Speaker 1: So really it's like what three hundred yards away from
Speaker 1: a schooler daycare?
Speaker 2: Carl, that's pretty Yeah, yeah, it's pretty far. It's far
Speaker 2: enough legally, it's compliant with a lot.
Speaker 1: I find the cold open gimmick really funny. And those
Speaker 1: who aren't aware it's we have like a normal conversation
Speaker 1: before that, I just get can't resist putting Carl in
Speaker 1: a bad position. But how are you doing, man, it's
Speaker 1: been a while.
Speaker 2: Yeah, doing well, doing well? Happy New Year?
Speaker 1: Yeah, happy New Year as well. It's always good. It's funny.
Speaker 1: I get two forms of feedback universally tar streams, which
Speaker 1: is Carl again or alternately, when are you having Carl
Speaker 1: back on? So I've just decided to disappoint both those people,
Speaker 1: at least as much as I can.
Speaker 2: Yeah, the I can't help but notice that the super
Speaker 2: chats are quite low. So yeah, yeah, they're a revealed
Speaker 2: preference versus stated preference.
Speaker 1: You know, well, honestly, like I, I probably would be
Speaker 1: a better streamer if I like held out more for
Speaker 1: super chats, like not answering questions unless you pay me.
Speaker 1: You know, I can't, I con be honest, I can't
Speaker 1: be bothered if something's funny. Something's funny. So yeah, I
Speaker 1: have an allegedly professional podcaster, but you know, getting paid
Speaker 1: for it. That's that's kind of gay.
Speaker 2: There's you know, to be honest, I can sympathize with that.
Speaker 2: I'm a professional author.
Speaker 1: Right by book as someone yes, yes, yes, bye book.
Speaker 2: Actually, the cool thing is, I'm not surprised, but I
Speaker 2: hear a lot more from people who buy my first book.
Speaker 2: And I think it's because it's like two hundred pages
Speaker 2: versus what is it almost six hundred for the other
Speaker 2: So it's a good bit has a lot to do
Speaker 2: with that, I think, But no, it's it's uh, it's
Speaker 2: doing well and it helps allow me the luxury of uh,
Speaker 2: you know, hanging out with the right wings first drill
Speaker 2: rap artist.
Speaker 1: I have no idea what you could possibly be referring to.
Speaker 1: I'm actually I'm very excited, uh actually largely based on
Speaker 1: Johann Kurzis book, which is very very good. I've I've
Speaker 1: begun collecting family artifacts and so I have a number
Speaker 1: one of which I think i've shown you Carl Rock
Speaker 1: Comedy now. But is this very cool Jesile musket. It's cool.
Speaker 1: It's a functional one which is.
Speaker 2: Something that's a family artifact.
Speaker 1: Yeah. I waving this around because it has quite a
Speaker 1: lot of highly specific biological biographical information on.
Speaker 2: It, and bio, we know what you're up.
Speaker 1: I mean, look, it's pretty cool, man. And if you're
Speaker 1: wondering the recent Reddit post how to get a you know,
Speaker 1: a fourteen centimeter cylinder out of a slightly larger one, well,
Speaker 1: you know, that's my feature there, but the background I'm
Speaker 1: working on, and so I just threw that in there
Speaker 1: because I think it's funny. It's been in the background
Speaker 1: of a couple of podcasts and no one's noticed yet.
Speaker 1: That's awesome, I think is amusing. But I have secured
Speaker 1: something very cool, which is the family leopard skin. I
Speaker 1: had a grand great grandfather who did some things with
Speaker 1: some people after World War two and ended up in
Speaker 1: you know, Southeast Asia, And as you do, you're like, huh.
Speaker 1: And also it's like, turns out people have conflicting feelings
Speaker 1: about the pelts of large predators. My thought is like,
Speaker 1: this thing's been dead for like ninety years, Like, oh yeah,
Speaker 1: having it in my house isn't going to kill it again.
Speaker 2: You're honoring it.
Speaker 1: Yeah, exactly, And it's just rad because it's got supers
Speaker 1: poked through it. But point is, I am probably going
Speaker 1: to construct in the background, like the hang the leopard
Speaker 1: pelt on the wall, put the musket on it, because
Speaker 1: I guess that's just kind of cool. So anyway, the
Speaker 1: point is I am going to you know, use my
Speaker 1: family artifact, which is what Johen Kurve's uh, you know recommended, right,
Speaker 1: you know, keep hold of those things, and you know
Speaker 1: that makes some you use it to benefit my work,
Speaker 1: right because honestly, like literally, what do you do with
Speaker 1: a leopard skin, you know, short of of like Alexander
Speaker 1: the Great and wearing it, uh in public? It's sort
Speaker 1: of an unwieldy thing.
Speaker 2: Being a fellow apple Achian Scott's Irishmen descendant, I think
Speaker 2: you need a aged tomahawk that the you know, rendered vintage.
Speaker 2: And I would be happy to collaborate with that because
Speaker 2: I have some experience with that.
Speaker 1: So honestly, that sounds a lot of fun. And weirdly enough,
Speaker 1: I know many people who are actually not weirdly enough
Speaker 1: look like you people know what I am. I know
Speaker 1: quite a lot of people who are into into blacksmithing,
Speaker 1: which kind of comes with the Derek that's a good idea.
Speaker 1: Point is I've been watching all of these what I
Speaker 1: consider you know, like the seven thousand Dollars Club as
Speaker 1: they're called, right, and they have cool studios. Or you
Speaker 1: can go Glenn Beck and you know, act like you're
Speaker 1: a super villain and like a James Bond movie and
Speaker 1: just have this like multimillion dollar all white, you know,
Speaker 1: like cyberpunk constrosity. And while I can't match that again
Speaker 1: you stendity people are not sending me the kind of
Speaker 1: super chats for my like meglomania cult desires here. But
Speaker 1: the point is sex Freakment twenty twenty six rebrand gonna
Speaker 1: be wild drill wrapper with a musket and a leopard skin.
Speaker 1: So it's kind of the plan. There's a great fortune
Speaker 1: greed text about I think the additional question is, like,
Speaker 1: you know, is a smooth four musket the ideal weapon
Speaker 1: for a crime? You know, no shell casings, no rifling
Speaker 1: on the bullet. And of course the entire threat is
Speaker 1: just guys talking about doing drive buys with like you know,
Speaker 1: tri corner. Yes, and a lot of three.
Speaker 2: Wounds from the bayonets.
Speaker 1: Yeah, yes, holding look sex frequent holding the musket sideways
Speaker 1: quite literally has no impact on accuracy.
Speaker 2: It's true, It's true, you know, it's it's funny. I
Speaker 2: can also teach you some sometimes we just call it
Speaker 2: hatchet but tomahawk fighting stuff. It's it's kind of what
Speaker 2: you would expect, but giving your grappling experience, like, I
Speaker 2: think you would pick it up very quickly because there's
Speaker 2: a lot of like limb control type of stuff involved
Speaker 2: in it. It's pretty pretty great sense.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean, look, I have have long gone by
Speaker 1: the reason I carry a gun is because I'm continuing
Speaker 1: reminded how bad I am at fighting otherwise. Yeah, the
Speaker 1: but in point point being, yeah, I'm gonna be you know,
Speaker 1: collecting items to sort of make this, you know, scene
Speaker 1: look better. Because there was some posts going around talking
Speaker 1: about the proliferation of you know, young male right wing
Speaker 1: podcasters who you know, all broadcast from beige rooms, and
Speaker 1: the poster was saying, I wonder if they're all in
Speaker 1: some server farm somewhere, right, it's just like identical cubicles.
Speaker 1: And I can assure you that it's not the case,
Speaker 1: at least in my instance. But yeah, fair enough, the
Speaker 1: beige room is it's a little grim, so hopefully we'll
Speaker 1: make it a little better. But that's actually not the
Speaker 1: purpose of this stream merely to you know, talk about
Speaker 1: my home redecoration projects. But it's to talk about, as
Speaker 1: you know, someone once said, the late unpleasantness, right, the
Speaker 1: kind of uproar surrounding ice and uh, you know, the
Speaker 1: shooting of this woman, Renee Good. I was on ur
Speaker 1: un obviously to discus after the second video dropped where
Speaker 1: she basically, you know, bounced this Ice agent off the hood.
Speaker 1: Several things I want to discuss there. One, I want
Speaker 1: to kind of reiterate the points that I made on
Speaker 1: Orange Show, which is effectively lunatic progressive rhetoric got this
Speaker 1: woman killed.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 1: In one of the other videos that's been going around
Speaker 1: has been you know repeat. It's different situations but very
Speaker 1: similar where people are saying like, oh, you can't arrest me,
Speaker 1: you're not a cop, and it's like, well that's not true.
Speaker 1: They can. They will. Also they have guns, so like
Speaker 1: the legality of that is sort of indeterminate in the moment.
Speaker 2: Yes, they're much larger than you and they have shiny badges.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and there's like twenty of them, so like, regardless
Speaker 1: of the legality of that like, hey, maybe you know,
Speaker 1: shut up and fight it in court, even from you know,
Speaker 1: their perspective. But additionally, right, all of the rhetoric that's
Speaker 1: been going on for what I mean over ten years
Speaker 1: now about you know, fighting fascism, right, the threat start democracy,
Speaker 1: this very existential language which is driving people to the
Speaker 1: breaking point. Right. We've seen a number of these more
Speaker 1: violent attacks a year ago with the anti Elon, anti
Speaker 1: anti Tesla riots, the kind of series of ambushes on
Speaker 1: DHS personnel, and honestly, like this will continue to happen, right,
Speaker 1: there's a desire to kind of spin this woman up
Speaker 1: into a martyr. I think that the you know, the
Speaker 1: the George Foyd rte, the idea that she would become
Speaker 1: sort of a rallying point for George Floyd season of riots. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I think that has probably petered out.
Speaker 2: I don't know, it's not happening that this does not
Speaker 2: get the the violent pets riled up.
Speaker 1: Yeah, exactly. And on that point, a lot of the
Speaker 1: discourse has shifted to the reaction, right, should you you
Speaker 1: celebrate the you know the death of an enemy And
Speaker 1: you know, I I have sort of in the conflicted
Speaker 1: feelings on the matter. You know, on one hand, I
Speaker 1: feel like it is somewhat poor form. It's just not
Speaker 1: something to be done, especially in public. But also man like,
Speaker 1: this is what politics has become. And you know, after Kirk,
Speaker 1: after all the stuff that happened to Trump, after events
Speaker 1: that have happened, you know, well before that, you know,
Speaker 1: even Dicky Spencer getting cold cocked like this isn't new.
