youtube

Untitled Document

youtube
D6 P24 P18 D3 P17
Open PDF directly ↗ View extracted text
👁 1 💬 0
📄 Extracted Text (11,121 words)
[00:00:00] Legacy media say that ICE arrested a [00:00:02] 5-year-old. But is that really true? But [00:00:04] on the other hand, the DOJ did arrest [00:00:06] three people who stormed into a church [00:00:09] and then proceeded to harass everybody [00:00:10] in that church over their immigration [00:00:13] policy. We'll get to all that in a [00:00:14] moment. First, three years ago, [00:00:15] Hollywood told fans they would never [00:00:17] make a series about one of the most [00:00:18] enduring stories ever told. And so we [00:00:20] did. Not the fairy tale, an origin [00:00:22] story. A series about power, sacrifice, [00:00:24] and the Christian beliefs that shaped [00:00:25] the West. Before Arthur, before Camelot, [00:00:27] before the sword, this is the beginning. [00:00:30] Yesterday, we released episodes 1 and [00:00:31] two of the Pen Dragon Cycle: Rise of the [00:00:33] Merlin, and you showed up. This is [00:00:35] premium storytelling without compromise. [00:00:37] This is what Hollywood wouldn't make. Go [00:00:39] to dailywearplus.com and start streaming [00:00:41] the Pen Dragon Cycle: Rise of the [00:00:43] Merlin, today. So, amid all of the chaos [00:00:46] regarding the immigration situation in [00:00:48] Minneapolis, members of the Legacy Media [00:00:50] have just started to tell lies. The [00:00:52] latest lie that is being told is that [00:00:54] federal agents seized a 5-year-old boy [00:00:57] in an effort to bait his father. This [00:01:00] story was first retailed apparently by [00:01:02] the New York Times. The original report [00:01:04] suggested a 5-year-old boy wearing a [00:01:06] Spider-Man backpack and an oversized hat [00:01:08] was detained with his father by [00:01:10] immigration authorities on Tuesday, one [00:01:12] of four students recently apprehended in [00:01:13] a suburban Minneapolis school district, [00:01:15] according to school officials. And this [00:01:18] was treated by the legacy media as a [00:01:22] major story. It was the lead on Drudge [00:01:24] Report. There was a picture of this [00:01:25] little boy wearing what appeared to be a [00:01:28] Disney hat. And again, the idea was that [00:01:32] he was used as bait. According to the [00:01:34] Daily Mirror, the pre kindergarten [00:01:37] pupil, kid named Liam Konor Ramos, was [00:01:39] pictured in a photo released by the [00:01:41] school system standing next to a vehicle [00:01:42] with an adult's hand on his backpack. [00:01:44] His father is not in sight. [00:01:47] Zena Stenfik, the superintendent of [00:01:49] schools in Columbia Heights, Minnesota, [00:01:50] asked at a news conference, "Why detain [00:01:52] a 5-year-old?" However, that is not [00:01:54] actually what happened. As you could [00:01:56] have predicted, according to the New [00:01:57] York Times, again, they bury this [00:01:59] further down in the story, the boy and [00:02:00] his father were taken to Dilly, Texas, [00:02:02] outside San Antonio, where they are [00:02:03] being held at an immigration detention [00:02:05] center. According to Mark Proash, a [00:02:07] lawyer working with the family, the boy [00:02:09] and his father came to the United States [00:02:10] from Ecuador in 2024. Each has an act of [00:02:13] asylum claim. The image of the child in [00:02:16] custody prompted an outcry. But what [00:02:18] exactly happened? Well, again, according [00:02:21] to Trisha Mclofflin, a spokesperson for [00:02:22] the Department of Homeland Security, [00:02:24] when the agents sought to detain the [00:02:26] father, he fled on foot and he left Liam [00:02:29] behind in the vehicle, [00:02:31] which is a bit of a different story. As [00:02:33] it turns out, if you're detained [00:02:34] alongside your child and you take off [00:02:36] and your kid is five, well, that might [00:02:38] say something about your parenting style [00:02:40] to say the very least. I have four [00:02:41] children, one of them is 5 years old. [00:02:43] The insanity of being detained alongside [00:02:45] my 5-year-old daughter and just taking [00:02:46] off is beyond measure. That is crazy. [00:02:51] Apparently, Miss Stenick, the district [00:02:53] superintendent, said in a statement that [00:02:54] another adult who lived in the family's [00:02:56] home had begged to care for Liam, but [00:02:57] federal agents refused to allow it. [00:02:59] Well, presumably one of the reasons why [00:03:01] they had refused to simply allow a an [00:03:03] adult staying in the home to take care [00:03:05] of the boy is they don't know who the [00:03:06] adult is. In 2024, there was a report [00:03:10] regarding the Biden administration that [00:03:12] found that from 2019 to 2023, more than [00:03:16] 32,000 unaccompanied migrant children [00:03:18] failed to appear for their immigration [00:03:20] court hearings. In fact, they lost track [00:03:22] of tens of thousands of migrant [00:03:24] children. Some of whom were reunited [00:03:25] with families, some of whom they really [00:03:26] don't have an idea. And so, yeah, they [00:03:29] might not be so hot on the idea of just [00:03:31] dropping the 5-year-old with a when it's [00:03:33] an adult who lives in the home. They [00:03:34] don't know who the adult is. According [00:03:37] to Trisha Mclofflin, the agents had [00:03:38] tried to get Liam's mother to take the [00:03:40] boy, but she had apparently refused. [00:03:42] Mclofflin said that Kona Ario told [00:03:44] federal agents he wanted Liam to stay [00:03:46] with him. Miss Granland said Liam's [00:03:48] father was yelling at adults inside the [00:03:50] home, "Please do not open the door." [00:03:52] Presumably because of fears the agents [00:03:53] would apprehend other people who are in [00:03:55] the home and in the country illegally. [00:03:57] Now again, this has raised hackles [00:04:00] because there is widespread debate over [00:04:02] what sort of warrant is necessary, an [00:04:05] administrative warrant or a judge signed [00:04:06] warrant in order to enter a home where [00:04:09] there's probable cause to believe [00:04:10] illegal immigrants are residing. We'll [00:04:12] get to that legal issue in a moment. [00:04:15] School officials have previously accused [00:04:16] immigration agents of making the child [00:04:18] knock on the door of his home as bay so [00:04:20] they could apprehend others, something [00:04:22] that immigration officials denied. So [00:04:24] again, I I cannot imagine that that is [00:04:26] actually the case, that they just took a [00:04:27] 5-year-old and they said, "We need you [00:04:28] to knock on the door and call for mommy [00:04:30] in order to get into the house to go get [00:04:33] illegal immigrants. In order to detain [00:04:35] Liam against his will, agents would need [00:04:36] probable cause to believe he was in the [00:04:38] country unlawfully, but they are allowed [00:04:40] to keep the child with an arrested [00:04:41] parents if the parent requests it." [00:04:44] Well, Vice President JD Vance was [00:04:45] visiting at Minneapolis on Thursday, and [00:04:48] here's what he had to say. [00:04:50] I see this story and I'm a father of a [00:04:53] 5-year-old, actually, a 5-year-old [00:04:54] little boy, and I think to myself, "Oh [00:04:56] my god, this is terrible. How did we [00:04:58] arrest a 5-year-old?" Well, I do a [00:04:59] little bit more follow-up research, and [00:05:01] what I find is that the 5-year-old was [00:05:03] not arrested, then his dad was an [00:05:06] illegal alien. And then they went when [00:05:08] they went to arrest his illegal alien [00:05:10] father, the father ran. So, the story is [00:05:13] that ICE detained a 5-year-old. Well, [00:05:15] what are they supposed to do? Are they [00:05:17] supposed to let a 5-year-old child [00:05:19] freeze to death? Are they not supposed [00:05:21] to arrest an illegal alien in the United [00:05:23] States of America? If the argument is [00:05:26] that you can't arrest people who have [00:05:28] violated our laws because they have [00:05:30] children, then every single parent is [00:05:32] going to be completely given immunity [00:05:34] from ever being the subject of law [00:05:36] enforcement. That doesn't make any [00:05:38] sense. No one thinks that makes any [00:05:40] sense. [00:05:41] >> Obviously, the vice president is [00:05:42] obviously 100% right about all of this. [00:05:44] I mean the fact of the matter is that we [00:05:46] have had a serious problem on our hands [00:05:47] since there was an agreement a consent [00:05:51] agreement between the federal government [00:05:53] and various judiciary bodies. The floor [00:05:57] is agreement going back decades that [00:05:59] suggested that you could not hold a [00:06:01] child and parent together in custody [00:06:04] when they crossed the border. And so [00:06:05] children were released into the interior [00:06:07] of the country and this caused the Biden [00:06:09] administration among other [00:06:10] administrations to release the parents [00:06:11] as well to reunify the family. Well, now [00:06:13] the idea is that you can't deport anyone [00:06:15] because they might have children and so [00:06:17] you can't reunify the family even if the [00:06:20] father wants to be with the kid and then [00:06:22] you get blamed if the father takes off [00:06:24] when you hold the kid and the parent [00:06:26] together. What exactly are immigration [00:06:28] agents supposed to do? This of course [00:06:29] makes everything unworkable, which I [00:06:31] believe is the point. Now, some of this [00:06:33] is part and parcel of a new ICE policy [00:06:36] that suggests that there does not need [00:06:38] to be a judge sign warrant in order to [00:06:39] enter the home. Again, you heard that [00:06:41] mentioned in the story from the New York [00:06:42] Times that ICE agents are showing up at [00:06:44] homes and based on administrative [00:06:46] warrants, they are entering homes and [00:06:48] they are looking for illegal immigrants. [00:06:50] According to the