America First - Nicholas J. Fuentes - DACA Deal Deja Vu | America First Ep. 94

00:00:04.000 Good evening, everybody.

00:00:05.000 You are watching America First.

00:00:07.000 My name is Nicholas J. Fuentes, and we have a great show for you tonight.

00:00:11.000 Lots to talk about fresh off of the Rouge v. Trad Thought live stream, of course, with Laura Loomer and others.

00:00:19.000 What a fun stream. 0.98

00:00:20.000 You know, I got to tell you, I got to tell you that Laura Loomer, look, I know she's not a Christian. 0.97

00:00:27.000 Far from it. 1.00

00:00:28.000 She causes a lot of trouble. 0.99

00:00:30.000 But in spite of that, we have this weird, she's like Catwoman.

00:00:34.000 I'm like Batman.

00:00:35.000 Right? 1.00

00:00:36.000 Where Catwoman, she's technically like a villain.

00:00:39.000 She's technically not to be trusted, but there is kind of this mutual respect where it's like, you know, we both patrol the streets of Gotham.

00:00:49.000 We both have the same affect, the same general approach here.

00:00:54.000 And so I have to say, I'm on the stream with Rush V and Loomer.

00:00:56.000 I gotta say, she's a little bit, I don't know what it is.

00:01:00.000 She's Catwoman and I'm Batman.

00:01:02.000 Forget any of the weird other connotations of that, but it's just sort of similar.

00:01:06.000 But.

00:01:07.000 Anyway, just got done with that.

00:01:09.000 Rouge V very graciously had me on, but we are here for a big, exciting show.

00:01:13.000 We're talking about DACA deals again.

00:01:16.000 Everybody's freaking out again, and I don't know why.

00:01:21.000 Just two weeks after, everybody was proven wrong about what President Trump presents as his position on DACA or on deal making.

00:01:31.000 If you recall, two weeks ago, the message from Trump was I'll sign anything, I'll take a $2.7 billion fence instead of a wall, I'll cave on.

00:01:39.000 DACA legalization.

00:01:41.000 And then we got a catastrophic government shutdown for the Democrats.

00:01:45.000 We got no deal, and now we have all the leverage.

00:01:47.000 Well, today it was announced or it was reported that there was a conference call with Republicans and Democrats in which a White House aide, Stephen Miller, described a plan that would give Amnesty a pathway to citizenship for 1.8 million DACA eligible illegal immigrants.

00:02:06.000 And of course, everybody, you know, I wake up to this, I wake up to this, by the way, at 4 o'clock in the afternoon.

00:02:11.000 I wake up to people on Twitter.

00:02:13.000 Linking me to this, DMing me to this.

00:02:16.000 Nick, what's going on?

00:02:17.000 I thought you said there wasn't going to be a deal.

00:02:19.000 Nick, what's going on?

00:02:21.000 How do you explain this?

00:02:23.000 And it just blows my mind.

00:02:26.000 How many times does this have to happen?

00:02:29.000 How many times does this have to happen?

00:02:31.000 It happened in September.

00:02:33.000 It happened in late December.

00:02:35.000 It happened two weeks ago.

00:02:38.000 And here we are again.

00:02:38.000 So we'll get into that.

00:02:39.000 We will get into the doomsday clock.

00:02:42.000 I know that's a silly, it's a goofy thing, but it changed today.

00:02:46.000 Which is the Universal Association of Scientists?

00:02:49.000 I don't know, a bunch of nerds in lab coats announced today that the doomsday clock, which is this analogy, it's kind of an abstraction that they used to show the world or to represent how close we are to the apocalypse.

00:03:04.000 And they say the closer we are to midnight in this symbolic clock, the closer we are to the end of the world.

00:03:11.000 And so that just moved up 30 seconds closer to the end of the world.

00:03:15.000 We'll get into that and why that is a flawed.

00:03:20.000 And what it says about foreign policy.

00:03:22.000 They say that the world is less safe now.

00:03:25.000 We're at a greater risk of nuclear war now than we were at the height of the Cold War in 1953.

00:03:30.000 And I'll talk about why that's not true and why that is a misconception.

00:03:34.000 Some other things, of course, to get into the XFL if we have time and a few other things.

00:03:41.000 But we have to start with the DACA deal because I know a lot of people are worried.

00:03:46.000 I know a lot of people are concerned.

00:03:48.000 And I admit it is concerning.

00:03:49.000 I will admit.

00:03:51.000 That when I see the headlines like this, when I saw the headline in September, September 13th or September 12th, and it said, Donald Trump has reached a deal with Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi to give legal protection to DACA recipients without a wall.

00:04:08.000 I read that headline in early September and I panicked.

00:04:11.000 I said, What is going on?

00:04:13.000 What happened to the Donald Trump who said they have dreamers, but we have dreamers too?

00:04:17.000 And we want our people to have dreams and we're not going to give legalization to these people.

00:04:22.000 I said, Where's that, Donald Trump?

00:04:23.000 And I freaked out.

00:04:25.000 That was the one time where I really wigged out, and I even tweeted about it.

00:04:28.000 I said, okay, so you're giving amnesty.

00:04:30.000 We're not going to get a continuous wall.

00:04:32.000 It's actually going to be a fence.

00:04:33.000 So this is what hardline immigration looks like, right?

00:04:37.000 This is what MAGA is supposed to look like, right?

00:04:39.000 And of course, within a few days, it came out that that memo that came out of Chuck Schumer's office, which announced the supposed deal for legalization in exchange for no wall, was BS.

00:04:51.000 It didn't happen.

00:04:52.000 And if it did happen, there was a reason behind it.

00:04:55.000 The same thing happened in late December.

00:04:58.000 There were talks about amnesty for the DACA recipients, talks about bringing DACA back.

00:05:02.000 And everybody panicked, and I said, you know what?

00:05:04.000 It's probably like it was in September.

00:05:06.000 And then, of course, the most recent example, which this is like the introduction for every show now, is the DACA thing.

00:05:12.000 But this is, of course, how we set the stage for the next round of negotiations, which has begun since the Senate passed the continuing resolution to fund the government earlier in the week.

00:05:22.000 And so, two weeks ago, it was the report from the White House.

00:05:27.000 They laid out The blueprint for what the wall would look like.

00:05:30.000 This was not last Friday or the Friday before.

00:05:33.000 I believe it was, what's today?

00:05:35.000 The 20th?

00:05:36.000 Today's the 25th?

00:05:38.000 So this was on, I believe, the 5th or the 12th.

00:05:40.000 I think it was the 5th, January 5th, a Friday.

00:05:42.000 I have my calendar over there.

00:05:44.000 The White House released a blueprint of what the wall would look like.

00:05:47.000 It would be $25 billion, or excuse me, it would cost $18 billion.

00:05:53.000 It would be continuous.

00:05:54.000 It would be about 1,000 miles.

00:05:55.000 There'd be 10,000 additional border enforcers, end to diversity visa, end to chain migration.

00:06:00.000 These were the demands.

00:06:01.000 Laid out by the White House and Stephen Miller.

00:06:03.000 The following Tuesday, there was the bipartisan meeting.

00:06:06.000 Trump said, I'll sign anything.

00:06:07.000 I'll take a $2.7 billion fence, discontinuous.

00:06:10.000 Doesn't even matter.

00:06:11.000 And then we saw how that played out.

00:06:13.000 We saw that he was dangling the carrot in front of the Democrats.

00:06:16.000 He was dangling the bait in front of them.

00:06:19.000 In the next two days, you had the Goodlot bill come out on Wednesday, which was surprisingly very hardline on DACA.

00:06:25.000 Then the following day, you had the Dick Durbin and Lindsey Graham Gang of Six bill come out, which was immediately shot down by the president and then torpedoed by the shithole comment.

00:06:35.000 And now here we are again.

00:06:36.000 After the government shut down, the Democrats were blamed.

00:06:39.000 The Democrats choked.

00:06:40.000 They caved.

00:06:41.000 They pulled back.

00:06:42.000 They funded the government.

00:06:43.000 And they lost the support of both any independents or moderates, but also their far left base.

00:06:48.000 Now people are saying President Trump is serious when his aide puts out a statement saying something like 1.8 million illegals are going to get amnesty.

00:06:57.000 And that is the background for it.

00:06:59.000 Before we get into what is in the plan, this is the context for this.

00:07:02.000 And that's why, at the very least, at the very least, Not asking for people to take my word for it.

00:07:11.000 Not asking people to not be concerned or not panic or not be opposed to giving amnesty to 1.8 million people.

00:07:18.000 That's a big ask, and that's if it's being asked.

00:07:21.000 But simply, I ask people to understand the headlines and what is being said in the context of what has happened previously.