Speaker 1: And you know, this is the the Republican's pounce phenomenon,
Speaker 1: which we've been aware of for quite some time. The
Speaker 1: same story or will be reported on drastically differently depending
Speaker 1: on who is you know, the who is the instigator? Right,
Speaker 1: the way that meme of Republicans pounce is on any
Speaker 1: sort of scandal, right, if it's you know, Republican or Conservative,
Speaker 1: it is reported as a scandal, whereas if the roles
Speaker 1: are reversed, it becomes Republicans are overreacting to this thing,
Speaker 1: aren't they gross?
Speaker 2: Right?
Speaker 1: And we understand this, and I think that that's a
Speaker 1: certain amount of what's happening as well. You know, even
Speaker 1: people I consider friends have been, you know, decrying the
Speaker 1: sort of celebration of this woman's death. And I kind
Speaker 1: of get it. I mean, Ultimately, I think that you're
Speaker 1: sort of, you know, struggling to find a polite phrase
Speaker 1: for this beer waste. Yeah, yeah, and you're you're sort
Speaker 1: of wasting your time trying to tone police the Internet.
Speaker 1: You simply can't. And so it's partially why I haven't engaged,
Speaker 1: because one, it's like, you know, I can control what
Speaker 1: I do, but the moment you sort of step in
Speaker 1: and say, boys, boys, you can't do that. Yeah, you're
Speaker 1: basically the hall monitor of the Internet, which is just
Speaker 1: kind of flame and embarrassing. And I think that again,
Speaker 1: there is a real problem with the sort of consenting
Speaker 1: to the moral frame of your enemies, right, and very
Speaker 1: clearly they are trying to paint this woman as a victim, right.
Speaker 1: We hear this, you know, repeated refrain, you know, a
Speaker 1: mother of three unarmed you know, in sort of the
Speaker 1: same way that you you know, you heard those sort
Speaker 1: of terms swirling around and figures like George Floyd Floyd. Wow,
Speaker 1: I can't even say his name correctly now. The meme
Speaker 1: is so thoroughly worked into my brain or Trayvon Martin,
Speaker 1: and that is, you know, a feature of narrative control,
Speaker 1: right when you have you know that when you have
Speaker 1: the press by the short hairs, you can make them
Speaker 1: or let's be honest, I even make them. They will
Speaker 1: do it for you, right, repeat your talking points. But
Speaker 1: I think that that while that bears mentioning, the thing
Speaker 1: that I want to pivot to, Carl, this is something
Speaker 1: you and I have been talking about for quite some time, right,
Speaker 1: both you know, going back to the ambushes on ice agents,
Speaker 1: but also write that article you and I went over
Speaker 1: from from Wired magazine, right that this sort of political
Speaker 1: violence is brewing, and very clearly, you know, this woman
Speaker 1: was a victim of that meme complex, right, She's a
Speaker 1: victim of you know, this narrative that you can basically
Speaker 1: do whatever you want and you will face no consequences
Speaker 1: for it. Yeah, and they're cynically using her death as
Speaker 1: a way to get more people riled up, more people
Speaker 1: involved in these dangerous protests. And a lot of the libertarians,
Speaker 1: of course, as you can imagine, are you know, very
Speaker 1: anti state. You know, they're saying like, oh, they would
Speaker 1: just happily do this to you or anyone else, And
Speaker 1: that analysis is incomplete because look like government goons are
Speaker 1: government goons. Yeah, but also not all government goons are
Speaker 1: on the same team, right ice is right coded certainly now,
Speaker 1: you know, I'm sure you've seen Carl the video of
Speaker 1: the guy saying, they pay me two hundred thousand a
Speaker 1: year and I'd still do this for free.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 1: But also like even during the Biden admin, you know,
Speaker 1: when they were not unleashed as they currently are, there
Speaker 1: were struggles between them and the administration, whereas the FBI,
Speaker 1: the ATF, organizations like that are very much not right
Speaker 1: wing aligned or right wing coded. And so again, right
Speaker 1: this doesn't mean like the government is your friend, but
Speaker 1: the idea that there's just a goon faction, which now
Speaker 1: that I've said is perhaps a poor choice of words,
Speaker 1: that there is like the government, it's just one.
Speaker 2: Monologne fact Yeah, exactly, it's factional. Which is why I
Speaker 2: use the term and the titles of both of my
Speaker 2: books is the world is factional. Government is factional. It's
Speaker 2: not a monolith. There is a uniparty, but there are
Speaker 2: factions within that uniparty that play nice with them, and
Speaker 2: quite often there are schisms. And we're in a schism
Speaker 2: period where we're in the trailing end of a schism
Speaker 2: period that frankly broke wide open after October seventh, twenty
Speaker 2: twenty three. And this is a armed faction with power
Speaker 2: that's chud write coated, that is loyal to Trump and
Speaker 2: goon faction shirts dropping. That's a great idea, Jay, should
Speaker 2: you should do that?
Speaker 1: Yeah? I have great ideas for merch. The follow through
Speaker 1: is always the issue. But to me, I sort of
Speaker 1: see this as inevitable. And it was very clear that
Speaker 1: they've fished for an instance like this for over a
Speaker 1: year now. You know, there were there were some leaked
Speaker 1: in Eternal memos basically talking about exactly this right the fact,
Speaker 1: and we've known this going all through kind of the
Speaker 1: peak Antifa years of you know, COVID and a little before,
Speaker 1: Like I'm sure you remember in the Pacific Northwest, what
Speaker 1: was the group of moms that wore those yellow jackets?
Speaker 1: What were they called again?
Speaker 2: Oh god? Yeah, they're basically the ones that run between
Speaker 2: the police and Antifa after and this is a this
Speaker 2: is an Antifa tactic. Someone runs in front into the cops,
Speaker 2: hits them in the head or throws a Molotov cocktail
Speaker 2: and then runs back into the crowd, and the innocent
Speaker 2: moms become the physical shield for them that the chuds
Speaker 2: then have to plow through to get the target so
Speaker 2: that they can have footage of like sixty year old
Speaker 2: retards getting flattened. And because their idea is that that
Speaker 2: stirs up you know, the sympathies of morons, and you
Speaker 2: know which it does. But they're completely disposable and it
Speaker 2: is literally their way of making up for their whiteness.
Speaker 2: This is that this is the mentality that they've internalized.
Speaker 1: Well, right, and you know, with that comes one. This
Speaker 1: is a deliberate tactic and obviously in every instantiation, I'm
Speaker 1: not trying to say Renay good was was in on it,
Speaker 1: but very clearly there is a desire to inject and
Speaker 1: to kind of profit off of these politically or narratively
Speaker 1: useful sort of memetic images or events. Uh, either this
Speaker 1: idea to create an iconic image or create a person
Speaker 1: from which you can sort of derive a narrative.
Speaker 2: Right.
Speaker 1: We've seen this over and over again, and a lot
Speaker 1: of the analysis people talking about like, oh, you know
Speaker 1: this isn't playing well, you know, this is looking bad
Speaker 1: to kind of Joe Normy. It is actually true, right,
Speaker 1: it seems to be, you know, according to my fairly
Speaker 1: scant research that you currently ice is unpopular. But look
Speaker 1: like we're all good elite theorists here, we all understand
Speaker 1: that one popular sentiment is very fickle. And also if
Speaker 1: you were a slave to popular sentiment, ultimately you're never
Speaker 1: going to get anything done. Yeah, because the same sort
Speaker 1: of you know, pressures that we identify with people when
Speaker 1: they go to college like this hits population writ large.
Speaker 1: And so to me, the idea that you know, this
Speaker 1: is horrible. You know, the optics are bad. We can't
Speaker 1: be doing this anymore. We should be very nice and
Speaker 1: kind of you know, use kid gloves with us. It's like, well,
Speaker 1: look like that's true. If your primary objective is to
Speaker 1: be in the current immediately popular, that's true. But ultimately
Speaker 1: that's not the game. And fundamentally right, the game is
Speaker 1: they are trying to demographically transform the nation or their
Speaker 1: own political ends. You are trying to stop that. You're
Speaker 1: trying to the bleed and you know, push things back
Speaker 1: in the other direction. And so really, for like the
Speaker 1: nominal right in America, this is actually existential. You will
Speaker 1: not be allowed to do what you want to do.
Speaker 1: You will not be allowed access to power if you
Speaker 1: don't succeed in this and so sure popularity, you know,
Speaker 1: mass appeal is a is a relevant factor, but compared
Speaker 1: to what and so to me again, I see that
Speaker 1: as in an immediate sense, perhaps true, but ultimately a
Speaker 1: very shortsighted analysis of this current situation if you see
Speaker 1: what I'm getting at, Carl.
Speaker 2: Yeah, And you know, the thing with polling is that
Speaker 2: you can shape and publish whatever you want to get
Speaker 2: the outcome that you want. It has very little It
Speaker 2: can be tailored very easily to have a little to
Speaker 2: do with reality. I really don't believe that most people
Speaker 2: really care that. You know, someone asks is it bad
Speaker 2: when bad things happen? And you're like, sure, you know
Speaker 2: that that's really the level of what we're dealing with
Speaker 2: her here. Do you think the average person has watched
Speaker 2: all of the footage to know exactly what was going
Speaker 2: on and has been informed about these things? Everyone who
Speaker 2: has is like, you know, either f this individual or
Speaker 2: you know, they have an ideological reason to say no,
Speaker 2: this is horrible. And the truth of it is is
Speaker 2: these people don't a lot of these people don't know
Speaker 2: what they're doing. They're they're they're in this like Star
Speaker 2: Wars fantasy where because they haven't been punched in the face,
Speaker 2: and as people who've been punched in the face, you
Speaker 2: and I are like, oh, if I get in front
Speaker 2: of big man with shiny badge and legal authority or
Speaker 2: just big man period who's doing thing, there's a very
Speaker 2: good chance that I could get punched in the face.
Speaker 2: There's a very good chance if I get in front
Speaker 2: of armed man and do thing that could kill armed man,
Speaker 2: that he might kill me. Like it's really quite simple.
Speaker 2: And these you know, media addicts in their cozy little lives,
Speaker 2: just they they can't fathom that that's real. They will
Speaker 2: just they will simply wow, just wow. Where while the
Speaker 2: people who are encouraging them to put their bodies on
Speaker 2: the line, which is their terminology, and die for this cause,
Speaker 2: like to sacrifice themselves on the altar of white erasure,
Speaker 2: like they want this to happen. They want them dead.
