, but I mean it's hard for businesses in California. They raised the minimum wage and what happened was exactly what people were Saying was going to happen, happen. Businesses would fire people. They would raise prices. You know, businesses would go out of business because they can't afford to pay people. I think it was like $20 or whatever. The. I don't know what the minimum wage was raised to, but they raised the minimum wage. And everyone that was against it was saying, don't do this, don't raise the minimum wage. This is going to be bad. It's going to have all these negative downstream repercussions. And as soon as they raised it, within a couple years, everything that the people were saying was going to happen to.
- [78:08]
B
Yeah, I got this feeling. I went to LA during COVID I think it was 20, 21, and it was like this feeling of pathetic pathos. I'm not like, I got that feeling a little bit in the entertainment industry when I lived there, because the people were so obsessed with getting picked, being, let me be part of your cult. Let me be picked by you and be part of your group. And yes, I'll say what you tell me to say. And it was just kind of sickening to watch. But this watching them on masks during COVID was the most grotesque. Like, bow down to authority. Dirty.
- [78:36]
A
Put sand in skate parks, so that way kids couldn't go. Go outside and skate.
- [78:42]
C
That's evil.
- [78:43]
A
They were arresting people for being on the beach during COVID Yeah, like, no one's around, and there are a handful of people on the beach and they were just wrapping.
- [78:52]
B
It was somewhere where someone that was like, out in a boat or on a canoe or something, they went out on a boat and arrested the guy. That might have been. That might have been in Australia. I'm not sure, but it was nuts.
- [79:01]
A
But I mean, California, it was definitely. They were doing that in California. There are people that talk about. I see the picture of the skate parks filled with sand. I see the. That picture frequently on X Venice Beach. Yeah. Because. Because people respond to Gavin Newsome with that picture regularly. He'll talk about freedom and all these things. He. Because he wants to run for president. And people are just like, oh, yeah, you really care about freedom. You locked everyone down and stuff.
- [79:23]
C
Yeah. How quickly he forgets.
- [79:24]
E
Yeah, they have surfers, but you can't catch me. So.
- [79:28]
A
All right, we're going to jump to this last story here from the U.S. son, spare the rod. Parents face $2,000 fines or 90 days in jail if their child breaks the law in US Skipping to school to muggings. Oh, see, some parents will face fines or jail time if their children break Any laws ranging from drunkenness to felonies. The Glasser Township Council in New Jersey has announced that any parent who fails to prevent their child from committing a crime will face up to 90 days in jail or fines totaling $2,000. The council has identified 28 crimes that could result in parents being fined or jailed. Some of these crimes include felonies, disorderly conduct, associating with thieves, gambling and idly roaming the streets, among others.
- [80:11]
D
I associate roaming the streets.
- [80:14]
A
Harsher penalties will be assigned to parents of children who are repeated offenders. New consequences come one year after a massive brawl erupted at a community drone show in South Jersey. The crowd of the show grew to 500 people, with kids and young adults making up the majority of the viewers. Multiple fights broke out throughout the show leading to the arrest of 11 people. Of the 11 arrests, nine involved teenagers. The ages of the arrest were teenagers. Teens of the ages of the arrested teens were 13 to 17, with seven of the arrestees being boys and three being girls. That's not a surprise. All of the teens arrested were charged with disorderly conduct and then released to their homes. During the fights, three police officers were injured and sustained minor injuries. The lawless groups of unsupervised juveniles and young people acting with total disregard for others ruined a great family oriented event which has taken place to raise funds for the Gloucester Township Scholarship committee for over 40 years. Gloucester. Gloucester Township Police Chief David Harkins told the outlet at the time, this type of lawless lawlessness and the violent, riotous behavior will not be tolerated and will not define the great community of Gloucester Township. I think that this will likely not produce the results that they want because I don't. I think that a lot of these kids that, and this is just an assumption, but I think a lot of the kids that end up behaving this way being, you know, kind of out of sorts and, and getting in trouble and stuff. A lot of them don't have two parents. What are you gonna do? You gonna throw a single mom in jail for 90 days?
- [81:50]
C
Is, are the kid. Do the kids get any sort of repercussions or is it just to the parents? Because also I can't imagine, like, what about the kids that hate their parents and then they'll purposely commit crimes to get their parents in jail. So like, what are you gonna do there?
- [82:06]
B
It really seems like a bad.
- [82:07]
A
That's.
- [82:08]
C
I, I could see where maybe they thought this would be a good idea because there is a lot of, a lot of like juvenile crime in Jersey.
- [82:19]
D
Why can't they discharge the kids.
- [82:22]
A
Well, because it doesn't seem, apparently it's not working. They're kids.
- [82:26]
D
The punishments harsher on the kids because they're kids.
- [82:28]
A
The point, the point, the point being that like they're under 18 so they don't get charged as, as an adult.
- [82:34]
D
But like you can still, still. I had plenty of friends that like went to, to jail at like 14 and 16.
- [82:41]
A
Oh my God, plenty of them.
- [82:44]
D
I'll be associating with thieves, but check this out.
