正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

加载此视频时出现问题。这可能是由于临时网络问题，或视频可能不可用。

🇺🇸 Dave Smith thinks the original mistake after 9/11 wasn’t going after al-Qaeda, but turning that mission into decades of regime change and war. “We could have captured Osama bin Laden at Tora Bora. The whole war on terrorism could have been over by Christmas 2001.” And that experience... show more

Mario Nawfal

3,937,271 subscribers

25,864 次观看 • 2 天前 •via X (Twitter)

新闻政治健康养生

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

5 条评论

GODSANGEL 的头像

GODSANGEL2 天前

THEY NEVER KILLED OSAMA BIN LADEN. IT WAS A BODY DOUBLE AND THE MARINES OR MILITARY THAT FOUND HIM SAW HE WAS A FAKE SO THEY KILLED SO OBAMA HAD THOSE MEN KILLED

Analog Android⭐️⭐️⭐️ 的头像

Analog Android⭐️⭐️⭐️2 天前

Mistake 😅🤣 . Ese era el plan desde el principio. No pueden ser tan idiotas, tienen que ser de la CIA sino no se entiende

Charles Hodge 的头像

Charles Hodge2 天前

Regime Change and war have been THE lynchpin of U.S. foreign policy for many decades. 911 was conceived as a means to maintain & even increase Pentagon & Security State funding after collapse of the USSR. If we need enemies, the Intel apparatus manufacturers them.

Gramma Sue 的头像

Gramma Sue2 天前

Hey and Bush maybe shouldn't have allowed BinLadins family to catch a plane out of the USA during the "no fly" ban🧐😡

Pompliano 的头像

Pompliano2 天前

Instead it became endless regime change The hard line is his closer free country or world empire, not both. History shows the second one always bills the first.

相关视频

🚨🇺🇸 🇮🇷 Losing control of the Strait of Hormuz would be a historic U.S. defeat. Dave Smith says it would transform Iran from a sanctioned state into a global power. He says that shift would change the world order. "They were at 3 and a half under the JCPOA. We could have had that problem solved, the pretend problem that is the pretext for war here." Dave Smith

🚨🇺🇸 🇮🇷 Losing control of the Strait of Hormuz would be a historic U.S. defeat. Dave Smith says it would transform Iran from a sanctioned state into a global power. He says that shift would change the world order. "They were at 3 and a half under the JCPOA. We could have had that problem solved, the pretend problem that is the pretext for war here." Dave Smith

Mario Nawfal

85,572 次观看 • 5 个月前

Dave Smith to Dinesh on why Tucker Carlson is more credible than him: “After supporting the war in Iraq, I think you should leave this game. I don’t think you should be giving your opinions anymore.” Is Dave aware that Tucker also supported the war in Iraq? 🤔 .Dinesh D'Souza

Dave Smith to Dinesh on why Tucker Carlson is more credible than him: “After supporting the war in Iraq, I think you should leave this game. I don’t think you should be giving your opinions anymore.” Is Dave aware that Tucker also supported the war in Iraq? 🤔 .Dinesh D'Souza

The Misfit Patriot

179,088 次观看 • 8 个月前

🇺🇸🇮🇷 Dave Smith: much of the language surrounding war depends less on what happened than on who did it. “It’s terrorism when they do it, and it’s counterterrorism when we do it.” His argument is that identical behavior can acquire an entirely different moral vocabulary depending on whether the actor is an enemy, an ally or the United States. And Dave thinks that gap helps explain why the Iran war can look so different outside Washington. His analogy is brutally simple: If the same guy keeps getting into fights in a crowded bar, eventually people start asking whether the problem might be the guy. Dave Smith

🇺🇸🇮🇷 Dave Smith: much of the language surrounding war depends less on what happened than on who did it. “It’s terrorism when they do it, and it’s counterterrorism when we do it.” His argument is that identical behavior can acquire an entirely different moral vocabulary depending on whether the actor is an enemy, an ally or the United States. And Dave thinks that gap helps explain why the Iran war can look so different outside Washington. His analogy is brutally simple: If the same guy keeps getting into fights in a crowded bar, eventually people start asking whether the problem might be the guy. Dave Smith

