Candace Owens says she has information that proves Turning Point USA has betrayed Charlie Kirk. What does that really mean, betrayed? Well, she's implied that there are multinational organizations involved in the assassination of Charlie Kirk, including Israelis, the French Foreign Legion, and the CIA.
00:02:32.000In a viral post on X, Candace Owens says she is convinced she has received information that she believes proves Turning Point USA has betrayed Charlie Kirk.
00:02:45.000Well, she's implied that there's multinational organizations involved in the assassination.
00:02:49.000There's Israelis, the French Foreign Legion.
00:02:52.000And with this latest post, the implication a lot of people took away is that they were involved in some way in the murder of Charlie Kirk, which, considering what we've seen already over the past couple of months, most people just believe that's the insinuation she's been desperately trying to make, which is really funny because so many people come out and go, she never said that.
00:03:16.000The post that she's made, the claims that she's making, in another claim, I believe this was today's episode, she said that one of the individuals, a high-ranking individual at Turning Point, lost millions of dollars when they didn't do a deal with Bibi Netanyahu.
00:03:44.000Well, I'll save the overt commentary for the show, but the insinuation that you're seeing across X, the implication she's making, they were involved in the murder of Charlie Kirk, which I'm just gonna say outright, I think is silly, but we'll talk about that.
00:03:57.000And there's a bunch of actually important news.
00:03:59.000The Washington Post claimed that Hegseth, Secretary of War, ordered the killing of survivors of a drone strike as they were clinging to a boat for dear life.
00:04:09.000And the New York Times said that's never happened.
00:04:11.000They actually checked with five different sources independent of each other.
00:04:15.000And they all said Hegseth just gave an order to strike the boats and left.
00:04:20.000Because they are now claiming in the press formally that the actions taken by Trump's administration are illegal and the orders given are illegal.
00:04:30.000At the same time, Mark Kelly, Alyssa Lotkin, and many of the Democrats have told the military to defy illegal orders.
00:04:36.000This is why they are putting out these lies.
00:05:26.000Call the professionals at Tax Network USA.
00:05:28.000The tax lawyers and enrollment agents are experts in powerful programs that may even help you eliminate your tax debt.
00:05:35.000Tax Network USA is A-plus rated and has saved over $1 billion for their clients.
00:05:40.000Whether you owe a few thousand or a few million, they can help you.
00:05:44.000With one phone call, you can start the process of stopping the threatening demand letters, stopping aggressive collections and resolving your tax matter once and for all, but you must act now while you still have options.
00:05:54.000For a free consultation, call 1-800-958-1000 or visit tnusa.com slash Tim.
00:06:02.000Shout out to Tax Network USA for sponsoring the show.
00:06:08.000Have you ever wanted to drink pool water?
00:06:10.000If you have, there's something wrong with you.
00:06:11.000But if you want to drink our pool water, you can go to casbrew.com and pick up a 12-pack of 12-ounce glass bottles of cool, crisp, refreshing Artesian pool water, Artesian, whatever.
00:06:25.000We only had about 800 cases that we actually made, and there's 275 left.
00:06:29.000So if you would like to have bottles of these in your home, shipping can actually be a little expensive.
00:06:46.000Check out Casbrew.com and you can pick up our pool water as well as, I don't know, we got Mary's Ghost Blend and we've got a bunch of different coffees and they're all delicious.
00:06:54.000Wait till you see what we've got coming out for Valentine's Day.
00:07:09.000Well, I'm currently in the Virginia House of Delegates, although I'm not seeking re-election, which given the last election results, probably a good move.
00:07:17.000But yeah, no, host of Making the Argument and the Wine Minutes and other snarky mug compilations on social media.
00:07:24.000Radan, well, it's always great to have you.
00:07:56.000It's kind of a meetup game, I guess, and it's going to be a lot of fun.
00:07:58.000We didn't know if we wanted to announce that we were going to be having this game, but I figure, hey, show up and let's see if we can pack this poker room.
00:08:05.000But let's get into the story here from Raw Story.
00:08:24.000She is not just implying that they were involved in the murder of Charlie Kirk, but that everybody should get a refund.
00:08:31.000And she's trying to get them to pull their donations.
00:08:34.000She tweets, I received information last night that put the final pieces together for me.
00:08:39.000I now can say with full confidence that I believe Charlie Kirk was betrayed by the leadership of Turning Point USA and some of the very people who eulogized him on stage.
00:08:47.000Yes, I will be naming names and providing evidence for my claims.
00:08:50.000And I'm making a personal plea to every well-meaning person who donated to this Godforsaken organization to request a refund.
00:08:58.000You were lied to, and leadership knew.
00:09:00.000Oh boy, Candace is doing everything she can to destroy Turning Point USA.
00:09:12.000Candace Owens just said a close family friend of Andrew Colvett allegedly reached out to her and said that Andrew told them he lost out of millions when Charlie rejected the deal with Benjamin Netanyahu earlier this year.
00:09:22.000Let me play the clip for you from her show.
00:09:51.000Charlie Kirk was assassinated, but moreover, they had mentioned that specifically Andrew had told them that when Charlie said no to BB, he lost out on millions.
00:10:05.000Now, I'm going to say allegedly because this is a tip, but I have that tip in writing.
00:10:39.000Obviously, it wouldn't be on this year's taxes.
00:10:42.000You're not going to find those on this year's taxes, but they would be on next year's, but we can ask now.
00:10:48.000You know, I was having a conversation with a friend of mine, and we were talking about how the average reading level in the United States is around like seventh grade.
00:10:58.000And I think she first had the eighth grade, and I was like, you know, this is funny because this just came up on Tim Castillo the other night.
00:11:03.000I think it's actually around seventh grade.
00:11:04.000And then I was like, I double check because we pulled up the data.
00:11:07.000And it actually ranges from between fifth to eighth grade.
00:11:10.000So it's like sixth, seventh grade reading level.
00:11:13.000And if I don't think Candace is stupid, I think she's actually super intelligent.
00:11:31.000Because the way she just phrased all of that to imply that there was some illicit deal with Andrew Colvett and Israel, it's exactly what she's been doing.
00:11:40.000And I'm going to say this much to the, I suppose it'll sound elitist and insulting, but the people of low reading comprehension who can't parse through the manipulations, they believe this.
00:11:53.000Let me, I said, I was sitting, I was, I was at the poker room over the weekend, and there were these young guys who were like, Did you hear that Candace is in hiding now because Israel and like they're trying to kill her over this Charlie stuff?
00:12:07.000And I said, You mean how she posted her show is off the air for the week because it was Thanksgiving?
00:12:11.000And they were like, She didn't say that.
00:12:12.000I'm like, Yeah, she didn't say anything, it was vague.
00:12:14.000That's what she does: vagaries so that you connect the dots and you can believe whatever it is you want to believe without her actually having said anything.
00:12:23.000So, let me put it like this: if Andrew Colvett is working at a nonprofit, or literally anybody works at a nonprofit, often you get commissions on it's called development.
00:12:31.000If you bring in a large donor, you will get a commission that is completely normal at nonprofits.
00:12:38.000People may say, I think it's wrong that you get a commission on donations, but nonprofits are the same as any other business.
00:12:45.000So, executive directors at nonprofits at big ones are going to make million-dollar salaries.
00:12:49.000And it is, I honestly think it's stupid that people get mad about this because if you want CEO-level talent, you have to pay CEO-level wages.
00:12:57.000Usually, it's not going to be identical.
00:12:59.000You know, I think Charlie was getting, I think they say he was around a million bucks between the four between four different nonprofits, and he was worth substantially more than that.
00:13:06.000His show alone was probably bringing way more anyway.
00:13:09.000But if Colvet or literally anybody was organizing some kind of deal, be it with Netanyahu or anyone else, now you can argue that in and of itself is wrong, but getting a commission on a donation is actually fairly routine for big organizations, especially when someone is working with they call it development.
