1/27/23 Weekly Roundup: No Fly List Hacked, Manchin At World Economic Forum, Pelosi Disses MSNBC, Desantis College, Marvel and China, UFO Debris Retrieved, Candace Owens Calls Steven Crowder Socialist

Breakingpoints dot Com. Super embarrassing moment for the US government as the no fly list, which has massively mallooned over the year since nine to eleven, was actually leaked after being left on an unsecured airline server. Let's go and put this up on the screen. This is from Vice News, they say in the headline US no fly list leaks. It was left on that unsecured airline server. The list was discovered by a Swiss hacker, and it contains the

names and birth dates and over a million entries. Just as a reminder, guys, we've had a no fly list in this country for a long time, but as they point out in this article, prior to nine to eleven it contained literally like sixteen names on it, so it was you know, almost non existent after nine to eleven. No one has any real insight into how large, but it had ballooned to you know, forty thousand, eighty thousand

something like that. And by the way, no due process about who gets put on this list or any process to get yourself taken off of the list. There's no way to even know if you're on the list. So this is a huge deal that this list has ultimately been obtained and leaked. The fact that it includes more than one point five million entries is really pretty wild, although they said many of those entries are aliases that

all reference the same person. But one of the people involved here said, it is so much bigger than I thought it would be. Yeah, the total number is somewhere between forty seven thousand and eighty one thousand people. And again, like, what does that even mean? And also what are the justifications for doing that? To be clear, you do not have to be convicted of a crime and may have no due process or burden of proof to be placed on the no fly list. They simply have to suspect you.

We had many of these cases in after nine to eleven where somebody who had a name that was similar to a terrorist name literally could not board a flight because they even though it wasn't them, their name was on the list and they had to go through an insane process to be able just simply to fly. And it gets to a lot of really interesting complex case law too, in terms of you know, you are right

basically as an American citizen. For people who aren't citizens is different that you know, you don't have a right to come to the country, but for people who are American citizens, your ability to navigate interstate is something that's been litigated and well established by the Supreme Court, and there were some cases on this, but it never actually

kind of quite came to fruition. So the fact that it is between forty seven thousand and eighty one thousand people also keep in mind this is the twenty nineteen version of the list. This is an old list. Yeah, what does it look like in the age of the whole domestic terror scare after the last two years. There's no open nothing about this that hasn't been made public. But it ultimately really serves as a reminder to me because I haven't thought, frankly about the no fly list

in quite a while decade. But it's a reminder of the many evils that were birthed out of the quote unquote War on Terror, which they never go away, They just get expanded and then used for other purposes or

by other political actors. And so the fact that you know something like this, which created a lot of uproar and a lot of questions from civil libertarians at the time, over time, Americans just sort of like accept that this is a thing that happens, that people got put on this list for with absolutely no due process and ability to get themselves removed from it, that it can be expanded, that you can be added to it at any time, and it takes a news item like this to remind

us that how much our sort of liberties and freedoms have really been impinged over this time period. Yeah, exactly. We've covered before how upset the Europeans were that we would dare do what they do, which is place restrictions on their ability to sell cars in the United States and car manufacturing. Well, they haven't forgotten it. They got real upset at Davos. Let's put this up there on

the screen. French President Emmanuel Macrone actually confronted Joe Manchin and said, quote, you are hurting my country for supporting protectionist actions within the Inflation Reduction Act. Let's go to the next one here, because this is actually my personal favorite. Oloff Schaltz, the Chancellor of Germany. He confronts Joe Manchin. He says, your support for policies favoring US automakers are

hurting Germany. Manchin pulls out his phone Google's tariff costs on autos in Germany and shows the top result, which shows that Germany has a higher tariff on US auto makers than the tariff that we actually put in place just to try and protect our domestic manufacturing. These people are the biggest hypocrites in the world. The French and the Germans have some of the most protectionist economies in

all of Europe. Germany specifically their manufacturing. They go to immense government lengths to prop it up because it's the backbone of the German middle class and really of the entire Europe. And it's been smart for them too. By the way, way, I don't fault them for a second. I would do the same thing if I was Germany, but do not have the temerity to get upset when we do one tenth and what you what we should

have done thirty years ago? What you've been doing? Yes, And we're like, yeah, maybe we'll protect our own industry and they're having a full fledged freak out. There's another level of hypocrisy here too, because they would sort of tried the US for not doing enough on the climate change, which I mean deserved, right, I get it. But then we actually do something and they're not about it. So

