Destiny DESTROY emotional Andrew Wilson in 60sec in a INSANE Trump debate

追加: 2026-06-01

[00:00:00]Andrew Wilson is the type of guy who thinks if he laughs during a debate, people will think he's winning. But these guys are maggas, so that's not really surprising. And before we get into it, just for your info, guys, this is a 1 versus 25 showdown where Destiny gets surrounded by Trump supporters. And man, some of these people came completely unprepared because Destiny spends most of the debate aggressively fact-checking them in real time. Andrew was probably the only guy in the room compared to the other opponents who actually gave some debatably vibes. And I'm saying that because literally everyone else look like they came straight from reading random Twitter posts 5 minutes before the debate.

[00:00:36]>> Number one, I'm a MAGA gangster. I'm outside when it comes to Trump.

[00:00:41]>> Have you ever been to a rally?

[00:00:43]>> That's number one. I don't know if you book smart or if I'm really outside cuz I'm outside.

[00:00:48]>> I'm outside. And and you basically said >> Maggas thrive off of lies.

[00:00:54]>> First of all, you ever seen a Trump rally? You don't see all of the unity and love out there?

[00:00:58]>> Nope. I see things saying like deport all the immigrants and I see more mega flags than I see and I see America.

[00:01:03]>> You support All right, let me ask you this. You support Black Lives Matter.

[00:01:06]>> Not that much.

[00:01:07]>> Black Lives Matter only when media put it out. That's number one. Trump is bringing a lot of unity and love. You support burning and looting. That's what you support. And it tripped me out how you could support >> someone that just want the world to just go crazy burning and looting. And I heard you say something earlier that's crazy.

[00:01:30]>> You said you hate America. Talk about that.

[00:01:33]>> I don't think I ever said I hate America.

[00:01:34]>> Yes, you did. And you hate America. And it made me look at you even in what cont say earlier. You said it earlier.

[00:01:41]>> I don't think so. I think I said I think I said that I I like America. I like America. I don't think mega people like America. I don't think you guys have any idea what it means to be American. I don't think you know what American values are. I don't think you know what this country was founded or built upon.

[00:01:54]And I think you guys are obsessed with a cult leader who is taking the entire Republican party off of a >> everything he say he do. Trump is gangster.

[00:02:02]>> Can you give me one thing you don't like about Trump?

[00:02:04]>> What I don't like about him? I love everything about >> I know because it's a cult.

[00:02:08]>> It's not a cult.

[00:02:09]>> I'm from No, it's not. Everything is a cult if you want to think about it.

[00:02:14]>> Okay.

[00:02:15]>> Everything is a cult to somebody in a cult. That's probably true. Yeah.

[00:02:19]someone that's representing and Camala Kumala whatever her name is she out of here >> Trump you know when a guy starts losing brain cells this is how his words exactly sound like there are some statements where you can just say yeah that's wrong but bro this literally this is beyond my understanding because I can neither handle statements this dangerous nor has my brain evolved enough yet to understand whatever he's trying to say imagine this you're sleeping at night and suddenly Suddenly, someone knocks on your door at 3:00 a.m. You're scared as hell, but somehow you gather the courage to open the door. And then suddenly, this guy says this to you.

[00:02:58]>> Trump is gangster.

[00:03:03]>> Okay, I want to talk about the alternate slate of electors. Um, and how historically that has happened before on the Democrat side. Yes, it has. In uh 1960, JFK against Nixon ran an alternate slate of electors um in case it was overturned in Hawaii. Um it was eventually overturned in Hawaii. And so then those electors were certified and um JFK won the state.

[00:03:29]>> So I'm glad you bring this up real quick because this is one of the biggest piecing points that you guys always bring up and I don't know why. In 1960, two slates of electors were authorized by the state legislature. both were granted the certificate of ascertainment from the governor because they knew that it was a very close election and they'd authorized a recount and because that recount was going to go past the December some mid December date December 14th for the 2020 election but some mid December date for when they had to certify their vote. So they said okay well we'll send in vote both certificates and then on the day of the counting um on January whenever they would have done the um certification in Congress then they can choose which one was authorized by the state legislature based on the results of the recount.

[00:04:05]Donald Trump's certificates were not authorized by any state legislature.

[00:04:10]>> Well, do you acknowledge that? Wait, wait, real quick. Do you acknowledge real quick that none of the seven slaves that were by Donald Trump, none of those were authorized by any state legislature?

[00:04:18]>> Can I answer?

[00:04:19]>> You're not going to.

[00:04:20]>> No, I am. No, I am. No, no, no, no, no.

[00:04:22]They they weren't certified. And why?

[00:04:24]It's because fraud wasn't found. It wasn't proven in court.

[00:04:27]>> No, you're lying. You're lying. They weren't >> You're saying fraud was founded?

[00:04:31]>> No, you're lying because those legislator >> Wait, what do you what do you say my lying about?