00:07:29.000 Simply to say, who is talking about 1.8 million illegals getting amnesty?

00:07:35.000 A White House aide on a conference call reported by The Hill.

00:07:38.000 Okay, so we have several degrees of separation here between something that President Trump has said is his stated intention and what is being reported.

00:07:47.000 When President Trump says we're going to give amnesty to 1.8 million people, I will start to look at it more seriously.

00:07:53.000 But right now, we have a conference call where an aide described to a bipartisan panel of congressmen what a hypothetical deal might look like.

00:08:00.000 They still have to write it, they still have to introduce it.

00:08:04.000 And anyway, they're planning on introducing it on February the 5th.

00:08:08.000 So the plan is, and this is what was laid out by, I believe it was Stephen Miller, the White House aide on the conference call, he said that the deal would consist of the following things it would be the 1.8 million DACA eligible.

00:08:21.000 Immigrants, illegal immigrants.

00:08:22.000 So right now you have 690,000 DACA recipients. 0.98

00:08:27.000 There are 690,000 illegal immigrants who are getting the legal protection for DACA that are getting the deferred action on their being a childhood arrival.

00:08:37.000 But there are 1.8 million who are eligible for the program at large.

00:08:42.000 690,000 in it, 1.8 million at large.

00:08:45.000 So Stephen Miller is saying that the 1.8 million who, given their age, would be applicable, would be eligible to apply for it.

00:08:53.000 They would get a pathway to citizenship in 10 to 12 years.

00:08:59.000 So, in 10 to 12 years, these 1.8 million DACA eligible illegal immigrants are able then to apply for citizenship.

00:09:08.000 In order to apply for citizenship, they cannot have been convicted of a crime at any point that they were here.

00:09:13.000 There are education and work requirements which have not been unveiled.

00:09:17.000 And also, there is a qualification that you have to be of good character.

00:09:22.000 So, in 10 to 12 years, these 1.8 million DACA eligible illegal immigrants.

00:09:27.000 They will be able to apply for citizenship insofar as they have not committed a crime, there are these unspecified, unstated work and education requirements, and also there is a good character requirement.

00:09:39.000 So when it says 1.8 million illegals are getting amnesty, what that really means is probably about half of those.

00:09:47.000 If we're really being realistic about this, and this is not to kind of obfuscate the point here, but when you hear the 1.8 million number, that's something to entice the Democrats.

00:09:56.000 They don't really show you the fine print, which is that.

00:09:59.000 You're going to have to have an education, a work requirement, a good character requirement, and no crimes.

00:10:04.000 And so, realistically, that's going to severely restrict the amount of people in 10 to 12 years that will be able to apply for citizenship.

00:10:11.000 So, that's number one.

00:10:12.000 That's the first part of the deal that was stated in this conference call.

00:10:17.000 The second part is that the president will get $25 billion for border security.

00:10:22.000 And about $18 to $20 billion of that will go towards a wall.

00:10:26.000 The other $5 billion will go towards border security, border patrol, ICE, funding judges.

00:10:32.000 To have hearings on whether people are going to be deported or not.

00:10:36.000 And so that's probably the biggest thing the $25 billion for a wall.

00:10:40.000 And not only do they allocate $25 billion for border security and the wall is included in this, but that money goes into a trust fund.

00:10:47.000 And that's very key because a lot of people, they have a valid skepticism of any funding for the wall because they say, you give amnesty now and you fund the wall.

00:10:58.000 Well, funding for the wall can be pulled before the wall is finished.

00:11:01.000 Funding for the wall can be put other places.

00:11:03.000 Meanwhile, amnesty happens and it's forever.

00:11:06.000 Well, the amnesty would take place hypothetically in 10 to 12 years, and the money for the wall would be placed in a trust fund so that you can't touch that money.

00:11:14.000 And they point to people who are skeptical, point to the Simpson Mazzoli Act, which passed under Ronald Reagan.

00:11:20.000 This was the infamous Amnesty Act by Reagan, which gave amnesty to 3 million illegal immigrants in exchange for funding to secure the border.

00:11:29.000 Now, in the Simpson Mazzoli Act, it's important to note that that money was just discretionary money that was appropriated for border security.

00:11:37.000 When it's appropriated that way, when it's simply discretionary money to be spent by an agency, and if the president is not on top of engineering that money, or rather directing that money to its proper ends, of course it's not going to follow through.

00:11:50.000 Of course it's not going to get where it was intended to go.

00:11:53.000 So it's vastly different between the Simpson Mazzoli Act, the Reagan amnesty that people talk about, where the amnesty happened, but the border security didn't, that deal.

00:12:03.000 Didn't go both ways.

00:12:04.000 With the Donald Trump deal, hypothetically, this is hypothetical, this is one of the demands that was laid out, or one of the provisions that was laid out, was that the money would go into a trust fund, and so it would be there and the wall would get built.

00:12:16.000 In addition to that, the deal would have an end to chain migration and an end to the diversity visa lottery system.

00:12:21.000 And this is big because you couple all of these things, you couple the wall with diversity visa lottery, with chain migration, and you are drastically reducing the amount of both legal and illegal immigration into the country for a long, long time.

00:12:38.000 So, people talk about chain migration and diversity visa lottery like these are trivial things.

00:12:43.000 We should not give any concessions for this.

00:12:45.000 But you imagine that, you know, let's take a pretty pessimistic outlook.

00:12:49.000 And let's say that at the minimum, eliminating those two things and building the wall would reduce legal immigration, the amount of legal immigrants coming into the country, by 500,000 per year.

00:13:02.000 And that's a pretty bare bones minimum.

00:13:04.000 A lot of people say it could be upwards of 700,000 or 800,000 illegal immigrants per year.

00:13:09.000 But let's say it's something like 500,000 between all three of those things.

00:13:13.000 If it's 500,000 immigrants per year, in 10 years, you prevent 5 million legal immigrants from coming into the country.

00:13:21.000 5 million legal immigrants coming into the country in 10 years.

00:13:25.000 So, in the 10 years that the amnesty hypothetically would happen, the pathway to citizenship would kick in, and at most 1.8 million are getting citizenship, and that's probably not going to be likely.

00:13:37.000 What you would get in return for that is 5 million less legal immigrants.

00:13:40.000 And then, so the question becomes essentially if everything is enforced, If we get a look at the deal and everything falls into place and everything checks out and there are assurances that both sides will be carried through, the question is do you want the 5 million legal immigrants that will come here on top of the 1.8 million people? 0.96

00:13:58.000 And they'll be illegal, but they'll still be here.

00:14:01.000 So do you want 6.8 million total people here? 0.96

00:14:04.000 Or do you want a net reduction in immigration by at least 3.2 million?

00:14:08.000 And that's given this deal, which I am not for.

00:14:11.000 That's given this deal, which I am not for.

00:14:12.000 I don't think this is the deal.

00:14:14.000 I don't think this is the deal that we will see.

00:14:16.000 If it were put to the floor, I don't think it would pass.

00:14:18.000 I don't think it'll get to the floor.

00:14:21.000 But if it did, you have to consider it this way.

00:14:24.000 This is how we have to think.

00:14:25.000 We have to think strategically.

00:14:26.000 We have to think tactically.

00:14:28.000 We have to think in terms of the numbers of this.

00:14:30.000 I wouldn't be for this deal.

00:14:31.000 I don't think that's a big enough reduction.

00:14:33.000 If you're talking about if there's any chance that 1.8 million people could get amnesty and the minimum is 5 million, that is not a big enough reduction in immigration.

00:14:42.000 I don't think I would be for it.

00:14:43.000 I would have to see it before I made a final call.

00:14:45.000 But given what we know so far, I wouldn't be for this deal.

00:14:49.000 But you have to think about everything.

00:14:52.000 That is in the context of this.

00:14:53.000 That it is getting unveiled on February 5th.

00:14:57.000 The government shuts down again on February 8th.

00:15:00.000 So, on Monday, when the House and the Senate passed the continuing resolution to fund the government, they only funded the government for another three weeks.

00:15:08.000 Many people might think, like, okay, the government shutdown's over.

00:15:12.000 We're in the clear.

00:15:12.000 We're okay.

00:15:13.000 That's not true.

00:15:15.000 The only reason that the continuing resolution was able to pass in the Senate was because Mitch McConnell gave an assurance to Chuck Schumer that they would negotiate on DACA.

00:15:25.000 They said, look, fund the government for three weeks, pass this continuing resolution, and in the period between now, which was Monday the 22nd, and February 8th, we can negotiate on a longer term spending bill and we can negotiate a fix to DACA.

