00:00:36.000Where Catwoman, she's technically like a villain.
00:00:39.000She'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.
00:00:49.000We both have the same affect, the same general approach here.
00:00:54.000And so I have to say, I'm on the stream with Rush V and Loomer.
00:00:56.000I gotta say, she's a little bit, I don't know what it is.
00:01:16.000Everybody's freaking out again, and I don't know why.
00:01:21.000Just two weeks after, everybody was proven wrong about what President Trump presents as his position on DACA or on deal making.
00:01:31.000If 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.
00:01:41.000And then we got a catastrophic government shutdown for the Democrats.
00:01:45.000We got no deal, and now we have all the leverage.
00:01:47.000Well, 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.
00:02:06.000And 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.
00:02:42.000I know that's a silly, it's a goofy thing, but it changed today.
00:02:46.000Which is the Universal Association of Scientists?
00:02:49.000I 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.
00:03:04.000And they say the closer we are to midnight in this symbolic clock, the closer we are to the end of the world.
00:03:11.000And so that just moved up 30 seconds closer to the end of the world.
00:03:15.000We'll get into that and why that is a flawed.
00:03:20.000And what it says about foreign policy.
00:03:22.000They say that the world is less safe now.
00:03:25.000We're at a greater risk of nuclear war now than we were at the height of the Cold War in 1953.
00:03:30.000And I'll talk about why that's not true and why that is a misconception.
00:03:34.000Some other things, of course, to get into the XFL if we have time and a few other things.
00:03:41.000But we have to start with the DACA deal because I know a lot of people are worried.
00:03:51.000That 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.
00:04:08.000I read that headline in early September and I panicked.
00:04:33.000So this is what hardline immigration looks like, right?
00:04:37.000This is what MAGA is supposed to look like, right?
00:04:39.000And 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.
00:04:52.000And if it did happen, there was a reason behind it.
00:04:55.000The same thing happened in late December.
00:04:58.000There were talks about amnesty for the DACA recipients, talks about bringing DACA back.
00:05:02.000And everybody panicked, and I said, you know what?
00:05:04.000It's probably like it was in September.
00:05:06.000And then, of course, the most recent example, which this is like the introduction for every show now, is the DACA thing.
00:05:12.000But 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.
00:05:22.000And so, two weeks ago, it was the report from the White House.
00:05:27.000They laid out The blueprint for what the wall would look like.
00:05:30.000This was not last Friday or the Friday before.
00:06:13.000We saw that he was dangling the carrot in front of the Democrats.
00:06:16.000He was dangling the bait in front of them.
00:06:19.000In the next two days, you had the Goodlot bill come out on Wednesday, which was surprisingly very hardline on DACA.
00:06:25.000Then 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.
00:06:43.000And they lost the support of both any independents or moderates, but also their far left base.
00:06:48.000Now 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.
00:06:59.000Before we get into what is in the plan, this is the context for this.
00:07:02.000And that's why, at the very least, at the very least, Not asking for people to take my word for it.
00:07:11.000Not asking people to not be concerned or not panic or not be opposed to giving amnesty to 1.8 million people.
00:07:18.000That's a big ask, and that's if it's being asked.
00:07:21.000But simply, I ask people to understand the headlines and what is being said in the context of what has happened previously.
00:07:29.000Simply to say, who is talking about 1.8 million illegals getting amnesty?
00:07:35.000A White House aide on a conference call reported by The Hill.
00:07:38.000Okay, so we have several degrees of separation here between something that President Trump has said is his stated intention and what is being reported.
00:07:47.000When President Trump says we're going to give amnesty to 1.8 million people, I will start to look at it more seriously.
00:07:53.000But right now, we have a conference call where an aide described to a bipartisan panel of congressmen what a hypothetical deal might look like.
00:08:00.000They still have to write it, they still have to introduce it.
00:08:04.000And anyway, they're planning on introducing it on February the 5th.
00:08:08.000So 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.
00:08:22.000So right now you have 690,000 DACA recipients.
00:08:27.000There 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.
00:08:37.000But there are 1.8 million who are eligible for the program at large.
00:08:45.000So Stephen Miller is saying that the 1.8 million who, given their age, would be applicable, would be eligible to apply for it.