- [82:47]
A
This is the crimes. Parents are held responsible for a felony, high misdemeanor, misdemeanor or other offense, violation of any penal law or municipal ordinance, any act or offense which he or she could be prosecuted in the method, partaking of the natural nature of a criminal action or proceeding, being a disorderly perpetual person, habitual vagrancy, incorrigibility, immorality, knowingly associating with thieves or vicious or immoral people growing up in idleness or delinquency, knowingly visiting gambling places or patronizing other places or establishments, his or her admission to which constitutes a violation of law, a felony, high misdemeanor or other offenses, violation of any penal law or municipal ordinance. Are they repeating that? Yeah, looks like they're, it looks like they're just repeating them. I like, was that indecent? Exposurely person begging, drunkenness, consumption of alcohol, alcoholic beverages on a public street, destruction of pagan equipment in public parks.
- [83:47]
B
I mean growing up in idleness mean I'm tired.
- [83:51]
D
I wasn't sure like a period of time. Like we've been watching you for 30 days and you've grown a whole month in idleness.
- [83:57]
A
You're just doing nothing but doing nothing. And so they're gonna arrest your parents.
- [84:02]
D
We're taking your parents.
- [84:03]
B
We've been reading the biometrics of your seven year old and he hasn't been exercising enough. Two thousand dollar fine.
- [84:08]
D
He failed the school wellness test.
- [84:11]
A
I mean do you guys think that this would actually work?
- [84:13]
B
No.
- [84:13]
A
Or do you think that.
- [84:15]
B
Well, I mean the nature of humans, it's the pendulum swinging. These, these councilmen got so overwhelmed with emotion is that now they're like, we just need to stop it all. Let's just do something extreme.
- [84:25]
A
Do you think that parents, parents are too, are not stern enough with their children nowadays and this is the result.
- [84:32]
B
I'd have to, I'd have to hang out with parents one on one more to answer that directly.
- [84:36]
C
No. Yeah, there's a lot of. Now it's like the, a lot of kids are growing up like with their own iPads and everything.
- [84:42]
A
Gentle parenting.
- [84:43]
C
And the gentle parenting. It's like the. The kid can punch their mother in the face and the mother will be like, oh, sweetie, no, please don't do that. We don't. And then the kid will slap her again. No, no.
- [84:56]
A
You have kids, right?
- [84:57]
C
Yeah, I have a two and a half year old who does hit me, but he's also two and a half.
- [85:01]
D
Is this particular to New Jersey, like, the. This kind of stuff?
- [85:06]
C
No, no.
- [85:06]
A
I like to take a chance to go ahead and give. Give New Jersey the grief. But I don't think that it is.
- [85:11]
C
No, no, no, no, it's not. Because there's also. When we were in. We lived in Virginia right after having river, and. And like, there was one family that would come over, like, we would. Friends would get together and like, they would barely associate with this toddler. Just stick an iPad in front of this toddler and just like, not play with him at all. And it's like. So the kids grow up in front of screens and then they grow up with the gentle parenting. Oh, we don't hit. You know, we have to be nice. And they have no actual structure. So I definitely think, think that parents have become easier on their kids now. I mean, I was. I was like, spanked as a child. I don't think it was necessarily fun, but I am a. Maybe there needs to be, like, a balance. But today the gentle parenting has definitely taken over and kids aren't being disciplined thoroughly. I think they're not, like, afraid of their parents. Parents.
- [86:12]
B
Yeah. I think the balance is that you want. You don't want to scare your children.
- [86:16]
C
Yeah, you don't want to scare them, but you still want to make sure that, like, they stay in line.
- [86:21]
B
In a way. You kind of want to present an essence of fear, like you are the authority that will bring down the hammer and destroy everything you love if you wrong me in the future, that will be the government. So keep. And then. But also. But not to hurt them. To sort of. To make them. To make sure it's okay for them to be afraid of what might happen if they wrong you. But you don't want to harm them with beatings, you know, like a snacking, so that they're afraid of never getting that sharp smack on their ass again. And they never do it again. Good. Doing it till you can feel their bones breaking.
- [86:51]
C
That's abuse.
- [86:53]
B
Yeah. That doesn't make the kid not do it again.
- [86:55]
C
And then they usually end up being criminals.
- [86:56]
B
So pain. Then you talk about, like, what's an ethical level of pain to administer on a child? Like, to teach it with pain. Like, touch the whole thing where if they touch a hot stove, don't do it. Don't do it until they do it once. Once. They don't know why they're not supposed to do it. So. And. And kids give into the Internet and they figure out all their emotions and pains with a video game. They go out there and they say it to somebody in real life and they get their teeth knocked in and they go. And they. So you got to kind of socialize off the screen, I guess. Yes.
- [87:23]
C
Yeah. Yeah. It's a big thing. So.
- [87:26]
A
So your. You guys are generally the opinion around the. Around the table is that punishing parents will not help, but parents need to be more stern with their kids. Do you think that this would motivate parents to be more stern with their kids?
- [87:40]
C
Maybe.
- [87:41]
B
Yeah.
- [87:42]
C
I think maybe that's the general, like, idea is for families to get, like, oh, they see these consequences of, like, if their children go out and do these things. These are the consequences for you. And maybe it gets, like, their family, like, the family's act together. But at the end of the day, I don't think it's the best.
- [88:00]
B
You. I thought the same thing. You thought that if a kid is pissed off with their parents.
- [88:03]
C
Yeah.
- [88:04]
B
They're just gonna go commit some stupid crime and get the parents fined. Like, yeah.
