Mark Dubowitz (5:53)

Hey, Tim. Great to be here.

Tim Pool (5:54)

Thanks for coming. Who are you? What do you do?

Mark Dubowitz (5:56)

So I am a swamp creature. I Live in Washington D.C. been running a national security think tank for about 20 years, working on Iran, Middle east foreign policy issues. 2019 got sanctioned by Iran. Kind of a fatwa for my hard work. And yeah, so I've been in America for over two decades. Born in South Africa, raised in Canada.

Tim Pool (6:19)

And I heard you and Serge speaking Afrikaans. We were, we were, I think we.

Mark Dubowitz (6:25)

Were cursing at each other. In Afrikaans. That's probably all the Afrikaans we know.

Phil Labonte (6:28)

It's the fun stuff, a lot of fun.

Tim Pool (6:31)

Everybody knows the swears.

Mark Dubowitz (6:32)

Yeah, everyone knows the swears. And great to be on the show first time and launching my own podcast pretty soon called the Iran Breakdown, all about Iran. So big year 2025, I think this is the year that we may see either the United States or Israel bomb Iran's nuclear facilities, or we may see Trump do the greatest deal of the century. So the podcast is gonna follow the details of this every week.

Tim Pool (6:53)

We actually, and we did talk a little bit about this more. So I actually ranted to you about the Israel stuff. I thought it was fun. But that's going to be on the Green Room show, which will be up on our Rumble premium channel for premium subscribers. It was, it's interesting, we had a conversation about Israel and I think it was interesting because we both agreed we need a tapering off of subsidy of Israel. They need to become self sufficient in, in some capacity over time. Interesting conversation. I won't, I won't spoil it. Maybe we'll get into a little bit, but it's going to be fun. Thanks for hanging out. We got Raymond G. Stanley Jr. What's up friends?

Ian Crossland (7:24)

It's Raymond, your local USMC veteran and Blue collar fella excited to talk to Market. It was a great Green room, if I'm be honest. You gotta watch out for Zhuz. But it was very fun. It was good to, it was good to listen to Phil.

Phil Labonte (7:38)

Hello everybody. My name is Phil labonte. I'm the lead singer of the heavy metal band all that Remains. I'm an anti communist and a counter revolutionary. Let's go.

Tim Pool (7:45)

Here we go, ladies and gentlemen, from Daily Mail, Trump's border czar gives wild answer on if ICE will round up leftist groups aiding illegal immigrants. Before I read his quote, I just want to say we asked this question as many Democrats had been instructing illegal aliens on how to avoid law enforcement. And the question, so there is along the books, I believe it is US Code Title 8, US Code 1324, Section A, Section 4A, which says that inducement of an individual who is here illegally, knowingly or otherwise, that you know, with reckless disregard for whether or not they be committing a crime, if you induce them to stay here, that would be a crime. Now in the debate and sort of the argument it was, yeah, but if you're informing someone of their legal rights, you're not really committing a crime. The issue is, of course, when we see Ilhan Omar and these other Democratic reps, we know their intention. So I put it like this. You know, we've all been to those parties, those keggers when we were young, where they're selling cups. They're like, I got a red cup for five bucks. I'm not selling beer, I'm selling cups. Good luck. You're gonna go to court and they're gonna be like, we knew exactly what you were doing. You were selling beer to minors cups.

Phil Labonte (8:58)

I do think, because it's a congressperson that's actually making these statements and informing these people. That would imply to people, obviously not directly tell them, but imply to people, look, this is an authority telling me that it's okay for me to do these things. For me to come. This is someone in a position of authority saying it's okay for me, I can get around the law if I do these things. So I think that if it's, if it's just someone, you know, just a joe on the street saying this is what you can do, you, it might be one thing, but I do think that people in positions of authority should be held to a higher standard because that position as a congressperson comes with the, the implied knowledge that you would think that the government has.

Tim Pool (9:42)

And the main point I'm making is we know the intention of these members of Congress when they're doing this.

Phil Labonte (9:47)

Yes.

Tim Pool (9:48)

They're not, they're not just telling your run of the mill American citizen how to, you know, make sure their, their rights are being protected. Certainly if you're an American and you get stopped by law enforcement, depending on the state you're in, it's always different. But you typically don't have a requirement to give your information to cops or show them your ID unless they've, they suspect you've committed a crime and are detaining you for such a thing. Usually you're just free to go. You say, am I being detained? If they say no, you say, thank you and have a nice day. Appreciate it. That I understand. But here's what, what, what we're, what we're seeing is activist groups, even I think AOC did this. They're putting out information specifically intended for illegal immigrants to, to skirt the law. Here's the story they go to mention. Since Trump took office, hordes of protesters have descended on L. A and other major cities waving Mexican flags and those of other Central and South American countries to decry the President's illegal immigration crackdown. These protests have involved protesters blocking freeways, though many demonstrations have been peaceful. Quote, sir, is there any plan to go after these leftist groups and these protests across the nation where those likely illegal aliens are flying foreign flags to be rounded up? A journalist for the Gateway pundit asked. Homan, the border czar had seemingly answered his share of questions, began walking away from the scrum, but the question piqued his interest. I do want to point out they chose the wrong peaked in. You guys need a copy editor, they wrote. P E A key King. Homan stopped in his tracks and flashed a brief smile before delivering a verdict. Watch and see what happens, he shot back, followed by, we're working on that right now, homan added, before striding away. Some of the groups seen protesting include Centro cso, an undocumented immigrant advocacy organization, and the Freed Freedom Road socialist organization. During the questioning, the borders are also shared that he is deeply unsatisfied with the rate at which Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents are able to arrest illegal immigrants residing in the USA when posed when posed the question of whether Trump is happy with the pace of ICE enforcement, Homan shot back, I'm not. If you look at the arrest in the interior enforcement, it's about three times higher than it was a year ago. Today, three times higher is good, but I'm not satisfied there's more criminal aliens that need to be arrested. Hundreds of thousand sanctuary cities are putting up roadblocks. We got leaks. The borders are continued. The question is, what are they going to do about these sanctuary states? These sanctuary cities where you have a government official outright saying we will aid and abet illegal immigration in violation of federal law?

Mark Dubowitz (12:14)

Well, a couple things strike me, Tim. First of all, I don't understand why these immigration groups are flying foreign flags. I mean, I'm an immigrant to America, proud American, was naturalized in 2015, came here 20 years ago. I mean, if I were advising these folks on public relations, fly American flags. I mean, that's number one. Number two is if you're inducing somebody to commit a crime. If I'm inducing someone to commit a robbery or armed assault or murder, I am as complicit in that crime as the perpetrator. So it is remarkable to me members of Congress are actually encouraging this. And don't get me started on Elon Omer, please. We could have a whole hour on her.

Tim Pool (12:57)

Oh, man, I heard the FBI is investigating her over this is recent over her marrying her brother. Because some people claim those DNA events. I'm not. Let's not get into that. Let's not get. But maybe, maybe we can later. But yeah, there's a lot of Questions here. And when we brought this up last week about whether or not it's illegal to provide this information, I'm curious. If you are not a lawyer, you have no legal authority to be giving legal advice to anybody. Not that no one's allowed to do it. I'm just saying, like, lawyers have. There's. You know. I can't think of the word.

Mark Dubowitz (13:34)

Well, I mean, you have an obligation as an attorney to provide privilege. Privilege.

Tim Pool (13:39)

Right, Right. That's what I was thinking of. Right.

Mark Dubowitz (13:40)

And you have right to counsel here. That's fine.

Tim Pool (13:42)

As a lawyer, let's say you're a regular person on the street, and you see a guy about to rob a bank, and you walk up to him and say, all right, here's what happens after you go and do this. The cops are gonna come from these places. Do not speak to them. And here's how you can avoid detection after you've committed that crime. Wouldn't that be plotting with them to commit the crime? Like, wouldn't you get in trouble for that accessory? Right. You're basically saying, here's how you can get away with it and avoid detection after you've broken the law.

Mark Dubowitz (14:08)

I mean, that's. That's conspiracy to commit a crime.

Phil Labonte (14:10)

Yeah.

Mark Dubowitz (14:11)

Actively engaged in the plotting of a. Of. Of a crime. And you are. You would be complicit. You'd be indicted.

Tim Pool (14:17)

So the challenge here is illegal immigrants in this country have broken the law already. And it's. It's one thing to provide blankets, legal advice, constitutional advice, all those things that American citizens saying to all American. To all of my American friends out there, and I'll say this legitimately, don't talk to cops. That's the rule. Everybody knows. You don't talk to cops. You get a lawyer. Don't be stupid.

Phil Labonte (14:41)

Yep.

Tim Pool (14:42)

And it is kind of rough because it's like, you can literally never. No. Like, there's some circumstances, obviously, where you talk to cops, like, if you call them. But the point is, when there's a crime being investigated, you don't know if you're the suspect. You just. I'm sorry. I mean, this is the way. The way it works. But there's something different here in that we have the intent, we know for a fact, and no reason. If you go up to a random person on the street and say, hey, AOC just provided this information how to avoid ice. Was that intended to help illegal immigrants avoid deportation? They'd say, yeah, of course. Oh, okay, well, that's inducement. That's illegal. The question Is, is Trump gonna have the gall to actually go after Democrat politicians who have long broken the law and skirted our federal codified law to induce illegal immigration? Because let's be real, as Phil was pointing out, these people from a position of authority saying this, what did we see? We saw people come to the border wearing shirts saying, please Biden let us in.

Phil Labonte (15:36)

Yeah, I mean, Joe Biden said that from the, you know, in one of the debates, he said, surge the border. And the result was, you know, 15, 20 million illegals came in in the four years or something along those lines. I mean, it was, it was an, it was record breaking and an astronomical number. And so if someone in a position of authority, if someone in Congress, an elected official, if they're making these kind of statements, there has to be a higher standard that they're held to because of the, because of the implication that they're telling people the legal right thing to do. You know, I, I understand that, you know, everyone is free to, whether they be in Congress or a regular citizen. You're free to say whatever you want to say, but there are certain responsibilities that come with your position in Congress. And I think that, that kind of, that kind of, you know, interaction with, with people that are, that are illegal, saying, look, these are the things you do to avoid detection and these are the things, the rights that you have. So that way you can avoid having to, you know, interact with police or whatever. I do think that that does at least approach a crime and it should be something that Congress, and I know I'm going to sound like a fossil for even saying this, but maybe Congress people need to be censured for it. We haven't censured anyone I know in ages and ages. Most people don't even know what a censure is. Right. But like, there should be some repercussions because they've enabled people to come to the US illegally and help and they're helping them stay.

Ian Crossland (17:12)

For those, for those who don't know, just real quick, if you, you don't know what inducement means, it's a, inducement of federal orders can be illegal if it involves improper financial arrangements, which is if you get away from ICE and you keep collecting money from the state, the government, that might be that or actions that violate federal laws, which is them telling them the bad, the illegals to get away from isis. That's if we're, if there's someone in jail and they are to be stayed there and the police let them go and the Congress people tell them that they should go and hide somewhere. That's definitely violating federal laws.

Tim Pool (17:43)

It's basically encouraging them. I believe it says encouraging and inducing. So encouragement would be. We know what that means. It's a literal. It's like saying to someone like, hey, come here, do this thing and you'll be safe. You can do it this way. Inducement would be providing some kind of incentive. Say, if you do this, we'll do X. So this is encouragement potential under the inducement statute. But I think the issue is, for these Democrats, they have large, longly, for a long time, operated with impunity as it pertains to the law. Like sanctuary states and sanctuary cities is one thing where they say, we're not going to participate in law enforcement nor communicate with them. And it's like, okay, well, I feel like they're violating the spirit of the union of states by basically saying, we're going to break the law, which negatively impacts all of you, disproportionately, gives us power in Congress and the presidential elections, whatever. But now, when they're at the federal level, actively helping illegal immigration, advocating for it outright, now we're at a point where we have to ask ourselves a question. Can we as a nation, can we stop that? It's illegal. It violates the spirit of the union. Let me explain it. California offers free health care. They call it medical. Free health care to illegal immigrants, not to. Not to American citizens. That's inducement. That is inducement. You come here, we'll give you free health care is inducement. The state is doing that. When those people come, they then say, we will not deport you, nor will we assist federal law enforcement. Then the census happens. They get extra congressional seats, extra votes at the Electoral College, and we all have to abide by them breaking the rules and violating the Constitution and committing federal crimes. How do you stop that? I mean, unfortunately, it seems like there's one strong way, and it's going to be DOJ accountability. Perhaps Trump can cut off all funding. The federal government will no longer provide a single penny to any state that is not enforcing the law.

Mark Dubowitz (19:36)

Look, I grew up in a country, Canada, where, I mean, the political game in Canada was that the Liberal Party for decades would let in as many immigrants as possible, not legal immigrants. And basically the quid pro quo was, we're letting you in, you're gonna vote for us. And that's why Pierre Trudeau stayed in power for two decades. Right? Democratic politicians in America understand that game. I mean, aoc, Ilan Omer and the Democratic Party understand that the more illegal immigrants they bring in, the more pathways to citizenship they provide, the more votes they get, and that secures them a Democratic majority. I mean, I think at the end of the day, Donald Trump is President, United States and Republicans control the House and Senate because it is, in effect today, an 8020 issue. The 80% of Americans want to control their borders. They don't want illegal immigrants, by the way. They want legal immigrants. They were a country of, I mean, a number of us, you know, who came from different countries. We understand the power and the strength and in some cases, the beauty of legal immigration. What we don't want to do is have our borders violated. Illegals come in, and one political party in America basically piggyback on illegal immigration in order to ride to a permanent political majority. And that's the Democratic game. I mean, let's face it, at the end of the day, that's behind everything.