00:15:40.000 And so Chuck Schumer said, okay, I think it was partly to do with the polling.

00:15:44.000 That many people blame the Democrats for the shutdown, but he said, okay, if you assure me that we'll negotiate on DACA, we'll fund the government and we'll have three weeks to negotiate.

00:15:54.000 Well, this proposal that was laid out in this conference call today, which everybody is up in arms about, this is still to be written, still to be brought to the floor, which is dubious if it'll even be brought to the floor for a vote or for negotiations or anything like that.

00:16:08.000 But it is set to be brought to the floor on February 5th, just three days before the government shutdown.

00:16:15.000 And you have to get into The mindset of President Trump, who in this position, he holds all the cards.

00:16:21.000 He holds all the leverage here.

00:16:23.000 In the sense that three days out from the shutdown, the Democrats are facing catastrophe either way.

00:16:30.000 Either they compromise on this, they give the wall, they give diversity visa, they give chain migration under this deal, and they get killed.

00:16:39.000 They're destroyed by their base.

00:16:43.000 People are going to be furious that the Democrats held up the government, moderates and independents.

00:16:48.000 For illegal immigrants, and the far left will say, Why didn't you fight for us?

00:16:51.000 Why did you give up the wall?

00:16:52.000 Why did you give up all this stuff?

00:16:54.000 You're obstructionists, and you're bad obstructionists.

00:16:56.000 Not only was your only job to simply impede Donald Trump for getting his agenda passed, you didn't have to pass anything yourself, but you couldn't even do that. 0.97

00:17:05.000 They will get killed if they pass this deal.

00:17:07.000 It is a poison pill that you have these three provisions $25 billion for border security, an end to chain migration, an end to the diversity visa lottery system.

00:17:18.000 They wouldn't give him more than $3 billion for offense.

00:17:21.000 Two weeks ago.

00:17:22.000 So it's a poison pill.

00:17:23.000 Any way you look at it, if they pass this, it would be deadly for them.

00:17:28.000 The alternative is between February 5th and February 8th, if they cannot negotiate a deal that will be somewhat good for them, government shuts down again.

00:17:37.000 Who's blamed for the second government shutdown?

00:17:40.000 Fortunately, Donald Trump has been framing the issue for a month.

00:17:44.000 He has been solidly framing the issue alongside Mitch McConnell, alongside Paul Ryan, consistently in concert every day.

00:17:52.000 To frame the Democrats as responsible for the shutdown, saying, Look, I wanted to make a deal.

00:17:58.000 I tried to make a deal in December.

00:18:00.000 I tried to make a deal in mid January.

00:18:02.000 I tried to make a deal in early February, and the Democrats won't do it.

00:18:05.000 They're shutting down the government again.

00:18:07.000 And not only are they shutting down the government, but they're shutting down the government a second time for illegal immigrants at the expense of children getting their health care, at the expense of the infrastructure plan I want to pass, at the expense of the military. 0.90

00:18:20.000 Think of what happens during the next government shutdown. 0.94

00:18:22.000 You thought the first one was bad.

00:18:24.000 What happens during the next shutdown when they actually have to negotiate a fix for DACA?

00:18:30.000 This one, if it gets to a shutdown, will be far more protracted, far longer, far more expensive, far more costly for the Democrats.

00:18:39.000 And ultimately, there's a time limit on this one as well.

00:18:42.000 With this one, with the government shutdown this week, there wasn't really a time limit.

00:18:46.000 I don't think anybody would anticipate a government shutdown.

00:18:50.000 No politician in their right mind would have extended a government shutdown for six weeks.

00:18:55.000 That is just unthinkable.

00:18:57.000 But this time around, February 8th, the government shuts down and they're on a four week time limit.

00:19:02.000 Because if they do not pass a DACA fix, all the DACA legal protections expire on March 5th.

00:19:09.000 They all expire and every DACA recipient is now subject to deportation.

00:19:13.000 They are no longer protected by the law.

00:19:16.000 And so, what happens then?

00:19:17.000 What happens?

00:19:18.000 What position are the Democrats in?

00:19:20.000 They are either in a position where they have to make a deal, which would be so costly.

00:19:24.000 They shut down the government until people start getting deported.

00:19:28.000 And I don't know exactly how it's going to play out.

00:19:30.000 There's a lot of moving parts here, a lot of variables.

00:19:32.000 But I think once you understand the dynamics here, once you understand the incentives that are at play here, it's very easy to read a headline and say, Donald Trump said this, and therefore that's what's going to happen.

00:19:43.000 But look at the incentives.

00:19:46.000 What incentive does a Democrat have to vote for this bill? 0.75

00:19:49.000 They don't have one.

00:19:51.000 If this was the bill that came to the floor, they don't have an incentive to vote for this bill.

00:19:55.000 They would get killed if they passed it.

00:19:57.000 They're damned if they do. 0.98

00:19:58.000 They're damned if they don't.

00:20:00.000 What incentive would a Republican have to pass this bill?

00:20:02.000 Even Ted Cruz was talking about how he couldn't vote for something like this.

00:20:06.000 I doubt even Republicans would vote for this, and they have a slim 51 vote majority.

00:20:10.000 So I doubt you'd be able to get 60 votes on this.

00:20:13.000 What's the incentive for Donald Trump to give amnesty to 1.8 million people?

00:20:18.000 He doesn't need to.

00:20:19.000 He has all the leverage.

00:20:20.000 He has all the cards.

00:20:22.000 Why would he negotiate on this when the Democrats are facing either a shutdown or they lose their one bargaining chip, the one concession that they could have had in this deal?

00:20:32.000 So, in summary, we'll keep watching this.

00:20:35.000 We'll keep seeing what develops.

00:20:37.000 It's pretty early in the game right now in the second round of negotiations.

00:20:40.000 This is the first act.

00:20:42.000 Just like last week on Tuesday when we saw that bipartisan meeting and Donald Trump said he would sign anything and all they wanted to do was protect the Dreamers.

00:20:51.000 It's very early, and we'll see what happens tomorrow.

00:20:53.000 My estimate, my guess, is that sometime this week, Donald Trump will come out and say, Of course, of course, I'm not for amnesty for 1.8 million people.

00:21:03.000 That is a soft guess of what will happen.

00:21:05.000 There are a lot of other deals being made, so we'll see.

00:21:08.000 But I imagine that you're going to see the same push and pull that you saw in the last week.

00:21:13.000 And, you know, look, if Donald Trump gives amnesty to 2 million people, and it's today, it's immediate, and it's in exchange for very little, I'll be up in arms.

00:21:21.000 I'll be right there with you.

00:21:22.000 But I think he's earned this much at this point after Syria, after Dhaka, after Iran, after Dhaka again.

00:21:31.000 I mean, every time.

00:21:32.000 This is how the guy negotiates.

00:21:34.000 He uses his leverage.

00:21:36.000 And we brought up the art of the deal last time.

00:21:37.000 It's the art of the deal.

00:21:39.000 This is what he's doing.

00:21:40.000 I mean, he could have.

00:21:42.000 The alternative to this kind of methodology would have been simply to not have anything passed.

00:21:48.000 The alternative would have been gridlock.

00:21:50.000 It would have been what you saw under Barack Obama.

00:21:52.000 The alternative would have been he could have approached the issue with executive orders and.

00:21:57.000 It would have been pretty milquetoast.

00:21:58.000 Talk about unsecure concessions. 0.51

00:22:01.000 If he started doing executive orders, the next time you get a Democratic president, those are out.

00:22:05.000 So, all the people that are saying, why doesn't Trump just take advantage of the executive branch, that would be less lasting than anything out of the Congress. 0.99

00:22:14.000 The alternative would be he gets a very shit compromise. 0.86

00:22:18.000 He has to give all kinds of concessions, and he would get nothing in return, or he would end up doing an executive order, which would end up being repealed in the next 10 to 20 years. 0.98

00:22:28.000 So, this is the right course.

00:22:29.000 This is the right thing to do, and we'll keep an eye on it.

00:22:31.000 We'll see how this develops, but I have a lot of faith after what happened these past two weeks.

00:22:35.000 And people are saying, you know, didn't you take a premature victory lap?

00:22:39.000 Didn't you celebrate too soon?

00:22:41.000 And I say, no, no.

00:22:42.000 I was correct about the first round of negotiations.

00:22:45.000 I'll be correct about the second round.

00:22:49.000 And we'll see.

00:22:50.000 We'll see how it plays out.

00:22:51.000 But I have some faith that that is what we will see in the coming weeks.

00:22:55.000 So that's the DACA deal moving right along.

00:22:57.000 We don't have much on that.

00:22:58.000 I mean, that's the thing.

