reSee.it - Related Video Feed

Speaker 0 criticizes left-wing individuals, calling them "pieces of shit" and warns against giving them any leeway as they will use it to destroy you. Speaker 1 questions why they refer to them as such. Speaker 0 explains that it's because they believe leftists will annihilate anyone who thinks differently. They mention how leftists hide their own wrongdoings but attack those who oppose them. Speaker 0 concludes that despite leftists resorting to repression, they are losing the cultural battle. They express satisfaction in being morally and aesthetically superior and claim that leftists are desperate and cornered. The transcript abruptly ends.

The speaker claims the media covers up violence by Antifa and ignores violence against Trump supporters. The speaker says that after a White House press briefing, they asked assembled journalists why they wouldn't cover violence against Trump supporters or demand that Democratic leaders disavow violence from Antifa, as they demanded of Trump regarding his supporters. The speaker states the journalists laughed at them, which the speaker took as proof that the media laughs at violence against people they don't like.

The political landscape has shifted dramatically, with conservatives now embracing the role of rebels against the system, while liberals advocate for censorship and regulation of free speech. This reversal is striking. One speaker mentions being investigated politically more than notorious figures, highlighting the aggressive tactics used against opponents, akin to actions seen in third-world countries. They discuss winning cases and the potential for political retaliation, with accusations flying about intentions to imprison rivals. Despite having the power to act against political adversaries, one speaker refrains from doing so, believing it would harm the country. The conversation underscores the current political climate's absurdities and the weaponization of investigations for political gain.

But all these camp encampments at universities and all these things, that's promoted by far left movement or ideology. Far right ideology, when you when you mesh it with the far left, any level of crazy gets more crazy. It's just that the far right people, when they get fucking mad, then they're gonna start fucking shit up. The statements illustrate a view of cross-ideological amplification of extremism and a tendency toward action when anger increases. These remarks describe a dynamic between extreme ends of the spectrum and potential for escalation. They focus on perceived tensions between left-leaning campus activism and right-wing responses. Overall, the passage centers on ideological interplay and escalation dynamics.

24% of people who identify as very liberal think that political violence is acceptable. That number is only 3% for conservatives. That's not an American problem. That's a left wing problem. Yes, everybody should be able to condemn political violence. On the left and the right, I certainly do. But this is a problem that we're seeing predominantly from the left.

The speaker accuses someone, referred to as "Spartacus," of hypocrisy in their criticism of Chuck Schumer. The speaker claims that "Spartacus" avoided answering whether criminal law should be enforced. According to the speaker, the answer is yes, and the Biden Department of Justice acted politically and with partisan bias by refusing to enforce the law because they disagreed with Supreme Court Justice rulings.

The alternative to controlled opposition is vandalism, rioting, and destroying property. Vandalizing a Tesla is more politically effective than voting or Bernie Sanders' rhetoric. Progressives and the left have never won rights or changes through the ballot box. These wins were achieved by rioting and burning things.

The speaker expresses shock at the level of violence and hatred they perceive as coming from the left, questioning how it aligns with their claimed image of empathy. They cite examples such as burning Teslas, shooting up dealerships, and calls for the death of the president and themselves. The speaker states that while people have a right to not buy a product, they shouldn't resort to violence like burning it down, as it affects other people's property.

The speaker believes that the left, including Antifa, is a revolutionary group interested in socialism and communism. They describe their tactics as fascistic and claim that the left has been demonizing the Trump administration since day one. The speaker mentions that Trump's victory speech was measured and statesmanlike, offering an olive branch and praising Hillary Clinton. However, they argue that the left has been resisting and trying to impeach Trump from the beginning, shredding the norms of the system. The speaker believes that the left's desire for power and their outrage over Trump's victory drive their actions. They also mention Antifa's roots and funding sources, suggesting they are well-organized and have ammunition against police officers.

At the core of the left, at the core of a liberal, is someone that would use the sword if they had it. They are very violent people at their core. They always have it. They can't debate. They can't have conversation. So they'll resort to these tactics. They're gonna do everything they possibly can to try to murder this movement because they can't beat us. So they're gonna try to take weapons. And now we're very aware of that. I'm aware of it. We have to have full time security. This is not a joke. This is who these people are.

