October 9, 2025 • 45 mins
Left-wing streamer and YouTube star Hasan Piker is facing dog abuse allegations after a recent moment from his stream went viral. Are these claims or are his denials convincing? Any why wasn't his career ended by much bigger past scandals? I break it down in this episode of the Brad vs Everyone podcast. Plus, woke Swifties are continuing to crash out over Taylor Swift's supposed "microaggressions" in her new album, and Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez posts a bizarre Instagram "apology" video. Finally, MAGA YouTube star Candace Owens makes bizarre and incoherent accusations against a Jewish journalist, alleging prior knowledge of Charlie Kirk's murder.
Send me a voice note: https://www.speakpipe.com/bradvseveryone
Check out the merch: https://bp-shop.fourthwall.com/
Support My Show: https://linktr.ee/bradpolumbo
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
It's the same reason as to why America kaya, please
just In Gold you stop.
Speaker 2 (00:06):
The left's favorite internet celebrity is facing allegations of abusing
his dog on camera. But everybody's missing a massive point here.
We're gonna break this down and so much more on
today's episode of the burad Versus Everyone Podcast, where I
(00:28):
break down the craziest stuff from the Internet and social media,
all from an independent perspective. And by the way, guys,
I am on the road today. We're back in Michigan
for a wedding, so we're back at the old House,
and yeah, I'm just gonna bring you in a normal
show like usual, but obviously not in my typical setup,
(00:49):
but still want to talk with you all. And there's
actually so much unhinged stuff, so we're gonna lose some
brain cells together. And the first topic we have to
talk about is the left wing Hassan Piker, who is
facing some pretty serious backlash right now. Honestly, the most
perhaps the most widespread condemnation I've seen from his own crowd.
(01:10):
Right like, even left leaning liberals and streamers and progressives
are very upset with him, many of them because of
an incident that happened on his live stream a couple
of days ago, where it appears from the footage hard
to say exactly when we'll get into the details. He
is denying this that he presses a button to shock
his dog Kaya, as if she is wearing a shock
(01:34):
collar to keep her in place on her mat that
she's supposed to sit in for hours and hours on
end during his live streams, almost as if she is
a prop. Here is the initial footage of him rambling,
and then Kaya disrupts him by daring to step up
or step away from the mat and not be a
good prop, and he reaches forward and appears to press something.
(01:56):
She then yelps in pain.
Speaker 3 (01:58):
Here is that footage of all of America's much more
consequential violence. Okay, it's the same reason as to why America,
Kaya please just go, just stop.
Speaker 2 (02:16):
Jesus Christ, what are you doing.
Speaker 1 (02:18):
You're being such a baby.
Speaker 2 (02:22):
It's just.
Speaker 3 (02:25):
You're making her stressed.
Speaker 1 (02:28):
She just literally is so incredibly spoiled from my mom.
Speaker 2 (02:36):
No, she doesn't want to come over here to see
what's up.
Speaker 1 (02:39):
She just wants to roam the house because she got
to roam the house when I was gone, and she
needs to literally have the same structured regimented.
Speaker 2 (02:48):
So you can hear the dog yelp in pain. Well,
explore why that happened or why it didn't happen. But
people were pretty upset with his son because everyone says,
this looks like he's using a shot collar on a
pretty high setting, by the way, not even just like
a light shot, because she yelps audibly to train his dog,
(03:08):
and she hadn't even done anything wrong. She just got
up out of the position that she was in behind him,
where I guess he wants her to sit all day
while he streams for like eight hours or whatever. I
don't know. Anyway, though he of course, in the spirit
of fairness, I should point out that he is denying it,
and I'll play the clip of him offering an alternative
explanation in a little bit. I did want to read
(03:30):
you guys this funny tweet though from some lefty on
X where they say she clips her paw. It's very obvious,
we have different definitions, very obvious. But anyway, here's the
funny part. And care imagine I can't even read this
with a straight face. You are willfully dumber than a dog.
If you choose to believe this, that it was a
shot color and you care more about imagining the suffering
(03:51):
of a single animal than millions of Palestinians, ma'am. Literally,
who said anything about Palestinians like you did the meme?
It reminded me of this tweet I saw a long
time ago from this kind of center left guy, Noah Smith.
Protester punches baby in the head, normal person. Hey, you
can't just punch babies in the head, protester. Okay, I
(04:13):
think we can all agree that what's happening in Palestine
right right now is a lot more important than this
one baby getting punched in the head just made me
laugh because she literally did the meme. She's like bringing
up Palestine to like, what about that even has anything
to do with this say that he did And I'm
(04:33):
stressing guys, he denies this, say that he did shock
his dog on camera on stream. You're just going to say, well,
what's happening in Palestine is worse, So what we can't
talk about anything ever, because there's always something worse happening.
That actually kind of reminds me of a conversation I
have with a couple lived out radio hosts the other
day post that on my bonus channel I think called
(04:54):
Brad Palumbo Highlights if you want to go take a look.
But we were talking about transitioning kids and I was
explaining why I'm against and they just kept bringing up, well,
like what about gun violence or other things? And it's like, yeah, there,
I acknowledge there are bigger problems in the world. Doesn't
make this not bad. Like there's just such a weird
deflection that these types pull all the time. Now we're
(05:14):
going to take a look at Hassan's initial denial where
he says that it wasn't a shock collar first though,
make sure subscribed with the like button comment YadA yah.
Now let's listen to Hassan. I think it was the
same day. He was kept getting brought up because this
was going viral while he was still streaming, and he
initially responds this way, take a look to hear oral
(05:36):
arguments on Thursday.
Speaker 1 (05:37):
Oh my god, is there like an LSF video or something.
Is that why there's like hella people coming in here
and screeching? Is that what's going on?
Speaker 4 (05:54):
Oh?
Speaker 2 (05:56):
Classic?
Speaker 1 (06:01):
It started on the then age three then l SEV
is the classic pipeline.
Speaker 2 (06:06):
I'm gonna die, dude.
Speaker 1 (06:10):
Yes, I am incredibly abusive to the not only best trained,
but also the best behaving and most spoiled dog on
the planet. Is from when Kaye yelped. Yeah, she yelped
because she clipped herself on something when she was getting
(06:31):
off the bed.
Speaker 2 (06:32):
So here's the thing that stood out to me about this.
A couple things did actually, But like if I was
on stream with Reggie, may he rest in peace and
somebody was like, oh my god, you shock your dog
or use a shot collar, I would pick Reggie up,
take off his collar and show it to the care
and be like, not a shot collar. I don't know
what we're yapping about, Like what do you talk about?
(06:52):
That's not real? Notable that he didn't do that right.
And then his explanation is that Kaya simply caught herself
and yelped. I don't find that impossible. But even then
I find like, Okay, you didn't exactly check on her.
You didn't seem very concerned that your dog was in pain,
or was your stream more important than that? So a
couple tweets here I want to read. One is from
(07:13):
the left. The I don't even know how to categorize
her the YouTuber shoe on head wild. How the most
good faith interpretation of the Hassan thing is that he
didn't really use a shot collar on his dog. He
just got weirdly angry at his dog for briefly stepping
off the little square he makes her sit on for
four plus hours while he live streams exactly. Another person
pointed out on x if his dog yelped like that
(07:34):
by a self inflicted injury and he didn't stop streaming
to check on her, that makes him an even bigger
sociopath than if he did it himself. I don't know
about that, but it's certainly a valid point that he
should have checked on her now. Dan Saltman, who's a
very prominent Hassan hater, just context there yes said yesterday
during his stream, Hassan had the chance to very easily
(07:55):
bring over the dog and show that there was no
shot collar on it. That's all it would take to
end the drama in any normal person, and would immediately
do that to stop the drama. Anything he shows now
is fabricated. So look, I should say this. I really
don't know either way. I think he probably does have
a shot collar, and I think he probably did shock
the dog. I think he uses her as a prop.
(08:16):
But I have to be honest with you guys when
I know something and when I don't, because I think
it's reckless when people speculate and present it as facts.
I don't know. It is possible that he is telling
the truth and it is not a shot collar, as
I will get to. I think there's a bigger point
here that everyone is missing. But there's a little bit
more evidence suggesting that maybe something here did go on.
(08:38):
One Here's a clip from when a guest recently visited
him and pointed out how tight Kaia's collar was. He
not only seemed unbothered, but he seemed to almost want
to say something about the collar. Then stop, listen to this.
Speaker 5 (08:52):
And now it's mainstream.
Speaker 2 (08:54):
I love her. I think her coller is too tight.
Speaker 4 (08:57):
Well, it's are we get to.
Speaker 6 (09:00):
You have to you have to be able to get
two fingers, and I couldn't even get one.
Speaker 2 (09:03):
I think you're choking.
Speaker 4 (09:07):
He has a lot of neck meat.
Speaker 2 (09:09):
There's also footage of him where he admits to owning
a shock collar. By the way, listen to this, My.
Speaker 4 (09:16):
Old roommate wanted to use a shock collar or Fish
and his dogs for Fish and his dog's barking. I
couldn't do it. I have it still, I bought it.
They are incredibly effective.
Speaker 2 (09:37):
And then you have to go several years back for
this one and it's it's old. But I don't and
I'm not going to show it because I actually just
think it's it's horrible. He's on footage pulling the tail
of his old dog when the dog was misbehaving, which
is a big no no. You don't do that. You
don't pull a dog's tail. That's like very messed up.
(09:58):
But what has happened since he shows the collar on
stream the next day. He didn't do it the day of.
He didn't just do it in the moment. This is notable.
He holds it up and he says, it's not a
shock collar. It's a vibration caller. So wait a second,
this doesn't add up because he told us she got caught,
so was he lying? Then he did, so he did
(10:19):
buzz her, But it's just a vibration caller, which is
a thing. There is such a thing as vibration callers.