I'm very upset. This was also something that can remember Macron had a state visit here recently, and this was apparently a point of real tension between him and Biden as well, over the fact that they're worried that some of their green energy manufacturing is going to reshore here because of the incentives in the Inflation Reduction Act. So the European Union's action preparing their own package now, which great, good, Yeah,

go for it, do it. But you know the fact that for once, the US is doing like the teeniest, tiniest bit to rebuild and protect our own manufacturing base here and they're freaking out about it is just hilarious. So yeah, a rare mansion w here. Yeah, very rare

mansion w and a very common euro centrism. They drive me nuts, like the level of moral superiority once again, you know, they act like they are the kings of the world, both morally, and then they get so upset whenever we happen to do something they've been doing basically since the inception of their economy. Germany is the richest country in all of Europe, and France is I think number two or number three, depending on how you define continental or define Europe with the UK or not. These

are very rich societies. Like the idea that they could not comprehend why we'd do this, also, Crystal, you know, they're taking us to court, most likely in terms of the U was the World Trade Organization. They're calling this like a breach of the WT or I mean, go for it all right, it be, my guests. It just

drives me completely crazy. Yeah, I will say that. You know, when the Inflation Reduction Act passed, obviously I was supportive of it, but I didn't It's hard to look at these numbers in the abstract and the tax credits in the abstract and say like, is this going to be a significant shit? Does this really matter? Or not. The total freak out from the Europeans has really hardened one. Yes, I agree, and made me feel like, oh, this was actually a bigger deal than maybe I really realized at

the time. So thank you by you know, happenstance, you have hardened my support and belief in the power of this program. Criticism of MSNBC coming from a very unexpected place. Let's go and put this up on the screen. Nancy Pelosi admits she is not a big fan of MSNBC.

Of course, her reasons here are absolutely hilarious. This was in a big sit down interview with Maureen Dawd of The New York Times, and dad brought up to her that even some of the folks on MSNBC were being critical of the president with regards to their handling of the classified documents situation. And that's when Pelosi said, quote, I'm not a big fan of MSNBC. I love some individuals there, but dot dot dot and then I guess

she sort of trailed off so effectively Sager. Amazingly, her criticism of MSNBC is that they are not slavishly partisan enough for her taste. Everyone to pay real close attention to this she's mad that MSNBC is not a one Biden propaganda network by just covering the Biden documents. And here's the funny part. If in their coverage, what do you always note that they say every single time, the totally these are totally different cases, same at all. They

actually go out of their way to downplay the entire thing. So, if anything, they are doing the Biden propagandas by their definition, I saw the straight and the Hillary thing the press that the Hillary people could not handle it. They you're not allowed to talk about the emails pod zero. Even talking about it means that you're playing into Republican hands. What if it's bad? What if it's the news? You would be derelict if you're a news network and you

are not covering that. And what do you do here? We cover it and then we cover a lot of other stuff. Everything is important. We're not saying it's the most important story in the world, but it's also very significant involving the current president of the United States and even the former tangentially, So these people are brained it. They demand one hundred percent allegiance from their allies in

the media. Well, and if you think that executives that MSNBC won't take notice of this, you are wrong, because they their core mission is to serve their advertisers and maintain their access to the Democratic Party. I mean, that's what they do. It really matters actually less what their audience thinks or whether they're certainly whether they're putting out their coverage or not. Those are really their sort of

two core missions. Would not shock me at all if Nancy Pelosi, who she may not be speaker anymore, still one of the most powerful forces in this town and in the country, if she or one of her aids put in a call to express directly their displeasure with the direction of this coverage. And in corporate media, careers are made by being able to maintain access to someone like Nancy Pelosi or any of her sort of like

you know, surrounding circle. So they will take careful notice of the fact that she is displeased with the tone of their coverage and the fact that they have been even covering this at all, let alone moderately occasionally mildly critical of the president. So that's why it's really something to take note of here. Would not be surprised at all if it shapes the network's coverage going forward. You're absolutely correct. Florida Republican Governor Ron DeSantis won a very

big battle actually against the college Board this week. He originally pushed back on the pilot curriculum for a new AP course in African American Studies, objecting to certain components of it, like critical race theory and queer theory that had been brought into this curriculum that was being piloted by the college Board. The coursework had been kept secret. The only reason the public really knows what's in it is because of leaks to media. But DeSantis pushed back

on it and the Associate and the Associated Press. The college Board said, Okay, we're going to rework it. We're going to revamp it because DeSantis and Florida Republicans were not going to allow it to be used in Florida schools. This does not have to turn into a debate over the Stop Woke Act that DeSantis implemented. I think it

was just last year. I have my own problems with that law, even if I sort of agree with the thrust of his point, But he got the college Board to change the coursework, and I mean as much as people hate Rond DeSantis. I actually think this will be for the better of the curriculum. What do we know? What do we know about what the curriculum? I saw him griping about queer theory and intersectionality, and what do we know about what was in the curriculum from the leaks. Yeah,

So the leaks particularly pointed to critical race theory. They pointed to queer theory, intersectionality, and a lot of the writers and thinkers that had been sort of used as scholars and used their scholarship in the curriculum where to put it, mildly, very radical, I would say, fringe left thinkers.

And again, this is where and this is my colleague growth in the Federalist that there's a fourteenth Amendment question here when you're getting into questions that there's a quote pulled out in one of the leaks about one of the scholars cited in the coursework had been talking about how white people are X, Y and Z and it was basically just because they were white, and not because of any sort of learned or conditioned traits that people pick up. But because they're white, they're X, Y and Z.

And that is not healthy. And I think there is a real Fourteenth Amendment violation in that case. To my Collie Droit Pulman wrote about that, and I thought it was an excellent point. Equal protection. Yeah, and that's, by the way, why I think you don't need things like the Stop Woke Act, because we already have civil rights protections on the books. I know, these lawsuits take a really long time to go through and you're banking on winning them, obviously, but we do already have protections for

racial equality. And so is he claiming that. So I'm wondering if he's let me try to find this one piece in there Thesantus Zurdin specifically on abolishing prisons, queer theory, and intersectionality, and he said, basically, this is a political inclusion. This is something that is more about one political team than the other. I saw in one of the articles that was about that, he was saying that they've won

a victory kind of over identity politics. But so that's why I wonder if this is actually about him wanting to edit out some of the excesses that might have kind of slipped in from some fringed thinkers, but is fundamentally, you know, comfortable with an ap African American history course, or whether he just rejects the entire idea, because if you say that you're winning a victory over identity politics,

in what way can you be against that? Completely against identity politics, but then also supportive of African American history classes like that African American history classes are in essence, by definition, connected to identity, the identity of African American history in America. I'm guilty of using that term im precisely myself because it's become such a political football, identity politics.

But I think you're making a really good point, which is that fundamentally, I don't really have an issue with identity politics, the literal definition of identity politics, because people are different, thus their political interests are going to differ based on those different interests. So of course there's some element of identity politics, and the right plays into them too, with the say the white working class. That's identity politics.

And I think personally there is legitimacy to talking about the white working class differently than other demographics, just like we talk about suburban women differently than other demographics. So yeah, I mean identity politics in its essence to your point, run de Santis, I guess isn't rejecting the ap African American Studies class. He's still going to allow, obviously the College Board to administer the class in the state of Florida and has said repeatedly, we are proud to teach

African American history. This is a line that I think many Diaz and Florida officials have been using in their back and forth with the college Board. We are proud to teach African American history in the state of Florida. This is just too far, which, you know, whether or not you think run to Santis is sincere in that it's at least politically clever and right. Not only our identity is kind of real and salient, but sometimes people

have multiple lapping elements of their identities that actually intersect. Basically, like white and working class would be an intersecting identity, and both of those pieces of your identity inform who you are, how you go about the world. So to see him coming to call it if maybe his advisors have some like sophisticated critique in the background, but like the way that he's presenting it publicly seems just like

a blunt rejection of the entire notion. Yeah, but I think it's a blunt rejection of the entire notion that's broadly popular because people are sick of being excessively divided along identity lines and being divided along identity lines when it's not salient to your point, and that happens over

and over again. And intersectionality was taken from a legal theory by Kimberly Crenshaw into a hierarchy and whether or not you think certain folks have abused it, Crenshaw accuses the right of abusing it, but it has been extrapolated in cases with certain thinkers to be becoming hierarchical. And I think that's been a high profile mistake and one that allows you run a scantis to come in and talk about identity politics being a bad thing because the

accesses do resonate with people. Yeah, And we talked earlier about how Maurice Mitchell, who's the national director of the Working Families Party, wrote this six thousand word essay about the way that the left had vulgarized identity politics and was and was abusing it for for the for kind of there are people's own, you know, kind of internal motivations inside organizations and divorcing it from its structure. Quoted somebody saying that you've you know, you've taken the politics

out of identity. You had identity politics. No longer has the politics connected to it. Now it's just identity. And so there's an irony in that we all sides have dumbed it down and then battered each other with it. And then you try to say, okay, well then let's start let's let's do let's do a course on this, like, let's let's actually study it in a in a profound way, and then the dumbed down parts woul get pulled out and say, well, we can't do that because this is

so dumb. Well how are we going to get smarter? Yeah, we don't study this. So we'll keep watching this and see what AP comes back with. I'm skeptical that it's going to be a good faith back and forth, but

this is all we've got, you know. I think the red line in the sand should actually be whenever you're studying, like racial history, whatever it is, the red line in the sand, if you're a Republican or Democrat, whatever you think should be treating people differently based on the color of their skin solely and saying these are innate characteristics

that come because of the color of your skin. And so to the extent that that's Rondasantis's red line, you can take it in good faith or not, it doesn't matter. But to the extent that this move at least drew that red line for the college board and the course is going to go on, I have a hard time

being upset about this. I think that's great because I imagine that that's painful for children and causes a lot of confusion, confusion for children, and a lot of strife in classrooms as we've seen actually over the last couple of years. And it's not just white students. A lot of studies have shown that black students, when when you present this kind of this idea that you are defined by race completely and fully from beginning to end, that

can create harm as well. But yeah, we'll keep following this story and others like it, so stay tuned for that really big news this week, though it kind of got buried in the media cycle. Disney is welcome back in China. This is again huge news for Disney stock, which has been struggling. But Actuos reported yesterday that Marvel movies are officially returning to theaters in China. That's the first time since Spider Man was released in twenty nineteen.

Remember how huge of a relationship that Disney and Marvel has had with China over the years. It's a big, big, big money maker. But it's also something that has caused losses. If you remember Turnals, which is directed by Chloe Joo, she was banned. Basically, the movie was banned from China because she had said something critical in a trade publication about how there are secrets everywhere in China ten years ago, and that caused the movie. I just pulled this up.

This is like a three hundred million dollar movie and its budget was expected to be made up by getting a great reception in China. That's a loss for Disney. When you can't show that money that movie in China and have spent a ton, a ton a ton of money on it. What do you make of this? This is a big deal. I just couldn't be happier for Mickey Donald, the whole gang, Disney happy for there that they're going to be back raking in money from China.

Congratulations to them. So they're going to do their Marvel comics. Right, They've got ant Man and Black Panther coming out in February in China. And do you think that this was public pressure in China, the public being like come on, like these are fun, or like what do you how do you account for this shift? Yeah? I mean maybe it's that, Maybe it's just shaking things back up post COVID.

Maybe it's because Bob Iger is back at Disney and he always had a good relationship with China, and Bob chat Back got pushed out last year and Iiger is back. That might have something to do with it. Maybe he was instrumental in reopening that relationship or rekindling that relationship. But Disney has really been struggling, and it's obviously a huge company. It's a huge part of the economy, and so it's access back to Chinese markets is a really

big deal. And they'll argue, by the way, that this is a really big bridge between the two countries so they can share culture. It's sort of like the old Cold War argument about blue jeans. Right, If you can get people overseas to enjoy blue jeans, appreciate blue jeans, want blue jeans, then they'll be more favorable to the United States. It's a problem that's really plaguing many, many industries, whether it's the NBA, whether it's talking about rare earth

minerals or semiconductors. This is a really big problem and Disney. It's interesting thor Love and Thunder. I think it was actually As that pointed this out. It dropped over the summer. It was not approved by China's censors because it had LGBTQ themes in it. Now it's awards season, and I'm very curious to see if any celebrities in their sanctimonious awards show speeches speak out against Disney coming back into

this relationship with China. You get immediately blacklisted, immediately blacklisted by China. Even your studios that you work with can get blacklisted. The consequences will be huge, They'll be sweeping and will affect more than you if you speak out against this. But this is them rekindling relationship with an authoritarian country that has a lot of human rights problems, right, and so some people would call it a bridge, but

what you're describing sounds more like shackles. Right. You saw the NBA cracking down on anybody who said anything even you know, remotely critical of treatment of people in Chin gen or or Hong Kong, said anything about time Wan like just you couldn't touch anything. So it was it's more more for boating it than basically anything online. It's like saying anything at all about the biggest country in

the world. And so you're right, like actors love nothing more than to give virtual virtuistic speeches at the oscars, but I would be shocked if any of them stood up for you know, said anything about any of that. And so then if it is a bridge, which way are the people marching, and it seems like they're they're marching this way and controlling us rather than us kind

of having an influence on them. And to your point about what's driving this, China has learned how to make Hollywood movies on its own, and they release a lot of movies that are very nationalistic, big blockbuster things. They are very nationalistic and very appealing to Chinese audiences that

really really like them. So that's another thing. I mean, Disney planned the budgets for a lot of these films well before this relationship splintered, and now they want to make up and they know that they can spend more money on these films and get them, hopefully to appeal to bigger audiences. We saw a top gun Dotto over the course of the last year. A huge, big budget blockbuster does really well because people like the high octane stuff. So Disney can spend more money on these movies and

then show them in China and all is well. That ends well, But every sector of our economy is now grappling with these questions. I think the public is more aware of these questions. Mulan, which never ended up getting shown in China, thanked the law enforcement of Shinjong the credits, which was a huge controversy at the time. So good luck to Disney, a huge lucrative contract or a huge lucrative move to be able to open up that relationship

again with these two films. They're going to make a lot of money off of it, maybe break even on the films because of it, or even do better than that. So we'll certainly keep following this in every sector of the economy because there are some real problems for American business leaders. Some big movement in the realm of UFOs UAPs, whatever you want to call it. The government put out their report. They've been trying to gaslight us all on

the issue. There's a new clip that's been reserved as well as a new image released by my friend Jeremy Corbel. Let's look at the clip first. I actually missed this. This was back in May of twenty twenty two, but still important. Nonetheless, you have a Congressman Richie Torres here talking about debris that has been recovered by the United States government. Let's take a lesson. Has any physical evidence such as debris been recovered. The debris that has been

recovered has not raised any notable alarms. So hold on a second, which debris, what where? So a lot of this was discussed was at least wiped under the rug in the report. We talked previously about the Pentagon Inspector General coming out and talking about secret compartmentalized programs, Roswell and other things that he's been quote looking into. Still absolutely no disclosure on any of that. So my friend Jeremy Corbel, he's been talking, he's been releasing new podcast,

Weaponized Podcast. Let's put this up there on the screen. You can make fun of it if you want to, But this is a brand new photo it's actually been taken from the US government archives. They call this crystal the mosl ORB. So this was a US military filmed UFO from presumably from a drone and has been officially designated in government files as a unidentified anomalous phenomenon at no IDEA what roundage, Yeah, that round thing is actually seen for So the video itself is four seconds long.

It was seen on the camera for only a single second. That's what you get there. And let's be clear, in the files itself, for all of the balloon people, this stuff has been ruled out. This has been you know, in terms of the analysis. Nobody knows what the hell it is. I don't know. I don't know what to make of it. It almost seems too good to be true. But again, I mean, nobody in the government is disputing this. I'm not saying it doesn't even look like anything in particular.

It literally appeared on camera like a flash. So it's just stunning stuff. And it all comes on the heels of the new report. And there's lot of general interest that is happening right now with post report environment. Jeremy himself, I spoke to him, a lot more stuff has been is going to continue to come out, and I just want to say, look, I know it sounds a little wacky,

and I know it sounds kind of crazy. None of these photos are smoking gun proof, but you would also presume that if you have a hyper advanced society that's like this, like the idea of the actual smoking gun proof and all of that just coming out. I mean, it doesn't seem all that likely. You get little glimpses and pieces. Maybe it's true, maybe it's not. I don't know, but it's it's a real mystery. Can we can we incorporate this into the weaponization of government New Church Committee?

Can we? No way, because it's one of those things where it's this is so much deeper than that, Like in terms of the car apartment. I always think about this John Podesta, whatever you think about the guy, he was a big UFO guy. Actually yeah, he was chief of staff to Bill Clinton and he wrote an intro to a UFO book and he was like, look, I tried to get to the bottom of this. He's like, I'm a UFO guy. I've always been interested in UFOs.

Bill Clinton's actually fully admitted this on camera. He said, I tried to get to the bottom of it, and they wouldn't tell me that's out there. You can go and look at the clip itself. Podesta himself of White House Chief of Staff. He literally tried to corral the IC to give him the information and they didn't give it to him. There have been a variety of people

like that who have been in senior government officials. Assistant Secretary of Defense Christopher Mellen, He's talked about the same thing. He's like, there's a lot of stuff in there. He's like, but you know it's not coming out. So the highest levels of elected office, and even they a money of them, they have no idea what's going on. We'll see. I take a lot of pride and the guys like Ryan Graves, he was the pilot, one of those pilots. I believe

he observed the gimbal Ufo. He actually said he was almost arrested for coming out and speaking out about his experience with the gimbal Whatever ever happened with the dude who ran the website and how does tell like house runs that also, nobody knows what the hell happens to that guy. They FBI broke into his house, no knock warrant.

Actually no, it wasn't FBI. It was like Navy Special whatever, the Naval Criminal Department NCIS literally went in and stormed in without a warrant U. They searched, seized all of his stuff, his servers, private phones, all that didn't give it back to him. Still to this day, we have no idea what happened. And he basically runs a website that has these like photos show you know from area fifty one and be similar photos to what we just showed you for example. And look, I get it. I

know this sounds crazy. I know that said this is all true. Nobody's disputing that video. And we're talking about members of Congress and all this stuff that are saying this who have access that are saying, actually there's debris, that's what he says. And he says it hasn't raised any questions. But I mean, look, we have questions, whether he does or not. We definitely I need to see it. We have been tracking somewhat and you guys have probably

been tracking as well. This big fight between two giants of conservative media's Stephen Crowder on one side and Daily Wire led by Ben Shapiro on the other side. Another player in this whole drama has been Candice Owens, who is now employed by The Daily Wire and who has been doing her own videos and appearance with Tim Poole talking about this whole thing, and you know, really slamming Crowder and talking about what a betrayal this was. And I think she called it a quote unquote bitch move.

That's but I can't really do it. It is a bitch move. I can't really just do that. But the latest charge against Crowder is that he is basically now with exposing these these terms of this contract, that he's basically a socialist. Take a listen to what she had to say. I think that people are really seeing just

how nasty what you did was. And I think that I would hope that you would come to terms to the fact that you owe everybody an apology, that this was never necessary, that you can start whatever company you want. You don't get to step in like a socialist, and it is socialists like these are the demands that you hear,

and people are trying to establish a union. When the Amazon workers have walked out because they have decided that they are worth more, that they should have three hour lunch breaks, they've gotten their contract from Amazon, and they realize that they are lunch breaks for only one hour, and that they're required to show up to work, and they think they should be able to work from home for three days a week post COVID, and they walk out and they want to stage a union. And this

is the big con. It's Amazon. No. I mean, I was with you on the bitch Move canvas. Why did you have to go so far as call a socialist? So obviously the Amazon part is going to trigger me, because this woman clearly has no idea what conditions are like for where houseworkers at Amazon. The idea that they get to work from home or they even get a lunch break, you know, let alone fighting for a three out. No,

that is not what's going on there whatsoever. So that eared and also the whole concept of like, oh, this is so outrageous that you would band together with your fellow workers to have a voice in your own workplace which you spend a majority of hours of your life at.

Obviously I find that atrocious. But I will say, Sager, one of the things that was always amusing to me about this fight is, you know, Crowder and Shapiro and Candice Owens, these are all died in well capitalists, blame free market all this stuff, and ultimately what Crowder was talking about, even though I think, you know, this is a total setup. It was like a cynical move to

start his own thing. But he's talking about provisions in a labor contract and what is fair and unfair to workers, as if any of these people in him in particular, have ever really expressed concern or encouraged anything like the banning of non competes from the Biden administration, Like there's no track record there of caring about labor conditions in

the past. So in a way, she does kind of have a point here of like, I clearly disagree with their ideology, but what Crowder is claiming to stand up for in this whole fight is very much inconsistent with the ideology he supposedly holds. Well. It's also you know, she also said something which really has me curious. She goes, Stephen has a lot going on, yeah, And I was like, what does that mean? Yeah, And she said something like, I think we should all pray for him right at

this point, just let it all out. I gotta know. I'm transfixed at a lot too, just to see exactly what's going on with this. I will say it seems incredibly bizarre. At first, I was kind of a crowder and I was like, well, I could see him like, I'm not sure I would sign that contract. You know, the idea of especially the tech censorship thing and all that. I get where the Daily Wire was coming from. But at the same time, it's a term sheet, right, so it's not even like it was a contract that said.

The more you think about it, like taping the phone call of your friend, and you could also so you can hear the betray when Ben and when Jeremy, especially Ben, when they talk about it. I'm like, man, that's well, that's screwed up. The timeline that Ben lays out of. You had registrate website, you had a term sheet for months, you register this stop big Con website, and then you set up the phone call that you record. It's very clear this was like a cynical market play. Ultimately, it

was very capitalist of him. I mean that's you know, uh, I think what he is is after here. I think that seems incredibly incredibly clear now. But yeah, it's going to continue to be ugly because she is effectively sort of threatening and blackmailing him with revealing some sort of information that I guess he you know, wouldn't want out and that she got from quote unquote sources. So we'll

see where it all goes. But you know, part of why it's brought these are huge players, Like we're talking about, this is a fifty million dollar contract over four years. The amount of money, the amount of influence they have in terms of the conservative ecosystem is massive. And I do think even though Crowder is not a noble actor here, you know, Daily Wire probably spends a lot of ad dollars on YouTube. I don't doubt that they have you know, people high up at YouTube that they're able to call.

Do they have insights into okay, what can you say and what can't you say? And how to walk the line to make sure they don't get demonetized, that they don't get suppressed in the algorithm. I think those are like decent questions to ask. But again, I don't really think Crowder is like a noble actor here in terms of cecil dynamic. I don't think anybody is particularly noble. Yeah, and also shows you the hell a lot of money involved.

It also just shows you also by the way, you know, whenever people accuse us or whatever of doing here's a perfect example. I was like, if you're willing to go all the way and read ads for gold and do sponsorships and really go into it, that's actually what it looks like. In terms of our business model, which is mostly in subscriber funded. We don't do host red ads

or any of the other stuff. Never just to give you you're talk to advertise exactly, it's just auto generated ads and subscriber yes, so just to give people an idea of how much money exactly we're leaving on the table knowingly in favor of independence, and this is exactly why. So I also want to put that out there in general. Like with the whole situation, I really do think like for me, it's the personal betrayal of Crowder and the

way that he has behaved. Because there are a lot of people who I hate in his business, people who actively talk smack and like all this. I would still never do any of that to them. It's just not right, like conducting yourself this way, especially to try and to make a profit. There was a genuine, genuine disservice here that was done. I think that's a completely different story. But the more that I see it, he betrayed friends

and I don't know. To me, that's all wash your hands, yeah, grow smooth, very gross, smooth alight, all right, we'll see y'all later