Speaker 1: In one instance on this show, someone was asked about
Speaker 1: the fentanyl crisis in West Virginia, and within twenty seconds,
Speaker 1: the guest turned it into it's Israel's fault and got
Speaker 1: I'm like, you got to stop, okay, Like the problem
Speaker 1: of opiates may come from China, but when we're talking
Speaker 1: about heroin abuse in West Virginia, we're talking about jobs,
Speaker 1: the white working class being left behind, the loss of
Speaker 1: the coal mines and things like this, and all of
Speaker 1: a sudden're talking about Israel.
Speaker 2: Who did it? All? That's derangement.
Speaker 3: So last night my good friend Timpole had Randy Fine
Speaker 3: on his show, a man I hesitate to call him
Speaker 3: a man, a man who I was about to run
Speaker 3: for Congress against. It's true. I was seriously considering it.
Speaker 3: I was talking to people in DC. I was about
Speaker 3: to do it. So of course I tuned in and
Speaker 3: I was like, well, this is going to be a banger.
Speaker 3: There's going to be some real contentious issues here. There's
Speaker 3: got to be some contention. There has to be. There
Speaker 3: was not, And as I'm sitting there as the clock
Speaker 3: ticks to two hours, I'm like, this is the most
Speaker 3: frustrating thing I've ever watched in my life, and I
Speaker 3: am now inspired to counter all of the terrible arguments
Speaker 3: that were put forward. Now, Tim was good enough to
Speaker 3: distinguish between those that have genuine criticisms of our foreign
Speaker 3: policy and our relationship with Israel, to make sure that
Speaker 3: he was being clear he's not talking about all of
Speaker 3: us when he's basically saying everybody's got Israel derangement syndrome. Now,
Speaker 3: but I felt like, okay, well, if you think that
Speaker 3: the Dave Smith libertarian camp, which I'm obviously a part of,
Speaker 3: have valid criticisms, let's make those counters. Since none of you,
Speaker 3: the entire panel, was capable of making any of them,
Speaker 3: as Randy Fine lied to your audience. So I pulled
Speaker 3: about ten clips that drove me absolutely up the wall,
Speaker 3: and I'm going to dismantle and devour these terrible arguments.
Speaker 3: So we're going to take it chronologically. First off, the
Speaker 3: first hour was all just basically like Boomer con garbage
Speaker 3: in my humble opinion, basically going after Hassan Piker and
Speaker 3: Fine like there's no disagreement with any of the first hour.
Speaker 3: The second hour is where things really got off the rails,
Speaker 3: and I felt as if I was compelled. It was
Speaker 3: a demand of me to counter this nonsense.
Speaker 1: So here we go my question for you, with Tucker
Speaker 1: and Megan Kelly and condos owns and many formerly big
Speaker 1: Trump supporters breaking for Trump from Trump on principally the
Speaker 1: issue of Iran, but also the issue of our alliance
Speaker 1: and support for Israel. You have right now the left
Speaker 1: and elements of the right unified in just hating Israel.
Speaker 1: I don't know how the Republican Party, to be fair,
Speaker 1: the Democrats have also are also divided on this as well.
Speaker 1: The older Democrats are much much more pro Israel. But
Speaker 1: with Trump losing support for this reason, how do Republicans
Speaker 1: actually even win with that sentiment in play?
Speaker 2: Well?
Speaker 4: I think it's not that they're unified in hating Israel.
Speaker 4: I think it's that they're unified in hating Jews, and
Speaker 4: Israel's just a vehicle that they use to do that. Look,
Speaker 4: Israel is the best ally that we have. Israel's the
Speaker 4: only country that is out there that doesn't ask us
Speaker 4: to fight their wars for them.
Speaker 2: So we start off with a banger.
Speaker 3: Israel is the only ally that does not ask us
Speaker 3: to fight their wars for them. What so all of
Speaker 3: the Middle East wars were not on behalf of Israel
Speaker 3: at all. They weren't even to the benefit of Israel
Speaker 3: a smidge, just a pinch. No, No, these were all
Speaker 3: obviously our own wars. That's why we fought Saddam Hussein
Speaker 3: in Iraq after nine to eleven. What did he have
Speaker 3: to do with Iraq or with nine to eleven? Nothing?
Speaker 3: Nothing at all, but sure, sure Israel is our greatest
Speaker 3: ally they never ask us to fight their wars. Now,
Speaker 3: I appreciate the fact that Tim was willing to acknowledge that, yes,
Speaker 3: this divide is making it impossible for the GOP to
Speaker 3: win my argument. For my counter argument, I respond to you, Tim,
Speaker 3: would be why do you think that is why after
Speaker 3: three years of this or two and a half years
Speaker 3: since this war began, are you still incapable of understanding
Speaker 3: your opposition's perspective?
Speaker 2: Why is that?
Speaker 3: Why have you been able to have Dave Smith or
Speaker 3: Scott Horton or myself on your show multiple times? I've
Speaker 3: been on I think a dozen times. I'm sure David
Speaker 3: Scott are comparable. Why is it that you still can't
Speaker 3: you can't even steal man a position by which we
Speaker 3: might actually be genuinely upset about our relationship with Israel
Speaker 3: and the militarism that has come as a consequence of that.
Speaker 3: And what makes so little sense to me is that
Speaker 3: Tim comes from the left. He was like a moderate
Speaker 3: Democrat covering the Occupy Wall Street movement, and then he
Speaker 3: became more conservative, more right wing, and then he became
Speaker 3: full on maga, like you can't even I think he's
Speaker 3: anti war, which is the strangest thing about all this,
Speaker 3: and we're going to get into some clips about that later.
Speaker 3: But when it comes to the Ukraine issue, Tim is
Speaker 3: the first to agree with us, and proudly so that yes,
Speaker 3: our aid to Ukraine and the militarism that has come
Speaker 3: from that conflict has not been to our benefit, has
Speaker 3: been a massive drain on this country. Why can you
Speaker 3: not see the same argument being made when it comes
Speaker 3: to Israel and all of their wars and just go okay, yeah,
Speaker 3: both rational arguments.
Speaker 1: Why do you think that we should continue funding providing
Speaker 1: funding to Israel?
Speaker 4: And we provide so interestingly, we provide about three and
Speaker 4: a half billion dollars a year to Israel, but we
Speaker 4: actually don't give Israel any money. That's one of the
Speaker 4: big misnomers. What we do is we give Israel three
Speaker 4: and a half billion dollars of America and made military equipment.
Speaker 4: So we give them stuff that makes American jobs and
Speaker 4: we give it to them. It's been estimated that what
Speaker 4: Israel gives us in return for that is worth ten
Speaker 4: times as much.
Speaker 5: Lorie.
Speaker 2: What do we get?
Speaker 4: We get intelligence gathering? Kidding what I said, Ramis is good,
Speaker 4: rhmis is good, but we get intelligence gathering.