And then he holds it up and he talks about
it and it's descended into like this forensic debate where
I'm not kidding you, this is a huge trend and
streamers are dissecting it framed by frame, They're looking up
the model number, They're trying to like prove he's lying
(10:41):
or all of this. My answer is, I don't know.
I do not know the truth about this. I don't
care enough to get down into the granular, granular granular
details of it and try to come up with the truth.
I don't trust him. I don't he's already lied in
this because or he's already at least been inconsistent in
(11:01):
this story so far, and that it's very clear to
me that he doesn't treat dogs well, whether it's pulling
the dog's tail in the past or making this dog,
even if it is just a vibration collar sit there
as a prop And I think that somebody doesn't treat
dogs well is a red flag to me of who
they are as a person or any helpless pet that
(11:21):
depends on you. If you mistreat them in any way,
that's a serious red flag to me as a person.
But the broader point I want to make about this,
it's kind of insane that it's come to this. It's
kind of insane that, like people are now turning against
Hassan over this. It wasn't gonna be when he said
America didn't deserve nine to eleven. It wasn't. It wasn't
(11:45):
when he said a Republican should be murdered on his
stream over and over again, right like, it wasn't any
of the times he has explicitly expressed support for designated
terror groups. But it was because he Peers too allegedly
may have, but he denies it, used a shot color
on his dog. Like I find that icky, especially in
(12:06):
this context. It's not like you're doing it for safety
reasons or something like. There may be a scenario in
which it is appropriate to use a shot collar for
a dog. I don't know. I'm not a dog ethicist,
I'm not a dog trainer, but I know that this
isn't it to keep them sitting there as a prop
in the background for your live stream. That is certainly
not it. But anyway, it's like crazy to me that
(12:29):
this is the thing that is finally getting some people
to turn against him, like even liberal content creators. I
just think, as much as I love dogs, we might
have cut up priorities at this point in this culture
and in this country. That's my take on this whole saga.
I want to know what you guys think. I want
(12:49):
to be again clear that I cannot categorically state that
he did use a shot collar. I don't know. I
think I'm presenting you with evidence. You can make up
your own mind what you think happened. But I think
even if he didn't, there's levels of dishonesty and mistreatment
of dogs here that are a problem. And then, more broadly,
(13:13):
the fact that anyone is still in his fan base
at this point and he's still so big. Guys, you
have to understand he's one of the most listened to
people on the internet is insane to me for all
the other reasons that I mentioned. That's my take. You guys,
let me know what you think in the comments below.
Do make sure subscribe if you aren't yet hit the
leg button yet. Yeah yeah, Oh, and remember you can
send in your voicemails for our Voicemail Friday episodes where
(13:34):
I react to your wild car stories, give you advice
on your personal life scenarios and drama, and answer questions
you guys have for me. The voicemail link is the
speak pipe link in the description. Now we're going to
talk about the Swifties again early some of the Swifties,
the woke Swifties. I got a lot of messages from
y'all last time I talked about this. I know that
(13:55):
there are lots of normal people out there who love
Taylor Swift, and it is no shade to y'all. Hashtag
not all Swifties, but there is a segment of the
Taylor Swift fan base, the woke segment in particular, that
is absolutely deranged, and many of them are now on
TikTok crashing out over the micro aggressions supposedly in one
(14:20):
of her songs, so much so that I keep seeing
viral video after viral video after viral video on TikTok
about this that I feel like I have to just
talk about it more because there's two levels of insanity
to the soaka. One is it's insane that anyone thinks
these are actually microaggressions. Then it's insane that when we
say they're not, their response is you're wrong because you're white.
(14:42):
I'm not kidding, Like this is exactly how they are
portraying it, and is genuinely diabolical. So the context here
is that the new Taylor Swift song Eldest Daughter has
some lyrics, and I looked up the full lyrics, but
these lyrics include these couple of sentences that people seizing on.
But I'm not a bad bitch and this isn't savage
(15:05):
is part of the chorus. Now it comes in the
context of the whole song is about how everyone tries
to seem unbothered. Like she says that everyone's unbothered till
they're not sad as it seems. Apathy is hot. When
you said you found me, When you found me, I
said I was busy. That was a lie. Anyway, I've
(15:27):
been dying from just trying to seem cool. So the
point is about how she's like, I'm not actually this
bad bitch, I'm not savage. I'm not like cool and unbothered.
I actually am you know, emotional, and I am in
love or I'm not so many traders smooth operators. But
she's saying that's not her anymore, if it ever was.
I guess don't come to me for Taylor Swift lyric interpretations,
(15:51):
but what I can tell you is that it is
not in fact a racist dog whistle because she used
the word savage. But that is what TikTokers are saying.
Listen to this Taylor Swift.
Speaker 4 (16:04):
Yeah, that song.
Speaker 2 (16:05):
Is so microaggressive.
Speaker 1 (16:07):
It's actually I felt like I was hate crimed as
I was listening to it.
Speaker 6 (16:12):
I'm not a bad bitch.
Speaker 4 (16:14):
I'm not as.
Speaker 7 (16:14):
Savage with basically the biggest dog whistle, slash and microaggression.
Speaker 2 (16:20):
That can be yelled at right in a song.
Speaker 4 (16:22):
But some of y'all are sitting on this app doing
mental gymnastics trying to say no.
Speaker 7 (16:27):
And so now when people are calling out a microaggression
and a song, it's not that serious, it's not that deep.
Speaker 2 (16:33):
But I think that things are that deep.
Speaker 7 (16:35):
Yes, I am the woke saying, but I'm not babitch
and hesy savage.
Speaker 1 (16:42):
I beg of you to actually look into the historical
roots of a word like savage.
Speaker 2 (16:46):
I love the one who says that we're doing mental
gymnastics or we're stretching to not acknowledge it. No, but
that's you. You're stretching. We're not the stretching one here.
You're at the yoga mat in the room. Okay, I'm
just babbling I'm not making any sense because these people
make me want to crash out. When Taylor Swift she
(17:09):
says I'm not savage, or she says this isn't savage.
What she's saying is she's referring to the slang use
of savage, like oh that was savage, or like when
somebody rows someone, you're like, damn, he's savage. It's has
nothing to do with like calling black people primal or
savages or whatever. Sort of microaggression, which, again I have
(17:31):
to stress to you, is not a real concept. It
is not a thing. But even to the extent that
it is, qualifying this as a microaggression is absurd because
in context, it's not referring to that kind of savage.
It's referring to like the brutal, like sleigh burn or
like that kind of person who's you know, savage. It's
(17:51):
not referring to like a savage. So it's not even
the right use of that word. These people are just,
I mean, the media literacy, the critical thinking is nonexistent
among so many of these people, and yet they just
influence millions of people online. Now apparently think Taylor Swift
the Kamala lover by the way is doing racist dog whistles.
(18:14):
It's just terrible. It's just more wanna be victim pathetic nonsense.
It makes absolutely no sense, and it discredits real racism
and real accusations of bigotry when you constantly just invoke
it so frivolously and throw these terms around like candy
on Halloween. At least, that's my take as a sane
(18:34):
person who doesn't even particularly like Taylor Swift but just
has a couple of brain cells left to rubbed together.
But here's the thing. When we push back on this,
when all the people like are saying, come on, guys,
this is ridiculous. You guys are saying it's a microaggression
that she used the word savage, like get a grip.
Their response is, well, you're white, so you're wrong. I'm
(18:57):
not even kidding. Listen to this woke Swift lecturing us
about how we need to listen to black women when
they say a microaggression is a microaggression. Actually I'll go off,
but first just watch the video.
Speaker 7 (19:12):
Hey, So, if a black woman or a person of
color is telling you that something is racist, something is microaggressive,
something is not sitting with them the right way. That
is not the time for you, as a white person
to open your mouth and say, actually the no, Yes,
I'm talking about Taylor Swift. I'm talking about critquess around
Taylor Swift. I know we're tired, I know it's been
talked about in nauseum, but I do think this is
(19:33):
really important and it's something that we should continue to
talk about. So one side of the criticisms about this
album are related to stylistic choice, vocals, musical composition. Right,
people can have their opinions on that. What I want
to talk about is the critiques of the lyrics and
specifically the way people are critiquing the racist and microaggressive
undertones that are within the lyrics, and a large majority
(19:56):
of the people calling that out and noticing that are
black women and people of color. And I am seeing
white women like myself commenting back on a lot of
those critiques saying, but she didn't mean it in this way,
and you're reaching and you're looking too far into it,
and it's not racist, Like, how could she be racist
when when in her music video she surrounded herself with
people of color and she endorsed Kamala Harris for it's
(20:20):
all of these people are making excuses like this for
a person that they don't even know. It's so wild
to me when a black person or a person of
color says that something is racist, that is not when
we go, hey, actually no.
Speaker 2 (20:34):
No, I would rather hurl myself into the sun than
hang out with her in any setting. Like you just
cannot imagine a more unpleasant type of person than this,
like woke young Karen TikToker, I don't know. To me,
(20:55):
at least, that's my These people are my personal Vietnam.
Every time I hear them speak, it gives me aids.