00:22:59.000 We have like a rumor from a White House aide.

00:23:02.000 We have a rumor that a White House aide was on a conference call and he said certain things.

00:23:06.000 Because just last week, we heard that the 10 year pathway to citizenship would only be offered at the $690,000.

00:23:13.000 So, again, you have this kind of schizophrenic White House deal where one face is saying one thing and one face is saying another thing.

00:23:20.000 Where last week you heard it was $690,000, and this week you're hearing it's $1.8 million.

00:23:26.000 So, that's deliberate.

00:23:28.000 That is by design.

00:23:29.000 So, that's the DACA deal.

00:23:31.000 We'll see what comes of that.

00:23:32.000 The next thing we want to talk about here is the doomsday clock.

00:23:37.000 And this is important because, you know, a lot of people like the international relations stuff.

00:23:41.000 They like the foreign affairs stuff.

00:23:43.000 And people, I think, are a little bit divided on the foreign policy stuff in terms of North Korea.

00:23:48.000 I hear a lot of right wing people that are not wild about what Trump is doing over there.

00:23:53.000 But so the doomsday clock, the infamous doomsday clock, where they inch it up every so often by minutes or seconds to say, well, we're closer to ending the world, we're closer to the apocalypse or something like this.

00:24:06.000 And so today, in a big dramatic show, The international scientists with the glasses, you know, with their spectacles, they got up and they said, Oh, the world is 30 seconds closer to the end of the world.

00:24:18.000 We're closer to nuclear war than ever.

00:24:20.000 And we should take no stock in this, for starters, to begin with.

00:24:25.000 Whenever you see one of these NGOs, one of these supranational organizations, one of these non state organizations get out and they do this kind of nonsense, this is signaling.

00:24:36.000 This is not intended to be an empirical review of anything that's going on.

00:24:41.000 This is not intended.

00:24:42.000 To inform decisions.

00:24:44.000 This is a tool of propaganda.

00:24:45.000 When the scientists get up there, scientists, you know, it's actors in white coats, they get up and they say, Oh, the world is two minutes closer to midnight.

00:24:54.000 What they mean to say is not, we have carefully looked at things, the political landscape, things that are going on in the world, and we did risk analysis, and we did actuarial science, and we predicted things, and we determined that it is now let.

00:25:06.000 They didn't do any of that.

00:25:08.000 They went in the back room, and the people that give them money said, Now is the time to counter signal, or I hate that word so much.

00:25:16.000 Now is the time to signal, just generally, on these issues.

00:25:19.000 Now, you need to go out there and talk about climate, and you need to go out there and talk about nuclear war.

00:25:25.000 You need to go out there and talk about how Trump is reckless with his nuclear arsenal.

00:25:30.000 So that's number one.

00:25:30.000 But it does bring up an interesting point where people talk about the fact that the world is less safe, the world is at a higher risk of a nuclear catastrophe than before.

00:25:41.000 And this is an interesting question.

00:25:43.000 The doomsday clock is not interesting. 0.99

00:25:45.000 This is dumb. 0.97

00:25:46.000 This is for people who go on Reddit. 1.00

00:25:48.000 This is for people who, I don't know, they can't think for themselves.

00:25:52.000 They need kind of this shiny, like, new, cool abstraction to tell them how to think.

00:25:59.000 You know, they won't go on antiwar.com.

00:26:01.000 They won't go and look at actual government documents.

00:26:04.000 They won't look at live maps of what's going on in these conflicts.

00:26:08.000 They won't look at what the PKK is and the YPG and, you know, everything else.

00:26:12.000 They need somebody.

00:26:13.000 They need a big, fat Reddit headline in bold.

00:26:17.000 To say, duh, the world is closer to ending, the clock, tick tock. 0.92

00:26:22.000 So, this is for pretty low IQ people.

00:26:24.000 But the question is interesting is the world more or less safe since Donald Trump got in office?

00:26:30.000 And this is something that a lot of people were concerned about before the election, even conservatives.

00:26:34.000 They said, really, this guy's going to have his finger on the button.

00:26:37.000 This guy who seems so out of control, who seems so unstable, it's going to be a lot less safe.

00:26:42.000 It's going to be a lot more catastrophic.

00:26:44.000 And this is something I've been thinking about when you look at the economic numbers, when you look at what's going on with foreign affairs.

00:26:51.000 Is the world less safe?

00:26:52.000 Is the world more safe?

00:26:53.000 I think the world is more safe.

00:26:55.000 I think when you look at how this president has been handling himself, not only with North Korea, not simply with North Korea, but with school shooters, but with terrorists, with ISIS, with China, with Russia, I think the world is a safer place.

00:27:11.000 And this gets to a fundamental difference in worldview.

00:27:15.000 This really gets to a fault line between two different kinds of people who see the world in two different kinds of ways.

00:27:23.000 The person who would say that the world is less safe under Donald Trump, the kind of Obama fan, sees the world in a way that if our president were out there making overtures to all the different countries in the world, you know, out there looking to embrace everybody with a big open hug and look, look, everybody, we're disabling our missile defense in Poland and Chechia.

00:27:44.000 We are, you know, look, we're not a threat.

00:27:46.000 We're dismantling our nuclear arsenal. 0.99

00:27:48.000 Look, we're pulling out of the Middle East.

00:27:50.000 We're pulling out of the wars.

00:27:51.000 We don't want to upset the apple cart.

00:27:53.000 Look, we're going to go to work on climate change and we just want to.

00:27:57.000 Become a part of the rest of the world.

00:27:58.000 I mean, that's one mentality where people think that that kind of signaling will get you safety, that that kind of signaling will make the world more peaceful.

00:28:08.000 It's this mentality that, if only, if only the world leaders would lay down their arms, if only the world leaders would come together and embrace what we all want, which is peace and friendship and love and, you know, rainbows and four leaf clovers, then everything would be okay.

00:28:29.000 And that's one worldview.

00:28:30.000 And those people would say that the world is less safe under Donald Trump and was more safe under Barack Obama because they see Barack Obama as professional and presidential and he's at his resolute desk and he's judicious.

00:28:44.000 Remember, he was a very judicious thinker.

00:28:46.000 Remember, he was very contemplative.

00:28:48.000 Remember all those profound photographs of Barack Obama in his office, brooding.

00:28:53.000 He was always thinking.

00:28:54.000 He always had his finger on his chin.

00:28:56.000 You could always see the wheels were turning in that big brain of his.

00:29:01.000 He was always thinking about.

00:29:02.000 Maya Angelou, he was always thinking about black poetry and thinking, oh, I just, why can't there just be peace in the world? 0.54

00:29:11.000 And so people think, well, that's probably the better thing.

00:29:13.000 It's this thing that presents as peace, it's this appearance of peace.

00:29:17.000 And then there are people who see the world quite differently.

00:29:19.000 I fall under this camp.

00:29:21.000 I think a lot of sensible people fall under this camp, which is the idea that we don't all want those things.

00:29:26.000 We don't all want peace.

00:29:28.000 We don't all want this universal brotherhood of man.

00:29:30.000 We don't want those things, and those things will never change.

00:29:33.000 It will never change that we'll never get those things.

00:29:35.000 We see Vladimir Putin as doing things contrary to our interests and in the minds of the progressives, things that are not of the 21st century, not of modern times, not worthy of the United Nations.

00:29:48.000 We see that not born out of resistance and bullying and being mean.

00:29:54.000 We see that as the natural inclination, the natural nature, the intrinsic nature of man, that man and his tribe will fight for as much as they can.

00:30:03.000 They're going to want to get as much land as they can, as much influence as they can.

00:30:08.000 They're going to want to get as much power and money and things that they can.

00:30:12.000 And it's not necessarily because of vice.

00:30:15.000 Certainly, this tends to be the case.

00:30:17.000 You can have vice.

00:30:18.000 But in the case of a statesman like Vladimir Putin, the expansionism, which it's arguable if it's really expansionist when you see what NATO has been doing in parallel to what Putin and Russia have been doing, you have to look at it as this is reasonable for a statesman to want what is best for his people.

00:30:37.000 Vladimir Putin.

00:30:38.000 Don't invade Crimea because he has contempt for democracy and he doesn't want peace between nations.

00:30:45.000 He invades Crimea because he knows he can get away with it. 0.54

00:30:47.000 And he knows that if Russia controls Crimea, they can exert power in the Black Sea and they can control more affairs in the Southwest, you know, compared to Moscow.

00:31:00.000 And when you have that kind of power projection, and when he's in Syria and when he's in Iran and when he's fortifying these rogue regimes like North Korea or others, they see that as more safety for their people.