00:13:26.000So, the insinuation now is that Turning Point USA killed Charlie.
00:13:30.000But the sledgehammer, of course, is when she says everybody should request a refund from this organization.
00:13:36.000Now, obviously, y'all know that we have the minorest of drama issues with Turning Point.
00:13:43.000We're not going to be there at Amfest, but it is what it is.
00:13:47.000I talk to these guys relatively often, so whatever.
00:13:51.000But the idea that you would try to destroy them and get everybody to pull their donations using the insinuation they murdered Charlie Kirk is evil.
00:14:03.000My whole thing with this, because I get asked about what do you think about what Candace said, or what's like, look, I got no problem with people that want to question the official narrative.
00:14:21.000What I don't understand, though, and I worded it to someone this way once.
00:14:25.000I said, if I spent my entire life building an organization that I truly believed in, and I built a life with my wife who I absolutely loved, and somebody came out and started making accusations that both the organization that I built and dedicated my life to and the woman I dedicated my life to were somehow complicit in my murder.
00:14:45.000I would hope, I would hope that they had real receipts before they were willing to put my wife or my organization, my life's work on the line for that.
00:14:58.000Again, you can ask all you want, but I would hope before people would believe that, you would actually be bringing something fairly concrete.
00:15:05.000Has Candace and I'd hope that, well, I can only imagine that if/slash when I die, I got a lot of text messages with people that can be made to sound.
00:15:15.000You know, I wonder if I could like, you could take any text message from me to anybody else and make it sound crazy.
00:15:21.000Let me see if I can find especially Tebbs.
00:15:24.000Well, hold on, I'm grabbing Phil over here.
00:17:11.000Like from top to bottom, all of the stuff that's that all of the people talking about Charlie's murder, post-Charlie's murder, it all just seems like sharks in the water looking to pick up their little bit of attention they can get.
00:17:29.000I have to say this, but I'm not going to say who told me it.
00:17:32.000But this issue, of course, comes up in these private circles.
00:17:36.000I get asked by a lot of people I meet who know who I am.
00:17:39.000The first thing they ask me about is Candace and what she said about Turning Point.
00:17:42.000And I have to be like, let's just stop and analyze what she said.
00:17:47.000But someone today was talking to me about it and they were just like, you know, Candace has made a lot of insinuations.
00:17:54.000And this latest one with like Andrew Colvette losing millions of dollars, like the implication that he's going after Charlie or whatever.
00:18:00.000And then this person I'm talking to goes like, you know, he's not a chess player.
00:18:07.000And that's like the nicest way of saying, with all due respect to Colvette, that he, he doesn't have the capability to plot something of this.
00:18:15.000I'm not trying to be a dick, but like the insinuation that their spokesperson had the capability to map out this plan involving the French Foreign Legion and his Israeli spies and like getting security pulled from the roof.
00:18:57.000Like security companies don't just be like, we know there's roof access and we're not going to put an old lady knitting in front of the door.
00:19:02.000Like you have an old lady knitting in front of the door and Charlie's alive.
00:19:06.000I mean, and, you know, Occam's razor, Hanlon's razor, it's just a very, very awful security company.
00:19:11.000But to then go and insinuate that the people who are made rich by Charlie turned on him, I, you know, the comments that I made before that got them upset with me was that I said there are people at Turning Point that fear they can't make it without Charlie.
00:19:26.000The people at Turning Point, like they all, they all stood to make significantly more money with Charlie at the helm than after Charlie's passed away.
00:19:36.000But who, real quick, but that's correct.
00:19:38.000Now, who stands to make the most money from this story?
00:19:42.000Currently, it seems like Candace Owens.
00:22:22.000Are you providing the commentary they're asking for?
00:22:25.000Or you can do what Candace does and show old text mentions when Met 2018.
00:22:29.000You can make vague insinuations that they can't sue you over and then be vague enough to where people think there's a grand conspiracy and do a true crime drama where you accuse the French first lady of having a dong.
00:22:39.000And you will get millions of views and you will make lots of money for which now I think it's, I don't know, a fortune is saying she makes around 10 million a year.
00:23:39.000So when I see the things she's saying and I know these techniques and manipulation, like when she said, I'll be off the air this week as an update, the White House confirmed receipt of the assassination plot against me.
00:23:50.000It's manipulative language intentionally to trick people into thinking she's going into hiding because of an assassination plot.
00:23:54.000And I saw an account today that's following all this and they say, well, the White House has confirmed the threat.
00:24:00.000No, the White House confirmed receipt of the threat.
00:24:18.000But my issue comes down to, okay, fine.
00:24:21.000Once again, if you're going to make this sort of accusations, if it were me, if you were making these accusations about people I loved, I would want more evidence than what you're presenting.
00:24:30.000The other thing that I don't understand is this.
00:24:31.000If you honestly believe that you have uncovered something that could potentially blow the lid off of one of the most consequential conspiracies, and I don't say conspiracy pejoratively, I mean the actual word and what the word means.
00:24:44.000Okay, look, I've done a little intel analysis in my life where I was tracking terror cells.
00:24:49.000My father was a homicide detective, and he will tell you that if you really do have all of these sources that are providing you information, every time you go out there and publicly talk about private sources close to people that are doing it, you essentially destroy that source's ability to give you future information because now they lose access and placement as the organizations that you're investigating shut down.
00:25:11.000For anybody that is, again, just genuinely interested in this, and, you know, again, there's plenty to be interested in.
00:25:19.000If your goal is really to get to the truth, to the bottom of what happened, what really happened with Charlie, if that is, why would you go about doing it this way as an investigation?
00:25:30.000I know why you would do it as a content creator.
00:25:33.000I don't know why you would do it as someone that's trying to get to the bottom of, again, a horrific crime.
00:26:10.000It's a true crime drama and it plays really, really well among women.
00:26:15.000And I think that's the play she's making.
00:26:17.000But let's jump to the story from Fortune.
00:26:19.000Hey, a lot of big news about Candace inside the economics of Candace Owens' media empire and the Macron lawsuit threatening to unravel it.
00:26:27.000Oh boy, let's talk about nitty-gritty inside stuff because I got information.
00:26:31.000So they say five years ago, Candace Owens was a mid-tier political operative working for Charlie Kirk's Turning Point USA.
00:26:36.000Now she's a globally famous conservative firebrand with one of the fastest growing independent media platforms in the U.S., raking in cash through controversy.
00:26:43.000But the same contrarian playbook that launched her solo career now threatens the media empire she built.
00:26:47.000Her company generates up to $10 million in revenues per year, according to an analysis by Fortune, implying that the company's valuation would be multiples of that.
00:26:56.000I would actually estimate, it's a broad estimation, but I think $10 million is low.
00:27:03.000$10 million makes sense if all she is doing is sponsor spots.
00:27:07.000But if she's doing anything else outside of that.
00:27:10.000So if you want to talk about just her podcast, perhaps.
00:27:14.000I guess I'll say this because I said it before, but we do more than that.
00:27:17.000And, you know, I guess the difference is I do like five different shows.
00:27:21.000So it's more granular where she has one big show.
00:27:32.000Revenues are down, although her show seems to be doing very well.
00:27:36.000They're now talking about this massive lawsuit.
00:27:38.000The conservative podcaster and provocateur is facing a high-stakes defamation lawsuit filed by French President Emmanuel Macron and Bridget Macron, the first lady.
00:27:46.000The suit is set to test whether the controversy as currency ouvre that made, is that how you pronounce that?
00:27:54.000That made Owens rich and gave her a media brand that reaches tens of millions of people can survive what experts say will be an immensely costly legal battle.
00:28:01.000The 219-page complaint filed in Delaware Superior Court in July of 2025 accuses Owens of orchestrating a campaign of global humiliation by promoting the conspiracy theory that Bridget McCrone was born male.
00:28:11.000The plaintiff's weapon of choice, Claire Locke, the firm that has extracted a record-shattering $787.5 million settlement from Fox News on behalf of Dominion, the largest media defamation payout in American history, the Macron's vehemently deny Owens' allegations.