00:08:53.000They would get a pathway to citizenship in 10 to 12 years.
00:08:59.000So, in 10 to 12 years, these 1.8 million DACA eligible illegal immigrants are able then to apply for citizenship.
00:09:08.000In order to apply for citizenship, they cannot have been convicted of a crime at any point that they were here.
00:09:13.000There are education and work requirements which have not been unveiled.
00:09:17.000And also, there is a qualification that you have to be of good character.
00:09:22.000So, in 10 to 12 years, these 1.8 million DACA eligible illegal immigrants.
00:09:27.000They 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.
00:09:39.000So when it says 1.8 million illegals are getting amnesty, what that really means is probably about half of those.
00:09:47.000If 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.
00:09:56.000They don't really show you the fine print, which is that.
00:09:59.000You're going to have to have an education, a work requirement, a good character requirement, and no crimes.
00:10:04.000And 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.
00:10:12.000That's the first part of the deal that was stated in this conference call.
00:10:17.000The second part is that the president will get $25 billion for border security.
00:10:22.000And about $18 to $20 billion of that will go towards a wall.
00:10:26.000The other $5 billion will go towards border security, border patrol, ICE, funding judges.
00:10:32.000To have hearings on whether people are going to be deported or not.
00:10:36.000And so that's probably the biggest thing the $25 billion for a wall.
00:10:40.000And 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.
00:10:47.000And 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.
00:10:58.000Well, funding for the wall can be pulled before the wall is finished.
00:11:01.000Funding for the wall can be put other places.
00:11:03.000Meanwhile, amnesty happens and it's forever.
00:11:06.000Well, 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.
00:11:14.000And they point to people who are skeptical, point to the Simpson Mazzoli Act, which passed under Ronald Reagan.
00:11:20.000This was the infamous Amnesty Act by Reagan, which gave amnesty to 3 million illegal immigrants in exchange for funding to secure the border.
00:11:29.000Now, in the Simpson Mazzoli Act, it's important to note that that money was just discretionary money that was appropriated for border security.
00:11:37.000When 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.
00:11:50.000Of course it's not going to get where it was intended to go.
00:11:53.000So 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.
00:12:04.000With 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.
00:12:16.000In addition to that, the deal would have an end to chain migration and an end to the diversity visa lottery system.
00:12:21.000And 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.
00:12:38.000So, people talk about chain migration and diversity visa lottery like these are trivial things.
00:12:43.000We should not give any concessions for this.
00:12:45.000But you imagine that, you know, let's take a pretty pessimistic outlook.
00:12:49.000And 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.
00:13:02.000And that's a pretty bare bones minimum.
00:13:04.000A lot of people say it could be upwards of 700,000 or 800,000 illegal immigrants per year.
00:13:09.000But let's say it's something like 500,000 between all three of those things.
00:13:13.000If it's 500,000 immigrants per year, in 10 years, you prevent 5 million legal immigrants from coming into the country.
00:13:21.0005 million legal immigrants coming into the country in 10 years.
00:13:25.000So, 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.
00:13:37.000What you would get in return for that is 5 million less legal immigrants.
00:13:40.000And 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?
00:13:58.000And they'll be illegal, but they'll still be here.
00:14:01.000So do you want 6.8 million total people here?
00:14:04.000Or do you want a net reduction in immigration by at least 3.2 million?
00:14:08.000And that's given this deal, which I am not for.
00:14:11.000That's given this deal, which I am not for.
00:14:31.000I don't think that's a big enough reduction.
00:14:33.000If 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.
00:14:53.000That it is getting unveiled on February 5th.
00:14:57.000The government shuts down again on February 8th.
00:15:00.000So, 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.
00:15:08.000Many people might think, like, okay, the government shutdown's over.
00:15:15.000The 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.
00:15:25.000They 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.
00:15:40.000And so Chuck Schumer said, okay, I think it was partly to do with the polling.
00:15:44.000That 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.
00:15:54.000Well, 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.
00:16:08.000But it is set to be brought to the floor on February 5th, just three days before the government shutdown.
00:16:15.000And you have to get into The mindset of President Trump, who in this position, he holds all the cards.
00:16:23.000In the sense that three days out from the shutdown, the Democrats are facing catastrophe either way.