- [88:09]
C
Like, you're a raging hormonal teenager, too. So it's just like, there's just. There's so much going on. It's like, they're not gonna think. They're gonna think, oh, my parents probably gonna go to jail for a little. It's gonna be fine. But it's like, no, that's a much bigger problem.
- [88:21]
A
So there's another thing that you might want to think about when it comes to this kind of stuff. Most of the time, if parent. Especially in places like New Jersey, if parents are too strict, then they run the risk of CPS coming and picking up their parents, their kids. If you allow your kid to go walk, you know, if the kid is too young and I'm. That's an arbitrary phrase. But if the kid is too young and he's allowed to walk to the corner store, there's a chance that the police will pick the kid up, bring him back to the house, and you'll get. You'll get, you know, and get a visit from cps. So how do you think that they would square that kind of system where if you're too stupid. Stern. The government might come and take your kid from you, but if you're not stern enough and your kid gets two buck wild, they're going to go ahead and come and pick you up and throw you in jail. I mean, what does that do? How does that actually help parents to raise their kids in a way where those kids will become, you know, productive members of society? It's, it's really, it's hard enough for parents to know how to raise kids.
- [89:29]
C
It puts a lot of pressure on, on parents, especially like first time parents.
- [89:32]
A
Both of you guys. Yeah, both of you guys have new ones.
- [89:35]
D
My children will never be out in the streets doing whatever it is that would put me in jail. I just wouldn't let that happen.
- [89:41]
A
How do you know I'm not gonna let it happen?
- [89:45]
D
Because they'd.
- [89:46]
A
Because I'm gonna chain them up in the basement.
- [89:48]
D
They would fear me like Ian said. I don't know. I. I don't know. I hope it never came to that.
- [89:54]
B
But we would lose privileges when the privileges are so good at heart home that it's, it's worse to lose those than it is to go do the thing you want to do. That's, that's why it was just so good at my house that losing that was just the most horrific. I didn't want to violate it because it was so good.
- [90:10]
C
You have to grow up in a loving home.
- [90:11]
D
Yeah.
- [90:12]
C
Like love your children. Like spend time with your children, engage in their activities and what they love. Like, I feel like parents don't do that enough.
- [90:24]
B
What kind of stuff? What do you do with the kid?
- [90:25]
C
Well, no, just like anything. Like just, it's just like engaging with them and like, you know, figuring out what they love to do, what hobbies they love to do and like maybe go and taking them to those to do those things. Like, I don't know.
- [90:40]
A
How old your kid, you say?
- [90:41]
C
Literally only two and a half.
- [90:42]
B
So I thought it impressive with a parent when they learn the video game that their kid loves.
- [90:47]
A
Yeah.
- [90:48]
B
That is a big deal for a kid if your parents can start talking to you in the language of the game and they know what the items are and everything.
- [90:54]
C
Yeah. Just show that like you're paying attention to the things that they are interested in.
- [91:00]
A
Yeah. I mean it's, I mean I imagine that just paying attention to your kid and interacting with your kid is the thing that they're after. Right. I know that there's. It doesn't matter so much what you're doing because kids don't you know, everything's kind of an adventure to a kid. Right. When you're 2, 3, 4, 5, like, they just want to do stuff with you because you're the most important person in their life, you know?
- [91:26]
D
Yeah.
- [91:27]
A
So I imagine the more time you spend with your kids and pay attention to them, that's the important thing. It's not what you're doing, it's. Are you doing things with them?
- [91:37]
C
Yeah.
- [91:37]
A
You know, and include them. Don't just have them be like, you know, don't have them be just a, you know, watching you do things or whatever. Make sure that they're doing things with you. Even if, you know, that's why they make things like little kids fishing poles, they're not going to pull in a, a three pound bass with it. But the kids there doing the fishing with dad, even if he's not going to catch anything worth doing, he's there doing the fishing, you know, and whatever it, whatever the activity is, it doesn't matter what the activity is.
- [92:08]
C
It's just you'd be like washing dates, dishes.
- [92:09]
A
Yeah.
- [92:10]
C
They have those like stools that kids can, can stand up on. And it's just like, even if you're doing washing dishes or you're cooking or you're folding the laundry, it's like, especially for, like you said, like a young toddler, they don't know any better. Like, they just want to be with you. Like every time, like my child will sit and play on the floor with toys, he's always involving me and I'm always playing with him because he doesn't want to do it alone. It sounds simple.
- [92:37]
B
I was thinking the last week or two that a lot of rhetoric about have more kids. It's been going on for years, like we need to populate growth. But I'm like, rather than ask how many kids do I have, ask how many children am I parenting? Yeah, because one, if it's your wife's kid from an old marriage, if you're the dad, you're the dad. That is your child that you're charged now.
- [93:00]
D
That's true.
- [93:01]
C
No, I get some.
- [93:02]
B
And if you're not there for the kid, what's the point?
- [93:04]
C
Yeah. You don't want to get too caught up in the, like have eight children and then not be able to like fully dedicate time to all of those eight children individually. You know what I mean? It's just like my opinion is it'd be better to have one child and be able to. Not saying you need to only have one child, but like just one child and be able to put all of your energy and attention into that child than to have have you know, five, six, seven kids and struggle to give them that attention that they're gonna want because they fight for the attention of their parents.