Mario Nawfal

26,489 次观看 • 2 天前

“Dave Smith’s Morality Is Actually Evil” Dave Smith is evil. Or, if you prefer to be charitable, his morality is; and that makes his worldview, and how he acts in the world, evil in practice. Dave Smith would know that if he was actually Jewish. Judaism does not judge morality by thoughts or intentions but by actions… and by that standard, Dave Smith is evil. Dave Smith is one of the loudest online voices opposed to Israel. He uses social media—most notably Joe Rogan’s bullhorn—to spread that opposition. And not through facts, expertise, or serious moral reasoning: Dave Smith doesn’t debate with facts, as Coleman Hughes pointed out. Dave Smith doesn’t understand urban warfare, as John Spencer made obvious. And Dave Smith doesn’t have a clue how to actually combat terrorism or defeat genocidal enemies, as Dave Smith himself ineptly revealed on TRIGGERnometry elsewhere. But if Dave Smith were merely a liar, an ignoramus, or a clown, that would be fine. It’s 2026. Social media is full of clowns. What makes Dave Smith dangerous is something worse. Dave Smith is a coward. He claims to be “anti-war” as a philosophy. In reality, he’s anti-war because he lacks the moral courage to confront evil. His worldview is built on refusal: refusal of responsibility, refusal of force, refusal of hard moral choices. That cowardice becomes evil when applied to the real world. Dave Smith is so reflexively anti-war that he uses Israel as a cudgel against the Iranian people themselves; people actively risking their lives to overthrow one of the most brutal, murderous regimes on earth. Let’s be clear about that regime: •It murders its own Olympians •It murders women for dancing or showing their hair •It murders people for protesting those murders Even if Dave Smith were right about Israel—and he isn’t—it would still be a moral good to oppose the Iranian regime. But because his morality is not rooted in Western Enlightenment philosophy—responsibility, agency, just war, moral clarity—Dave Smith collapses everything into childish transitive logic: “Israel bad! Therefore anyone who supports Israel is immoral. And therefore anyone who supports the Iranian people is also immoral.” This isn’t moral seriousness. It’s intellectual sloth. Dave Smith lies about genocide in Israel. Then, because of his immoral framework, he turns 2+2 into BREAKFAST! His worldview doesn’t just misunderstand evil… it incentivizes it. He treats any military action against terrorists or murderous regimes as inherently immoral. He has no answer for how evil is defeated. No framework for stopping genocidal enemies. No solution beyond posturing. And that’s the point. A morality that refuses to confront evil is not neutral. A philosophy that allows evil to flourish is itself evil. If you allow evil to flourish—and do nothing to stop it—you are complicit. If this were merely cowardice, maybe Dave Smith wouldn’t be evil. But he goes further: he actively condemns those who take the fight to terrorists and tyrants. “I’m anti-war,” he says… while excusing those who start wars, butcher civilians, and rule through terror. That isn’t peace. That’s surrender dressed up as virtue. Dave Smith is an unserious thinker who relies on his audience being just as unserious: “Israel bad! Ergo people who support Israel and also support the Iranian people are bad!” Dave Smith thinks you are immoral for supporting Israel in its war to defeat genocidal terrorists. And he thinks you are immoral for supporting the Iranian people who are trying to defeat a murderous, oppressive theocratic regime. Dave Smith is a liar. Dave Smith is a coward. And Dave Smith believes that defeating evil—in the only way it has ever been defeated, through force when necessary—is itself evil. If you think defeating evil is wrong like Dave Smith, you’re evil. Welcome to the Dave Smith Comedy Tour: acting morally righteous while ensuring evil flourishes… and attacking those trying to stop it.