00:16:30.000Either they compromise on this, they give the wall, they give diversity visa, they give chain migration under this deal, and they get killed.
00:16:54.000You're obstructionists, and you're bad obstructionists.
00:16:56.000Not 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.
00:17:05.000They will get killed if they pass this deal.
00:17:07.000It 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.
00:17:18.000They wouldn't give him more than $3 billion for offense.
00:17:23.000Any way you look at it, if they pass this, it would be deadly for them.
00:17:28.000The 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.
00:17:37.000Who's blamed for the second government shutdown?
00:17:40.000Fortunately, Donald Trump has been framing the issue for a month.
00:17:44.000He has been solidly framing the issue alongside Mitch McConnell, alongside Paul Ryan, consistently in concert every day.
00:17:52.000To frame the Democrats as responsible for the shutdown, saying, Look, I wanted to make a deal.
00:18:00.000I tried to make a deal in mid January.
00:18:02.000I tried to make a deal in early February, and the Democrats won't do it.
00:18:05.000They're shutting down the government again.
00:18:07.000And 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.
00:18:20.000Think of what happens during the next government shutdown.
00:19:20.000They are either in a position where they have to make a deal, which would be so costly.
00:19:24.000They shut down the government until people start getting deported.
00:19:28.000And I don't know exactly how it's going to play out.
00:19:30.000There's a lot of moving parts here, a lot of variables.
00:19:32.000But 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.
00:20:22.000Why 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?
00:20:32.000So, in summary, we'll keep watching this.
00:20:42.000Just 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.
00:20:51.000It's very early, and we'll see what happens tomorrow.
00:20:53.000My 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.
00:21:03.000That is a soft guess of what will happen.
00:21:05.000There are a lot of other deals being made, so we'll see.
00:21:08.000But I imagine that you're going to see the same push and pull that you saw in the last week.
00:21:13.000And, 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.
00:22:01.000If he started doing executive orders, the next time you get a Democratic president, those are out.
00:22:05.000So, 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.
00:22:14.000The alternative would be he gets a very shit compromise.
00:22:18.000He 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.
00:23:43.000And people, I think, are a little bit divided on the foreign policy stuff in terms of North Korea.
00:23:48.000I hear a lot of right wing people that are not wild about what Trump is doing over there.
00:23:53.000But 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.
00:24:06.000And 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.
00:24:18.000We're closer to nuclear war than ever.
00:24:20.000And we should take no stock in this, for starters, to begin with.
00:24:25.000Whenever 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.
00:24:36.000This is not intended to be an empirical review of anything that's going on.
00:24:45.000When 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.
00:24:54.000What 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.
00:25:30.000But 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.
00:26:24.000But the question is interesting is the world more or less safe since Donald Trump got in office?
00:26:30.000And this is something that a lot of people were concerned about before the election, even conservatives.
00:26:34.000They said, really, this guy's going to have his finger on the button.
00:26:37.000This guy who seems so out of control, who seems so unstable, it's going to be a lot less safe.
00:26:42.000It's going to be a lot more catastrophic.
00:26:44.000And 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.
00:26:55.000I 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.
00:27:11.000And this gets to a fundamental difference in worldview.
00:27:15.000This really gets to a fault line between two different kinds of people who see the world in two different kinds of ways.
00:27:23.000The 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.
00:27:44.000We are, you know, look, we're not a threat.
00:27:51.000We don't want to upset the apple cart.
00:27:53.000Look, we're going to go to work on climate change and we just want to.
00:27:57.000Become a part of the rest of the world.
00:27:58.000I 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.
00:28:08.000It'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.
00:28:30.000And 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.
00:28:44.000Remember, he was a very judicious thinker.
00:29:28.000We don't all want this universal brotherhood of man.
00:29:30.000We don't want those things, and those things will never change.
00:29:33.000It will never change that we'll never get those things.
00:29:35.000We 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.
00:29:48.000We see that not born out of resistance and bullying and being mean.
00:29:54.000We 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.
00:30:03.000They're going to want to get as much land as they can, as much influence as they can.
00:30:08.000They're going to want to get as much power and money and things that they can.
00:30:12.000And it's not necessarily because of vice.
00:30:18.000But 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.
00:30:38.000Don't invade Crimea because he has contempt for democracy and he doesn't want peace between nations.