00:31:11.000 When they have more control over affairs, when they have more influence, they have more safety for their people, they have more security and assurances for their people.

00:31:19.000 And we see the world as more stable.

00:31:21.000 When there's an acknowledgement of this, we see the world as more stable when we aim not for peace, not for concessions, but for communication, so that errors are not made, so that mistakes are not made, so that the world reflects the power that underlies a lot of these statements.

00:31:38.000 So, for example, when the United States approaches North Korea, Barack Obama and the left wing type people, the progressive type people, might say that Donald Trump's rhetoric is dangerous, it's more dangerous, it's bad.

00:31:51.000 Because it's risking war.

00:31:53.000 When you talk about war, there's a greater risk for it.

00:31:56.000 Just talk about how you want peace.

00:31:57.000 If you communicate peace, peace will come.

00:31:59.000 Well, the right wing says that the problem there is not necessarily that conflict begins.

00:32:03.000 The problem is that a miscalculation is made in the sense that we understand why North Korea does what they do.

00:32:09.000 It's not because they're a big, bad meanie.

00:32:11.000 It's not because they just want to piss us off. 0.95

00:32:14.000 And they're probably just, you know, they're barbarians. 0.61

00:32:17.000 They're ahistorical barbarians. 0.86

00:32:18.000 They're from the 13th century. 1.00

00:32:20.000 But rather, they are making.

00:32:22.000 Calculations about their national security based on their interests.

00:32:26.000 And so, what we strive to reduce is not necessarily conflict, which in many cases is inevitable, not necessarily butting of heads, which is necessary, but miscalculations where North Korea understands what we want and what we're willing to secure it.

00:32:42.000 And we understand what North Korea wants and what they're willing to do to secure it.

00:32:46.000 And when that communication happens, when you have this fluidity, when you have this understanding of incentives and motives, Then the world as it is reflects the desires of the actors that are in play there.

00:32:58.000 So, in the sense that now North Korea is making kind of this overture to South Korea, they're having these bilateral talks.

00:33:04.000 North Korea understands that the president will not accept a nuclear North Korea.

00:33:08.000 And they know that they do not want to die.

00:33:11.000 They do not want to die in a war.

00:33:13.000 They know that they can inflict a lot of pain on us. 0.75

00:33:15.000 But if they understand that we accept that, that that is probably better now than accepting a nuclear North Korea in the future, which has the potential to destroy us, they understand very quickly that this is no longer going to work. 0.86

00:33:28.000 I will not err in my calculation that the United States would never go to war with me, and therefore I have to change how I practice diplomacy. 0.76

00:33:36.000 And so, in that sense, the world has gotten safer because communication has gotten sharper.

00:33:40.000 There is less room for error.

00:33:42.000 There's less room for miscalculation.

00:33:44.000 And so, conflicts will always happen.

00:33:46.000 The butting of heads will always happen, but they will only take place when they are absolutely necessary, and they will only happen when I think both actors can benefit.

00:33:57.000 I think it's a very interesting question that is posed by these nuclear or these doomsday clock scientists when they say the world is less safe and people react to this.

00:34:06.000 And I think it betrays these fundamental questions of whether or not, or rather, what school of thought we hold, not only about political affairs or foreign affairs, but about human nature.

00:34:17.000 And so a very interesting thing there.

00:34:19.000 It's a little bit of a deep dive, but I see this.

00:34:21.000 I see a lot of people panic, and it is a tool to make people panic.

00:34:25.000 This is obviously a left wing.

00:34:27.000 Propagandizing attempt to get people to wig out about climate change.

00:34:30.000 You know, people have this existential fear of apocalypse and catastrophe.

00:34:35.000 And, you know, if a bunch of scientists get together and say, clock's ticking towards the end of the world, you know, people start to get a little bit anxious.

00:34:42.000 But I think it's important to understand the realities here of this situation.

00:34:46.000 We're in much better hands with somebody like President Trump than we are with somebody like Barack Obama because President Trump understands the limitations.

00:34:54.000 Barack Obama does not.

00:34:56.000 And when you don't understand the limitations, it leads you to folly.

00:34:59.000 When you reach beyond your grasp, it leads to folly.

00:35:02.000 You know, this was the case even of George W. Bush, who, you know, you contrast George W. Bush with, say, Donald Trump with the war in Iraq.

00:35:10.000 Donald Trump would say, what Saddam Hussein is doing is not good, it's very deadly, it's very problematic.

00:35:17.000 It's very risky.

00:35:18.000 This is a very disruptive element in the Middle East, a very disruptive and dangerous actor in the Middle East. 1.00

00:35:24.000 But it's better than the alternative. 1.00

00:35:26.000 It's better than the alternative, which is what we see now in the Middle East this Islamic resurgence, in the words of Sam Huntington, since 1979, the rise of fundamentalism, the demographic shift towards a much younger, more hungry, and restless demographic, where that would take its place in the wake of secular, strong, stable, Ordered dictatorships, you would have chaotic, disordered, young, fundamentalist, ideological, 0.86

00:35:57.000 the mob essentially taking over. 0.89

00:35:59.000 And so Donald Trump understands the limitations of what is possible, understands the limitations of what is possible in the region and what can come out of it in the near future.

00:36:07.000 And so he would say, I'm not going to invade Iraq.

00:36:10.000 And that's what he said in 2003. 0.89

00:36:12.000 They're bad guys, say what you will about them, but they kill the terrorists and they balance against other actors like Iran and some of the others. 0.95

00:36:20.000 The George W. Bush says, Oh, to hell with that. 0.92

00:36:23.000 The cowboy and George W. Bush are the neoconservatives behind him, the ideological people behind him.

00:36:29.000 It's dubious what their motives were.

00:36:31.000 I doubt they were totally ideological, but this is what they present as the argument.

00:36:35.000 They say, and this is what Charles Krauthammer even said.

00:36:38.000 He said, Why are these people any more immune to democracy than South Korea, than Japan, than Germany?

00:36:45.000 Charles Krauthammer wrote in an essay about the Iraq War, and I read this in his book, Things That Matter.

00:36:51.000 He said, Why should we believe?

00:36:52.000 That the Arabs are any different than the Japanese, who, when we invaded after World War II and we instituted a constitution and democracy and a Western order, they were able to adopt it.

00:37:03.000 And when we did the same in Germany, we were able to de Hitlerify or de fascist, whatever the country, and now they're democratic and capitalist. 0.86

00:37:11.000 Why can't that happen in the Middle East?

00:37:13.000 And that was the mentality of George W. Bush, which was we have these bad actors and we're just going to go in and take them out.

00:37:21.000 We're the good guys and they're the bad guys.

00:37:24.000 And we're going to go in and we're just going to knock them down.

00:37:27.000 And who cares what happens next?

00:37:29.000 I have a pretty good idea.

00:37:30.000 We could probably go in and do it.

00:37:31.000 We're America.

00:37:32.000 America's exceptional. 0.94

00:37:34.000 We can go in, and because if we believe hard enough and we believe in the right things, well, the Arabs will come on our side and they'll go to the ballot boxes and they'll support our invasion. 0.73

00:37:44.000 They'll greet us as liberators and we'll move towards the new world order, in the words of his father. 0.52

00:37:51.000 And of course, when he tried to overstep, when he overreached the limitations of the region and what was possible.

00:37:58.000 And how much power could be projected, and what could be expected of a people that don't have a history of that kind of tradition, it led to something immeasurably worse than the bad things that existed before.

00:38:11.000 And so that's why we have to understand limitations.

00:38:13.000 That's why we're in much better hands here.

00:38:15.000 Somebody who has an understanding, who is a realist and not an idealist, somebody who is a Bismarckian, not a Wilsonian.

00:38:22.000 That's what it means to be a conservative.

00:38:24.000 And so, an interesting question, and one I think people will benefit from hearing the answer.

00:38:28.000 So that's. 0.93

00:38:29.000 The doomsday clock, the last thing we want to get to, I don't know, do we want to get to the XFL or Palestinian aid? 0.93

00:38:37.000 I got to tell you, the XFL stuff, because we only have about four minutes before we'll start taking your super chats.

00:38:44.000 I don't know if you saw this, and this is a little bit less obviously philosophical, but the XFL was announced by Vince McMahon today, who is, of course, the chairman of the WWE, the World Wrestling Entertainment Company.

00:38:56.000 He announced that he would be bringing back his Extreme Football League in 2020, which, for the uninitiated, the XFL was tried and failed in the 1990s.

00:39:07.000 You know, it was a professional wrestling company that tried to do extreme football, and it went bankrupt pretty quickly.

00:39:13.000 Well, now they're relaunching it in 2020, and the rules are.