But well, I probably shouldn't say that, but you know what,
I'm at the point where I give no, so anyway
back to me. The idea that we just have to
listen up to black people and do whatever they say
(21:16):
because they're black is not giving anti racist, babe. It's
giving racist. It's giving woke KKK. By the way, I
just want you to know that because there's there's so
many problems with it. But if a black person makes
an allegation or an assertion, that assertion is either true
or false. It's either supported by points and logic and claims,
or it's not. But the color of their skin doesn't
(21:39):
like make it more or less correct. You genuinely sound
like your perspective would have a lot in common with
that of a clansman who also similarly think that people's
skin pigment or racial background determines the validity of their
perspective and being I don't think that. And the other
big problem with this is that it it assumes there's
(22:00):
some kind of homogeneous mind meld among black people. Because
I promise you right now, I could show these Taylor
swift lyrics to probably ninety percent of black women and
ask them if is this a microaggression? And their response
would be, well, first, their response would be, wtf is
a microaggression? I've never heard of that. I got bills
(22:22):
to pay, I have a job. But then if I
explained it to them and then ask them is this
a microaggression? They would look at me like I have
like I'm crazy? And are we supposed to listen to
those black women or are we supposed to listen to
the TikTok yapping black women work? I mean, this is
a microaggression because the idea that you can just well,
we need to listen to poc. What do you think
(22:44):
that they all get together at the barbecue and decide
whether something's a microaggression or not. Like, no, a lot
of them have different opinions, and they're either wrong or
right based on the merits of that opinion, not because
they check off some box. And if your message to
white people is that they just need to shut up
and listen to black black people and whatever they say,
because you're white so you don't get an opinion, you're
(23:05):
just going to create a lot of racist people. Actually,
like you're actually just gonna help farm more fans for
Nick Fuentes. I don't know how to tell you that
what you're doing is not constructive or productive. It is
deeply inflammatory and divisive. So why do they do it right,
It's because there is a certain woke echo chamber where
(23:28):
they are rewarded. They are applauded for this as your thanks, queen,
we love an Ally, Oh my gosh, thank you so
much for sticking up for listening to POC. So it's
this self serving thing that they do for atta boys.
But then they don't seem to realize how insulting actually
racist and just like destructive and inflammatory it is other
(23:50):
than that, though the woke Swifties seem lovely like I'm sorry,
I'm once again hashtag not all Swifties, but some of
these people are the most, like among the most deranged
and toxic people I've seen on the Internet. And if
you are not new here, if you've been listening to
the Brad Versus Everyone podcast, you know that I do
not say that lightly and that there is a lot
(24:12):
of competition. What do you guys think? Can you even
believe this is a controversy at all? I honestly can't.
But here we are, Here we are. This is what
my career has come to. Anyway, Like comment, YadA, YadA,
send me some will to live up. Next, we're going
(24:34):
to check in with everybody's favorite far left congresswoman and
also social media influencer of sorts, AOC Alexandria Ocasio Cortes,
because she just posted kind of a bizarre, kind of
gravelly video on Instagram apologizing sort of for something that
she said during an Instagram live. She's been trashing the
(24:59):
White House advisor Stephen Miller, who is an extremely controversial
and I think pretty radical figure, but she decided to
go after his height, which I'm we'll talk about it
doesn't even really make sense. In an Instagram live, she
started roasting him for being short, and now apparently that
was problematic, and she's explaining why she is sorry for
(25:20):
body shame. I'm not Oh my gosh. Anyway, here's that
original AOC video.
Speaker 8 (25:25):
Laugh at them. Stephen Miller is a clown. I've never
seen that guy in real life, but he looks like
he's like four to ten, and he looks like he
is angry about the fact that he's four ten, and
he looks like he is so mad that he is
for ten that he's taken that anger out at any
(25:49):
other population possible, like laugh at them, laugh at them, Yes,
they are dangerous.
Speaker 2 (25:58):
So this is just weird. This original little lant was weird.
Maybe she's trying to be funny. I don't know, she's
trying to like roast him or eat him up or whatever.
And I'm guilty of this on occasion. But I will
just say that like making fun of someone's looks or
taking shots at their physical appearance is like non responsive.
(26:19):
It doesn't actually make any Stephen Miller. Let's say that
he was four foot two or whatever. That doesn't make
him wrong about anything. And it's not a very good
or persuasive critique of someone. I also find height, of
all things, is a strange thing to go after people for,
to criticize people for, or to judge them based on,
because it's literally not a choice. There's nothing. If you're
(26:41):
going to roast somebody for like having terrible style or
not taking care of themselves and being like morbidly body
positive or whatever. I mean, even then I would rather
talk about the substance of what they're saying. But yeah,
I can be tempting to engage in that a little
bit sometimes, but at least then you're like roasting them
for aspects of their appearance, the body they have some
control over, just like roasting short people. And I guess
(27:04):
I say this also as somebody who was just I'm tall,
I'm six three or six four, and I don't know,
it just kind of lame, like I don't get the
point of this. What is the point of this? What
are we supposed to conclude about Stephen Miller on the
basis of the fact that he is short. And the
funny thing is he's not actually short. He's actually I
think above average height for a man. So it's just
(27:26):
like a very weird and stupid thing. But she's just
popping off on an Instagram live. I did find it
funny that they made Stephen Miller respond to this live
on Fox News. That was kind of hilarious to me,
Like they played this clip and made him react, which
I just found that funny. Of all the things, you've
got the White House Advisor, a top White House advisor
(27:47):
behind lots of Trump's most controversial policies. You're like, I
want to get your thoughts on this AOC Instagram video
where she called you short kind of comical but not
just very unserious and doesn't really make any points, but
this is kind of where our politics is that But
what's so funny to me? And I can't quite decide.
You guys will have to let me know if you
think in the comments if this is at least slightly
(28:09):
meant tongue in cheek, or if she's dead ass about this.
But AOC appears to have gotten some pushback for like
body shaming short kings or something, and so now she
wants to apologize and explain what she meant. So the
journalist Glenn Greenwald shared this and wrote, after facing backlash
over her body shaming of Steven Miller for his height.
(28:32):
AOC proclaims her love and support for the short king community.
She then explains her theory of height. Let's listen to this.
Speaker 5 (28:40):
I want to express my love for the short king community.
I don't believe in body shaming. I am talking about
how big or small someone is on the inside. Like,
for example, I have no idea how tall Andrew Tait
is no idea at all, But that guy looks to
(29:02):
me like five to three, like five three, five four.
Speaker 6 (29:09):
Whereas physically men of smaller stature can come across, they
are spiritually six foot.
Speaker 2 (29:20):
If you're a good.
Speaker 6 (29:20):
Dad, if you're if you stand with women, if you're
not belittling immigrants, you're like, you know, six'.
Speaker 5 (29:29):
Three, SPIRITUALLY i don't. Know AM i being? Problem?
Speaker 2 (29:31):
So is she being serious right? Now like is she trolling?
Us or is SHE i can't quite. Tell she's poking.
Fun So i'm not going to treat this too. Seriously
but this is so incoherent with this idea that WELL
i meant that he's spiritually five to three or, whatever
what does that even? Mean and it still all plays
(29:52):
into the kind of silly idea that like being taller
is means you're, better and being sure is somehow like
some kind of failing or, whatever which just doesn't, again
makes no. Sense it's like saying brunettes are inferior to.
Blondes it's just not a meaningful characteristic of human life
(30:12):
to draw conclusions about people. Love AND i don't, know
like's she a couple of glasses will wine deep in
this because, listen me And clarkson did a drunk live
stream where our members on the Normal gaze, channel SO
i can't. Judge ALTHOUGH i am not a, CONGRESSWOMAN i
am a, YouTuber so there's. That but this just all
(30:32):
seemed incoherent to, me and to the extent that she
is actually responding to un ironic backlash she received for body.
Shaming that is hilarious because simultaneously it can be true
that her comments are dumb and make no, sense and
also that anyone offended by them desperately needs a hobby
because it is not that. Deep it is really not that, significant,
(30:55):
Uh and you can actually just move along, like, oh,
no show me on doll where the body's shaming hurt, you,
like especially if you're not Even Stephen, Miller you're just
some short person out there and you're, offended like get
a grip and maybe some shoe. IMPLANTS i don't know
what to tell, you but to, me it's irrelevant whether
you're short or. Tall BUT i just found this whole
(31:15):
thing kind of, funny, honestly SO i wanted to share
it with all of. Y'all but you let me know
what you think in the comments. Below makes your subscribe
to the like? Button? YEA yeti. Yeah one final thing
we got to talk about, today and this is not
funny at. All we got to check in With Candace,
owens the, podcaster YouTube extraordinary and conspiracy. THEORIST i think
(31:38):
she actually would unironically call herself that at this, point
because she's making so many claims About Charlie kirk's death
that it's hard to keep. Up but she just dropped
an entire episode where she accuses A jewish journalist and
political Commentator Josh hammer of essentially being in On Charlie kirk's,
(31:59):
murder knowing about it ahead of time, somehow having advanced.
Knowledge maybe this connects to her suggestion maybe it was
an inside job AT, tpusa maybe it was a done By.
Israel all, things she has no real evidence Of but
she's making these very serious allegations About Josh, hammer but
making some pretty blatant errors and grossly contradicting herself in
(32:23):
some ways THAT i think are worth pointing out because
millions and millions of people are tuning instill and don't
seem to realize they're being. Misled and, then just to
be fair To josh who it's funny Because josh AND
i agree on very. Little we have had cordial interactions
in the, past but there's, like we're not, friends we're
not allies in any political or ideological. Sense BUT i
(32:45):
just feel compelled to help clear up his name a
little bit Because candace did him so dirty by smearing
him as somehow in on the death of a, friend
a dear friend of, his because of a tweet she
took insanely out of context and miss. Portrayed we're going
to break it, down but all, right so, first here
is the episode she. DROPPED i did listen to the whole,
(33:05):
Thing Charlie's Final. Hours what else Is Josh hammer lying
about his pictures and the? Thumbnail and she goes on
to accuse, HIM i would, say pretty explicitly of having
advanced knowledge Of charlie's murder like this was going to,
happen and maybe even calling for it ON. X let's
watch this clip AND i will then show you some
RECEIPTS i was able to pretty easily. Find actually didn't
(33:28):
take much work or. EFFORT i just had to scroll
for about five minutes that contradict the things she's. Saying,
now this is a. COMPILATION i did watch the Full canvas,
episode but this is a compilation made by Milk BAR,
tv which is an account that Criticizes Candice ollens and
slices up compilations of her contradicting herself and then puts
receipts against her claims in the. Video here is a
(33:51):
compilation they made from this video that she made very
explicitly Accusing Josh hammer of some kind of nefarious activity
on the basis of exactly. One let's take a.