00:30:45.000He invades Crimea because he knows he can get away with it.
00:30:47.000And 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.
00:31:00.000And 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.
00:31:11.000When 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.
00:31:21.000When 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.
00:31:38.000So, 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.
00:32:22.000Calculations about their national security based on their interests.
00:32:26.000And 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.
00:32:42.000And we understand what North Korea wants and what they're willing to do to secure it.
00:32:46.000And 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.
00:32:58.000So, in the sense that now North Korea is making kind of this overture to South Korea, they're having these bilateral talks.
00:33:04.000North Korea understands that the president will not accept a nuclear North Korea.
00:33:08.000And they know that they do not want to die.
00:33:13.000They know that they can inflict a lot of pain on us.
00:33:15.000But 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.
00:33:28.000I 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.
00:33:36.000And so, in that sense, the world has gotten safer because communication has gotten sharper.
00:33:46.000The 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.
00:33:57.000I 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.
00:34:06.000And 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.
00:34:17.000And so a very interesting thing there.
00:34:19.000It's a little bit of a deep dive, but I see this.
00:34:21.000I see a lot of people panic, and it is a tool to make people panic.
00:34:27.000Propagandizing attempt to get people to wig out about climate change.
00:34:30.000You know, people have this existential fear of apocalypse and catastrophe.
00:34:35.000And, 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.
00:34:42.000But I think it's important to understand the realities here of this situation.
00:34:46.000We're in much better hands with somebody like President Trump than we are with somebody like Barack Obama because President Trump understands the limitations.
00:34:56.000And when you don't understand the limitations, it leads you to folly.
00:34:59.000When you reach beyond your grasp, it leads to folly.
00:35:02.000You 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.
00:35:10.000Donald Trump would say, what Saddam Hussein is doing is not good, it's very deadly, it's very problematic.
00:35:26.000It'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,
00:35:59.000And 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.
00:36:07.000And so he would say, I'm not going to invade Iraq.
00:36:12.000They'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.
00:36:20.000The George W. Bush says, Oh, to hell with that.
00:36:23.000The cowboy and George W. Bush are the neoconservatives behind him, the ideological people behind him.
00:36:52.000That 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.
00:37:03.000And 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.
00:37:11.000Why can't that happen in the Middle East?
00:37:13.000And 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.
00:37:21.000We're the good guys and they're the bad guys.
00:37:24.000And we're going to go in and we're just going to knock them down.
00:37:34.000We 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.
00:37:44.000They'll greet us as liberators and we'll move towards the new world order, in the words of his father.
00:37:51.000And of course, when he tried to overstep, when he overreached the limitations of the region and what was possible.
00:37:58.000And 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.
00:38:11.000And so that's why we have to understand limitations.
00:38:13.000That's why we're in much better hands here.
00:38:15.000Somebody who has an understanding, who is a realist and not an idealist, somebody who is a Bismarckian, not a Wilsonian.
00:38:22.000That's what it means to be a conservative.
00:38:24.000And so, an interesting question, and one I think people will benefit from hearing the answer.
00:38:29.000The 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?
00:38:37.000I got to tell you, the XFL stuff, because we only have about four minutes before we'll start taking your super chats.
00:38:44.000I 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.
00:38:56.000He 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.
00:39:07.000You know, it was a professional wrestling company that tried to do extreme football, and it went bankrupt pretty quickly.
00:39:13.000Well, now they're relaunching it in 2020, and the rules are.
00:40:24.000Even people that didn't watch football would be in attendance.
00:40:26.000And 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.
00:40:36.000And it's a statement, I think, on what is possible here the counterculture that is possible and the potential that this has.
00:41:01.000Think about the power, the influence that is lost by certain people.
00:41:07.000Think about the influence that is lost by the people who control ESPN or the NFL, the corporate crony interests that control those organizations.
00:41:16.000Once that monopoly loses its grip, think about what is opened up, how much the playing field opens up once the NFL is challenged.
00:41:24.000And it doesn't even have to be replaced, it doesn't have to fail, it doesn't have to go bankrupt.
00:41:29.000But 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.
00:41:40.000And here's the beauty of it apolitical, not political.
00:42:37.000People might not be willing to listen to it.