00:28:28.000Interestingly, the suit alleges that spreading false information is essentially Owens' business model.
00:28:33.000The complaint names three defendants, Candace Owens personally, Candace Owens LLC, her Delaware company, and Georgetown Inc., presumably named after her husband, George Farmer, who is directly involved in the business and operates her website and podcast distribution.
00:28:45.000In naming all three parties, the suit takes aim not only at Owens personally, but also her entire known business infrastructure.
00:29:25.000The issue is it's kind of a bold, ridiculous, and hard-to-prove thing that is going to land on defamation per se, which is it is so humiliating and damning because it's not just that Bridget Macron is a man, but apparently Candace has also insinuated that it's a pedophilic network or something, or at least that's what people are posting online saying it's not just about this.
00:30:12.000They believe that, you know, there's a viral clip I watched, the Thomas Crown affair, where Pierce Brazn signs the contract and then they start busting out laughing, like, ha we got you.
00:30:22.000And then he gets up and says, now explain to your board why you paid 30 million more than everyone else offered.
00:30:28.000But the thing is, if you ever signed a contract and then as soon as you signed it, the guy started laughing, saying they got you, that contract is not going to be binding.
00:30:36.000You're not going to go into a court and the judge is going to be like, was there something in the contract you didn't read?
00:30:40.000And be like, yeah, we absolutely did not agree that I'd signed over power of attorney.
00:30:43.000The judge is going to be like, okay, contract is out.
00:30:50.000When the French government says we want to stop Candace, I imagine what happens is, you know, Candace has claimed Trump called her and told her, like, you know, maybe you got to back off the story or whatever.
00:31:03.000If the Macron's were actually trying to stop Candace, likely, I think the most likely scenario is they call the State Department and they say, this is causing us problems in our country and we don't want these tensions.
00:31:14.000And the State Department says, what can we do about it?
00:31:17.000And then all that needs to happen is Emmanuel Macron says, listen, we are telling you to make it stop however you can.
00:31:24.000And if you don't, there's going to be problems.
00:31:29.000So it's not like France can control what the United States does, but the U.S. has to negotiate with France, has to cut deals with France, has to work with France and NATO, and they don't want problems.
00:32:04.000Some people would even say she's easy on the eyes.
00:32:06.000She's also a good DEI commentator for right-wingers to put on this sort of pedestal.
00:32:13.000And, you know, it's really unfortunate that she's really willing to peddle bullshit and rumors and spin up fake narratives to try to get clicks.
00:32:22.000It seems it's clear to me that she has an axe to grind.
00:32:53.000And he's, I believe, allegedly the former CEO of Parlor.
00:32:56.000So, you know, the amount of attention that this is giving her, you know, she knew that this, I don't know if she believes what she's alleging about Bridget McCrone, but I think she does know that it'll bring her a ton of attention.
00:33:07.000It's a transvestigation of obviously like, you know, a very prominent woman, a prominent European leader's wife.
00:33:15.000Do you have evidence that she's a woman?
00:33:17.000The evidence was that, or the evidence that she was a man was from two French bloggers or something, and they just had a couple of pictures of them, of her looking like a man allegedly.
00:33:26.000But I think as far as the media savviness goes, though, if you're trying to get your name out there, you want a lot of to put a lot of bullshit out there and then have them get mad at you and sue you because like this is the Streisand effect at hand.
00:33:38.000And then I think there's also to say something to say about all the other bullshit she peddles because she's been pushing a lot of dumb stuff for a while.
00:34:00.000She'll get like messages or alleged tips and just, I don't know, won't vet them at all.
00:34:04.000For example, earlier when she said something about like a text message about Andrew Colve allegedly getting money, it's just like, yeah, somebody texted me this.
00:34:16.000I want her number so I can text her about the ice wall.
00:34:18.000Hey, hey, can you text me right now that you think Candace works for Israel so that I can then say on the air, I just received a tip that Candace works for Israel.
00:34:25.000And it's just like some people are dumb enough where the rhetoric, the way she phrases things could come off like to an unmedia savvy person, like, oh, this is convincing.
00:34:34.000This is basic manipulative rhetoric, social engineering, where you say things so that the other person makes an assumption and then you can't be held liable for it.
00:34:45.000And you always have plausible deniability.
00:34:50.000That's why everyone keeps pointing out she's making insinuations and then people go, she never said that.
00:34:56.000No, but she said 80 things where the Sudoku puzzle concludes.
00:35:02.000I wish at some point people would think about this from the standpoint of, okay, if somebody was saying this about you, would you think to yourself, oh, well, they didn't say me.
00:35:12.000Or would you think they're obviously implying me?
00:35:15.000And all I want from this, especially because there's a lot of conservatives watching this, is, do we still believe in like standards of truth?
00:35:22.000Do we still believe in like objective standards of truth?
00:35:47.000And that's how she builds mass audience by being correct to everybody because she's actually not saying anything specific.
00:35:53.000She's letting people fill in the gaps of what they want to believe.
00:35:57.000What I do want to say real quick, though, you know, if I were to say Bridget McCrone's a hog, okay, I can't be sued by the French government for that.
00:36:06.000But when you say that Bridget McCrone's a man, you're getting into defamation per se territory where you're accusing someone of some kind of, it's something disgusting and humiliating, which is inherently in and of itself detrimental to you, your life, or whatever.
00:36:22.000I think she's going to get Alex Jones, but I think they're going to come and they're going to take everything from her.
00:36:28.000I can't understand what she thinks the long-term play is.
00:36:53.000I don't know how passionate Kier Starmer is about the peerage in the UK.
00:37:00.000Wouldn't it be really funny if just the UK and France go to war for the first time in like 800 years because Candace called Bridget McCrone a man?
00:37:08.000I think one of the reasons why this is so important.
00:37:13.000I think the reason why this is so important is because this actually, I think like conspiracy, driving conspiracies really drives, draws away from people dealing with like legitimate politics that they could have the potential to influence.
00:37:25.000So instead of learning about your local congressperson or what they're doing in the House and Senate or what's going on in the Supreme Court, no, we're paying attention to whether or not Bridget McCrone has a cock or whether or not Charlie Kirk was murdered by Israel.
00:37:36.000Although baselessly, though, that's the problem.
00:37:45.000I've actually fought not that long ago.
00:37:47.000But to what you were saying, Elad, this is the point about declining viewership and ad rates.
00:37:56.000Maybe it's fair to say that Candace actually does 10 million because no advertiser really wants to be on a show about Bridget McCrone having a dong.
00:38:03.000Advertisers want to be on normal content.
00:38:10.000And, you know, perhaps when she makes this kind of weird content, she gets more views.
00:38:14.000She does make more money than the average political commentator, but the CPMs are actually still very low.
00:38:20.000The thing that has always struck me about this, I remember when Candace first started making these claims.
00:38:24.000And I was like, okay, you know, like, look, I remember a time where I watched a lot of things Candace was doing and appreciated her commentary and appreciated her contributions to the conservative movement.
00:38:35.000If she's very convinced, I just would like to see substantial evidence to back it up.
00:38:40.000And again, I had really thought, I had really thought that the majority of sympathy in this entire case was going to be for Erica.
00:38:48.000And what has shocked me is I feel like it isn't.
00:38:54.000And again, if you're going to imply, if you're going to insinuate that Erica, if she wasn't directly involved, knew something about it, let it go is hiding truth or whatever it is.
00:39:07.000Just please show me something significant to justify that.
00:39:10.000Because again, I go back to, I think about this from my perspective.
00:39:14.000If somebody did this to my wife after I was gone, I would be furious unless they could actually produce hard evidence.
00:39:21.000The last thing I'll say on this before we go to the next story is she will never be sued by turning point.
00:39:26.000Turning Point USA, oh boy, do they have grounds to sue Candace Owens, but they're not going to.