“Dave Smith’s Morality Is Actually Evil” Dave Smith is evil. Or, if you prefer to be charitable, his morality is; and that makes his worldview, and how he acts in the world, evil in practice. Dave Smith would know that if he was actually Jewish. Judaism does not judge morality by thoughts or intentions but by actions… and by that standard, Dave Smith is evil. Dave Smith is one of the loudest online voices opposed to Israel. He uses social media—most notably Joe Rogan’s bullhorn—to spread that opposition. And not through facts, expertise, or serious moral reasoning: Dave Smith doesn’t debate with facts, as Coleman Hughes pointed out. Dave Smith doesn’t understand urban warfare, as John Spencer made obvious. And Dave Smith doesn’t have a clue how to actually combat terrorism or defeat genocidal enemies, as Dave Smith himself ineptly revealed on TRIGGERnometry elsewhere. But if Dave Smith were merely a liar, an ignoramus, or a clown, that would be fine. It’s 2026. Social media is full of clowns. What makes Dave Smith dangerous is something worse. Dave Smith is a coward. He claims to be “anti-war” as a philosophy. In reality, he’s anti-war because he lacks the moral courage to confront evil. His worldview is built on refusal: refusal of responsibility, refusal of force, refusal of hard moral choices. That cowardice becomes evil when applied to the real world. Dave Smith is so reflexively anti-war that he uses Israel as a cudgel against the Iranian people themselves; people actively risking their lives to overthrow one of the most brutal, murderous regimes on earth. Let’s be clear about that regime: •It murders its own Olympians •It murders women for dancing or showing their hair •It murders people for protesting those murders Even if Dave Smith were right about Israel—and he isn’t—it would still be a moral good to oppose the Iranian regime. But because his morality is not rooted in Western Enlightenment philosophy—responsibility, agency, just war, moral clarity—Dave Smith collapses everything into childish transitive logic: “Israel bad! Therefore anyone who supports Israel is immoral. And therefore anyone who supports the Iranian people is also immoral.” This isn’t moral seriousness. It’s intellectual sloth. Dave Smith lies about genocide in Israel. Then, because of his immoral framework, he turns 2+2 into BREAKFAST! His worldview doesn’t just misunderstand evil… it incentivizes it. He treats any military action against terrorists or murderous regimes as inherently immoral. He has no answer for how evil is defeated. No framework for stopping genocidal enemies. No solution beyond posturing. And that’s the point. A morality that refuses to confront evil is not neutral. A philosophy that allows evil to flourish is itself evil. If you allow evil to flourish—and do nothing to stop it—you are complicit. If this were merely cowardice, maybe Dave Smith wouldn’t be evil. But he goes further: he actively condemns those who take the fight to terrorists and tyrants. “I’m anti-war,” he says… while excusing those who start wars, butcher civilians, and rule through terror. That isn’t peace. That’s surrender dressed up as virtue. Dave Smith is an unserious thinker who relies on his audience being just as unserious: “Israel bad! Ergo people who support Israel and also support the Iranian people are bad!” Dave Smith thinks you are immoral for supporting Israel in its war to defeat genocidal terrorists. And he thinks you are immoral for supporting the Iranian people who are trying to defeat a murderous, oppressive theocratic regime. Dave Smith is a liar. Dave Smith is a coward. And Dave Smith believes that defeating evil—in the only way it has ever been defeated, through force when necessary—is itself evil. If you think defeating evil is wrong like Dave Smith, you’re evil. Welcome to the Dave Smith Comedy Tour: acting morally righteous while ensuring evil flourishes… and attacking those trying to stop it.

Jake Donnelly

18,571 次观看 • 8 个月前

.Ben Shapiro today on Dave Smith 👏🏻: “Dave Smith is the kind of fellow who says Donald Trump should be in jail for life as a war criminal, legitimizes every scurrilous figure on the Internet from Nick Fuentes to Candace Owens, and then demands that everyone treat him as some sort of honest, worthy intellectual opponent. He’s not.”

.Ben Shapiro today on Dave Smith 👏🏻: “Dave Smith is the kind of fellow who says Donald Trump should be in jail for life as a war criminal, legitimizes every scurrilous figure on the Internet from Nick Fuentes to Candace Owens, and then demands that everyone treat him as some sort of honest, worthy intellectual opponent. He’s not.”

Jackie Chea ⚖️

218,963 次观看 • 7 个月前

Here’s why the word “genocide” matters — and what happens when it’s misused, says war scholar John Spencer: He said: “We have war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide.” “Genocide [is] the ultimate, created after the Holocaust to define the worst human thing you could ever do: trying to eliminate an entire race or religion.” “By the literal definition of genocide, it trying to destroy—in whole or in part—a group…both by intention and in action.” “I don’t want that word to just be synonymous with ‘bad.’ Like war is bad. War is hell. War is killing. It’s awful, but we can’t redefine a term.” “Something can be brutal and a lot of death, and also be the opposite of genocide.” John Spencer

Here’s why the word “genocide” matters — and what happens when it’s misused, says war scholar John Spencer: He said: “We have war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide.” “Genocide [is] the ultimate, created after the Holocaust to define the worst human thing you could ever do: trying to eliminate an entire race or religion.” “By the literal definition of genocide, it trying to destroy—in whole or in part—a group…both by intention and in action.” “I don’t want that word to just be synonymous with ‘bad.’ Like war is bad. War is hell. War is killing. It’s awful, but we can’t redefine a term.” “Something can be brutal and a lot of death, and also be the opposite of genocide.” John Spencer