Speaker 2: And it isn't just it's because they're white and because
Speaker 2: it'll get an outcome that they want.
Speaker 1: Oh one hundred and even setting aside the moral legitimacy
Speaker 1: or necessity of ice, which is a separate discussion, you
Speaker 1: are interacting with someone who has is a part of
Speaker 1: the state's monopoly on violence. They are allowed to do
Speaker 1: things that you are not, regardless of how you feel
Speaker 1: about that, and the same way that it is in
Speaker 1: your best interest to you know, interact with even just
Speaker 1: local law enforcement in a certain way. You have to
Speaker 1: understand that, like, effectively, their purpose for existence is violence.
Speaker 1: Like we church it up, we dress it up a
Speaker 1: little bit, but like that is the function of the state. Violence, yeah, externally, internally,
Speaker 1: and so when you're interacting with that again, like you
Speaker 1: kind of have to understand the variables here. Right, It's
Speaker 1: not like a death squad, Right, It's not like gene
Speaker 1: Row where they're walking around and you know, head to
Speaker 1: toe rmer with an MG thirty four just mowing down communists. Like,
Speaker 1: there is a number of decisions you can make, I
Speaker 1: know in Chilla, but there is a you know, a
Speaker 1: number of decisions you can make. You know, there's certain
Speaker 1: things in your control, some of which will result in
Speaker 1: you being shot and killed or roughed up or sent
Speaker 1: to jail, completely sidestepping the issue of how you feel
Speaker 1: about that or legitimacy.
Speaker 2: Right.
Speaker 1: This is also the same conversation that we get into,
Speaker 1: you know, every three or four years, when you know
Speaker 1: some aspiring astrophysicist, is you know, shuffled off this mortal
Speaker 1: coil again, like, regardless of your feeling about the police, like,
Speaker 1: if you do certain things, they will respond in a
Speaker 1: certain way. Yeah, and again right, Like I'm someone who
Speaker 1: honestly I support ICE per se, but like I think
Speaker 1: that immigration restriction and deportations are sorely needed.
Speaker 2: I support ICE for the record, I've.
Speaker 1: Got that, and I think I just hate Christy No.
Speaker 2: Oh yeah, absolutely, yeah.
Speaker 1: Our guys out there, I mean there's probably half a
Speaker 1: dozen of them listening now at godspeedfellas as far as
Speaker 1: I'm concerned. But point is right, Like, your feelings on
Speaker 1: the matter don't change the actual material reality of what
Speaker 1: you're going up against. And look, Carl, I think we're
Speaker 1: both in the same camp of being sort of darkly
Speaker 1: fascinated by police body cam footage. Is that correct?
Speaker 2: Oh? Absolutely, it's wonderful.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it's genuinely fascinating. The comment section is wild. You
Speaker 1: will learn a lot of new things you go to
Speaker 1: the police activity comments section. I highly recommend it because boys,
Speaker 1: the guys who are running that channel are trying to
Speaker 1: keep it uh, trying to keep it professional, and it's
Speaker 1: not working, right, it's not working at all. And this
Speaker 1: will be like you know, seventy two year old like
Speaker 1: retired electricians with their first, middle last name and a
Speaker 1: photo of them and like a.
Speaker 2: Dog, Yeah, exactly, like red gook.
Speaker 1: Around its eyes and they're just like, hang them all,
Speaker 1: Hang them all, signed darryl.
Speaker 2: Uh With with their home address and phone number.
Speaker 1: Yeah, the channel is police activity, but there are there
Speaker 1: are dozens, right, dozens of you know, alternatives. But point is,
Speaker 1: you're sorry, camera unfocused, You're you're no doubt aware of
Speaker 1: the whole sub genres. Right there, you start to pick
Speaker 1: up on patterns. Right, there's like, you know, there's a
Speaker 1: whole lot of the ones that are domestic disputes or
Speaker 1: you know, like hostage situation, bank robberies. But one of
Speaker 1: the other genres is effectively attempted vehicular man or vehicular homicide. Right,
Speaker 1: it's a traffic stop that goes wrong, try and you know,
Speaker 1: ram the officers, and generally these end in lets, to
Speaker 1: be honest, mostly one way. It's just kind of how
Speaker 1: we get there. But that is and in all these
Speaker 1: situations generally considered to be an attempted murder. Right, you've
Speaker 1: got a four thousand pound missile that you're trying to
Speaker 1: crush someone with. In the response to this, for example,
Speaker 1: they were posting a really tragic bodycam footage of this,
Speaker 1: you know, one hundred and ten pound female police officer
Speaker 1: in a traffic stop and a cul de sac and
Speaker 1: the guy backs into her right, he smashes her into
Speaker 1: the car behind her, and even at low speeds, she
Speaker 1: unfortunately passed away. Setting aside whether she should have been
Speaker 1: a police officer to begin with, she was killed right
Speaker 1: in such a similar instance, and so setting everything all
Speaker 1: to the side merely on that like, is this a
Speaker 1: justified situation in that kind of narrow lens. It's like, well,
Speaker 1: if it isn't, we have a major problem because this
Speaker 1: happens fairly oft right. Obviously a lot of police incidents
Speaker 1: involved motor vehicles that the leap to I'm going to
Speaker 1: hit you with my car or ram you to try
Speaker 1: and get out of this situation, while not a good decision,
Speaker 1: is yeah, you could see the flow of that logic, right, like,
Speaker 1: this is something that is pretty well established, and you know,
Speaker 1: especially when you know, as I indicated earlier, we have
Speaker 1: a video of this guy basically bouncing off the hood
Speaker 1: of her car. Yeah, I'm gonna be honest, man, it's
Speaker 1: one of those things where it's like my sympathy is limited,
Speaker 1: and I don't think this is a real discussion. This
Speaker 1: isn't a real forensic debate. It is effectively emotional. It
Speaker 1: is you know, I don't like this. I do like this,
Speaker 1: and this serves my narrative. So it will be you know,
Speaker 1: it will be broadcasted. And I'm curious, Carl, what you
Speaker 1: make of the kind of saber rattling Uh, the sort
Speaker 1: of saber rattling around basically secession, right, you know the
Speaker 1: idea that you know, Wallas is going to call in
Speaker 1: the National Guard to you know, kick Ice out of
Speaker 1: the city. Well, I don't necessarily think that's fully sincere. Uh.
Speaker 1: It is an interesting it is an interesting dynamic there
Speaker 1: that you know, apparently this this fault line is being
Speaker 1: exploited even up at the government level. Dude, I'm gonna
Speaker 1: stay on so I'll be able to hear you, but
Speaker 1: I gotta go grab a glass of water. I'll be back.
Speaker 2: But anyway, all right, I will, I will, I will
Speaker 2: run with this. So in some it's highly performative signaling.
Speaker 2: I agree Dylan Walker. First name, last name, social security number,
Speaker 2: last four. You know that the biggest thing in politics
Speaker 2: is is always you give us rules that we're going
Speaker 2: to ignore. Yes, I do, look at the chat hh
Speaker 2: and hello my friend. And you know, the the the people,
Speaker 2: the people who are being paid the patrons have to
Speaker 2: represent for their clients like it, which unfortunately the right
Speaker 2: wing does a very poor job of doing, and the
Speaker 2: left is good at it. Is that we basically say,
Speaker 2: there are rules that exist that come from the state,
Speaker 2: and we will be selective in how we uh in
Speaker 2: how we enforce them or follow them. And so you have,
Speaker 2: for example, right wing sheriffs saying, you know, as we're
Speaker 2: all familiar with over the past couple decades, like, you know,
Speaker 2: we're not going to enforce certain kinds of federal gun laws,
Speaker 2: right like we're we're not doing that. And then the
Speaker 2: left says, we're not going to enforce immigration laws because
Speaker 2: we like it when child sodomizers stay in our country
Speaker 2: so that we can signal, how, you know, how wonderful
Speaker 2: we are and that we're great allies, and which is
Speaker 2: insane because if you think about it, the handful of
Speaker 2: child sodomizers you know, and those are the first four
Speaker 2: that come to mind in from the ice list of
Speaker 2: the people that they were getting out right that they
Speaker 2: were snatching. They'd snatched like Ay thirteen hundred or something
Speaker 2: of the highest priority illegals in the United States, whether
Speaker 2: they were illegals or they had formerly had green cards
Speaker 2: and had lost it because of felonies, and you know,
Speaker 2: for one reason or another, they haven't been able to
Speaker 2: get them out of the country. Like a big example
Speaker 2: of this in Minnesota is the like Lao and Mung
Speaker 2: communities communities up there who've been there since really the
Speaker 2: late seventies or early eighties, mostly into the eighties, you know,
Speaker 2: the last big wave of them being in the nineties.
Speaker 2: You know, felons lose their green cards and they get
Speaker 2: the boot, but you have to be able to remove
Speaker 2: them from the country and send them to their home country.
Speaker 2: And that is exceedingly difficult with certain situations where like
Speaker 2: a lot of them are semi stateless people because their
Speaker 2: family was from Laos, they were in a refugee camp
Speaker 2: in Thailand where they were born, or like Laos is like,
Speaker 2: you know, we don't want the felonious children of the
Speaker 2: people that fought against our communist government back the Trump administration. Finally,
Speaker 2: after like this is like a forty year process, the
Speaker 2: Trump administration in the second term finally got laos to
Speaker 2: take them back because they enough people are dependent on
Speaker 2: aid from the United States and skimming it that it's
Speaker 2: worth their while to take these people back and do
Speaker 2: various things. But anyway, that is who these supposed nighbors are.
Speaker 2: I agree, Machiavelli sucks to go. You know that sending
Speaker 2: them back to a country is not my top priority.
Speaker 2: You know, Anakin glower. But you know, that's why there
Speaker 2: are so many of them, is that we've had this
Speaker 2: totally failed system where we couldn't get rid of them,
Speaker 2: and then you have, you know, decades of accumulation of
Speaker 2: people in a steady stream and then a massive explosion
Speaker 2: during the Biden administration. It's very challenging to identify and
Speaker 2: then remove all of these people. And you know, Ice
Speaker 2: just got another like ten thousand people and it's like
Speaker 2: ten to fifteen k per month per a couple months
Speaker 2: over the next period is my understanding of how many
Speaker 2: will be coming online. That could be a slight exaggeration,
Speaker 2: but that was the figure I saw and so you
Speaker 2: have to build up this force that can actually do it.
Speaker 2: So everyone complaining about fiscal year on twenty five, which
Speaker 2: was a essentially a Biden budget, and it wasn't you know,
Speaker 2: all the stuff from the big beautiful bill, et cetera
Speaker 2: came online this year. That's why there are all these delays.