00:39:16.000 People stand for the anthem.

00:39:18.000 I think they said there's going to be 10 games, eight teams with 40 people on each team.

00:39:23.000 And he said, look, it's just got to be good football.

00:39:27.000 No politics, no kneeling, none of this liberal stuff that you're on ESPN, but simply good, entertaining, extreme football.

00:39:36.000 And I got to say, it's an interesting idea.

00:39:39.000 This is, you know, people might say this is a silly thing, people might say this is like a goofy thing, this is irrelevant.

00:39:47.000 But what does it say?

00:39:48.000 What does it say that somebody is challenging the NFL, folks?

00:39:53.000 Could anybody imagine 10 years ago?

00:39:55.000 I remember 10 years ago going to the Super Bowl parties in the neighborhood.

00:39:59.000 And not too fond memories of the Super Bowl parties, but you go to the Super Bowl parties.

00:40:04.000 And if you recall, the Super Bowl was the biggest thing on planet Earth.

00:40:10.000 And not only was it the biggest thing, but it was known as the biggest thing.

00:40:14.000 It was like there was nothing bigger.

00:40:16.000 You would pay millions of dollars for advertisements, there was the commercials.

00:40:20.000 Everybody would be watching it.

00:40:21.000 It was such a huge event.

00:40:24.000 Even people that didn't watch football would be in attendance.

00:40:26.000 And just 10 years later, when that was the sun never set on the empire of the NFL, just 10 years later, and this XFL business is coming back.

00:40:36.000 And it's a statement, I think, on what is possible here the counterculture that is possible and the potential that this has.

00:40:43.000 What happens if the XFL comes back?

00:40:46.000 And I don't really place a lot of stock in it too much.

00:40:48.000 I mean, who knows what they'll be capable of.

00:40:50.000 But what happens if the XFL comes back and they could get some of the market share?

00:40:55.000 What happens if the XFL comes back and people watch it because they're tired of the politics?

00:41:00.000 They want to watch their football.

00:41:01.000 Think about the power, the influence that is lost by certain people.

00:41:07.000 Think about the influence that is lost by the people who control ESPN or the NFL, the corporate crony interests that control those organizations.

00:41:16.000 Once that monopoly loses its grip, think about what is opened up, how much the playing field opens up once the NFL is challenged.

00:41:24.000 And it doesn't even have to be replaced, it doesn't have to fail, it doesn't have to go bankrupt.

00:41:29.000 But simply that it is challenged and contested successfully, you start opening up the whole playing field to television, to movies, to music, and we have a real renaissance.

00:41:40.000 And here's the beauty of it apolitical, not political.

00:41:44.000 That's the beauty of it.

00:41:45.000 We do not have to create a counterculture that is liberal, but in the other direction.

00:41:51.000 We don't have to create a counterculture that says, here's the liberal institutions and we'll create parallel conservative institutions.

00:41:57.000 We'll have this over the top, Bullshit right wing political narrative and movies and music, just like the left does.

00:42:03.000 No, no, no, that's all wrong.

00:42:05.000 The XFL merely has to be apolitical for the left to lose.

00:42:09.000 You know, people want it to be, well, the left loses and also we win.

00:42:12.000 The biggest victory of all is to steal their monopoly and just make it apolitical.

00:42:16.000 And then guess what?

00:42:17.000 They don't have the media, they don't have sports, they don't have the culture, they don't have Hollywood.

00:42:21.000 And it doesn't matter that, it doesn't even matter so much that we have it, but just that they don't have it and they lose.

00:42:27.000 And here's the beauty of it people want that.

00:42:30.000 People don't necessarily want an over the top political message.

00:42:33.000 They just want to be left alone.

00:42:35.000 And so there's an appeal in that.

00:42:37.000 People might not be willing to listen to it. 0.92

00:42:39.000 Right wing football league as opposed to the NFL or ESPN, but most certainly they'll be able to convert from ESPN with all the liberal drama and the black power stuff that goes on there to let's just watch football, let's just watch movies, let's just watch television. 0.89

00:42:53.000 And so it's a small thing, it might be a silly thing. 0.98

00:42:57.000 Vince McMahon is a silly guy. 0.61

00:42:59.000 I always used to be a big WWE fan, and what they do there is pretty brilliant in terms of the marketing, in terms of the business model there. 0.97

00:43:06.000 But this gives me a lot of hope.

00:43:07.000 This should give a lot of people a lot of hope as to what is possible. 0.94

00:43:13.000 And for all the black pillars out there, it just goes to illustrate the fact that these empires that are built up, whether it's real empires, whether it's like the Soviet Union or Rome or the Ottoman Empire, they collapse slowly and then suddenly. 0.98

00:43:30.000 So for people that are thinking, look at what we're up against, look at how powerful they are, look at how much they have and how little we have, just look at the history of empires.

00:43:39.000 It happens very, very slowly, and then it happens suddenly.

00:43:43.000 Slowly, you start to see the resistance build up in Poland with Lech Waleza and Solidarity.

00:43:47.000 Slowly, you start to see a little bit of resistance.

00:43:50.000 You see Glasnost, you see Perestroika, and then one day the Berlin Wall comes down.

00:43:55.000 And then one day there's tanks driving down the streets in Moscow, and there's a constitutional crisis, you know?

00:44:01.000 And so it happens.

00:44:02.000 One day it all comes crashing down, and that's what we're pushing for.

00:44:05.000 It's tough because we don't see where the cusp is.

00:44:09.000 We don't see where exactly we start to grow exponentially, where the decay starts to increase exponentially.

00:44:17.000 And so it's difficult because when you're pushing and pushing, Against this brick wall, and you can't see the other side of it.

00:44:22.000 You can't see when you're finally going to push over the edge.

00:44:26.000 You may get blackpilled because you could say, you know, look, we're not making any progress.

00:44:30.000 I can't see it going anywhere.

00:44:32.000 But that's when you have to just keep pushing because eventually you get there and you get things like this.

00:44:36.000 So that's the XFL.

00:44:37.000 That's the news of the day.

00:44:39.000 We'll jump into your super chats.

00:44:41.000 We will see what the masses are saying.

00:44:43.000 What do they think?

00:44:44.000 Am I reading too much into the XFL?

00:44:46.000 Am I reading too much in the doomsday clock?

00:44:49.000 Let me know what the people think.

00:44:50.000 And it looks like.

00:44:52.000 Has the streaming quality been poor?

00:44:54.000 Because it looks like there's these sporadic, very, very, I don't know, inconsistent numbers here where it jumps up to 340 and then it's down to 300.

00:45:05.000 I don't know.

00:45:06.000 And in a matter of minutes.

00:45:09.000 So let's see our super chats. 1.00

00:45:11.000 Simon Scola, should there be women judges? 1.00

00:45:15.000 Again, I wouldn't say I'm against the blanket rules, I'm against the blanket generalizations. 1.00

00:45:20.000 It should be non normative that a woman should be a judge. 0.99

00:45:23.000 That's what I will say. 0.98

00:45:24.000 So, I'm not going to say no women should be judges, but it should be seen as non normative. 0.57

00:45:28.000 It should be normative that men are judges. 0.86

00:45:30.000 It should be expected.

00:45:32.000 This should be the general expectation. 1.00

00:45:35.000 Certainly, women are capable of being judges, but should they be pushed towards that? 1.00

00:45:39.000 Should they be seen as equally capable of being judges? 1.00

00:45:42.000 I don't think so. 1.00

00:45:44.000 And people might say, oh, do you think women can't do that because they're inferior? 1.00

00:45:47.000 That's the mistake a lot of people make. 0.88

00:45:50.000 People make this in bad faith.

00:45:52.000 Will Nardi makes this mistake.

00:45:54.000 He says, you think women are incapable of doing some things compared to men, or they're less capable.

00:45:58.000 And that means you think they're inferior.

00:46:00.000 And that is a wild extrapolation.

00:46:02.000 That is wildly reductive.

00:46:05.000 I would say that a woman is less capable to be a judge in the same way that a man is less capable to raise a child, in the same way that a man is less capable to multitask, to run a household, to do all kinds of other things, to be nurturing towards children, to be an elementary school teacher.

00:46:22.000 And that may sound condescending or patronizing, but I think it's only condescending or patronizing. 0.96

00:46:28.000 If you come at it from the presupposition that the female talents are somehow less than the male talents, you know, you say women are better at doing these things, and the feminist will tell you that's so demeaning, that's so contemptuous, and that's because they hate women, they hate femininity. 0.98

00:46:45.000 You know, if they didn't, if they were really feminists, they would say women are more capable at being women, and look at how men suck at being women. 0.99

00:46:53.000 Take that. 0.97

00:46:54.000 But instead, they're saying, well, all the things that women are good at are not important. 0.99

00:46:59.000 And ridiculous, and they're inferior. 0.99

00:47:01.000 And so, who really hates women then? 0.99

00:47:02.000 If we're saying women do things that women do better, they're more capable at the woman's role, and they say, well, that's not good enough, that's inferior.