American Thought Leaders 🇺🇸 with @JanJekielek

22,033 次观看 • 1 个月前

How powerful is the Israel lobby in the United States? Coleman Hughes (Coleman Hughes): “The Israel lobby, as powerful as you think it is, couldn’t get any president to [recognize Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights] for 36 years…but [you think] they could get us into a whole war.” Dave Smith (Dave Smith): “I’ve never been one of these conspiracy kooks. I’m not claiming Israel controls everything that ever happens…but I think Israel has a lot of influence over this country, which they obviously do.”

How powerful is the Israel lobby in the United States? Coleman Hughes (Coleman Hughes): “The Israel lobby, as powerful as you think it is, couldn’t get any president to [recognize Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights] for 36 years…but [you think] they could get us into a whole war.” Dave Smith (Dave Smith): “I’ve never been one of these conspiracy kooks. I’m not claiming Israel controls everything that ever happens…but I think Israel has a lot of influence over this country, which they obviously do.”

Conversations with Coleman

336,964 次观看 • 1 年前

Outstanding point from Wes Huff on The Shawn Ryan Show on why it had to be Jesus: "There's something that sets apart the Christian worldview with Jesus, that He's a real person that really lived that we can point to. You know, in one sense, if the Buddha didn't exist, you could still technically have Buddhism. You could have the philosophies. You could have the noble truths...It didn't have to be Gautama Siddhartha who came up with those things. It could have been anybody. Likewise, in Islam, it could have been anybody. It didn't have to be Mohammed. The god of Islam could have chosen any person to be the prophet that he revealed his truth to, but it does have to be Jesus. It cannot be anyone else. And there's a historical grounding of the Christian faith that the tomb is either empty, or it's not."

Outstanding point from Wes Huff on The Shawn Ryan Show on why it had to be Jesus: "There's something that sets apart the Christian worldview with Jesus, that He's a real person that really lived that we can point to. You know, in one sense, if the Buddha didn't exist, you could still technically have Buddhism. You could have the philosophies. You could have the noble truths...It didn't have to be Gautama Siddhartha who came up with those things. It could have been anybody. Likewise, in Islam, it could have been anybody. It didn't have to be Mohammed. The god of Islam could have chosen any person to be the prophet that he revealed his truth to, but it does have to be Jesus. It cannot be anyone else. And there's a historical grounding of the Christian faith that the tomb is either empty, or it's not."

Melissa the Hopeful🏠Homemaker

183,620 次观看 • 7 个月前

You could make an argument for America striking Iran's nuclear facilities. Trump, to his credit, has been consistent on that for 15 years. But regime change? I explain why that would be a HUGE mistake. Subscribe and listen for updates on the Iran war⬇️

You could make an argument for America striking Iran's nuclear facilities. Trump, to his credit, has been consistent on that for 15 years. But regime change? I explain why that would be a HUGE mistake. Subscribe and listen for updates on the Iran war⬇️

Charlie Kirk

373,143 次观看 • 1 年前

“Dave Smith; the Pennywise of Pacifism” “Comic” Dave Smith is currently in an X spat with Dan Crenshaw over the perils of war. Yes, Dave Smith is staring at Crenshaw with two good eyes and telling Crenshaw’s eye patch about war. Hubris, thy name be “Comic” Dave Smith. Dave Smith presents himself as the anti-war guy despite LOVING and INCENTIVIZING all the worst actors in history: The terrorists who committed genocide against Israel and Israelis on October 7th? According to Dave Smith, “well, what do you think happens when you occupy somebody for 60 (sic) years?” Want to ensure more wars? Excuse the people who commit genocide and complain about the people who sacrifice their own soldiers so as to avoid as many civilian casualties as possible. EVERY war starting entity should be so lucky as to go to war against Israel. Don’t believe me? Ask the Ukrainians. Dave Smith’s current favorite current historian? Martyr Made, AKA “the Churchill was the main villain of World War II guy.” Boo the world savers? Yay the Hitler stans? What’s next, “why Mao was the greatest hop scotch player of all-time?” If you think that’s a leap, you don’t know what I’m talking about. And that’s Dave Smith. He’s loud. He’s confident. And he doesn’t have a fucking clue what he’s talking about. His morality doesn’t belong in the United States of American. Every debate with him should never move past this one issue: Why do you defend the war starters? Why do YOU—the anti-war guy—incentivize wars? Because you, Dave, are why many young men are dead in Israel AND Gaza. You, Dave, are why many young men and women in Israel don’t have limbs. Because you and your rhetoric incentivize wars. You incentivize death. Dave, you’re morally angry in the way a college freshman is morally angry after reading half a Chomsky essay. I’m morally angry because I’ve seen what your worldview does to actual families, actual children, and actual warriors. You get applause for your anger… I can’t get Arnon Zamora out of my head. I can’t get Sabine Taasa crumbling to the ground out of my head. Your rhetoric JUSTIFIES the terrorists to murder her husband. Your worldview made that possible. Your morality helped usher in the inevitable deaths of tens of thousands of Gazans… But you’re too much of an unserious, unfunny clown to see it. You’re not the Clown of Peace. You’re the Pennywise of Pacifism; waving people toward a moral sewer you’ll never have to drown in. And nobody who’s lived through real violence finds any of this funny. Nobody is laughing, Dave… Just like at your standup sets.

“Dave Smith; the Pennywise of Pacifism” “Comic” Dave Smith is currently in an X spat with Dan Crenshaw over the perils of war. Yes, Dave Smith is staring at Crenshaw with two good eyes and telling Crenshaw’s eye patch about war. Hubris, thy name be “Comic” Dave Smith. Dave Smith presents himself as the anti-war guy despite LOVING and INCENTIVIZING all the worst actors in history: The terrorists who committed genocide against Israel and Israelis on October 7th? According to Dave Smith, “well, what do you think happens when you occupy somebody for 60 (sic) years?” Want to ensure more wars? Excuse the people who commit genocide and complain about the people who sacrifice their own soldiers so as to avoid as many civilian casualties as possible. EVERY war starting entity should be so lucky as to go to war against Israel. Don’t believe me? Ask the Ukrainians. Dave Smith’s current favorite current historian? Martyr Made, AKA “the Churchill was the main villain of World War II guy.” Boo the world savers? Yay the Hitler stans? What’s next, “why Mao was the greatest hop scotch player of all-time?” If you think that’s a leap, you don’t know what I’m talking about. And that’s Dave Smith. He’s loud. He’s confident. And he doesn’t have a fucking clue what he’s talking about. His morality doesn’t belong in the United States of American. Every debate with him should never move past this one issue: Why do you defend the war starters? Why do YOU—the anti-war guy—incentivize wars? Because you, Dave, are why many young men are dead in Israel AND Gaza. You, Dave, are why many young men and women in Israel don’t have limbs. Because you and your rhetoric incentivize wars. You incentivize death. Dave, you’re morally angry in the way a college freshman is morally angry after reading half a Chomsky essay. I’m morally angry because I’ve seen what your worldview does to actual families, actual children, and actual warriors. You get applause for your anger… I can’t get Arnon Zamora out of my head. I can’t get Sabine Taasa crumbling to the ground out of my head. Your rhetoric JUSTIFIES the terrorists to murder her husband. Your worldview made that possible. Your morality helped usher in the inevitable deaths of tens of thousands of Gazans… But you’re too much of an unserious, unfunny clown to see it. You’re not the Clown of Peace. You’re the Pennywise of Pacifism; waving people toward a moral sewer you’ll never have to drown in. And nobody who’s lived through real violence finds any of this funny. Nobody is laughing, Dave… Just like at your standup sets.

Jake Donnelly

274,940 次观看 • 10 个月前

#WATCH | Mumbai, Maharashtra: On Iran's 10-point proposal amid announcement on the ceasefire, Former Minister of State for External Affairs, MJ Akbar says, "I do not believe that a ceasefire could have been announced without a broad agreement on key factors. And obviously, Iran's nuclear program has to be one of the major factors, because if you don't have an agreement on that, then this is a hoax. But the point of fact is that one day before this war began, America and Iran had agreed, even on the language, which leaves the world perplexed as to what this war was about. Because over and over again, you say that the war is about nuclear weapons and Iran's potential. So if on the eve of the war, you had accepted an agreement in which Iran had also accepted America's language, then I think the war had to be an exercise in political hysteria, for purposes that are not fully comprehensible to the same world..."