Wall Street Journal, [00:06:51] the Trump administration is asserting [00:06:53] new powers to forcibly enter the homes [00:06:54] of people they are hoping to arrest [00:06:56] without a criminal warrant signed by a [00:06:57] judge. Over the summer, lawyers at ICE [00:07:00] and its parent agency, the Department of [00:07:01] Homeland Security, penned a secret memo [00:07:03] expanding the authority by which agents [00:07:05] may enter homes of immigrants with final [00:07:07] deportation orders, the people said. [00:07:08] Now, what's happening here? What they're [00:07:10] saying is that is effectively a judge [00:07:11] signed warrant or at least it's very [00:07:13] similar. You have a deportation order. [00:07:15] It has been signed by a judge, a final [00:07:17] deportation order. And now they are [00:07:19] using that as the predicate for the [00:07:22] warrant. It is a civil warrant, not a [00:07:24] criminal warrant. That is the basic [00:07:26] argument that is being made. And when it [00:07:29] comes to immigration enforcement, [00:07:31] Supreme Court precedent suggests that [00:07:33] administrative warrants issued by the [00:07:35] attorney general rather than a judge [00:07:37] could be utilized to arrest people [00:07:39] pending deportation. [00:07:42] And that was codified in the Immigration [00:07:44] and Nationality Act. Actually, [00:07:47] now there are restrictions on it, like [00:07:49] you're not supposed to enter a private [00:07:50] home without consent. But again, the DHS [00:07:53] has now said, well, maybe that changes [00:07:55] because the final order of removal has [00:07:57] already been signed. So the person's [00:07:59] already had due process. It's not a [00:08:00] matter of there has to be another [00:08:02] judicial hearing in order to remove [00:08:03] them. They already have a final order [00:08:04] pending removal. And so once that order [00:08:07] is already done, they've had their due [00:08:08] process and now it's just a question of [00:08:10] executing the order. [00:08:12] All of that will end up litigated in [00:08:14] court. But to pretend that there is no [00:08:16] legal basis whatsoever for what DHS and [00:08:17] ICE are doing, that seems wrong. [00:08:20] According to the Wall Street Journal, [00:08:21] DHS and ICE officials have not [00:08:23] publicized or broadly distributed the [00:08:25] legal decision because they felt it [00:08:26] would invite legal scrutiny. [00:08:29] Immigration lawyers and advocates from [00:08:31] Minnesota have documented cases of [00:08:32] agents breaking down people's doors to [00:08:34] arrest them without a warrant. But [00:08:35] again, in some of these cases, you're [00:08:38] talking about people who have overstayed [00:08:39] their visas by legitimately 20 years. [00:08:42] The most prominent case concerned a [00:08:44] Minnesota man born in Liberia whose [00:08:46] fourth amendment right was violated by [00:08:47] ICE officers when they broke down his [00:08:48] door without his consent and without a [00:08:50] judicial warrant. He was issued a [00:08:51] deportation order in 2009. He was [00:08:54] allowed to remain in the US under ICE [00:08:56] supervision. His most recent check-in [00:08:58] with ICE was December 29th, 2025. And on [00:09:01] January 11th, immigration officers [00:09:02] forced their way into his home and took [00:09:04] him into custody. They said they had a [00:09:06] warrant. Apparently, this would be the [00:09:08] administrative warrant. This will all [00:09:09] get litigated in court. [00:09:12] But the bottom line is this. There are [00:09:14] plenty of situations that are going to [00:09:16] be dicey when it comes to specific [00:09:17] enforcement of general law. However, the [00:09:21] media should not have to make things up [00:09:22] like they found a 5-year-old boy and [00:09:25] they used him as bait in order to go [00:09:26] after his father. They shouldn't have to [00:09:28] do that. And the fact that they are [00:09:29] having to do that means that again the [00:09:32] broad policy is largely inarguable, [00:09:34] which is why you look for bad [00:09:36] exceptions. Now, meanwhile, this sort of [00:09:38] media coverage is leading to significant [00:09:41] and rage in places like Minneapolis. It [00:09:43] is ratcheting up the tensions with ICE. [00:09:45] Again, the vice president was visiting [00:09:46] Minneapolis and he said, "Listen, the [00:09:48] problem here is Minneapolis authorities, [00:09:50] not ICE. [00:09:52] But the number one way we could lower [00:09:54] the mistakes that are happening, at [00:09:56] least with our immigration enforcement, [00:09:58] is to have local jurisdictions that are [00:10:00] cooperating with us. There are some very [00:10:02] basic things that would make Minneapolis [00:10:05] look like look Memphis, Tennessee, a [00:10:07] blue city where you do not have this [00:10:09] chaos in immigration enforcement because [00:10:12] the local police and the local [00:10:13] authorities are cooperating with us. So [00:10:15] when you look at Memphis, Tennessee or [00:10:18] Austin, Texas, or any other community [00:10:20] virtually across the United States of [00:10:22] America, and you don't see the same [00:10:24] level of chaos in Minneapolis, the [00:10:26] natural conclusion is that it's not what [00:10:28] ICE is doing in Minneapolis, it's what [00:10:30] Minneapolis authorities are doing to [00:10:32] prevent ICE from doing their jobs. And [00:10:34] that's exactly what's happening. [00:10:37] >> And Vance, of course, is right about [00:10:38] this, too. I mean, the fact is that if [00:10:40] local authorities were in fact working [00:10:42] handin glove with DHS, things would go a [00:10:44] lot smoother. Vance also pointed out [00:10:46] that protest does not mean assault. That [00:10:49] if you're going to protest ICE agents, [00:10:50] that does not mean that you can obstruct [00:10:51] federal law or go after the ICE agents [00:10:53] physically or threaten them. A lot of [00:10:56] these guys are unable to do their jobs [00:10:58] without being harassed, without being [00:11:00] doxed, and sometimes without being [00:11:01] insulted. That's totally unacceptable. [00:11:03] And that's one of the things that I want [00:11:04] to send a message to is yes, come out [00:11:06] and protest. Protest me. protest our [00:11:08] immigration policy, but do it [00:11:10] peacefully. If you assault a law [00:11:12] enforcement officer, the Trump [00:11:14] administration and the Department of [00:11:15] Justice is going to prosecute you to the [00:11:17] fullest extent of the law. And I wanted [00:11:19] to show some support for these guys. Now [00:11:21] again, when it comes to prosecuting [00:11:23] people to the fullest extent of the law, [00:11:24] the big story with regard to immigration [00:11:27] over the past 24 hours is that now the [00:11:29] DOJ is going after three people who [00:11:32] essentially took over a church in the [00:11:35] middle of a service in order to promote [00:11:37] their immigration radicalism in [00:11:39] violation of the FACE Act, which is an [00:11:42] act that was designed to do two things. [00:11:43] It was designed to prevent people from [00:11:46] obstructing abortion facilities on the [00:11:47] one hand and also designed to prevent [00:11:49] people from storming churches [00:11:51] essentially and taking them over in the [00:11:52] middle of services. According to NPR, a [00:11:55] prominent civil rights attorney and at [00:11:56] least two other people involved in an [00:11:58] anti-immigration enforcement protest [00:12:00] disrupting a service at a Minnesota [00:12:01] church have now been arrested according [00:12:03] to Trump administration officials on [00:12:05] Thursday. Attorney General Pambani [00:12:08] announced the arrest of Nikima Ley [00:12:10] Armstrong in a post on X. Again, all of [00:12:12] that follows protesters entering the [00:12:14] city's church in St. Paul where a local [00:12:16] official with US Immigration and Customs [00:12:18] Enforcement serves as a pastor. And then [00:12:21] Pambani later posted on X. A second [00:12:22] person had been arrested, followed by a [00:12:24] third arrest announced by FBI Director [00:12:26] Cash Patel. [00:12:28] Now, as always, social media tom foolery [00:12:32] makes these things more ridiculous. [00:12:36] Apparently, the White House posted a [00:12:37] digitally altered image of one of the [00:12:39] people who was arrested. In the original [00:12:42] picture, she looks composed. In the [00:12:43] White House image, she is apparently [00:12:46] dramatically crying, which is like, why? [00:12:49] Why? Like, why? Who's doing this [00:12:51] stupidity? And it's it's enough for the [00:12:53] legacy media to make things up. You [00:12:55] don't need people in the social media [00:12:57] sphere for the White House making things [00:12:58] up and making the job of the legacy [00:13:00] media really a lot easier. That's really [00:13:02] foolish. We'll get to what the church [00:13:04] had to say. what its attorneys had to [00:13:06] say about all this in a moment. First, [00:13:08] from Amazon MGM Studios comes Melania. [00:13:11] Every protocol, every precaution, every [00:13:13] move coordinated, this new film takes [00:13:15] you inside the 20 days leading up to the [00:13:18] 2025 presidential inauguration through [00:13:20] the eyes of the first lady herself. The [00:13:22] briefings, the planning, the private [00:13:24] conversations. Witness what it takes to [00:13:27] secure her return to one of the most [00:13:28] powerful roles in the world. Melania is [00:13:32] only in theaters January 30th. It is [00:13:34] well worth the watch. Make sure that you [00:13:36] go check it out again. Melania heads to [00:13:38] theaters January 30th. Also, as we move [00:13:41] into 2026, many businesses, including [00:13:42] The Daily Wear, are ramping up hiring [00:13:44] efforts to meet ambitious new [00:13:45] objectives. But bringing those goals to [00:13:47] life requires assembling the right team. [00:13:49] And that's easier said than done. [00:13:50] Today's