Speaker 9 (34:01):
Look twitter users pointed out a very strange tweet That
Josh hammer hit send on sixteen hours Before Charlie kirk
was assassinated for no apparent reason at. All he retweeted
something That President Donald trump had sent a full twelve
years ago about public. Executions here it is here is that. Retweet,
(34:22):
now what is a justification for? This there might be.
ONE i tried in earnest to at first rationalize. It,
right what could have been going on That Josh hammer
decided to dig through the twenty Thirteen twitter archives and
retweet someone calling for someone calling for a public.
Speaker 2 (34:36):
Execution, so, okay the first problem here is she makes
it sounds like it was Just josh who did. This
that's not. True tons of people were sharing this Old
trump tweet calling for public. Executions and they were doing
this because everyone was talking about the murder of That
ukrainian refugee who was murdered by that man on the,
(34:58):
subway and it was in reference to that that he
was making this. Claim and we know this BECAUSE i
went back In josh's FEED i found this exact, tweet
and immediately prior to, that he had retweeted THE Us
attorney for The Western district Of New York city saying
federal charges against The charlotte killer are to make sure
that the violent people like this don't see the light of.
(35:19):
Day so immediately after, that he then shares this should
public execution for all to see be brought back tweet From. Trump,
Yeah so it's like immediately clear that he was talking
about the person who murdered That ukrainian refugee and saying
there should be public. Executions and it wasn't just. Him
tons of people were sharing the Soul trump tweet because of,
that because the federal charges had just dropped that day
(35:42):
or maybe the day, before and so everyone was talking
about the. Case, still that is why he tweeted. This
but she is suggesting that what exactly that he had
for knowledge of That Charlotte kirk was about to be publicly,
Executed that is what she's. Implying there's no evidence other
than this completely out of context. Tweet and, again you
(36:03):
can go and find tons of people who were sharing
this Old trump tweet if you go to the quote.
Tweets tons of people were circulating, it and tons of
people were calling for the death penalty for the dude
who killed this, woman or for public executions because the
federal charges had just. Dropped so she looked really hard
but couldn't find an. Explanation she clearly either was looking
(36:27):
and didn't want to find an, explanation or as just
being dishonest. HERE i don't know what to, say but,
GUYS i come back to this extraordinary claims require extraordinary,
evidence and she's suggesting That Josh hammer was somehow aware
of what was going to happen To Charlie kirk and
her only evidence is this. Tweet she has. Misunderstood that's it, seriously,
(36:48):
like let's keep, Listening, jen.
Speaker 9 (36:51):
Would we trust If josh came out and said that
tweet was definitely About? Arena other people pull Old trump,
tweets some did pulled that very tweet and called for
a public execution.
Speaker 2 (37:11):
The first. Time so this is so strange because she
says she couldn't find any reason why he would share
this tweet and say public, Execution but then As milkbar
put on, screen tons of people were sharing that tweet
about The ukrainian refugee. Case and then also she acknowledges
that other people were doing, that but then, says it's
so suspicious That Josh hammer pulled this random. Tweet does
(37:34):
she not understand how this doesn't add? Up this does
not make. Sense and, again, GUYS i am not A
Josh hammer, Fan, okay like WE i know nothing in.
Common we're not. Friends and by the, way every TIME
i Criticize, candace people are like Is israel paying. YOU
i actually disagree with a lot Of Josh hammer's views On.
(37:54):
ISRAEL i think he totally lacks sympathy for the people
Of gaza in a way THAT i don't agree with at.
All And i'm not paid By israel in any. WAY
i just call out internet charlatan's and crazy people who
spread fake, news And Candice owens is increasingly becoming one
of the most prominent. Ones so that's WHAT i, do,
Okay And i'll do that for the, LEFT i will
do that for the. Right i'll do that for the.
(38:15):
MIDDLE i don't. Care AND i don't even weigh in
on The Israel palestine conflict any great. DETAIL i just
weigh in on internet, hoaxes, lies terrible, coverage all this
kind of, stuff and she keeps doing. IT i would
gladly do this for a Pro israel person as, well
by the, way so don't hit me with. That the
bb checks have not hit, yet, okay Getting i'm not
(38:37):
getting people keep commenting you're getting seven thousand dollars a
week OR i don't even know what that's talking, about
but it's certainly not. TRUE i make all my money
from YouTube and other platforms and sponsors, occasionally BUT i
don't get paid by any. Country crazy talk.
Speaker 9 (38:51):
Time that he tweeted about a public execution was back
in twenty, thirteen and he's said it in Reference i'm
sorry in twenty twenty, two and he said it in
reference to The boston marathon bombing terrorist Account i'm sorry
the uvade. Shooter AND i can tell you that it
(39:14):
is not something that Josh hammer regularly tweets.
Speaker 2 (39:17):
About so this is just weird because she's admitting that
he has, previously on multiple occasions called for public executions
of like atrocious criminals who commit horrible, acts but also
telling us she doesn't believe that he was talking about
The ukrainian, murder the person who murdered The ukrainian. Refugee why,
not like you're providing evidence that supports his most obvious
(39:40):
interpretation of. EVENTS i don't get. IT i don't how
does she not see?
Speaker 9 (39:45):
This rather than say what he definitely meant or what
he didn't, MEAN i decided to just create a micro
timeline of Josh hammer's tweets a the day Before charlock.
Kirksassination this is what Josh hammer. Tweeted he tweeted a
total of n nine times On september, ninth and you
can gather what was going on that day from his
tweeks this three hour. Break maybe this is A this is.
Speaker 2 (40:08):
Hilarious because she her own timeline shows that on the
day of this, tweet he was tweeting about the media
appearances he was doing about the murder of The ukrainian.
Woman but this is evidence he couldn't have been talking
about The ukrainian. Case what what's.
Speaker 9 (40:30):
The three hour break where he speaks To Charlie kirk
and then at nine oh nine pm again we're Talking
Eastern Josh hammer tweaks in favor of republic, execution and
there's no context that is. Provided so anybody telling you
he for sure meant, this we cannot know. That we
cannot Know Josh hammer's.
Speaker 2 (40:49):
Thoughts so she did a whole episode of her podcast
that millions and millions of people listen to and watch
suggest some sort of nefarious behavior or foresight on the
behalf of on behalf Of Josh. Hammer and the only
real evidence she has is this tweet from him that
(41:12):
actually makes perfect, sense and there's a million more obvious
and logical explanations for it That i'll relate to The ukrainian,
case rather than him secretly having some sort of knowledge
About Charlie kirk or Wanting Charlie kirk, executed because the
first thing you would do is tweet. That by the, way,
Right like that totally makes. Sense, Yeah, Candace you're really onto.
(41:33):
Something and what's so strange about this is THAT i
still Believe candace has provided no evidence that the federal
government is in on some conspiracy or cover up to
like Frame Tyler, robinson or That israel really did, it
or that it was an inside job BY, tpusa although
she's now citing her dreams as evidence of THE tpusa. Claim,
(41:56):
ACTUALLY i should mention that listen.
Speaker 9 (41:58):
To, This LIKE i just, said had a vivid dream this,
weekend And charlie came to me and he told me
that he was. Betrayed and so for, me you don't
have to believe, that BUT i do believe, That and
it was the immediate SENSE i. Got, actually AND i
don't know who exactly it is that betrayed, him BUT
(42:18):
i also felt in the. Dream but it is soon
going to be revealed that it's actually inevitable that it
is going to be revealed that there is nothing and
no one that is going to stop the truth from coming,
out and it is going to have international. Consequences take
that to the. Bank quote me on.
Speaker 2 (42:31):
That i'm, sorry but dreams are not, evident so why
you would bring that up is kind of beyond. Me but,
ANYWAY i think she's provided no evidence of these extraordinary
conspiracy theories or claims or. Whatever but she actually has
provided some real evidence that Maybe Charlie kirk was changing
his views On. Israel she provided these text messages that
were later, authenticated and, okay so she Has apparently they're,
(42:55):
real maybe he was, reconsidering although she could have also
sent those texts kind of in cheek or kind of in.
FRUSTRATION i don't. Know but then you discredit yourself when
you've actually discovered something real or made an interesting revelation
or point by then immediately jumping to conclusions you haven't,
substantiated like Therefore israel did, it or therefore it's A
(43:17):
tpusa inside, job any of these outlandish claims for which
there is no, evidence or when you dedicate an entire
episode to attacking and slandering A jewish journalist based on
a complete misrepresentation and distortion of one tweet like she
can't help. Herself that's the, thing because when she occasionally
(43:39):
stumbles on something true or, interesting she then goes onto
the next crazy imagination hallucination thing that she's obsessed with that.
DAY i don't, know, MAN i just it is a
spectacle to. Watch it concerns. ME i, mean at this,
Point i'm past concern for, her because you have she
(44:01):
clearly has some. Issues but you can't bleed on other,
people and she's clearly doing. That But i'm more concerned
that millions of people are still trusting her because she
has shown you over and over again that she is
sloppy or. Dishonest there's no other. Explanation and if somebody
will mislead you about this one thing in this kind of,
(44:21):
way they will mislead you about all. Things so JUST
i really wish people would wake up and stop listening
To candace and. Stop it's not entertainment at this. Point,
OKAY i know people find it. Entertaining she is, entertaining
she is, charismatic but she is slandering innocent people and
being so fast and loose with the facts in such
areas of such egregious and serious allegations that she's. MAKING
(44:43):
i truly think it is totally irresponsible and reprehensible at this.
Point but that's just my. Perspective you guys are free to.
Disagree you're free to still watch her if you. Choose
it is a free. Country but that is my perspective
and my. Recommendation what do you guys? Think let me
know in the comments. Below make sure subscribe to the like.
Button YadA, YadA, yeah and that will be it for
today's episode of The Brad Versus Everyone. Podcast thanks so
(45:06):
much for tuning. In do consider rating and reviewing the
show on audio podcasts or we're recommending it to a.