00:47:10.000 Well, who really thinks women are inferior there, right? 0.92

00:47:13.000 Comparative advantage.

00:47:15.000 Simon Scola says, favorite person from Jersey Shore.

00:47:18.000 Mine is Mike.

00:47:20.000 I don't watch Jersey Shore, I don't watch television.

00:47:23.000 And if I did, I certainly would not watch the Jersey Shore.

00:47:27.000 Very offensive to an Italian like myself, to a greaseball like myself.

00:47:32.000 Empress Finest says, not sure I like Rouge. 0.84

00:47:34.000 He's kind of crude and sleazy.

00:47:36.000 You know, I mean, look, I'm not wild about the approach of a lot of people in the movement.

00:47:42.000 It's not an endorsement when I go on his stream, it's not an endorsement of his lifestyle or the things he believes necessarily.

00:47:49.000 I think he has interesting things to say.

00:47:50.000 And so I go on and I interact with him.

00:47:53.000 And it is what it is.

00:47:54.000 And people say I'm kind of this isolationist kind of character.

00:47:58.000 I'm this person who can't get along with people.

00:48:01.000 I'm perfectly willing to get along with all kinds of people, I get along with Lucian Wintrich.

00:48:05.000 I get along with Rouge V. I get along in some capacity with Mike Cernovich, Laura Loomer.

00:48:10.000 I used to get along fine with Richard Spencer.

00:48:11.000 I got along fine with Enoch.

00:48:13.000 I got along fine with a lot of these guys.

00:48:16.000 It's only when they attack.

00:48:18.000 And you have to understand that that is just sort of the game.

00:48:21.000 It just is what it is.

00:48:23.000 You interact with these other intellectuals.

00:48:25.000 You discuss, I use that loosely.

00:48:27.000 I mean, commentators, pundits more broadly.

00:48:30.000 You interact, you exchange ideas, you talk about these things.

00:48:33.000 And that's just a part of it.

00:48:34.000 The cross pollination is key. 0.79

00:48:36.000 You know, maybe I go on the Roosh V stream, and there's a lot of Manosphere type people, and there are these hedonistic, atheist, black pill type people, and maybe they hear a traditional and a more Catholic message. 0.75

00:48:47.000 They hear a more Christian message, and maybe they come over to my side. 0.81

00:48:50.000 Who knows?

00:48:51.000 But Roosh is an interesting guy, and he brought me on, and that was kind of him, and he was a good host.

00:48:57.000 He was very welcoming in that regard.

00:48:59.000 So you can't hold these things against these people totally. 0.95

00:49:02.000 And people say, Nick, aren't you a hypocrite because of the Trad Thought thing? 0.80

00:49:06.000 Well, I never said I wouldn't work with any of those people. 0.89

00:49:08.000 Tara McCarthy came to me and said she wouldn't work with me.

00:49:11.000 I said I'd be happy to have you on the show.

00:49:13.000 I said I'd be happy to have you on the show last week.

00:49:17.000 I'd be happy to work with these people.

00:49:18.000 It's them, it's they that put the free speech restrictions on me.

00:49:21.000 I'd be happy, even after Richard Spencer calls me up drunk at midnight and calls me all kinds of names and goes after my family and goes after all kinds of other things, I'd still have him on the show to have a civil conversation.

00:49:34.000 Wouldn't like him, but I'd still have him on the show for a conversation.

00:49:38.000 And so.

00:49:39.000 That's what it has to be about, in my estimation.

00:49:42.000 If you really believe that your ideas win, they push through the personalities, they push through some of these other things, and that's how you have to look at it.

00:49:50.000 But I understand why you feel that way.

00:49:52.000 The right leaf.

00:49:53.000 Did you hear Richard Spencer's number got doxxed on Allsup's stream last night?

00:49:57.000 Had to give him a quick call.

00:49:59.000 Poor guy seemed very shaky.

00:50:01.000 Well, that's karma, I guess.

00:50:03.000 I don't wish that on anybody.

00:50:05.000 Certainly, I don't wish that on anybody, even people I don't like, even people that do all kinds of things.

00:50:10.000 That I disagree with and who come after me.

00:50:12.000 I don't wish for people to get doxxed.

00:50:14.000 It's a very stressful thing. 0.97

00:50:16.000 It's not fair and it sucks. 0.78

00:50:19.000 It's happened to me before. 0.77

00:50:21.000 So I don't wish that on Richard Spencer.

00:50:23.000 But I don't know.

00:50:24.000 Maybe that's karma.

00:50:25.000 Maybe that's karma.

00:50:26.000 I certainly believe that what goes around comes around kind of a thing.

00:50:30.000 And I certainly, again, I don't endorse that.

00:50:34.000 I think it's a bad thing that that happened to him.

00:50:36.000 And I feel for him, I guess, in some capacity.

00:50:38.000 But you put out a lot of bad energy, you put out a lot of bad karma, and it's undue.

00:50:45.000 You know, that's how things have a habit of working themselves out.

00:50:49.000 Right from wrong.

00:50:50.000 See the laws California is passing to let illegals vote? 0.99

00:50:53.000 I have, which is not good. 0.97

00:50:56.000 Right from wrong.

00:50:58.000 Chain stops more, but 1.8 million might kill us electorally.

00:51:02.000 Guy, 1.8 million might kill us electorally.

00:51:05.000 Yeah, and so will the 5 million that come if we wouldn't make a deal, right?

00:51:09.000 1.8 million will kill us electorally in 10 years.

00:51:13.000 And therefore, we should continue and resume letting in the 5 million people that would be cut with the deal.

00:51:17.000 I don't understand how people ignore this.

00:51:23.000 Tim Gegline.

00:51:24.000 Guess what, Nick?

00:51:24.000 Little Benji will be at CPAC.

00:51:26.000 Oh, I can't wait to see him.

00:51:28.000 I hope I get to meet him.

00:51:29.000 I hope I get to ask him a question or something.

00:51:31.000 I got to think what I'm going to say to my dear friend, little Benjamin.

00:51:37.000 Little Benjamin.

00:51:39.000 Benjamin Shapiro.

00:51:41.000 Certainly it will be interesting.

00:51:42.000 The cataclysmic confrontation between Nick and Ben.

00:51:47.000 Finally, at long last, I'll get to meet the guy, the author of my pain, in the words of James Bond.

00:51:57.000 John S. Favage.

00:51:59.000 Will Trump. 0.76

00:52:00.000 Fold on DACA and legalize the banditos. 0.58

00:52:03.000 I don't think so.

00:52:04.000 I don't think he will.

00:52:05.000 Michael Keiss, the healthy response to the White House DACA statement is to call the comment line and voice their disapproval.

00:52:11.000 Yeah, I suppose.

00:52:13.000 But just, you know, whenever people talk about this, you know, light up the switchboards, I just really, in my opinion, it doesn't have an effect.

00:52:22.000 The lighting up of the switchboards, you know, people put this stuff out there with the black pilling.

00:52:27.000 They say, light up the, call the phones.

00:52:29.000 We're going to make them hear us.

00:52:31.000 Do you think?

00:52:32.000 Do you think in the Oval Office they're making their calls based on what a thousand angry people are saying on the telephone?

00:52:37.000 I don't know.

00:52:38.000 Maybe they do.

00:52:39.000 Maybe they do.

00:52:41.000 I'm a little skeptical as to how much of an effect that has.

00:52:45.000 And when you start telling people to do this, maybe they think they're doing more than they are.

00:52:50.000 Maybe you get them in the wrong direction.

00:52:51.000 I just think you turn a lot of people off with this anxiety kind of a message.

00:52:55.000 We need to reassure people that the system is still worth pursuing.

00:53:01.000 Reform within the system is still worth pursuing.

00:53:03.000 Pursuing. 0.94

00:53:03.000 And when you black pill, you turn people right off to that. 0.94

00:53:06.000 It's not a good thing.

00:53:08.000 Jacob Seals, NJF, my man, if Vince McMahon called you up to join the main roster, what would your ring name be?

00:53:14.000 Nikki J, Furious Fruentus.

00:53:15.000 Well, good to hear from you, Jake.

00:53:17.000 Good to hear from me.

00:53:18.000 Miss you from the old RSVN days.

00:53:20.000 Jacob Seals was my old producer on the show, and we worked together for a long time.