hiring landscape presents unique [00:13:52] obstacles. From sourcing candidates with [00:13:54] niche expertise to sifting through [00:13:56] overwhelming numbers of applications and [00:13:57] finding the truly qualified prospects. [00:13:59] For companies facing those hurdles, our [00:14:01] sponsor, Zip Recruiter, offers a [00:14:03] solution designed to streamline the [00:14:04] entire hiring process. Right now, you [00:14:06] can explore what Zip Recruiter has to [00:14:08] offer at no cost by visiting [00:14:09] ziprecruiter.com/dailywire. [00:14:12] Zip Recruiter's matching technology [00:14:13] really cuts through the typical hiring [00:14:15] headaches. As soon as you post a role, [00:14:16] you can see exactly how many qualified [00:14:18] candidates are in your area. No [00:14:19] guessing, no waiting around. Their [00:14:21] resume database lets you go straight to [00:14:22] top candidates and access their contact [00:14:24] info immediately. That saves both time [00:14:26] and money. It's no surprise they're the [00:14:28] number one rated hiring site on G2. When [00:14:30] you're running a company, you need tools [00:14:32] that actually deliver results. And [00:14:33] that's what Zip Recruiter does. Let Zip [00:14:35] Recruiter help you find the best people [00:14:36] for all your roles. Four out of five [00:14:38] employers who post on Zip Recruiter get [00:14:39] a quality candidate within day one. See [00:14:41] for yourself. Just go to this exclusive [00:14:43] web address right now to try Zip [00:14:45] Recruiter for free. That's [00:14:46] ziprecruiter.com/dailywware. [00:14:48] Again, that's [00:14:48] ziprecruiter.com/dailywire. [00:14:51] Now, attorneys representing city's [00:14:53] church in St. Paul, which is of course [00:14:54] the church that was victimized in this [00:14:56] situation. They put forward a statement [00:14:59] from Renee Carlson, the general counsel. [00:15:01] Quote, "The First Amendment does not [00:15:02] allow premeditated plots or coordinated [00:15:04] actions to violate the sanctity of a [00:15:06] sanctuary, disrupt worship, and [00:15:07] intimidate small children. There's no [00:15:09] press to invade a sanctuary or to [00:15:11] conspire to interrupt religious [00:15:12] services. The Constitution protects [00:15:14] citizens from threats against [00:15:16] fundamental rights by the government, [00:15:17] but it also requires government to [00:15:18] protect those same rights when they are [00:15:20] jeopardized by private actors." [00:15:22] And the director of litigation for True [00:15:24] North Legal, a person named Doug [00:15:25] Wardlaw, put out a statement very [00:15:26] similarly saying, "The US Department of [00:15:28] Justice acted decisively by arresting [00:15:30] those who coordinated and carried out [00:15:31] this terrible crime, which is to invade [00:15:33] a church and terrorize worshippers." [00:15:35] That is his quote. [00:15:37] The arrest and the prosecutions to [00:15:39] follow will help ensure mob aggression [00:15:40] like city's church experienced will not [00:15:42] be repeated in any other house of [00:15:44] worship. That is a good move by the [00:15:45] Trump administration. [00:15:48] Now, it doesn't mean that the people [00:15:49] arrested aren't going to fib about it. [00:15:51] One of the people arrested as mentioned [00:15:53] was Nikima Levy Armstrong, a civil [00:15:55] rights attorney. And here she was on CNN [00:15:58] claiming that she was welcomed into the [00:16:00] church. Well, I mean, under false [00:16:02] opaces, as she then proceeds to explain, [00:16:06] we did not rush into that church. We [00:16:08] actually went and sat down and [00:16:10] participated in the service. And after [00:16:13] the pastor prayed, that is when I stood [00:16:16] up and asked him a question in response [00:16:19] to his prayer. And then I and he [00:16:21] responded to me. And then I proceeded to [00:16:24] ask him about Pastor David Easterwood [00:16:28] and how is it possible for him to serve [00:16:30] as both a pastor and the director of ICE [00:16:33] for Minnesota. And instead of responding [00:16:35] to me as soon as I said the name David [00:16:38] Easterwood, the pastor says, "Shame, [00:16:41] shame." And that is when I led us in [00:16:45] chance justice for Renee Good. And he [00:16:47] ends up don't shoot. [00:16:48] >> Okay. So that of course is ridiculous. [00:16:51] You don't get to go into somebody else's [00:16:53] church and then if you wait for 5 [00:16:55] minutes and then break out into a [00:16:57] disruption of the church service. [00:17:00] Call that permission tensor the church. [00:17:01] That is not that is not right. If you go [00:17:04] into somebody's house claiming that you [00:17:06] are for example a carpet salesperson and [00:17:07] you want to check out the house and the [00:17:09] person invites you in, you proceed to [00:17:10] steal all the crockery. Well, it turns [00:17:12] out they didn't invite you in the house [00:17:13] to steal the crockery. That is that is a [00:17:15] ridiculous argument and that one is not [00:17:17] going to hold up in court. Now, one of [00:17:19] the people that the DOJ wanted to charge [00:17:20] was Don Lemon. The former CNN talking [00:17:23] head and host. So, Don Lemon, and again, [00:17:27] I know Don. Don is a um he is a a a [00:17:32] character to say the very least. Well, [00:17:34] Don had pretty clearly allegedly [00:17:37] allegedly coordinated with this group to [00:17:39] be there. How else would he know to be [00:17:40] there? He wasn't just attending a random [00:17:41] church in St. Paul on that day. That is [00:17:44] not what was happening. Well, he showed [00:17:47] up and a judge in Minnesota was handed [00:17:52] an indictment for him and rejected the [00:17:55] indictment. [00:17:56] That judge rejected the federal [00:17:58] prosecutor's attempt to criminally [00:17:59] charge Don Lemon in relation to his [00:18:00] presence this week during a protest at [00:18:02] that St. Paul church. According to the [00:18:04] Washington Post, this represents an [00:18:05] extraordinary rebuke of a justice [00:18:07] department that has drawn criticism for [00:18:10] its forceful response to demonstrations [00:18:11] against ICE offers officers. [00:18:14] The magistrate judge's decision was [00:18:16] described at Thursday by two people [00:18:17] familiar with the matter who spoke on [00:18:18] the condition of anonymity. Their [00:18:20] accounts emerged the same day department [00:18:22] officials announced the arrests of again [00:18:24] the other three. [00:18:27] Well, it turns out, shock of shocks, it [00:18:30] turns out that the judge in this [00:18:31] particular case, according to Bill [00:18:32] Malugan of Fox News, [00:18:35] actually his wife works as an assistant [00:18:39] attorney general in Minnesota under [00:18:41] Keith Ellison. So Keith Ellison is the [00:18:44] attorney general of the state and he of [00:18:45] course is an ally of Don Lemon. In fact, [00:18:47] here he was over the course of the last [00:18:49] 24 hours joining Don Lemon's show to [00:18:51] explain why Don Lemon didn't do anything [00:18:53] wrong. [00:18:55] This is I mean look it's a it's a w it's [00:18:57] a wild stretch and inappropriate and the [00:19:00] and the and the face act by the way is [00:19:02] designed to protect the rights of people [00:19:05] seeking their reproductive rights um to [00:19:08] be protected uh and so that people for a [00:19:11] religious reason uh you know cannot just [00:19:14] use religion to break into women's [00:19:17] reproductive health centers right so how [00:19:21] they are stretching either of these laws [00:19:23] to apply [00:19:24] to people who protested in a church over [00:19:27] the behavior or the perceived behavior [00:19:28] of a of a of a religious leader is is [00:19:31] beyond me. Um, but they don't mind [00:19:33] stretching these days. [00:19:35] >> Okay. Well, it's not actually a stretch. [00:19:37] Now, Keith Ellison is out there telling [00:19:39] Don Lemon, quote, "People have a right [00:19:40] to lift up their voices and make their [00:19:41] peace, and none of us are immune from [00:19:43] the voice of the public." And then he [00:19:45] said, "Chanting cannot be a crime, is [00:19:47] freedom of expression." Well, actually, [00:19:50] not so much. Not so much. It turns out [00:19:52] that the Face Act explicitly talks about [00:19:56] the attempts to disrupt church services. [00:20:00] It explicitly protects religious [00:20:02] freedom. It imposes criminal penalties [00:20:04] on anyone who quote by force or threat [00:20:06] of force or by physical obstruction [00:20:07] intentionally injures, intimidates, or [00:20:09] interferes with or attempts to injure, [00:20:11] intimidate, or interfere with any person [00:20:12] lawfully exercising or seeking to [00:20:14] exercise the First Amendment right of [00:20:16] religious worship at a place of [00:20:18] religious worship. [00:20:20] That is what it is. That's legitimately [00:20:22] what the law was designed to do. Why? [00:20:24] Well, because it was essentially a [00:20:25] trade. This was a bipartisan bill signed [00:20:28] into law in 1994. [00:20:30] On the one hand, Democrats were saying [00:20:31] that they wanted to protect abortion [00:20:33] clinics from people who are obstructing [00:20:34] the entrances. And Republicans said, [00:20:36] "We're not going to vote for that unless [00:20:37] you also vote that you're not allowed to [00:20:39] disrupt church services." So, yes, part [00:20:40] of the Face Act is preventing this sort [00:20:42] of stuff pretty clearly. [00:20:46] But that's what Keith Ellison is all [00:20:47] about. Again, it is not about the [00:20:50] impartial administration of law. And so, [00:20:53] there's something a little bit [00:20:55] problematic about the fact that the wife [00:20:57] of the judge who's protecting Don Lemon [00:21:00] works for Keith Ellison. Representative [00:21:03] Tom Emmer, he says Keith Ellison needs [00:21:05] refresher course in law. This is true. [00:21:09] >> But there's