Speaker 3: So of course Randy Fine fires off an overt lie
Speaker 3: and nobody counters it. But in fact, you can look
Speaker 3: this up. The aid that we have given to Israel
Speaker 3: over the past two and a half years has been
Speaker 3: about twenty three billion dollars. That does not include the
Speaker 3: cost of our military, which is obviously astronomical going to
Speaker 3: the Middle East and firing off tons of missiles against Iran,
Speaker 3: but also firing off interceptor missiles to defend Israel as
Speaker 3: they provoke and attack all of their neighbors. We're talking
Speaker 3: tens and tens and tens of billions of dollars on
Speaker 3: top of the twenty three billion that we have given
Speaker 3: to them an aid. So you already know that you're
Speaker 3: dealing with the dishonest broker. You already know that if
Speaker 3: someone who's going to downplay it and say, oh, we're
Speaker 3: just giving them three billion a year, as if that's
Speaker 3: not a lot of money, but sitting aside, yeah, compared
Speaker 3: to our total national budget annually, three billion isn't a
Speaker 3: lot of money. However, it's not even close to the
Speaker 3: totality of what we give them. It's not even close
Speaker 3: to the trillion dollars that's the estimate of what we've
Speaker 3: spent on the global war on tear. If you actually
Speaker 3: have done any research, if you've actually read or listened
Speaker 3: to Scott Horton or Dave Smith, or myself or Tom Woods,
Speaker 3: or go down the line. There's so many people, so
Speaker 3: many people have laid this out for you as to
Speaker 3: the expenditures that have come as a consequence of our
Speaker 3: relationship to Israel, our greatest ally. Right, But if you're
Speaker 3: going to be honest about it, if you're going to
Speaker 3: have an honest debate and discussion about it, be honest
Speaker 3: about the facts. How much have we actually expended in
Speaker 3: our defense of our greatest ally, And don't get it twisted,
Speaker 3: it has been in their defense. It has been to
Speaker 3: their benefit. Why have we spent over a trillion dollars
Speaker 3: over the past twenty five years to defend a nation
Speaker 3: in the Middle East the size of New Jersey. Why
Speaker 3: have we done that? Make that argument? And if you
Speaker 3: can't make that argument compelling enough to justify a trillion
Speaker 3: plus and expenditures, not to mention the thousands of soldiers
Speaker 3: that died, well, then maybe you don't have a good
Speaker 3: argument at all.
Speaker 4: President Trump wants to build the Golden Dome. Where do
Speaker 4: you think that the technology for the Golden Dome contry?
Speaker 2: They do a lot.
Speaker 4: The other thing is Israel is the beta test site
Speaker 4: because they're always in a war. They're the beta test
Speaker 4: site for so many of our weapons. So we give
Speaker 4: them to them and then their soldiers use them. It's
Speaker 4: estimated for every dollar we give them, we don't give
Speaker 4: them any Every dollar of our equipment we get ten back.
Speaker 4: Now are they purchasing at them just so we buy
Speaker 4: the three and a half we when they say three pop.
Speaker 4: We buy three and a half billion dollars of our
Speaker 4: stuff from American military companies, and then we give it
Speaker 4: to them.
Speaker 2: We don't give them any there's no check, give.
Speaker 3: It and there you have it. The truth comes out, well,
Speaker 3: at least a partial truth, at least a partial truth that,
Speaker 3: in fact, yeah, we're not giving them the three and
Speaker 3: a half billion dollars annually. We buy weapons from our
Speaker 3: military industrial complex and then we give the weapons to them.
Speaker 3: So are we giving them three and a half billion
Speaker 3: dollars in cash? No, We're funneling three and a half
Speaker 3: billion dollars in cash annually into our weapons contractors and
Speaker 3: then giving those weapons for free. So, in fact, yes,
Speaker 3: we are giving three and a half billion dollars worth
Speaker 3: of weapons to Israel annually, and that doesn't even come
Speaker 3: close to the totality of it. As I've already laid out.
Speaker 3: The other tidbit of truth he accidentally let slip there
Speaker 3: was that he says they're the biggest benefit we get
Speaker 3: is that it's basically a weapons testing ground for us.
Speaker 3: That they take our most advanced weapons and they use
Speaker 3: them on the battlefield. And why does he say, because
Speaker 3: they're always at war?
Speaker 4: The other thing is Israel is the beta test site
Speaker 4: because they're always in a war, always.
Speaker 3: At or with their neighbors, is what he says, which
Speaker 3: is true. Thank you for being honest, But why why
Speaker 3: are they always at war with their neighbors. Why do
Speaker 3: we consider them an ally if they can't ever get
Speaker 3: along with anybody around them? Why do we ignore the
Speaker 3: obvious negative consequences that come from having a relationship with
Speaker 3: a nation that is constantly at war with a billion
Speaker 3: neighboring Muslims. Why do we look at Germany's militarism in
Speaker 3: the lead up and then during World War Two and say, oh, well,
Speaker 3: they are obviously the provocateur and obviously the problem. But
Speaker 3: when Israel does it, we all go no, it's somehow
Speaker 3: different the fact that they've been at war with, or
Speaker 3: at least very antagonistic with, all of their nations around them, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Lebanon, Syria, Turkey.
Speaker 3: I mean, the list is it's a mile long. Because yeah,
Speaker 3: he's right, they're always at war with their neighbors. Can
Speaker 3: we at least evaluate whether or not being greatest allies
Speaker 3: with a country that is constantly at war is to
Speaker 3: our benefit? Can that question at least be put on
Speaker 3: the table without me being accused of being some hateful bigot?
Speaker 3: Do you think sincere quot to U Tim, do you
Speaker 3: think that if Japan, who's also an ally of ours.
Speaker 3: If Japan was constantly at war over the past twenty
Speaker 3: five years, if they were dragging us into a war
Speaker 3: with I don't know, North Korea, China and a bunch
Speaker 3: of other countries that surround them are near them, would
Speaker 3: I not be just as angry about our relationship to
Speaker 3: Japan as I am to Israel? And can you not
Speaker 3: see the obvious difference? Can you not see that because
Speaker 3: Japan is not some imperial empire that's constantly trying to
Speaker 3: conquer their neighbors, that I don't have the same anger
Speaker 3: about our relationship to Japan as I do to Israel.
Speaker 3: Is that not rational? Is that not justifiable? Is that
Speaker 3: not logical? I think it's all of the above, which
Speaker 3: makes it very hard to counter my position when I
Speaker 3: say that I don't think our relationship to Israel is
Speaker 3: to our benefit. So you have to strawm in it.
Speaker 3: You have to bring up the most zany out there,
Speaker 3: people who don't know anything, who haven't read anything, who
Speaker 3: don't actually understand all of the detriments that have come
Speaker 3: from a relationship to Israel, so they make bad arguments,
Speaker 3: and then instead of taking on the good arguments that
Speaker 3: come from our camp you take on the bad arguments,
Speaker 3: and then you use that to dismiss the broader counter
Speaker 3: argument that you don't want to contend with in your perspective.
Speaker 1: What is the reason why so many people right now
Speaker 1: have turned and have become anti Israel.
Speaker 4: I think there's a couple of reasons. I think on
Speaker 4: the left there's an obsession with the underdog, so if
Speaker 4: you're more in worse shape, you must therefore be good.
Speaker 4: It's part of the obsession with illegal immigrants. And so
Speaker 4: people look at Israel's this strong, successful country and all
Speaker 4: these poor, sorry people around it, so therefore they must
Speaker 4: be good.
Speaker 2: In Israel must be bad. That's number one.