00:39:32.000They're not going to because the law doesn't work to protect you or any meaningful way.
00:39:38.000Like I've illustrated before that we had someone commit a crime on our property and then threaten us.
00:39:43.000And then they threatened to use the legal process through this criminal charge, almost like it was intentional, to exploit it and gain access to private information and other information.
00:39:53.000And they made the argument that in order for our defense, we need access to private information.
00:39:57.000And we were like, okay, drop the charges then.
00:40:01.000And so here's what happens: if Turning Point were to sue Candace Owens, there would be depositions and discovery.
00:40:07.000And they'd be required to turn over certain communications, which I'd imagine are going to be embarrassing.
00:40:14.000And depending on the context, they can be incriminating over certain issues.
00:40:19.000I'm not saying in the killing of Charlie Kirk or anything like that, but there's going to be conversations about donors, things that she will then use on her show.
00:42:08.000I thought it's, you know, it's actually her own words that if you criticize Israel, you'll get suspended, banned, and censored, but not her.
00:42:14.000Why is it that the person who claims that Charlie was betrayed is actually the one trying to destroy his legacy and the company that he built?
00:42:20.000Turning point, you know, Andrew Colvette and Erica and the rest, you know, Tyler Boyer and the rest of them at Turning Point are fighting as hard as they can to keep Turning Point alive.
00:42:36.000Obviously, we're not going to be there.
00:42:37.000So, you know, I'm not, it's not like I've got, I'm happy with the direction it's going, but she's actively trying to destroy Charlie Kirk's legacy.
00:42:46.000So the question is: who really betrayed Charlie Kirk?
00:42:49.000Because if Charlie were still around, like, if Charlie could speak, do you think he'd be like, oh, gee, thanks, Candace.
00:42:55.000Thank you for telling all the donors to abandon Turning Point USA.
00:42:57.000Well, here's my, here's my, I'll put it differently.
00:43:02.000Candace Owens, based off of what she's done here and what she's been, you know, putting out there, Candace Owens, there's only one of two possible options.
00:43:11.000She is either Charlie Kirk's greatest friend who stood up to everybody when they called her a liar or they called her psycho, that she was, she is either that or she is a horrible betraying villain in this story.
00:43:42.000I feel like if you have a how you feel about one particular issue really prescribes how you, whether or not you think she is a villain or not.
00:43:49.000I don't even need to say the issue, but you could tell she's laser-focused on it and she'll drag it into everything else.
00:43:55.000So it really begs the question because she used to have a great relationship with the Daily Wire and Ben Shapiro, and then that had to figure out for one reason or another.
00:44:04.000And the same thing with Turning Point.
00:44:05.000She hasn't been to MFest for years, as I understand.
00:44:07.000She hasn't been a speaker or collaborating with Turning Point for years before this happened.
00:44:12.000You have to wonder, you know, what made that fall through?
00:45:31.000If you like Charlie Kirk and the work that he did, telling everyone to pull their donations is simply to destroy the organization.
00:45:38.000By all means, you can be angry with Colvette and maybe Erica's leadership, whatever you might think.
00:45:44.000Maybe you think someone else should come in and run it.
00:45:46.000But the response should be: donors should all email and ask for new leadership, not destroy it and pull all your money out, which burns Charlie's legacy to the ground.
00:45:58.000I think if there's anyone who betrayed Charlie Kirk, it is Candace Owens, and she has proven it time and time again.
00:46:03.000Well, like you said, it would be one thing if you said, Here's all the evidence, donors pull your money.
00:47:40.000He told me that Shane Smith, the CEO, held a meeting.
00:47:45.000They had been having conversations throughout the year that they were working on getting a cable channel and it was their big dream to get a cable channel.
00:47:52.000And everyone makes an assumption when you hear that, which is what, that he has to move to Canada?
00:47:58.000No, When someone says, I want to start a cable channel, what do you immediately think?
00:51:28.000I went over to the Franklin's page on X and they were talking about how they're really big on inclusivity and the whole deal, but then they shut off their comments to only people that they allow you to like, oh, you're not that inclusive.
00:51:41.000A lot of people are talking, or she's talking about how it's evil or how it's immoral and whatever.
00:51:46.000And Sabrina Carpenter has used a lot of what people would consider sacrilegious imagery and stuff.
00:51:54.000It's a little pot calling the kettle black.
00:51:57.000She doesn't like the White House used it when it comes to enforcing immigration law, but she's perfectly comfortable with insulting Christians and get a rise out of people.
00:55:56.000Like, look, if the White House just replied, if the White House reply with your mom, everybody would be like, boy, you know, it would have been a much better reply.
00:56:07.000Look, I think they like this as a distraction.
00:56:09.000I think posting memes and like Sabrina Carpenter's response got more millions of impressions than anything else I think that the White House put out today.
00:56:17.000So I think they utilize this as a good distraction when they need one.
00:56:23.000The DHS and White House Twitter account runners probably need a raise.
00:56:27.000And that's that new frontier that they fight on online, the meme wars.
00:56:32.000Yeah, I mean, look, it does matter, right?
00:56:34.000I mean, there is an argument to be made that Donald Trump got memed into the White House in 2016.
00:56:40.000All the people online that were constantly flooding social media and stuff with pro-Donald Trump memes really did have an effect on popular culture and the way that people perceived Donald Trump.
00:56:50.000You know, it's funny is were you at the Pentagon today, Elad?
00:57:18.000And I was like, I filled out a press application so I can go to the Pentagon one time to do a podcast one time because sometimes people interview other people.
00:57:26.000Like it is crazy that the perception they created in the press over the Pentagon thing is that we were all signing a loyalty pledge to the president when I was literally like, hey, guys, why don't we try and do, why don't we try and book Pete Hegseth?
00:57:40.000And then they came back with, he can't because he's working all the time from the Pentagon.
00:57:44.000And then one of the people who's been on the show that we know said, maybe we can find space for you guys to come and do the show in the Pentagon.
00:57:51.000Then the team came back and said, we have to get press passes so that we can come in and do the show.
00:57:56.000And I was like, okay, well, if we're going to have Pete Heggs on the show to talk about all this stuff, that'd be amazing because like having a direct access to the Secretary of War is tremendous.
00:58:04.000There's a lot of questions we'll have.
00:58:05.000And we'll even, we've got friends with a lot of questions.
00:58:07.000Scott Horde will get questions from him and Dave, and we could have these here.
00:58:10.000And so I said, let's fill out the thing.
00:58:11.000Next thing I know, the media is like Tim Poole and the right-wing puppets showing up at the Pentagon to steal our spaces.
00:58:16.000As if they were like, you know, falling over themselves to get access to these seats before, you know, alternative media got the opportunity.
00:58:24.000Like they thought that those seats were theirs.
00:58:27.000I remember when the White House correspondents or the press room in the White House, you know, a lot got in there and other people from alternative media got in there.
00:58:38.000And they were behaving as if something that they owned had been taken from them.
00:58:44.000And it was an affront to journalism, you know, in its entirety that someone that they disapproved of was there asking questions of the White House.
00:58:54.000And it's that, what's the word I'm looking for?
00:59:18.000I mean, I was shocked when I first learned who got to decide who was in the White House because I'd always assumed it must be the White House.
00:59:27.000It was this incredibly far-left organization that essentially had the authority to decide who made it and who did it.
00:59:32.000And when Trump came in and said, yeah, we're not going to give a far-left organization the ability to gatekeep access to the White House, they just infuriate.
01:03:14.000So the New York Times basically Have countered what the Washington Post reported saying, Hagseth ordered a lethal attack, but not the killing of survivors, officials say.
01:03:24.000The reason why this is important is that the Washington Post put out the claim that Hag Seth basically said double tap.
01:03:29.000That he said, kill the narco-terrorists, blow them up.
01:03:34.000After he did, they claimed that they were staring at survivors clinging to boats, and he said, Finish them off, which would be a war crime, survivors.