another thing he said, which [00:21:10] is this behavior did not violate the [00:21:13] First Amendment. This is what they do. [00:21:14] They just go to talking points. I Keith [00:21:17] Ellison is a is a lawyer. Uh he's our [00:21:20] attorney general. He's an embarrassment. [00:21:22] Uh he would pre prefer to prosecute cops [00:21:25] uh and defend criminals rather than [00:21:26] doing his job. And by the way, when you [00:21:29] suggest that interrupting a faith [00:21:31] community during while they're [00:21:33] worshiping is a exercise of your first [00:21:36] amendment rights, I would suggest he [00:21:37] head back for a refresher course in law [00:21:39] school because he clearly didn't learn [00:21:41] the law cuz he certainly doesn't [00:21:43] understand it. Well, that of course is [00:21:45] Tom Emmer, Republican of Minnesota, and [00:21:47] he is right about all of that. The mayor [00:21:50] of Minneapolis, Jacob Fry, also came out [00:21:53] and suggested that it was absolutely [00:21:55] terrible, awful in fact, for the Trump [00:21:57] DOJ to indict people who are disrupting [00:21:59] church services and entering churches [00:22:02] without permission in order to do that. [00:22:04] Jacob Frey tweeted, quote, "This is a [00:22:05] gross abuse of power. The federal [00:22:07] government is picking and choosing who [00:22:08] to investigate, going after protesters [00:22:09] and not the person who shot and killed [00:22:11] one of our neighbors. I'm calling for [00:22:12] Nikima to be released immediately. [00:22:15] Well, I mean, good for him. And I [00:22:17] declare bankruptcy like Michael Scott. [00:22:20] You know, that and $5 will buy you a [00:22:22] pretty mediocre cup of coffee. But it is [00:22:25] always incredible to see who the [00:22:26] Minneapolis mayor will bow before and [00:22:29] who he will instead allow to trample all [00:22:33] over the law, including, of course, [00:22:36] people who are attempting to violate the [00:22:37] rights of others to worship freely in a [00:22:39] church. [00:22:41] Now, the question is how all of this is [00:22:43] going to impact the 2026 midterm [00:22:44] elections. And that is not the biggest [00:22:46] question. The biggest question, of [00:22:47] course, is whether we continue to [00:22:48] enforce the law. But this will be a [00:22:50] major issue in the run-up to the 2026 [00:22:52] elections. And there are a couple of [00:22:53] ways this could go. On the one hand, [00:22:55] Democrats have an inherent advantage. On [00:22:58] the generic ballot, it is an off-year [00:23:00] election. Off-ear elections typically [00:23:02] move in favor of the party out of power. [00:23:05] Nate Silver suggests that Democrats have [00:23:08] some pretty good news here. The pretty [00:23:11] good news for Democrats is that in the [00:23:13] generic ballot, they are on average up [00:23:17] by more than five points at this point [00:23:19] in time. [00:23:21] Not only that, it means that because [00:23:23] there's a margin of error, it is [00:23:26] possible that anything from an 11point [00:23:28] Democratic win to a 0.4 point Republican [00:23:31] edge could be within that margin of [00:23:33] error. Well, that spells potential [00:23:36] blowout for the Democrats. And even if [00:23:38] Republicans were to win slightly in the [00:23:40] national popular vote, that would be a [00:23:42] disappointment for Democrats, but they [00:23:43] might still win back the House. So, [00:23:46] Democrats certainly have some pretty [00:23:47] significant advantages. [00:23:51] Does that mean that Democrats are [00:23:53] definitely going? Well, they're acting [00:23:54] like it, aren't they? Democrats are [00:23:56] acting as though it is inevitable that [00:23:58] they are going to win the 2026 [00:24:00] elections. that that is the only [00:24:01] rationale that I can I can use to [00:24:04] explain why they continue to embrace the [00:24:06] most radical policies that Americans [00:24:08] really are not going to like. So for [00:24:10] example, Eric Swallwell, [00:24:12] one of my congressional bet Noir who is [00:24:14] now running for governor of California, [00:24:17] he says that he will make ICE agents [00:24:18] unhirable in California. So if you were [00:24:21] working for ICE, he's going to say that [00:24:23] you will never be able to work in [00:24:24] California again. Why is this sort of [00:24:26] thing going to benefit Democrats [00:24:28] generically across the country? [00:24:30] As governor, I'll use my emergency [00:24:32] powers and I'll tell every state agency, [00:24:34] we are not as a policy hiring ICE agents [00:24:37] because right now these guys doing this [00:24:40] work, it's a decision. No one's holding [00:24:42] a gun and saying you have to work for [00:24:44] ICE. And so when I'm governor, if you're [00:24:46] still working for ICE, you haven't got [00:24:48] the message that no one's asking you to [00:24:49] do this, you won't be hired in the [00:24:51] state. And it's part of an approach that [00:24:52] says either we can be on our heels as [00:24:56] the most vulnerable in our community or [00:24:58] we can make them react and go on offense [00:25:00] and and so I can't take on any other [00:25:02] crisis until I do that first part of the [00:25:04] job which is you know to be a fighter [00:25:06] protector uh for Californians. [00:25:09] >> So again what you have right now is a [00:25:11] bit of a game of hold my beer when it [00:25:12] comes to immigration. On the one hand, [00:25:14] you have an administration that for the [00:25:15] most part is attempting to go after [00:25:18] criminal illegal immigrants, but doing a [00:25:19] terrible job rhetorically in doing so. [00:25:22] Truly not doing a very good job [00:25:23] rhetorically in explaining that they are [00:25:25] going after criminal illegal immigrants. [00:25:27] They've been trying a little bit harder [00:25:28] in the last couple of weeks. But the [00:25:30] reality is the polling shows that [00:25:31] Americans do not approve of what ICE [00:25:34] they perceive ICE to be doing. As Carl [00:25:37] Rove points out over at the Wall Street [00:25:38] Journal in a January 12th Quinnipiac [00:25:40] University poll, 57% of all voters and [00:25:43] 64% of independents disapprove of how [00:25:45] ICE is enforcing immigration law. Now [00:25:47] again, what they think of what ICE is [00:25:49] doing is not actually what ICE is doing. [00:25:51] Many of them think that ICE is simply [00:25:52] going and rounding people up generally [00:25:54] at Home Depot. That is not what ICE is [00:25:56] doing. They are in fact targeting [00:25:58] criminal operations in which illegal [00:25:59] immigrants are involved. [00:26:02] Sure, when you're attempting to deport [00:26:03] some 660,000 people, which I believe is [00:26:06] the number that they've worked on [00:26:07] deporting thus far, when you do that, [00:26:09] you're going to catch up some people who [00:26:10] may not have committed an extraneous [00:26:12] crime. But ICE has been directing its [00:26:15] resources at the worst offenders. No [00:26:17] question. [00:26:19] Well, the the administration needs to do [00:26:20] a better job of explaining that. [00:26:22] Democrats, on the other hand, can't [00:26:24] restrict themselves to saying that the [00:26:26] Republicans should stick to criminally [00:26:27] illegal immigrants. Instead, they go all [00:26:29] the way with Eric Swallwell and talk [00:26:31] about how they're going to make it so [00:26:32] that ICE agents are unhirable. They go [00:26:34] with Zoran Mandani who says he's going [00:26:36] to attempt to defund ICE if he ever gets [00:26:38] the opportunity. [00:26:40] It is amazing how everybody misreads the [00:26:43] tea leaves. Everyone misreads what the [00:26:44] American people want. They believe [00:26:46] always that the American people want [00:26:47] what they are selling, but the most [00:26:48] extreme version of it. And that is [00:26:50] almost never true. That is almost never [00:26:53] ever true. [00:26:55] That is why I cannot explain to you why [00:26:57] exactly Virginia Democrats have decided [00:26:59] to swing all the way to the left. So [00:27:01] Abigail Spanberger won the governorship [00:27:03] of Virginia. She was purporting to be a [00:27:07] sort of blue dog moderate Democrat. She [00:27:09] of course had chewed out some of the [00:27:11] more extreme versions of the Democratic [00:27:12] party. She had chewed out AOC. She had [00:27:14] chewed out Elhenna Omar. She had [00:27:16] suggested that their defund the police [00:27:18] routine was bad politics. Now, Virginia [00:27:20] Democrats are shifting to far-left [00:27:23] policies. [00:27:26] As Virginia Cruda points out at the [00:27:27] Daily Wire, at the top of their agenda [00:27:29] seems to be implementing some kind of [00:27:30] wealth tax in Virginia. Lawmakers have [00:27:33] already introduced several competing [00:27:34] bills that would create new tax brackets [00:27:36] with steeper rates for higher earners. [00:27:38] One bill would nearly double the state [00:27:40] income tax rate for Virginiaians who [00:27:41] make over a million dollars a year. [00:27:44] Not only that, they've also decided that [00:27:48] they're going to make it easier to [00:27:50] pursue voter fraud, [00:27:53] and they are teeing up bills to make the [00:27:55] state softer on crime and illegal [00:27:56] immigration. [00:27:58] One bill would eliminate mandatory [00:28:00] minimum sentences for certain offenses, [00:28:02] including but not limited to illegal [00:28:03] sales of cigarettes and alcohol, certain [00:28:05] conduct punishable as involuntary [00:28:07] manslaughter, and violations of certain [00:28:09] provisions of protective orders. Another [00:28:11] couple of bills pushed by Virginia [00:28:13] Democrats would help protect illegal [00:28:14] immigrants in Virginia. One by barring [00:28:16] officials from arresting illegal [00:28:17] immigrants in courouses and another by [00:28:20] finding employers who pay illegal aliens [00:28:22] less than the established minimum wage. [00:28:26] Why each party seems to feel the [00:28:28] necessity to swivel all the way out to [00:28:30] the left is absolutely beyond me. It [00:28:32] makes no sense at all. And it is bad [00:28:34] electoral politics. Just bad. [00:28:38] Now, Gavin Newsome, [00:28:40] he what he's doing, again, I think that [00:28:43] Gavin Newsome is not the world's best [00:28:45] candidate. I will say that what Gavin [00:28:47] Newsome seems to be attempting to do is [00:28:49] fib about his pretty radical record in [00:28:51] California while focusing in on Trump. [00:28:53] That is the happy medium that he is [00:28:55] pursuing. Again, he was over in Davos [00:28:57] and he suggests that what he is going to [00:28:59] do is basically just attack Trump, but [00:29:00] he's going to be moderate on policy, [00:29:02] which and is a better pitch than many of [00:29:04] the other Democrats who seem to be [00:29:05] swiveling way out on policy. Now, the [00:29:06] thing about Nuome is if you look at his [00:29:08] policy in California, it's pretty dang [00:29:10] radical. We talked about that on his [00:29:12] podcast, but it is fascinating to watch [00:29:15] him play maybe the only smart hand in [00:29:17] the Democratic party right now. So, I [00:29:20] put a mirror up to Trump and Trumpism in [00:29:22] all caps. And it was ironic because [00:29:24] Pravda, Fox News in America, uh others, [00:29:27] they got offended by it. They said, [00:29:28] "Well, where's his mother to wash his [00:29:31] mouth out with soap?" I said, "Where the [00:29:33] hell have you been? You've never said a [00:29:35] word about Trump dressing up as the Pope [00:29:38] uh tweeting out and cosplaying on the [00:29:40] world stage. And so look, the Treasury [00:29:43] Secretary talked about a Barbie doll. It [00:29:45] was as if he was reading a diary and had [00:29:48] just broken up with someone. I mean, [00:29:50] that was the Secretary of Treasury using [00:29:52] valuable time yesterday on the world [00:29:54] stage. Some sexual Thank you for not [00:29:57] sharing that on the official White House [00:29:59] account. We're deeply in their head. I [00:30:01] think the affordability agenda appears [00:30:03] to be I'm living rentree in the Trump's [00:30:06] head, Trump administration's head. [00:30:08] >> Okay. So again, what he is doing is he [00:30:10] is focusing all of his on Trump [00:30:11] personally and he's talking about how he [00:30:13] lives free in Trump's head and he talks [00:30:15] about knee pads for Trump and all this [00:30:16] kind of stuff because he doesn't want to [00:30:18] talk policy because the minute the [00:30:20] Democrats are forced to talk policy, [00:30:21] they've got a problem. They have to lie [00:30:23] and campaign as moderate Republicans or [00:30:25] they have to go fully radical in order [00:30:26] to entice their base. It'll be [00:30:29] fascinating to see what they do. Now [00:30:30] again, does that mean the Republicans [00:30:32] are going to fare better? I mean, not [00:30:35] necessarily. They can also do a bunch of [00:30:37] stupid things. I think, frankly, they do [00:30:39] do many stupid things by promoting the [00:30:41] worst aspects of what seemed to me very [00:30:44] often eminently reasonable policies. [00:30:46] But there are some factors that are [00:30:48] moving in a Republican direction if they [00:30:49] can actually tell them properly. So, for [00:30:51] example, the New York Times Sienna poll, [00:30:54] the latest poll shows that actually [00:30:56] people are feeling better about the [00:30:57] economy. If you take a look at people [00:31:00] who believe that the economy is [00:31:02] excellent or good versus the people who [00:31:04] believe the economy is poor right now, [00:31:07] about 29% of Americans believe the [00:31:08] economy is excellent or good. About 38% [00:31:11] believe that the economy is poor. That [00:31:12] sounds bad until you realize that that [00:31:15] is in fact the best number in over four [00:31:18] years that you have to go back before [00:31:21] 2022 to get to a number even remotely [00:31:23] like that. You have to go back all the [00:31:25] way to 2020 20 2019 probably to get a [00:31:27] number that is that is better than that. [00:31:29] So people are in fact feeling better [00:31:30] about the economy and that may redown to [00:31:33] President Trump's benefit. That at least [00:31:36] is going to be the hope. And the hope [00:31:38] should be that the administration's [00:31:41] border policy starts to pay dividends, [00:31:44] that people calm down about ICE, or that [00:31:45] the Democrats continue to go out on a [00:31:48] limb over ICE, and that there are some [00:31:51] foreign policy wins that materialize [00:31:53] sometime between now and the election. [00:31:56] Now, speaking of foreign policy, there [00:31:58] may be some major changes with regard to [00:32:01] geopolitics over the course of the next [00:32:03] few months. Begin in Cuba. According to [00:32:05] the Wall Street Journal, emboldened by [00:32:07] the US ouster of Venezuelan President [00:32:08] Nicolas Maduro, the Trump administration [00:32:10] is apparently searching for Cuban [00:32:12] government insiders who can help cut a [00:32:13] deal to push out the communist regime by [00:32:15] the end of the year, according to people [00:32:17] familiar with the matter, which of [00:32:18] course would be an astonishing event. If [00:32:21] the communist regime in Cuba actually [00:32:22] fell, that would be a gamecher for a lot [00:32:24] of Cuban Americans. It would be a game [00:32:26] changer for the hemisphere in the same [00:32:28] way that it would be a gamecher if the [00:32:29] Maduro aster resulted in Venezuela [00:32:31] eventually democratizing and becoming a [00:32:34] non-eneemy of the United States. And [00:32:36] we're already earning some geopolitical [00:32:38] dividend by cutting China off from [00:32:41] Venezuelan oil, for example. If Cuba [00:32:44] were to turn into a friendly, that would [00:32:46] change the hemispheric gravity in a [00:32:49] pretty significant way. [00:32:52] And President Trump has been pushing [00:32:54] Cuba pretty hard. He stated in a January [00:32:56] 11th social media post, quote, I [00:32:58] strongly suggest they make a deal before [00:32:59] it's too late. No more oil or money. [00:33:02] They have assessed that Cuba's economy [00:33:04] is close to collapse and that the [00:33:05] government has never been this fragile [00:33:06] after losing their biggest benefactor in [00:33:08] Nicolas Maduro. Officials don't have a [00:33:10] concrete plan to end the communist [00:33:12] government that has held power on the [00:33:13] Caribbean island for almost seven [00:33:15] decades. But they see what happened to [00:33:17] Maduro as a blueprint and a warning for [00:33:19] Cuba. [00:33:21] So again, what they are looking for here [00:33:22] is a palace coup. They are not looking [00:33:24] for some sort of fullscale Bay of Pigs [00:33:26] style invasion. [00:33:29] Leave aside the history of the Bay of [00:33:30] Pigs and whether or not the JFK [00:33:32] administration did a terrible job with [00:33:33] it. The reality is that the American [00:33:35] people are not up again for a gigantic [00:33:36] invading force in Cuba fighting on the [00:33:40] hills. But if there is somebody who is [00:33:43] friendlier in the government willing to [00:33:44] topple the current regime, that would [00:33:46] change things pretty significantly. Cuba [00:33:49] has basically been cut off from all the [00:33:50] money. The administration is also taking [00:33:53] aim at Cuba's overseas medical missions. [00:33:55] That is Havana's most important source [00:33:56] of hard currency, including through visa [00:33:58] bans targeting Cuban and foreign [00:34:00] officials accused of facilitating the [00:34:02] program. [00:34:04] So were Cuba to fall, that'd be a big [00:34:06] win obviously for the president of the [00:34:07] United States. The other big win that [00:34:09] may be on the agenda is the situation in [00:34:12] Iran. [00:34:14] So reports suggest that the United [00:34:16] States has deployed significant [00:34:18] resources in the Persian Gulf toward [00:34:21] Iran. According to Reuters, President [00:34:24] Trump said on Thursday the US has an [00:34:25] Armada heading toward Iran. Here was the [00:34:27] president on Air Force One. [00:34:29] >> We have a big force going toward Iran. [00:34:33] I'd rather not see anything happen, but [00:34:35] we're watching them very closely. I [00:34:37] stopped 837 [00:34:40] hangings on Thursday. [00:34:43] They would have been dead. Every one of [00:34:45] them would have been hung. This is like [00:34:47] from a thousand years ago. This is an [00:34:49] ancient culture. Very smart people, by [00:34:52] the way. It's an ancient culture. 837, [00:34:56] mostly young men, were going to be [00:34:59] humped on Thursday. And I said, "If you [00:35:02] hang those people, you're going to be [00:35:05] hit harder than you've ever been hit. [00:35:07] It'll make what we did to your Iran [00:35:09] nuclear look like peanuts." And [00:35:13] an hour before this horrible thing was [00:35:15] going to take place, they cancelled it. [00:35:18] And they they actually said they [00:35:20] cancelled it. They didn't postpone it. [00:35:21] They cancelled it. So, that was a good [00:35:23] sign. But we have a uh an arm motto. We [00:35:26] have a massive we have a massive fleet [00:35:28] heading in that direction. [00:35:31] And maybe we won't have to use it. We'll [00:35:33] see. [00:35:34] Now again, we'll have to see what this [00:35:37] means because just because the Iranian [00:35:39] government said that they didn't hang a [00:35:40] bunch of people doesn't mean they didn't [00:35:41] murder those people or that they haven't [00:35:42] kept those people under arrest until the [00:35:44] moment when murder becomes more possible [00:35:47] for them. On Tuesday, the USS Abraham [00:35:49] Lincoln, which had been in the South [00:35:50] China Seas, was in fact making its way [00:35:53] to the region. According to ship [00:35:55] tracking data, that aircraft carrier and [00:35:57] three accompanying destroyers were all [00:35:58] confirmed to be heading west toward the [00:36:00] Persian Gulf. Meanwhile, the USS George [00:36:02] HW Bush is at sea in the Atlantic Ocean [00:36:05] bound for Europe. That aircraft carrier [00:36:07] is conducting live fire exercises and [00:36:09] other training activities as per a post [00:36:11] on the ship's official Facebook page. [00:36:15] So, yeah, we'll see if the president [00:36:18] actually activates here. Reports coming [00:36:21] out of Iran seem getting worse and worse [00:36:23] in terms of what the impact was, what [00:36:24] the regime actually did. The numbers [00:36:26] continue to go up and up and up in terms [00:36:28] of the number of dead and the number of [00:36:29] wounded in Iran. The president set a red [00:36:32] line. The Iranians violated the red [00:36:34] line. The president just set a red line, [00:36:36] by the way. He said that people should [00:36:37] go out in the streets and continue to [00:36:38] protest. Help is on the way. That is a [00:36:40] pretty strong red line. And Iran [00:36:42] violated it. So, does it require another [00:36:44] trigger in order for the United States [00:36:46] to do something? Again, doing useless [00:36:47] things is not the goal here. Neither is [00:36:49] a full-scale invasion of Iran. No one [00:36:51] would like to see hundreds of thousands [00:36:53] of troops on the ground in the Middle [00:36:54] East for the 1,000th time. No one is no [00:36:56] one is interested in that. The question [00:36:58] is what is possible, what is doable, and [00:37:00] what ensures that the United States is [00:37:02] steer is still feared on the world stage [00:37:05] because you want to make sure that if [00:37:07] you set a red line, you don't turn into [00:37:08] Barack Obama. Okay. Meanwhile, on the [00:37:11] foreign policy front, the Europeans seem [00:37:13] to be in a better mood after they pushed [00:37:15] the president or or at least dealt with [00:37:17] the president to the point that he did [00:37:18] not levy gigantic tariffs on the [00:37:21] European Union. They're apparently now [00:37:23] willing to admit some truths. The German [00:37:26] chancellor, Friedick MS, he said at [00:37:28] Davos that Europe does in fact have to [00:37:30] revitalize its economy. That their their [00:37:32] forms and their regulations, their [00:37:34] permitting processes have made the [00:37:36] economy in Europe just weak. Germany and [00:37:39] Europe have wasted incredible potential [00:37:42] for growth in recent years by dragging [00:37:46] feet on reforms and unnecessarily and [00:37:49] excessively curtailing entrepreneurial [00:37:52] freedoms and personal responsibility. We [00:37:55] are going to change that now. Security [00:37:58] and predictability take precedence over [00:38:01] excessive regulation and misplaced [00:38:04] perfection. We must reduce bureaucracy [00:38:07] substantially in Europe. The single [00:38:10] market was once created to form the most [00:38:12] competitive economic area in the world. [00:38:15] But instead, we have become the world [00:38:18] champion of overregulation. [00:38:22] >> He is right about that. Absolutely. He [00:38:24] also added, "This new world of great [00:38:26] powers is being built on power, on [00:38:27] strength, and when it comes to it, on [00:38:29] force. It is not a cozy place. We do not [00:38:31] have to accept this new reality as fate. [00:38:33] We're not at the mercy of this new world [00:38:34] order. We do have a choice. We can shape [00:38:36] the future. To succeed, we must face [00:38:38] harsh realities and chart our course [00:38:39] with cleareyed realism. MS did suggest, [00:38:42] however, that Europe should continue to [00:38:45] pursue strong transatlantic ties with [00:38:47] the United States. So, he is operating [00:38:50] in the world of reality. [00:38:52] So, he says that yes, the EU may have [00:38:55] prompted some movement from the Trump [00:38:57] administration away from going after [00:39:00] them over Greenland. [00:39:03] That does not mean that Europe should [00:39:04] abandon the United States or vice versa. [00:39:07] So it seems that overall the president [00:39:09] may have achieved many of his goals in [00:39:11] Europe. Get them to deregulate, get them [00:39:12] to be stronger on their borders, get [00:39:14] them to spend more on their defense. And [00:39:16] you know, as far as Greenland goes, I'm [00:39:18] not really that concerned about small [00:39:20] victories won in Greenland or pride out [00:39:23] of the Europeans in Greenland nearly as [00:39:24] much as I am about the Europeans taking [00:39:26] seriously the threats that come from [00:39:28] other places on the globe and the [00:39:30] reality that we do need strong allies [00:39:32] and that means sometimes pushing our [00:39:34] friends to do the right thing in order [00:39:35] to strengthen their own economies and [00:39:37] their own military. [00:39:39] So that's on the positive side of the [00:39:41] ledger. On the negative side of the [00:39:43] ledger, the continued unwillingness of [00:39:46] the Trump administration to face reality [00:39:48] when it comes to Vladimir Putin seems [00:39:51] shortsighted to me at the very least. [00:39:53] Apparently, Steve Whit and Jared Kushner [00:39:55] headed on over to Russia in order to [00:39:58] greet Vladimir Putin at the Kremlin. [00:40:12] So there they are. They're meeting. [00:40:15] >> Yeah. Steve Woodoff looks a lot warmer [00:40:17] with Vladimir Putin than Jared Kushner [00:40:18] does in that particular tape. According [00:40:19] to Bloomberg, there was no immediate [00:40:21] word on the outcome of the meeting which [00:40:23] ended well after midnight Moscow time. [00:40:25] That was WhitF's seventh visit to Putin. [00:40:28] Now again, Whitoff in the past has gone [00:40:30] in there and used Putin's translator. So [00:40:33] I I have yet to see what cost [00:40:35] extraordinary negotiating leisure domain [00:40:37] with regard to the Ukraine Russia deal. [00:40:40] US and Ukrainian officials have said [00:40:42] they made significant progress on their [00:40:43] 20point plan, but Moscow has yet to [00:40:46] actually acknowledge any of that as a [00:40:48] positive. [00:40:50] Meanwhile, the United States is [00:40:52] apparently weighing a complete military [00:40:54] withdrawal from Syria. Presumably, they [00:40:55] are doing so because they now believe [00:40:57] that the Syrian government is a [00:40:59] friendly. It seems to me a little bit [00:41:01] early to declare the Syrian government a [00:41:03] friendly in this fashion considering [00:41:05] that they and the Turks are basically [00:41:07] going around killing the Kurds and also [00:41:09] going after religious minorities like [00:41:10] the Drews in the south. The Turkish [00:41:13] government is one of the more malign [00:41:15] actors on the world stage right now and [00:41:17] pretending that they are an urstwhile [00:41:19] American ally is foolhardy in the [00:41:21] extreme. They're run by a radical [00:41:22] Islamist Ripa Erdogan who has gotten rid [00:41:26] of the secularistleaning military [00:41:28] apparatus. He has spent a quarter [00:41:30] century doing that and he has converted [00:41:32] it into an Islamistleaning [00:41:35] governance structure that is friendly [00:41:37] with a wide variety of terrorist groups [00:41:39] around the Middle East. [00:41:41] Now, according to the Wall Street [00:41:42] Journal, Washington is considering a [00:41:44] complete withdrawal of American troops [00:41:45] from Syria as Syrian President Ahmed [00:41:47] al-Sharah moved to rest control of the [00:41:49] northeastern part of the country from an [00:41:50] Americanbacked Kurdishled militia. So [00:41:54] yet another presumed ally that the [00:41:56] Americans have abandoned over the course [00:41:58] of the last 25 years or so would be the [00:42:01] Kurds. I mean at this point the Kurds [00:42:03] must be tired of American guarantees [00:42:04] that end with Americans basically [00:42:06] leaving them in harm's way. The move [00:42:08] would end a decadel long American [00:42:09] operation in Syria which began in 2014 [00:42:12] when Barack Obama intervene in the [00:42:13] country's civil war. And it had come as [00:42:15] Shar's government ordered the US [00:42:17] military's longtime partner in the [00:42:18] region, the Kurdishled Syrian Democratic [00:42:20] Forces to disband. [00:42:23] The US considered a draw down in Syria [00:42:25] before. Now again, drawing down is not [00:42:27] the worst idea in the world. It's just [00:42:29] that if you believe that the Syrian [00:42:31] government is a friend to the West, [00:42:33] you've got another thing coming. [00:42:34] Normalization with the Syrian government [00:42:36] while they go after America's ally in [00:42:39] that region in the Syrian defense forces [00:42:41] is pretty astonishing stuff. [00:42:44] Roughly a thousand American troops are [00:42:45] in Syria, most scattered across [00:42:46] facilities in the northeast where they [00:42:48] are colllocated with the SDF. [00:42:52] Apparently, the Pentagon is questioning [00:42:54] the viability of the American military's [00:42:55] mission in Syria after the SDF's defeat. [00:42:59] Much of the assault's success was the [00:43:00] result of Arab tribal forces who are [00:43:02] once loyal to SDF switching sides to [00:43:04] back the government, presumably with the [00:43:07] help of the Turkish military. [00:43:10] You know, pretending that Turkey has [00:43:11] nothing to do with this would be [00:43:12] ignorant. The fact that we continue to [00:43:15] talk about selling them F-35s and [00:43:16] treating them as a NATO ally is sort of [00:43:19] insane to me. Speaking of which, if we [00:43:21] are talking about the insanity of [00:43:22] welcoming aboard the sort of Western [00:43:24] alliance, countries that ought not be [00:43:26] part of it. There's been a lot of talk [00:43:28] about what's going to happen in Gaza, [00:43:30] the attempt to rope in Qatar and Turkey [00:43:33] or allow them in is foolhardy. in the [00:43:36] extreme. These are both countries that [00:43:38] have supported Hamas soup to nuts. This [00:43:41] does not mean that what is being laid [00:43:43] out by the United States in Gaza is [00:43:44] totally impossible. It means the only [00:43:46] way that what the United States [00:43:49] is trying to do becomes possible is if [00:43:51] you reckon with reality, reality has a [00:43:53] funny way of biting you directly in the [00:43:54] ass if you ignore it. and pretending [00:43:57] that without security arrangements or if [00:43:59] you have security arrangements including [00:44:00] terror allies that you're still going to [00:44:02] be able to build a thriving society in [00:44:04] the heart of the Gaza Strip, one of the [00:44:06] most radicalized areas on planet Earth. [00:44:08] That seems shortsighted at the very [00:44:10] least. So, the United States has now [00:44:12] listed [00:44:14] its plans for the Gaza Strip. According [00:44:17] to the New York Times, Jared Kushner [00:44:19] laid out an ambitious and highly [00:44:21] speculative vision for the future of the [00:44:22] Gaza Strip in Davos. The presentation of [00:44:25] featured slides depicted gleaming [00:44:27] skyscrapers rising on Gaza's coast and [00:44:29] construction of entirely new cities. The [00:44:31] plan would require investment of at [00:44:32] least $25 billion in the Palestinian [00:44:35] enclave. Gaza said Jared Kushner would [00:44:38] be rebuilt in phases starting with the [00:44:39] south. The southern city of Rafa would [00:44:41] be rebuilt in two to three years. That [00:44:42] of course is the area that right now is [00:44:45] essentially protected by the Israeli [00:44:47] defense forces. Other areas like Kyunas [00:44:50] are not at this point, which means that [00:44:53] Hamas is likely going to infiltrate [00:44:55] those areas. Hamas continues to hold [00:44:58] arms, including small arms. [00:45:01] Jared Kushner outlined the proposal [00:45:02] during the gathering. [00:45:04] Here was Jared Kushner spelling it out. [00:45:08] So, we did a master plan. Uh we brought [00:45:10] in I thank you Kier Gabby who's one of [00:45:11] the most successful real estate [00:45:13] developers and brilliant people. I know [00:45:15] he's volunteered to do this not for [00:45:16] profofit really because of his heart. He [00:45:18] wants to do this and we've developed [00:45:19] ways to redevelop Gaza. Gaza, as [00:45:21] President Trump's been saying, has [00:45:22] amazing potential and this is for the [00:45:24] people of Gaza. We've developed it into [00:45:26] zones. In the beginning, we were toying [00:45:28] with the idea of saying, let's build a a [00:45:30] free zone and then we have a Hamas zone. [00:45:32] And then we said, you know what, let's [00:45:33] just plan for catastrophic success. We [00:45:35] Hamas signed a deal demilitarized. That [00:45:36] is what we are going to enforce. People [00:45:38] ask us what our plan B is. We do not [00:45:40] have a plan B. Uh we have a plan. We [00:45:42] signed an agreement. We are all [00:45:43] committed to making that agreement work. [00:45:45] There's a master plan. We'll be doing it [00:45:46] in phasing. In the Middle East, they [00:45:48] build cities like this in, you know, [00:45:50] two, three million people. They build [00:45:51] this in three years. And so stuff like [00:45:53] this is very doable if we make it [00:45:55] happen. [00:45:55] >> And now the question becomes, how do you [00:45:57] disarm Hamas? That is always the [00:45:59] question. Always. So Jared Kushner said [00:46:01] that there will be demilitarization [00:46:02] within the first 100 days [00:46:05] >> as we're creating this system. Hopefully [00:46:07] it's something that we can just document [00:46:08] these learnings and make them available [00:46:10] to all else who want to use them in the [00:46:11] future. So, uh, demilitarization, this [00:46:14] is something, uh, we're starting now. We [00:46:15] have a new government, uh, in Gaza. This [00:46:17] government will be working with Hamas on [00:46:18] the demilitarization to really take, um, [00:46:21] uh, the principles that were agreed to [00:46:22] in the document to the next phase. Um, [00:46:24] and and hopefully that will be [00:46:25] successful. Without that, we can't [00:46:27] rebuild. So, uh, if Hamas does not [00:46:29] demilitarize, that will be what holds [00:46:31] back Gaza and the people of Gaza from [00:46:33] achieving their aspiration, and that's [00:46:34] very important. So, the next 100 days, [00:46:36] we're going to continue to just be heads [00:46:38] down and focused on making sure this is [00:46:39] implemented. We continue to be focused [00:46:41] on humanitarian aid, uh, humanitarian [00:46:43] shelter, but then creating the [00:46:45] conditions to, uh, to move forward. [00:46:48] >> Okay. Well, again, that doesn't really [00:46:49] answer what happens if kamas refuses to [00:46:52] disarm. That is the 100 billion [00:46:55] question. What if Hamas simply refuses [00:46:58] to disarm? What happens next? Who's the [00:47:00] enforcement body? Is the enforcement [00:47:02] body going to be Turkey and Qatar kind [00:47:04] of testifying that they've disarmed? [00:47:06] Will be the IDF? who is actually going [00:47:08] to do the dirty work if kamas refuses to [00:47:10] disarm. That remains the big question [00:47:12] here. Now again, the plan itself is [00:47:14] inspiring and good if it can be [00:47:16] achieved. But it does require the de [00:47:19] demilitarization of kamas and it [00:47:20] requires the denazification of Gaza. [00:47:24] Meaning that a huge percentage of the [00:47:25] people in the Gaza Strip supported Hamas [00:47:28] and continue ideologically to support [00:47:30] Hamas. That means education programs [00:47:32] that aren't run by Hamas. It means the [00:47:35] UN RWA becoming a non- entity in the [00:47:38] Gaza Strip. There are a lot of steps [00:47:39] that have to be taken if this is going [00:47:40] to materialize. If it does, that'd be [00:47:41] great. But unless you can answer that [00:47:44] question, how does Kamas get disarmed? [00:47:47] You know, I think that a lot of [00:47:48] obstacles remain. Meanwhile, on the [00:47:50] cultural front, one of the great moments [00:47:52] in culture history happened over the [00:47:54] course of the last few days. And I know [00:47:56] we remiss that we did not report on [00:47:57] this, but you know who did was Lynden [00:47:59] Blake, Daily Wire reporter [00:48:01] extraordinaire and correspondent from [00:48:04] Podcast Land, where apparently Michelle [00:48:05] Obama appeared on the most important [00:48:07] podcast of our time. It is basically [00:48:11] Einstein for Dummies, Caller Daddy. So, [00:48:14] um, Lyndon, tell me about this magical [00:48:16] moment. [00:48:17] >> This is insane. Ben, I know you're not [00:48:19] the Call Her Daddy target audience, so [00:48:22] I'm going to fill you in on what this [00:48:23] podcast is really about. We had Michelle [00:48:25] Obama on with Alex Cooper and they spent [00:48:28] the first half of the podcast talking [00:48:30] about objectifying women and how it is [00:48:32] so awful. Meanwhile, the podcast is [00:48:35] called Call Her Daddy. That is a play [00:48:38] tongue and cheek on a podcast that [00:48:40] started out being a hypersexual podcast. [00:48:43] The whole point was to teach girls how [00:48:46] to entice men, how to get the guys to [00:48:49] call them daddy and be controlling and [00:48:53] manipulative. So, it's very ironic [00:48:56] anytime I hear Alex Cooper try to tell [00:48:58] me about how women are objectified in [00:49:01] this country when I'm like, "You made [00:49:02] your career on telling girls how to act [00:49:05] in the bedroom." Now, we have seen other [00:49:08] major political figures appear on Call [00:49:10] Her Daddy. Most famous Kla Harris [00:49:12] appeared on Call Her Daddy during her [00:49:14] successful run for the presidency. Wait, [00:49:16] it didn't work out amazing. Uh, so [00:49:18] Michelle Obama shows up on this podcast [00:49:20] and uh and how did it go? Do they have, [00:49:22] you know, deep and and important [00:49:24] conversations about Michelle Obama's sex [00:49:27] life or favorite positions or what? Cuz [00:49:29] I I know that that sounds like a joke, [00:49:31] but that's actually a thing that that [00:49:32] Alex Cooper does talk about on her show [00:49:34] is is stuff like that. [00:49:35] >> Yeah. Well, she introed this the same [00:49:37] way she kind of did the Kamla interview. [00:49:39] She's like, I've thought about, you [00:49:40] know, all the way through this [00:49:41] interview, but I'm going to go with [00:49:42] this. So, she did the same thing with [00:49:44] Michelle Obama. She opens the interview [00:49:46] and she goes, "You know, I thought we [00:49:48] could do this way and talk about your [00:49:50] sex life and all of that." And Michelle [00:49:53] was like, "Or lack thereof, you know," [00:49:55] and Alex goes, "Well, I was going to go [00:49:57] this way and let's talk about being a [00:50:00] woman and women empowerment." And then [00:50:03] they just go on to just talk in circles [00:50:06] about how women are treated so awful in [00:50:09] this country and all men care about is [00:50:11] the way women look and how they dress. [00:50:14] And it's just not reality. But that's [00:50:17] what we learn about those that lean [00:50:18] less, they don't live in reality. [00:50:20] >> Well, one of the things that I find [00:50:21] really hilarious about this is that [00:50:23] apparently Michelle Obama went on there [00:50:24] and compare complained about the [00:50:26] patriarchy and one of the things that [00:50:27] came up was women taking men's names [00:50:30] when they get married and how this is [00:50:31] very terrible for them. Which is funny [00:50:32] because her name is Michelle Obama and [00:50:34] no one would know who the hell she is if [00:50:36] she were still