[00:04:35]>> You're lying because none of those alternate slates were arranged by the state legislators. They were arranged by Trump and his criminal co-conspirators.

[00:04:42]None of the state legislators, none of the state governors authorized those slates of electors.

[00:04:46]>> Okay, what's wrong with that? It's illegal. Number one, and number two, what law? What law says that?

[00:04:53]>> In you have laws that are governing how you're supposed to transmit.

[00:04:56]>> What law? What law? I do you want me to give you the specific statutes in Georgia, Arizona, New Zealand? I I don't know them off the top of my head. If you want, you can baseless claim.

[00:05:06]>> It's not a baseless claim. Ches Chespro and Eastman can't provide me a specific law >> because I can't give you the state statute.

[00:05:13]>> Yeah, if you can't give me a specific law, then why should I believe you?

[00:05:17]There's no justification for that. You have to provide evidence for >> basically this MAGA guy is saying that Trump's alternate electors were not unusual because Democrats did something similar in 1960 with JFK during a close election recount. Bro thought he was about to end the whole conversation except he completely embarrassed himself because he didn't actually know the full story of what he was citing. Both groups of electors were officially approved by the actual Hawaii state government because the election was insanely close and there was a legal recount happening.

[00:05:48]The governor literally signed papers for both sides since they weren't sure the recount would finish before the deadline. So, the state basically prepared for both possible outcomes legally and officially. Now, compare that to what Trump's team did in 2020.

[00:06:01]In states like Georgia, Arizona, Michigan, Wisconsin, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and New Mexico, none of those so-called fake electors were approved by any state government. Not a single governor signed off on it. Not a single state legislature approved it.

[00:06:15]When Destiny says what Trump's electors did was illegal, this guy instantly goes, "What law? Tell me the exact statute." Like, bro, just because someone can't randomly memorize a law code number on the spot doesn't mean the law suddenly disappears. By that logic, a cop can't give you a speeding ticket unless he recites the entire traffic law word for word first. It was such a bad faith argument just to make Destiny look unsure. even though the actual charges connected to this stuff like conspiracy and obstruction are literally why people like John Eastman got indicted in the first place. And honestly, the funniest part is this guy's whole Democrats did it too argument ended up making Destiny's point even stronger. The 1960 Hawaii situation is actually the perfect example of how alternate electors are supposed to work. Everything was officially approved by the state and done openly. Trump's 2020 electors had none of that. No state approval, no governor backing them, nothing. So by bringing up Hawaii 1960, this guy accidentally made Trump look worse instead of defending him.

[00:07:18]>> Destiny, can you define fascism?

[00:07:20]>> Um, I would say the two big points for fascism would be uh ultra nationalism and authoritarianism.

[00:07:25]>> Okay. What is authoritarianism?

[00:07:27]>> I would say that authoritarianism is trying to centralize as much power in like a structural sense into one part of the government. And then in a broader sense, it usually means undermining a bunch of liberal values that you would finally say in the first.

[00:07:38]>> So then how is it that every part of the government which acrews more and more power to itself every single year aren't a bunch of fascists?

[00:07:45]>> Because the government gaining power doesn't necessarily make it fascist. You could say there might be governmental overreach.

[00:07:50]>> I'm still not even sure what is fascist here, Destiny. What is fascist? Giovani Gentilely, we have definitions of what fascism is. We have third partyists who are out there right now who are fascist.

[00:08:00]They claim Trump is a populist. Can you tell me why they're wrong? and why you're right that he's a fascist.

[00:08:05]>> I would have to know their exact reasons for why they reject Trump being a fascist, but I would say that Trump is a fascist. He's an ultra nationalist.

[00:08:11]>> These are your claims.

[00:08:12]>> I'm not claiming anything that those people said. My definition for fascist.

[00:08:15]I gave the two parts. I can explain them more if you want.

[00:08:17]>> So, let's start with ultra athoritarian.

[00:08:19]>> Why? I said ultra nationalist and authoritarian.

[00:08:20]>> What is ultra nationalism?

[00:08:22]>> So, I think ultra nationalism is when you engage in a hardcore protectionist ideology that usually involves shutting yourself out from the rest of the world.

[00:08:30]That could be in forms of um international affairs like military conflicts and it could be in the forms of ultra protections in terms of trade and shutting down um things like immigration in order to protect your own native peoples. Often times there's a heavy heavily racialized element but might not have to be.

[00:08:43]>> Okay. Well, Donald Trump you're you're not saying has heavy racialized element.

[00:08:46]Are you >> um I'm don't really care that much. I think that he qualifies or satisfies the term without that. But >> okay. So let's dive into this real quick. Mhm.

[00:08:53]>> Uh if you have a president who doesn't want to get involved in foreign affairs as far as wars go and has some type of policies which benefit the United States over all other nations, is he a fascist?

[00:09:03]>> No.