#WATCH | Mumbai, Maharashtra: On Iran's 10-point proposal amid announcement on the ceasefire, Former Minister of State for External Affairs, MJ Akbar says, "I do not believe that a ceasefire could have been announced without a broad agreement on key factors. And obviously, Iran's nuclear program has to be one of the major factors, because if you don't have an agreement on that, then this is a hoax. But the point of fact is that one day before this war began, America and Iran had agreed, even on the language, which leaves the world perplexed as to what this war was about. Because over and over again, you say that the war is about nuclear weapons and Iran's potential. So if on the eve of the war, you had accepted an agreement in which Iran had also accepted America's language, then I think the war had to be an exercise in political hysteria, for purposes that are not fully comprehensible to the same world..."

ANI

15,240 次观看 • 6 个月前

Former World Bank Lead Economist warns the world is close to WORLD WAR 3, draws parallels to the world before WW1: ‘You can say that of course in the World War One and what is similar today, you had coalitions. You had coalitions that were getting ready to sort of pounce on each other…. And nowadays we have the same situation. We are actually having more and more clear coalitions. On one hand it is China, Russia and Iran. On the other hand it’s Europe and the United States, and people are unaware of what the war would bring and they were similarly very oblivious and they were very optimistic… You know that famous story ’we will be back home for Christmas’, they just did not figure which Christmas it would be they thought it would be Christmas 1914 but it turned out it was Christmas 1918. When they came back after 20 or 30 million dead so I think we should not take this lightly at all and I think there’s people who have either no knowledge of history or actually they don’t have family who have been exposed to war and they believe the war is some kind of game.’ —Branko Milanovic on the latest episode of Going Underground Watch the full interview in the quoted post below 👇

Former World Bank Lead Economist warns the world is close to WORLD WAR 3, draws parallels to the world before WW1: ‘You can say that of course in the World War One and what is similar today, you had coalitions. You had coalitions that were getting ready to sort of pounce on each other…. And nowadays we have the same situation. We are actually having more and more clear coalitions. On one hand it is China, Russia and Iran. On the other hand it’s Europe and the United States, and people are unaware of what the war would bring and they were similarly very oblivious and they were very optimistic… You know that famous story ’we will be back home for Christmas’, they just did not figure which Christmas it would be they thought it would be Christmas 1914 but it turned out it was Christmas 1918. When they came back after 20 or 30 million dead so I think we should not take this lightly at all and I think there’s people who have either no knowledge of history or actually they don’t have family who have been exposed to war and they believe the war is some kind of game.’ —Branko Milanovic on the latest episode of Going Underground Watch the full interview in the quoted post below 👇

Going Underground

41,067 次观看 • 1 个月前

.David Smoak asked Dave Aranda "What have you been told [by leadership] about what you need to do and what your future is?" Here's Aranda's full response: Yeah, our focus is just trying to win this next one, you know? And after we win, this next one is a really good team. And then after this next one, trying to win the one after that, and just try to build and show improvement and some excitement on winning and get it and have it be consistent. And so, really our focus is only that. I think whether it's the noise or it's the distraction or it's the whatever it is, right? We have to keep that on the outside and be focused on improving. Fair amount of improving needs to be done. #Baylor #SicEm

.David Smoak asked Dave Aranda "What have you been told [by leadership] about what you need to do and what your future is?" Here's Aranda's full response: Yeah, our focus is just trying to win this next one, you know? And after we win, this next one is a really good team. And then after this next one, trying to win the one after that, and just try to build and show improvement and some excitement on winning and get it and have it be consistent. And so, really our focus is only that. I think whether it's the noise or it's the distraction or it's the whatever it is, right? We have to keep that on the outside and be focused on improving. Fair amount of improving needs to be done. #Baylor #SicEm

Parker Rehm

73,430 次观看 • 10 个月前

Kayce on the Cornell 7: Why Does Everyone Have to Pick a Side? Kayce Smith says the Cornell case conversation has turned into two camps — either you believe her or you believe the men — when the reality could be much more complicated. Will Cain pushes her on where she thinks the line may have been crossed.

Kayce on the Cornell 7: Why Does Everyone Have to Pick a Side? Kayce Smith says the Cornell case conversation has turned into two camps — either you believe her or you believe the men — when the reality could be much more complicated. Will Cain pushes her on where she thinks the line may have been crossed.

The Will Cain Show

55,215 次观看 • 2 天前