Speaker 5: I think.
Speaker 4: Number two, I think that unfortunately, when something goes wrong
Speaker 4: in people's lives, they look for someone to blame.
Speaker 2: You know, if I weigh a little.
Speaker 4: Bit too much, it's not my fault, it must be because
Speaker 4: the restaurant feeds me too much. And I think I
Speaker 4: think Jews are an easy target if your life isn't good.
Speaker 4: I think it's been that way for thousands of years.
Speaker 2: I call it the Israel derangement syndrome.
Speaker 4: Yep. And I think the third reason there is a
Speaker 4: ton of foreign money that is out there funding this
Speaker 4: sort of stuff.
Speaker 3: I'm gonna leave point one aside because I'm not of
Speaker 3: the left, so I'll let them defend their own position
Speaker 3: on not loving Israel. But i will say, when it
Speaker 3: comes to number two, people look for a scapegoat. Let's
Speaker 3: first think of the irony that comes with an argument
Speaker 3: from a guy like Randy Fine, a man who portrays
Speaker 3: almost not all, but almost all disagreement when it comes
Speaker 3: to our relationship with Israel as somehow being anti Semitic
Speaker 3: or bigoted or hateful. Are you not coming up with
Speaker 3: a scapegoat to try and excuse your own struggles, your
Speaker 3: own downfall, your own shortcomings, your own problems in life
Speaker 3: that you want to make sure that they defend Israel
Speaker 3: in perpetuity, no matter the expenditure, no matter the cost
Speaker 3: of American lives, no matter the detrimental effects that it
Speaker 3: has on the American people. But you're coming up with
Speaker 3: a whole bunch of excuses so that you don't have
Speaker 3: to deal with the genuine art arguments here. Are you
Speaker 3: not creating a scapegoat to avoid the reality that some
Speaker 3: people genuinely just don't like it because they've killed tens
Speaker 3: of thousands of children over the past couple of years.
Speaker 3: Is that not creating a scapegoat? When you call us
Speaker 3: the woke Right or the woke Reich, are you not
Speaker 3: creating a scapegoat? Are you not actually trying to deflect
Speaker 3: from the discussion at hand? And then, of course, the
Speaker 3: last claiming makes is that there's a ton of foreign
Speaker 3: money out there that's funding this stuff. Has there ever
Speaker 3: ever been any evidence of that ever sincere question? Because
Speaker 3: I've looked, I haven't found any I can tell you
Speaker 3: for a fact, hand on my heart, No, I'm not
Speaker 3: being funded actually by anybody other than you guys who
Speaker 3: support me through my locals account or through subscriptions and
Speaker 3: things like that. So no, it's not happening. It's like,
Speaker 3: at least on my end, it's certainly not happening. But
Speaker 3: when it comes to Israel paying for propaganda in my country,
Speaker 3: I have hard proof of that. The Esther project, which
Speaker 3: I did an entire episode on. Are you going to
Speaker 3: contend with that? Does it not seem as if it's
Speaker 3: just deflection and projection, that you're not actually conned contending
Speaker 3: with the fact that there's genuine anger and disagreement here
Speaker 3: about our relationship to Israel that is not being bought
Speaker 3: and paid for. Does anyone on the panel ask Congressman
Speaker 3: Fine if he has any evidence of American political commentators
Speaker 3: or bot networks or whatever actually being created and funded
Speaker 3: through foreign governments to try and get us to not
Speaker 3: like Israel. Is there any evidence of it at all?
Speaker 3: The answer is no, and.
Speaker 1: The Free Press, notably, I mean, Barry Weiss is is
Speaker 1: an avowed and proud Zionist, and even her publication points
Speaker 1: out that there's a there's a there's an extremist settler
Speaker 1: problem in the West Bank.
Speaker 2: Do you think that, like, how do how do we
Speaker 2: how do we parse through this?
Speaker 1: I agree with you, there's foreign funding promoting individuals who
Speaker 1: say the stupidest thing about Israel. But then there are
Speaker 1: stories like this where my libertarian friends are not coming
Speaker 1: to me and saying stupid conspiracy nonsense. They're saying things
Speaker 1: like this.
Speaker 2: Yep.
Speaker 3: So I got really excited during this segment because I
Speaker 3: was like, finally they're going to actually deal with the
Speaker 3: valid complaints that exist out there, because there are many.
Speaker 3: And he brings up an article about the violent settlers
Speaker 3: in the West Bank, and I'm like, Okay, he's going
Speaker 3: to actually get into it, but then the framing of
Speaker 3: the question already tells me where this is going. He says,
Speaker 3: how do we deal with this? How do we like,
Speaker 3: how do we parse this? Contend with this?
Speaker 2: How do we how do we parse through this?
Speaker 3: It's like, are you asking Randy Fine for talking points
Speaker 3: on how to basically write off what is honest reporting
Speaker 3: that you have very violent Israeli settlers that go into
Speaker 3: the West Bank and steal property and have been doing
Speaker 3: so for decades and worse than that, He says, I
Speaker 3: agree with you on the foreign funding.
Speaker 1: Why I agree with you there's foreign funding promoting individual
Speaker 1: to say the stupidest things about Israel.
Speaker 3: Why do you agree with him that there's foreign funding
Speaker 3: that is creating animosity towards Israel in America? How do
Speaker 3: you know that? I've heard him say it a dozen times.
Speaker 3: I've never seen any proof. He's never proffered any proof,
Speaker 3: has anybody.
Speaker 4: This is a legitimate issue that people should have concerned about.
Speaker 4: But the most pernicious form of anti Semitism is when
Speaker 4: when every other country does it, it doesn't bother you,
Speaker 4: but when Israel does it, you lose your mind.
Speaker 3: I mean this part drove me absolutely up the fucking wall.
Speaker 3: He says, Yeah, this is a legitimate issue that you
Speaker 3: should be concerned about. That's it, and then he immediately
Speaker 3: pivots to this is the most pernicious form of anti
Speaker 3: Semitism because you're only bothered by it when Israel does it.
Speaker 3: You're only bothered by it when our greatest ally steals
Speaker 3: land from people. Well, first off, no, I'm not, I
Speaker 3: like probably the mostly like early on in my career,
Speaker 3: if you want to call it, that, the most viral
Speaker 3: clip I had that went around was me laying out
Speaker 3: the history of America's intervention and expansion of NATO that
Speaker 3: led to Russia invading Ukraine and how I was opposed
Speaker 3: to all of it. So, yeah, stealing land from your
Speaker 3: neighbors via violence is bad always. But moreover, even if
Speaker 3: people only know about Israel stealing land and they don't
Speaker 3: know about or focus on other nations doing it, that's
Speaker 3: still a valid complaint. If you don't know or care
Speaker 3: about Russia, Ukraine or any other war going on in
Speaker 3: the world, but you say you see and you know
Speaker 3: about because of the media environment, you've just seen it.
Speaker 3: More that this is like the one thing that you
Speaker 3: really know about and you really care about. That's still fine.
Speaker 3: That's still not anti semitism. It's not hateful to say, hey,
Speaker 3: stop killing innocent people and taking their land. That is
Speaker 3: always the principal position to have, even if you don't
Speaker 3: apply it too stories that you aren't as focused on
Speaker 3: what kind of a fucking defense is that it's not
Speaker 3: a defense at all.
Speaker 2: But they should talk about all of the other bad things.
Speaker 4: I agree, and that so this is true. But when
Speaker 4: people obsess about this to the exclusion of all of
Speaker 4: the others, that is the direct.
Speaker 6: No one hears about Christians being slaughtered in Africa right now,
Speaker 6: and I would always i would say, it's really interesting.
Speaker 6: There was that image that was all over the internet
Speaker 6: about a week ago where an IDF soldier had removed
Speaker 6: chopped a cruise, which is horrible, disgusting, But of course
Speaker 6: that image went viral overnight. Well, no one cares about
Speaker 6: the fact that in Europe now there's an attempt to
Speaker 6: basically undermine Christian iconography by a lot of immigrants.
Speaker 2: There No one cares about that.
Speaker 3: You can imagine me watching this show and I'm just
Speaker 3: like I'm sitting at home, like someone's gonna say something
Speaker 3: about how stupid all of this is, right, Ian Crossland's
Speaker 3: going to happen at some point. He did once or twice,
Speaker 3: but it was very, very minor pushback. But what's so
Speaker 3: frustrating about it is that it's just an obvious lie.
Speaker 3: People have been talking about the downfall of Europe for
Speaker 3: a very long time now, like it's pervasive, especially an
Speaker 3: online culture. People talk about it NonStop. So obviously that's
Speaker 3: just a deception. It's just a misdirect. People don't care. Yeah, sure,
Speaker 3: I guess people don't care so much about the Christians
Speaker 3: in Africa. But guess what, neither do any of you.
Speaker 3: You don't talk about it. You don't know anything about it.
Speaker 3: You don't know the details of it, you don't know
Speaker 3: what led up to it, you don't know anything about it.
Speaker 3: You don't know about American intervention in Africa, you don't
Speaker 3: know about how that has created conflict in those nations,
Speaker 3: and you don't you sure as hell don't know what
Speaker 3: my opinions are on any of it. And you also
Speaker 3: don't talk about how the immigrant crisis, the illegal immigrant
Speaker 3: crisis in Europe has been just exploded ever since the
Speaker 3: War on terror, a litany of wars that were began
Speaker 3: to the benefit and at the behest of Israel. So
Speaker 3: if you want to distract us from what the violent
Speaker 3: extremists are doing in the West Bank or Gaza for
Speaker 3: that matter, by bringing up Europe, how about you bring
Speaker 3: up the totality of the story. How about you actually
Speaker 3: know what created the illegal immigrant flood into Europe. Do
Speaker 3: you think they just all of a sudden one day
Speaker 3: in two thousand and four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, ten.
Speaker 3: Do you think they just randomly fled their nations or
Speaker 3: could it have been the thousands of bombs that were
Speaker 3: dropping on their heads.
Speaker 1: We have given more to Ukraine in three years than
Speaker 1: Israel and fifty by all means, you can tell me
Speaker 1: that we shouldn't give Israel any money or military aid
Speaker 1: by through spending, that we should not be allowed them.
Speaker 1: I will listen to all of these arguments on foreign policy.
Speaker 1: But when I ask you about the same thing is
Speaker 1: true for Ukraine and you're like, I don't know, I'm like, okay,
Speaker 1: I'm not going to accuse a person who has legitimate
Speaker 1: criticism of Israel of Israel derangement syndrome.
Speaker 2: If you don't know about Ukraine.
Speaker 1: I just say, take a look into it, because we've
Speaker 1: given them more money. Their president has come to our Congress,
Speaker 1: they've all waived the Ukrainian flag in our land. People
Speaker 1: in this country, liberals all over the country are flying
Speaker 1: the Ukrainian flag, and I look at that very similarly.
Speaker 1: We give them insane amounts of money.
Speaker 2: They lobby on behalf of a foreign president.
Speaker 1: My question only is why is there only one place
Speaker 1: you care about? Why not why not Burma, which and
Speaker 1: you know, or the weaker Muslims, or Sudan.
Speaker 4: You've identified again that most pernicious form of anti Semitism.
Speaker 3: Tim is right, we've given an astronomical amount of aid
Speaker 3: to Ukraine since that war began. But here's the thing
Speaker 3: I and Tim and so many others, Basically, the entirety
Speaker 3: of MAGA opposed that we all uniformly were like, this
Speaker 3: is insane. We're risking World War three, we're risking nuclear holocausts,
Speaker 3: and we're blowing up our budget sending one hundred and
Speaker 3: seventy five billion dollars to Ukraine, a war that was
Speaker 3: created by our CIA, by our State Department through the
Speaker 3: Maidan Revolution. This is terribly misguided. And it has to end.
Speaker 3: This is what created the alliance. This is the Maga
Speaker 3: Maha libertarian alliance, is that we all agreed that the
Speaker 3: Democrats were leading us to ruin. But here's the problem.
Speaker 3: Tim kind of pulls a fast one on you by saying,
Speaker 3: we've given more to Ukraine since that war began than
Speaker 3: we've ever given to Israel in the entirety of their existence. Well,
Speaker 3: first off, we've given them about one hundred and seventy
Speaker 3: billion dollars just in straight aid that I'm talking about Israel. Well,
Speaker 3: we've given about one hundred and seventy five billion, so
Speaker 3: let's just be honest, it's about the same amount. But
Speaker 3: then you're also leaving off the tabulation sheet the entirety
Speaker 3: of the wars that we've fought for them, the thousands
Speaker 3: of lives that we've lost. You're leaving off the tabulation
Speaker 3: sheet all of the aid that we've given to their
Speaker 3: neighbors when we're trying to get them to sign on
Speaker 3: to the Abraham Accords. We're giving billions and billions of
Speaker 3: dollars to the Saudis and to the Egyptians and so
Speaker 3: many other nations trying to get them to be friendly
Speaker 3: with Israel. But you're not going to calculate any of that,
Speaker 3: even though it's obviously obviously crystal clear being done on
Speaker 3: behalf of Israeli interests. And then on top of all
Speaker 3: of that, you've left off the trillion dollars through the
Speaker 3: global warr and tear. So we're talking. I mean, this
Speaker 3: is exponential spending compared to what we've done in Ukraine.
Speaker 1: If you only criticized Israel, I would just simply ask,
Speaker 1: is there a reason why you think Israel bears more
Speaker 1: focus than any other country?
Speaker 2: You're allowed to have response to that. I know that
Speaker 2: you know.
Speaker 1: Dave Smith, for instance, would say, yeah, here's why I
Speaker 1: think that. I say, okay, if you give me a
Speaker 1: legitimate reason, if you can say I understand what China
Speaker 1: is doing, yes, maybe we could focus more on it.
Speaker 1: I would say that the arrangement is when people make
Speaker 1: things up, like netan Ya, who installed Zelenski to build
Speaker 1: a corridor.
Speaker 2: I'm like, now you've lost your mind. Yep.
Speaker 3: So this is why I'm not like over the top
Speaker 3: angry with Tim. He is at least willing to acknowledge
Speaker 3: that there are genuine, good faith criticism or critiques that
Speaker 3: come from my camp. But it just drives me up
Speaker 3: the wall that knowing that that exists, knowing that there
Speaker 3: are millions of us that have genuine anger and disagreement
Speaker 3: when it comes to these issues that you only talk
Speaker 3: about and dismantle all of the bad arguments as if
Speaker 3: that is the totality of them, If you know there's
Speaker 3: sincere reasons, why not contend with them? And I'll be honest,
Speaker 3: I think it's because you can't. I think it's because
Speaker 3: you know that we're right. You know that when I
Speaker 3: applied the exact same principle and philosophy to the Ukraine
Speaker 3: Russia war that I do to the Gaza Israel war,
Speaker 3: that it makes it impossible to defend Israel's action. But
Speaker 3: you can't defend it. You cannot defend it, so you
Speaker 3: don't even try. And what's so utterly bizarre about all
Speaker 3: this is that you guys can continuously harp on the
Speaker 3: people who only concern themselves with Israel but don't concern
Speaker 3: themselves with Africa or Ukraine or whatever. But then you
Speaker 3: are doing the exact same thing in the inverse. You
Speaker 3: were the first to stand shoulder to shoulder with me
Speaker 3: and say we should not be giving weapons and aid
Speaker 3: to Ukraine. This is insane. But when it comes to Israel,
Speaker 3: you're on the fence, you're right in the middle on
Speaker 3: this one. Why is it different? You can't even explain it,
Speaker 3: Explain why it's different. Explain why aid and weaponry to
Speaker 3: Ukraine was obviously an insane thing to do, but this
Speaker 3: isn't why. And honestly, the only difference I can see
Speaker 3: that's like from your worldview that makes any sense to
Speaker 3: me is that you go, well, the Left supported the
Speaker 3: war in Ukraine, so you opposed it, and the Left
Speaker 3: opposes the war in Gaza, so you support it. Now
Speaker 3: you'll say, oh, I don't support the war, I don't
Speaker 3: support the aid, or I'm not sure. That's a valid
Speaker 3: argument to make, and it's a valid position to hold.
Speaker 3: But you're not taking a stance. You're not actually saying
Speaker 3: what you believe. You're not actually saying why it's different.
Speaker 3: And I think at its core, the reason that we've
Speaker 3: parted ways, at least philosophically ideologically, is because your primary
Speaker 3: concern is just opposing the Left's worldview. It's not actually
Speaker 3: about philosophy or principles or morals or anything. That's actually
Speaker 3: rooted in something solid, because, as you know, the Democrats'
Speaker 3: philosophy changes annually, and to be clear, the Democrats are
Speaker 3: a train wreck and they should be opposed on almost everything.
Speaker 3: So we don't disagree with that. But if your worldview
Speaker 3: is being formulated purely as a reaction to the mistakes
Speaker 3: and the insanity of the Left, then you're not actually thinking,
Speaker 3: you're just reacting.
Speaker 1: Someone comes to me and says, I see these stories
Speaker 1: about children being blown up in Gaza. I see these
Speaker 1: civilian sits being targeted. I'm not a fan of that,
Speaker 1: and don't I don't want money funding it. I say, okay,
Speaker 1: I mean, there's not sure that's an opinion.
Speaker 4: Except a lot of except most of it's not happening.
Speaker 4: Civilian sites aren't targeted.
Speaker 1: I mean, well, I think the issue is that there's
Speaker 1: no distinction between civilian and military and Gaza because of
Speaker 1: the way Hamas operates.
Speaker 2: And but the fault of that is on Hamas.
Speaker 4: You blame the people who misuse so by the way,
Speaker 4: under the laws of war, when you use human shields
Speaker 4: and the human shields die, it is not the fault
Speaker 4: of the person who kills the human shields. It's the
Speaker 4: fault of the person who used them, isn't isn't isn't
Speaker 4: this mean? But the left likes to.
Speaker 1: Go to these protests, start a fight with a cop
Speaker 1: and then only film the reaction to the cop and
Speaker 1: say the cops beating innocent protesters.
Speaker 3: As you can imagine, this is the moment that my
Speaker 3: blood started to boil. I mean, obviously, yeah, it's a
Speaker 3: fair point. Sometimes there are provocateurs on the left in
Speaker 3: America that do things like that. When it comes to cops.
Speaker 3: There are all also instances of cops just being psychopaths
Speaker 3: and beating the shit out of people. That does happen too.
Speaker 3: But moreover, the beginning of that clip is where I
Speaker 3: started to pull my hair out if I had any left,
Speaker 3: when he basically Steelman's the position and says, look, there's
Speaker 3: lots of civilians that are dying and being blown up
Speaker 3: and kids and all this, and you know, so they
Speaker 3: oppose it, and I say that's a position to hold,
Speaker 3: And I'm like, wait, wait, wait, how about you contend
Speaker 3: with that position. How about you actually think about it
Speaker 3: for ten seconds? How about you actually go I don't
Speaker 3: agree with that, because ABC, Because if you don't agree
Speaker 3: with it, that's fine, But make a fucking argument. Make
Speaker 3: an argument as to why it's okay for tens of
Speaker 3: thousands of kids to be blown up, Make an argument
Speaker 3: as to why Gaza being flattened is okay because that's
Speaker 3: what happened, and do me a huge favor and challenge
Speaker 3: Congressman Fine when he says that that's not actually happening,
Speaker 3: that civilians aren't being targeted. You how could you say that?
Speaker 3: Look at Gaza, it's gone. Are you arguing that every
Speaker 3: fucking building in Gaza was a military target, every single one?
Speaker 3: Are you arguing that ten thousand plus children being blown
Speaker 3: up is acceptable collateral damage? Because if so, why, And
Speaker 3: if you're going to make the human shields argument, well
Speaker 3: then you'd have to also show some evidence of that,
Speaker 3: Show some evidence that the tens of thousands of innocent
Speaker 3: civilians that got blown up were all being held in
Speaker 3: front of a terrorist because I've never seen footage of
Speaker 3: it once.
Speaker 1: You know, what I really really can't stand about the
Speaker 1: Israel pals On conflict is that the obsession that people
Speaker 1: have over it, and for Americans young liberal left or right,
Speaker 1: who have no reason to be so fervent about a
Speaker 1: foreign conflict like this. Because I've tracked this, I've been
Speaker 1: to many of these countries. I've been to thirty eight
Speaker 1: different countries tracking conflicts of arrest, and they seem to
Speaker 1: have strong opinions. I don't understand why cause so let
Speaker 1: me just finish this point. Israel is in a conflict
Speaker 1: with the mass the idea of the fighting, and I go,
Speaker 1: that's a war. One side has more power than the other.
Speaker 1: So if Hamas fires missiles, Israel's going to crush them.
Speaker 1: Hamas uses civilian sights to launch their to store weapons,
Speaker 1: launch weapons, and do command operations. Israel says, okay, we're
Speaker 1: not going to allow this. According to Israel, they'll put
Speaker 1: out messages saying if do evacuate, we're going.
Speaker 2: To blow it up.
Speaker 1: Right now, when I look at all of the facts
Speaker 1: of the matter, I say, I don't have any answers
Speaker 1: for any of you people.
Speaker 3: And again with this straw man non argument that people
Speaker 3: are wrong because they're obsessed, as if they're focused on
Speaker 3: this war as opposed to all wars somehow nullifies the
Speaker 3: position that they hold, which makes no sense at all.
Speaker 3: But then you also don't even contend with the what
Speaker 3: makes it different. Why should Americans be more concerned about
Speaker 3: a war that Israel is fighting, that is aggressively fighting,
Speaker 3: versus that of a civil war in Africa or Asia
Speaker 3: that we didn't have much or anything to do with.
Speaker 3: And the answer is very obvious if you're just willing
Speaker 3: to steal man it for a second, that, in fact,
Speaker 3: our relationship to Israel, the aid that we give them,
Speaker 3: the wars that we fought for them, the soldiers that
Speaker 3: have died for them, the trillions of dollars in expenditures
Speaker 3: that have gone towards this relationship, makes it different. It
Speaker 3: makes it pertinent to us as Americans as taxpayers. Is
Speaker 3: that not obvious? And then at the end of it,
Speaker 3: to just say, you know, I don't have an answer
Speaker 3: for you, It's like, okay, well, then why are you
Speaker 3: so in opposition to this perspective. If you don't have
Speaker 3: an answer either, it seems as if you've just thrown
Speaker 3: up your hands that yeah, it's just a it's a problem,
Speaker 3: and you know, I guess we shouldn't take a position
Speaker 3: on it. We just got to keep funding it in perpetuity,
Speaker 3: no matter the costs, no matter the consequences. I mean,
Speaker 3: we're two and a half years into this thing, when
Speaker 3: are you going to formulate an opinion that's actually like
Speaker 3: grounded in something.
Speaker 1: They're just like, no Israel's line about everything, They're wrong
Speaker 1: about everything, And I'm like, why why have you chosen
Speaker 1: a side in a foreign conflict you're not involved.
Speaker 4: In Because they're they're fighting the war with American gifted weaponry.
Speaker 1: And that's why I said, if you were to come
Speaker 1: to me and say we should cut off military support
Speaker 1: to israelize say, okay, that's an opinion, right, that makes
Speaker 1: sense to me. Well you say I don't want to
Speaker 1: be involved in this, I say, sure, you can make
Speaker 1: a counter argument.
Speaker 2: I understand these opinions exist.
Speaker 1: What I'm saying is it doesn't make sense for someone
Speaker 1: to be like Israel is evil, they want a corridor
Speaker 1: to Ukraine, they control our government, like all of this stuff.
Speaker 2: That's just not real.
Speaker 3: So obviously I'm jumping for joy because Ian Krauslan jumped
Speaker 3: in there and made the point that I'm making that, yeah,
Speaker 3: it's different because we're funding it, because we're fighting it.
Speaker 3: And again Tim's counter is, well, yeah, that's a position.
Speaker 3: That's a fair argument to hold. That's a fair argument
Speaker 3: to make. Okay, well, then fucking deal with it. Deal
Speaker 3: with that argument. Why are you not in agreement with it?
Speaker 3: Make an actual claim as to why you oppose our
Speaker 3: involvement on our aid to Ukraine, but you don't have
Speaker 3: the same stance when it comes to Israel. Explain why.
Speaker 3: And we're two and a half years in and you
Speaker 3: haven't done it. And I'll just be honest, it seems
Speaker 3: to me as if you're trying to middle ride this
Speaker 3: thing to the whenever it ends, if it ever ends.
Speaker 3: And the obvious truth is is that that's going to
Speaker 3: hurt your brand. It's going to hurt how people perceive you,
Speaker 3: because if you're not being consistent when you apply your
Speaker 3: perspective to foreign policy broadly, if you can look at
Speaker 3: another foreign war that we shouldn't be involved in, like
Speaker 3: Russia Ukraine, and you can have a very firm position
Speaker 3: on that, but you can't do the same when it
Speaker 3: comes to this, but you don't even clarify why it's different. Well,
Speaker 3: then how are people supposed to take you seriously? And
Speaker 3: I think the answer is that they can't because you're
Speaker 3: not making a serious argument. You're not making a serious
Speaker 3: differentiation as to why you feel differently when it comes
Speaker 3: to each of these issues. And the obvious major difference
Speaker 3: from my perspective as to why you're you're holding different
Speaker 3: perspectives is that this is a Republican war, that this
Speaker 3: is more specifically a Trump war, that Trump supports it,
Speaker 3: and therefore you will. And just to be clear, I
Speaker 3: don't want to believe that about you. I don't want
Speaker 3: to feel like that's actually how you're evaluating these things.
Speaker 3: But if you're not going to make an actual claim
Speaker 3: or an actual counter argument to any of this, an
Speaker 3: actual firm position, then what other what am I left
Speaker 3: to assume other than that.
Speaker 4: It is true that the Israelis are fighting wars with American.
Speaker 2: Weapons as gifts. So it's true.
Speaker 4: People in America have a right to be up on
Speaker 4: your poet, maybe they should also understand what the what
Speaker 4: the war's about. So the root of Christianity all took
Speaker 4: place where Israel is right, That's where Jesus was born,
Speaker 4: that's where he lived, it's where he died. And when
Speaker 4: I went to Israel with my colleagues last August, they
Speaker 4: got to visit two sets of places. They got to
Speaker 4: visit the Christian holy sites that were run by Israel
Speaker 4: and then they went to Bethlehem. When they came back
Speaker 4: from Bethlehem, I asked them, what was it like to
Speaker 4: go to the birthplace of Jesus? You know what they
Speaker 4: told me. They had nothing to do with the birthplace
Speaker 4: of Jesus. They said, I can't believe how bad it
Speaker 4: was kept versus the Christian sites that I visited that
Speaker 4: were controlled by the Jews. Bethlehem used to be ninety
Speaker 4: percent Christian, now it's ten percent.
Speaker 3: But where is Bethlehem. Bethlehem is in the West Bank.
Speaker 3: So he's contrasting the holy sites that exists within israel
Speaker 3: territory versus those in Palestinian territory and saying one is
Speaker 3: treated better than the other. But why could it be
Speaker 3: that they're totally oppressed and impoverished. But moreover, if you're
Speaker 3: going to make the argument that the reason that this
Speaker 3: war is being fought by America is to defend Christian
Speaker 3: holy sites, then wouldn't you also have to take a
Speaker 3: little bit more seriously when you see an IDEF soldier
Speaker 3: destroying a statue of Jesus. Wouldn't that kind of go
Speaker 3: counter to that claim? Or how about when the IDF
Speaker 3: blows up Christian monasteries, blows up Christians. Wouldn't that also
Speaker 3: kind of go counter to the claim that we're defending
Speaker 3: Christianity somehow, not to mention the fact that if we're
Speaker 3: going to be defending Christianity, how about we actually read
Speaker 3: the book? How about we actually know what we're really
Speaker 3: defending as opposed to statues, how about children? How about
Speaker 3: the innocent? How about making sure that this war is
Speaker 3: just to begin with, given that that's an entire vein
Speaker 3: of thought and debate within Christianity, just war theory.
Speaker 1: The biggest podcasts in the world right now are those
Speaker 1: that are critical of Israel and the people that Trump
Speaker 1: has been criticizing. These prominent podcasters all have some of
Speaker 1: the top spots, and they're all very critical of Israel.
Speaker 1: Some of them discuss what they call greater Israel and
Speaker 1: Jewish supremacy. And I guess my issue is why haven't
Speaker 1: the Jews, considering that they control all the yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: why are they allowing that to happen.
Speaker 4: It's a great question, and you know, it has a
Speaker 4: lot to do with numbers. You know, there are fewer
Speaker 4: Jews in the world than there are people who live
Speaker 4: in Beijing, China. It's only fifteen million Jews.
Speaker 2: Yeah, there's one.
Speaker 4: There's one point two billion Muslims in the world. So
Speaker 4: if you measure your audience based on number of people,
Speaker 4: do you think you're going to get a bigger audience
Speaker 4: if you target Jews or if you.
Speaker 2: Don't target Jews? Aren't there aren't that many of us?
Speaker 3: Of all the dumb and non arguments that happened during
Speaker 3: this hour, I think that this may take the cake, honestly.
Speaker 3: I mean, first, they start out by pointing out our
Speaker 3: ten points out that all of the most successful podcasts
Speaker 3: over the past couple of years have been those that
Speaker 3: are Israel critical Tucker Candice, Megan, Kelly, Dave Smith. But
Speaker 3: they leave out a couple variables that actually makes this
Speaker 3: entire argument super stupid. First off, you'd have to completely
Speaker 3: ignore the existence of Nick Fuent is the fact that
Speaker 3: he was basically the Canary and the coal mine that
Speaker 3: had everything taken from him and including being put on
Speaker 3: a no fly list and treated like a terrorist because
Speaker 3: he was one of the first people to come out
Speaker 3: and successfully, successfully and prominently go after our relationship to Israel.
Speaker 3: But then you also have to ignore the fact that
Speaker 3: what we're talking about when it comes to control of
Speaker 3: the media is that's the old guard, that would be
Speaker 3: corporate media. And it's very hard to look at CNN, MSNBC,
Speaker 3: Fox News, CBS down the line and find any genuine
Speaker 3: critiques that are well grounded, that aren't just leftist slop.
Speaker 3: When it comes to our relationship with Israel, especially when
Speaker 3: it comes to conservative media, my god, you will never
Speaker 3: get a legitimate argument against our relationship with Israel on
Speaker 3: Fox News. And then you'd also have to ignore the
Speaker 3: fact that there are constantly conventions in America by Zionists
Speaker 3: where they talk about how to get rid of voices
Speaker 3: like Twentez and Candics and Tucker and everybody else.
Speaker 7: We use cutting edge AI tools to analyze the endless
Speaker 7: online chatter, and then when we identify salient trends or
Speaker 7: material threats, out them to whoever may need it. Could
Speaker 7: be journalists, policymakers, and very often law enforcement. It makes
Speaker 7: our communities safer.
Speaker 3: They're constantly talking about it, They're constantly pushing for additional censorship.
Speaker 3: Have you not listened to green blad over at the
Speaker 3: Adel talk about it. He talks about it monthly, weekly,
Speaker 3: all the time. He's constantly talking about we need to
Speaker 3: get the social media platforms to kick these people off.
Speaker 3: And then the icing on the cake is the argument
Speaker 3: that the reason that this has been a successful thing
Speaker 3: to talk about is because there's just not that many
Speaker 3: Jewish people globally. It's so ridiculous. It's like, do you
Speaker 3: think that we would be successful if I just harped
Speaker 3: on eskimos. There's not that many of them, so obviously
Speaker 3: I'm going to be more successful if I just talk
Speaker 3: about how evil Eskimos are, right, But at the pygmies,
Speaker 3: there ain't that many of them. Should I dedicate my
Speaker 3: show to Oh no, no, no, Actually, it's because of
Speaker 3: what Israel is doing that this has become a topic
Speaker 3: that people want to talk about and listen to, and
Speaker 3: that's the reason that those shows have been so successful.
Speaker 3: But it's really hard if you steal man it to
Speaker 3: then just dismiss it. And here's the final clip before
Speaker 3: I get out of here.
Speaker 4: It sounds like, Rabbi, the consensus around the table here
Speaker 4: is in Mike Pompeo that time really is on the United.
Speaker 3: States side right now, Israel side?
Speaker 4: Right now?
Speaker 5: Yeah, we do have the time because it's you know,
Speaker 5: the people of the IRGC, if they're not going to
Speaker 5: get paid, like he said, they're to mafia and they're
Speaker 5: protecting between me and you and the lamp post is.
Speaker 5: We got to know exactly where the nuclear stuff is.
Speaker 5: We got to know where the uranium is.
Speaker 3: A little comedic humor for you. That was a rabbi
Speaker 3: talking in prime time Fox News about how this war
Speaker 3: cannot end until we get the enriched geranium. And the
Speaker 3: reason I played that to end this is to point
Speaker 3: out that that's basically what this entire episode of Tim
Speaker 3: kast Irol was was just having a rabbi on to
Speaker 3: lie to you, because that's all Randy Fine did. He's
Speaker 3: told basically zero truth, was zero pushback, and no one
Speaker 3: seemed to care except for your audience. Except for the chat,
Speaker 3: which I happened to have been in because I was
Speaker 3: curious how your audience was going to react to this.
Speaker 3: Let me tell you it was about ninety percent just fury.
Speaker 3: People were very, very angry. And before you think that
Speaker 3: this is some sort of platforming argument, an argument I
Speaker 3: would never make, that's not the point that I'm making.
Speaker 3: The reason that people were so furious is not because
Speaker 3: you had Randy Fine on. It's because you had Randy
Speaker 3: Fine on and you agreed with every single thing he said.
Speaker 3: There was almost no pushback from an entire filled with
Speaker 3: people as a man overtly lied over and over and
Speaker 3: over and over again, and not just a man, a congressman,
Speaker 3: a guy who allegedly represents us. And if there's one
Speaker 3: thing that independent media or media broadly is supposed to
Speaker 3: do is hold the powerful to account. And Randy Fine,
Speaker 3: whether we like it or not, and trust me, I
Speaker 3: don't like it, has power. And honestly, it just makes
Speaker 3: me sad. It makes me sad that this guy sat
Speaker 3: there and lied NonStop and you either agreed with him
Speaker 3: or you would straw man the opposition to the things
Speaker 3: that he was saying over and over and over again.
Speaker 3: And honestly, unless you're angling for a Fox News job,
Speaker 3: I don't understand what you're doing. I don't get it.
Speaker 3: I watch it. I try and put myself in your position,
Speaker 3: and the only conclusions I can come to is angling
Speaker 3: for a Fox News gig or you are just full
Speaker 3: on Trump sickophant. You're gonna ride with whatever position he holds,
Speaker 3: no matter how much it goes against your principles just
Speaker 3: because you're so fearful of the left. But here's the thing,
Speaker 3: I oppose the Left just as much as you do.
Speaker 3: I'm just as fearful as what they're about to do.
Speaker 3: But that cannot, or at least it should not permit
Speaker 3: us to become just as bad as them, to ignore
Speaker 3: all of the evil that comes from our side. And
Speaker 3: there has been plenty of evil that has come from
Speaker 3: our side over the past year and a half. And
Speaker 3: if independent media is going to exist, we have to
Speaker 3: be better than corporate media. We can't be Fox News
Speaker 3: just gleefully smiling as a rabbi comes in and says, Hey,
Speaker 3: let's send American sons and daughters and money and munitions
Speaker 3: to a foreign country to fight a war that was
Speaker 3: never existential to us, that was never a threat to us,
Speaker 3: at least not domestically. And you know, I'm telling the
Speaker 3: truth about that, because it's obvious they don't have missiles
Speaker 3: to hit us at all. They couldn't have done anything
Speaker 3: to us ever, or at least not in years, probably decades.
Speaker 3: We are fighting a war on behalf of a foreign
Speaker 3: country and doing so under a banner that says America first.
Speaker 3: That's not acceptable, and I'm not straw manning anything. I'm
Speaker 3: being totally crystal clear about this. If you campaign on
Speaker 3: making America great again or America first, and then you
Speaker 3: put America anything other than first, it is my duty,
Speaker 3: my obligation to say you're fucking up. And if you
Speaker 3: won't say it, then somebody else will. If I have
Speaker 3: to say it, then I will. And if that means
Speaker 3: that people start to listen or watch me and not you,
Speaker 3: then that's how it plays out. But that's not my fault,
Speaker 3: and that's not me being a hater, and that's not
Speaker 3: me writing algorithmic waves. That's me taking a moral and
Speaker 3: principled stand, which is all people want.
Speaker 2: They want someone.
Speaker 3: Who's going to be honest about these issues, and if
Speaker 3: you can't do that, then you are no better than
Speaker 3: the corporate media. And that hurts me to say, because
Speaker 3: you're the guy that gave me my first big break.
Speaker 3: You had me on your show when I was nobody,
Speaker 3: when nobody had heard of me at all. And the
Speaker 3: truth is, I think what major your show is so
Speaker 3: successful was that you were willing to have on different
Speaker 3: voices in a well founded, fair reasoned way pushback against
Speaker 3: anybody who comes on, including me, and I have gotten
Speaker 3: into it on your show countless times, and I've always appreciated.
Speaker 3: I've always felt, well, there's been sometimes where it wasn't
Speaker 3: so respectful, but for the most part, it's been respectful,
Speaker 3: and honestly, I think everything I've said here has been respectful.
Speaker 3: I have not tried to straw man your position. I've
Speaker 3: tried to understand your position, and I have found it lacking.
Speaker 3: And before people say, well, why aren't you just doing
Speaker 3: this on his show or why aren't you calling him up?
Speaker 3: And like you think Tim's gonna have an hour plus
Speaker 3: long conversation with me, is I devour all of these
Speaker 3: non arguments like, no, he's not gonna do that, and
Speaker 3: that's fine, he doesn't have to, he doesn't owe me that.
Speaker 3: And the other thing is I would gladly have waited
Speaker 3: until my next time on ir RelA to contend with
Speaker 3: these arguments, had I had the offer, But it's been
Speaker 3: eighteen months since I've been on there, so obviously Tim
Speaker 3: has decided that he doesn't like voices like mine going
Speaker 3: on his show. That's totally fine. I don't hold that
Speaker 3: against him at all, And to be clear, even though
Speaker 3: he's not having me on his show, I still consider
Speaker 3: him a friend and I still think Tim's a good guy.
Speaker 3: But I think the path he's on is very misguided,
Speaker 3: and as someone who was a of his I want
Speaker 3: to see him continue doing what he used to do,
Speaker 3: which is to actually want to focus on the people
Speaker 3: in power that are doing bad, that are doing evil
Speaker 3: in our names. And if you've gotten so fearful of
Speaker 3: the left that you can no longer see this clearly,
Speaker 3: then I hope, if anything else, you'll just reflect. You'll
Speaker 3: reflect on why people like me are so disappointed in
Speaker 3: the direction or the trajectory of IROL over the past
Speaker 3: couple of years. Because I'm not bought off and I'm
Speaker 3: not botted, and I'm not a bot in your chat
Speaker 3: who's trying to hate on you. I am a friend
Speaker 3: of yours in my opinion, that's telling you the truth
Speaker 3: that I think that you are capable of doing better
Speaker 3: than this, and I hope you will, and I'm rooting
Speaker 3: for you, and I want you to be the most
Speaker 3: successful largest nightly show that goes live on YouTube every
Speaker 3: single night. But I only want that if you're going
Speaker 3: to actually do what you used to do, which is
Speaker 3: be honest about these issues shoes and take on the
Speaker 3: legitimate arguments that exist out there, and not straw man
Speaker 3: and not dismiss what are genuine complaints from the real
Speaker 3: America first people and we are legion. Oh god, this
Speaker 3: episode is gonna get me in a lot of trouble.
Speaker 3: But whatever, I care about this shit a lot, and
Speaker 3: I think that it had to be said, so I
Speaker 3: said it. If you guys have appreciated it, please do subscribe,
Speaker 3: share it around, hit the like button. And just to
Speaker 3: be clear, I'm not I don't want any of you
Speaker 3: to harass him. I'm not trying to like make my
Speaker 3: name by dragging somebody bigger than me down or anything
Speaker 3: like that. I fucking like the guy. I mean that
Speaker 3: totally sincerely. We've hung out a ton, We've gone and
Speaker 3: played poker together. I like him a lot. So this
Speaker 3: is not about me being some hater or anything like that.
Speaker 3: I'm genuinely rooting for the guy, and I really hope
Speaker 3: that he gets more serious about these issues because I
Speaker 3: think it's hurting his reputation and it sucks to see
Speaker 3: because we need as many honest people in this fight
Speaker 3: as possible. We need as many people with large platforms
Speaker 3: to be telling the truth as much as possible. And
Speaker 3: to be clear, I'm not compelling Tim to agree with
Speaker 3: Tucker or Candice or myself or Dave or any of us.
Speaker 3: I'm just saying, if you can't at least challenge and
Speaker 3: dismantle the arguments that someone like Tucker Carlson or Dave
Speaker 3: Smith makes, then don't dismiss them. Don't pretend as if
Speaker 3: they're all just psychotic anti semitism when you know that
Speaker 3: they're not. All right, guys, love you very much, Love
Speaker 3: you Tim. I'll catch you, guys, so please. Oh and
Speaker 3: last but not Lee's hit the hype. Hype this shit.
Speaker 3: Apparently that helps it go viral. So if everybody that's
Speaker 3: watching this right now, you get three hypes per week.
Speaker 3: If everybody who's watching or listening to this right now,
Speaker 3: if you go and you hype it, then it will
Speaker 3: get a little hype badge, and then it'll show it
Speaker 3: to more people that don't already subscribe to me. And
Speaker 3: by the way, if you're listening on Spotify right now,
Speaker 3: only forty percent of the people that listen to every
Speaker 3: episode or subscribe. What are you doing subscribe. Same thing
Speaker 3: with YouTube. Forty percent of the people that watch this
Speaker 3: or subscribe right now. What's the sixty percent of you're
Speaker 3: doing fucking just watching for funzies and hating on me.
Speaker 3: Hit the subscribe button.
Speaker 2: Subscribe to Liberty Lockdown. Great podcast, Clint is Tight