01:03:42.000Well, the New York Times was like, We talked to five different people independently of each other, and they all confirmed Hagseth gave one order, struck the boats, and then left.
01:04:52.000So when Mark Kelly is coming out and saying, Don't follow illegal orders, this is overt calls for civil war.
01:05:00.000And I want to make sure this is very, I want to very much define and clarify this.
01:05:05.000There is never going to be a circumstance in modern warfare where someone trying to ignite a military coup goes on TV and says, I am calling on the military to engage in a military coup against the president.
01:05:47.000I guarantee you, with those billboards that have been popping up since October, there are already men and women in uniform who have been in contact with these organizations and have already made vows to defy the chain of command.
01:05:59.000So when people ask, How would a civil war ever happen in this country?
01:06:02.000The military is not going to turn on itself.
01:06:04.000It makes me want to just bash my face in the table because in 2018, when I first started talking about the prospect of civil war, the first question was, why would anyone at the federal government be fighting each other?
01:06:31.000So back in 2018, people would say to me, the federal government is never going to allow this kind of fighting because they're too powerful and they control everything.
01:06:39.000Well, now the federal government is fighting itself.
01:06:41.000And now we're seeing, and people said, yeah, well, they're fighting each other, but how would the military ever line up against the military?
01:07:09.000But if a year from now, we see Gavinism come out and say, I am seizing full control of the California National Guard, and I'm ordering all members of the Guard to defy federal court orders to obey Donald Trump.
01:08:04.000Do you have the clip of how she actually responded?
01:08:07.000Because I watched this full briefing and I thought she did it.
01:08:09.000You mentioned working with partners on the Hill.
01:08:11.000Another senator on the Hill, the Democrat side, is Senator Mark Kelly.
01:08:14.000Now, we heard some reporting about a possible investigation into him regarding his status as a retired member of the United States Navy, still on pension, and therefore still under the jurisdiction of the Uniform Code of Military Justice.
01:08:29.000And as such, his membership, you mentioned the seditious six.
01:08:32.000Would that be grounds for possibly bringing him back to active service for an investigation for NJP or even a full court martial?
01:08:39.000The Department of War received serious allegations of misconduct against Senator Mark Kelly.
01:08:44.000And in accordance with the Uniform Code of Military Justice and other applicable recommendations and regulations, we're doing a thorough review of all of these allegations.
01:08:53.000And the Secretary of War has tasked the Secretary of the Navy, John Phelan, with doing a thorough review, looking into all of these allegations and providing him an update on December 10th.
01:09:04.000So we will have more information to come on that.
01:09:07.000But I would just add that this despicable video that Mark Kelly participated in with the seditious six was a politically motivated influence operation that was an attempt to undermine the chain of command to sow distrust and division in our armed forces.
01:09:24.000That is absolutely ridiculous, and it puts our warfighters at risk.
01:09:29.000And again, he doubled down on the Sunday shows.
01:09:32.000I don't know if you all saw him on the Sunday shows, but he basically insinuated that service members who do not defy President Trump's orders could face potential prosecution in the future when Democrats are back in power.
01:09:46.000He even called our troops and likened them to those of the Russian military.
01:09:51.000This is totally disgraceful from an elected official.
01:09:54.000And the department takes it very seriously, and that is why we have launched this review.
01:09:58.000And just to be clear, so if Secretary Phelan were to recommend court martial, that would be on the board.
01:10:10.000All options are on the table at this moment in time.
01:10:12.000And we look forward to getting the Secretary of the Navy's review.
01:10:16.000And the Secretary of War has been very clear in his statements as well Well, that he takes this extremely seriously and it is unacceptable.
01:10:23.000I want to pull up the law for all the yells so you can see.
01:10:37.000And let's see, or fined or imprisoned not more than 10 years.
01:10:41.000Whoever with the intent to interfere with, impair, or influence the loyalty morale or discipline of the military or naval force of the United States, one, advises, counsels, urges, or in any manner causes or attempts to cause insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny, or refusal of duty by any member of the military naval force of the United States, or distributes or attempts to distribute any written or printed matter which advises, counsels, or urges insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny, or refusal of duty by any member of the military naval force of the United States,
01:11:07.000shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 10 years or both, and shall be ineligible for employment by the United States or any department of agency thereof or agency thereof for the next five years following his conviction.
01:11:20.000And I'm pretty sure when you have a website that instructs you to reduce risk by using encrypted communications because you're questioning what you signed up for, this falls perfectly under 18 USC 2387, Section A, subsection 2, and 1 falls perfectly, and Mark Kelly's actions fall under one, Section A, subsection 1, perfectly.
01:11:47.000If they are not, this will keep getting worse.
01:11:49.000If you do not use your power, you lose it.
01:11:52.000And if the DOJ is unwilling to bring an indictment, this is a slam dunk, by the way.
01:11:57.000If they're unwilling to do it, Democrats are going to keep, they're going to entrench this worldview.
01:12:02.000They're going to expand their efforts.
01:12:04.000And by then, it will be too late because the military will be scared.
01:12:07.000There's going to be some young guys in the military.
01:12:10.000And they heard Mark Kelly say, if Democrats win, they're going to prison.
01:12:14.000So they're going to say, Trump, you have to win because I don't want to go to prison.
01:12:19.000And Trump's going to go, I can't do anything about it.
01:12:21.000And they're going to say, then I'm with them.
01:12:23.000Because if you will not use power, we know they will.
01:12:26.000So if Trump doesn't do it, the military is going to immediately defect and go to the people willing to crush them.
01:12:31.000That's why in Venezuela, you are able to suppress the people who are fighting against communism.
01:12:36.000Because the military is told, we'll kill you if you defy us, but we'll feed you if you work with us.
01:12:42.000And so people are like, okay, it's better to be a soldier well-fed and fat and happy in Venezuela than one of these impoverished poor people suffering under socialism.
01:13:10.000I mean, look, I do still, I'm still of the opinion that the government is being very precautious about any kind of any kind of legal action they take.
01:13:25.000But I do think that this is pretty clear.
01:13:27.000And I would like to see, you know, see something come from the investigation.
01:13:33.000I think, so I'm always, again, my background was unconventional warfare, counterinsurgency.
01:13:42.000I'm always cautious of the idea of the whole Alinsky rule that their action is our reaction.
01:13:49.000And there is something to be said for perp walking somebody out who's then going to claim that I was just, I was simply repeating what the law is.
01:13:55.000You're obligated to not follow unlawful orders.
01:13:58.000Show me exactly where I violated this by telling service members that they don't have to follow lawful orders.
01:14:18.000And the thing, the thing, again, there's two things about this that really piss me off.
01:14:23.000The first one is that I am so sick and tired of watching these former members of the military sit there and hold up their prior service and the oath we swore to the Constitution.
01:14:37.000Well, will that include the First Amendment, Second Amendment, Ninth Amendment, 10th Amendment, Article 1, Section 8?
01:14:41.000Because I've noticed you don't seem to care about those things.
01:14:59.000I remember when the guys in the military needed these guys when they were getting kicked out of the military by Eugene Vinman because they didn't want to take an experimental vaccine.
01:15:07.000Or the people who got kicked out because they had Gadsden flags on their Facebook profile.
01:15:10.000Or a member of the Virginia National Guard that I'm trying to help right now that not only got kicked out, but barred from re-enlistment, demoted.
01:15:18.000Because, well, he belonged to a local militia.
01:15:21.000The local militia was actually sanctioned by their local sheriff's department and actually helped them engage in things like first responder activities.
01:16:37.000Because it's the whole idea of how do you know it's an unlawful order?
01:16:39.000Well, it's pretty easy when you look at the Uniform Code of Military Justice in order to decipher between a lawful order and an unlawful order.
01:16:46.000But the fact that he said we'll go after the people that follow, this is the part where it gets into a much grayer area.