Tim Pool (20:52)

Let's jump to the story from the New York Post where it gets a lot worse. Border czar Tom Homan accuses FBI of leaking information about ICE raids. Lives at risk. Kristi Noem made a similar comment, pointing out that information was leaked to the LA Times about raids that were gonna be happening all over this country. Tom Holman pointed out that if this information gets out, there's gonna be some criminal, a gang member, a cartel member who's concerned about getting caught lying in wait. And when the law enforcement shows up, they get ambushed. Now, this is where it gets crazy. Tom Homan said that they've narrowed it down. They think they know who it is and there's going to be an arrest. So they're going to go after the leakers in the FBI. But in the previous segment, we are talking about Democrats, largely in California. But there's many states that are doing it, that are violating the law. That's US A, Title 8, US US Code 1324, Subsection, Section A, Subsection 4, Encouragement and Inducement of illegal immigration. California provides free health care to illegal immigrants. I would call that inducement.

Phil Labonte (21:57)

Yep.

Tim Pool (21:58)

They refuse to deport or cooperate with law enforcement. They use the illegal immigrants to bolster their census number so they get more congressional seats, more electoral votes. You have an inside job.

Ian Crossland (22:09)

Yes.

Tim Pool (22:10)

States violating the law for power and at the federal level, leaking information to aid and abet those states and the people who have broken the law, illegally entering the country and those that would help them. The question we asked in the previous segment was, will the DOJ have the gall to go after these states for doing this? When Tom Holman says they're going after the FBI, it's actually a terrifying prospect. If you think about it, this means you have rogue states. We've known this. But. And you have rogue FBI. We've known this. What happens when the DOJ starts going after arresting FBI agents, state officials, people who are within our state government and federal government who are actively trying to cause harm to this country? I think you have the makings for a very serious constitutional crisis and potential intrastate conflict.

Mark Dubowitz (23:02)

I mean, Tim, so what's going on here, if I understand this, is that FBI agents are leaking information about ICE raids to information that's ending up in the hands of not only illegal immigrants, but gangs who get the heads up that ICE is coming in and then can flee. I mean, that has got to be a violation or worse. I mean, it's got to be a violation of every duty that the FBI holds. I would also say probably a violation of their actual security clearances, because this is information that is classified information that they are leaking and they should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law as anybody who holds security clearance and violates that clearance has been and should be.

Phil Labonte (23:44)

Well, I don't know about anybody that has that. That's. That's had that clearance and violated it.

Mark Dubowitz (23:48)

Let's talk about that. That'd be interesting.

Phil Labonte (23:50)

But. But I do think that. I do think that in this context, it's not, it's undeniable if, if those things have happened, if the, if the FBI is leaking about, you know, ICE raids and stuff, I think that that is ample evidence that we need people like Cash Patel, people that are outside of the bureaucracy, going into these organizations and looking for the people that are not on board with the administration. There's a lot of people that are up in arms about Elon Musk. And the thing they say over and over is, he's not elected. He's not elected. There's only 435 members of Congress, 100 senators and one president. That's 536 elected representatives. That's it. Like in the federal government, everybody else, all the other millions and millions of people that work for the federal government, they're all appointed. None of them are elected. So this idea that, that an. Elect, an unelected person, you know, going in and trying to fix the problems of other unelected people is beyond the pale, is ridiculous.

Tim Pool (25:03)

If you.

Phil Labonte (25:03)

And the president needs to have the authority to fire people. And this is something that I'm not sure if we're actually going to talk about it. But it's, it, it's something that, that will come up in the future because a lot of these, there's a lot of judges that are blocking things that the President has said, you know, as, as executive orders he's made. And the argument is, well, the president does that, doesn't have the authority to do that. The president doesn't have the authority. And essentially what they're saying is if the president is of the opposing political party, he has no authority and will use the judiciary to prevent him from doing anything we don't like. I mean, there was a, there's a list, I have it. Of, of specific things that have been blocked so far.

Tim Pool (25:45)

We're definitely going to talk about that. Because the judge is being impeached.

Phil Labonte (25:48)

Good.

Tim Pool (25:49)

But that the impeachment, the articles impeachment are being filed.

Phil Labonte (25:53)

Good. That's important because we need to be able to fix, like, the problems that the FBI, if this is the case, if the, if the president.

Tim Pool (26:01)

You want me to just say it, Phil, go ahead.

Phil Labonte (26:03)

Yeah.

Tim Pool (26:04)

Let me say what we're talking about. When you have states defying federal law, cheating the Constitution, FBI agents opposing the executive administration and judges going rogue to shut down executive authority a long time.

Phil Labonte (26:15)

Give it to me.

Tim Pool (26:15)

Civil war.

Ian Crossland (26:18)

That was my first time on the show getting it.

Phil Labonte (26:20)

All right. It's been a while. It's been a while. It's been a while. But it's back, baby. Civil war is back on the table, or at least on the podcast. But you're not wrong, like how the, and thankfully we, we there. We do have. And this is something that I said a couple months ago when we were talking about, about these problem, these possible problems. I would prefer there to be some kind of conflict like this when the party that I prefer has the levers of power than when the other party has the levers of power. So if there's going to be, if the Democrats want to be like, oh, well, we're going to go ahead and, and resist, et cetera, et cetera, and want to, want to do all that stuff, fine, then we'll go ahead and allow the executive to do executive things. Send the FBI to go ahead and pick up the people that are not following the rules and put them in front of the jury, in front of the courts, I would love it.

Tim Pool (27:13)

Right. And this is the crazy thing, Trump, one of the moves he's made, he said, we're gonna put you on leave. And they said, no, he's not even firing me. Says, we're gonna keep paying you, but you're just not gonna be here. And they're like, nope, nope. So what? And this is what they did during Trump's first term, but this time he's not playing around. They, they've repeatedly tried to act like the president has no authority at all, as if the president himself is a ceremonial position. That's what they've been doing.

Phil Labonte (27:37)

Yeah.

Tim Pool (27:37)

Now we will get into more of that, of course, to go back to the immigration thing. We'll center this around like, you know, what we're talking about now. Law enforcement at the federal level that has been aiding and abetting criminals. And I got questions, I got questions because certainly we can look at what Tom Homan said. According to the story told Fox News Hannity, some of the information we are receiving tends to lead toward the FBI saying it's, it's this. They're quite certain it's coming from the, from inside the FBI. He said he's been promised not only will a person lose their job and pension, but they will go to jail. I'm glad to hear it. But I got questions for, for Tom. There were CBP agents that were facilitating child trafficking. Yeah, we're going to forget that. No. Is the argument that because Biden told him to do it, we're okay with that? I'm not okay with that. So I don't know how far any of these people are willing to go, but I'll tell you likely what I see happening. Tom Holman, Trump. They're going to say if we've got cogs in a machine that are the banality of evil, but they're gonna do their job. Now as we go against, they're gonna let these guys go. The CPP agents that were bringing these children in, knowing that they were being trafficked into sex slavery, they're not gonna see any charges. And the argument is gonna be, well, you know, they're just doing their job and we need their assistance and we don't wanna lose these officers and things like that. I don't accept that. But I don't think Trump or Hamad or anybody else is gonna actually take action against them.

Ian Crossland (29:00)

I think he'll. They'll take home in is definitely the right guy for the job because he works for the Border Patrol Agency and then he worked as an assistant special agent for Immigration for ice. And he's made his way up. He is tough as nails. He is hardcore and he would go after people today. I can see him. To answer your question to him, yes, he will do that. But I don't see. I'm really worried about him not going. Him going back and not taking all the agents who did facilitate facilitates all the child traffic, sex working.

Mark Dubowitz (29:29)

Let me say something. I think it's going to be controversial with this audience, but look, I think there's. I think I agree with everything you said, but there should be some legal consistency, right? I mean, FBI agents violating their clearances, providing classified information to drug cartels to give them the heads up that ICE is coming in is beyond the pale. Immoral and illegal. But a guy named Snowden, who had high security clearance, the highest security clearance in the land, instead of going to the Inspector general of the CIA and saying, I believe there's a legal activity taking place that violates America's constitutional rights, decides on his own accord to leak highly classified information to the press, putting people's lives in jeopardy. And there are people, I think, who want to see Donald Trump issue a pardon of Snowden or think that he was illegally convicted in the first place. I mean, I believe at the end.

Tim Pool (30:29)

Of the day, was he convicted? Actually, I don't know if they held a trial or anything for him.

Mark Dubowitz (30:34)

Well, he certainly. I mean, he should be put on trial. I think that. I mean, we'll see what the evidence points to. He says a presumption of innocence, but at the end of the day, if it's shown that he violated his security clearance and he leaked information that he was not allowed to leak, it's no different than FBI agents leaking information about ICE raids ending lives at risk.

Tim Pool (30:55)

And I think a lot of people watch, so completely agree, because we've talked about this before. I'm not here to give you. There's a lot of people who are going to say I hate the US Government or I think they're corrupt, therefore, what Snowden did was good. I'm not gonna play the game. I'm gonna talk to you about what is and what is not. Snowden is not a whistleblower. He is a leaker. There's a difference. Bradley, AKA Chelsea Manning, is a whistleblower, not a leaker. There's a difference. The difference is when it came to Bradley Manning at the time, releasing information on specific actions, blowing the whistle is saying, this one thing that happened was illegal, and people need to know this illegal thing happened. Now, that's a broad definition of whistleblower. Some might prefer that you go through the official channels of saying, I have uncovered something illegal, but when you're dealing with superiors or whatever, I'm not saying this is exactly what happened. But it's not so easy to do. If a person goes to the press and says, I've uncovered a direct action that is illegal and needs to be revealed, you're blowing the whistle. That's not what Snowden did. Snowden found a couple, a handful of programs, X key score being one notable example. There was spying going on. So did Edward Snowden. Then take that program individually, go to the press and say, look at this one thing that is illegal. No. Snowden took tens of thousands of documents without checking any of them or redacting any of them, and leaked them to a bunch of different news organizations in which Snowden admitted this in an interview, saying, perhaps I should have actually gone through them. And so there's a big difference between being a leaker and a whistleblower. Certainly I can say I am, I am glad to an extent. Snowden revealed information on NSA spying and these illegal programs. That's good. We learned about it, but it was done horribly. It was done horribly. This is, this is going on over 10 years ago when one of the documents that got released, just one, but it happened in many occasions. I don't think anyone lost their lives. But the identity, identity of a US operative was, was compromised in the leaking of this information without redaction. Snowden was challenged on it. And Snowden said, yeah, I probably shouldn't have done that. And it's like, right, well, you did wrong. You did wrong. Okay, so I can accept the good, but say it was still done improperly and there's gotta be some penalty for it. However, I will add at this point, I don't know. I think we're so far past it with the Snowden Assange, with the Manning stuff, where it's just like, I'm not gonna sit here and try and litigate the past. We, we, we. I don't wanna go backwards. And I know sometimes you have to. Depends on the severity. In this case, I don't know that we are, we are served by prioritizing that. There's a lot of, a lot of the things that I wanna prioritize. I'm not saying necessarily give him a blanket pardon, bring them home and give him a ticker tape parade. Maybe we just say we've got bigger fish to fry right now and we can acknowledge there was wrongdoing in that regard. But instead of ranting on all of that, because I can go in a million years on all that stuff, can that be said?

Ian Crossland (33:46)

I mean, I agree about going back to the past when it comes to the Border patrol agents. But that can different. Okay, that's what I think.

Tim Pool (33:54)

This is the point. Edward Snowden leaking information from several administrations ago, of which it included some illegal activity, but was done improperly, is not child trafficking.

Ian Crossland (34:05)

Correct.