The speakers are debating the former president's statements about an "enemy within." One speaker claims the former president suggested turning the American military on the American people. A clip is played of the former president responding to accusations of threatening people, stating he is not threatening anyone, but that "they" are the ones doing the threatening through "phony investigations" and "weaponization of government." The other speaker objects, asserting the clip does not reflect the former president's repeated statements about the American people being the "enemy within." This speaker claims the former president has talked about turning the American military on the American people, going after peaceful protestors, and locking up those who disagree with him, which they argue is unacceptable in a democracy.

Speaker 0 criticizes leftists, calling them "pieces of shit" and saying they cannot be given any leeway. Speaker 1 asks for a definition of "piece of shit." Speaker 0 explains that it refers to collectivists who he believes are terrible. Speaker 1 questions why they are terrible. Speaker 0 responds that they are terrible because they will destroy anyone who thinks differently. He emphasizes that leftists cannot be negotiated with and should not be given any space. He claims that conservatives are morally and aesthetically superior and are winning the cultural battle against leftists. He also accuses leftists of using the state's repressive apparatus to harm conservatives, but claims they are failing. He concludes that leftists are feeling cornered and losing the cultural battle.

The people committing violence are not the same ones peacefully protesting immigration enforcement. The violent individuals wear hoodies and face masks, using similar tactics across different civil unrest situations. They are connected, and some might call them anarchists. Many of these individuals come from other places specifically to hurt people and cause havoc.

The speaker expresses strong disdain towards left-wing individuals, referring to them as "miserable lefties" and stating that they cannot be given any leeway. They believe that negotiating with leftists is impossible and that they will use any opportunity to destroy their opponents. The speaker also claims that conservatives are morally and aesthetically superior, and that leftists are resorting to using the state's repressive apparatus to try and defeat them. However, the speaker asserts that despite these efforts, leftists are losing the cultural battle and are feeling cornered.

The speaker claims that someone received 14,000,000 votes but was thrown out of office. The speaker states this action is a threat to democracy. The speaker also claims that this person hates the woman who ran instead of him and cannot stand her.

I wanna address this idea that both sides just need to lower the temperature. If you've been watching the news or scrolling on social media, you've probably heard this. Both sides just need to lower the temperature. It's bullshit, and I wanna point out exactly why it's bullshit. First, let's take a look at what these Democrat politicians are saying now that their side has committed many acts of domestic terrorism. They say: “Everybody, right, left, center, I don't care what your politics are, has to speak out strongly against it. But look, I think, and I don't know what's happened here, and I don't know about the guns, but we need better laws on guns.” Then: “I I I just don't even know why there aren't uprisings all over the country, and maybe there will be.” And: “There needs to be unrest in the streets for as long as there's unrest in our lives. Enemies of the state.” They add: “Show me where it says that protests are supposed to be polite and peaceful.” They state: “There is no both sides in this. Okay? That is what the left has done over about the last week.” They list alleged incidents: “A leftist murdered Charlie Kirk. A leftist shot an ABC affiliate for not airing Jimmy Kimmel. Imagine shooting up a TV studio because Jimmy Kimmel was not being aired. Somebody on the left shot a wedding while yelling free Palestine. Leftists had mass celebrations and celebrated Charlie Kirk's murder in the streets of New York. And today, a leftist shot an ICE facility.” They conclude: “There is no both sides.” “The right is not the one doing this. The far left, the leftist organizers, activists, the people at the root of the Democratic Party are the ones behind this. They have an insane ideology, and they are making people pay for it in blood.”

The speaker expresses strong disdain for left-wing individuals, calling them derogatory names and stating that they cannot be negotiated with. They claim that if someone thinks differently, they will be attacked and that negotiating with them is futile. The speaker also accuses left-wing individuals of hiding their own wrongdoings while attacking those on the other side. They believe that despite these challenges, those who oppose the left are morally and aesthetically superior and are winning the cultural battle. The speaker concludes by stating that the left is desperate and losing the battle.