Friend that's the number one way that audio podcasts. Grow
and with, that, guys we'll talk. Again real s
It's the same reason as to why America kaya, please
just In Gold you stop.
Speaker 2 (00:06):
The left's favorite internet celebrity is facing allegations of abusing
his dog on camera. But everybody's missing a massive point here.
We're gonna break this down and so much more on
today's episode of the burad Versus Everyone Podcast, where I
(00:28):
break down the craziest stuff from the Internet and social media,
all from an independent perspective. And by the way, guys,
I am on the road today. We're back in Michigan
for a wedding, so we're back at the old House,
and yeah, I'm just gonna bring you in a normal
show like usual, but obviously not in my typical setup,
(00:49):
but still want to talk with you all. And there's
actually so much unhinged stuff, so we're gonna lose some
brain cells together. And the first topic we have to
talk about is the left wing Hassan Piker, who is
facing some pretty serious backlash right now. Honestly, the most
perhaps the most widespread condemnation I've seen from his own crowd.
(01:10):
Right like, even left leaning liberals and streamers and progressives
are very upset with him, many of them because of
an incident that happened on his live stream a couple
of days ago, where it appears from the footage hard
to say exactly when we'll get into the details. He
is denying this that he presses a button to shock
his dog Kaya, as if she is wearing a shock
(01:34):
collar to keep her in place on her mat that
she's supposed to sit in for hours and hours on
end during his live streams, almost as if she is
a prop. Here is the initial footage of him rambling,
and then Kaya disrupts him by daring to step up
or step away from the mat and not be a
good prop, and he reaches forward and appears to press something.
(01:56):
She then yelps in pain.
Speaker 3 (01:58):
Here is that footage of all of America's much more
consequential violence. Okay, it's the same reason as to why America,
Kaya please just go, just stop.
Speaker 2 (02:16):
Jesus Christ, what are you doing.
Speaker 1 (02:18):
You're being such a baby.
Speaker 2 (02:22):
It's just.
Speaker 3 (02:25):
You're making her stressed.
Speaker 1 (02:28):
She just literally is so incredibly spoiled from my mom.
Speaker 2 (02:36):
No, she doesn't want to come over here to see
what's up.
Speaker 1 (02:39):
She just wants to roam the house because she got
to roam the house when I was gone, and she
needs to literally have the same structured regimented.
Speaker 2 (02:48):
So you can hear the dog yelp in pain. Well,
explore why that happened or why it didn't happen. But
people were pretty upset with his son because everyone says,
this looks like he's using a shot collar on a
pretty high setting, by the way, not even just like
a light shot, because she yelps audibly to train his dog,
(03:08):
and she hadn't even done anything wrong. She just got
up out of the position that she was in behind him,
where I guess he wants her to sit all day
while he streams for like eight hours or whatever. I
don't know. Anyway, though he of course, in the spirit
of fairness, I should point out that he is denying it,
and I'll play the clip of him offering an alternative
explanation in a little bit. I did want to read
(03:30):
you guys this funny tweet though from some lefty on
X where they say she clips her paw. It's very obvious,
we have different definitions, very obvious. But anyway, here's the
funny part. And care imagine I can't even read this
with a straight face. You are willfully dumber than a dog.
If you choose to believe this, that it was a
shot color and you care more about imagining the suffering
(03:51):
of a single animal than millions of Palestinians, ma'am. Literally,
who said anything about Palestinians like you did the meme?
It reminded me of this tweet I saw a long
time ago from this kind of center left guy, Noah Smith.
Protester punches baby in the head, normal person. Hey, you
can't just punch babies in the head, protester. Okay, I
(04:13):
think we can all agree that what's happening in Palestine
right right now is a lot more important than this
one baby getting punched in the head just made me
laugh because she literally did the meme. She's like bringing
up Palestine to like, what about that even has anything
to do with this say that he did And I'm
(04:33):
stressing guys, he denies this, say that he did shock
his dog on camera on stream. You're just going to say, well,
what's happening in Palestine is worse, So what we can't
talk about anything ever, because there's always something worse happening.
That actually kind of reminds me of a conversation I
have with a couple lived out radio hosts the other
day post that on my bonus channel I think called
(04:54):
Brad Palumbo Highlights if you want to go take a look.
But we were talking about transitioning kids and I was
explaining why I'm against and they just kept bringing up, well,
like what about gun violence or other things? And it's like, yeah, there,
I acknowledge there are bigger problems in the world. Doesn't
make this not bad. Like there's just such a weird
deflection that these types pull all the time. Now we're
(05:14):
going to take a look at Hassan's initial denial where
he says that it wasn't a shock collar first though,
make sure subscribed with the like button comment YadA yah.
Now let's listen to Hassan. I think it was the
same day. He was kept getting brought up because this
was going viral while he was still streaming, and he
initially responds this way, take a look to hear oral
(05:36):
arguments on Thursday.
Speaker 1 (05:37):
Oh my god, is there like an LSF video or something.
Is that why there's like hella people coming in here
and screeching? Is that what's going on?
Speaker 4 (05:54):
Oh?
Speaker 2 (05:56):
Classic?
Speaker 1 (06:01):
It started on the then age three then l SEV
is the classic pipeline.
Speaker 2 (06:06):
I'm gonna die, dude.
Speaker 1 (06:10):
Yes, I am incredibly abusive to the not only best trained,
but also the best behaving and most spoiled dog on
the planet. Is from when Kaye yelped. Yeah, she yelped
because she clipped herself on something when she was getting
(06:31):
off the bed.
Speaker 2 (06:32):
So here's the thing that stood out to me about this.
A couple things did actually, But like if I was
on stream with Reggie, may he rest in peace and
somebody was like, oh my god, you shock your dog
or use a shot collar, I would pick Reggie up,
take off his collar and show it to the care
and be like, not a shot collar. I don't know
what we're yapping about, Like what do you talk about?
(06:52):
That's not real? Notable that he didn't do that right.
And then his explanation is that Kaya simply caught herself
and yelped. I don't find that impossible. But even then
I find like, Okay, you didn't exactly check on her.
You didn't seem very concerned that your dog was in pain,
or was your stream more important than that? So a
couple tweets here I want to read. One is from
(07:13):
the left. The I don't even know how to categorize
her the YouTuber shoe on head wild. How the most
good faith interpretation of the Hassan thing is that he
didn't really use a shot collar on his dog. He
just got weirdly angry at his dog for briefly stepping
off the little square he makes her sit on for
four plus hours while he live streams exactly. Another person
pointed out on x if his dog yelped like that
(07:34):
by a self inflicted injury and he didn't stop streaming
to check on her, that makes him an even bigger
sociopath than if he did it himself. I don't know
about that, but it's certainly a valid point that he
should have checked on her now. Dan Saltman, who's a
very prominent Hassan hater, just context there yes said yesterday
during his stream, Hassan had the chance to very easily
(07:55):
bring over the dog and show that there was no
shot collar on it. That's all it would take to
end the drama in any normal person, and would immediately
do that to stop the drama. Anything he shows now
is fabricated. So look, I should say this. I really
don't know either way. I think he probably does have
a shot collar, and I think he probably did shock
the dog. I think he uses her as a prop.
(08:16):
But I have to be honest with you guys when
I know something and when I don't, because I think
it's reckless when people speculate and present it as facts.
I don't know. It is possible that he is telling
the truth and it is not a shot collar, as
I will get to. I think there's a bigger point
here that everyone is missing. But there's a little bit
more evidence suggesting that maybe something here did go on.
(08:38):
One Here's a clip from when a guest recently visited
him and pointed out how tight Kaia's collar was. He
not only seemed unbothered, but he seemed to almost want
to say something about the collar. Then stop, listen to this.
Speaker 5 (08:52):
And now it's mainstream.
Speaker 2 (08:54):
I love her. I think her coller is too tight.
Speaker 4 (08:57):
Well, it's are we get to.
Speaker 6 (09:00):
You have to you have to be able to get
two fingers, and I couldn't even get one.
Speaker 2 (09:03):
I think you're choking.
Speaker 4 (09:07):
He has a lot of neck meat.
Speaker 2 (09:09):
There's also footage of him where he admits to owning
a shock collar. By the way, listen to this, My.
Speaker 4 (09:16):
Old roommate wanted to use a shock collar or Fish
and his dogs for Fish and his dog's barking. I
couldn't do it. I have it still, I bought it.
They are incredibly effective.
Speaker 2 (09:37):
And then you have to go several years back for
this one and it's it's old. But I don't and
I'm not going to show it because I actually just
think it's it's horrible. He's on footage pulling the tail
of his old dog when the dog was misbehaving, which
is a big no no. You don't do that. You
don't pull a dog's tail. That's like very messed up.
(09:58):
But what has happened since he shows the collar on
stream the next day. He didn't do it the day of.
He didn't just do it in the moment. This is notable.
He holds it up and he says, it's not a
shock collar. It's a vibration caller. So wait a second,
this doesn't add up because he told us she got caught,
so was he lying? Then he did, so he did
(10:19):
buzz her, But it's just a vibration caller, which is
a thing. There is such a thing as vibration callers.
And then he holds it up and he talks about
it and it's descended into like this forensic debate where
I'm not kidding you, this is a huge trend and
streamers are dissecting it framed by frame, They're looking up
the model number, They're trying to like prove he's lying
(10:41):
or all of this. My answer is, I don't know.
I do not know the truth about this. I don't
care enough to get down into the granular, granular granular
details of it and try to come up with the truth.
I don't trust him. I don't he's already lied in
this because or he's already at least been inconsistent in
(11:01):
this story so far, and that it's very clear to
me that he doesn't treat dogs well, whether it's pulling
the dog's tail in the past or making this dog,
even if it is just a vibration collar sit there
as a prop And I think that somebody doesn't treat
dogs well is a red flag to me of who
they are as a person or any helpless pet that
(11:21):
depends on you. If you mistreat them in any way,
that's a serious red flag to me as a person.
But the broader point I want to make about this,
it's kind of insane that it's come to this. It's
kind of insane that, like people are now turning against
Hassan over this. It wasn't gonna be when he said
America didn't deserve nine to eleven. It wasn't. It wasn't
(11:45):
when he said a Republican should be murdered on his
stream over and over again, right like, it wasn't any
of the times he has explicitly expressed support for designated
terror groups. But it was because he Peers too allegedly
may have, but he denies it, used a shot color
on his dog. Like I find that icky, especially in
(12:06):
this context. It's not like you're doing it for safety
reasons or something like. There may be a scenario in
which it is appropriate to use a shot collar for
a dog. I don't know. I'm not a dog ethicist,
I'm not a dog trainer, but I know that this
isn't it to keep them sitting there as a prop
in the background for your live stream. That is certainly
not it. But anyway, it's like crazy to me that
(12:29):
this is the thing that is finally getting some people
to turn against him, like even liberal content creators. I
just think, as much as I love dogs, we might
have cut up priorities at this point in this culture
and in this country. That's my take on this whole saga.
I want to know what you guys think. I want
(12:49):
to be again clear that I cannot categorically state that
he did use a shot collar. I don't know. I
think I'm presenting you with evidence. You can make up
your own mind what you think happened. But I think
even if he didn't, there's levels of dishonesty and mistreatment
of dogs here that are a problem. And then, more broadly,
(13:13):
the fact that anyone is still in his fan base
at this point and he's still so big. Guys, you
have to understand he's one of the most listened to
people on the internet is insane to me for all
the other reasons that I mentioned. That's my take. You guys,
let me know what you think in the comments below.
Do make sure subscribe if you aren't yet hit the
leg button yet. Yeah yeah, Oh, and remember you can
send in your voicemails for our Voicemail Friday episodes where
(13:34):
I react to your wild car stories, give you advice
on your personal life scenarios and drama, and answer questions
you guys have for me. The voicemail link is the
speak pipe link in the description. Now we're going to
talk about the Swifties again early some of the Swifties,
the woke Swifties. I got a lot of messages from
y'all last time I talked about this. I know that
(13:55):
there are lots of normal people out there who love
Taylor Swift, and it is no shade to y'all. Hashtag
not all Swifties, but there is a segment of the
Taylor Swift fan base, the woke segment in particular, that
is absolutely deranged, and many of them are now on
TikTok crashing out over the micro aggressions supposedly in one
(14:20):
of her songs, so much so that I keep seeing
viral video after viral video after viral video on TikTok
about this that I feel like I have to just
talk about it more because there's two levels of insanity
to the soaka. One is it's insane that anyone thinks
these are actually microaggressions. Then it's insane that when we
say they're not, their response is you're wrong because you're white.
(14:42):
I'm not kidding, Like this is exactly how they are
portraying it, and is genuinely diabolical. So the context here
is that the new Taylor Swift song Eldest Daughter has
some lyrics, and I looked up the full lyrics, but
these lyrics include these couple of sentences that people seizing on.
But I'm not a bad bitch and this isn't savage
(15:05):
is part of the chorus. Now it comes in the
context of the whole song is about how everyone tries
to seem unbothered. Like she says that everyone's unbothered till
they're not sad as it seems. Apathy is hot. When
you said you found me, When you found me, I
said I was busy. That was a lie. Anyway, I've
(15:27):
been dying from just trying to seem cool. So the
point is about how she's like, I'm not actually this
bad bitch, I'm not savage. I'm not like cool and unbothered.
I actually am you know, emotional, and I am in
love or I'm not so many traders smooth operators. But
she's saying that's not her anymore, if it ever was.
I guess don't come to me for Taylor Swift lyric interpretations,
(15:51):
but what I can tell you is that it is
not in fact a racist dog whistle because she used
the word savage. But that is what TikTokers are saying.
Listen to this Taylor Swift.
Speaker 4 (16:04):
Yeah, that song.
Speaker 2 (16:05):
Is so microaggressive.
Speaker 1 (16:07):
It's actually I felt like I was hate crimed as
I was listening to it.
Speaker 6 (16:12):
I'm not a bad bitch.
Speaker 4 (16:14):
I'm not as.
Speaker 7 (16:14):
Savage with basically the biggest dog whistle, slash and microaggression.
Speaker 2 (16:20):
That can be yelled at right in a song.
Speaker 4 (16:22):
But some of y'all are sitting on this app doing
mental gymnastics trying to say no.
Speaker 7 (16:27):
And so now when people are calling out a microaggression
and a song, it's not that serious, it's not that deep.
Speaker 2 (16:33):
But I think that things are that deep.
Speaker 7 (16:35):
Yes, I am the woke saying, but I'm not babitch
and hesy savage.
Speaker 1 (16:42):
I beg of you to actually look into the historical
roots of a word like savage.
Speaker 2 (16:46):
I love the one who says that we're doing mental
gymnastics or we're stretching to not acknowledge it. No, but
that's you. You're stretching. We're not the stretching one here.
You're at the yoga mat in the room. Okay, I'm
just babbling I'm not making any sense because these people
make me want to crash out. When Taylor Swift she
(17:09):
says I'm not savage, or she says this isn't savage.
What she's saying is she's referring to the slang use
of savage, like oh that was savage, or like when
somebody rows someone, you're like, damn, he's savage. It's has
nothing to do with like calling black people primal or
savages or whatever. Sort of microaggression, which, again I have
(17:31):
to stress to you, is not a real concept. It
is not a thing. But even to the extent that
it is, qualifying this as a microaggression is absurd because
in context, it's not referring to that kind of savage.
It's referring to like the brutal, like sleigh burn or
like that kind of person who's you know, savage. It's
(17:51):
not referring to like a savage. So it's not even
the right use of that word. These people are just,
I mean, the media literacy, the critical thinking is nonexistent
among so many of these people, and yet they just
influence millions of people online. Now apparently think Taylor Swift
the Kamala lover by the way is doing racist dog whistles.
(18:14):
It's just terrible. It's just more wanna be victim pathetic nonsense.
It makes absolutely no sense, and it discredits real racism
and real accusations of bigotry when you constantly just invoke
it so frivolously and throw these terms around like candy
on Halloween. At least, that's my take as a sane
(18:34):
person who doesn't even particularly like Taylor Swift but just
has a couple of brain cells left to rubbed together.
But here's the thing. When we push back on this,
when all the people like are saying, come on, guys,
this is ridiculous. You guys are saying it's a microaggression
that she used the word savage, like get a grip.
Their response is, well, you're white, so you're wrong. I'm
(18:57):
not even kidding. Listen to this woke Swift lecturing us
about how we need to listen to black women when
they say a microaggression is a microaggression. Actually I'll go off,
but first just watch the video.
Speaker 7 (19:12):
Hey, So, if a black woman or a person of
color is telling you that something is racist, something is microaggressive,
something is not sitting with them the right way. That
is not the time for you, as a white person
to open your mouth and say, actually the no, Yes,
I'm talking about Taylor Swift. I'm talking about critquess around
Taylor Swift. I know we're tired, I know it's been
talked about in nauseum, but I do think this is
(19:33):
really important and it's something that we should continue to
talk about. So one side of the criticisms about this
album are related to stylistic choice, vocals, musical composition. Right,
people can have their opinions on that. What I want
to talk about is the critiques of the lyrics and
specifically the way people are critiquing the racist and microaggressive
undertones that are within the lyrics, and a large majority
(19:56):
of the people calling that out and noticing that are
black women and people of color. And I am seeing
white women like myself commenting back on a lot of
those critiques saying, but she didn't mean it in this way,
and you're reaching and you're looking too far into it,
and it's not racist, Like, how could she be racist
when when in her music video she surrounded herself with
people of color and she endorsed Kamala Harris for it's
(20:20):
all of these people are making excuses like this for
a person that they don't even know. It's so wild
to me when a black person or a person of
color says that something is racist, that is not when
we go, hey, actually no.
Speaker 2 (20:34):
No, I would rather hurl myself into the sun than
hang out with her in any setting. Like you just
cannot imagine a more unpleasant type of person than this,
like woke young Karen TikToker, I don't know. To me,
(20:55):
at least, that's my These people are my personal Vietnam.
Every time I hear them speak, it gives me aids.
But well, I probably shouldn't say that, but you know what,
I'm at the point where I give no, so anyway
back to me. The idea that we just have to
listen up to black people and do whatever they say
(21:16):
because they're black is not giving anti racist, babe. It's
giving racist. It's giving woke KKK. By the way, I
just want you to know that because there's there's so
many problems with it. But if a black person makes
an allegation or an assertion, that assertion is either true
or false. It's either supported by points and logic and claims,
or it's not. But the color of their skin doesn't
(21:39):
like make it more or less correct. You genuinely sound
like your perspective would have a lot in common with
that of a clansman who also similarly think that people's
skin pigment or racial background determines the validity of their
perspective and being I don't think that. And the other
big problem with this is that it it assumes there's
(22:00):
some kind of homogeneous mind meld among black people. Because
I promise you right now, I could show these Taylor
swift lyrics to probably ninety percent of black women and
ask them if is this a microaggression? And their response
would be, well, first, their response would be, wtf is
a microaggression? I've never heard of that. I got bills
(22:22):
to pay, I have a job. But then if I
explained it to them and then ask them is this
a microaggression? They would look at me like I have
like I'm crazy? And are we supposed to listen to
those black women or are we supposed to listen to
the TikTok yapping black women work? I mean, this is
a microaggression because the idea that you can just well,
we need to listen to poc. What do you think
(22:44):
that they all get together at the barbecue and decide
whether something's a microaggression or not. Like, no, a lot
of them have different opinions, and they're either wrong or
right based on the merits of that opinion, not because
they check off some box. And if your message to
white people is that they just need to shut up
and listen to black black people and whatever they say,
because you're white so you don't get an opinion, you're
(23:05):
just going to create a lot of racist people. Actually,
like you're actually just gonna help farm more fans for
Nick Fuentes. I don't know how to tell you that
what you're doing is not constructive or productive. It is
deeply inflammatory and divisive. So why do they do it right,
It's because there is a certain woke echo chamber where
(23:28):
they are rewarded. They are applauded for this as your thanks, queen,
we love an Ally, Oh my gosh, thank you so
much for sticking up for listening to POC. So it's
this self serving thing that they do for atta boys.
But then they don't seem to realize how insulting actually
racist and just like destructive and inflammatory it is other
(23:50):
than that, though the woke Swifties seem lovely like I'm sorry,
I'm once again hashtag not all Swifties, but some of
these people are the most, like among the most deranged
and toxic people I've seen on the Internet. And if
you are not new here, if you've been listening to
the Brad Versus Everyone podcast, you know that I do
not say that lightly and that there is a lot
(24:12):
of competition. What do you guys think? Can you even
believe this is a controversy at all? I honestly can't.
But here we are, Here we are. This is what
my career has come to. Anyway, Like comment, YadA, YadA,
send me some will to live up. Next, we're going
(24:34):
to check in with everybody's favorite far left congresswoman and
also social media influencer of sorts, AOC Alexandria Ocasio Cortes,
because she just posted kind of a bizarre, kind of
gravelly video on Instagram apologizing sort of for something that
she said during an Instagram live. She's been trashing the
(24:59):
White House advisor Stephen Miller, who is an extremely controversial
and I think pretty radical figure, but she decided to
go after his height, which I'm we'll talk about it
doesn't even really make sense. In an Instagram live, she
started roasting him for being short, and now apparently that
was problematic, and she's explaining why she is sorry for
(25:20):
body shame. I'm not Oh my gosh. Anyway, here's that
original AOC video.
Speaker 8 (25:25):
Laugh at them. Stephen Miller is a clown. I've never
seen that guy in real life, but he looks like
he's like four to ten, and he looks like he
is angry about the fact that he's four ten, and
he looks like he is so mad that he is
for ten that he's taken that anger out at any
(25:49):
other population possible, like laugh at them, laugh at them, Yes,
they are dangerous.
Speaker 2 (25:58):
So this is just weird. This original little lant was weird.
Maybe she's trying to be funny. I don't know, she's
trying to like roast him or eat him up or whatever.
And I'm guilty of this on occasion. But I will
just say that like making fun of someone's looks or
taking shots at their physical appearance is like non responsive.
(26:19):
It doesn't actually make any Stephen Miller. Let's say that
he was four foot two or whatever. That doesn't make
him wrong about anything. And it's not a very good
or persuasive critique of someone. I also find height, of
all things, is a strange thing to go after people for,
to criticize people for, or to judge them based on,
because it's literally not a choice. There's nothing. If you're
(26:41):
going to roast somebody for like having terrible style or
not taking care of themselves and being like morbidly body
positive or whatever. I mean, even then I would rather
talk about the substance of what they're saying. But yeah,
I can be tempting to engage in that a little
bit sometimes, but at least then you're like roasting them
for aspects of their appearance, the body they have some
control over, just like roasting short people. And I guess
(27:04):
I say this also as somebody who was just I'm tall,
I'm six three or six four, and I don't know,
it just kind of lame, like I don't get the
point of this. What is the point of this? What
are we supposed to conclude about Stephen Miller on the
basis of the fact that he is short. And the
funny thing is he's not actually short. He's actually I
think above average height for a man. So it's just
(27:26):
like a very weird and stupid thing. But she's just
popping off on an Instagram live. I did find it
funny that they made Stephen Miller respond to this live
on Fox News. That was kind of hilarious to me,
Like they played this clip and made him react, which
I just found that funny. Of all the things, you've
got the White House Advisor, a top White House advisor
(27:47):
behind lots of Trump's most controversial policies. You're like, I
want to get your thoughts on this AOC Instagram video
where she called you short kind of comical but not
just very unserious and doesn't really make any points, but
this is kind of where our politics is that But
what's so funny to me? And I can't quite decide.
You guys will have to let me know if you
think in the comments if this is at least slightly
(28:09):
meant tongue in cheek, or if she's dead ass about this.
But AOC appears to have gotten some pushback for like
body shaming short kings or something, and so now she
wants to apologize and explain what she meant. So the
journalist Glenn Greenwald shared this and wrote, after facing backlash
over her body shaming of Steven Miller for his height.
(28:32):
AOC proclaims her love and support for the short king community.
She then explains her theory of height. Let's listen to this.
Speaker 5 (28:40):
I want to express my love for the short king community.
I don't believe in body shaming. I am talking about
how big or small someone is on the inside. Like,
for example, I have no idea how tall Andrew Tait
is no idea at all, But that guy looks to
(29:02):
me like five to three, like five three, five four.
Speaker 6 (29:09):
Whereas physically men of smaller stature can come across, they
are spiritually six foot.
Speaker 2 (29:20):
If you're a good.
Speaker 6 (29:20):
Dad, if you're if you stand with women, if you're
not belittling immigrants, you're like, you know, six'.
Speaker 5 (29:29):
Three, SPIRITUALLY i don't. Know AM i being? Problem?
Speaker 2 (29:31):
So is she being serious right? Now like is she trolling?
Us or is SHE i can't quite. Tell she's poking.
Fun So i'm not going to treat this too. Seriously
but this is so incoherent with this idea that WELL
i meant that he's spiritually five to three or, whatever
what does that even? Mean and it still all plays
(29:52):
into the kind of silly idea that like being taller
is means you're, better and being sure is somehow like
some kind of failing or, whatever which just doesn't, again
makes no. Sense it's like saying brunettes are inferior to.
Blondes it's just not a meaningful characteristic of human life
(30:12):
to draw conclusions about people. Love AND i don't, know
like's she a couple of glasses will wine deep in
this because, listen me And clarkson did a drunk live
stream where our members on the Normal gaze, channel SO
i can't. Judge ALTHOUGH i am not a, CONGRESSWOMAN i
am a, YouTuber so there's. That but this just all
(30:32):
seemed incoherent to, me and to the extent that she
is actually responding to un ironic backlash she received for body.
Shaming that is hilarious because simultaneously it can be true
that her comments are dumb and make no, sense and
also that anyone offended by them desperately needs a hobby
because it is not that. Deep it is really not that, significant,
(30:55):
Uh and you can actually just move along, like, oh,
no show me on doll where the body's shaming hurt, you,
like especially if you're not Even Stephen, Miller you're just
some short person out there and you're, offended like get
a grip and maybe some shoe. IMPLANTS i don't know
what to tell, you but to, me it's irrelevant whether
you're short or. Tall BUT i just found this whole
(31:15):
thing kind of, funny, honestly SO i wanted to share
it with all of. Y'all but you let me know
what you think in the comments. Below makes your subscribe
to the like? Button? YEA yeti. Yeah one final thing
we got to talk about, today and this is not
funny at. All we got to check in With Candace,
owens the, podcaster YouTube extraordinary and conspiracy. THEORIST i think
(31:38):
she actually would unironically call herself that at this, point
because she's making so many claims About Charlie kirk's death
that it's hard to keep. Up but she just dropped
an entire episode where she accuses A jewish journalist and
political Commentator Josh hammer of essentially being in On Charlie kirk's,
(31:59):
murder knowing about it ahead of time, somehow having advanced.
Knowledge maybe this connects to her suggestion maybe it was
an inside job AT, tpusa maybe it was a done By.
Israel all, things she has no real evidence Of but
she's making these very serious allegations About Josh, hammer but
making some pretty blatant errors and grossly contradicting herself in
(32:23):
some ways THAT i think are worth pointing out because
millions and millions of people are tuning instill and don't
seem to realize they're being. Misled and, then just to
be fair To josh who it's funny Because josh AND
i agree on very. Little we have had cordial interactions
in the, past but there's, like we're not, friends we're
not allies in any political or ideological. Sense BUT i
(32:45):
just feel compelled to help clear up his name a
little bit Because candace did him so dirty by smearing
him as somehow in on the death of a, friend
a dear friend of, his because of a tweet she
took insanely out of context and miss. Portrayed we're going
to break it, down but all, right so, first here
is the episode she. DROPPED i did listen to the whole,
(33:05):
Thing Charlie's Final. Hours what else Is Josh hammer lying
about his pictures and the? Thumbnail and she goes on
to accuse, HIM i would, say pretty explicitly of having
advanced knowledge Of charlie's murder like this was going to,
happen and maybe even calling for it ON. X let's
watch this clip AND i will then show you some
RECEIPTS i was able to pretty easily. Find actually didn't
(33:28):
take much work or. EFFORT i just had to scroll
for about five minutes that contradict the things she's. Saying,
now this is a. COMPILATION i did watch the Full canvas,
episode but this is a compilation made by Milk BAR,
tv which is an account that Criticizes Candice ollens and
slices up compilations of her contradicting herself and then puts
receipts against her claims in the. Video here is a
(33:51):
compilation they made from this video that she made very
explicitly Accusing Josh hammer of some kind of nefarious activity
on the basis of exactly. One let's take a.
Speaker 9 (34:01):
Look twitter users pointed out a very strange tweet That
Josh hammer hit send on sixteen hours Before Charlie kirk
was assassinated for no apparent reason at. All he retweeted
something That President Donald trump had sent a full twelve
years ago about public. Executions here it is here is that. Retweet,
(34:22):
now what is a justification for? This there might be.
ONE i tried in earnest to at first rationalize. It,
right what could have been going on That Josh hammer
decided to dig through the twenty Thirteen twitter archives and
retweet someone calling for someone calling for a public.