Tim Pool (34:06)

So I don't think this is, this is. Look, this is my moral line. Edward Snowden did something wrong. There was some good in it. The CBP agents did nothing good. Children were coming off with numbers on their arms to child sex traffickers. And they were like, oh well, Biden told me to do it. And I'm like, Edward Snowden being doofy and being like, oh, I'm just gonna leak all these documents is a more of a banality of evil. But some good was in it. It's more nuanced. I'm not happy with the way he did it. I have no problem saying he is a leaker and not a whistleblower. Cuz people, they keep trying to say he's a whistleblower. They try to compare Snowden with Assange. Assange was a journalist. Assange was getting documents from sources, redacting information where need be and publishing it. Don't compare the two. Snowden did bad things, he did wrong. But there was some good in it. There is a moral line in that. CBP knew children were coming across the border, had numbers on their arms to sell them into slavery, sex slavery. And they went, oh well, there was no good being done there. And I will take no statute of limitations on that, Snowden. I'm just kind of like, I don't care at this point. You know what I mean? I mean, some people might say we can't allow these kinds of leaks to happen. You made a good point. Look, the FBI's leaking information. They, they think they're doing the right thing. We know it's not, it's bad for this country. So perhaps we need to say to Snowden, like, look, you leaked. And if we're gonna hold them to the same standard, you will get held to it as well. The penalty probably wouldn't be too severe. So maybe, fine, but for those CBP agents, for this FBI agent, I'm like compromising national security. Aiding and abetting cartels, drug smugglers, fentanyl, all that stuff. I don't tolerate that, that is killing people. One is administrative, bureaucratic, high level national security stuff, which is, which is scary. And one is directly eroding and ripping the country apart at the, at the base level. And I don't know, man. Look, I. The child stuff with CBP I think is just like, no way. No way. Let's do this, though. Let's jump to what Phil was talking about, the story at Newsweek. Judge Paul Engelmeier faces impeachment for blocking Musk's doge. Good. Absolutely. So this is Rep. Eli Crane of Arizona posted on X that he will be filing articles of impeachment based on Engelmeier, who is attempting to stop White House employees from accessing the very systems they oversee. I'm in favor of this. You know, I'll put it this way. I was watching a segment from CNN earlier. I know, I know. It was rough. Kaitlan Collins was saying that we're facing a constitutional crisis potentially within the first three weeks of Trump's presidency. Of course, the issue at play was he wants to put federal employees on leave. And, okay, like, I don't see what's a problem. But there have been lawsuits to stop that. There are things that Trump wants to do that they're saying, you can't do. You can't fire people. Well, Trump didn't fire people. He put them on leave. Right. There's a difference. They say, well, you need an act of Congress, blah, blah, blah. For Doach, this is a federal agency tasked with performing an audit of another agency and a judge intervening from outside the executive branch saying, you can't audit your own departments. That doesn't make any sense. If Trump tried to fire. Here's how it's supposed to work. Let me explain. If Trump tries to fire a bunch of employees, but Congress has codified legislation saying, you can't fire these employees in these circumstances, the courts, as a check and balance, would then come in and say, no, Trump, you can't do it. There's a law passed by Congress. Congress says federal employees are protected in these way. So in this way. So that's a check on the executive branch. You may not like it, but that's how we're supposed to do it. When Trump says, I have the U.S. digital Service, now called U.S. dOE Service, with executive branch employees who are going to go in and review documents from another branch. A judge can't block that. There's no codified law. There's no check on that. It's literally federal executive employees who serve at the pleasure of the president looking over documents in a department of the federal government to look for fraud and abuse. Here's where it gets crazy. A judge has now blocked Trump from pausing federal grants. So Trump basically signs this order saying, we're going to stop spending all this money at the federal government because of the because there's a lot of fraud, waste, fraud and abuse. The judge said, find the fraud first. You can't shut these payments down. Then when Elon Musk and Doge go to the treasury because they suspect fraud, a judge says you're not allowed to look at it. So how are you supposed to stop the payments that are fraudulent or you suspect to be fraudulent if another judge is blocking you from investigating fraud? These people are corrupt all around. Impeach them. Or Trump should just say, you are outside of your purview. The Constitution grants you no authority to stop me from doing an audit of a federal department that may or may not be spending money fraudulently. And you know what? They've already uncovered fraudulent spending. They fired several FEMA employees over it. Money should not be going from FEMA to luxury hotels for illegal immigrants, especially when they're.

Phil Labonte (38:57)

When FEMA was specifically targeting conservatives and Trump. Trump voters, people with Trump flags or Trump signs in their front yard. In, in after hurricane. I forget which hurricane. It was the most recent hurricane in Florida, Right. Ed Markey has a tweet that says birthright citizen order blocked. Federal funding cutoff, blocked. Illegal feds resignation plan, blocked. Access to Treasury's vital data system, blocked. Firing 2,000 USAID workers, blocked. USAID workers blocked. Drastic NIH grant cuts, blocked. Removing public health websites, blocked. This is literally in direct conflict with the will of the American people. The President was elected. He was elected. Clearly there was. It was. He had the. The Electoral College and the popular vote, and the Democrats didn't pick up one individual county. They didn't pick up any counties in the whole country. They only lost. The whole United States shifted to the right. Now, you don't have to like President Trump, but I do recall that when President Obama was elected, one of his famous tag or one of his favorite lines was, elections have consequences. This is what the American people want. This, this obstruction by federal judges. This is literally obstructing the will of the American people. And I don't see, and I don't see how you can see it any other way, because this is like. I mean, the USAID stuff is egregious in and of itself, but all of this stuff, it's just essentially an audit. And they don't even want to allow an audit. And the American people are almost consistently like, this is an 80, 20 issue. Like everybody says, okay, yeah, it's okay to audit the government. It's okay to shrink. To shrink the size of government a little bit, because we know that there's some kind of waste, fraud and abuse all the time.

Mark Dubowitz (40:58)

Look, I mean, Trump's political genius is fighting the 80, 20 issue, taking the 80 and letting Democrats go crazy about the 20. And it's a great political strategy. And if he follows that, Democrats will never come back into power. I would say the other thing. President Obama.

Phil Labonte (41:11)

It's also the right thing to do.

Mark Dubowitz (41:13)

No, it is the right thing to do. It's the right thing to do for America. President Obama also said that if Congress is not. Is gonna block me, I'm gonna rule by executive order. So, you know, another example of hypocrisy, I would say, just on the other side. And it's personal. It's a passion of mine. I don't know how this will play with you guys or the audience, but what's going on with TikTok? Right? TikTok controlled by the Chinese Communist Party.

Tim Pool (41:32)

Right.

Mark Dubowitz (41:33)

I mean, it's akin to having, like, Joseph Goebbels control every radio set in America during World War II and Joseph Stalin controlling, you know, ABC, CBS, and NBC during the Cold War. Congress, on a bipartisan basis, overwhelmingly passes a law requiring ByteDance, that owns TikTok, that's owned by the Chinese Communist Party, to divest within a certain period of time or face a ban. It gets challenged by TikTok in the courts. TikTok loses at the Court of Appeals. They go to the Supreme Court. They lose nine to zero. Supreme Court a day before inauguration is the time where the clock has run out. President Trump comes into office, and he decides not to enforce the law. Now, Tim, I want to ask you, because you were talking about the checks and balances in the system, I think the example you gave was a perfect example where the checks and balances can work. And these. There are many examples here where this is the executive branch's prerogative to do what it wants to do with the executive branch. In the case of TikTok, I don't know where you are on the issue.

Tim Pool (42:33)

But not a fan.

Mark Dubowitz (42:34)

Not a fan of TikTok. Should President Trump be enforcing the law passed by Congress and helped upheld by the.

Tim Pool (42:40)

Absolutely.

Phil Labonte (42:41)

I don't think he's far enough on China.

Tim Pool (42:43)

In fact, he is. So while Trump has come out and claimed he's put an executive order pause on TikTok, TikTok has and is still banned on all app stores. So when, when the law was put into effect, it triggered Google, Apple, and all the other ancillary digital and TV stores nuked TikTok from their platforms, as well as Cap Cut and other apps that are owned by that company. Trump issued an executive order saying, we're putting a pause on it. TikTok pulled this stunt where before the law went into effect, they shut themselves down. They. Then Trump came out and said, I'm gonna work with TikTok. Then TikTok turned themselves back on and said, thanks to President Trump, you know, we're back. All of these young people on TikTok who don't understand how the system works started cheering for this, saying, I can't believe I have to support Trump now. He just saved TikTok. And then a day later, all the app stores banned TikTok, and to this day they have been banned. You don't need enforcement. When the insurance companies tell big tech, we will drop you like a sack of potatoes if you break the law. So the argument I had made when the TikTok thing came in was Trump can say whatever he wants. He put a deferment on enforcement, saying, so I believe the penalty is, was it $5,000 per user per day or some ridiculous. It's like, it's insane. It's like, it's like trillions of dollars. Billions of dollars a day or trillions of dollars a day? And he said, you know, for this amount of time, we're not going to enforce those fines. And my point was, you know, running a company, you're gonna be hard pressed to find an insurance, an insurer who's gonna say, so let me get this straight. You intend to violate federal law, but because Trump said he won't come after you for the liabilities you incur in a short amount of period, you're willing to incur the liabilities over a greater amount of period. I ain't sharing that. If you get a grace period on a month for, let's say, let's just simplify it, the law says if you do bad thing, million dollar fine per month, President says, yeah, yeah, but we won't enforce against you. So you mean after 30 days you will. Yes. So that means if Amazon, if Oracle, whatever, if any of these big tech platforms provide a service to, to ByteDance to TikTok, they're going to incur those penalties, which is billions and trillions of dollars. And then after Trump's executive order expires, then they're going to go after him. Every single insurance company that's operating in that chain, of which I bet there's 30 to 40 of them for, Google, for instance, would cut them off in two seconds saying, there's no way we are going to Take the risk that Trump is gonna just not enforce that against you, and then we have to pay it. What happened? They all dropped TikTok in a second. Enforcement doesn't even matter at this point. Nobody's getting involved in that.

Mark Dubowitz (45:25)

But you do ultimately support the proposition that the Chinese Communist Party should not be controlling the most important media platform.

Tim Pool (45:32)

TikTok just gave us. So we launched another channel. We've been banned 87 times. TikTok's outright told us this time around they didn't do it the first time, that our conversations are not allowed explicitly. So our social team got a warning saying that while we allow opinions, we exist in a shared reality and your opinions have to adhere to ours. That's what it said. And I'm like, this is a talk show. We do a talk show where we have conversations not on TikTok. This is, this is the problem I have. Instagram's got no problem.

Mark Dubowitz (46:04)

Now.

Tim Pool (46:04)

The annoying thing is Instagram doesn't let us promote the show because it's political. They have rules and you have to go to like a special thing to promote or whatever. But TikTok bans us every time because TikTok does not want. This is the Chinese control. This is the communist control. In my opinion, they don't want these conversations to reach the masses. They don't want Gen Z to hear this. So that's why they're like, sorry, those opinions aren't allowed on TikTok. So much for free speech. And then you get all these people claiming that. Yeah, but TikTok lets you badmouth Israel and I'm like, and they ban everybody else. I don't care. Look, Rumble exists, right? You can say whatever you want on Rumble. You know, you can't break the law, obviously, but there are platforms and you can navigate them. So I am, I am, I am, I am no TikTok.

Phil Labonte (46:50)

Another thing about the. I think, I think when I said earlier, the US doesn't go far enough when it comes to the Chinese Communist Party. I think the CHIPS act was a good intentioned policy, but I think the fact that we don't make enough chips here in the United States to take care of the federal government and the military, I think that that's actually one of the biggest threats to the United States there is. It's not controversial to say that almost every piece of equipment that comes from China can be compromised by China. And I would not in any way be surprised if the Chinese had the ability to either access or to cripple vital software, vital hardware, in, in the military. That's used in the military. Look, because of the, the faa, we can't make drones in the United States. We don't make any drones. All of the drones that are built, they're all made in China because the fa FAA says that to have a drone, to build a drone you have to be a, it has to be line of sight or you have to have a pilot's license. So the Chinese can make drones, sell them in the United States, but you can't have an American company make them. That means that the US Military, which is using drones all the time and is only going to use them more as AI becomes more prevalent, because when you can have a drone that literally will just be following a squad around, so you got four dudes and you got one drone that goes with the squad, squad over their shoulder, giving them heads up of possible threats in the, in the, you know, down the downrange, or if you can send the drone into a building that you're trying to clear so that you can, you can assess what's going on, that kind of stuff. China will have all the access to that it wants. Not only that, it'll have access to all of our planning and all of our, our methods and all of our, you know, all the training that we do. It'll know all the stuff the United States does on the ground. And the idea that we don't have an infrastructure to make sure that the F22 has the chips that it needs that, to make sure that all the drones that we fly have the chips that they, that we need to make sure that all of the drones that are going to be assigned to just infantry guys like your, your, you know, your, your oh, three Elevens, you know, all your, your riflemen, your, your squads, all of that stuff needs to be, it needs to be made in the United States and it needs to be made. And honestly, it should be ts, it should be top secret. It should be, there should be significant security placed on all this stuff because if not, we're in a losing game, you know, So I personally, I don't think.

Mark Dubowitz (49:31)

One quick point on that. I mean, the greatest threat to our economy and our national security is when we lose Taiwan to the Chinese Communist Party.

Phil Labonte (49:38)

Absolutely.

Mark Dubowitz (49:39)

Because Taiwan is the leading center for semiconductor design and manufacture in the world.

Phil Labonte (49:45)

You should, if you build, if you're, if you break ground on a semiconductor building factory in the United States, you shouldn't pay taxes at all. Ever, Ever.

Tim Pool (49:55)

Period. They are trying to get those plants up and operating.

Phil Labonte (49:58)

You're right, the CHIPS act was a good initiative, but because of all the regulation that everything takes, we can't get it done.

Tim Pool (50:04)

Well, maybe Trump is going to. You know, I would love to see.

Phil Labonte (50:07)

I would love to see. You know, I know David Sacks is on, is working with the, with AI stuff. I know that he's working with crypto. I hope that there are other people in the, in the administration that are as focused on this stuff because it is the so I'm, I'm regularly, I say that the, the greatest, the only existential threat the United States faces is our debt, is our national debt, right? The Social Security, the unfunded liabilities, those things can blow up our economy. There is one other thing that maybe it's not an existential threat, but a major threat, and that's our inability to produce semiconductors in the United States.