The speaker describes the left as ashamed of nothing, offended by everything, contributing nothing, and believing they're entitled to everything. They claim the left consistently lies and uses manufactured propaganda, such as falsely portraying a movie sound as the sound of families destroyed by ICE. The speaker asserts that low wages and housing unaffordability are related to illegal immigration and that removing 50 million illegal immigrants would solve these problems. They believe tax dollars should support homeless American citizens instead of immigrants. The speaker questions why anyone entertains the left's lunacy or argues with them, suggesting that if someone can't make a morals-based, logical argument, there's no point in engaging. They express frustration with the left's "burn it to the ground" mentality and urge decisive action against them, calling for their arrest and punishment.

Speaker claims, "Brother Charlie got murdered, assassinated a few days ago, but the truth is he was assassinated a few years ago." They argue that electing people who demonize their political opponents leads to violence, adding, "So you might have pulled the trigger yourself." The speaker asks, "Who demonize political opponents? Who call political opponents enemies, Hitler, a threat to democracy, who say because we disagree, if you see someone, walk up to them and if they're eating in a restaurant, tell them they're not welcome, get in their face." They warn, "When you start saying stuff like that, calling your political opponents Nazis, fascists, stuff like that. Well, sooner or later, a kook is gonna hear that. A crazy person is going to hear that, and they're going to act on it."

They aim to harm us for disagreeing with them. Our justice system no longer prioritizes truth, but winning at all costs.

I don't need to tell my supporters that there will be no violence; they are not violent people. I don't want any violence, and my supporters share that belief. These are good people who stand for peace. Unlike your question implies, they believe in non-violence.

The speakers discuss the hatred and violence they perceive from Trump supporters. Speaker 1 claims that Trump supporters hit people, throw urine, and use crowbars. Speaker 0 expresses doubt but acknowledges the possibility of milkshake incidents. Speaker 1 questions if Trump supporters would engage in such behavior, to which Speaker 0 responds that they hope not. Speaker 1 then suggests that Democrats and liberals are actually responsible for these actions. Speaker 0 disagrees, stating that the average Democrat does not support violence. The conversation continues with Speaker 1 mentioning incidents at a Trump rally and accusing liberals of stealing and burning red hats. Speaker 0 dismisses these claims as an attempt to push an agenda. The video ends with Speaker 1 questioning Speaker 0's support for multiple candidates.

The speaker claims that the individuals committing violence are distinct from those peacefully protesting immigration enforcement. These violent individuals are hooded, masked, and move from one civil unrest situation to another, employing similar tactics. The speaker alleges these individuals are connected, often labeled anarchists, and travel from city to city to instigate harm and chaos. The speaker finds it disgusting that many of these people come from other places just to hurt people and to cause havoc.

The speaker expresses strong disdain for left-wing individuals, referring to them as "pieces of shit" and accusing them of being intolerant and violent. They argue that negotiating with the left is impossible and that they will resort to expropriation, violence, and ruining lives if someone disagrees with them. The speaker believes that the positive aspect of this situation is that it forces others to become better and highlights their superiority in productivity, morality, and aesthetics. They claim that the left is losing the cultural battle and resorting to repression, but even that is ineffective. The speaker concludes by stating that the left is feeling cornered for the first time.

The speaker discusses protests in New York City where participants chanted: “Christy Noem will hang.” The speaker notes Christy Noem is the secretary for homeland security and says Democrats are “out en masse” saying she will hang. They also chant “save a life, kill an ICE,” and the speaker states this amounts to talking about killing ICE agents. The speaker argues that this demonstrates a permission structure for violence and that the left is openly encouraging violence against ICE agents and cabinet members of the president. The speaker says it will be interesting to see how many Democrats condemn these actions. The speaker asserts that the left has a problem with political violence and that it is visible “more and more.” They claim this is unacceptable and criticize the left for portraying themselves as more virtuous and morally superior, describing this behavior as inconsistent with that portrayal. The speaker emphasizes the need to call this out and to raise awareness about what they view as the violence being promoted by the left. Additionally, the speaker promotes a free email newsletter, stating that it is sent every morning around 7 AM Central. They mention that the link to subscribe is in their profile and urge viewers to drop their email and subscribe. The segment ends with the speaker noting they will see the audience in the next update.