Michelle Robinson. [00:50:38] >> Yeah. She acts like it's the hardest [00:50:39] thing ever to have to teach herself how [00:50:41] to write MRS. Period. instead of m i ss. [00:50:45] Like, oh, the horror of changing your [00:50:47] name, changing how you're addressed. [00:50:49] That's just one other thing that women [00:50:51] have to do that men don't. I thought [00:50:53] that whole segment was silly. And then [00:50:55] you have Alex trying to bring it back to [00:50:57] her audience who are single women in the [00:51:00] dating world. And she's like, Michelle, [00:51:01] this is something that comes up with my [00:51:03] audience members. You know, they are [00:51:04] women and they are successful, which I [00:51:07] think I'm successful. I love success. [00:51:09] But she's like, "They're scared to date [00:51:12] a guy because most men don't want that. [00:51:14] They're going to be intimidated." And [00:51:16] all I can think about in my head is I'm [00:51:18] like, "No, most men don't think that. In [00:51:22] fact, only losers think that way." Like, [00:51:25] most men, I think, I don't know about [00:51:26] you, Ben, would enjoy some more golf [00:51:28] trips if their wife was successful. I [00:51:30] think they like it. I did this segment [00:51:32] once on Broadway in Nashville where I [00:51:34] asked women if they would date a guy [00:51:35] that made less than them. 100% the [00:51:38] answers were no. So, what's that about? [00:51:41] >> Yes. I mean, it is it is sort of funny [00:51:43] how much of this interview seemed to be [00:51:46] projection. There's a lot of talk about [00:51:47] how men just care all the time about [00:51:49] what women wear. To which I thought to [00:51:50] myself, I've been married for almost 20 [00:51:51] years. I'm not sure I can name more than [00:51:54] like two outfits my wife has ever worn [00:51:57] in 20 years. It It is It is like men [00:52:00] never think about [laughter] what women [00:52:01] are wearing. It's such absolute [00:52:03] nonsense. But again, everything is the [00:52:05] fault of the patriarchy apparently. [00:52:07] >> Yeah. I asked my husband. And I'm like, [00:52:08] "Do you remember what my wedding dress [00:52:10] looks like?" He's like, "It was white." [00:52:12] And I was like, "There you go, ladies." [00:52:15] Like, they don't they don't they don't [00:52:16] think about that. [00:52:18] >> Well, it was good times over on Call Her [00:52:20] Daddy. As per our usual arrangement, and [00:52:22] I appreciate that, Lyndon Blake, Daily [00:52:24] Wire reporter, extraordininaire, [00:52:25] suffered through that. Lyndon, thanks [00:52:27] for your time. Thanks for sticking [00:52:28] through all of that and reporting on it. [00:52:31] >> Yep. Two hours. I'll never get back. [00:52:34] >> Meanwhile, on the cultural front, we [00:52:36] have the 2026 Oscar nominations. I'm [00:52:38] going to hold off on on some of the [00:52:40] rankings of these movies. I haven't seen [00:52:41] some of them. I do know that One Battle [00:52:44] After Another, which has received 13 [00:52:45] Oscar nominations, is an incredibly [00:52:47] overrated film. You can go view my [00:52:50] review of that film over on YouTube. I [00:52:53] thought that the film is poorly written. [00:52:54] I think that the film is not acted well. [00:52:57] I think Shawn Penn particularly overacts [00:52:59] in that film. It is not a great Paul [00:53:01] Thomas Anderson flick. It's It's obvious [00:53:04] writing. It's stupid. It's it's a really [00:53:06] off-putting movie for people who are not [00:53:08] ardent leftists. Frankly, some of the [00:53:10] other movies that have been granted [00:53:14] large numbers of nods, Sinners was given [00:53:16] the most Oscar nominations ever. Now, to [00:53:18] be fair, it has more Oscar nominations [00:53:20] than say All About Eve. To be fair, [00:53:22] there are more Oscar categories now. So, [00:53:25] that's sort of like, you know, Roger [00:53:27] Maris hitting 61 home runs in more games [00:53:29] than Babe Ruth was able to play. So, I'm [00:53:31] not sure that I follow that. But I [00:53:33] haven't seen Sinners yet, so I'm going [00:53:34] to hold off on commentary on Sinners. [00:53:38] There's some other nominations that I [00:53:39] think are welldeserved. Ethan Hawk was [00:53:41] nominated for best lead actor for his [00:53:43] role in Blue Moon, in which he plays the [00:53:45] lyricist Loren's Hart. He's terrific in [00:53:47] it. I I I loved parts of the movie, not [00:53:49] the whole movie, but he's really really [00:53:51] good in that film. [00:53:53] Wicked for good basically got shut out. [00:53:56] That is not a gigantic shock, frankly, [00:53:58] because as I mentioned on the show, the [00:54:00] second act of Wicked is not as good as [00:54:01] the first act of Wicked. And so, it [00:54:03] wasn't as though that was going to clean [00:54:04] up at the Oscars. Also, Cynthia Orivo, [00:54:07] who was sort of the standout in the [00:54:08] first one, is less of a main character [00:54:10] in this movie. The one who got snubbed [00:54:12] is Ariana Grande, who is good in the [00:54:14] movie. I don't think she's fabulous, but [00:54:16] I think she's good in the movie. [00:54:19] Some of the other best picture nominees [00:54:22] include Hamnit, which is Khloe Xiao's [00:54:27] movie about William Shakespeare and his [00:54:29] son Hamnit, which was supposed to serve [00:54:31] as the inspiration for Hamlet in the [00:54:32] movie. Haven't seen that one yet, so [00:54:33] I'll hold off on it. F1 was nominated [00:54:35] for best picture, which again, F1 is [00:54:37] fine. It's okay. It's a worse version of [00:54:39] Top Gun Maverick and Ford versus [00:54:41] Ferrari. It's like all right. I, you [00:54:44] know, didn't love it. sentimental value. [00:54:47] I haven't seen that one yet. [00:54:49] Frankenstein, which again I I thought [00:54:50] was going to be great and I was kind of [00:54:52] underwhelmed by. This is GMO del Toro's [00:54:54] Frankenstein, [00:54:55] which is beautifully produced, but kind [00:54:58] of shockingly flat in in the way that [00:55:00] it's presented. [00:55:03] The Secret Agent, [00:55:05] which is a foreign film, [00:55:09] haven't seen that one yet. Marty [00:55:10] Supreme, which is supposed to be good. [00:55:12] Train Dreams, which is mostly kind of [00:55:16] like a Terrence Malik film kind of. It's [00:55:18] not Terence Malik didn't do it, but it [00:55:21] was nominated for best picture. It's [00:55:22] it's a it's a movie about a man who [00:55:24] suffers a family tragedy and then sort [00:55:26] of travels around the country looking at [00:55:28] pretty things. [00:55:30] Not, you know, again, I thought it was [00:55:31] overrated. Bugonia by maybe the most [00:55:33] overrated director working today, or at [00:55:35] least one of the five most overrated [00:55:36] directors, Yorgos Lanthamos. Everything [00:55:38] he does is obvious. Everything that he [00:55:39] does is far leftwing. [00:55:42] Beonia is about a CEO, a pharmaceutical [00:55:45] CEO who is kidnapped by people who [00:55:46] believe she's an alien. And spoiler [00:55:48] alert, it goes exactly where you think [00:55:50] it was going to go. One battle after [00:55:52] another, which as I say was wildly [00:55:54] overrated, and Sinners, which was [00:55:56] nominated for 16 Academy Awards. So, [00:56:00] those are your best picture nominees. [00:56:02] Kind of an underwhelming crew in a lot [00:56:04] of ways. [00:56:06] On the other hand, I'm not sure what [00:56:07] I've seen this year that that rises to [00:56:08] that level. I I'll give you better [00:56:09] ratings once I've seen all of the [00:56:10] movies. I try to make a habit of seeing [00:56:12] movies before I actually rate them or [00:56:14] talk about whether they're good or not. [00:56:17] All righty, folks. Coming up, we'll get [00:56:19] to tennis players being asked about [00:56:21] their politics. I'm not sure why that is [00:56:23] happening, but it seems to be happening [00:56:25] a lot. Remember, in order to watch, you [00:56:26] have to be a member. If you're not a [00:56:27] member, become a member and use coach at [00:56:29] checkout for 2 months free on all annual [00:56:30] plans. Click that link in the [00:56:31] description and join us. [00:56:34] >> What was it like, Merlin, to be alone [00:56:38] with God? [00:56:40] >> [screaming] [00:56:43] >> Is that who you think I was alone with? [00:56:49] >> Mathan, I knew your father. I am yet [00:56:52] convinced that he was not of this world. [00:56:57] >> All men know of the great Talasin. [00:57:00] >> You are my father. That the gods should [00:57:02] war for my soul. [00:57:04] >> Princess Garis, savior of our people. [00:57:10] I know what the bull god offered you. I [00:57:13] was offered the same. [00:57:15] >> And [00:57:16] >> there is a new pirate work in the world. [00:57:18] I've seen it. [00:57:20] >> A [music] god who sacrifices what he [00:57:22] loves for us. [00:57:23] >> We are each given only one life singer. [00:57:26] >> No. And we're given another. [00:57:31] >> I learned of Yazu the Christ. I know you [00:57:33] have become his follower. [00:57:35] >> He's waiting on a miracle. And I think [00:57:37] you can give him one. Trust in Yazu. He [00:57:40] is the only hope for men like us. [00:57:42] >> Fate of Britain [music] never rests in [00:57:44] the hands of the great light. [00:57:46] >> Great light, great darkness. Such things [00:57:49] mattered to me then. [00:57:51] >> What matters to you now, mistress of [00:57:52] lies? [00:57:54] >> You, nephew, [00:57:58] [music] [00:57:59] the sword of a high king. [00:58:04] How many lives must be lost before you [00:58:06] accept the power you were born to wield? [00:58:11] So cling to the promises of a god who [00:58:13] has abandoned [music] you. [00:58:14] >> I cannot take up that sword again. [00:58:17] >> You know what you must do. [00:58:21] >> Great light, forgive me. [00:58:30] The time has come to be reborn.
ℹ️ Document Details
SHA-256
yt_vNBtq4HBdew
Dataset
youtube

Comments 0

Loading comments…
Link copied!