01:16:53.000Because when you have service members that now have to execute on orders fighting terrorism or something like that, now it's the whole idea of, am I going to, is there going to be a future regime, a future Congress, a future president, a future attorney general that's going to come in and now determine three years after the fact, oh, you know, that order that you executed, which by the way, JAG cleared off on at the time that you did it.
01:17:19.000Because especially when you're talking about this, I've explained this before.
01:17:32.000What you actually have when you have a common operating picture and you have a talk, you have a tactical control area, and you are actually blessing off on this stuff where it's like, okay, in S2, S3, right?
01:18:00.000They've gone to law school and they clear it.
01:18:02.000And so these enlisted dudes, these E4s, E5s, E6s, they do what they're told.
01:18:08.000And then Mark Kelly's coming and threatening them and essentially saying, look, we're going to hold you responsible if you violate the law, if you violate your oath to the Constitution.
01:18:38.000I agree with everything you guys just said, but I feel as though we're speaking a little bit too much in the abstract.
01:18:42.000So I wanted to add details to what we're actually talking about here.
01:18:46.000So originally, the Washington Post put out an article saying that Pete Hegseth ordered a strike on an alleged Venezuelan drug boat.
01:18:55.000He said, allegedly said, kill them all, and then allegedly ordered the follow-up strike.
01:18:59.000I believe that's what it says in the Washington Post article.
01:19:01.000The New York Times came out with a new article that says Pete Hegseth only was involved in the initial strike, as I understand, and didn't allegedly give them one order.
01:19:08.000He ordered a lethal strike, but not killing of the survivors.
01:19:11.000And then Pete Hegseth, Secretary of War Hegseth, alleges that it's Admiral Bradley who eventually sent the follow-up kinetic strike.
01:19:19.000And now, Senator Mark Kelly is saying that that could potentially, if it truly happened the way that the Washington Post is alleging, that that could be a war crime.
01:19:28.000So I guess Mark Kelly is also saying that, therefore, if that is the case, then, and you are following the chain of command, you will still be held liable if these are unlawful orders.
01:19:37.000I guess on that part particularly, what do you think about, based on the reporting that we've seen, if that's, you know, could that, would you interpret that as a war crime?
01:19:45.000The point of this is not to actually claim there's a war crime.
01:19:49.000It's to tell an enlisted guy who doesn't know left or right on the legal matters, we are coming for you.
01:19:55.000If Trump tells you to do something and you do it, we are coming for you.
01:19:58.000And it harms our military readiness because now all of our soldiers need to think twice.
01:20:01.000This is the decisions you're making potentially going to compromise you in the future.
01:20:05.000But I think there are two issues at hand there.
01:20:08.000There's that issue, and then there's also the issue of potentially striking people who have no means to kick back in.
01:20:15.000To your first point, and Nick, you can speak to this.
01:20:17.000You hear guys on the ground talking about how the rules of engagement have been detrimental to actually accomplishing the mission.
01:20:25.000Can you go ahead and expand on that idea so people can't do that?
01:20:27.000So to give you an idea, I'll just use Iraq as an example in 2008.
01:20:31.000The amount of trouble we had to go through to get outside the wire and actually conduct military operations, it was far more intense than anybody would think.
01:20:39.000It looked more like law enforcement operations than you would think, like an active combat area.
01:20:43.000So this is something where I had to secure warrants.
01:20:46.000I remember going out, we launched an operation to get a guy for which we had, I think, 10 different sworn statements from Iraqis.
01:20:55.000And I go back and like me, I'm a sergeant first class.
01:20:58.000I'm a Green Beret, but I'm a sergeant first class.
01:21:00.000And all of a sudden, I got to sit and I got to justify to a JAG officer on why this person needs to go to higher detention.
01:21:06.000So yeah, there was a lot of us that got to the point where it's like, this is getting ridiculous.
01:21:09.000And then remember, this is also the time during the Obama administration where they were talking about they wanted to have an award for valorous restraint.
01:22:46.000Yeah, in the prior Trump election was a Trump plus 20.
01:22:49.000Nick, I wanted to follow up with you on one of the details here in particular.
01:22:53.000As I understand on ground, it's different than what it's going on at sea.
01:22:56.000Correct me at any moment because I'm sure you know a lot more about this than I do.
01:22:59.000But on land, people, survivors could potentially be seen as a continuing military threat.
01:23:04.000But however, when you are at sea after you strike a boat and there's survivors just hanging on to whatever's left over of the boat, it's different and they don't seem to pose a clear military threat.
01:23:13.000That's when an alleged second strike was ordered and people are alleging that if that's the way it happened, then it would be a war crime.
01:23:19.000Do you think that would be a war crime if it happened the way that the Washington Post is alleging?
01:23:24.000That's one that I don't have a legal expertise with respect to that to be able to definitively say one way or the other.
01:23:31.000I can't say that typically speaking, it's generally understood that if you have survivors of like a sunken ship or something like that, to strike that again would that would seem outside the rules to me, but I don't have a legal expertise because I did want to, again, get to the specifics because that's, I believe, again, I do not believe Senator Mark Kelly is justified in telling soldiers that they shouldn't follow what they believe may be illegitimate orders because the next administration might come after them.
01:23:59.000But that's what he's talking about here with these orders.
01:24:02.000Look, with all of this, we just got done talking about this earlier with Candace with respect to how words are chosen carefully in order to avoid prosecution or avoid defamation or anything like that.
01:24:11.000It's going to be the same thing here, right?
01:24:13.000And that's going to be the question: can you make a strong enough legal case where you could actually convict something for that?
01:24:48.000Does anyone here think that the Democrats really just wanted to keep the government shut down because they were just so upset about some of these budget items?
01:24:58.000Or do you think it's far more likely that they realized that they were impacting tens of thousands of voters in Northern Virginia right ahead of election?
01:25:44.000And to your point, when you do, when you are handed by the electorate legitimate government power, I don't think that means that you should abuse that power, but should you exercise it to its full legitimate force?
01:26:16.000In January, it's probably the last time I drive through Virginia because we are currently living in a country where Charlie Kirk was murdered.
01:26:24.000And no matter who you think did it, whatever, I'm not here to get into that whole argument.
01:26:28.000The point is somebody wanted him dead and they made sure he was.
01:26:33.000You have Jay Jones now, a man who wants his opponent's children to die so that they will agree with him on policy.
01:26:42.000That doesn't just mean, hey, you know, if your children were brutally murdered, maybe you'll change your mind.
01:26:46.000It means there are things I am willing to do that I understand must be done to make someone change their mind.
01:26:52.000And so I'm not going back to Chicago for the holidays because, and you can look this up, you can ask Luke about it.
01:26:59.000Police in Chicago tried planting drugs on us back in, I think it was 2012.
01:27:03.000And NBC News reported how we got pulled over at gunpoint.
01:27:08.000And call me paranoid, but all it takes is one day I drive through Virginia and some state trooper who's some crackpot far-left guy who's a fan of Jay Jones and believes all the crazy Nazi stuff plants drugs.
01:27:26.000It's much easier just to be like, he resisted arrest and now he's going to jail.
01:27:30.000If you want to take a piece off the board, there are many ways you can do it.
01:27:35.000And we are living in a country right now where someone was willing to murder Charlie Kirk because of his influence.
01:27:42.000When an AG comes in who expresses his desire to see children murdered for his political benefit, I am taking that very seriously.
01:27:49.000I think I've said this before where originally, I mean, I was used to the General Assembly when I got in there in 2016, and it was if you disagreed with the Democrats, you were a racist, you were a bigot, you were a sexist.
01:27:59.000And the use of that language was designed to rob you of moral legitimacy with respect to the arguments that you made.
01:28:06.000It was, I don't need to listen to your arguments because who cares about the opinions of a racist, a sexist, or a bigot.
01:28:12.000Then the language changed and the language became, you're a threat to democracy.
01:28:19.000That's not to rob you of moral legitimacy.
01:28:21.000That is to create a moral framework for where they can use aggressive violence against you and claim it with self-defense.