- [93:41]
B
I get the utilitarian argument of like if we were like in a tribe and there had been a nuclear holocaust and we had like 17 people we had to repopulate, go have 800 kids. You never see whatever. Do that if you need to. But I don't think that the system requires that right now.
- [93:54]
C
No, I don't.
- [93:55]
B
It doesn't seem to.
- [93:56]
C
I'm personally not on board with the whole have more kids than you can afford type thing. I'm not on board with that.
- [94:02]
D
It's crazy because ye, as a new father I feel like my 4 month old is already teaching me that I must be giving all my attention all the time and I couldn't imagine having eight kids because I don't know how to split that attention.
- [94:18]
C
The spoiler yeah, it's a very selfless thing.
- [94:22]
A
Yeah. We're we're going to jump to this last story here from the Post Millennial Trump to deploy 4,000 Marines around Latin American Waters to Combat cartels Report reports the Trump administration will be deploying an additional 4,000 Marines from the US military in the waters around Latin America in order to combat the drug cartels, according to a new report from CNN. Citing two U.S. defense officials, the outlet reported that the move is part of a broader mission to ready military assets to target the drug cartels. A third person familiar with the plans told the outlet that the additional military assets are aimed at addressing threats to US national security from specially designated narco terrorist organizations in the the region, including in the deployment is the GIMA amphibious Ready Group ARG and the 22nd Marine Expeditionary Unit reporting to U.S. southern Command. The effort is repeatedly has reportedly been underway for the past three weeks. A P8 Poseidon reconnaissance aircraft, nuclear powered submarine, multiple destroyers and a guided missile cruiser are also being allocated to U.S. southern Command as part of the effort. One of the officials told the outlet that the buildup of the military assets is meant to show the force of the US Military rather than the targeting of the cartels. However, having the military assets at the ready allows for more options if Trump orders military action to take place. An official from the Marines told the outlet that a Marine Expeditionary unit stands ready to execute lawful orders and support the combatant commanders in the needs that are requested of them. A memo from Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth earlier this year instructed the Pentagon to seal our borders, repel forms of invasion, including unlawful mass migration, narcotics trafficking, human smuggling and trafficking and other criminal activities, and deport illegal aliens in coordination with the Department of Homeland Security. Last week, it was reported by the New York Times that Trump signed a directive for the Pentagon to start using military force against some drug tells in drug cartels in Latin America. What do you guys think? Do you think that the. This is going to. Do you consider this an escalation of the war on drugs, or do you think this is more about securing the United States from foreign terrorist organizations?
- [96:32]
B
I think I.
- [96:33]
A
The latter.
- [96:34]
C
Yeah.
- [96:35]
B
Yeah, it's more of a defensive tactic. With the amount of fentanyl that's been coming over the southern border, reportedly from China, wherever it's coming from Canada, China to Canada, back to China, to Mexico, through the border. I don't know. But yeah, we gotta, we gotta tamp, tack that down. That's. I think, I mean, you talk about the war on fentanyl, that's a whole other thing, man. I'm open to starting a war on fentanyl if you want to talk about that, but, you know, forget about the others, the other drugs for the moment.
- [96:59]
A
Yeah.
- [97:00]
B
Or whatever else they got. More Fentanyl, I think is another fentanyl they're working on.
- [97:03]
E
It's also the people that they're bringing, don't forget, like these cartels bring lots of people across the border front. Have for a long time.
- [97:08]
C
They control that border.
- [97:10]
E
Well, not anymore.
- [97:12]
C
But they did.
- [97:12]
E
They did. Yeah, but not anymore.
- [97:14]
B
I saw them shooting a couple months ago. There's reports that the cartels were firing it across the border.
- [97:19]
D
Yeah.
- [97:20]
B
Now they got military on your coast. So that's what happens when you shoot at Americans.
- [97:23]
A
Yeah. I mean, so it's much my assumption, and this is not based on any kind of, you know, any kind of inside information. I don't have some kind of contact or anything. But this kind of show of force, it really, it's probably just an intimidation tactic. Yeah, it's to remind cartels what exactly they're going to be up against. Because, look, if you w. I mean, you can get on telegram channels and you can see what the cartels are doing, how they're outfitted, what they, you know, how brutal they are. You can see in. In graphic detail the way they behave. And they do look like militias. Like they're. They're not just dudes that are, you know, selling drugs or, or guys running around with an AK anymore. Like these guys are legitimately well equipped. They probably have anti air assets, right? Like they probably have things like stingers and stuff because you can get that stuff on the black, black market. So the, they have, you know, a lot of armored vehicles. They're not like APCs, they're trucks that they've put armor onto. They're closer to, I guess like a, an armored car that you would, you would have, you know, transporting money in and stuff. But these vehicles are, you know, full of dudes with serious hardware. They've all got belt fed fully automatic machine guns, they've got 50 cal. Rifles, semiautomatic rifles, rifles. They've got, you know, they're walking around with AKs and ARs or M16s and stuff. The idea that these, that the cartels are what they were, you know, 30, 40 years ago, that is, that that stuff is gone. These guys are, are as well equipped as any other terrorist organization that you would find in the Middle east or anything. But the United States has really gotten extremely proficient at disassembling gambling terrorist organizations. He spent 20 years doing it in the Middle East. And whereas the cartels are brutal and they're violent and they do things trying to intimidate, I don't, it's my sense that the United States military is not going to be intimidated. Right. And, and so they are. The argument that I hear is oh well, the cartels will come into the US And I, I do think that there, there could be some attacks in the US But I don't see the cartels having significant impact on the United States. And I don't think the United States would say, oh, we should stop going after the cartels because they've killed some Americans.