00:42:39.000Right 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.
00:42:53.000And so it's a small thing, it might be a silly thing.
00:42:59.000I 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.
00:43:07.000This should give a lot of people a lot of hope as to what is possible.
00:43:13.000And 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.
00:43:30.000So 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.
00:43:39.000It happens very, very slowly, and then it happens suddenly.
00:43:43.000Slowly, you start to see the resistance build up in Poland with Lech Waleza and Solidarity.
00:43:47.000Slowly, you start to see a little bit of resistance.
00:43:50.000You see Glasnost, you see Perestroika, and then one day the Berlin Wall comes down.
00:43:55.000And then one day there's tanks driving down the streets in Moscow, and there's a constitutional crisis, you know?
00:44:54.000Because 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.
00:46:05.000I 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.
00:46:22.000And that may sound condescending or patronizing, but I think it's only condescending or patronizing.
00:46:28.000If 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.
00:46:45.000You 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.
00:47:02.000If 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.
00:47:10.000Well, who really thinks women are inferior there, right?
00:48:36.000You 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.
00:48:47.000They hear a more Christian message, and maybe they come over to my side.
00:48:59.000So you can't hold these things against these people totally.
00:49:02.000And people say, Nick, aren't you a hypocrite because of the Trad Thought thing?
00:49:06.000Well, I never said I wouldn't work with any of those people.
00:49:08.000Tara McCarthy came to me and said she wouldn't work with me.
00:49:11.000I said I'd be happy to have you on the show.
00:49:13.000I said I'd be happy to have you on the show last week.
00:49:17.000I'd be happy to work with these people.
00:49:18.000It's them, it's they that put the free speech restrictions on me.
00:49:21.000I'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.
00:49:34.000Wouldn't like him, but I'd still have him on the show for a conversation.
00:49:39.000That's what it has to be about, in my estimation.
00:49:42.000If 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.
00:49:50.000But I understand why you feel that way.
00:52:13.000But 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.
00:52:22.000The lighting up of the switchboards, you know, people put this stuff out there with the black pilling.
00:52:27.000They say, light up the, call the phones.
00:53:28.000I 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.
00:53:38.000Because at America First Media, don't get me wrong, James and Matt, they're young, they're hip.
00:53:45.000We share the same memes, we have similar experiences.
00:53:49.000But 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.
00:53:55.000And 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.
00:54:04.000Understand then and come to appreciate what it's like to work alongside good people.
00:54:08.000And 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.
00:54:25.000I mean, really, they were always there and on top of it, trying to make the show better.
00:56:14.000What do you mean by the counter arguments to the idea that we can maintain apolitical institutions against the left?
00:56:21.000I think we can simply because there's an appetite for that.
00:56:25.000I understand the counter arguments, perhaps, but I think they've gone so far, and I think people are so tired of partisanship.
00:56:33.000I think in many ways Trump was the epitomization of that because Trump was not a partisan.
00:56:36.000You know, Trump was not out there like Ted Cruz, ideological, super far right, super far right conservative.
00:56:44.000He wasn't out there in the traditional right wing partisan sense, and he wasn't a lefty kind of a guy.
00:56:49.000He 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.
00:56:58.000He 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.
00:57:04.000And I think that is symptomatic of the mood in the country, which is very sick of.
00:57:09.000I think people can resonate, or that resonates with a lot of people.
00:57:14.000And last but not least, we have Awe Maria.
00:57:16.000What do you think of the Latin Rite and Vatican II?
00:57:19.000Well, I think the Latin Rite is very important, and I think Vatican II was kind of a disaster.
00:57:25.000Vatican II, in many ways, was foreshadowed by Pope Pius X, who said that there were elements in the church who had infiltrated this.
00:57:35.000Certainly, this was forecasted by many prominent Catholics, very public Catholics.
00:57:40.000Public 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.
00:57:51.000Many, 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.
00:58:02.000It 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.
00:58:17.000And I don't know what's going on here.
00:58:18.000I guess something's going on with my stream because we keep seeing these weird numbers in our numbers.
00:58:37.000But that's going to do it for us here on the show tonight.
00:58:39.000Remember, 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.
00:58:53.000It gets you a special role in the Discord and priority on the call in shows.
00:58:58.000And 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.