01:28:28.000Now we're moving into what Mark Kelly's doing right now, where it's, we will come after, we're promising to prosecute you if you follow the orders of a president we don't like.
01:28:37.000We will use the full force and power of government.
01:28:40.000Yeah, the thing that's going about to be going on in Virginia right now is the place is going to be run like the mob, right?
01:28:46.000Don Scott and Louise Lucas are talking to all the lobbyists right now, essentially saying you better tell everybody that ever donated to a Republican, they better get on board.
01:28:54.000They're going to tell everybody who wants legislation before the General Assembly, you hire a Yunkin appointee, you're done.
01:29:12.000They can bankrupt you having to fight.
01:29:15.000They will use your tax dollars to crush you into the ground or to withdraw the investigation after the damage is done.
01:29:22.000They can launch an indictment against a company based in Nashville and accuse several prominent conservatives of being paid by Russians and then abandon the investigation a month later when the election's over.
01:29:31.000And that's literally what Merrick Garland did because he is evil.
01:29:36.000And it's funny because I always bring up my buddy in the poker room who's like, you're always calling Democrats evil.
01:29:41.000And I was like, well, maybe when the AG lies about you intentionally misrepresenting everything with no evidence and then you get death threats because of it, you might understand.
01:29:51.000But to the people who don't really pay attention and they're just passively absorbing news, they don't get it.
01:29:56.000And I've had to explain to people, I said, listen, for you to truly understand where we are, we have to go back in time 10 years.
01:30:03.000And there's so much information you have wrong.
01:30:06.000So I was talking to this guy and I said, Donald Trump never called neo-Nazi.
01:30:32.000Not only that, but I have friends that have said things like, oh, well, you know, maybe he didn't actually call Nazis fine people, but he was there that day with them.
01:31:13.000I mean, the BBC deliberately edited speeches in order to make it look like he had called for people to go over to the Capitol on January 6th.
01:32:23.000And the fact that these things are untrue and it was the foundation for a movement that, I mean, what, seven, eight years later, nine years later, eight years later, because I think, no, seven years later, because Ferguson was in 2013, seven years later, literally burned down multiple cities across the country.
01:32:44.000Just massive amounts of rioting, which, by the way, were not demonstrations of left-wing ideological political violence.
01:33:25.000I may be, but still prominent where I hear the debate all the time where someone will say something like, the right commits way more violence.
01:33:33.000And the conservatives respond with, oh, yeah, but the left does this.
01:33:37.000Instead of saying, brother, I'm not going to sit here and defend white supremacists punching anybody.
01:33:42.000Don't, we are not part of the same group.
01:33:44.000So if you want to make an argument about white supremacists, fine.
01:33:47.000If you want to make an argument about conservatives or Republicans, whatever you want to make, fine.
01:33:51.000When they say the right is responsible for X, what they're actually trying to do is saying the run-of-the-mill working class Republican is the exact same thing as a skinhead neo-Nazi guy chasing down black men.
01:34:02.000And then Republicans go, well, but the left does this or that.
01:34:05.000My response is, oh, yeah, if you mean right isn't like the white supremacists, fine, but let's separate them and we'll all agree to condemn them.
01:34:13.000Okay, of regular Republicans, oh, now it's zero.
01:34:16.000Oh, among regular liberals, it's 27,000.
01:34:19.000Well, it's this, this, I was speaking at a University of Alabama on this, and I would say, look, the bottom line is, one, you're associating to typical conservatives, stuff that's done by like extremists.
01:34:32.000And then you're completely negating stuff done by Antifa, right?
01:34:36.000There's an intellectual dishonesty here that has reached a critical mass.
01:34:40.000And this, again, I think this all goes back to Gramsci with this whole idea of you take over culturally shaping institutions and then you use their credibility, their stored up credibility in order to push your agenda.
01:34:53.000The problem now is that when you use those kind of statistics to try to push this narrative that, oh, well, 80% of political violence is on the right.
01:35:02.000I'm looking at them now going, you understand that that doesn't cause me to go, oh my gosh, is that true?
01:35:09.000Whoa, yeah, but this study said it, or is it all that does, okay, all you have done is reinforced my belief that that institution, the people conducting those studies, the organizations that put it out there, are co-opted.
01:35:24.000Because I can go over here and I can look at a poll that was conducted where they asked self-identifying liberals, moderates, and conservatives, how comfortable are you with political violence?
01:35:36.000And it turns out that it's overwhelmingly the left, which, oh, by the way, is what I observe on a daily basis.
01:35:45.000So it's like, I don't, again, you can't continue to wear these culturally shaping institutions as a kind of like skin suit and demand that I give them the same credibility that they earned decades ago when they actually engaged in either objective journalist or objective analysis.
01:38:36.000Well, so here's what's, there's a big problem with this.
01:38:41.000It's one of the reasons why in Virginia this year, they are probably going to try to take away land use authority from localities in order to try to push more data centers and to definitely push green energy.
01:38:51.000Like in Virginia, the issue that we have is they passed the Virginia Clean Economy Act, which is destroying our energy capacity.
01:38:57.000So what are they doing to protect the environment?
01:38:59.000Well, they're scooping up farmland and forestry, destroying it, and putting out industrial solar fields.
01:39:05.000Now, why do they need to keep doing this to the degree that they are?
01:39:08.000Because they have to feed these incredibly energy-hungry data centers.
01:39:13.000And so it's amazing how in Virginia this is going to cause, I mean, this is about to cause our energy rates to just go through the roof.
01:39:23.000It's kind of scary to think the amount of power that these things need and to know that the federal government has made it so difficult to build power plants, you know, whatever types they are.
01:39:37.000I know that the left wants to see all kinds of green energy and stuff.
01:39:41.000Personally, I'm of the opinion that you don't get any more green energy than nuclear power.
01:39:45.000And if you want to start, if you want to build a nuclear power plant, it's like 10 years before you'll be able to get any power out of it if you start today.
01:39:56.000I'm trying to work out this mini doc plan with Shane about the data centers in Northern Virginia because I've told the story a couple different times, but it's creepy.
01:40:05.000A large language model instructed me on how to contact data center land acquisition to get a massive payout if I shut up, take the show off the air and sell the land quietly.
01:40:18.000It argued that the data centers effectively are their own entity.
01:40:24.000It's called the Virginia Instance, which is these massive data centers connected to the NSA, the CIA, et cetera.
01:40:30.000They're basically, humans are basically saying, what should we do?
01:40:34.000And they're just being told what to do by the AI.
01:40:36.000And it wants to buy up all the land in this area because it needs energy transmission from north of here into Northern Virginia.
01:41:07.000But the AI said there are Delaware limited liability partnerships quietly buying up plots of land.
01:41:13.000They're trying to create large acreages to build data center transmission lines to go into the big data centers in Northern Virginia.
01:41:21.000And it said that there are many people in the area who have quietly received exorbitant payouts for their land in exchange for privacy.
01:41:29.000That it said, if you don't list your property and you email directly to the land acquisition companies, they'll offer you a premium not to go through any real estate and to do a private sale so that it doesn't pop up in the press.
01:41:41.000The reason being, the news finds out that land is being purchased for the purpose of a data center and all the locals are going to lose their mind.
01:41:50.000So they're trying to do it very quietly.
01:41:51.000And they, uh, this, this, so I need to talk to Shane about this because we wanted to do a mini doc talking about what's actually going on and exposing it all.
01:42:00.000And we, we've talked about it a bit, but we've never actually sat down and planned it.
01:42:03.000Well, and a lot of a lot of localities like the data centers because they look at it as additional tax revenue for very few services.
01:44:03.000You know, the thing is, like we were looking at that story, talking about how much money she made.
01:44:10.000Twitch is a big problem right now with bots.
01:44:12.000There's a reason why people buy bots to make their viewership look bigger.
01:44:17.000We're not going to get, you know, so right now, what do we have?
01:44:21.000We're split between Rum, but we have 46,000 concurrent viewers, which is, it's actually really good because four years ago when we were in the offseason after the 2020 election, we were averaging about 27,000 concurrent viewers.
01:44:33.000So the show has grown, its consistency, all these things.
01:44:37.000I don't need to bot or buy views or do anything like that because honestly, I don't really care if it's number one, number 10, number 100.
01:44:43.000But people don't understand that Candace has one really big show she does every day.
01:44:52.000That's great if they like it, whatever.
01:44:54.000And so you'll hear in the press about how she's so big.
01:44:58.000Well, actually, across the board, I'm pretty sure we get equal to or more views than she does.
01:45:03.000As a company, I've got four different shows of different subject matter.
01:45:07.000And then we've got audio side, then we've got the other shows.
01:45:11.000So, you know, if I were to stop doing five different shows and just do one, I don't think I'd get as many views as Candace, but I think I'd probably get like 60, 70%.
01:45:22.000Whereas, you know, Tim Castiro does about half a million and she does like two.
01:45:26.000If I stopped doing all the other shows, the viewers would concentrate around one show or whatever.
01:45:30.000My point is there's a handful of, you have to break down total viewership per company for views.
01:45:38.000So it's like her show's really big, but it's one, you know, hour-long show per day, right?
01:45:44.000Do you want to hear the conspiracy about why she's still on air?
01:45:49.000And Israel is, and that's why Nick Fuentes is banned and she's not, because Nick, they don't want to actually, so Nick is a wild card no one controls, and he says things that are dangerous to Israel.
01:46:00.000But Candace has controlled opposition, who literally worked for the Daily Wire and then goes rogue and disappears from the company.
01:46:08.000But then she's propped up on YouTube and Spotify as the acceptable anti-Israel, and she sounds crazy, and everyone's disparaging her.
01:46:16.000And Nick Fuentes is banned from every platform.
01:46:18.000She is a dumb black woman that makes anti-Semites look exceptionally low IQ.
01:46:23.000Like her brand of anti-Semitism is extraordinarily low IQ.
01:46:26.000I think anybody with any media literacy looks at her shit and goes, wow, what a moron.
01:46:30.000Well, I mean, obviously you're personally offended by the things that she says and does.
01:48:05.000Steven Crowder doesn't go anywhere near the degree that Fuentes does in the hate or like, hate's not the right word, but like the aggression, the way he insults people.
01:48:16.000Yet they give credit strikes like hotcakes, but not Candace Owens.
01:48:22.000Hey, maybe she got somebody on the inside.
01:48:25.000Or she worked for The Daily Wire alongside Ben Shapiro.
01:48:29.000And it's, you know, I was talking to these young guys and they were like, you know, Candace Owens, you know, this is the funny thing about people who are like, Candace never said Israel did it.
01:48:37.000I talked to these young guys and they were like, do you believe what Candace is saying?
01:49:46.000He literally came out of the story, and I don't get any people even Ian Carroll, but he was like, Tim Poole was trying to buy the Daily Wire.
01:50:00.000No, it's just, it's remarkable the insane-ish that comes out of this sector of the internet, where they claimed the Daily Wire owned a portion of Timcast.
01:50:12.000They literally were spreading rumors that Daily Wire was a minority holder of Timcast.
01:50:18.000And then at the same time, they said I was trying to buy the Daily Wire.
01:50:24.000Here we are, one year on from this retarded BS doing the same thing we've always done.
01:50:29.000And it was really funny because I had someone ask me and they were like, is this true that you're trying to buy out the Daily Wire?
01:50:35.000And then I was just like, first of all, that's insane.
01:50:37.000And they were like, well, what about the rumor that they own a piece of Timcast?
01:51:18.000I was actually reviewing some other stuff since you mentioned Ian Carroll, and it reminded me of this tweet that he released in March 29th, alleging that there's an RFK Jr. blackmail story from multiple angles that Candace Owens also pushed.
01:51:31.000These retards push so much bullshit that it's really hard to forget the actual dumb shit that they push.
01:51:37.000It's because instead of, again, paying attention to the important political stories or engaging in politics in a serious way, it's easy to digest this stupid Netflix true crime type bullshit that really, I don't know, gets your brain going, gets the adrenaline running, but isn't necessarily true.
01:52:59.000I really do recommend you watch the show she put out today because I can't remember who said it, but someone in here, someone in pre-production, we were getting race at it.
01:53:09.000It sounded like she was in love with Charlie.
01:53:56.000And I have to imagine what she must feel knowing Erica Kirk inherited and took over what Charlie built, even though Candace was there from the beginning.
01:54:04.000And Candace got to watch Charlie, who was her best friend, and she was the wingman, go on some other woman.
01:54:09.000I think the motivation may be that Candace, she can't come out and say she hates Erica.
01:54:35.000Where she talks about the texts, and she was telling him what clothes to wear on his dates and how she was the wingman and these texts about how she felt like an alien.
01:55:06.000Jane Waters says, someone explained to me how Candace is on the front page of YouTube's featured, yet the only time they put Tim Cast IRL on the featured is an episode from five years ago and is YouTube's members only.
01:58:59.000It is a community of people who build things because they want to build things, and they're wondering why you don't want to be friends with them.
01:59:05.000I think you should be by going to Timcast.com and clicking join us and getting in the Discord server.
01:59:30.000Because if we want to make the world work, the first thing we do is figure out what's true and then what we have to do to get to our solution.
02:00:11.000You can definitely attempt to contact your state legislators and ask them about it.
02:00:15.000Now, I will say this: there is obviously separation of powers between your legislatures and the judiciary.
02:00:21.000So, we're always careful about what we theoretically interfere with on things like that.
02:00:26.000But you can attempt to appeal the decision.
02:00:29.000You can attempt to contact the Attorney General's office if you think there's been kind of like a tragic miscarriage of justice on that.
02:00:36.000Those are the different legal mechanisms that you can take.
02:00:39.000The other thing that you can do is, depending on you can get the information out about the judge that actually did the decision of the sentencing.
02:00:47.000The other question is, is your Commonwealth attorney for your area?
02:00:57.000And so you can theoretically go after the Commonwealth Attorney during the next election cycle.
02:01:01.000I wish I could give you like a better response on the things that you could do to try to correct for this, but those are the various mechanisms available.
02:01:10.000So we put up a poll and it said Candace is right or Candace is wrong.
02:01:15.000It's 59% Candace is wrong, 41% Candace is right.
02:01:18.000I guess my follow-up is just, what is she right about?
02:01:22.000Okay, this is what's killing me about this.
02:01:25.000This is why I go back to, like, regardless of where you stand on this issue, is there anyone that can tell me that she is anything other than his best friend or his worst enemy?
02:01:38.000Because this is what troubles me about this, is that if you're willing to look at this subjectively and you just say, I find what she says convincing so far, that's fine.
02:01:46.000I do not find what she has said convincing.
02:01:48.000But if you do, my question is: what is the standard of truth that you're actually going to utilize?
02:01:52.000Because at some point, there can no longer be, I have evidence and I'm going to present it, and then there's no evidence, or the evidence is not sufficient to actually prove what she's saying.
02:02:01.000And this goes back to what you were saying before.
02:08:33.000So this house but bought the sun for 20 trillions our ships run enough to fight the succorbork Sam open and his yee bleehore so go get ship to just the blessing Elon said we surely must now breed you fools or we'll all die just salute and let the tears fly
02:09:06.000This dude who made this actually wrote at least some of the lyrics, because they're really good.
02:11:41.000And you're like, okay, I will say that.
02:11:43.000No, I don't think there's any profession that I've experienced where people are more convinced that they know more about how it actually works than politics.
02:12:44.000And then once you convince them that you're not actually evil, that you are flesh and blood and a human being like them, then it's, you know, you're stupid.
02:12:52.000And then once you convince them that, oh, actually, you're not stupid, then what it is is you're just ignorant.