Tim Pool (50:44)

Let's jump to this next story from the New York Times. Top FEMA Official Is Fired Over Payments for New York City Migrant Shelters the Trump Admin fired the Federal Emergency Management Agency's chief financial officer and three others after Elon Musk misleadingly claimed the agency had used disaster relief funds for migrant services. Ah, let's play the game. New York Times. They say blah, blah, blah. We get it. The firings kept a startling chain of events. Elon Musk claimed, misleadingly, that Fema recently sent 59 million meant for disaster relief to New York City to pay for high end hotels for migrants, and who called the expenditure unlawful. New York City officials raced to clarify that the federal money had been properly allocated by FEMA under Biden last year, adding that it was not a disaster relief grant and not been spent on luxury hotels. Nonetheless, just two hours after Mr. Musk's post, FEMA's acting director, Cameron Hamilton, announced the payments in question have all been suspended, even though most of the money had already been dispersed, and that personnel will be held accountable. By Tuesday morning, roughly 24 hours after Musk's post, the Trump administration had followed through on one part of its pledge. Tricia McLaughlin, spokesman for the Department of Homeland Security, which oversees FEMA, said that the four employees had been terminated for circumventing leadership to unilaterally make egregious payments for luxury NYC hotels for migrants. Ms. McLaughlin did not specify the employees had undermined leadership or how making payments previously appropriated by Congress amounted to unilateral conduct. But she said those fired included two program analysts, a grant specialist and the agency's chief financial officer, Mary Komins, whom FEMA's website identifies as A longtime public servant under President Trump and Secretary Noem's leadership, DHS will not sit idly by and allow deep seat activists to undermine the will and safety of the American people. McLaughlin said in her statement. The suit firings underscored Mr. Musk's growing influence. Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. Now, I'm just going to pause real quick and ask the New York Times a question. Where in this story do they explain how Musk was wrong other than just saying he was honest? Question, please tell me what was really going on with this money. Now, they say Biden had already. What is it they say under Biden it had already been appropriate, yet Trump signed an executive order freezing these, these payments. I know a judge has put a pause on the suspension and there's an appeal, an ongoing thing, but we do have a conflict here. What they said was that he's misleading them. It didn't go to high end hotels. But they're not explaining to us how he was wrong, what actually happened. So I don't tolerate this from news organizations. Elon Musk made an assert, asserted this issue. I want to know why it was wrong. But this is what the media does. They say he was wrong. And I say, oh, really? Why? What was the truth? And they say nothing. They say nothing. So which is it?

Ian Crossland (53:21)

It's debunked.

Tim Pool (53:22)

It's debunked. That's it. Like everything debunked. Well, I'm gonna say this. I don't trust these people at all. And I think in all likelihood they actually were trying to fund this. And the New York Times is simply claiming it's wrong because they're probably gonna cite some technicality as to why it wasn't technically going to high end hotels because the hotels aren't really high end because their stakes only cost $70, not 75. I don't know what they're actually talking about and I'm not falling for it. So you can come to me and you can say, no, no, no, Tim, here, look, here's what was really going on. The money wasn't disaster relief. It was meant to go to insert this or whatever. And that's fine. And you're allowed to do that. My point is we don't trust you at all. The media plays these games. Elon Musk will say luxury hotels. And they'll say These are only four star. They're not five. That's not luxury. Luxury is five stars. And it's like four star hotel with $50 stakes is luxury. And they'll say, no, it's an opinion. And then I'm supposed to just take their word for it. At any rate, it is big news to hear that one of the highest officials at FEMA has been nuked from their position over this payment. So this is absolutely fascinating. And I'm curious what you guys think about the moves Elon Musk is making and if it's a good thing or not.

Mark Dubowitz (54:36)

Just one quick point about the New York Times. Not to get to sort of my issues, but I've been reading the New York Times for decades, particularly on the Middle East. What's that?

Phil Labonte (54:45)

Condolences.

Mark Dubowitz (54:46)

Condolences on the Middle east, on Israel, on the Palestinian conflict, on Iran. And it's not shocking to me at all after reading the New York Times for decades on something I know a lot about, to find the New York Times continuing to mislead the American people about all of these issues. I mean, it should have been a red flag a long time ago that this is not news reporting. There are ideological agendas at work here. There are editors who have ideological agendas and find reporters to fit the story. And for those of us who support what Elon Musk is doing, for those of, you know, your audience who voted for President Trump, you should not be surprised that the New York Times has a deep ideological hostility against the president, against Elon Musk, and against Republicans. And every story you should read with a skeptical eye.

Tim Pool (55:39)

Let me do this for you guys, because to make my point, you know, often I'll use CNN, the New York Times to make that point. Here's ABC 7. This is your, your typical corporate press news outlet outright saying Department of Government Efficiency had Elon Musk on Monday sounded the alarm over $59 million payment by FEMA to house migrants in New York City. They go on to say that the finding comes as Doge continues to uncover controversies of taxpayer dollars. So there's numerous outlets asserting this as true. And the New York Times just simply said it was false and then didn't tell us why it was false. So you pick. That's the world we live in right now. I'm going to tell you what I pick. I pick that Elon is largely correct. USAID has been funding garbage. We've exposed a lot of that garbage. Donald Trump was elected specifically to go out, go after waste, fraud and abuse, among other things. So in the New York Times, which has lied numerous times about Donald Trump and actively worked to stop him from getting elected, comes out and says, Elon Musk is lying. I'll be like oh wow, the New York Times is lying.

Phil Labonte (56:33)

That's the knee jerk reaction. That only makes sense. You know the New York Times has been, I mean look, it's been garbage since the Soviet Union, since they were cheerleading the Soviet Union in the what twenties was when Duranty was writing I think it was, you know, and just straight up lying for ideological purposes. So to believe, to believe the New York Times is to intentionally accept the propaganda.

Tim Pool (56:59)

Remember when I have this story actually let me hold the story this from. Yeah, it was interesting point. Telegraph wrote FEMA officials sacked over $59 million payments to migrant for migrant hotels. Oh, that's weird that it's being reported as fact by the Telegraph and by abc. But they make an interesting point. They say in November a FEMA official was suspended after allegedly ordering disaster relief workers to avoid homes owned by Trump supporters as they work to clear devastation wreaked on Florida by Hurricane Milton. Remember when they, the media lied about that and said it wasn't happening. Then you ended up with an interview where the woman said well I mean if someone feels uneasy and they don't want to go to that house, you know, they, they can't.

Phil Labonte (57:36)

That's ridiculous. It's so ridiculous. I can't, I can't believe that they actually make that argument. Like oh well you know they, they, they're literally. It was the people on the ground like come on, I keep underwater and.

Ian Crossland (57:52)

They feel unsafe going there to try.

Tim Pool (57:54)

To help out fellow Trump sign.

Ian Crossland (57:55)

It's insane.

Phil Labonte (57:56)

It's insane. Well I just think, I think that these kind of things are, they happen so regularly and the bias from the media is, it's not, it's look, in the early aughts it was like oh well you know there is a left wing bias in the media. It's because they're based in cities and the people live in cities and so they have city kind of mindsets and the difference isn't really intentional because you want, you wanted to believe that you weren't being propagandized that and that honestly you wanted to believe that people on of the opposing political opinions weren't actually being targeted and attacked. But then when Barack Obama had the IRS scandal Lois Learn scandal when they were targeting conservatives and, and then every single, you know, nor you know, legacy media outlet went all in on Donald Trump's a Nazi and they all were doing the, you know, the very fine people hoax and all that stuff. It, it's not only did it become undeniable, it became common knowledge but they were doing, they were Doing the whole, you know, like, social Nison said, like, they're lying. We know they're lying, and they know that we know we're lying, and yet they keep lying. And now with the USAID stuff and all the. The doge uncoveries, we know that they were being paid, and I know there are people that are going to say, oh, well, you know, they weren't being paid. They weren't. Or they weren't getting, you know, just getting free money. They were buying, you know, buying subscriptions and blah, blah, blah. Yeah, but they were still making tons of money off of the government.

Tim Pool (59:37)

Well, where do you think all this goes? Do you think. Do you think Elon is going to stop anytime soon? I hear the. The rumor going around now that they're just going to gut all the departments, all the agencies.

Mark Dubowitz (59:48)

Look, I don't know how far Elon's gonna go. I'm certainly a huge supporter of this kind of accountability. But I was thinking, just as you guys were speaking about the media, I hate to invoke my age, but I'm old enough to remember what the media used to be like and what the media is today. And I think what saddens me is there's so much disinformation, there's so much fake news that I think young people have lost all trust in the media. And I think to be skeptical today, to be a critical thinker today, is what will make America great. What I worry about is, because we've lost so much faith in mainstream media and their reporting and their ideological agendas, is that it is now so easy to be influenced by conspiracy theories, to go down rabbit holes, to start to accept things that I don't believe anybody. I don't believe anything. Our government is evil. And from our government is evil to America is evil is not a far leap. So for that reason, I mean, great to have shows like this one. I mean, the explosion of social media, of podcasts, of opportunities for people to go and get another perspective. It's no longer the days of Walter Cronkite, where Walter Cronkite declared one thing and that was the universal truth. And it's certainly not the days of where now the New York Times, the paper of record. It's no longer the paper of record because I think it has delegitimized itself. I agree completely, as have, you know, has the Washington Post. I think the Washington Post is even a more egregious example of this than the New York Times. Democracy dies in the darkness. Well, so do subscribers when you're not reporting the truth. Yeah, but I do worry about where this taking us as a nation where, you know, you know, we no longer believe anything we hear. And I think it's very easy to go from that to we no longer have faith in our own country.

Phil Labonte (61:42)

Speaking of skepticism, let's jump to the.

Tim Pool (61:44)

Story from the Post. Millennial Anna Paulina Luna believes there were two shooters in JFK assassination. Oh, boy. We were originally going to lead with this because it's massive. You know what's really remarkable to me? I mean, let me start by saying we got it. We got a couple of big stories here. We got Daily Mail saying FBI uncovers hidden JFK assassination files after Trump orders full evidence release. I don't believe it for a second. They knew they existed. They just weren't disclosing they existed until Trump's making them do it. Yeah, but in my lifetime, you weren't allowed to question the JFK assassination. How dare you.

Phil Labonte (62:16)

And Oliver Stone got a lot of hell when he made the, the JFK movie.

Tim Pool (62:20)

Yeah, right. And then we sat down with Dr. Paul, Dr. Ron Paul, and he said it was a CIA. And we were like, wow. Well, right away. And I believe when we sat down with RFK Jr, he said. He said the same thing, didn't he?

Phil Labonte (62:34)

Yeah, he did.

Ian Crossland (62:34)

So.

Tim Pool (62:35)

So in our lifetimes, in our lifetime, we have shifted dramatically from the how dare you question the narrative to it's widely accepted that this was an inside job to take out a president that had been causing problems. And there were a lot of special interests that wanted to see this man lose his life. Well, in a press conference, Rep. Anna Paulina Luna said this. What's your priority list? Because Epstein911, our first investigation will be announced, but it's going to be covering on a thorough investigation into the John F. Kennedy assassination. And I can tell you, based on what I've been seeing so far, the initial hearing that was actually held here in Congress was actually faulty in the single bullet theory. I believe that there were two shooters and we should be finding more information as we are able to gain access into the skiff, hopefully before the files are actually released to the public. Now, I believe she's also getting roasted by many on the left because she mentioned something about wanting to bring in the Warren Commission. Did you see that video of which they're. They're dead. There's no one left. I think the old. The last person died at 2006 or whatever. So I'm just assuming she misspoke or is just Incorrect, but that's okay. I'm curious to see what they uncover from these documents. And I think largely the reason Democrats are singling out one misstatement or whatever is because they don't want to address the meat and potatoes here.

Phil Labonte (63:54)

Yeah.

Tim Pool (63:54)

That is, there are a lot of documents. Trump ordered them to be released, then offered up the pen to RFK junior. They used to sign the order and everybody. Oh, man, they. You insert conspiracy theory, they believe they're gonna find what they want. Of course, the UFO people are like, oh, I bet the document, it was aliens the whole time. And then of course, you've got the, the Israel people who are like, it's the documents. They're gonna claim it was Israel, but.

Mark Dubowitz (64:23)

It was the Jews.

Tim Pool (64:24)

But that's legit. There are people who are saying that the documents are being or only covered up because of Israel's involvement. It's going to include them. I think likely what we're going to find is there were very many groups that were interested in this, and I think the most likely reason for a cover up is government involvement. Yeah.

Phil Labonte (64:41)

So my, my tertiary understanding after the Bay of Pigs Kennedy was like, maybe the CIA is not all that and maybe we should think about disbanding or significant cuts or whatever. And CIA didn't like that. That's my.

Tim Pool (64:57)

He didn't say. He said he was going to splinter them into the wind or, well, more them into the wind.

Phil Labonte (65:02)

So then, I mean, is that, is that, is that. Does that wrap up what your sense is, Mark?

Tim Pool (65:05)

What.

Phil Labonte (65:05)

Do you, do you have an opinion on this or.

Mark Dubowitz (65:08)

Look, I don't know. I mean, obviously I'm also again, old enough to remember Oliver Stone and his film and the conspiracy theories that we all grew up with. I mean, I think many of us believe there was one shooter and many of us believed that there were, you know, whether it was angry Cubans or the Mafia or the Soviets. I would just like to say this. I hope to God that it doesn't demonstrate that it was an inside job. I hope to God the US government was not involved. I hope to God the CIA was not involved in the assassination of a US President because I think that will rock this country.

Tim Pool (65:46)

Do you think so?