00:53:26.000 Good friend, really solid people.

00:53:28.000 I have to say, in reflecting on my experience in America First Media, You really take for granted what it's like to work alongside solid people.

00:53:38.000 Because at America First Media, don't get me wrong, James and Matt, they're young, they're hip.

00:53:45.000 We share the same memes, we have similar experiences.

00:53:49.000 But they're people that, at the end of the day, they didn't do their jobs, they didn't follow through, they weren't there.

00:53:55.000 And in dealing with them during and after the company, how they handled the whole affair of firing me, which I still own part of the company, you really.

00:54:04.000 Understand then and come to appreciate what it's like to work alongside good people. 0.66

00:54:08.000 And so, not to blow smoke up your ass or anything, but I gotta say, I gotta say, I had been thinking about that when thinking about the SEALs family and Right Side and how good they were by me through thick and through thin, even when Reagan Battalion was coming after me, when Huffington Post came after me. 0.85

00:54:25.000 I mean, really, they were always there and on top of it, trying to make the show better. 0.98

00:54:28.000 And so I have to say that.

00:54:30.000 I really have to say that.

00:54:31.000 For people, you know, they take me as like this, like I'm hostile or I can't work with anybody.

00:54:37.000 You know, it just isn't the case.

00:54:39.000 But my ring name in the WWE, I actually thought about becoming a WWE wrestler for a long time, I have to say.

00:54:46.000 I was big into the WWE as a youngster.

00:54:49.000 I was a big fan of Randy Orton, big fan of John Cena, The Undertaker.

00:54:52.000 I was all about that stuff when I was in middle school.

00:54:55.000 I guess it kind of fits into it, it doesn't help.

00:54:58.000 When people call me a mestizo or a Mexican, because of course the Mexicans are very into the wrestling.

00:55:05.000 But I went to Monday Night Raw.

00:55:07.000 I went to Monday Night Raw a couple of times.

00:55:09.000 I've got all the pay per views, a couple of them.

00:55:12.000 I don't know what the ring name would be.

00:55:14.000 The Catholic?

00:55:14.000 I don't know.

00:55:15.000 I don't know.

00:55:16.000 Maybe it would be something religious.

00:55:17.000 It would be something about the church.

00:55:19.000 It would be like, that would be my theme, I think.

00:55:22.000 Maybe the preacher?

00:55:23.000 Who knows?

00:55:23.000 Who knows what it would be?

00:55:26.000 That might be blasphemous, actually.

00:55:27.000 But, uh, Certainly, that would be an interesting theme to explore.

00:55:30.000 The Thought Patroller. 1.00

00:55:32.000 Maybe that would be my specialty, I would go and I just beat up the divas on WWE. 1.00

00:55:37.000 I would wrestle exclusively the women and I just win every time. 0.78

00:55:40.000 That'd be a pretty funny rant. 0.97

00:55:41.000 The Thought Patroller, I'd come out and just boom!

00:55:45.000 No, that's wrong.

00:55:46.000 That's wrong.

00:55:47.000 That would be wrong. 0.96

00:55:48.000 It's a funny joke, but you can't even joke like that because violence against women is a very real and serious thing. 0.97

00:55:55.000 And it's always, they never start it.

00:55:59.000 I'm going way.

00:56:00.000 I'm pushing too far on the Overton window.

00:56:03.000 The seven Adelie says, consider the counter arguments to the idea that we can maintain political institutions against the left.

00:56:11.000 Google Conquest's second law.

00:56:14.000 What do you mean by the counter arguments to the idea that we can maintain apolitical institutions against the left?

00:56:21.000 I think we can simply because there's an appetite for that.

00:56:25.000 I understand the counter arguments, perhaps, but I think they've gone so far, and I think people are so tired of partisanship.

00:56:33.000 I think in many ways Trump was the epitomization of that because Trump was not a partisan.

00:56:36.000 You know, Trump was not out there like Ted Cruz, ideological, super far right, super far right conservative.

00:56:44.000 He wasn't out there in the traditional right wing partisan sense, and he wasn't a lefty kind of a guy.

00:56:49.000 He was out there talking about health care, I'll take care of everybody, $1 trillion infrastructure plan, and criticizing the Iraq war, the Bush family.

00:56:57.000 He was just a big middle finger.

00:56:58.000 He was saying, I'm not ideological, I'm not partisan, I'm just going to go in there and do what needs to be done.

00:57:04.000 And I think that is symptomatic of the mood in the country, which is very sick of.

00:57:09.000 I think people can resonate, or that resonates with a lot of people.

00:57:14.000 And last but not least, we have Awe Maria.

00:57:16.000 What do you think of the Latin Rite and Vatican II?

00:57:19.000 Well, I think the Latin Rite is very important, and I think Vatican II was kind of a disaster.

00:57:25.000 Vatican II, in many ways, was foreshadowed by Pope Pius X, who said that there were elements in the church who had infiltrated this.

00:57:35.000 Certainly, this was forecasted by many prominent Catholics, very public Catholics.

00:57:40.000 Public intellectual Catholics prior to the 1960s who talked about how the church was getting too soft to try and appeal to the people, and that was a big mistake.

00:57:49.000 Fulton Sheen wrote about this.

00:57:51.000 Many, I think C.S. Lewis wrote about this that the strength of the church was not, or the best move for the church was not to appeal to people and to be weak and to be open and to try and appeal.

00:58:02.000 It wasn't, the strength of the church was not to appeal to progress, but to resist progress and maintain the tradition to be stalwart and fortified against progress and the passions of the masses, the public.

00:58:17.000 And I don't know what's going on here.

00:58:18.000 I guess something's going on with my stream because we keep seeing these weird numbers in our numbers.

00:58:25.000 But I hope that answers the question.

00:58:27.000 We're going to call it a night here.

00:58:29.000 We're going to call it an evening.

00:58:30.000 It's 8 o'clock, and I'm hungry, and I'd like dinner.

00:58:34.000 So I hope somebody can hear me.

00:58:36.000 Maybe they'll start whipping something up.

00:58:37.000 But that's going to do it for us here on the show tonight.

00:58:39.000 Remember, if you like the show, if you like what you hear, please support us on Maker Support.

00:58:45.000 $5 a month for America First Premium, which gets you the audio only format of the show on SoundCloud if you want to listen to it as a podcast.

00:58:52.000 Podcast.

00:58:53.000 It gets you a special role in the Discord and priority on the call in shows.

00:58:58.000 And we're looking to expand maybe to an America First Premium Plus where we do a little bit more content, maybe a featurette, some more live streams, maybe an additional podcast.

00:59:07.000 Who knows?

00:59:08.000 More content could be on the way if you want to upgrade to $10 a month.

00:59:12.000 Or if you want to support the show just by giving a little bit more, you could always do that.

00:59:15.000 But I just keep it cheap for students, for vets, for people.

00:59:20.000 I know people that watch this show, maybe they're the forgotten men and women.

00:59:24.000 And we like to keep it cheap for them.

00:59:26.000 I know at America First Media they're going to beef it up to $10.

00:59:29.000 But here we're going to keep it reasonable for you.

00:59:32.000 Subscribe to the channel if you want to see more of this.

00:59:34.000 Give it a thumbs up.

00:59:35.000 Leave a comment.

00:59:35.000 Click the notification button.

00:59:37.000 And, you know, comment your constructive criticism, but also comment your praise.

00:59:41.000 You know, too often we get the unsolicited and very mean spirited criticism.

00:59:45.000 If you have something to say about the show, I always take it into consideration.

00:59:49.000 You can leave a comment.

00:59:50.000 And if you have a compliment, it makes our heart sore over here at America First.

00:59:54.000 So do that as well.

00:59:55.000 We're on the air Monday through Friday, 7 to 8 p.m. Central Time, 8 p.m. Eastern Time.

01:00:01.000 I'm Nicholas J. Fuentes.

01:00:02.000 This was America First, as always.

01:00:04.000 Thank you so much for watching. 0.57

01:00:06.000 Thank you for supporting the show with the Super Chats.

01:00:08.000 And thank you to the Premium members for continuing to support the show.

01:00:12.000 Means the world.

01:00:13.000 We couldn't do it without you.

01:00:15.000 But with that, we will see you tomorrow for a fun, casual Friday episode.

01:00:19.000 Have a great rest of your evening.

01:00:24.000 Americanism, not globalism, will be our credo.

01:00:31.000 It's going to be only America first.

01:00:36.000 America first. 0.99

01:00:37.000 The American people will come first once again.

01:00:53.000 The respect

America First - Nicholas J. Fuentes - January 25, 2018

DACA Deal Deja Vu | America First Ep. 94

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript