Everything You Missed in the News: Judges vs. Trump, Tesla Vandalism & MAGA Leftists

Here come the judges! The Democrats are using judges to get Trump because they lost so badly at the ballot box, Teslas are being targeted and vandalized across the country, and who will be the next Democratic presidential nominee?

Brash, irreverent, and mostly peaceful! Stay in contact with us!

Robert Chernin
X - @RBChernin
FB - @OfThePeopleShow
IG - @rbchernin1

Ericka Redic
X - @ErickaRedic
FB - @GenerallyIrritable
IG - @generally_irritable

The American Coalition: https://coalition4america.com/

American Coalition Merch: https://coalition-4-america-llc.revv.co/storefront/

Israel Appreciation Day: https://www.israelappreciationday.com/

Israel Appreciation Day Merch: https://israel-appreciation-day.launchcart.store/shop

American Center for Education and Knowledge: https://acekfund.org/

ACEK Merch: https://american-center-for-education-and-knowledge.revv.co/storefront/

About Robert:

Robert is a longtime successful entrepreneur, business leader, fundraiser, political advisor, and now popular podcast and radio talk show host. Robert has been an in-demand consultant on important gubernatorial, congressional, senatorial, and presidential races, including leadership roles in the presidential campaigns of President George W. Bush and John McCain. In 2004 he was praised as a difference maker as Executive Director for the national Republican Jewish outreach operations. Robert also proudly served on the President’s Committee of the Republican Jewish Coalition. He studied political science internationally at McGill University in Montreal.

About Ericka:

Ericka L. Redic is a Vermont and Texas-based Chief Financial Officer, author, entrepreneur, and former Republican/Libertarian Congressional candidate. She strongly advocates from an originalist constitutional position for conservative values focusing on the culture war on her show Generally Irritable.

Make your own merch! https://launchcart.com/?via=3vro9

Want to create live streams like this? Check out StreamYard: https://streamyard.com/pal/d/6010510893121536

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Then we're live.

Speaker 2 (00:02):
Yeah, prove it, prove that we're live. How do you
know when you're not being filmed in the desert somewhere?

Speaker 1 (00:07):
Uh, come on, I don't. I can't prove it.

Speaker 2 (00:11):
Good evening, Rika, I'm welcome to other people.

Speaker 1 (00:14):
Thank you, Thank you, Robert. That's a nice t shirt
you have on there.

Speaker 2 (00:18):
Nice merch. Hey, where can they get this merch? Come on?

Speaker 1 (00:22):
Come on, look, hey guys, go check out our sponsor
Israel Appreciation Day. You guys, we've got merch. We've got mugs,
we've got shirts, We've got my fancy water bottle here.

Speaker 2 (00:38):
Wait.

Speaker 1 (00:38):
Oh, look, and there's the hat, y'all. Ooh, let's go. Actually,
you know what, ASIK has its own store, doesn't it.

Speaker 2 (00:46):
Yes, let's go.

Speaker 1 (00:47):
Let's oh. Oh, look at that. There's another sponsor Israel
Appreciation Day, American Center for Education and Knowledge. You guys,
you can get this. This Ben's shirt just came in.
This is dope. It's so comfortable. This sweatshirt I'm wearing
is so soft and comfortable. I love it. And this
water bottle, you guys on the Israel Appreciation Day merch

(01:10):
site real, no joke. We live in Texas.

Speaker 2 (01:12):
Okay.

Speaker 1 (01:13):
The other day we were out at our new house
cleaning up the yard. This sat in the hot car
all day and when I picked it up to drink
out of it, it was still cold. This thing is amazing.
So go get your merch. Support you support us over
here of the people, y'all. That was a really bad
That was a really bad accent.

Speaker 2 (01:35):
It was a really bad y'all. I mean, don't give
up your day now. Reas. The reason I like this
hat is the back.

Speaker 1 (01:43):
Oh oh wait, hold on, let's let's look at Robert
close up here. What does that say? Defending American exceptionalism.
I love it because, no matter which.

Speaker 2 (01:54):
At the end of the day, that's really what this
is all about. You know, Erica, you were asking me,
you know, you know what's the here and American exceptionalism
in every way, shape or form.

Speaker 1 (02:05):
Yes, Amen to that. Amen.

Speaker 2 (02:10):
Alright, Hello, and welcome to of the people. Here comes

(02:35):
the judge, or in this case, here comes the judges.
It's now clear to anyone who is not deef, dumb
and blind right that the Democrats are using the courts
to accomplish what they couldn't accomplish at the ballot box,
which is basically to stop Donald Trump at any cost.
There are now over a dozen injunctions out there to date,

(02:56):
issued by various courts, specifically selected courts. By the way,
a deportation, birthright citizenship, DOGE, federal funding, free DEI programs
be eliminated, transgender all the things that Trump is trying
to put into effect is being challenged by the courts.
So we have one word predictable. But in case everybody

(03:18):
missed the Constitution, one on one course, these are supposed
to be coinqual branches of government. I want to know
when the judiciary became more powerful, with more authority than
the executive branch. And why is it that a district
judge is allowed to make a ruling in DC that
affects the entire country, but the president, who's elected by

(03:38):
the entire country is not allowed to unless he gets
approved by a judge. Right? I mean, am I missing
something here? But I have an idea brilliant as usual.
Maybe the president should take a poll of all the
judges before he enacts any executive decisions or executive orders. No,
I don't think that's practical either. Seriously, I want people

(04:03):
who are listening to the show now right, you can comment,
if you're listening, name one judicial order that Donald Trump
or the Trump administration has ignored. Because all you hear
from the rule of lawyers, right, rule of law, rule
of lawyers those guys, is that there's a constitutional crisis coming.
It's constitutional crisis. And if Trump doesn't obey the judicial decisions,

(04:25):
that he's bringing on a constitutional crisis. So my question is,
are we so sure that the current legal system is
functioning properly that it's really Trump who's bringing on this
constitutional crisis? Because it's already been clear since two thousand
and eight that there's a dual justice system in place,
and there's been a weaponization of the various agencies and

(04:47):
now the judiciary as well. So why not the courts
makes sense to me. So is it really Donald Trump
who's bringing on this constitutional crisis? Let's look back Obama.
The NSSA wanted to they wanted to g continue the
bulk data collection, was ruled illegal, they did it anyway. Obama.
Same thing the NSA, the searchless warrants, which by the way,

(05:08):
occurred both during the Bush administration and the Obama administration.
In twenty ten, the judge comes back and says illegal.
They did it anyway. Affordable Care Act as well, they
implemented certain aspects that the courts that were illegal. President
Biden no different. Section seven oh two of the NSA Act,
which was FAIZA allowed to collect foreign information ruled illegal.

(05:33):
They did it anyway. And let's not forget Joe Biden's
student won't forgiveness program, and their list goes on. Now.
As for this judge Boisberg or Bozberger, however you pronounce
his name. If you really want proof that he's biased,
that would give you two things to consider. Number One,
he issued his ruling when he only listened to one
side of the argument. He did not allow the government

(05:54):
to present its case. He listened to the plaintiffs and ruled.
Number two, even excuse me, even more egregious. That's what
happens when I get all worked up at salivate, right,
Even more egregious. Was that usual in customaries you allow
the other side time to appeal, which he did not do.
He did not give the government time to appeal. So

(06:16):
this whole concept judge shopping. Of course they're judge shopping.
Anybody really surprised by that? I mean, keep in mind,
this is from the party of Senator Schumer, who, if
you remember, during the election, talked about quote expanding the court,
which was another version of FDRs packing the courts. But
that's you know, now, you know why because none of

(06:39):
this is new. None of this is new with using
the courts to get what you want, then you can't
get it at the ballot box, and none of this
is new. This now talk about reforming the judiciary. On
either side of this, there was the Judiciary Act of
eighteen oh one John Adams President, also called the Midnight
Judges Act. There was then the Judiciary Act of eighteen
oh two next year Thomas Jefferson, which undid the prior act.

(07:01):
There was a Judiciary Act of eighteen sixty nine, there
was one in nineteen eleven, and let's not forget FDR's
court packing, which was defeated, of course, And if you
want to know what any of those were, look it up.
But it's not like, oh my god, you can't mess
with the courts. Because when you hear all this talk
about constitutional crisis, don't believe it not true. Trump is

(07:25):
rightfully asserting his executive authority, and he's pushing the boundaries
a little bit from what's been usual and customary in
the last twenty thirty forty years. But all of this
is going to go to the Supreme Court. There was,
by the way, a Federal Court of Appeals, ninth Circuits,
just the rule we're going to talk about in the
show when we get into it. But it's going to
go to the Supreme Court. And Trump will win most
of them. He won't win all of them. But to me,

(07:47):
the most important question that no one is asking is
the following, in a system of checks and balances short
of impeachment, what mechanism, what body exists, what remedy exists
to check and out of controlled judiciary? Answer that one
for me, and that's the monogue.

Speaker 1 (08:11):
Erica, Well, well well.

Speaker 2 (08:15):
Well, well well well PD fell into well sorry, that's.

Speaker 1 (08:23):
Another Yes, you know, I just I personally I love this.
I kind of love it. And and the reason I'm
loving all this stupid nonsense with the courts. They've basically
set up the government. And when I say they, I
mean Democrats, particularly to utilize law fair. So they're up

(08:46):
in arms. Oh there's Supreme Court. Oh oh, they dodges,
but they pack the court with judges who will side
with them and have no problem screwing over the general public.

Speaker 2 (08:58):
Wait a minute, time out, So dope the Republicans, that's
part of the game here. So ultimately, it's supposed to
don't forget this is a system. It's supposed to be
driven by compromise. We're way past that now, unfortunately, and
all of this because you know, there is no middle anymore,
although we'll talk about that in a second. But in theory,
you're the real hypocrisy in all of this is pre election,

(09:23):
you had the Democrats talking about expanding the court and
that the court had no legitimacy because it was staffed
by you know, it was selected by Donald Trump, the
Supreme Court in particular, and they were all about delegitimizing
the courts. Now that that's their only weapon. Look, they
only have two weapons left, right, the courts and violence, right,
and we'll talk about we'll talk about what I call

(09:46):
the Tesla terrorism, right.

Speaker 1 (09:51):
Well, but what else would you call it? Domestic terrorism?

Speaker 2 (09:56):
Yeah? Notice it's okay though, because it's against Trump, right,
because you know, don't start down that please. So it's
just but look, they everybody judge shops, right, So I mean, so,
I mean, I don't have necessarily an issue with all this.

(10:17):
I actually think Donald Trump looks what I said a
long time ago, He's going to be smarter in the
second term than he was in the first term. So
not only is he flooding the zone with executive orders,
he's flooding the zone because he knows a lot of
this is going to have to go to the judiciary,
and a lot of this is going to be well
a purview as the executive who's duly elected by the

(10:39):
entire country, as opposed to appointed judges. But both sides
do this, and that's okay. I don't like what they're doing, right,
and I certainly think that the Democrats are being far
more aggressive with this tactic. But if you go back,
I mean the Judiciary Actor right of eighteen oh one,

(11:00):
Adams on the way out at midnight, right, that's why
they call them midnight Judges. Appointed all these judges and
expanded the courts because he wanted his people to you know,
because you know, he was at odds with Jefferson. Jefferson
comes in and the next year they not only repeal
the Act, but they shrink the courts and they reorganize

(11:20):
the courts. So what I don't want is for people
to oh, you can't touch the courts. Of course you can.
It has to be done properly. It has to be
done through through Congress and active congress. Donald Trump can't
expand the court or shrink the court. Right, yeah, so,
I mean, but it's the hypocrisy of you know, here's chucky, right,

(11:43):
it's the meaning well it is.

Speaker 1 (11:46):
Oh sorry, isn't that sad? The one branch of government
that's supposed to be nonpartisan, where all they're supposed to
do is make a determination if something is within the
law or within the constitution, depending on which court you're
talking about. Like, instead, we're getting activist judges and and like,

(12:07):
and you said, I don't like it. I don't like
it on our side either. I want judges to be judges.

Speaker 2 (12:12):
You know.

Speaker 1 (12:13):
I hate that. I I hate that I'm cheering on
partisan partisan uh courts. I hate that. But you know, Eric,
where we are, this.

Speaker 2 (12:26):
Is a very simple truth. Here's here's the simple truth.
You're listening. Yeah, if you bring a knife to a gunfight,
you're gonna lose.

Speaker 1 (12:36):
Yeah, that's why it's bringing oozy.

Speaker 2 (12:39):
Yeah, it's it's that simple. Now. Look, but the doom
and gloom from the Democrats, right, the court packing or
the judiciary. Look, they're they're they're using every tool in
their toolbox. There ain't many left, but they're using every
tool on their toolbox to try to once again stemy Trump. Look,
you're seeing the same kind of violence that you saw.

(13:03):
And by the way, it's mostly peaceful violence, you know,
just like the.

Speaker 1 (13:07):
Uh, well don't peaceful?

Speaker 2 (13:11):
No, no, come on, do you not remember at the
height of the Black Lives Matter protests you had all
these uh news newsmen or newspeople newswomen on TV going, well,
you know, these these protests are mostly peaceful as they're
burning in Lewis right, or talk to you know, David
Dorn's widow and Saint Louis who got shot by one

(13:31):
of these mostly peaceful protesters right, trying to rob the store.
So you're just but they're using the same tactics. To
notice that you even now have the professional protesters you're
showing up again, yep, right, the ones that are the
ones that are being paid. So they're using the same tactics.
And you know, so so let's let's talk about this

(13:51):
whole tesla terrorism thing, right, because the thing that trusts
me in all of this is there are words and deeds,
and the order that they come in really makes the difference.
The problem is with the Democrats. I find that they
that they say words that propelled deeds, right, whether it's

(14:14):
you know, Jasmine Crockett or Schumer about or Crockett hit
them over the head, right kind of thing. They they
say words that cause deeds, then they take no responsibility
because there's no consequences, and then all they have is
empty words afterwards.

Speaker 1 (14:27):
Yeah, yeah, Trump insided crazy, Trump insided a riot, right,
Trump insided a riot. Trump did this, Oh my god,
fight fight fight right, so peacefully patriotically protest apparently means
go start a frickin brawl. But y'all can run out
and say, don't let them have peace, hit them over

(14:49):
the head, you know. And I'm sorry, but the news
reports that I see the political violence is all on
one side. It is. It is one side. I'm not
saying there aren't Trump supporters out there running around being
dumb behinds, but I guarantee you that if we if
we added it up, if we added all the billions

(15:12):
of dollars in damage and lives lost, it would the
Ledger would be clear. The political violence is accepted and
acceptable by Democrats and it's not by Republicans.

Speaker 2 (15:23):
And yet and they will say, oh, no, we called
it out, we said it's unacceptable. Excuse me. Words empty words,
have no meaning. And all they do is they condemn
it after the fact. But they do they do anything
to prevent it.

Speaker 1 (15:37):
No.

Speaker 2 (15:38):
Do they change their rhetoric. No, No, they keep they
keep using sort of that actionable rhetoric about fighting. And
that's fine. But when Donald Trump, our supporters used it,
you know, then he was inciting riots or whatever. So
I have a prediction for you. And the prediction is following.
Don't get you ready. Drum roll please drum roll. That's

(15:58):
pretty good.

Speaker 1 (15:59):
That was pretty I know.

Speaker 2 (16:01):
But I was just being nice to you. You know,
it's been a long day with you, totally. One of
the things that Donald Trump has taught America is how
to fight back for the values that they believe in
and America, you know, in twenty sixteen, I think America,
most of the average Americans were sort of cowed into

(16:22):
silence or scared to participate, you know, to fight back.
But the election was dramatic proof that America is fighting back,
and I think you're going to now start seeing, you know,
America fighting back. Now. I'm not advocating for violence, and
I'm not advocating, you know, for violence in the streets.
I'm just telling you you're going to see it, right,

(16:43):
because the government can only protect you to a certain
degree and as good of a job as they may
be doing at the Department of Justice, and they're going
to prosecute these people. That's that's not where this battle
is going to be fought, right, because the Democrats now
know the progression You really got to call him the
progressive Democrat, right because because the progressive wing runs the party,

(17:06):
Chuck Schumer is now self who was once self identified
as as a sort of moderate Democrat, now self identifies
as a progressive Democrat. I mean, the chameleon nature of
this of this man never ceases to amaze me. But
in any of them, oh.

Speaker 1 (17:19):
Oh wait, oh yeah, Now Bernie Sanders is against open
borders again. So that's that that tells you anything? Yeah,
sorry for interrupting, but oh yeah. Listen to an interview
this weekend, uh from this weekend, and it's like, bro,
so you were you you know rightly that illegal immigration
harms the working class, who you purport to speak for,

(17:40):
who you who you supposedly care about and stand for.
And then when it's politically expedient, you decide that it's
okay and no one's illegal and whatever. And then now
that Trump is in office and everyone in America is
saying we're sick of the nonsense, we want people to
poort all that. Now you're back to remember your freaking

(18:00):
worker's roots. Sorry, bro, like, I don't care what you
have to say. You're just as much of a liar
and flip flopper as everyone else. The man has no morals.

Speaker 2 (18:12):
So in two thousand and four, when John Carrey was
running against George Bush, we had the ideal commercial that
I would love to find again. It was because John
Carrey actually said something I was before it, before I
was against it, and he was a windsurfer. We actually
got videos of him windsurfing in one direction and then
windsurfing in the other direction. It was the perfect crystallization

(18:33):
not only of Carrie Center to carry at the time,
but people like Bernie Sanders. But I want exactly, but
I want to move on, so you know, to go
back to this because you know a I predict that
the people are going to start fighting back, and I
don't know it's going to necessarily be in the streets,
but I think as this goes on longer, you know,
through the dog days of summer and things like that,

(18:55):
I am not optimistic that they will be mostly peaceful protests.
There's that. But then there's this new term out there
called a maga leftist. Have you heard that term?

Speaker 1 (19:08):
No, So, is this where the horseshoe comes back around?

Speaker 2 (19:14):
Yeah, something like that. So wait a minute, I got it.
So this woman, I'm not even trying to remember who
she was, you know, I get all this. She was
on Bill Maher and she gave this term about being
a maga leftist. I'm like, that's ath and basically what
it is is people who basically come on, where is it?
I know you're there. It is so and I can't
pronounce this name for the life of me. So it's
Batia Ungar Sargun. I don't know, b A t y A.

(19:36):
She basically said that, you know, she was a radical leftist,
and then you know, over time she realized that, you know,
that Trump was right on certain things and that here's
the point though, that she made because a maga leftist
was really what what I grew up with is a
Reagan Democrat or a blue dog or a blue Dog Democrat,
because you know, you remember during the campaign, and we

(19:58):
have plenty of friends, you know, you and I know
in common who would say things like Donald Trump will
not win this election. Because tell me one person who's
going to vote for Trump in twenty twenty who didn't
vote for him in twenty sixteen. Clearly that didn't happen.
And what she's basically saying is in this is interesting.
I haven't seen what is it real whatever? What's Bill Marsha?

(20:22):
Whatever the name is that real time?

Speaker 1 (20:23):
I think?

Speaker 2 (20:24):
Yeah with Bill Yeah, yeah, that thing who, by the way,
is going to be interviewing President Trump in the White House.
What Bill Maher?

Speaker 3 (20:35):
I'm sorry, Bill Maher, the anti Trumper is apparently had
Kid Rock on a show and he said, you should
meet the president.

Speaker 2 (20:47):
I'll arrange it. So he arranged it, and Bill Maher
is going to do an interview. I think it's next week.
You don't quote me. It's going to be is going
to be interviewing Donald Trump in the White House.

Speaker 1 (20:58):
Okay, we got to babe, Ben, you got to get
the HBO membership so we can do a live reaction
to that. I need to see this Lord Heaven Arc Okay,
and just for the record, when you're ready, I've got
the ad pulled up and I can shore the John
Carrey ad.

Speaker 2 (21:19):
Oh you have it. Yeah, sure, let's let's let's play
it for everyone because we're the ones who did it. Okay,
it was the right one.

Speaker 1 (21:26):
See, let me add it. Okay, hang on, I'm going
to add it to the stage. Ben, you fix the
audio for me, okay, you yeah, you know I always
screw it up. I don't know where I'm supposed to
mute it.

Speaker 2 (21:38):
Okay, hang on, Well you guys are a happy couple.

Speaker 1 (21:40):
It is. Do it now, okay.

Speaker 2 (21:47):
Drum roll please? You know dead air, Come on, you
can do it. Dun dun, dun, dun dun d I mean,
it's not that good waiting for it. It's just it's
a it's a it's like a I don't know, should
be a meme. I was before it, before I was against.
I guess we're not having it. Okay.

Speaker 1 (22:04):
Wait, I can't hear it, Robert.

Speaker 2 (22:07):
You can't hear me. Hello, ding ding ding ding ding
Dun na dun duh.

Speaker 1 (22:14):
I couldn't hear you while you were talking.

Speaker 2 (22:15):
Sorry, Robert, you couldn't hear me while I was talking.
You know a lot of people I've been having problems
like that.

Speaker 1 (22:23):
Oh this was it was super loud in my headphones.
I saw that you were talking, but I couldn't hear
got it?

Speaker 2 (22:27):
So do we have the video or don't we what video?
John Kerry?

Speaker 1 (22:32):
Oh, this isn't it. This isn't the commercial.

Speaker 2 (22:35):
I haven't seen it. It's not up on the screen.

Speaker 1 (22:37):
Oh what in the Lord have mercy? I'm sorry you guys.
This is the joys of live television. You guys. Okay,
now can you see it?

Speaker 4 (22:48):
Are you the wind post?

Speaker 2 (22:50):
George W.

Speaker 5 (22:51):
Bush?

Speaker 2 (22:51):
And I approved this message?

Speaker 4 (22:53):
In which direction would John Kerry lead? Carrie voted for
the Iraq war, opposed it, supported it, and now opposes
it again. He bragged about voting for the eighty seven
billion to support our troops before he voted against it.
He voted for education reform and now opposes it. He
claims he's against increasing Medicare premiums, but voted five times

(23:15):
to do so. John Kerrey, whichever way the wind.

Speaker 2 (23:18):
Polls, that is what what what what go back? That
is okay, so we did that commerciall, by the way,
and it is so typical of most politicians. So when
you tell me that Bernie Sanders was you know, four
open borders before, now he's against it, yep, I'm like yes,

(23:41):
So what, by the way, you do know who the
next Democratic nominee for president is going to be a
O C. Because now she is changing her position to
become this moderate democrat? Did you know that? So have
you followed her on the what is it the the
oligar tour? Hang on? You know, I have all this

(24:02):
stuff written out. So it's called the what to the
fighting oligarchy rallies, which, by the way, I'm told they
have paid I'm told that the turnout is a lot
of paid supporters. But she's about now basically saying that
if you are willing to fight for someone you don't know,
you are welcome here, no matter if even if you
disagree with me on a few things. I'm like, So

(24:24):
she's she's trying to change her image a little bit, right,
and she will. Here's my prediction early on, she will
be one of two things. She will either run for
Senate and be the next senator from New York and
or she will be the Democratic nominee in twenty twenty eight.

Speaker 1 (24:46):
Well, the polling, internal polling of primary voters shows Kamala
has the highest support. I think it was like twenty
six percent or twenty seven percent. Pete Boodagig, Pete Buck
As Matt Walsh says, he got ten percent, and then
you have AOC and Gavin Newsome. I think it was

(25:07):
tied with five percent. So this was basically going by
name recognition.

Speaker 2 (25:13):
That's the Yeah, the polls are meaning you meanings. But
but here here's the thing. People who dismiss her out
of hand do so at their own peril. She is,
in her own way a populist and Trump is a populist. Now,
I grant you they stand for different things, but you're
talking about populist waves. So they did a poll of
you know, her positives and negatives, and let me get

(25:37):
let me get the number. There was a third, there's
a thirty and a forty in here. So I think
the polling that they did basically said that three and
ten had a positive view, four and ten had a
negative view. So she's she's underwater there. But that means
that thirty percent you know, are open for game game here.
So anyone who discounts her does so at their own
peril because she totally candidate. She's attractive. That helps if

(26:02):
you're a candidate, right, she is, she's charismatic, she's young,
she there is a whole and she appeals to the
younger generation. So in twenty fifteen, we also have a
polling firm. We did an extensive poll of five thousand people,
which is more than the usual sample, and we did
something unusual is we gave a lot of open answers

(26:24):
to questions, so a lot of people, so we weren't
doing you know, you know, pick your you know, ABC
or D or one to five film when they it
was filling the blank, you know. And how we had
to tabulate and score it was was a different kind
of methodology. But what we found was very interesting, several things.
But the most interesting thing. Don't forget. In twenty fifteen,
you have Hillary Clinton running against Donald Trump, but you

(26:46):
also have Bernie Sanders as an insurgent third party candidate. Right,
the two people in the age group of eighteen to
thirty five, the two people that scored the highest far
up pacing anybody else was Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders.
But the interesting thing about the polling was the Trump

(27:07):
supporters were more likely to vote for Bernie Sanders. If
they didn't vote for Trump, then they would for Hillary Clinton,
as were the Bernie supporters. So what does that tell you?
It tells you that. Well, to me, it tells you
that what the populist wants is an anti establishment candidate

(27:28):
that's going to disrupt the system. Right, That's what the
that's what they want. So now you know, fast forward
to today or twenty twenty eight, AOC will disrupt the system.
She is a disruptor and she is a popular So
anybody who doesn't take her seriously, you know, well, you

(27:50):
know she was a bartender. Look who cares where she
came from or what she did, right, the story is compelling.
I personally, look, I disagree with everything she stands for,
right and well, and we'll fight to the death to
you know, oppose it. But we would be foolish to
discount her as the next wave because, as we just
talked about, the progressive wing of the party, the squad

(28:13):
is the one that drives the agenda on the democratic side,
and it's because the old fogies, like like Senator Schumer,
who's Senator Schumer? I respect your career, it's time for
you to retire and go away, right and you need
Oh she's not in there. Wait a minute, So who's
the guy in the lower left? This?

Speaker 1 (28:31):
Uh Josh Shapiro?

Speaker 2 (28:33):
Wait?

Speaker 1 (28:33):
Oh, lower left? Who's that guy? Who is that guy?
Is that terrible Richard? That's not that's not Hackeen, Jeffries, that's.

Speaker 2 (28:44):
Not Higeen Jeffries. I will tell you that I think
Senator Spiro hurt himself, but I think he's a possibility.
Gavin Newsom will never be the nominee, and Gavin Newsom
will never be president. Kamala Harris will never be the nominee.
She will never be president. I don't think Gretchen Whittmer
will either Shapiro possibility or to judge possibility.

Speaker 1 (29:05):
Her face is terrifying to me. She looks I get,
I get, then I get the feeling of uncanny Valley.
Whenever I'm looking at you talking.

Speaker 2 (29:14):
Are you misogynist? You're talking about people's looks, women's looks.

Speaker 1 (29:17):
You know, I'm saying, she looks like a robot. Her
face does not move she's got so much freaking botox
in her face, and then she's always super shiny. She
looks like a robot to me, like a what is
it Stepford wife? What was that with Stepford wife? Yeah,
she looks like a fake person. I literally get that
that Uncanny Valley unease. Whenever I see her talking, it's

(29:41):
she's awful. Bah ah ah, she's terrifying. I'm getting scared.

Speaker 2 (29:48):
But we need to come up, you know, you know
when you make those noises, we need to come up
with a meme we can put up just just so
when you're sort of gagging or choking. We we can
do that well.

Speaker 1 (29:58):
And I really think that you know, the what you're saying,
I we we gotta, we gotta mark this episode in
uh and Robert predicts Robert right. Robert was right, because
you know what we're seeing is over the last you know, decade, essentially,
Bernie Sanders has been the only Democrat that has really

(30:22):
cut through the noise and spoken to the people. And
they and the Democrat Party did everything that they could
to keep him out of the nominated of being the nominee.
And there is a very good reason that he is
touring around the country with AOC right now.

Speaker 2 (30:41):
Uh.

Speaker 1 (30:41):
He he is passing the torch, you know, the Democrat
socialist torch down because he knows he's gonna plot soon.
Let's be real, like he's old. He's old as all
get out. Uh, he doesn't have much for this earth.

Speaker 2 (30:56):
Excuse me? Did you just use Yiddish?

Speaker 1 (30:58):
You're using Yiddish on me part You're you're wearing your
rubbing off on me.

Speaker 2 (31:04):
I love that. I love that. So if I told
you Niche to go, I am never mind.

Speaker 1 (31:12):
I don't know that. I don't remember that one yet,
but I remember you.

Speaker 2 (31:14):
Well, it's it's it's basically no shicks's. It's okay. Sorry
you started this.

Speaker 1 (31:21):
It's my ball. I'll own it. I take it, Okay, Yes,
I got it? All right? So where are we going
to go next? Are we gonna? Are we gonna? Are
we gonna talk about some of these crazy videos? Are
we going to talk more about politics? Should we hear
from one of our sponsors?

Speaker 2 (31:36):
Oh? Well, I mean I think I think you know,
we have to have one of our sponsors if they
want to want them to keep.

Speaker 1 (31:42):
Paying, whether they want to or not. All right, let's uh,
let's hear from Asik Defenders of American Freedom. Okay, Robert,
now that we're back really quick so that we don't
get accused of being racist because we didn't know who
the one black guy on the panel was. Uh, this
is Wes Moore.

Speaker 2 (32:00):
Right, Maryland, always Maryland.

Speaker 1 (32:02):
Maryland, Yep, wesmo Ah. So that's why, because who cares
about Maryland. Let's be real, Jamie Rask does I know
it's terrible. It's just you know what it is. You
know what's so funny to me, Robert. All of these
Democrats want to be in a position of leadership. They
they believe somehow that they have the better policies, the

(32:26):
better ideas. And yet whenever we're looking at democrat run cities,
particularly democrat run cities and democratically controlled states, they're all
garbage heaps. They're all fraught with fraud and abuse. They're bankrupt.
Half of them are going bankrupt. I just like the

(32:49):
Democrats have not proven that they should be given the
right to lead when all they do is destroy everything
that they touch. You know, stick to stick to social work, Uh,
stick to helping the people and leave the leave the
administrative stuff to people who can do math. That's all

(33:09):
I'm saying, Well, that's what I'm saying.

Speaker 2 (33:11):
Look, look, historically Republicans have not shown their ability to
govern either, even though I aligned with their ideals. So
let's let's let's let's see what happens. We're early into
the administration. Let's let's let's see what happens. What I
will say is Democrats and Republicans used to agree on
the goal, and they don't, and they would disagree on
that on how to get there. Now the divide is

(33:31):
so much that the Democrats and Republicans disagree on even
the goal. It's it's it's sort of like, you know,
Israel versus Iran. Right, the world views are so different
that of course the goals are different. The Democrats believe
in a large federal government, top down governing. The Republicans
believe in smaller government. Right, individual individual rights, uh, gun rights,

(33:55):
all of those things. So one grabs the trunk of
the elephant, the other grabs to tell the elephant. They're
both saying, we know what the elephant is. Obviously, it's
a question of what does the country want. I believe
that this is a still a center right country as
a majority, and certainly if you take out sort of.
You know, you can't really take out the cities, but

(34:15):
you know, if you eliminated California and they succeeded, that'd
be lovely. Then you have a republican country. If you
take out you know, New York City, in LA you
have a republican you know, and maybe you know, right Chicago,
you have a republican country. Right. If you look at
it by zip codes, if you look at it by counties,
if you look at it by land mass this is

(34:36):
a center right country. I'm not sure it's an arch
conservative country. I think the country is socially pretty moderate
on most things. I think they're fiscally conservative. I think
they're economically conservative, and they still believe in the American dream,
which is I want my children to have it better
than I did. That's right, and I think that's where
the Democrats have lost their way. But I want to

(34:59):
segue to you know, I watched the Trump administration, and
there are things that are happening that people don't hear
about in the news, or if they do, you know,
you get thirty second blurb in all of this and
then it goes away. Several things have happened in the
last couple of weeks that to me, all connected people
are like, no one's covering right, And we heard maybe
briefly about it. Venezuela is now accepting repatriation of the Venezuelans,

(35:25):
right right, Number one, Number two Mexico just delivered I
think it was twenty eight or twenty nine of the
most hardened cartail leaders that were in their jail for years.
We've been trying to get them, you know, you know,
extradited to the US. They just delivered them in a
plane load. Right. Trump just announces that we're doing the

(35:47):
Golden Dome now. And the Goldenome we've talked about it,
but it's basically star Wars on steroids, which it would
be a layered missile system. And I want to talk
about that in a second, because you know, the real
question becomes, what would the world look like if the
US was like Israel relatively impregnable to missile attacks. How
does that change foreign policy? How does that change you know,

(36:08):
international politics? Right? But when you look at all the
things that Trump is flooding the zone with, the thing
you got to ask yourself is how is it getting done?
Why is it not being covered? Because to me, it's
those are the stories. Right, Why did Venezuela here's the question.

(36:28):
Answer for me, not that I have the answer, but
answer for me. Why did Venezuela start taking back they're
on citizens? What changed? Maduro hates the US?

Speaker 1 (36:39):
I guarantee you this is this is the art of
This is classic art of the deal. Okay, we've got
Trump out there. I'm going to put tariffs on everybody
and screw you, and we're going to make Canada the
fifty first state. It is all part of the negotiating
strategy Mexico, Venezuela, all of these.

Speaker 2 (37:00):
Yeah. But but but but give me two. There's two
answers here, Eric. Number one. You hit the first one,
which was terrists, which was economic pain. The second one
is they didn't want him going to the to the
brutal jail like the Abu grabe kind of jail in
El Salvador in El Salvador, Right. And the third thing,

(37:21):
and this is just my guess, right, the third thing
is I think that the trendy Aragua gang members that
were here, and maybe not all of them, were funneling
money back to Maduro.

Speaker 1 (37:32):
Oh yeah, and that's now.

Speaker 2 (37:33):
I can't prove that I can't prove that. I'm just
giving you my opinion.

Speaker 1 (37:37):
That is part of the the order UH regarding Trenda
of Ragua calling them a terrorist organization. I'm trying to
remember the exact wording from last week. But if, if,
if we can in any ways prove that these terrorists

(37:57):
are supported by the Venezuelan government, you have war on
your hands, and I doubt Venezuela won.

Speaker 2 (38:04):
You don't have, you don't have. I mean, this is
not Reagan where he invaded Granada. Okay, we're not going
to invade Vez invade Venezuela. What we are going to
do is increase tariffs and cause more economic pain. And again,
don't don't forget. Even though gas prices are now going
down at the pump, and I'm not trying to hurt
any gas dealership around, but there are certain gas dealerships

(38:29):
that import from Venezuela that's going to become more expensive,
even more expensive. So what most people don't understand is
there is both a carrot and stick approach to international diplomacy.
And if all you were willing to do is wield
one or the other for that matter, you're not going
to be effective. So what's your thought on Mexico though,
So you have twenty nine cartel leaders that were in

(38:52):
Mexican jail that even the Biden administration tried to get extradited,
and all of a sudden trumps in office and now
they're extra dated to the US. We've been trying to
do this for years.

Speaker 1 (39:04):
Yeah, that's what it looks like to have a strong
a strong man in the office. You know, if you
have a bunch of if you have a bunch of pussies,
can I say that if you have a bunch.

Speaker 2 (39:14):
Of well, well you you just did.

Speaker 1 (39:17):
I don't know. I don't know if that's a cuss
or not. That might get us in trouble. But but
that's the reality. You have a bunch of n income
poops running things. They don't care, they don't care about
the American people. Biden was apparently asleep at the wheel
and having a robot sign things like how how how

(39:38):
do you run a country that way? How do you
keep us safe that way? You don't, you can't. You
you bend over to try to get as much to
try to extract as much wealth as you can.

Speaker 2 (39:51):
You know, way, is that like a visual? Is that
like a visual of the bending over part.

Speaker 1 (39:56):
Yes, yes, I'm trying to be as crack as as
possible right now, because that's what it is you guys
are you guys are letting because of some Is it?
Is it greed? Is it because you hate our country?
Anythin like? What leadership except this stuff?

Speaker 2 (40:17):
Well, as I always tell you, follow the money. But
and and by the way, with Mexico, followed the money.
Not only Trump placed tariffs on Mexico, which is now
pushed to April second, we'll see what happens. But Secretary
of Defense sect sect deaf he Seth, Yeah, three times.

(40:39):
I can't even say that sect deaf. I can't say it.
My lips are not that good. But the Secretary Secretary
of Defense he Seth, delivered a message to Mexico that said,
if you do not take care of the drug cartels
on your side, the US military will on your side
of the border. Right because we also that well, I mean,

(41:01):
there's nothing wrong with it other than it calls Mexico's bluff,
which for years no one else was willing to do.
And let's be candid, during the whole border crisis that
is still going on, even though it's it's you know,
it's greatly reduced. There were instances where Mexican military officials
in Mexican uniform crossed into the US to shepherd certain

(41:27):
cartel deliveries and when they got caught, and you can
look it up, it's there. When they got caught, they said,
oh it's not you don't remember the It sparked an
international incident. It's got to be a couple of years ago, right,
they where there were Mexican military officials in line with
the cartels coming across the border into the US to
guard shipments coming in from the cartels.

Speaker 1 (41:49):
That's that is That is wild.

Speaker 2 (41:52):
Look up is craz ladies and gentlemen. Ladies and gentlemen.
I don't make this stuff up.

Speaker 1 (41:56):
Look it up and oh they get whatever they get.
This is the same.

Speaker 2 (42:00):
Well, my point is that you now have an administration
that said we have had enough of this, right it is?

Speaker 1 (42:08):
It is shocking. Uh, as an American like hu, if
you aren't mad, if you aren't mad about this stuff,
and you are mad that Trump is doing something about it,
like you have a you have a virus in your
brain as a as a what's his name? Said, like, uh,

(42:30):
what the heck is.

Speaker 2 (42:31):
That guy Ben I have a virus in my brain.

Speaker 1 (42:33):
News anchor who said that all white people have a
virus in their brain.

Speaker 6 (42:36):
That.

Speaker 1 (42:38):
No, it was a Don Lemon. It was the one
who everybody thinks is like reasonable.

Speaker 2 (42:44):
One who everyone thinks is reasonable.

Speaker 6 (42:46):
Yeah.

Speaker 1 (42:47):
I don't know that he's not though, he's a total
he Uh hold on, I'll come up with it. Van Jones,
that's it, yeah, Van Jones. Van Jones famously said that
all white people have a virus in their brain that
makes them racist. So if you think that this stuff
is okay, and you think the Mexican government is cool

(43:09):
to help ship Fentanel over the border to kill your
fellow Americans, you're the problem. Do okay, Okay, I'm fired up.
I'm so f you got me freaking fired up. I
want to I want I want to fight now.

Speaker 2 (43:26):
You want you want to burn it down? Burn it down,
burn it down. Hey, look, I think America has It's
what I've said. I think America has their fighting spirit back.
Speaking of fighting, so Trump has now proposed the Golden
Dome project. Mm right, oh wait, we have Van Jones up.
Let's be to Van Jones clip.

Speaker 1 (43:44):
Clip. No, it's just a picture.

Speaker 2 (43:46):
You know. The one thing I would say about Van
Jones is he is a good looking dude.

Speaker 1 (43:51):
You know, that's a He always looks good. His suit
has always really not done you. And he talks calmly
and intelligently, so he can say really stupid stuff and
it's not sound like a total moron. It's a skill.
It's definitely a skill.

Speaker 2 (44:07):
But by the way, were you woman splaining when you said, well,
you know he's intelligent. Is that woman's plaining?

Speaker 1 (44:15):
No?

Speaker 2 (44:17):
I mean, why did you have to say he's intelligent?
I mean, why was that even part of the conversation.

Speaker 1 (44:21):
I don't know.

Speaker 2 (44:22):
I mean, by the way, if he's on CNN, I'm
not I'm sure, not sure it makes him that intelligent.

Speaker 1 (44:26):
But no, no, that's something he's.

Speaker 2 (44:28):
No disrespect to all my friends who have been on CNN.
I'm just kidding.

Speaker 1 (44:31):
I'm insulting all of you.

Speaker 2 (44:32):
All of you, all white, all white people, all white
people or hadsome men, all.

Speaker 1 (44:37):
People, anybody on CNN who's a Democrat.

Speaker 2 (44:40):
You're no stock. Oh stop stock.

Speaker 1 (44:44):
I can say it. I'm not friends with any of
these people. Okay.

Speaker 2 (44:47):
The Golden Dome, So the Golden Dome is going to
be a project sort of Star Wars on you know,
the Star Wars on steroids so to speak. Is you know,
because it's going to be a system. We don't know
how they're going to roll it out, but it's a
major project that would require coordination among the branches. But
it would be a layered defense system of short range,

(45:10):
medium range, long range missiles how to defend them and
create an impregnability for the United States, similar to what
Israel has. Not one hundred percent fool proof, but they
have a layered system. Between David Sling and the other
things as well as hellel Fold was telling us about.
But here's my question. Let's assume, first of all, why
don't we have it already? It's my first question, really, right,

(45:32):
I mean, you know, we're the United States. Why don't
we have this technology? Why does Israel have develop this
technology and we don't have it? That said, we do
have some intercept capabilities of course, But here's the question.
Let's assume we build a system like that and the
United States becomes impregnable to external missile attack, whether it's
an ICBM, SLBM right, submarine launcha ballistic missile right. Because

(45:56):
I go back to the days of MERV and MARV. Right,
you know, multi independently targeted re entry vehicles where they
would take one warhead and they have multiple multiple bombs
on them and they could direct them all that stuff. Right, Yeah,
not to bore everybody, But what do you think that
how does that change foreign policy? And I don't claim
to have the answer, I'm just it's an interesting thought process.
If the US, who has always been separated geographically by

(46:19):
bodies of water on both sides, right, but all of
a sudden, now so that's from the sea, Right, we
were always removed. But if we are also there from space,
space and missiles, and we are impregnable that way, how
does that change foreign policy and politics in general? What
do you think?

Speaker 1 (46:40):
That's a really good question, because you know, I've often
heard people say that, you know, a lot of these
countries that don't like us, you know, they're too far away,
they don't have the capability to send missiles, they can't,
can't do whatever. But then we saw China fly by
balloons across our country and drones which supposedly are fine

(47:03):
now flying around everywhere, freaking people out. So I think
that there is a very real threat that now these
countries will have the capability or the oh kutzba right,
there's another word for.

Speaker 2 (47:22):
You enough, look at you.

Speaker 1 (47:26):
So freaking yeah, dude to come over here and do
some wild stuff because they saw the Biden administration do nothing.
So what would stop any foreign country from doing the
same thing?

Speaker 2 (47:39):
Well, look, weakness in foreign politics and in schoolyard politics, right,
if you're on the playground politics, weakness breeds aggression. There's
no question about that. But my question is if the
United States develops a golden dome, how does that change politics? Right?

(48:02):
On the one hand, the United States could be far
more bullish or as a bully in foreign politics, or
the United States could be far more removed right, non interventionist,
or they could be what's the term I'm looking for? Yeah, no, Paul, No, no,

(48:23):
Rand Paul and everyone.

Speaker 1 (48:24):
Else you know, libertarian?

Speaker 2 (48:27):
Yeah, it's a libertarian but but meaning there's a term
on the tip of my tongue. But any of it,
you get the idea, or just we can withdraw from
draw from foreign politics.

Speaker 1 (48:38):
Would be the other thing. I know what you're going for.
It's like a harm the word harm or something, isn't
it do no harm? There's a no I'll think, I'll
think of it. That's really interesting idea.

Speaker 2 (48:52):
Because however, it doesn't eliminate one threat. I mean, look,
you want to make sure the system works right because
you know, once once it's up running, because you know,
I want to start out with the Golden Dome and
end up with a golden shower. It just doesn't really
you know, not one of those things.

Speaker 1 (49:06):
But but well you're right, oh, go ahead, go ahead.

Speaker 2 (49:12):
But it still does not address the enemy within issue,
because then the only way to attack America is from within, right,
And it's sort of you know, you know, think about
it like Return of the you know, we're going into
Return of the Jedi, right where they you know, they
have to break down the force field around the planet.
Well you have to, and the only way to do
that was to come inside of it, right and then

(49:33):
and then get rid of it, you know, and get
rid of it. But it's an interesting concept, and if
you know, there's a bunch of articles out there it's
a layered missile defense system. We already have some things
in place. I mean, it's one thing to protect Israel,
which is roughly the size of you know, New Jersey,
Thank you very much. But it's just an interesting but
this is all the stuff that Trump's putting into play

(49:53):
that nobody's talking about. Yeah it nobody.

Speaker 7 (49:58):
No.

Speaker 1 (49:58):
And then so the Row doctrine maybe is that's kind
of like the isolationist kind of theory.

Speaker 2 (50:06):
No, the isolation is the isolationist is exact word. I
was looking more. Thank you. Oh okay, yeah, we could
become more isolationist, yes, or we could become more you know,
sort of heavy handed. I mean, you know, just think
about how it changes China if China can't attack us. Now,
I'm not sure it helps our friends like Taiwan, but
of course we can give it to them too. Well.

Speaker 1 (50:25):
There and then and there you go. This is the
thing is this kind of tech. First of all, this
this started getting developed in the eighties, Like you said,
why don't we have this yet?

Speaker 2 (50:35):
And we wait, wait, wait a minute. We have a
lot of capability. We we have a lot of star
Wars capabilities now and they hang on. If you look
up some of the names we have. We have FAT
which is the terminal high Altitude Area Defense already which
we have a layered system called the C two b MC,
which is Command control Battle management and communication system to

(50:58):
detect incoming. So we have a lot of this in place. Okay, right,
So so it's not you know, and again you know,
depending on you know, is it to use Israel as
a as a as a judge, isn't really really or
as a comparison really accurate because land mass is smaller
altitude of the of what they're firing. What they're firing,

(51:20):
it's one thing. It's one thing for you know, a
scud missile or different even even intercontinental missiles. But ballistic,
are they subsonic? Are they supersonic? You know, that's a
whole different level of coordination. And we have much more
territory to defend, yes, and I mean, you know, exponentially,
but we have It's not like we don't have some
of this capability.

Speaker 1 (51:40):
Now, okay, all right, I'm with it. I'm with it.
The more the more defense we can have, the less
offense we have to do. In my opinion, and I understand,
you know, I'm i I'm you know, I'm very libertarian.
And there are a lot of times where you know,

(52:00):
people that are very libertarian, you know, they don't want
to spend money on anything, they don't want to do
any foreign anything, And I think that that is misguided.
I think that there is something real to having. I mean,
we have to have diplomacy of some kind. And that

(52:21):
doesn't mean we have to go bomb people. That also
doesn't mean we have to give them money for no reason.
But we do have to negotiate deals when we do.
When we see bad actors in the world threatening their neighbors,
you know, you would think, whit.

Speaker 2 (52:38):
Wait, wait, wait, wait, why is that the United States?
This problem? Maybe if we have an interest there, why
is it what? Look, this comes down to Teddy Roosevelt, right,
it walks softly and carry a big stick, but not necessarily.
And I'm not arguing to be an isolationist. But I'm
also not arguing to be an interventionist, right. I mean,
it depends on the theater, it depends on who the

(52:59):
client is, so to speak, it depends on the country,
it depends on the issue at hand. I mean one
of the criticisms that I have, Look, I think, regardless
of you know, how Trump sees the Bush presidency, I
think I think the Bush presidency, I think a more
decent man you wouldn't find. I think he always tried
to do the right thing. No president does the right

(53:19):
thing all the time, but he always tried to do
the right thing. But I think one of the things
that I disagree with in hindsight is we are not
the world's policeman, you know. So so to make a
generic statement like that, I just it's sort of I go, well,
you know, I mean, that's what gets us into trouble
to begin with. Having said that, I you know, we've

(53:39):
talked about it till we're at nauseum, right, I mean,
I still think the great battle and the reason Trump
is so it's so important if someone like Trump in
office is this is this is Judeo Christian Western values
battle against you know, you know, sort of the globalist
Islamists kind of you know struggle in the world. And
that's really the defining struggle for a century in my opinion.

Speaker 1 (54:01):
But and Ben says we need Ben says we need
the golden dome so we can fight the alien invasion.

Speaker 2 (54:08):
Like I said, as long as you're gonna en up
with a golden shower and then a golden dome and
what works, I'm okay with that.

Speaker 1 (54:13):
So here's what I do know. The good thing is,
here's the one good thing. If there ever is a
zombie apocalypse, all the democratic cities will will go first,
because all and all that will be left is a
bunch of conservatives, because all the cities, you know, they'll

(54:34):
all like kill each other and go zombiefide and then
they can't really unless it's World War Z, unless they're
World War Z zombies.

Speaker 2 (54:41):
Right, And this is a positive to you why.

Speaker 1 (54:43):
Because then all the the crazy people will be gone,
and there all of us with guns and our Second
Amendment rights will go murder all the zombies and then
we'll take park everything. See I solved everything.

Speaker 2 (54:58):
Okay, I just you know I'm not often speechless, but yeah, okay,
So anywn, you know, I'm glad that you find yourself entertaining.
I mean we are, Yeah, we are going to build
a statue, but you know, lo and behold, we is

(55:19):
running out a time. So before we go, though, yeah,
I at least want to play one of the videos.

Speaker 1 (55:25):
Pick one, any of them?

Speaker 2 (55:27):
Yeah, pick one? Do? Okay, the reaction? So what it is?
We look for videos, ladies and gentlemen, go, you know,
let's react to this one, because there's just so much
crazy crap out there that when you see some of
these videos and you go, huh. I mean, I personally
would go for the pink haired lady, but you.

Speaker 1 (55:45):
That's what I'm That's what I was going to go
for to bring us a little levity at the end
of the levity.

Speaker 2 (55:52):
It's not levity, but it's it's pathetic, but it's pathetic levity.

Speaker 1 (55:56):
Yes, all right, let's listen.

Speaker 8 (55:58):
Did you know, however, that is a gender identity that
is linked to the seasons. This is called gender season.
And this is a gender identity I've only just learned about.
It's a micro identity. It's not an identity that I
have ever heard discussed before. It's a new one for me.
And a season is an individual who explores the gender

(56:18):
identity in relation to a season or all the seasons.
So this might be somebody whose gender expression and identity
is linked to one season, so for example Winter, or
this might be somebody whose gender identity and expression changes
depending on the season.

Speaker 2 (56:36):
First of all, what's a micro gender What I mean?
I mean, I don't, but I can't. Okay, So there's
gender fluid and gender season.

Speaker 1 (56:52):
I mean, I thought I thought this was like in
immutable characteristic your gender nder identity and therefore you shouldn't
you shouldn't be discriminated against because it's just who you are.
How is every five minutes? Wait?

Speaker 2 (57:09):
Wait a minute, wait a minute. First of all, we
started with gender fluid right where there are people who are,
so we already know that genders can say like today
I'm a minotaur, tomorrow I'm a tree, and the next
day I'm you know, I mean, is I am?

Speaker 7 (57:22):
You know?

Speaker 2 (57:22):
I'm a I don't know. Can I say this, I'm
a black lesbian from you know, uh, San Francisco to
get some of the reparations money?

Speaker 4 (57:30):
Right?

Speaker 2 (57:30):
Yes? But gender season? Is that like it sounds like
an illness? Right, it's gender season?

Speaker 1 (57:35):
Well, and that's is this like?

Speaker 3 (57:37):
Is this?

Speaker 1 (57:38):
Does this go along with seasonal effective disorder?

Speaker 2 (57:42):
Be careful you're going to catch gender It's gender season,
of course, you know it could also be sort of,
it could also be bugs, bunny like, be very careful.
We'll think rabbits, right, it's rabbit season, it's duck season.
It's gender season. Oh does that mean does that mean
we can hunt them? It's gender season?

Speaker 1 (58:02):
That is who you We're gonna get in trouble for
that one.

Speaker 2 (58:08):
Excuse me after hours, aren't we after hours? That wait?
Oh my gosh, it's rabbit season.

Speaker 1 (58:16):
It's it's maddening rabbit season. What what is so wild
is is that people think that whatever there, that everyone
else is responsible for their feelings and their sense of
well being.

Speaker 2 (58:31):
I I care, you're responsible for my feelings and well being?
What you what? What what you said before about you know,
Van Jones hurt my feelings? What? No?

Speaker 1 (58:42):
No, it didn't. No, it didn't because you don't have feelings.
You're a man.

Speaker 2 (58:48):
There you go. Now we're talking.

Speaker 1 (58:51):
Okay, hold on, one more, one more, one more, okay,
one more, Okay, hang on. Looking right at the.

Speaker 2 (59:12):
Camera, can I say, check, here's this check woman girl whatever?
Maybe she's maybe she identifies as a minotaur. Right. It's
gender season, rabbit season, gender season. How stupid are they?
Because this Tesla's are sort of the pinnacle of of

(59:33):
you know, sort of engineering, electric electric engineering, automotive engineering.
If cameras around the around the vehicle.

Speaker 1 (59:42):
This is this is, this is the problem with these people.
Just like your gender can change with the season, your
ideology can change with the with the political swings. So
Tesla was Elon Musk was the guy the electric car,
you know, eaving the planet, and everybody jerked him off

(01:00:03):
for years and years and years buying all these cakes.

Speaker 2 (01:00:05):
Excuse me, what did they do.

Speaker 1 (01:00:07):
They jerked him off? Really, I'm sure that's not allowed
to say either.

Speaker 7 (01:00:13):
Y'all.

Speaker 1 (01:00:13):
We are off the rails now. But this he was everybody's.
He was the he was the little little everybody's you know,
they were in love with him. And then he says, Hey,
I don't like waste, fraud and abuse. Now we're gonna
do terror.

Speaker 2 (01:00:27):
Tesla terrorism, tesla terrorism. That's what it is.

Speaker 1 (01:00:30):
People have no morals, they have no no real ideology,
they have no rudder for which to make decisions. They
just whatever their feelings are. I feel like fucking winter today.

Speaker 2 (01:00:43):
Oh my god, ladies and gentlemen. That was Eric Euretick
and that was of the people. This is our last broadcast.

Speaker 1 (01:00:57):
Sorry, guys, sorry, not sorry. I love it.

Speaker 2 (01:01:00):
This is wild bringing home. Where can they find us?
And where can they get this? Merch?

Speaker 1 (01:01:05):
Fantastic merch? You guys, if you have been watching the
video for this long, we ask that you leave a like,
share it, subscribe, and if you haven't liked what you've watched,
we Thank you for watching. Anyway, go check out our sponsors,
you guys, ASIK American Center for Education and Knowledge. Hang on,

(01:01:25):
we're going to do this. Guy ready, boom American Center
for Education and Knowledge. Buy some merch. Donate. Our goal
is to promote American exceptionalism. So when you donate to ASIK,
you donate to spreading the word about conservative values, American values,
American exceptionalism, Israel Appreciation Today, you guys, is another sponsor

(01:01:50):
that highlights the special relationship between the United States and Israel,
and you guys, we need the information out there more
than ever, so donate that. We've got like a documentary
in the works. We are doing a bunch of sexy stuff,
you guys. I can't I can't really say much, but
by some merch, donate if you care about Israel, if

(01:02:12):
you're a Zionist, if you believe that Israel has the
right to exist, support support support, okay.

Speaker 2 (01:02:17):
And if you believe together we win. That's what this is, right,
two flags and the test cliente says together we win.
By the way, I learned something, If you look at
the Hebrew on win, it actually is Hebrew for shoot.
So it's either together we win, or together we shoot.
What could be better than that? Maybe together we shoot
to win? Right, I hope?

Speaker 1 (01:02:39):
Hey ironic? Ironic?

Speaker 2 (01:02:42):
Oh, hey, guys, where is that?

Speaker 1 (01:02:43):
We're gonna We're gonna cut, We're gonna We're gonna leave
you today with a word from Israel Appreciation Day.

Speaker 2 (01:02:51):
Hello, and thank you for being here.

Speaker 5 (01:02:53):
This is the first ever Israel Appreciation Day.

Speaker 2 (01:02:57):
I believe in the words of Israel's first lead, David Bengorian,
who said one does not write history, one makes history.

Speaker 1 (01:03:09):
The history of the Jewish people is one of rising
and flourishing, despite thousands of years of being attacked, exiled
and scapegoat.

Speaker 6 (01:03:18):
Here and I'm honored to join all of you in
celebrating the first annual Israel Appreciation Day. And there are
many reasons to appreciate Israel. It's one of America's closest
allies in the world. It's a safe haven to persecuted people,
and it's a well sprint of innovation that.

Speaker 2 (01:03:31):
The land of visual was given to the Jewish people,
not by the United States Nations, but by God himself.

Speaker 1 (01:03:38):
Well, no one wants to find that love, not to
have this weapon, to be in a bulletproof vest, to
serve in the idea.

Speaker 6 (01:03:44):
We cannot allow the worst instincts in our society to win.

Speaker 2 (01:03:47):
We must stand proud, but we must stand tall.

Speaker 9 (01:03:51):
This is the Jewish moment, when the Jewish people stands
for life over death and shows the lost and confused
West how to survive.

Speaker 10 (01:04:02):
From the hallwu Seine, the pioneers, the original and early
inhabitants of the land, even before the official creation of
the State of Israel in nineteen forty eight.

Speaker 6 (01:04:13):
In my mind, one does not have to be Jewish
to support Israel in the battle against the evil that
is amass One only has to be human.

Speaker 7 (01:04:22):
Our Jewish community is stronger than ever.

Speaker 1 (01:04:26):
In Israel's two days. It's not just a place, it's also.

Speaker 7 (01:04:30):
A people well the generation away from the Holocaust and understanding, yes,
it could happen again.

Speaker 10 (01:04:36):
My daughter came home and said, is there going to
be another Holocaust?

Speaker 1 (01:04:39):
I couldn't live with myself if I didn't stand with
Israel and the Jewish people at this moment in time?
Will they most made us?

Speaker 2 (01:04:47):
The free press during the Israel AAMAS conflict has provided
real time updates on terror attacks, and.

Speaker 1 (01:04:55):
If we don't learn from those conflicts more, we're doing
the repeat the same mistake.

Speaker 7 (01:05:00):
And it takes a lot of courage and a lot
of strength to come out and be a voice of one. Sometimes,
what did you do professionally prior to October seventh?

Speaker 1 (01:05:12):
It is your duty ever due to shine the lot.
Go on to social media.

Speaker 5 (01:05:17):
Why would you flourish under persecution? The answerance, that's our nature.
That's always been our nature. When our enemies terrorize us
and they come after us, what you see is a
direct correlation to innovation.

Speaker 2 (01:05:30):
The nation of Israel lives