Mark Dubowitz (65:47)

I think so. I mean, we were talking earlier about just my fear that this sort of new generation of Americans is not proud, is not patriotic, doesn't love this country, you know, is skeptical about their government. And I just think that if that becomes true and that the CIA was involved in killing jfk, I mean, I think we Are, as a. I don't know if as a country, we recover from that.

Phil Labonte (66:13)

Do you have a sense of what people believe now? Like, I know obviously nothing's confirmed, but. And the reason I say this is because the. There was, there's been a long time where people were talking about UFOs, right? And UFOs were, you know, something that the government didn't comment on, etc. Etc. Now it's come out that, hey, look, they, they've changed the name, they're UAPs or whatever, but they talk about them openly. And some of them, they, they say, we don't know what these are, blah, blah, blah, et cetera. And, and the American people are kind of just like, yeah, we know. And I feel like that might. I feel like that that would be the sense from at least most young people, like, if it was like, oh, CIA did it. Yeah, we know. I mean, if that's, if that, if you have a different, you know, outlook.

Mark Dubowitz (66:58)

I think it's one thing to have a theory of the case, you know, based on your own views, your own ideologies. I think it's another thing for the US Government to release information after all these years that demonstrates that the CIA was responsible for the assassination of the US President. So I worry about our country.

Phil Labonte (67:15)

If that's true, hypothetically.

Tim Pool (67:17)

Me too, and I think it's true, hypothetically.

Phil Labonte (67:21)

What happens? What does the Trump administration do if that turns out to be the evidence?

Mark Dubowitz (67:28)

Well, look, I think part of the problem with this whole issue has been the lack of transparency over decades, which has fed so many conspiracy theories. And I think the Trump administration is right to finally disclose this to the American people. And now if it's true, again, I'm skeptical, but if it's true, we're gonna have to reckon with this. Quite possibly one of the ugliest episodes in American history.

Phil Labonte (67:53)

You shut down Langley, do you? I mean, because.

Tim Pool (67:56)

And I gotta say, there's a strong incentive for Trump to want this to be true, considering what happened with him, with the 51 intel officers who said the laptop and all that stuff. Maybe the real reason Trump is like, we're declassifying the JFK files is that you are going to find either willful negligence at, like, at minimum, there's going to be some implication, I think, for government failure. And you could, you can go the official route and say, how did they allow this guy to get a shot off on Kennedy, or you can go to the most extreme end saying it was quite literally the CIA that orchestrated the whole thing. Either way, it looks like it'll be damaging. Trump could use that damaging to say we need an overhaul of this agency, an agency that largely targeted him. That's revenge. Look, I've always.

Mark Dubowitz (68:39)

What's always puzzled me about. And I'm not an expert on JFK assassination, but. So Lee Harvey Oswald is the single shooter, kills jfk. Jack Ruby, who works for the mob, kills Lee Harvey Oswald and goes to jail for the rest of his life and never breathes a word. And it just always fascinated me. I mean, Lee Harvey Oswald took out. I mean, Ruby took out Lee Harvey Oswald.

Tim Pool (69:05)

Why? Right.

Mark Dubowitz (69:07)

Why did he not want him to testify and publicize the involvement of somebody in that assassination? It's always fascinated me and puzzled.

Tim Pool (69:18)

Well, he didn't go to jail for. I mean, you can take jail for the rest of his life, but he.

Mark Dubowitz (69:21)

Died right away in jail. Right within.

Tim Pool (69:24)

Like, what is it? He died that year.

Mark Dubowitz (69:27)

Interesting.

Tim Pool (69:28)

Yeah, he died in 67.

Mark Dubowitz (69:29)

Yeah. So, I mean, that's always intrigued me, but again, I just want to get.

Tim Pool (69:32)

Back to this several years later. Sorry.

Mark Dubowitz (69:34)

Trump may have an incentive. Trump may want to, you know, go after the CIA for the things that were done against Trump. And certainly there are, you know, 51, as you say, senior intel officials who not only deserve to have their security clearances revoked, which he did.

Tim Pool (69:47)

Yeah.

Mark Dubowitz (69:48)

I think should have their reputations permanently damaged.

Phil Labonte (69:50)

They should be prosecuted.

Tim Pool (69:52)

Let's just, let's just.

Mark Dubowitz (69:53)

Having said that, I do think the CIA performs an important service in defense of America. I think the FBI performs an important service in defense of America. I think U.S. military.

Tim Pool (70:03)

I do not.

Mark Dubowitz (70:04)

I don't wanna see these institutions gone. I think it's dangerous for our country. I do, however, wanna see what does the FBI do? A massive overhaul.

Phil Labonte (70:12)

FBI, yeah, yeah.

Tim Pool (70:14)

FBI. Say, like I'm gonna tell you, certainly we can take the Cash Patel route and say these people should be enforcing the law. Go out and fight crime. That's what you should be doing. But they're operating like it's cointelpro. What is the CIA doing? What benefit? Let me put it this way. There is a country, the United States. The vision for this country and the perception of this nation in the minds of the people for a long time has been that it is the will of the people through a constitutional republic, that the structures of government will abide by what the people largely vote for, who the representatives they send to Washington and to their states, to their capitals. That's what it's supposed to be. For the longest time, the CIA took it upon itself to do what it thinks is right. And the American people have no idea it's become a zombie state. So if, if some. If you were to make the argument the CIA does good to protect this country. No, the CIA does good to protect CIA. The CIA has interests. The FBI has interests. The NSA have interests. The American people do not agree with those interests. If, if. If the. If the CIA, FBI, the intel agencies were actually operating under what the American people wanted, we would have a secure southern border and no war in Ukraine. Instead, what we get the whole time is the CIA protecting only itself and what it perceives, the people in the CIA and the FBI, what they perceive to be the right thing to do. If the American people vote to shut down the petrodollar, resulting in a unipolar communist Chinese party state, the American people voted for it. I do not believe we should live in a country where a deep state bureaucracy operating behind the scenes dictates for us what it thinks we should get. And that's what we've gotten our whole lives. Maybe that. Maybe that means we lose. Well, that's what America is, and that's what America is supposed to be. And I do not accept that we should be a nation of secret institutions guiding the blind American public into war and conflict because it's the best thing for them. So say I, the secret cabal of individuals working in intelligence. The American people voted for Donald Trump. They want these institutions brought to heel. They want a secure southern border, and it's about time we got it. And if that means these corrupt institutions that largely only believe in themselves, stop doing what will make Americans prosperous, will stop making us the big name all around the world, whatever it may be. American people never wanted that. American people never wanted to be at war in Ukraine, never wanted to be at war in Israel, never wanted to be at war in Afghanistan, never wanted to go to war in these places. But thanks to the corrupt, unelected bureaucrats and intel agents, that's what we got the whole time. For the entirety of my life.

Mark Dubowitz (72:49)

Tim, can I just say something? I actually think it's worse than that, because I think the reason we have a southern border that's not secure, the reason that we went to war against Russia, the reason that we went to war against Iraq and against Afghanistan, is not because of a deep state, is because elected officials decided on a policy decision to do that. Right? Joe Biden decided to open up the southern border. Joe Biden decided to open up.

Tim Pool (73:20)

I don't believe that for a second.

Mark Dubowitz (73:21)

I mean, at the End of the day, there was some American, I think it was. I can't remember actually who it was. It was an American politician who said, you get the politicians you deserve. And the American people have elected presidents who've made terrible decisions that have undermined American national security. Now, does that mean that these security agencies, the CIA, the FBI, and others should not be brought to heel? Does that mean they should not be held accountable? Does that mean that corrupt officials should not be fired? Absolutely. Absolutely not.

Tim Pool (73:52)

They should be.

Mark Dubowitz (73:53)

They need to be. And I think Donald Trump and I think appointees are gonna do this, however.

Tim Pool (73:57)

And we elected a Donald Trump in 2016.

Mark Dubowitz (73:59)

Right.

Tim Pool (74:00)

And the CIA colluded and conspired to destroy this man.

Mark Dubowitz (74:04)

And now we've reelected Donald Trump, and now he has the opportunity and should have the. Should have the authority to do everything necessary in order to make sure that doesn't happen.

Tim Pool (74:15)

Shatter the CIA and splinter into the wind.

Mark Dubowitz (74:16)

Yeah, I guess maybe I'm old fashioned here, and I've said that a few times this evening, but I do believe that there are serious, patriotic, hardworking men and women in these agencies who committed their life to defend us and defend our country. I mean, the fact of the matter is we have enemies. We have enemies abroad who want to destroy our way of life. The Chinese Communist Party, the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Putin in Russia, the North Koreans and their enablers around the world, including Sunni jihadists and Shiite jihadist groups, who want to destroy us and bring 9 11s over and over again. We need people who are going to defend us. And brave patriots have stood up for decades to defend this country, and those people are still hard at work. The problem is, and you're absolutely right, there are political appointments that have been made of people in these agencies who have undermined our democracy and undermined our elected officials. There are elected officials who've come in and have made terrible decisions for our country and for our people that have cost lives and cost treasure. And I think we should welcome this administration holding all of these agencies accountable, doing what they do, and let the Democrats freak out and let the radical left freak out. That's fine. Changes need to be made. I guess at the end of the day, I'm just not a. I'm not a rip it all down kind of person.

Tim Pool (75:35)

Rebuild it.

Mark Dubowitz (75:36)

I think you're going to be left with no institutions to defend us. And I think our enemies abroad are just waiting for the opportunity to strike a blow at a divided America, a weakened America.

Tim Pool (75:47)

And I completely agree, and I blame the CIA, the FBI, and the other intelligence agencies. How about when Eric Charamela filed that complaint against Donald Trump and Venman brought it forward? This is CIA agents lying to the American people about what Joe Biden was doing with Burisma. And you know what? I know it's only surface level, but I'm going to say it again. The American people have a right to know to a great degree what is going on with our government and why we are involved in foreign countries. Joe Biden flies to Ukraine. His son's involved in an energy company, largely presumably having to do with the Gazprom gas monopolies. I bring it up 800 million times. So the US, through the CIA, with a CIA counterterrorism director on the board of Burisma, along with the president's son, is trying to operate in what they call American interests, despite the fact the American people reject it outright. And when Joe Biden flies over there right after his son called, saying, please help, the prosecutor in Ukraine is investigating the founder of the company that we're using as a CIA front to go up against the gas monopoly because we want to build a pipeline through Qatar and Turkey. I'm not gonna get into all of it. Let me put it this way. The American people do not want to be involved in Ukraine, do not want the vice president flying to Ukraine and offering a billion dollars in loan guarantees for any reason. And no matter what the American people say, they keep doing it. And when Donald Trump got elected by the will of the people through the electoral system, the CIA, not just through the whistleblowers falsely accusing Trump of wrongdoing, but through these intel officers who lied to the press. And now the email's been released where they said they were doing it to assist Joe Biden with a talking point during a debate. This is the intelligence agencies conspiring and committing sedition against the American people. If I live in my house and I want to operate in my house as I see fit, police should not be able to walk into my house and tell me I have to live the way they want because I'm wrong and stupid. The American people voted for a secure border for our jobs. We are tired of the extraction. We are tired of our jobs being sent to China and to Mexico. We are tired of seeing Michigan begun and destroyed. We are tying to. We are tired of seeing, as Ro Khanna described it, this leftist globalist dream, a multicultural dream of bringing in all of these people to create this multicultural utopia which failed. That's Ro Khanna's words. And it left the middle class gutted. But for some reason, my entire life, no matter how many times we said no more war, no matter how many times we said, stop sending our jobs overseas, they kept doing it. And then Donald Trump gets elected. Why? Well, Bernie Sanders was the first choice for a lot of people. He was the guy saying, we got to secure the border. It's the Koch brothers who want the free trade. They want the illegal immigration to come in so they can pay in pennies in the dollar. Donald Trump was saying a lot of similar things in the 2015, 2016 cycle. The media was comparing Trump and Bernie. Bernie got crushed by the dnc. They forced him out. He bends the knee and gives into the machine. And now he makes no sense. And Donald Trump wins. He wasn't supposed to win. So what happens? Intel agents conspire against Donald Trump, along with powerful interests at law firms in D.C. to destroy what the American people voted for. And that's why I agree there are men and women at the CIA and FBI who are deep, patriotic Americans. I know they exist. I've met some of them. I've met them years ago. I talked to a guy who worked at intel in D.C. and he said, you know, there are a lot of people in these departments, in these agencies who love Trump and want to see him succeed. And then I said, but is your department being run by these deep state bureaucratic elements? And the response I got was, it's the same inside as it is outside. And at the time woke was law, nobody wanted to speak up. So the people at the FBI, the CIA, the nsa, and these other, you know, all the other intelligence agencies, of which I believe they're 17, the people who, like Trump, wouldn't speak up in his defense, Certainly I think many of those people are good. But here's the problem. Now Trump's in office, he's gonna have to go to each one of these agencies and say, for one with the FBI, he's looking to terminate a bunch of them. Why? What is it, like, 40% of FBI agents were hunting down J6ers? I mean, that is absolutely insane, considering we had thousands of far leftists across this country ransacking everything. In the George Floyd riots. Trump sent out a memo that got leaked, or a memo was sent out. I think it was from Trump saying, we don't believe you can uphold the Constitution and do your duty because of the biased political actions you took during the Biden administration. I completely agree. Trump's gonna have to. That's why they said, tell us who was involved in this, they turned over 5,000 names. Judges and Democrats are desperately trying to stop that. Why? These institutions are majority, deeply corrupt. You either have the banality of evil or evil. There certainly may be good patriotic FBI agents who sat by and watched as corrupt institutions went after the president in the most corrupt ways and hunted down nonviolent protesters. You want to complain about the violent people in J6, please do so. I think if you hit a cop, you deserve jail. But what about the people who are walking around on the grass? What about Owen Schroyer? So those FBI agents go after those people while other agents sat back and watched? That is not the kind of person I want upholding my Constitution, or at least pretending to. Donald Trump's going to, going to go have. He's going to have to go into these institutions in whatever way he can, shatter them, splinter them into the wind, and maybe we can rebuild them. Maybe if we get Pam Bondi and Cash Patel, start going through and firing all of these people that were complicit in this corruption and the targeting of the American people, maybe then we can actually have a resurgence of deep, patriotic Americans in intel we can trust. But let me, let me, let me just finalize this January 6th point. The American people voted for Donald Trump. It is a fact, a fact that intel officers lied to the press for the purpose of benefiting. Joe Biden lied about the Hunter Biden laptop story, which would have benefited Donald Trump lied about what Trump's involvement was in the Burisma scandal because Trump discovered Joe Biden broke the law with a quid pro quo. And CIA agents conspired to blame Trump for that and impeach him, damaging his image. The FBI raided his home over a spattering of random documents in memo boxes that he had, while ignoring that Joe Biden did substantially worse. Admittedly, Joe Biden said on recording he did it to make money. He said, I want these documents to make a book so I can make money. And his ghostwriter tried to delete the evidence. The FBI did nothing to go after these people. The FBI did not go after the far leftists who firebombed the White House. No, the FBI went after the people who protested in D.C. angry that the intelligence agencies were trying to gut this country. These people are evil. We live under a deep state bureaucracy, or we did where these people say, you Americans are stupid, you're morons, and if we actually enacted policy the way you wanted it, China or whatever, or whatever country would crush us, and then we'd get 9 11s all over again, whatever it may be. So the simple point is, the American people should be the ones dictating what we want. We should not have a secret, unelected bureau deciding how the government should be run, using the press and lying to the American people so they can do whatever they want. Because as it turns out, through USAID, the State Department, and other NGOs, they are basically using the system to their benefit while they extract from us our value, our working class, our morals, our cultures. And it leaves us with nothing we have left. We are left now with a listless generation of lazy individuals who don't want to work, who are supporting communism, who are so overweight they're injecting themselves with a drug because they can't stop eating. This country has become deeply sick. And now, for once in my life, I see something truly amazing. RFK Jr. And what happens? The entirety of the Democrats try to shut him down. Tulsi Gabbard, Pete Hegseth. This has been absolutely fantastic, what we're seeing. And now Trump's gonna have to go in and make sure he shatters out the corruption, and maybe then, as I said, he can rebuild it. Sorry, everybody. Rant over.

Mark Dubowitz (83:47)

Hey, Tim, let me just say one thing. We're talking about 80, 20. I mean, I agree with 80% of what you said. We can quibble over the 20, but I think the important thing to focus on, in addition to that is we, we have real enemies abroad who want to destroy our country and our way of life. And let's just not whitewash this. There's Vladimir Putin in Moscow, there's Ali Khamenei in Tehran, there's the Kim family in Pyongyang, and most importantly in Beijing is Xi Jinping and the Chinese Communist Party. What I, as an American, want to do is I want to support allies who are willing to fight and die in their own defense against common enemies. Okay. I don't think there's going to be much dispute. Maybe there will be, that Israel's a good ally, good democratic ally. It's fighting against common enemies. It's not asking for U.S. troops. We can talk about military aid. I think you and I probably agree we can taper that off over the years, even though at the end of the day, the Israelis are spending all of that military aid in the United States on US Companies and US Jobs. But I think Israel is a great ally, and I think I wish we had more allies like Israel around the world fighting the Islamic Republic of Iran that has killed Americans. Maimed Americans taken Americans hostage. And if the Israelis are going to fight against our common enemy using their. Their men and women, their boys and girls, Thumbs up, Great ally. This will be more controversial with you, given what you said, with everything you said about the corruption, Joe Biden and Ukraine. The Ukrainians are fighting against Vladimir Putin. And it's cost huge number of Ukrainian lives, hundreds of thousands of the Ukrainian men and women against a brutal enemy that has used force without compunction and deliberately targeted Ukrainian civilians. And the Ukrainians have been fighting the Russian military, an enemy of the United States, with no American soldiers. No American soldiers have lost their lives. That's not a bad ally.

Tim Pool (85:38)

That's a bit manipulative, I would say.

Mark Dubowitz (85:40)

You think so?

Tim Pool (85:40)

Why? Well, there are American individuals who are operating as volunteers, and there's U.S. special Forces on the ground. So to a large degree, I think it's fair to say US Boots are not on the ground in an official capacity, but US Personnel are operating in Ukraine as private contractors and volunteers. And that's just to get around the fact that Congress hasn't declared war since World War II. So when the U.S. is providing the weapons, the intelligence, and telling them when to press the buttons, but we're using the Ukrainian people as drafted cannon fodder, I wouldn't necessarily praise what's going on.

Mark Dubowitz (86:13)

Well, no, that's fair enough. And we can have a whole discussion about. And I think it is about time for the Ukrainian war, long past the time for the Ukrainian war to end. And I think Donald Trump is taking exactly the right approach by saying to Vladimir Putin, we can do a deal. I got Zelensky on board. Do a deal with me or I'm going to punch you in the face, quote, unquote. Right. But at the end of the day, I don't believe any Americans have died fighting in Ukraine. And that is the kind of ally that we want. So if the Ukrainians and the Israelis are going to fight American enemies, and we're not gonna lose American men and women in that fight the way we did in Iraq and in Afghanistan and Vietnam and other wars, I think. At the end of the day, why.

Tim Pool (86:50)

Would we want Ukraine as an ally?

Mark Dubowitz (86:52)

Well, I'd rather have Ukraine as an ally fighting Russia and preventing the Russians from taking over Eastern Europe, from taking over Poland and Lithuania.

Tim Pool (87:02)

Why would Russia go near Poland or Lithuania?

Mark Dubowitz (87:04)

Well, Putin has said very clearly, and he says it at length and he says it often, that he wants to rebuild and resurrect the Russian empire. And the Russian empire does not Stop with Ukraine, it goes further. And so look, I don't read. I can't read Putin's mind. Or as George Bush once famously said, I can't see into his soul. I have no idea what his ambitions are except what he has stated. And I'm not a student of history, but I'm an observer of history. And I believe when brutal dictators say something, take them seriously. And he said it, and we should take him seriously. And I do not think we want to send U.S. troops because we will be obligated under treaty to defend our NATO allies under Article 5 if Putin moves into NATO. And God forbid we do that, because then American men will be dying, dying on the plains of Europe.

Tim Pool (87:55)

I gotta say that I don't see indication of that happening right now.

Mark Dubowitz (87:58)

I don't think it's happening right now, number one, because I think the Russian military has taken a serious beating from the Ukrainians.

Tim Pool (88:04)

But when were they ever going to go into Lithuania or these other countries?

Mark Dubowitz (88:08)

So if, If. If Putin had done what Putin had intended to do and what his. What his intelligence community told him he could do, if he had moved in and taken Kyiv in three days and moved into Ukraine without. Without a significant cost, if you take him at his word. I'm not saying you should, but if you take him at his word, he was gonna go further and at some point he was gonna be on the NATO border. And then the question would be.

Tim Pool (88:33)

And that would be, he's on the NATO border. NATO border. No, no.

Mark Dubowitz (88:36)

And he would have moved into NATO.

Tim Pool (88:37)

And at some point Kaliningrad borders through these countries. As it is.

Mark Dubowitz (88:40)

Look, at some point we would.

Tim Pool (88:41)

And the Baltic.

Mark Dubowitz (88:42)

No, I hear you. But what we want to avoid at all costs, okay, is an invasion of a NATO country that obligates us under treaty to send men and us men and women to defend these countries under Article 5.

Tim Pool (88:55)

Sure.

Mark Dubowitz (88:55)

Then we want to avoid that.

Tim Pool (88:56)

That what we should have done is not gotten involved in a Ukrainian conflict in which we are not allies, nor are they in. They're not in NATO. They're not eu. And all we've done is convince Russia, as they've now stated over and over again, they're at war with NATO already because of our involvement. It is the US Military, weapons and intelligence under the Asking Ukrainian to press the button. Guys, that sunk the Russian flagship in the Black Sea, that was the US And NATO that did that. That wasn't Ukraine and Russia knows it. So how about if the US Is involved in this, I should say us. I want to say NATO, I want to say the EU is involved in this fight over Ukraine's future, whether it's going to be an EU Schengen zone state, etc. Or it's going to be Russian trade federation. When Russia says, I will not allow NATO expansion on my border to this degree, we say, well, that's not, they're not an ally of ours. Why are we going to get into a war which would create the exact scenario saying we should avoid. If Putin went in and seized the Donbass and Mariupol and Luhansk and all that, going down to Crimea and he took control of Crimea largely was the motivating factor because the US influence in Ukraine and them joining the EU would cut off Russia from their Black Sea port. If we didn't get involved in this at all, the war would have been over, as you, as you said, in three days. And Russia, sure, maybe in some hypothetical scenario would try and make a move on Lithuania or something. I think it's strange considering they already border Poland and I think it's, it's, Is it Estonia with Kaliningrad and the Baltic? I don't see why they would make that military move directly confronting NATO. If they moved into Ukraine and we did nothing, there'd be no war, there'd be no death. But instead, what we're dealing with now is you. This, this goes well beyond just Russia's expansion and some noble effort by the west to stop an evil dictator. Zelensky is not having elections. He won't have them. He's saying he's not going to do it. You've got Joe Biden committing crimes in Ukraine. You've got questions about Hunter Biden and Mykola Zachevsky's involvement in the crimes they committed and why the US government was involved in stopping a prosecutor from investigating corrupt elements. And this goes back to, to great geopolitics and it's not so simple to say illegal, legal, right, wrong. What you have is power structures competing for power. The Western Russia and its allies, they want to. Russia wants to sell gas to Europe. It makes a lot of money. Germany wants to buy it. The US doesn't want them to because it gives Russia more power. So the US and NATO is trying to offset their, their control, sending natural gas through, through Ukraine. The US wants to do it. Russia is already doing it. So the US was trying to gain control politically of Ukraine so they can put controls on Gazprom and cut out their, their ability to sell gas. Then once they control Ukraine and they cut Out Russia from the Black Sea. Russia's ability to sell fuel in the Mediterranean through other nations in North Africa gets shut down, and it extremely damages the Russian economy. Russia then says, we're not gonna let you do it. So a war starts and the US Gets involved in a conflict the American people do not want. It has created a potential for World War Three. It has convinced the Russian people and the Russian government and their media that they're at war with NATO, not Ukraine, while the American media keeps lying, claiming we're not involved at all, and it's Ukraine doing it. And then you end up with the president of Ukraine refusing to hold elections, coming to the US Getting our Congress to fly Ukrainian flags, US Spending hundreds of billions of dollars on their war under some strange guise of Putin may be Hitler. Putin is not some comic book villain. I do think he's a bit of a. I'll avoid swearing he's not a good person. I'll put it that way. He's a very bad person, in my opinion. But I don't think that justifies why the US Is running the risk of Russia actually having an incentive to strike a NATO ally, triggering Article 5 and making us go to war. We shouldn't be involved in Ukraine. The argument is on the surface. Again, I could be wrong. Maybe the intel agencies hold. They absolutely do hold classified information on this in this regard. But on the surface, it's largely, we want cheaper gas into Europe. We want to expand the European economic bloc. Russia makes it more difficult because they control gas into Europe, largely about 24%. We can't convince Russia to drop the prices. So we tried building a pipeline through Syria. Syria said no. We're allies with Russia. So then we destabilized the Syrian government, sent troops in without congressional approval, by the way. And I have no idea what. When. Do you guys remember when we announced we dispatch. We dispatch US Troops into Syria? How crazy. We end up siding against their government. Their government collapses. The US Wants to build the pipeline next. The next domino to fall is Ukraine. Let me simplify everything. There is no right. There's no wrong. There's war. They say all is fair in love and war. The issue I take is not with whether or not it's right or wrong to defeat Russia, China, Iran, or any of these other countries. The issue I take is the American people are supposed to largely decide. It's not supposed to be a nation of direct democracy where a random person just says, we should do this thing. And then you're like, bro, you have no idea. What you're talking about, we're not gonna do that. It's supposed to be as the founding fathers envisioned. We elect representatives who keep us informed to the best of our abilities. They have the skiff, they have classified intelligence, and they try their best to explain to us why we have to do certain things. Instead, what we've got is a largely corrupt state of permanently elected bureaucratic politicians who raise money from special interest groups, never seem to lose elections. Intelligence agencies that, when we actually get a popular president, defy the will of the people to go against them. If this is what we are fighting to preserve, we're burning down the country and the world as it is. So we've got ourselves an impasse. We can say this corrupt nation of bureaucracy, garbage and self infliction and corruption should exist for the sake of itself, or we should say the American people should get a grip on what's going on. We should reassess our priorities, not be involved in these foreign wars. And that may result in Russia gaining more economic power. It may result in China making a move on Taiwan. I don't see how. We are served as a country by having open borders, weak generations who don't want to do work, don't have kids, and then we dump our funds into ridiculous USAID programs. We have intelligence agencies backing all of that up. Democrat politicians panicked that our slush fund into ridiculous gender studies, NGOs. I mean, this is abject corruption. I would liken what the United States is right now to a Jackson Pollock painting. No one can make heads or tails of why any of it, any of it is happening or why it should exist. We need to get a hold on all of this. And it starts with saying, secure our borders, bring back our jobs, have a moral resurgence. We want people to get back to work. We want them to understand the value of hard work. We want people to have families. We want them. We want them to understand what it means to have moral tradition and believe in the American culture and the American dream. Once we can reassess and rebuild what America is supposed to be, maybe then we can be a player on the grand stage. The way I see it right now is with Donald Trump and with Biden, Clinton, Obama, whatever it is, you have two visions of what the world is going to be. And the Obama, Biden, Clinton system that was being built was America. Doesn't matter. It's an economic bloc. We are going to build power. And effectively they created an extra national entity of military intelligence power. Donald Trump's system is the United States is breaking apart. It's not going to be sustainable. And eventually we will get World War three, most likely. And the war that I blame Biden for in Eastern Europe, which is exacerbating this, not to mention it's spreading with North Korea getting involved. Now we have the makings of potential World War Three. Donald Trump's vision seems to be, let's make America functional, get our young people back to work. Work is not a bad thing. It's a good thing. Build up a great nation, build culture. Once we are strong, we can build powerful economic ties around the world which can prevent the collapse of these nations into war. Yeah.

Mark Dubowitz (96:27)

But there's one other element of Trump's strategy which I think is worth highlighting, and I think this is why a lot of Americans voted for him, because he absolutely believes in peace through strength. Strength at home, strength abroad. And I think Americans saw that under Biden. Completely agree with you. Under Obama, we were heading to World War 3. The world was unraveling. Our enemies were emboldened, whether it was Eastern Europe, the Middle east, or the Indo Pacific. And I think what Trump has come in and said is, don't mess with me and the United States of America. I don't want to go to war. I don't want to send American soldiers abroad, but I will use American military power if you test me. And I think that's exactly the message we should be sending. Not that we are withdrawing from the world, not that we are not going to be involved in the world, but we're not going to waste blood and treasure over wars that don't advance the American interest. But we are absolutely a powerful country with a powerful economy and a powerful military. So dictators around the world, Vladimir Putin, Ali Khamenei, the Kim family, Xi Jinping, Zelensky. Well, listen, we can talk about Zelenskyy, but at the end of the day, I don't put Zelenskyy in the axis of aggressors.

Tim Pool (97:39)

Right.

Mark Dubowitz (97:39)

I think there are four main members of the axis of aggressors, and they are Iran, China, Russia and North Korea. Right. And then we've got a bunch of allies. Some are great allies, some are awful allies, some are imperfect allies, but at the end of the day, they're still allies. And Donald Trump is saying to the axis of aggressors, don't mess with the United States of America. And I think that's restoring pride in our country. I think it means that we don't have to fight stupid wars because they fear Donald Trump in ways that they didn't fear Joe Biden.

Tim Pool (98:10)

I agree. And I think largely this just means if we don't get a handle on what our intel agencies and our law enforcement institutions are doing, if Trump can't get confidence that they'll operate under the. As to the will of the American people, we'll never get any of that.

Phil Labonte (98:25)

Doesn't.

Tim Pool (98:26)

So you want to hit a point before we go to super chats.

Phil Labonte (98:29)

I think. I think you're to add to the point. I think you're right. But I think that part of what needs to happen, because he needs to have the. The bureaucracy needs to be something that the administration can trust. That's why we need to have the President be able to fire people and put in the people that he wants.

Tim Pool (98:43)

Agreed.

Ian Crossland (98:44)

And RFK or JFK is cool and all that baloney. But I want to know about Butler and what happened with down there.

Tim Pool (98:49)

Absolutely. So I hope Trump declassifies as much as he can. The American people knowing as much as they can is extremely important. For too long we're kept in the dark. Let's go to super chats, my friends. Smash that like button. Share the show with everyone you know and heads up. At 10 o'clock we're gonna have the members only uncensored show exclusive on rumble.com timcast IRL. That's where you can check out all of our offerings. And I will also point out the green room show we did where we discussed Israel and Gaza. It was, it's about, I think it's about a half an hour long. It is up now on the green room playlist. Premium only. And you can check that one out. But for now we will read your super chats. Let's go. We got Shane H. Wilder who says as a longtime Tim cast member, I'm happy to see the Rumble announcement. I'm excited to see the fruits of this deal. It's going to be legend. Wait for it. Dairy.

Phil Labonte (99:39)

Aha.

Tim Pool (99:40)

Let's go. Thanks for the premium, by the way. So the way it works is if you're a member@timcast.com the email that you use for timcast.com if you log into Rumble with that email, just like create a free account, you will instantly have premium access. Boom. Just as a member of Timcast.com that's why I was telling everybody, just become a member@timcast.com you're not going to regret it. We had a lot of people, you know, who had lapsed credit cards and things like that, but it should be that easy. So for now here's the plan. If you are a member as of yesterday, you're going to have everything Tim Cast, Discord membership access, community access and all of the newsletter we're going to be sending out to everybody. And you will also get Rumble Premium, which includes all of their other creators. So you're getting a massive library of content. Moving forward, if you want to be a member of the community involved in the Discord, coming to in person events, that's going to be a Timcast.com membership. We're not going to be pushing it as hard. We really want people to watch the content. But if you want to call into the show, if you want to be involved in our events, the reason we're doing it this way is because one of the challenges we had in trying to work out a deal is how do we maintain community growth and engagement. It's not the same thing as a content deal. So they're effectively two different things. All of our exclusive members only content is going to be Rumble Premium. That means we're going to have documentaries, which we already do. All that's going to, we're going to put that up as soon as possible. We're going to have the green room show, we're going to have other behind the scenes stuff as well as the, the uncensored call in show. But if you want to be actively involved in the Discord community where we have staff and we have, you know, events managers and stuff, that'll be a membership@timcast.com so we're not, you know, we want to maintain that we. One of the big concerns we had was moving forward. It's like, well, we can't lose the Discord. We have tens of thousands of people that hang out every day that there's, they have shows among them and so we have to make sure it's maintained and that costs money. And so we want those members to benefit and Rumble super cool. The guys over at Rumble, we're just like, then we're going to make sure that all of your members get both and then anybody who wants to join you in that, they can do so. And anybody who wants to watch the content, we'll do at Rumble. And I was like, bro, this is epic. It's the perfect, it's the perfect mix. And all of those OG members who support us to this point, they're getting it all, so should be great.

Ian Crossland (101:57)

Absolutely love that. When we first started, you so first started you want to do the culture you wanted to bring on everyday. Guys, you were talking about Having interviews with them. And now you finally. We're getting to that point. You're getting to the point where it's going to be a thing and that's beautiful.

Tim Pool (102:09)

This is what we're going to do. Yeah. So the culture war show that we've never actually got to the point in full development, but we're looking at venues in the D.C. area. We are going to book guests and have the culture war debates as we do. But there will be a live audience of the Tim Kord. Tim Kord, Tim cast Discord community members and you can submit your, your talking points because we're going to have the subject matter of the debate. It'll be like immigration, abortion, whatever, you know, kind of simple, but it might be UFOs. And then we're actually going to bring you up to join the debate. You'll get five minutes to like make your points, challenge some of the decisions that were made. We'll debate with you for a few minutes and then you get to, you step down and you know, give a shout out. It's basically in person, join the debate. And it's, it's because we wanted to bring in regular people, but we also wanted to bring in tons of other ideas and give people who, who normally don't have a chance to be in that debate to join the debate. Which means there's going to be some crazy.

Ian Crossland (103:06)

Yo, it's going to be upside.

Tim Pool (103:08)

I know that's. We thought it'd be fun. Like what if some guy comes up and tells us we're wrong on Israel because it was actually the Reptilians who took over and we just, it's like, well okay, we think it'll be an entertaining show so let's, let's grab some more. Matthew Emmon says the swatter that went after Tim cast another youtubers caught and sent to federal prison for four years per Jeremy at the quartering. First of all, maybe the story about the swatter that went after us had been reported a while ago. So maybe he has just been convicted. But I will tell you this, my understanding is the person who went after us was for hire. That's the information that we had, we thought was reasonable based on the evidence we'd seen. And so when people started telling us hey, just wanna let you know the swatter was caught, I said, well not the people who instructed him and gave him the information. Cuz one of the addresses that was swatted is not publicly available and somehow the swatter got access to that address, which is very interesting. Yeah. And there's only a handful of people who knew the address which of course easily helped us understand who was leaking the information. So we hey told the FBI and they did nothing. So when people show up, when 16 guys show up to your house with rifles pointed through your windows and you say here's evidence suggesting who did it and they say we don't care. Makes you wonder. Makes you wonder. Not the first time I've asked the FBI for help and they refused to do it. But hey, I guess I don't matter. That's fine. I guess. Jason Dixon says. Hey Tim, please shout out the discord building culture over here. Also shout out to it's based gaming. They are from your discord. They make games. Very cool.

Phil Labonte (104:46)

Sick.

Tim Pool (104:47)

Yeah, we're, we're in the early stages of setting up a sports show.

Ian Crossland (104:50)

I'm glad you did that. I brought it up a couple, a couple weeks ago on the show and you know like I asked about sports and like yeah, I do skateboarding but you know, I was talking about more. Yeah, we're more, bigger.

Tim Pool (104:58)

We're, we're, we're, we'll see. You know, it's, it's, it's. We don't want to launch too much at once. But Kellen and Chuck, big football fans and with the super bowl they were expressing interest in and having a sports show and I was like, really good idea. We can set up an area with couches and, and do a sports podcast in a similar, similar element. I think that'd be, that'd be super cool.

Ian Crossland (105:17)

Heck yeah. A lot of us folks who are newer to the political world, you know, we're normally sportsball guys for the last freaking 20 years.

Phil Labonte (105:25)

Normie spots sports ball a rat ebud.

Tim Pool (105:29)

Says even though I have it set to receive all. Today marks the first day in over two years where your live show is. Has actually admitted to my notifications. I've only been getting clips until now. Interesting. Yeah, I don't know how that stuff works, man. You know, YouTube does what it does. I wanna. Let me see here, let me see here. We have a bunch of amazing chats as well over at Rumble. Just because I'm free says welcome to Rumble. Glad to finally be able to watch you live over here. Now get PCC over to Rumble and I can do away with commitube. My Rumble stock is going to do so good this year. Well, I'm, I'm glad to hear it. You know, you know what's really cool about Rumble is that I know the CEO. It's like with, with Rumble, when we have issues, it's just like a text message away to try and get these things resolved. And that's really a component of smaller companies versus larger companies. I think YouTube's got political interests, but there's really no one to talk to when you have a glitch. I'll do air quotes, do air quotes. But for the time being, like, we're not, we're not intending on changing anything. We're gonna, we're gonna fish where the fish are. We're gonna post on YouTube. We have a large YouTube audience, you know, but all of our exclusive premium members only stuff, it's gonna be on Rumble, which I'm gonna be completely honest, it's a. It's a load off our back. It's the infrastructure stuff. So hard to do. People don't understand running a website, the IT development and all the code stuff, it's just, it's expensive. It's a lot of work. So I'm like, hey, this will make things a lot easier for everybody. No one's got to worry about crashes and things like that. So it's going to be a lot easier and a lot more fun. And I'm excited too, because it frees up budget because we really want to do these documentaries. And I'm just going to say it anyway. I don't, I don't, you know, because you go, well, because Milo was like, he wants to go to Israel with Ian. And I was like, I think that would be very, very fun. We'll see.

Phil Labonte (107:19)

Entertaining for sure.

Tim Pool (107:20)

That's right.

Ian Crossland (107:21)

Great content. But you're also helping, you know, the parallel economy from back in the day, you know, build up rumble, YouTube, Google, all those guys can go. Go back their own way and start.

Tim Pool (107:32)

I mean, we've got the show on Apple, Spotify, everywhere. You know what I mean?

Phil Labonte (107:36)

Yeah. People were asking. It's going to be. It still will be available on all of the podcast platforms.

Tim Pool (107:41)

It's going to be everywhere. And we want it to be bigger and better everywhere. You know, the only, the only specific thing is that, you know, we were using timcast.com for exclusive member stuff because that's what supported the show. Basically. That's going to be part of the Rumble premium family. So you got Bongino, you got Charlie Kirk, you got Dr. Disrespect, you got a bunch of really awesome people and we can collab. I think a big thing about it was we've been the Tim Cast island for a long time. It's like we have A show. I don't do a lot of collabs or anything like that. And it's. It's. You know, you can only last so long. You got to strategize, you got to network. You need. You need a team, as it were. And so this was the best way to get things done. We've been talking with a bunch of companies about, like, ad sales and things like that. And then we worked a deal out with Rumble that was really good, and I think benefits everybody. Very fun.

Ian Crossland (108:28)

Go, team.

Tim Pool (108:28)

Super excited for the stuff we're going to do, especially with skateboarding. All right. Nathan says bring Taiwanese chip engineers to the US Project Paper Clip. Oh, in the style. I mean, that's not nearly as horrifying as Operation Paperclip. Right? That was a. Japanese scientists we brought over, Right? Or was that the Nazi scientists?