Speaker 2 (34:36):
Execution, so, okay the first problem here is she makes
it sounds like it was Just josh who did. This
that's not. True tons of people were sharing this Old
trump tweet calling for public. Executions and they were doing
this because everyone was talking about the murder of That
ukrainian refugee who was murdered by that man on the,
(34:58):
subway and it was in reference to that that he
was making this. Claim and we know this BECAUSE i
went back In josh's FEED i found this exact, tweet
and immediately prior to, that he had retweeted THE Us
attorney for The Western district Of New York city saying
federal charges against The charlotte killer are to make sure
that the violent people like this don't see the light of.
(35:19):
Day so immediately after, that he then shares this should
public execution for all to see be brought back tweet From. Trump,
Yeah so it's like immediately clear that he was talking
about the person who murdered That ukrainian refugee and saying
there should be public. Executions and it wasn't just. Him
tons of people were sharing the Soul trump tweet because of,
that because the federal charges had just dropped that day
(35:42):
or maybe the day, before and so everyone was talking
about the. Case, still that is why he tweeted. This
but she is suggesting that what exactly that he had
for knowledge of That Charlotte kirk was about to be publicly,
Executed that is what she's. Implying there's no evidence other
than this completely out of context. Tweet and, again you
(36:03):
can go and find tons of people who were sharing
this Old trump tweet if you go to the quote.
Tweets tons of people were circulating, it and tons of
people were calling for the death penalty for the dude
who killed this, woman or for public executions because the
federal charges had just. Dropped so she looked really hard
but couldn't find an. Explanation she clearly either was looking
(36:27):
and didn't want to find an, explanation or as just
being dishonest. HERE i don't know what to, say but,
GUYS i come back to this extraordinary claims require extraordinary,
evidence and she's suggesting That Josh hammer was somehow aware
of what was going to happen To Charlie kirk and
her only evidence is this. Tweet she has. Misunderstood that's it, seriously,
(36:48):
like let's keep, Listening, jen.
Speaker 9 (36:51):
Would we trust If josh came out and said that
tweet was definitely About? Arena other people pull Old trump,
tweets some did pulled that very tweet and called for
a public execution.
Speaker 2 (37:11):
The first. Time so this is so strange because she
says she couldn't find any reason why he would share
this tweet and say public, Execution but then As milkbar
put on, screen tons of people were sharing that tweet
about The ukrainian refugee. Case and then also she acknowledges
that other people were doing, that but then, says it's
so suspicious That Josh hammer pulled this random. Tweet does
(37:34):
she not understand how this doesn't add? Up this does
not make. Sense and, again, GUYS i am not A
Josh hammer, Fan, okay like WE i know nothing in.
Common we're not. Friends and by the, way every TIME
i Criticize, candace people are like Is israel paying. YOU
i actually disagree with a lot Of Josh hammer's views On.
(37:54):
ISRAEL i think he totally lacks sympathy for the people
Of gaza in a way THAT i don't agree with at.
All And i'm not paid By israel in any. WAY
i just call out internet charlatan's and crazy people who
spread fake, news And Candice owens is increasingly becoming one
of the most prominent. Ones so that's WHAT i, do,
Okay And i'll do that for the, LEFT i will
do that for the. Right i'll do that for the.
(38:15):
MIDDLE i don't. Care AND i don't even weigh in
on The Israel palestine conflict any great. DETAIL i just
weigh in on internet, hoaxes, lies terrible, coverage all this
kind of, stuff and she keeps doing. IT i would
gladly do this for a Pro israel person as, well
by the, way so don't hit me with. That the
bb checks have not hit, yet, okay Getting i'm not
(38:37):
getting people keep commenting you're getting seven thousand dollars a
week OR i don't even know what that's talking, about
but it's certainly not. TRUE i make all my money
from YouTube and other platforms and sponsors, occasionally BUT i
don't get paid by any. Country crazy talk.
Speaker 9 (38:51):
Time that he tweeted about a public execution was back
in twenty, thirteen and he's said it in Reference i'm
sorry in twenty twenty, two and he said it in
reference to The boston marathon bombing terrorist Account i'm sorry
the uvade. Shooter AND i can tell you that it
(39:14):
is not something that Josh hammer regularly tweets.
Speaker 2 (39:17):
About so this is just weird because she's admitting that
he has, previously on multiple occasions called for public executions
of like atrocious criminals who commit horrible, acts but also
telling us she doesn't believe that he was talking about
The ukrainian, murder the person who murdered The ukrainian. Refugee why,
not like you're providing evidence that supports his most obvious
(39:40):
interpretation of. EVENTS i don't get. IT i don't how
does she not see?
Speaker 9 (39:45):
This rather than say what he definitely meant or what
he didn't, MEAN i decided to just create a micro
timeline of Josh hammer's tweets a the day Before charlock.
Kirksassination this is what Josh hammer. Tweeted he tweeted a
total of n nine times On september, ninth and you
can gather what was going on that day from his
tweeks this three hour. Break maybe this is A this is.
Speaker 2 (40:08):
Hilarious because she her own timeline shows that on the
day of this, tweet he was tweeting about the media
appearances he was doing about the murder of The ukrainian.
Woman but this is evidence he couldn't have been talking
about The ukrainian. Case what what's.
Speaker 9 (40:30):
The three hour break where he speaks To Charlie kirk
and then at nine oh nine pm again we're Talking
Eastern Josh hammer tweaks in favor of republic, execution and
there's no context that is. Provided so anybody telling you
he for sure meant, this we cannot know. That we
cannot Know Josh hammer's.
Speaker 2 (40:49):
Thoughts so she did a whole episode of her podcast
that millions and millions of people listen to and watch
suggest some sort of nefarious behavior or foresight on the
behalf of on behalf Of Josh. Hammer and the only
real evidence she has is this tweet from him that
(41:12):
actually makes perfect, sense and there's a million more obvious
and logical explanations for it That i'll relate to The ukrainian,
case rather than him secretly having some sort of knowledge
About Charlie kirk or Wanting Charlie kirk, executed because the
first thing you would do is tweet. That by the, way,
Right like that totally makes. Sense, Yeah, Candace you're really onto.
(41:33):
Something and what's so strange about this is THAT i
still Believe candace has provided no evidence that the federal
government is in on some conspiracy or cover up to
like Frame Tyler, robinson or That israel really did, it
or that it was an inside job BY, tpusa although
she's now citing her dreams as evidence of THE tpusa. Claim,
(41:56):
ACTUALLY i should mention that listen.
Speaker 9 (41:58):
To, This LIKE i just, said had a vivid dream this,
weekend And charlie came to me and he told me
that he was. Betrayed and so for, me you don't
have to believe, that BUT i do believe, That and
it was the immediate SENSE i. Got, actually AND i
don't know who exactly it is that betrayed, him BUT
(42:18):
i also felt in the. Dream but it is soon
going to be revealed that it's actually inevitable that it
is going to be revealed that there is nothing and
no one that is going to stop the truth from coming,
out and it is going to have international. Consequences take
that to the. Bank quote me on.
Speaker 2 (42:31):
That i'm, sorry but dreams are not, evident so why
you would bring that up is kind of beyond. Me but,
ANYWAY i think she's provided no evidence of these extraordinary
conspiracy theories or claims or. Whatever but she actually has
provided some real evidence that Maybe Charlie kirk was changing
his views On. Israel she provided these text messages that
were later, authenticated and, okay so she Has apparently they're,
(42:55):
real maybe he was, reconsidering although she could have also
sent those texts kind of in cheek or kind of in.
FRUSTRATION i don't. Know but then you discredit yourself when
you've actually discovered something real or made an interesting revelation
or point by then immediately jumping to conclusions you haven't,
substantiated like Therefore israel did, it or therefore it's A
(43:17):
tpusa inside, job any of these outlandish claims for which
there is no, evidence or when you dedicate an entire
episode to attacking and slandering A jewish journalist based on
a complete misrepresentation and distortion of one tweet like she
can't help. Herself that's the, thing because when she occasionally
(43:39):
stumbles on something true or, interesting she then goes onto
the next crazy imagination hallucination thing that she's obsessed with that.
DAY i don't, know, MAN i just it is a
spectacle to. Watch it concerns. ME i, mean at this,
Point i'm past concern for, her because you have she
(44:01):
clearly has some. Issues but you can't bleed on other,
people and she's clearly doing. That But i'm more concerned
that millions of people are still trusting her because she
has shown you over and over again that she is
sloppy or. Dishonest there's no other. Explanation and if somebody
will mislead you about this one thing in this kind of,
(44:21):
way they will mislead you about all. Things so JUST
i really wish people would wake up and stop listening
To candace and. Stop it's not entertainment at this. Point,
OKAY i know people find it. Entertaining she is, entertaining
she is, charismatic but she is slandering innocent people and
being so fast and loose with the facts in such
areas of such egregious and serious allegations that she's. MAKING
(44:43):
i truly think it is totally irresponsible and reprehensible at this.
Point but that's just my. Perspective you guys are free to.
Disagree you're free to still watch her if you. Choose
it is a free. Country but that is my perspective
and my. Recommendation what do you guys? Think let me
know in the comments. Below make sure subscribe to the like.
Button YadA, YadA, yeah and that will be it for
today's episode of The Brad Versus Everyone. Podcast thanks so
(45:06):
much for tuning. In do consider rating and reviewing the
show on audio podcasts or we're recommending it to a.
Friend that's the number one way that audio podcasts. Grow
and with, that, guys we'll talk. Again real s
Popular Podcasts
CrimeLess: Hillbilly Heist
It’s 1996 in rural North Carolina, and an oddball crew makes history when they pull off America’s third largest cash heist. But it’s all downhill from there. Join host Johnny Knoxville as he unspools a wild and woolly tale about a group of regular ‘ol folks who risked it all for a chance at a better life. CrimeLess: Hillbilly Heist answers the question: what would you do with 17.3 million dollars? The answer includes diamond rings, mansions, velvet Elvis paintings, plus a run for the border, murder-for-hire-plots, and FBI busts.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.