Speaker 2: It sucks. I wish it was it was better. And
Speaker 2: so you're gonna see a ramping up of this and
Speaker 2: this is the breaking of the wave of the resistance
Speaker 2: to it that has to be done. You cannot let up.
Speaker 2: You cannot take your foot off the gas. All these
Speaker 2: people crying about optics and like I think we should
Speaker 2: just be nice, like Joe Faggot Rogan, excuse me sorry,
Speaker 2: like all that stuff. It's it's so delusional. You can't
Speaker 2: do this without there being rough scenes when people resist it,
Speaker 2: like that that footage from that target. They should have
Speaker 2: cracked that legume enthusiasts head open, like within thirty seconds
Speaker 2: of interacting with him, from the way he was behaving
Speaker 2: totally unacceptable and so him getting flattened and then handcuffed
Speaker 2: and then ditched because they were like, oh wait, well
Speaker 2: we can book him for assault or like, but it's
Speaker 2: so minor, it'll probably get tossed off. So why don't
Speaker 2: we just ditch him in a parking lot because we
Speaker 2: can't remove him, but we have his information in case
Speaker 2: we feel like going after him later. It's a low priority, right,
Speaker 2: you know they're going to be doing this stuff, and
Speaker 2: it's just up to us to say, I support what
Speaker 2: Ice is doing.
Speaker 1: That's our jab, right, It's like, okay, what's your top
Speaker 1: priority here? Is it fixing the problem or being nice?
Speaker 1: Because look like we've had decades now of conservatives who
Speaker 1: are very concerned with being nice and being presentable, being
Speaker 1: this sort of person you could invite to a cocktail
Speaker 1: party and he wouldn't feel embarrassed by them. And okay, well,
Speaker 1: let's examine the trajectory of the country. You know, how
Speaker 1: many of us and I realize I'm sort of appreciating
Speaker 1: to the choir here, but how many of us feel
Speaker 1: as if the conservative movement has served us well, that
Speaker 1: they have done a good job conserving really anything at all.
Speaker 1: It's like, okay, well, if we accept that premise that
Speaker 1: this is deeply flawed and dramatic changes need to be made,
Speaker 1: it's like, well, people are going to be unhappy with that.
Speaker 1: There are people who benefit from a current status quo.
Speaker 1: There are people who are doing something they'd prefer to
Speaker 1: be doing now that need to stop that. And you know,
Speaker 1: this applies to any number of things, right, Like there
Speaker 1: are people who you know, really love grooming children, right
Speaker 1: they love finding trans kids and you know, rural America
Speaker 1: and you know, spiriting them away to urban centers where
Speaker 1: they can be thrown into foster care. Right. Benjamin Boyce
Speaker 1: just talked to a woman chronicled one such event, and
Speaker 1: it's like, Okay, well, I think we widely agree that
Speaker 1: should stop. But if you do that, that person involved
Speaker 1: in that, many other people will be upset. They might
Speaker 1: even cry, they might even make a scene, and you know,
Speaker 1: be forced to be removed or arrested. Of course, speaking
Speaker 1: euphemism euphemistically here, but like that that's sort of baked in.
Speaker 1: You can't do this without making people upset. There's simply
Speaker 1: no way to do it. Like, either you're okay with
Speaker 1: things as they are, or you're willing to make people upset.
Speaker 1: It's quite simply the only two options. And to me,
Speaker 1: I understand, you know, feeling a little bit more laqueasy
Speaker 1: about that. I understand that. You know, it would be
Speaker 1: nice if we could simply have solved this, you know, simply,
Speaker 1: and we could have for fifty sixty years ago. But
Speaker 1: the problem is when you let a problem get this back, yeah,
Speaker 1: you know, when you let the leak in your roof
Speaker 1: go for two years, three years, four years, sixty, why
Speaker 1: not it goes from being something that can be solved
Speaker 1: pleasantly and easily, you know, with a relatively minimal amount
Speaker 1: of force, to something that requires a lot of doing.
Speaker 1: That simply is the calculus. And so if your answer
Speaker 1: is well I don't want to do it, then you're
Speaker 1: not in the game. You're okay with it. You were saying, no,
Speaker 1: this is all right. I support the current thing. And
Speaker 1: if you, out of one side of your mouth talk
Speaker 1: about how horrible the current situation is, how the country
Speaker 1: is being transformed by your replacement level migration, and then
Speaker 1: on the other like, well we can't be mean. It's like,
Speaker 1: well you must choose one. You can have only one
Speaker 1: top priority, and I think we are seeing the top
Speaker 1: priority of many people. Now, look that said, you know,
Speaker 1: a lot of the the pro ice, you know, anti renade,
Speaker 1: good reaction, as we said earlier, has been kind of weird,
Speaker 1: you know, like Matt Walsh kind of looks like a
Speaker 1: little bit of a psycho the way he talks about it.
Speaker 1: I'm not saying that you should go to that extent,
Speaker 1: and in his case, I don't necessarily want to psycho
Speaker 1: analyze him, but there seems to be something going on there,
Speaker 1: you know, even as someone who doesn't believe in psychology.
Speaker 1: But that said, it's like, well, look, man like, they're
Speaker 1: not going to whoever you consider. They just give up
Speaker 1: because you ask them to. Right, we have certainly seen
Speaker 1: self deportations, but why is it because we asked or
Speaker 1: because there were consequences? There were things that are going
Speaker 1: to make that more unpleasant, and people ran the calculation
Speaker 1: for themselves and decided, you know what, I had a
Speaker 1: good run. And again that involved the threat, implied or
Speaker 1: actual of violence one way or another, which, ultimately, man like,
Speaker 1: that's what authority is. Power is all derived from violence.
Speaker 1: And again, in a high trust society where people are
Speaker 1: on the same page, that violence is very abstract, that
Speaker 1: violence is very distant, but that is not the situation
Speaker 1: we're in. And you see this in you know, the
Speaker 1: third World. Right, there's a reason that policing in Brazil
Speaker 1: looks very different from policing in America, even as America
Speaker 1: is significantly more violent than it is in the UK
Speaker 1: or is in most of Europe. And so again, to me,
Speaker 1: it's again the same problem of like, you know, popular consensus,
Speaker 1: where it's like that is no basis for policy. It
Speaker 1: can't be because it is too fickle, it is too
Speaker 1: unwilling to do difficult, unpopular but ultimately necessary things. I mean,
Speaker 1: this is a conversation we get into all the time
Speaker 1: talking about government entitlements and currency, where it's like, well,
Speaker 1: eventually someone is gonna need to say, all right, like
Speaker 1: no more social security. Like you know, if you assume
Speaker 1: this thing can be saved, yea, that will have to happen.
Speaker 1: But dude, no one wants to do it, right, it's
Speaker 1: political suicide. But ultimately it's you know, it's the Gordian knot.
Speaker 1: It's something which will be solved one way or another.
Speaker 1: And that again is that sort of you know, decisionist politics, right,
Speaker 1: who is willing to do that? Who is able to
Speaker 1: do that? And uh yeah, man, I think that this
Speaker 1: sort of like you know, over focus on optics. It's like,
Speaker 1: I get it, it makes sense from a certain perspective,
Speaker 1: but that will never solve us these sort of like
Speaker 1: deep existential issues because you get in this sort of
Speaker 1: you know, eternal status quo where, oh, we'll just keep
Speaker 1: it how it is, We'll just issue an amnesty, we'll
Speaker 1: just you know, legitimize what's already here, but no more.
Speaker 1: But one that doesn't solve the problem. You're just painting over,
Speaker 1: you know, rot you're you're you know, effectively covering over
Speaker 1: and as we've seen over and over again, it's never done.
Speaker 1: They never decide all right, we got enough, we'll stop,
Speaker 1: Like you have an amnesty under Reagan, and what continues
Speaker 1: to happen exactly the same thing that the amnesty was
Speaker 1: supposed to end. And so to me, I guess it's
Speaker 1: it's why you get so frustrated in this conversation, because
Speaker 1: it's like, well, do you want to fix this man?
Speaker 1: Because if you don't, like, there's some guys you can
Speaker 1: hang out with if you're honest about it. But this
Speaker 1: sort of you know, like middle road, this sort of
Speaker 1: lukewarm response is ultimately very frustrating to me. I'll throw
Speaker 1: it back to you, Carl.
Speaker 2: Yeah, So I want to want to point out a
Speaker 2: couple some good news one just got posted two hours ago.
Speaker 2: But I also want to answer or comment on an
Speaker 2: observation made by Requited in the chat whose states. Although
Speaker 2: I would have trained them on the work sites, the
Speaker 2: violent criminal ones are probably more risk. The work sites
Speaker 2: are absolutely being gone after, but it's very quiet on
Speaker 2: that front. And my theory is that that is because
Speaker 2: one that from an optical perspective, the libtards don't want
Speaker 2: people to think about that or see that as much
Speaker 2: because they don't want people to associate, you know, immigration
Speaker 2: enforcement on what it really is, which is getting rid
Speaker 2: of people stealing jobs and frankly labor law violations. Last year,
Speaker 2: the morning of the Trump inauguration, a meatpacking plant in
Speaker 2: North Texas was raided by Ice and Customs and Border
Speaker 2: Patrol because they had been flagrantly abusing a pool of
Speaker 2: Social Security numbers, including my wife's by the way, for decades. Dumas,
Speaker 2: Texas sometimes known as Dumbass Texas. But anyhow, I know
Speaker 2: you and I know someone from there, Jay. But anyhow,
Speaker 2: that and that was because they had been reported for
Speaker 2: years and years and years of the social Security Administration
Speaker 2: because they were recycling Social Security numbers that they were
Speaker 2: reusing for people who of course worked just enough to
Speaker 2: like squeak under you know, the annual minimum for for
Speaker 2: paying taxes and stuff like that to keep it from
Speaker 2: showing up. But they were recycling them on a regular basis.
Speaker 2: And then like around me, there was a job site
Speaker 2: where ninety percent of the employees were napped because they
Speaker 2: were all illegal Central Americans, et cetera. So that is
Speaker 2: going on. That's going on in Texas, that's going on
Speaker 2: in states where local law enforcement is cooperating, and even
Speaker 2: in some blue and purple states, you know, in the
Speaker 2: more rural purple to red counties, this is going on
Speaker 2: and it's still going on. And that's where a lot
Speaker 2: of the numbers of the physical expulsions of like the
Speaker 2: six hundred thousand from last year, were associated with these
Speaker 2: high visibility ICE. Thank Carl.
Speaker 1: What's that number you said there?
Speaker 2: Wasn't it six hundred thousand?
Speaker 1: Oh no, dude, it was at least six million.
Speaker 2: Oh oh oh, I think it was fifteen million personally,
Speaker 2: you know, sorry, I numbers are we going with the
Speaker 2: yad vishem deportation numbers or.
Speaker 1: See the American Red Cross has a different story.
Speaker 2: I do have to point out that the American Red Cross,
Speaker 2: those figures are associated with one site. Let's just put
Speaker 2: it that way, so people get that those figures conflated
Speaker 2: that you know, you should go. I think that Thomas
Speaker 2: seven seven seven approach is probably the most accurate. But anyhow, what.
Speaker 1: Are we talking about again, Carl deportation.
Speaker 2: So yeah, so the high visibility stuff that we're seeing
Speaker 2: is in these in these blue enclaves where like the governors,
Speaker 2: the governors are supporting the uh you know, the the
Speaker 2: mayors and such that are allowing this, and it's in
Speaker 2: the bluest of the blue hives. You notice that you
Speaker 2: don't see nearly as much of this out of California anymore.
Speaker 2: Yet is going ham in California? Why is that? People
Speaker 2: have had conversations Now My position is that they absolutely
Speaker 2: need to be arresting governors and mayors and anyone who's
Speaker 2: coordinating this kind of stuff. And I would even go
Speaker 2: so far as to say I won't say it. However,
Speaker 2: here's something else that's new. Here's some more good news.
Speaker 2: Everyone has been complaining aboutrant immigrant visa pauses, and there
Speaker 2: were only like thirteen of the worst abusers that were frozen,
Speaker 2: and everyone's like, I want to see India. India is
Speaker 2: not on this. But as of this morning, little Marclo
Speaker 2: foam enthusiast, excuse me, Marco Grande Rubio freezes all foreign
Speaker 2: visa processing indefinitely from seventy five countries. Officially, it's temporary.
Speaker 2: The phrasing is the State Department. This is quoting quote.
Speaker 2: The State Department will pause immigrant visa processing from seventy
Speaker 2: five countries whose migrants take welfare from the American people
Speaker 2: at unacceptable rates. The freeze will remain active until the
Speaker 2: US can ensure that new immigrants will not extract wealth
Speaker 2: from the American people. Unquote seventy five countries. It's basically
Speaker 2: the entire third world. India is not on there. Unfortunately,
Speaker 2: Pakistan is. Russia's on there. Interestingly, China is not. But
Speaker 2: it's basically almost it's almost the entire third World, not Vietnam.
Speaker 2: So it isn't just the welfare, but it's also and
Speaker 2: there's some there's some like legacy populations that help shift
Speaker 2: the numbers, but they do have extremely high welfare utilization
Speaker 2: as well as visa over stay rates. And just general parasitism.
Speaker 2: And this is a lot of this is making these
Speaker 2: countries playball with America with the US State Department because
Speaker 2: they haven't been. But that's good news. And yes, there's
Speaker 2: a lot of complex like geostrategic issues that are that
Speaker 2: are baked into this, but it's very good news that
Speaker 2: they're saying, like you can't even come here on a
Speaker 2: tourist visa, and they're going to be particularly scrutinous with
Speaker 2: even consular, uh, consular visas. So this is good stuff.
Speaker 1: So the the other thing that I want to talk about,
Speaker 1: uh is and this is kind of a similar to
Speaker 1: both the immigration issue and you know, the anti Ice riots,
Speaker 1: something that we've talked about multiple times, which is the
Speaker 1: continuing kind of uh you could say conservative civil war right,
Speaker 1: the woke right struggle. Woo boy as that majorly kicked
Speaker 1: off because Tucker Carlson interviewed his brother Buckley based Buckley Yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: you know, don't know super well, but I have some
Speaker 1: sort of relationship with He's a very kind guy or
Speaker 1: generous with his time. And the interview was good, you know,
Speaker 1: it was kind of fun just to see like these
Speaker 1: two guys who obviously you have a great deal of
Speaker 1: affection for each other and for their father, but also Ben,
Speaker 1: it was just an interesting interview, right, you got to
Speaker 1: plug for the UN's review like fifteen seconds in, you know,
Speaker 1: which you know is certainly a strong start to the conversation.
Speaker 1: But the reaction has been absolutely absurd, right you have
Speaker 1: you know, John pod Horritz, who is a genuine lunatic,
Speaker 1: like it was just jumping at the bit, has lost
Speaker 1: his mind. Particular weirdly enough the comment that sort of
Speaker 1: you know, kicked off this whole uh yeah, this whole
Speaker 1: disaster was was I thought, relatively mild. Uh yes, sex
Speaker 1: freakman the UNKX review, I think is what I should
Speaker 1: have been saying. Uh But in all seriousness, right, Fucky
Speaker 1: made this point where he was talking about, you know,
Speaker 1: realizing that so many of the cultural narratives that we
Speaker 1: know are are false, and he basically said, you know,
Speaker 1: I grew up, you know, talking to Cold Warriors, people
Speaker 1: who were you know, involved in the fight against communism.
Speaker 1: They always talked about North Korea, Right, is this country
Speaker 1: under complete and total narrative control? And he said, you know,
Speaker 1: and then I grew up and I realized, wait a minute,
Speaker 1: where North Korea. And of course he doesn't literally mean
Speaker 1: where North Korea.
Speaker 2: You don't.
Speaker 1: You don't have to have you know, one hundred and
Speaker 1: thirty IQ to pick up on what he's saying, but
Speaker 1: making the point that America is under a sort of
Speaker 1: social engineering regime that we have you know, been subjected
Speaker 1: to the same sort of narrative control. And this comment
Speaker 1: came within a broader discussion of COVID, which is a
Speaker 1: great example, right, there was a strong narrative push, one
Speaker 1: that was being updated in real time. Again, come on,
Speaker 1: it's not that hard to figure out what he's saying.
Speaker 1: But you've seen these sort of crazy responses from the
Speaker 1: usual suspects. So for instance, you have this Jordan and
Speaker 1: sc and tell we'll go with that. Lots of Star
Speaker 1: Wars names, Buckley is job lists, he owns lots of stuff,
Speaker 1: you know, going through it. Now he says, weird North Korea.
Speaker 1: The Wolk right is a comedy routine. Again this term
Speaker 1: getting out there right, connecting it to Carlson. But we
Speaker 1: see from Joseph Brooks no points for guessing. Uh, he's
Speaker 1: a great advertisement for putting in a high inheritance task. Obviously,
Speaker 1: conservatives enjoy abhor such a concept, but he isn't one anyway,
Speaker 1: so he's a great poster child the idea that we
Speaker 1: should take all this guy's money away. I don't like him,
Speaker 1: we should smash him. Schofield, Not quite, but point is right.
Speaker 1: Like this has been one of many such reactions. You've
Speaker 1: got another one from Let me pull this up. One
Speaker 1: of my favorite follows on the internet, by the way,
Speaker 1: is Mark Levin. You know, this is really tied to
Speaker 1: a lot of the stuff out of you know, out
Speaker 1: of Iran speaks. Dude, man, this guy's going off. So
Speaker 1: i'll again sort of, you know, kind of summarize what
Speaker 1: he's saying. But this is the first paragraph which has
Speaker 1: an M dash in it, which makes me wonder if
Speaker 1: Ai wrote this talking about the situation in Iran. It
Speaker 1: should be no shock to you that Mark R. Levin
Speaker 1: is pushing very hard for a war in Iran. This
Speaker 1: Islamic Nazi regime in Iran. Several questions there should have
Speaker 1: been taken out in June when the woke right neo
Speaker 1: fascists that's us and therefoeign government task masters sought to
Speaker 1: silence me, but for are emboldened. He's spelled that wrong,
Speaker 1: all the lies, all the lives lost, the horrendous slaughter
Speaker 1: the other inhumanity, and the isolationists remain isolationists and worse
Speaker 1: mouthpieces for the enemy. They are psychotic monsters. They remain
Speaker 1: Israel blaming jew haters as the Iranian people see p
Speaker 1: help from Potis and pn net and Yahoo. Huh. Not Qatar,
Speaker 1: not Saudi Arabia, not Turkey, not from any Muslim country.
Speaker 1: So point is, he goes on a little bit longer,
Speaker 1: but going back to you know, talking about Iran, and look, man,
Speaker 1: I don't like the Iranian government in particular, but this
Speaker 1: is just absurd.
Speaker 2: Oh, it's retarded.
Speaker 1: The Islamic Nazi regime is committing horrific acts of genocide
Speaker 1: against the majority Muslim citizenry. An Islamic Nazi regime attacking Muslims. Huh.
Speaker 1: Take a note, and remember who's demanding immediate action against
Speaker 1: these hitlarian mass murderers. Them seeking Muslims. Take note, keep
Speaker 1: speaking out loudly, so again.
Speaker 2: That free get your heads bashed in.
Speaker 1: Again, man, going back to our conversation about Ice. Regardless
Speaker 1: of how you feel about this, like I Ran as
Speaker 1: a country, they've got a lot of guys with guns.
Speaker 1: Clearly they don't have anything, uh, you know, any combunction
Speaker 1: about slaughtering their own people. It's just absurd. It's wish casting,
Speaker 1: as I heard someone say. But again we see that
Speaker 1: mention of the term woke right or woke right really clever.
Speaker 1: There the idea that if you have any objection to
Speaker 1: you know, neo kon projects, if you have any oh shoot,
Speaker 1: actually I accidentally clicked that, but that's pretty funny.
Speaker 2: Click. The most recent one.
Speaker 1: Islamo fascisted across the room hitlerly that islah. But again, right,
Speaker 1: we see several things there. We see this desire to
Speaker 1: connect the so called woke right, woke right, if you will,
Speaker 1: to enemies foreign and domestic, the idea that they need
Speaker 1: to be smashed, their wealth needs to be taken, they
Speaker 1: need to be ruined. But what's interesting is this this
Speaker 1: sort of term, or this sort of trend line I've
Speaker 1: identified for a while. To be honest, I started to
Speaker 1: reach into into government, right, So forgive me for bringing
Speaker 1: up one Jimbo Lindsay, but he's continued this this push.
Speaker 1: So the Department of Labor put out kind of a
Speaker 1: you know, a hype edit you've seen this from the
Speaker 1: Trump administration before, and it's nothing, you know, shocking, right,
Speaker 1: it's you know, Thomas Jefferson his statue in front of
Speaker 1: kind of a quick edit of different pictures of American excellence, right,
Speaker 1: you know, Frontiersman, you know, Pioneers, that sort of thing,
Speaker 1: just a quick ten second video. But the phrase at
Speaker 1: the top, one homeland, one people, one heritage, Remember who
Speaker 1: you are. American produced a similar just absence chimp out,
Speaker 1: and again we see this deliberate use of the term
Speaker 1: woke right to try and justify an internal perf not again,
Speaker 1: the very real threat of political violence, not the people
Speaker 1: threatening Trump administration leaders or others with jail time, with
Speaker 1: being sent to the Hague. This is the real struggle,
Speaker 1: right of course, Remember there's the one axis of this,
Speaker 1: which is you know, the foreign policy, which you know
Speaker 1: the Trump administration has sadly capitulated on, but also on
Speaker 1: the domestic. So this is from you know, very based
Speaker 1: James Lindsay based AF as his Twitter handle tells us,
Speaker 1: the young men who run the social media accounts for
Speaker 1: the Department of Labor don't know who it is, and
Speaker 1: Department of Homeland Security very likely full name not going
Speaker 1: to read it a recent Claremont Lincoln fellow. Are woke right,
Speaker 1: if not Grouper's, if not neo Nazis, just be fired immediately.
Speaker 1: Again we see this call for effectively political assassination. Get
Speaker 1: these guys out, get them gone. All of the previous
Speaker 1: remarks we heard from Levin and from Lindsay, from any
Speaker 1: one of these guys about cancel culture were insincere. It
Speaker 1: affected them. They had no principled objection to this. And
Speaker 1: we see this again, this sort of tactical liberalism, liberalism
Speaker 1: for me but not for the right, the idea that
Speaker 1: I need to be respected, I need to be allowed
Speaker 1: to say whatever I want, and if you disagree with that,
Speaker 1: you will be driven out. And again we see who
Speaker 1: these people real enemies are. Sure they love talking about
Speaker 1: the woke left kind of, but aren't nearly as interested
Speaker 1: in actually solving these issues and doing something mean as
Speaker 1: we said earlier, and actually getting to the root of
Speaker 1: these issues. They only matter insomuch as they affect their priorities,
Speaker 1: which on a personal level are kind of their sinecures.
Speaker 1: They feel as if they're owed there shall we say
Speaker 1: foreign policy objectives, you know, across the world, And yeah,
Speaker 1: they are doing the exact same thing, using this term
Speaker 1: woke right as a in group out group signify clearly
Speaker 1: they are angling for a perche. They're angling for these
Speaker 1: people to be fired from their jobs, to have their
Speaker 1: wealth stripped. They're calling them traders to the nation, you know,
Speaker 1: foreign adversaries like this is the angle right, this is
Speaker 1: what they want. And to say, oh, this is infighting
Speaker 1: on our side, No it's not. They aren't on our side.
Speaker 1: They're on their side, and they're more than willing to
Speaker 1: try and twist us to those ends. But clearly they
Speaker 1: have different priorities. Clearly they're different things which motivate them,
Speaker 1: which which they prioritize. And again these people have completely
Speaker 1: lost their minds. So again I'll read another one, and
Speaker 1: this is less philosophically significant. It just kind of shows
Speaker 1: you the absolute nutcases these people are. So John Potarts
Speaker 1: I can't say his name, I refuse to pronounce it correctly.
Speaker 1: He's talking about, you know, Buckley Carlson Buckaroo, who I
Speaker 1: remember as a repellent teenage creep. I have a weird
Speaker 1: feeling that you're now a drunken, drug addled mucher loser
Speaker 1: and a vile anti Semite whose soul is rotted away,
Speaker 1: you know, kind of like your brothers. So I'm probably
Speaker 1: right again going for the throat saying insane things. You're
Speaker 1: just just absolutely foaming at them out because again all
Speaker 1: the woke stuff didn't bother them. They opposed it, right,
Speaker 1: but not enough to actually do anything. Yeah, but when
Speaker 1: you're you know, actually you're passionate about your people, about
Speaker 1: prioritizing your interests above certain Middle Eastern democracies, well then
Speaker 1: the knife come out. Then we see what really matters.
Speaker 1: Then we see the construction of this friend enemy distinction
Speaker 1: where my enemies can do no right and my friends
Speaker 1: can do no wrong. And all of these liberal priors
Speaker 1: disappear into thin air, just return to dust, because that's
Speaker 1: what they always weren't. They weren't real. They're completely and
Speaker 1: totally fake. And I'm reading you these selections messages not
Speaker 1: because I think there's any deep argument in them, right,
Speaker 1: A lot of these are just throwing invectives out, just
Speaker 1: just kind of criticizing every aspect of a person to
Speaker 1: get something to stick. But because they've shown you what
Speaker 1: they care about, what animates that, and again it's not
Speaker 1: things that benefit you it's not the people trying to
Speaker 1: attack you, the people trying to harm you, that's almost indeterminate.
Speaker 1: It's their priorities, very clearly, and I have less I
Speaker 1: have no sympathy for this sort of behavior. These people
Speaker 1: who claim to be, you know, the representatives of a
Speaker 1: conservative right wing movement. You know, if they are simply
Speaker 1: there as one half of a sandwich, right that they
Speaker 1: control one half of the Overton window and again.
Speaker 2: A certain type, a certain flavor.
Speaker 1: Yeah, Reuben might.
Speaker 2: Approved, approved by certain people, blessed one, I could say.
Speaker 1: And that is their priority more than anything else. All
Speaker 1: the other stuff is merely window dressing, you know, the
Speaker 1: glove around the iron fist. So yeah, that sort of
Speaker 1: attempted purge has continued to pace. You know, we've seen
Speaker 1: the scope grow from first kind of focused on Tucker
Speaker 1: in particular, who look like you know, I like a show.
Speaker 1: I don't agree with him on many things, but clearly,
Speaker 1: you know, he has become sort of an avatar. It
Speaker 1: is extended to Nicholas J. Fuentes. You notice the term
Speaker 1: groper being invoked kind of cynically and inaccurately, right to
Speaker 1: just be anyone I don't like in much the same way. Yeah,
Speaker 1: that you know in cell is used to just attack
Speaker 1: any man a woman doesn't like Joe. Soberen made this
Speaker 1: comment about the term anti semite. But point is, you know,
Speaker 1: we see that the knives come out anyway, we do
Speaker 1: have a single super chat from theel Bucks to Chardon.
Speaker 1: Carl alluded to something interesting. The start has sort of inverted.
Speaker 1: Stratt has sort of been inverted in that the stereotypically
Speaker 1: criminal image of the aliens is preferable to the relatively
Speaker 1: normal blue collar type workers. Oh one hundred percent. And
Speaker 1: that's that sort of ocophobia, right that the heat map,
Speaker 1: as someone else would put it, right of where empathy lies.
Speaker 1: That's what it is right to interact with progressives. They
Speaker 1: have a radically different sense of or an inverted hierarchy
Speaker 1: scale for exactly that reason. Sorry, Carl, I realized I
Speaker 1: threw a bunch at you there, but I did think
Speaker 1: that was notable because that that battle has only intensified
Speaker 1: since we spoke about it, you know, most recently. But
Speaker 1: I agree, you get your reaction.
Speaker 2: I agree utterly. And let me point something out that's
Speaker 2: that I think is very important that people are missing
Speaker 2: in the commentariat. But I'm not us Department of Labor.
Speaker 2: You were just quoting the complaints about the one homeland,
Speaker 2: one people, one heritage, or remember who you are American?
Speaker 2: That was a if you go back to the early
Speaker 2: twentieth century, that was a talking point that was actually
Speaker 2: very inclusive. It was not exclusive. It was essentially saying,
Speaker 2: we're grafting you into this, but you have to respect it.
Speaker 2: And now now you know, obviously these people who claim
Speaker 2: to be conservatives, neo conservatives, right, they are saying essentially no,
Speaker 2: that approach, and those people are not who we are now.
Speaker 2: Like the new Founding, which happened either after eighteen sixty
Speaker 2: five or after nineteen sixty five, is who we are now.
Speaker 2: And we the your betters that you know, we're the
Speaker 2: ones who are the intellectuals, as a certain person in
Speaker 2: Sweden said recently when she resurfaced from out of her car, often,
Speaker 2: you know, we are the we are the intellectuals, and
Speaker 2: we're the ones who determine what's legitimate and what's not.
Speaker 2: And so the supposed conservatives kicking and screaming about this optics,
Speaker 2: which is literally just a classic like this is the
Speaker 2: two hundred and fiftieth anniversary of the United States of
Speaker 2: America this year, and invoking that is unacceptable. Invoking everything before,
Speaker 2: like Heartseller, is unacceptable. So it's really it's really quite
Speaker 2: telling that the people who who are using this woke light,
Speaker 2: woke right label are the ones who are deceiving, and
Speaker 2: in fact, their ancestors doubled and tripled down on this reconciliation,
Speaker 2: on this inclusive one homeland, one people, one heritage, you know, verbiage.
Speaker 2: We are part of it, We're grafted into it. We're
Speaker 2: just like you, let us in, like we will respect it.
Speaker 2: And they did a very good job of doing that
Speaker 2: publicly at least, and officially informally in the literature into
Speaker 2: really into some point in the sixties and seventies, kind
Speaker 2: of depending on which faction, which side of the sandwich
Speaker 2: they fell into. And so the fact that even these
Speaker 2: supposed conservatives are freaking out about traditional representations of actual
Speaker 2: America is hilarious because it shows how bankrupt they are
Speaker 2: and how it was always a lie and it was
Speaker 2: always a tactic. So I love it, and we need
Speaker 2: to hold up the microphone to them and use their
Speaker 2: own words, let their own words and own positions represent
Speaker 2: them instead of some like third party non primary sources
Speaker 2: like summary of what they claim to be. It's wonderful, frankly,
Speaker 2: because it invalidates everything that they've claimed that they represent.
Speaker 2: If you have your average patriotic American boomer who gets
Speaker 2: a lot of crap if you put this in front
Speaker 2: of them, if you juxtapose these two things, they will
Speaker 2: short out. Their minds will short out, and they were like,
Speaker 2: they'll be like, wait a minute, that guy doesn't care
Speaker 2: about us at all. He claims to represent us and
Speaker 2: speak for us. Because the actual American conservative, like the
Speaker 2: vast majority of them, still love their country. They still
Speaker 2: love this.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 2: Now, I will say that there are some from more recent,
Speaker 2: more recent immigrant stock whose name is and in vowels
Speaker 2: a lot of the time that have this like aman
Speaker 2: immigrant like way stronger and they have this this isn't
Speaker 2: me way stronger. I still like I tend to like
Speaker 2: those people. I respect their their wacky Mediterranean ways. And
Speaker 2: so they're one of those like schism like wedge points
Speaker 2: that that you get. But like your average like deep
Speaker 2: heritage American, if they're not a total like libtard who
Speaker 2: like thinks that they're like thirty percent Cherokee because their
Speaker 2: grandmother was like a dusky German or something. You know, uh,
Speaker 2: you know they they tend to respect and love their heritage.
Speaker 2: And so this is a beautiful wedge point. You don't
Speaker 2: have to rant and rave. You don't have to talk
Speaker 2: about the Red Cross versus yad vashem. This is it,
Speaker 2: This is this is a weapon. They're handing you a hammer.
Speaker 1: One hundred percent. And actually I think we all know
Speaker 1: who the boomer in our life who is absolutely convinced
Speaker 1: that he or she is actually an Indian.
Speaker 2: Uh.
Speaker 1: Look like I've got my whole family, uh like family
Speaker 1: heritage on that side documented in a bound binder thanks
Speaker 1: to my grandmother. Uh yeah, it may surprise you to
Speaker 1: learn that's not true.
Speaker 2: It's not true at all. Right, when people say when
Speaker 2: people say the average white American is or the average
Speaker 2: American is like six percent non white, and it's like
Speaker 2: or has six percent non white heritage, what that means
Speaker 2: is when you look at like people who are genuinely
Speaker 2: yet when you're when you when you look at people
Speaker 2: who are genuinely mixed race, like that's who that's accounting for. Like,
Speaker 2: and yes, there are places where you have like more
Speaker 2: Native American ad mixture, and if you go to like
Speaker 2: I can go to this one res near where my
Speaker 2: in laws live, and they're like the average person there
Speaker 2: who's on the tribal council is seventy five percent white.
Speaker 2: Like this is like, that's where most of that is is.
Speaker 2: You you either know it, like very clearly, or like
Speaker 2: it just doesn't exist. And yeah, there's a sprinkling of
Speaker 2: people where some guy, you know, one hundred and fifty
Speaker 2: years ago, see Captain married a Chinese woman or something
Speaker 2: like that, or like you know, took his Native American bride,
Speaker 2: But it's really the vast majority of us are just
Speaker 2: one hundred percent white. Sorry, that's just the way it is.
Speaker 1: So we have a very generous twenty dollars super chat
Speaker 1: from Mando Spam to eighty seven this year. I look
Speaker 1: forward to the two hundred and fiftieth birthday of the US.
Speaker 1: That being said, do you think the US has has
Speaker 1: a solid country last past two hundred and seventy five?
Speaker 1: It felt quite uncertain as of late. Look, man, I
Speaker 1: think that countries and governments are a lot stickier than
Speaker 1: we'd like to think. I mean, lookah, I ran so
Speaker 1: I'd say that the math on that's almost entirely Yes,
Speaker 1: I think that there's a lot of doom posting, a
Speaker 1: lot of people kind of fantasizing about the end, and
Speaker 1: that's been going on for quite a while. I think
Speaker 1: that the the black pillows. Of course, this can go
Speaker 1: on for way longer than you think. There's you know,
Speaker 1: a whole lot of ruin in a nation, as Adam
Speaker 1: Smith said, so yes, I mean, look like Brazil is
Speaker 1: still nominally a country, and I wouldn't want to live there.
Speaker 1: So the point is, I think, yes, you know, to
Speaker 1: what degree does the empire continue to function? That's sort
Speaker 1: of an open question. The economics of this don't make
Speaker 1: any sense, but they haven't made any sense for longer
Speaker 1: than I've been alive. So you know clearly that, you know,
Speaker 1: illogical situations can go on for quite some time. So
Speaker 1: I'd say there's a very good chance of you know,
Speaker 1: two seventy five and then honestly even past that. Okay,
Speaker 1: look at that. Wow, we're getting super chats. Thank you guys,
Speaker 1: very generous. Cordy Wise easy seven for two dollars Canadian.
Speaker 1: I'm having a kid. Is it inbreeding? If she's Irish?
Speaker 1: Did you mean inbreeding or something else, because that wouldn't
Speaker 1: matter if she's Irish. It would matter how closely related
Speaker 1: to her you are, in which case you're Canadian. So yeah,
Speaker 1: probably uh so. Yeah, but your to the question you
Speaker 1: seemingly meant to ask. Yeah, I'm sorry, man, you will
Speaker 1: have POC as a child. Pay no attention to how
Speaker 1: much I look like prominent Irish actor Silly and Murphy
Speaker 1: or the occurrence of certain names in my own family tree. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I haven't done the DNA test, so I'm not Irish
Speaker 1: at all.
Speaker 2: You know what I've found out recently that I have
Speaker 2: an Irish I have like a couple Irish ancestors, or
Speaker 2: let me rephrase, I have a one Irish ancestor from
Speaker 2: the colony of the founders of the Colony of Maryland.
Speaker 2: So yeah, I am a POC.
Speaker 1: Yeah, well that means you can say it Carl and
Speaker 1: he certainly cashed in your car. Use uh glorified Carter. Sorry,
Speaker 1: I really wanted to say Gardner there, Carl is running
Speaker 1: for the most based gen x are on the Internet. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I think I mean you got t Triple seven and Pete,
Speaker 1: who are both your your co compatriots there, which which
Speaker 1: might give you a run for your money. But yeah, Carl,
Speaker 1: you're you're pretty good. Uh the you know for this
Speaker 1: this uh podcast? Yeah, what was the one that was
Speaker 1: going around for a while. Was it like the Boomer
Speaker 1: and the Fetus or something stupid?
Speaker 2: Yeah, it was something hilarious like that. That's so funny.
Speaker 1: Yeah again. Uh yeah, no, Carl, Carl is great, which
Speaker 1: is why we keep having him back on. Yeah. No,
Speaker 1: Actually I think I think z Man I really enjoyed
Speaker 1: our retrospective on him, Carl. It was on Pete Show.
Speaker 1: If you guys are interested in listening to it. You
Speaker 1: knew him, you knew him better than I did. But uh, yeah,
Speaker 1: it was. It was good to sort of do a
Speaker 1: send off there. Obviously we're much poorer without him around.
Speaker 2: Yeah, but uh it was.
Speaker 1: It was good to sort of, you know, have a
Speaker 1: sort of time to look back on it at the
Speaker 1: end of last year.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it was a good It was a good way
Speaker 2: to wrap up the year because I literally think that
Speaker 2: like z Man's passing and the recognition that he got,
Speaker 2: uh you know, formally from so many people was possibly
Speaker 2: as consequential as the second Trump administration. Like I'm not
Speaker 2: joking yeah, I mean in our circles.
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, Well, and also like I think that, like
Speaker 1: many people, I didn't realize how widely read he was
Speaker 1: because I was primarily a podcast consumer of his content.
Speaker 1: You know, that's that's really worth being.
Speaker 2: A zoomer with all these words and ship.
Speaker 1: Can you explain this to me, Draco what I would
Speaker 1: never Carl? You know, my form one was filed yesterday.
Speaker 2: Beautiful, beautiful, it's technically no longer a Draco. You've gotten
Speaker 2: your white card back?
Speaker 1: What is it? Is it the It's not an AMD,
Speaker 1: that's the Romanian one? Is it the pm D? The
Speaker 1: Romanian shorties? Is that what they're officially called again?
Speaker 2: Oh forget the AMD is Hungarian? Yeah? Oh, let me
Speaker 2: look at my big book of the Kalashnikov.
Speaker 1: H you have that?
Speaker 2: Oh? I have an official Klashnikov arms Russian book from
Speaker 2: the ninth It's the.
Speaker 1: Pm D sixty pm D sixty three. I believe maybe
Speaker 1: maybe I cannot read Romanian. I'm not sure it's a
Speaker 1: real language. It's this is gun autism. You don't need
Speaker 1: to know.
Speaker 2: Is through a book like it's the Middle Ages?
Speaker 1: Is there sublay surfer at the bottom, because that's the
Speaker 1: only way I could read a book.
Speaker 2: And it's in Russian, so it's oh, there's some English,
Speaker 2: so there is the Yeah, PM sixty three is the
Speaker 2: old underfolder the Avtamat aims. And then I'm looking for
Speaker 2: a Shortian. I'm not seeing it in here, but that's
Speaker 2: because this is a very old book. I do have
Speaker 2: to say, like, the AMD sixty five is one of
Speaker 2: those things that like looks sick as hell, but the
Speaker 2: first time you actually shoot one with that muzzle break, like,
Speaker 2: it's a horrible experience. That muzzle break just directs all
Speaker 2: of the muzzle blasts right into your like nasal cavity,
Speaker 2: and like your inner ear just shatters. It's quite it's
Speaker 2: quite unpleasant. I fired one without hearing protection one time,
Speaker 2: and I think I lost like seven IQ points. I'm
Speaker 2: dead serious. I used to be much more erudite and
Speaker 2: like much better at math.
Speaker 1: Yeah, the uh I got the privilege of uh And
Speaker 1: he'll probably send me a text afterwards of shooting a
Speaker 1: fil auto you goo uh ak with you know, a
Speaker 1: friend of the show. I'll say that who might actually
Speaker 1: show up on one of our live streams. Carl very nice.
Speaker 1: I'll tell you about it later. You like the guy, uh,
Speaker 1: what point is? It had the like old school uh
Speaker 1: slant break right, which looked like a full out of
Speaker 1: ak is not particularly controllable anyway, but the slant break
Speaker 1: sort of turns the pattern and you know, you basement
Speaker 1: valling losers. May you know be familiar with the cunts
Speaker 1: from like counterstrike, right, You know, it kind of climbs
Speaker 1: up and in sort of a random pattern. It takes
Speaker 1: it from being a vertical string to like a nine
Speaker 1: to three o'clock slash. Right, So we're shooting this like huge,
Speaker 1: like I don't know, like door sized piece of steel
Speaker 1: out in the middle of the woods, like forty yards away.
Speaker 1: In order to get anything on target, you'd have to
Speaker 1: start like two feet to the left and you shoot
Speaker 1: like three four rounds. The middle two would be kind
Speaker 1: of somewhere on the door, and the rest would just
Speaker 1: be in like a diagonal line straight up. The verb
Speaker 1: the Communists have a very different understanding of ergonomics than
Speaker 1: we do in the West.
Speaker 2: Yes they do. Oh, it was actually a Japanese book
Speaker 2: that I have on Kloshnikov patterns that has the Romanian
Speaker 2: that has the Romanian types in here. So let me
Speaker 2: find the origin. Okay, so it was the aim was
Speaker 2: the was the original AKM variant with the with the
Speaker 2: dong for a grip. And then let's see here there
Speaker 2: is a shorty aim carbing that the that the Yeah,
Speaker 2: they just call it an aim carbing that the Draco
Speaker 2: is based on. It's the same, it's the same everything
Speaker 2: in seven six y two.
Speaker 1: How do you say the choppa in Romanian?
Speaker 2: Uh?
Speaker 1: Cordy again? For ten dollars Canadian? Do you think destabilizing
Speaker 1: Canada for a chance at conquest makes sense? Obviously, hate
Speaker 1: the vile Republic South, but even the American people cannot
Speaker 1: be that stupid. Keep the Great White North.
Speaker 2: Uh.
Speaker 1: I am unsure of how serious that is.
Speaker 2: Uh.
Speaker 1: That seems to be kind of meming.
Speaker 2: Thirty stabilizing themselves.
Speaker 1: Yeah, one hundred per I mean I can certainly see
Speaker 1: something just to kind of keep the as Alex Jones
Speaker 1: would say, the chi cooms out, you know, as we
Speaker 1: sort of hibit to you know, some sort of like
Speaker 1: Hemisphere focus. I actually had a great episode. It probably
Speaker 1: won't get great views, but talking about exactly this with
Speaker 1: Chronicles contributor whose name he's I don't want to get
Speaker 1: this wrong. He is from the Balkans, and I literally
Speaker 1: cannot pronounce his name, but Triffkillick is his last name.
Speaker 2: How would you be able to man, I.
Speaker 1: Can't pronounce English. You've heard me mispronounced very basic words
Speaker 1: like ten times on this show. You throw in another
Speaker 1: language with letters that I entirely understand. Yeah, foreign languages.
Speaker 1: The point is that will be kind of a further
Speaker 1: examination of that topic. I'm not entirely confident anything will
Speaker 1: come from it. And again, even the kind of like
Speaker 1: meme maps I've seen have been you know, the kind
Speaker 1: of like far northern territory, which, like, let's be honest,
Speaker 1: even if we did technically control that, how much would
Speaker 1: that affect either us or you? I mean, yeah, sure
Speaker 1: there's some mineral right stuff, but like it's pretty barren country.
Speaker 1: So I have several I just don't think it's gonna happen.
Speaker 1: But this is also the guy who said that the
Speaker 1: Russian Ukraine War wasn't gonna happen. So, like, you know,
Speaker 1: do not take my predictions on international relations. I'm very
Speaker 1: bad at them. That's sort of my initial response. What
Speaker 1: do you think, Carl about the possibility.
Speaker 2: Of I have my personal opinion, don't dox me or anything.
Speaker 2: But I have I have Canadian relatives and mag yeah,
Speaker 2: so have. I have many many Canadian relatives and am
Speaker 2: very familiar with Western Canada. And you know, I don't
Speaker 2: think destabilizing is the term. I think an offer of stability.
Speaker 2: You know, the government of Canada is totally illegitimate and
Speaker 2: the that you know, something has to be done. Do
Speaker 2: I think it's going to be done. I don't know.
Speaker 2: I don't have a way of knowing. I literally believe
Speaker 2: at this point that the biggest conflict there it's it
Speaker 2: would be multi national and it would be India v Canada,
Speaker 2: the United States or excuse me, India v China, like
Speaker 2: for struggle of control over the place, because they kind
Speaker 2: of cool, which I advocate.
Speaker 1: I have you see the other it's like the Chinese
Speaker 1: Indian border disputes where.
Speaker 2: They're just wailing on each other. I was watching the
Speaker 2: video of that this morning.
Speaker 1: Actually, that would be that would be so much fun.
Speaker 1: Like we could give the Canadians hockey sticks they can
Speaker 1: they can join into maybe like a like a Paul
Speaker 1: Bunyan acts that seems to be in their character and
Speaker 1: just have a full on like you know, Mountain blade
Speaker 1: style melee.
Speaker 2: I mean lee En feel for the boys. Like there
Speaker 2: are so many lean fields and addicts and basements in
Speaker 2: Canada that and so like, and the only people that
Speaker 2: have them are the white Canadians.
Speaker 1: Right, everyone knows the real rifle of Canada is a
Speaker 1: Chinese skas.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I h yeah, there's that. They have some really
Speaker 2: cool Chinese stuff that we don't have. But yeah, so
Speaker 2: it could be. It could be very entertaining. It could
Speaker 2: be very entertaining.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I I I uh, I'll be honest. I watched
Speaker 1: those Uh sorry, I can't. I can't keep a straight
Speaker 1: face around you people. You're constantly distracting me.
Speaker 2: Uh.
Speaker 1: But every time I see those videos of those like
Speaker 1: masses of disorganized men like wailing on each other with
Speaker 1: like pikes and stuff and like baseball bats taped to
Speaker 1: broom handles, I just think, like, man, that looks funk.
Speaker 2: It does look fun. I mean, get get like get
Speaker 2: your unit to actually form like a phoul ax. You
Speaker 2: would get with them one.
Speaker 1: Like me and the boys are gonna be gone for
Speaker 1: a little bit. We're gonna turtle conquer the India China border.
Speaker 1: But bike and shot actually no shot, I guess yeah,
Speaker 1: just get out like.
Speaker 2: Uh, it has to be improvised. You have to sharpen
Speaker 2: your entrenching tool, which is actually a good weapon.
Speaker 1: Seems like a lot of fun. I don't know what
Speaker 1: they're complaining about. Like have you seen the meme Carl
Speaker 1: where it's like one of those like super airbrushed like
Speaker 1: hyper color illustrations of like a dolphin like leaping through
Speaker 1: the in with like a and it just says war
Speaker 1: before drones. You know, well there it is. You have
Speaker 1: war before gun power, right, just you and you and
Speaker 1: the boys, you know, getting a squad together, piece cut
Speaker 1: off ud like it sent me to like some random
Speaker 1: like high school in the South. I'll like get together
Speaker 1: like a few football teams and yeah, demolish.
Speaker 2: Like you would annihilate them.
Speaker 1: Just give some like future D three offensive lineman, a
Speaker 1: baseball bat, a breastplate, a peaked helmet, and just tell
Speaker 1: them to come back with like thirteen ears on a
Speaker 1: necklace and we'll be done by the afternoon.
Speaker 2: Right, my goodness, my goodness, Well.
Speaker 1: Dude, we are we have gone over time. This was
Speaker 1: a ton of fun, man, I know.
Speaker 2: We have one more super chat?
Speaker 1: Oh we did I missed up? Oh yeah, Oh, that's
Speaker 1: why I was trying to move past it from uh
Speaker 1: sangway and menacing.
Speaker 2: I agree on this one. By the way, burden.
Speaker 1: Baby, when working on it, did you convince your wife
Speaker 1: on real children or if you still set on adopting
Speaker 1: a pigmy dude, adopting you can just take them home.
Speaker 1: Like I don't do housework anymore. I've just got a
Speaker 1: bunch of midgets doing it for me. It's it's a
Speaker 1: ristocratic I'm sort of like a like a medieval baron.
Speaker 2: You know.
Speaker 1: I have my dorbs. They sort of cavort and you know,
Speaker 1: amuse me while I eat like a chicken leg. Uh oh,
Speaker 1: check at for peep. Oh, you guys are being very
Speaker 1: generous and keeping me here.
Speaker 2: Thank you.
Speaker 1: Uh Sean Schaeffer, real questions only which fallout New Vegas faction.
Speaker 1: But seriously, rip Scott Adams. Yeah, obviously sad to see
Speaker 1: Scott Adams passing.
Speaker 2: Uh.
Speaker 1: I was never a you know, like a regular viewer
Speaker 1: of his stuff. But obviously he put himself out there
Speaker 1: and uh, you know, he took hits for what he believed,
Speaker 1: so you know I have to give him him credit
Speaker 1: for that and sounds like his you know, his books
Speaker 1: were very good. His comic was hilarious. Like he was,
Speaker 1: he was talented, and you know, go out on a
Speaker 1: limit sacrifice that like you have to give him, you
Speaker 1: know what he's doing for that? Do you? Did you
Speaker 1: have any sort of more in depth relationship with Scott
Speaker 1: Adams or his work than that?
Speaker 2: Carl I used to troll him on GAB, but mostly
Speaker 2: about the JAB and sometimes I regret it a little bit.
Speaker 2: But he actually wrote some very good books about systematizing
Speaker 2: your your thinking and operation and I had essentially done
Speaker 2: learned to do that without him. But his summary and
Speaker 2: framing of stuff is very good. It's it's definitely worth
Speaker 2: reading if if you get a chance to.
Speaker 1: All right, Uh, one more somewhat threatening message from why
Speaker 1: is ez seven? I keep lists for just such an occasion.
Speaker 1: I'm not entirely sure what that's in reference to. I
Speaker 1: endorse that keep and you're keeping your Pygmy lists or
Speaker 1: maybe another one? Uh the boy it is? Yeah, thank
Speaker 1: you guys so much. This one was very generous. I
Speaker 1: think I've said it before, but Carl gets half of these,
Speaker 1: so I'm not just sitting a mountain of gold here.
Speaker 1: It's a small Mountain, but nonetheless no Max Pain. We
Speaker 1: have not attacked Iran yet. Although look it's it's a
Speaker 1: day now. I think I'm past selective service, So I mean,
Speaker 1: I don't care anymore.
Speaker 2: I don't. I don't think that's going to happen. It's
Speaker 2: not a problem, Yuh.
Speaker 1: To quote the Boomers, I'll be dead by that, uh
Speaker 1: know it at all seriousness? Yeah, thank you guys so much.
Speaker 1: Check out Carl's work on Substack. There's some some good
Speaker 1: stuff there. Highly recommend it. His book by book two books,
Speaker 1: oh yeah, two actually and and the first one is
Speaker 1: shorter and it features uh subway surfer intermission. So for
Speaker 1: your uh you know, attention spend challenge viewers, you can
Speaker 1: you can you break up the monotony of reading words
Speaker 1: and sequence? Uh, obviously you know my stuff the Jay
Speaker 1: Burdons show. You know where to find me, guys. It
Speaker 1: was great to great to get back on. You're very generous,
Speaker 1: appreciate it, and we'll be back soon.