Phil Labonte (108:48)

The paperclip was the Nazis.

Tim Pool (108:50)

Well, they built rockets.

Ian Crossland (108:52)

We're in space now. Thanks.

Mark Dubowitz (108:53)

Good news. We are bringing Taiwanese semiconductor.

Ian Crossland (108:56)

Oh, yeah.

Phil Labonte (108:57)

Jump up on the.

Ian Crossland (108:57)

Get closer to them.

Mark Dubowitz (108:58)

Yeah, we're bringing them here. I mean. And the Taiwanese understand why they need to be here. Because if Chinese Communist Party takes over their island. Yeah, I've heard by company.

Phil Labonte (109:08)

Yeah, I've heard stories that. That Taiwan is part of the reason why China hasn't moved on Taiwan is because as far as, like, the. The practical invasion and taking of Taiwan, it would actually be very difficult. Correct. Do you know anything about that, or.

Tim Pool (109:23)

Yeah.

Mark Dubowitz (109:23)

I mean, I've been to Taiwan many times, you know, talked to the Chinese military. Look, it's not going to be easy. I mean, it's going to be logistically over the Taiwan Straits for the Chinese navy, for the Chinese military and special forces. Not easy. Terrible weather. And look, I think the Taiwanese people are going to fight for their country. Now, at the end of the day, I think what's deterred Xi Jinping from launching an invasion for now has been his fear that the United States is going to step in. And this goes back to my original point. I mean, I don't know if we're going to step in. I'm not sure if we should step in. But at the end of the day, we must create the perception in the eyes of Xi Jinping that we will step in and that will keep Taiwan independent. It'll keep Taiwan's semiconductor crown jewels away from Xi Jinping. Because if he gets that, that's like dominating the oil of the 21st century. Yeah, right. He controls the global economy. You know, you may not like. You may not like America. You may think we're flawed. You may think we have a lot of problems. I don't think any of us want to live under the Chinese Communist Party and in the Chinese security state. So we definitely want to keep semiconductors away from him.

Tim Pool (110:29)

Bike Collins says, Tim, you should try. You should give downhill mountain biking a try. Coming from a skating background, you'll be a shredder out the gate. Welcome to Rumble.

Mark Dubowitz (110:37)

Agreed.

Tim Pool (110:38)

No, I'm not going to do downhill biking. Allison likes downhill mountain biking stuff. But I have a really nice mountain bike.

Ian Crossland (110:45)

You guys love your bike.

Tim Pool (110:46)

And, and what happened was Allison said, you know, you should get a bike so we can go on a bike ride. I said, okay. And then she said, let's go for a bike ride. We went and it turned out it was like a 30, 30 mile bike ride. And I never, I never went again. Yeah, it was brutal. It was like, hey, we're gonna, you know, I won't give out too much of the private details, but we're gonna go from this point to this point should take, you know, not that long. I was like, okay. And then as we're riding, it's kind of nice. You get lost in the start of the bike ride and look at the trees and the river and everything, having a good time. And then eventually I'm getting tired. I'm like, are we there yet? We finally get there. And then I was like, yeah, we're not riding that all the way back. That was nuts. And there was literally no other way back.

Ian Crossland (111:27)

West Virginia, up the, the mountains.

Phil Labonte (111:29)

Okay.

Ian Crossland (111:29)

Maryland.

Tim Pool (111:30)

Yeah. Uphills, around and all that stuff. And so then we started riding back and I was like, my legs feel like they're being stabbed with a thousand knives of fire. I need a ride home. And there's no signal. There's nobody who can pick us up. And so we just had to go for it. And that was the last time we rode our bikes. And I'm, and I'm. I. And I'm in shape. I, like, I got real low resting heart rate. I skate all the time.

Ian Crossland (111:51)

You got them thighs.

Tim Pool (111:51)

But it's just, it's a different. It's a different kind of exercise. You know, like I do high burst, right? Like you stand on the board, you jump bang with the bike. It's endurance. It's non stop. I get it. Downhill though, you're not really pedaling, you're braking. But I don't know, I can barely snowboard and ski as it is.

Phil Labonte (112:12)

It's. It's worth noting that, like, the different type, it's a good idea to do different types of cardio because your body does get acclimated to whatever type of cardio you're doing. So it is a good idea to throw in variation because, like Tim says, you'll get used to one thing and then you do something else and it's like, whoa, this is totally different.

Tim Pool (112:29)

All right, let's grab some more super chats. Iggy, the incubus says reminder, JFK turned down Operation Mockingbird. I know he turned down Operation Northwoods. I don't think Mockingbird was turned down. I think maybe you mean Northwoods. You're familiar with Northwoods?

Mark Dubowitz (112:44)

I'm not.

Tim Pool (112:44)

Tell me that was when. What was it? L.L. lemnitzer. Was that his name? L. Lemnitzer. I don't know a whole lot about this. I just seen, you know, tidbits on the Internet. Wanted to stage false flags in Florida so that we could justify conflict with Cuba. Wanted to blow up a plane near Florida and say Cuba did it and things like that. And JFK was like, nah, we're not doing any of that stuff. And so that often gets brought up by people to point out that false flag attacks do exist. People.

Phil Labonte (113:12)

One thing that people need to, or you should understand about Northwoods is it was. It was actually proposed by the Dodge, right? CIA was. CIA, was going to carry it out, but it was dod. So, like, when Mike Benz talks about, quote, unquote, the Blob, he's talking about State Department, DOD and CIA. It's three different means of exercising power. State Department soft power. DOD is hard power. And then the CIA is when they don't want anyone to know the US is exercising power. It's. It's supposed to be covert. And when things go right, you don't find out about it. But things don't always go right. So.

Tim Pool (113:46)

Indeed true. Yeah. But I always like to point out you don't need Northwoods because the Gulf of Tonkin happened and we know that it was fake. So, you know, there's your special police action in Vietnam for you. Oh, I'm sorry, Iggy. You literally super chatted right afterwards, saying, correcting myself. Operation Northwoods. I apologize. You corrected yourself.

Ian Crossland (114:05)

Shout out, Iggy.

Tim Pool (114:07)

There you go. All right. Sean P says your own spy agencies want to destroy you. That is unfortunate. The Dex vet says. So we leave the Alphabet agencies and we continue having our country destroyed from within. Or we dismantle them and we have foreign intervention. I'll take the bad guy I know for the bad guy pretending to be my Protector. It's not easy. You know, I told my friends this back in like 2015. I was like, if you want to live in America where you watch the red carpet, listen to, you know, whatever weird R and B pop is on the radio, eat dollar slices of pizza, vote for the machine state, vote for Hillary Clinton, because they're gonna go blow up kids in foreign countries so that we can maintain the petrodollar, and then you don't gotta think twice. But if you're actually concerned about what this country is gonna turn into and how long it's gonna last, then you probably should vote for someone who's interested in what actually happens to this country. And that's gonna be Donald Trump. So take your pick.

Ian Crossland (115:00)

Yeah, you can wear your blinders and only see in front of you and see what you're doing, or you can take off the blinders and see everything that's around you.

Tim Pool (115:06)

Do you want to be a chicken in a chicken cooperation?

Ian Crossland (115:08)

Yeah.

Tim Pool (115:08)

Or do you want to be a farmer who has to do the hard work? Hey, man, our chickens, they don't do nothing. They want for nothing. But they live in a box. And you know, a nice box too. It's very nice. Yeah, they're wealthy 1 percenter chickens. But when Mr. Mutton Chops jumped out of the chicken coop, he was killed by a fox. Now, you know what?

Ian Crossland (115:28)

Breaking free.

Mark Dubowitz (115:29)

You know that I would say one thing again. I. I don't want to be the, you know, the voice here of opposition. I'll say one thing. This podcast, which been a pleasure to be part of, can only take place in one country in the world. This podcast could never take place. Communist China.

Ian Crossland (115:46)

Oh, of course.

Mark Dubowitz (115:46)

Putin's Russia and Khamenei's Iran wouldn't even mind, by the way.

Phil Labonte (115:51)

Exactly. I was just gonna say UK would never allow Canada.

Ian Crossland (115:55)

It would be in janitors in the.

Tim Pool (115:56)

Uk if we were in Ukraine, I'd be dead. Gonzalo Lira.

Mark Dubowitz (115:59)

Well, all I can say is what makes America great and make it great again or make it greater is the fact that this conversation can take place where you can literally sit here in this amazing studio and say what you have about the CIA and the FBI and other institutions. And at the end of the day.

Tim Pool (116:19)

They'Ll falsely accuse you of being a Russian.

Mark Dubowitz (116:22)

Maybe, but probably not. And you're going to have an incredibly successful podcasts. You're gonna be on Rumble. You know, your great personality. You're provoking people to think you got a lot of people out there listening to you and Imbibing this, and that's phenomenal. That's what makes America great.

Tim Pool (116:38)

I agree. And the problem is, when you look at, like, the James O'Keefe videos, you see these people who work in the bureaucratic state outright saying, we will defy the will of the people outright, outright. And so how we fire those people who are breaking the law. It's gonna be a challenge to actually go through and figure this out. But Trump's got active opposition from judges and from Democrats, and it's a tough challenge, I'll put it that way.

Ian Crossland (117:04)

Isn't the president supposed to be, you know, he's in charge, he has a plan, gonna get stuff done. Why are these other federal employees. I don't want to go on a big old tangent. These other federal employees got elected, are working for the United States government, are saying, no, don't listen to your leader.

Phil Labonte (117:20)

Because they're activist judges. They're trying to legislate from the bench. The, and the point is to, to obstruct their, their obstructions. They're trying to obstruct what the president's trying to do. They do have, like. So they have a, they do have a legal argument in that they, you know. Well, actually, no, I'd have to go through the, the individual.

Ian Crossland (117:41)

Sure.

Phil Labonte (117:42)

Positions to say for sure, but there is the, the power of judges to, to put. Stays on. But even the idea of a nationwide stay, like, that's all fairly new. Like, that started in the 60s. FDR made massive changes to the government that were, some of them were unconstitutional. And I believe there were some things that were struck down eventually. But none of the stuff that he proposed, none of the, the executive orders that he made, none of them were prevented or stopped or put on hold by any, any judges. They just went through. The President said, this is what we're going to do. And it happened. This is all new. And this really, this idea of a, you know, a judge in the 9th Circuit putting a stop to something the president does nationwide, that's honestly new. In the past, I think it started, really started to get ramped up during the Obama administration. But this, it's honestly, it's an innovation in the past 20 years. It's not something that has a long history of happening, you know, in the United States. The, the separation of powers is supposed to actually be a separation of powers. And if a judge can say, no, you can't do this, Mr. President. There's actually no separation of powers between the president and the judicial branch.

Tim Pool (118:57)

All right, let's grab One more here. We got good to her. Triple eight says the difference is that Snowden did this on behalf of a privacy breach of the citizens of the us. The others are illegal immigrants committing absolutely heinous crimes against Americans. Yeah. So, you know, again, that's why I. It's like a triage thing. It's a priorities thing and it's a moral line thing. I look at what Snowden did and I'm like, man, he sure did find a lot of malfeasance and then went about it the com the very wrong way in leaking all this information without redacting it. And so that's bad at this point now. What has it been, over 10 years? It's like 13 years something. I'm kind of like, yeah, I don't know. It's not my biggest priority right now. We're well past that. Some of it was good, a lot of it was bad. It is what it is. The illegal immigration stuff is child trafficking, outright breaking of our laws. And it is en masse. So enforcement that is deeply important, my friends. Smash the like button. Share the show with everyone. You know, make sure you head over to rumble.com/timcast IRL become a premium member because at uncensored members only show is coming up in about a minute and for those that are watching, there will be a seamless transition with a small, you know, I don't know, 30 second intermission or so. But you can follow me on X and Instagram, Timcast. Of course, the Discord membership, if you want to join our community and actually call into the show, is available@timcast.com Mark do you want to shout anything out again?

Mark Dubowitz (120:13)

Shout out to. First of all, thank you for having me. Please follow me on X if you can. And yeah, I mean, if you're interested in Iran, it's kind of my obsession. But I got this Iran Breakdown podcast that is going to be launching in the next week. It'll be limited series, 10 episodes to start. It gives me an easy off ramp if it fails to say it was limited series and that's why I'm ending it. But if it succeeds, we're going to obviously continue it. And I think all Americans should understand more about Iran, more about the threat from the Islamic Republic of Iran and how we can actually stop Iran from developing nuclear weapons without risking us lives.

Ian Crossland (120:49)

Awesome. My name is Raymond G. Stanley Jr. You can find me around the world as Raymond G. Stanley Jr. I want to shout out the Quiet Part podcast, another fellow podcast started off from the Discord. It's a great launching pad. I would suggest you join the Discord. Tim Cast Discord Mark, thank you for hanging out man. Good perspective.

Mark Dubowitz (121:06)

Thanks for having me, sir.

Phil Labonte (121:08)

I am Phil that Remains on Twix. I'm Phil that Remains official on Instagram. The band is all that remains. The new record dropped January 31st. It's called Antifragile. You can go check it out on YouTube, Amazon Music, Apple Music, Spotify, Pandora and Deezer. Don't forget the left lane is for crime.

Tim Pool (121:23)

We will see you all in the uncensored call in show on rumble.com Timcast IRL in about 30 seconds. Thanks for hanging out.