- [99:50]
B
No, if you look at it, I mean the best allegory would be like what they just did to the Iranian government with that bunker buster. And then like you, I think you said, Phil, a few weeks ago when we were talking about it, that it's like they go in there, the CIA, and they kill the leadership of this terrorist seller with this government. And then the next people come in, they're like, we're gonna get those Americans for what they did to us. And then they go in and they kill all those guys. The sea goes and they kill all the new guys. Then the group comes in, they're like, all right, you know what, we're going to play ball with the Americans.
- [100:14]
A
And the thing is, you're not, it's, it's not so much the CIA like, you're Talking about direct action military forces. Like if the Navy's there, you know that there, there, there are seals there, right? There are definitely seals that would have the capacity to go into Mexico and attack assets on the ground.
- [100:32]
B
I imagine they would use airplane, they, they bomb. They would do what they did to the Iranians to the T. No, I.
- [100:39]
A
Think how they would start, I think that more than likely it would be more like the way that the US Took on isis because the US Had a lot of COVID assets in Iraq that would go into Syria and take, take on ISIS and get into a lot of gunfights and kill a lot of, a lot of isis. The guys got, a lot of ISIS guys got killed by Delta, didn't.
- [101:04]
B
It was either the Israeli and the American intelligence together before that attack on the Iran Iranians, they, they, a bunch of killed a bunch of people inside. They had dudes on the inside. I remember that part of it.
- [101:14]
A
I don't know exactly. But that was all Iran. I mean, that was all Israel doing. The only thing the US did was use B2s with bunker busters or B1s and B2s with bunker busters because the assets that the Iranians had where they were doing the nuclear enrichment were too far underground. The Israelis didn't have anything that could get into those. Everything else was, was Iran. I mean, sorry, everything else was Israel and the US Attacked the actual nuclear sites because the US had the, the, the, the actual bombs that could get into them. That's it. So I really do think that the, the attack or, or the dealing with the cartels would be much closer to the way that we dealt with isis. Like ISIS was. ISIS was doing things like making passports. Like ISIS was a country. It was a, it was a, it was a very young new country, but they were providing infrastructure to, to the, the inhabitants. They were making passports. They were doing state things. They were doing things that countries do. And so the US had to, had to deal with them in a very different way than just dropping bombs on them. And so they had people stationed and they had, they had Bagram Air Force Base in, in Baghdad. I'm sorry, not Bagram. I forget the, what the, the Air Force base was or the, the, the, the airport that the US Outside of Baghdad in. Yeah, in Baghdad. I forget what it's called, but either way, that's where the U.S. forces were. And they were, they had some state. Some places stationed in the desert so that they could get into Syria. But they had a lot of special forces that were doing the, the actual Fighting of isis. And, and when Donald Trump came into office, that was one of the things that he wanted to do. He was like, we're gonna go and smash isis. And he really let loose the, the Special Forces and let loose Delta. And they went in and they, they killed a lot of ISIS and got them to the point where they were no longer technically a country. And Assad was able to push them back. And then, you know, there was a civil war going on. But the US really did disassemble isis. And I imagine that's probably the strategy that they have when it comes to the cartels. Now, whether or not the Mexican government wants the US to do it, I don't think that really matters. No, you know, because everyone knows that if the US goes, just like the same exact thing that they did in, when they went and they got bin Laden, right? The, the strike to get bin Laden, they didn't let the packs know because if they'd have told the packs, the packs would have informed. Someone would have informed bin Laden. So they had to do it without the pack.
- [103:37]
B
It's the Pakistani government. We say the pack.
- [103:39]
A
Yeah, the pack. The Pakistani, the Pakistani government. They didn't tell the Pakistanis because if they'd told the Pakistanis, someone in the government or the military would have gone and informed bin Laden. So the same things goes on in Mexico. You can't go to President Sheinbaum and say, oh, we're gonna do this, because Sheinbaum is only there because the cartels allowed her to live. There were like 40 politicians in Mexico that got killed in the past year or something like that, and they cut their heads off and hang them up on. Off bridges and stuff. So anyone that's a politician in Mexico, they're there with the approval of the cartels. It's a total narco state. So the US Isn't going to sit there and be like, hey, we're going to work together to get these. They're going to, they're going to go.
- [104:22]
C
In there with the cartel.
- [104:24]
A
No, they're going to go and they're, they're going to start attacking the cartels and they start taking those people out without the approval of the Mexican government. And the Mexican government's going to make a bunch of noise to the President, but. Or to the, to the US government, but they're going to say, we can't trust you.
- [104:37]
E
Yeah. Shine Bomb literally can't say, like, shine Bomb is the president of Mexico. She can't say that she wants to happen, because we all know It'll happen to her. If she starts saying stuff like that. If she starts saying things like that, very bad things will happen to President Sheinbaum.
- [104:49]
B
Okay, so Sheinbaum Control. Use her as controlled opposition. That's good.
- [104:53]
E
Yeah, that's. That's what I would think.
- [104:55]
A
You know, So, I mean, I. I think that this is a. This is the. The obvious course of action.
- [105:02]
B
Yeah, it seems obvious. It doesn't excite me. It doesn't make me happy. The thought of another military explosion, death, all this, God, whatever. But at the same time, it seems inevitable, like, if we don't militarize our southern border in some fact. Like, this is what even. I'm talking about the water, too. I'm glad that Navy's there. Very, very, very least is just a show of force. If there's an attack on Taiwan from the Chinese, our Pacific fleet needs to be ready. Everything is in position. You know, I like it. The Chinese Taiwan thing bothers me a lot. It's been on my mind lately. Someone said, oh, they're going to take it. I think it was Alex Jones was saying it.
- [105:35]
A
Well, I mean, there, there's there. They look at Taiwan as part of China, so.
- [105:39]
B
And if I was an alien looking down at Earth, I would have looked at it as part of China, too, and be like, why is this, this part controlled by that guy? Give it to them. Let them have their part.
- [105:47]
A
Let them. Taiwan's actually the same. Taiwan's actually controlled by Taiwan. Anyways, we're going to. We're going to go to Super Chats right now, so go ahead and smash the like button, Share the show with all your friends, go to rumble.com, become a member, and then head over, head on over to Timcast.com and join the Discord. So you can join us at the after show. We're not having an after show today because it's Friday, but we will have an. We have the after show Monday through Thursday where you can call in, talk to our guests, guests, talk to the panel, all that stuff. And also in the Discord, that's where the. The podcasts are. Are created. That's where people find love. There's like three people that got married in the Discord, So head on over there and join the Discord. But we're going to read some of your Super Chats right now. Andrew says Ari Trump, Putin interview. Putin finished off speaking English. This is huge. This is a huge deal. Knowing Putin will only speak Russian for interviews. Those last words meant a lot. I hope you're right. I mean, I don't know particularly how frequently Putin speaks English. I don't know how well he knows English. But listen, I would love to see Trump be able to broker some kind of peace deal so that way we can stop sending weapons to Ukraine or stop sending money to Ukraine and Ukraine can stand on its own feet. But I do think that this is probably just Putin making a peace of deal for a short amount of time. So that way he can say, all right, we can rebuild the military some, build up our, our, you know, ranks and, and prepare to go back in. I assume that he's thinking when there is a less volatile president, someone a little more easy to predict what they would do. But like, like I said, I, I mean I hope that, that it actually does produce peace even if, even if it's not a long term piece. Shane H. Wilder says the Texas House special session ended today. Cindy. Cindy, I'm not sure what you're talking about. The governor called for a second special session. Dem said they will come back if California redistricts in Dem's favor. Newsom said he will. Well, I mean, look, the, this is all about figuring out how Democrats can retain power. This isn't about representing the people. That has nothing to do with democracy or making sure that people's voices are heard. This is all about consolidating Democrat power as much as they can because they have been totally trounced and they are, they're remarkably unpopular. You'd think that considering how unpopular the Democrats are, something like 30% approve of them, a 30% approval rating. Their, their brand is totally been dragged through the mud. You'd think that they would say we need to come up with better policies as opposed to saying things like we need to figure out ways to grab power power in, in, in a, in a way that is not representing the people of the states. Like if they're unpopular, they shouldn't be thinking hey, how can we grab onto power and hold on to it. They should be thinking what are we going to do to offer the American people a platform that they will vote for. But they're not interested in representing the American people. They're interested in holding on to power. So hopefully, you know, they're, they're not successful in their, in their efforts. But this is, this is what you can, can expect from the Democrats. They don't have a popular platform. They don't, they can't speak to the American people. They're at, you know, record low approval ratings. And now instead of going and thinking how do we fix this. They're thinking, how do we grab power and make sure that we can hold on to power? Who cares what the people think? Who cares that the people don't like us? Who cares that the people don't want anything to do with our platform? It doesn't matter what our platform is. The only thing that matters is we hold on to power.
- [109:34]
B
I think it's because the. The COVID response was such a floundering miss, you know, fumble of human society. And now all those people that were complicit, like Gavin Newsom, they know that. And the utter humiliation, which is why they can't create a resounding message. And they're falling back on tricking people. People to vote for them.
- [109:53]
A
No, that's not even tricking people to vote. They're trying to get around people voting. They're trying to make sure that they can retain power in, like, no matter what the people want.
- [110:03]
B
Is it that they're not giving a message and no coherent message out of that party that I've heard. Is it. I mean, my best take is that, what can you say other than I'm sorry that I screwed you over for four years during COVID Like, they'll never say that, though. Yeah, because as soon as you apologize, like blood in the water, all the sharks attack, and then they never get reelected because they were weak.
- [110:21]
A
Well, not only that, but they're the policies that the progressives want. The. The far left wing of the party are the unpopular policies. They're literally open borders. Like, the closing the border has been super popular with the American people. But Democrats will swear up and down that it's horrible that the borders are closed. They want to have open borders. The Democrats want to have LGBT stuff taught in schools, even though the American people are generally not for that. The American people are still not for having, you know, the boys and in girls, sports. But they haven't really softened on that. They haven't moved away from that. They have doubled down on so many 80, 20 issues on the 20 side, as opposed to the 80 side, as opposed to rethinking what their platform should be. Donald Trump and the maga Republicans have really done a job on what the Democrats used to be. They used to be the party of kind of the center, and they used to be the party. Party of the working people and stuff, and they've abandoned them totally. Now they're the party of the super rich, and they're the party of the dependent class.
- [111:29]
B
Yeah, they used to be the rich people that were cool and then they stopped being cool during Obama. Obama went from being cool to not cool in like 2013 or 12. And he started to get really gray too. I think the stress of being, you know, the killer in chief was, was getting to him.
- [111:46]
A
Well, presidents tend to go gray when they get into office.
- [111:48]
B
He seemed cool. Yeah, that's true.
- [111:50]
C
I always say he was. I almost feel like sad like the potential, like he's such a great speaker. He like carries himself really well, but like he's really just a terrible person with terrible policies.
- [112:02]
B
When he came in, he said his favorite president was Abe Lincoln. I think he was planning to sacrifice himself to free us from whatever this global tyranny, this economic order had been. But then he learned as he became co opted by the system when he left office, he said his favorite president was Trump, Teddy Roosevelt. So he completely let go of that whole Abraham Lincoln ethos while he was in office. At some point.
- [112:20]
C
So much wasted potential, honestly.
- [112:23]
A
Funk master general says Ian, what happened to the live streams? The masses are clamoring for them to.
- [112:28]
B
Return one more live streams.
- [112:30]
A
They can't get enough of you just.
- [112:31]
B
A click button away. You know, I put a couple videos up on YouTube. Check them out if you want to get a fix. Talking about God and spirits, actually talking about spirits. Why your be your thoughts affect reality because you're changing the shape of your neurons which is altering your resonating field which is then resonating, causing other people's neurons to change. Anyway, your thoughts are directly influencing other people's thoughts and they thought about the spirits and how your thoughts are affecting. If they're within your resonation field, them these high frequency density things and then they're changing and then they're influencing so you can think healthy thoughts. Change the spirits with these healthy thoughts and then the spirits will then make other people think healthy thoughts. It's a wild ride.
- [113:12]
A
See Trump and the rue actual says Trump and the Clintons are still close friends. Same with the Obamas. It's all theater. Trump is one of them. He is proving every day he's not on our side. I'm. I'm not sure that I agree. I think that the, the fact that the. They were trying so hard to put him in jail makes me think that maybe he's not actually one of them. You may not like what he's been doing or don't think that he's been doing enough. And that's. There's an argument to be had there. You, you're, you're entitled to your opinion but the idea that he's the same as the people that are trying to throw him in jail, I don't know, man.
- [113:48]
B
Yeah. If you get in a swamp, people might think you're part of that swamp if they see you in there digging around. And he's in there right now.
- [113:55]
A
Rue actual came back and said, if he was on our side, there would already be over a million deportations. No, there wouldn't. The nfa, irs, and the ATF would be gone. No, they wouldn't. He would be. He would tell judges to get effed and people would be in prison. You're wrong on all of that.
- [114:10]
D
Yeah. I kind of feel like he doesn't have that kind of power. We're kind of overestimating.
- [114:13]
A
Bingo.
- [114:13]
C
Actually do.
- [114:14]
D
It's amazing to me that he's able to have done what he's done so far.
- [114:18]
A
So the, the. A million deportations, it takes time to actually process the people. I mean, I'm not even sure if you have enough time to grab. Like, a million's a lot, man. Like a millions of a whole lot. The nfa, irs, and the ATF would be gone. That takes Congress, not Donald Trump. Right. Like, all of those things were created by an act of Congress, so it would require an act of Congress to make them go away. You're. You're, you're saying that you wish Donald Trump would just be a dictator. I don't think that that's a good thing for the country. I do think that he's doing things that could, could have the results that you're looking for. But there is a process. No one likes it. No one likes to see the way the sausage is made. Right. That phrase means no one likes to see how things are actually done in D.C. and it's hard to pass legislation for a reason, because the federal government isn't supposed to be passing legislation. So you've got a hundred years of garbage legislation that's been passed and 100 years of bureaucracies that's been created, maybe more. One guy isn't going to get in there and in six months be like, bam, it's all set. Now, unless that guy gets in there and literally takes over the whole government with the military pointing guns at people. Like, I understand where you're coming from, that you want these results, and a lot of those results I want, too. But to think that that was ever going to happen was an error in on you, your part, because it was never going to be like that. Let's see. Ski Bird says, my wife and I are continuing the tradition under IRL while in labor with our third daughter. Cheers. Congratulations. Thank you for letting us know. We appreciate that. Make babies, right? Like making them is fun and having a family is cool. Make babies. So get married and make babies. Let's see. Dan Hall, 960 says countries do not have morals, only interest. Yes. That is 100 true. You can have a population that wants, they, they want, that wants policies that ascribe to the population's moral, moral outlook. But the countries themselves, they don't have morals. They only have interests. Smokey Mirror said, should EMP guns be legal as home defense weapons or. Or as drones and cyber warfare type things become commonplace? I mean, I don't know if they have EMP guns yet. Right. Like that won't fry everything, you know.
- [116:57]
B
So would it shut the lights off if you pulled the trigger or would.
- [116:59]
D
It be like direct practice with that?
- [117:01]
A
Yeah, I mean, I would you go? I personally, I think that if they, if they did have them, I think that they're. They're probably non lethal to humans as EMP weapons. Like people. That doesn't really affect people. So I can't, I can't imagine that being a problem for people owning them. I mean, the government likes to get involved and say, you know, you can't own this with a lot of things. So maybe they would stick their nose in. But yeah, I, I don't think that that would be a problem. Wyatt Claydenberg says, I watched Culture War today and I am an old fart and not with it. Are young people's sexual relationships really that weird? If so, the west is doomed. Look, man, I think they probably are that, that weird. There's, there's a lot of kids nowadays that have not ever had any alcohol. I think it's something like less than half of Gen Z has ever had any alcohol. Kids aren't smoking weed anymore. They're not going out and doing the things they used to do. So I think you're probably right. It, it. They probably are that weird.
- [118:05]
B
So I didn't, I didn't get the reference of the show. I didn't see that part of the show. Tinder made things weird. Online dating sure made things strange.
- [118:15]
A
Let's see. Garrett says D.C. is ruled by Congress. D.C. was allowed home rule in 73. D.C. home rule can and will be removed. D.C. has zero say in the matter. I mean, yes, that's true. They, they do. Let's see. Garrett goes on to say, complaining, yeah, I'm out. You guys need fact checkers. Too much ignorance being drop tonight meet before and talk about the topics and fact Check yourselves.
- [118:43]
B
Okay, Gary, drop specifics, homie. What was wrong? Give the correction in the super chat. Be a team player, Gary.
- [118:51]
A
Joe Arnold says, thank God Ian is back. The show is too boring without him. Welcome back, Ian Arnold. Everybody loves you.
- [118:57]
B
Hi Joe. Thank you.
- [118:59]
A
And then someone else says, Justin Green says this idiotic crap like this that makes me hate Ian.
- [119:05]
B
I love these. I love you so much. What, what's his name?
- [119:07]
A
Thank you, sir. Who is he? Justin Green.
- [119:10]
B
Justin, thanks for the expression. I love. Sometimes I'll read literally in a chat I'll be like, Ian is the best. Ian sucks. It'll be like, I want a screenshot. And just be like life on the Internet, baby.
- [119:19]
A
Let's see. MrP 1775 says Phil, last night you said the US has been stable since 1905. 1945 also argument go. Also argued government made a boo boo with fed in 1913. Does former cut against ladder not defend fed wef boo with capital 86 apologies if misconstrued. I do think that it is, it is probably like you wouldn't have had the, the Cold War if it wasn't for the Federal Reserve. You wouldn't have had a lot of the, the bureaucracy. You wouldn't have had all the bureaucracy that we have without the Federal Reserve. I think that a significant portion of our, actually probably all of our big bloated government is because of the Federal Reserve. If it wasn't for the ability to print money, I don't think that the government would have been able to have all of the, the bureaucracy. They wouldn't have been able to, to engage in all the, the adventurism and wars abroad and stuff. So it is possible that the US wouldn't be able to do things like have the liberal economic order that is made the world a, a much better place after World War II. But without the, without the Federal Reserve. I mean. But yeah. So let's see one last one. Pinochet's helicopter tour says, Phil, look into what the job Is of the 7th Special Forces Group is also Stop Glazing the CIA. No, I'm, I'm not going to stop glazing the CIA, even though I don't know how I am glazing the CIA. A lot of times people are like, like, if you don't criticize the things that I want you to criticize, then that means that you're glazing them or you're a shill. It's like, I want to Hear my opinions coming out of your mouth. And if I don't hear my opinions coming out of your mouth, that means you're a shill.
- [121:07]
C
Sounds very liberal.
- [121:08]
A
It's. Yeah. I tell you what, there's a lot of people, A lot of people that get mad at you if you don't have their opinion. And that's a very leftist liberal.
- [121:15]
B
You know, if you want to hear your words in Phil's mouth, just super chat them.
- [121:18]
A
There you go. I mean, we'll. We'll read things that are critical as well as things that are positive, so. All right, smash the like button. Share the show with your friends. Do you have any. Where. Where can people find you on the Internet?
- [121:30]
C
You can find me on X at Real alex lanes. That's LA INS and Instagram @ Living Lifelike. Alex.
- [121:39]
B
Thanks for coming, Alex.
- [121:40]
A
Thanks, Carter.
- [121:41]
B
Artist in the house.
- [121:42]
D
I've been trying to find this link.
- [121:44]
B
What link? It's.
- [121:45]
D
It's to the song that me and Alex are gonna do. Tomorrow is inspired by it. It's from the Sin Frontera score that I did and I'm like, trying to give it to y' all and I.
- [121:54]
B
Literally can't play it out well, Carter, so.
- [121:56]
D
Yeah, go ahead.
- [121:57]
B
I'm Ian Crossland. You can find me at Ian Crossland, which is my name, all over. Pretty much all over the Internet. So find me, hit me up. Happy to be here. Great to. Great to have you.
- [122:05]
D
I'll tweet it whenever I find it. Just follow me at Carter Banks. I'm gonna tweet momentarily.
- [122:11]
A
I am Phil that Remains on Twix. The band is all that remains. You can check us out on Apple Music, Amazon Music, Pandora and Deezer. Don't forget, the left lane is for crime. And we will see you all back here Monday. There will be clips throughout the weekend, so keep that YouTube app open and we'll see you on Monday.