[00:09:04]>> Well, I'm still confused as to what makes Trump a fascist.

[00:09:07]>> That's because I had two parts of that and you missed the authoritarian one.

[00:09:09]What you described there before was just like protection.

[00:09:11]>> Well, when you said authoritarian, what is he doing which is accumulating all power to himself?

[00:09:15]>> So, he's trying to centralize power in the executive branch of the government and specifically in the presidential part of the government of the executive branch. How >> um how Donald Trump thinks that he should be able to unilaterally make decisions up and down all of the different departments and offices that exist in the executive branch.

[00:09:30]>> Presidents use executive orders all the time. Presidents Presidents unilaterally make decisions all the time. No, they don't.

[00:09:37]>> Yes, they do. They do. They use executive orders all the time.

[00:09:39]>> An executive order doesn't mean that you are taking power away from the departments and offices that have been created.

[00:09:44]>> Right. So where's the fascism here?

[00:09:46]>> Would you like me to give you specific examples?

[00:09:47]>> Give me the specific example.

[00:09:48]>> Sure. So when Donald Trump didn't like the answer that he was getting from his attorney general because he was trying to direct the Department of Justice to do investigations or to fabricate claims, that would be an example of trying to centralize power just to the president because he's undermining his own department that's been created for him that's tasked that's supposed to have some level of independence that's tasked with doing investigations.

[00:10:05]>> Let me ask you a question. Is the president of the United States a commander-in-chief of the of the armed forces of the United States?

[00:10:10]>> I believe so.

[00:10:11]>> You believe so? Unless something's changed for >> Do they have Do they have control of the entire military apparatus essentially as the commander-in-chief?

[00:10:18]>> Commander-in-chief. Yes.

[00:10:19]>> Yeah. Is that fascist?

[00:10:21]>> Uh, no.

[00:10:21]>> So, they have unilateral basically almost unilateral control by your own metrics of the most mighty military on planet Earth. That's not accumulating enough power, centralized control to one person. It's the fact that he tried to slay some electors. Really?

[00:10:37]>> So, the president being the commander-in-chief is specifically laid out in the constitution. That's an authority granted to him. Mhm.

[00:10:42]>> Um I don't know what's fascist about because you said it's ultra power. It's this idea of having >> anything ever bring that up for him. But >> if you have the central power >> of the most mighty military on planet Earth and the codes to the largest sneaker armament on planet Earth, you already have all of the central power, bro.

[00:11:04]>> Really?

[00:11:04]>> Yeah.

[00:11:05]>> What? How do the nuclear codes help you direct a Department of Justice?

[00:11:08]>> You Okay, I'm sorry. Does he is he the commander-in-chief of the of the United States Armed Forces?

[00:11:12]>> Are you just arguing that he's the commander? I already agree with you. I don't know why you can argue.

[00:11:15]>> What I'm arguing to you is I'm asking you how does the commander-in-chief use the military? Ask me. It's your claim.

[00:11:20]I'm going to ask you about your claim and your claim is >> how does that make him control the DOJ?

[00:11:24]How does how does the military help him control the DOJ?

[00:11:26]>> Back up. That is the most powerful position I can think of for you to be in. Period. How could you powerful what more accumulation of power would you want for a fascist >> dictator? Okay. So, that's powerful and that you controlled the military. That's it. That's just control of the military.

[00:11:42]For the FBI coming to your house to arrest you for the DOJ filing charges against No, the president doesn't do that. I don't know if No, I don't believe that he can. I don't believe you can. I don't think that you can deploy the military to arbitrarily arrest US citizens. Andrew Wilson's point in short is basically if you think a president having normal constitutional powers like controlling the military or using executive orders is fascism then your definition is so broad it makes every US president sound like a dictator. He's basically saying destiny is calling basic government power fascism just because it sounds scary. I mean this guy's argument is more dumb than I expected. Andrew is basically trying to say that if the president already has certain powers, then using those powers doesn't automatically mean it's fascism.

[00:12:25]But honestly, this argument is so bad that it's hard to even take seriously.

[00:12:29]It sounds like a childish logic like saying if someone has power, then using it in any way must be okay. Yes, the president does have power, but that power is supposed to be used within limits and for legitimate purposes, not to target people randomly or misuse institutions for political reasons, which is what destiny is actually talking about here. It's the same simple idea. If a judge has the power to punish, that power is meant for criminals under the law, not for randomly punishing anyone they personally dislike. That's how systems are supposed to work. But again, like I said at the start, these are MAGAs. So honestly, whatever they say shouldn't really surprise anyone anymore.

[00:13:06]Destiny's best moment here was simple.

[00:13:08]He didn't get fooled by Andrew's commanderin-chief point. Andrew was basically saying, "The president already controls the military, so by your logic, every president is basically a dictator." Destiny cut it down with one really simple question. How do nuclear codes help you control the Department of Justice? That made it clear what Andrew was doing. He was comparing military power, which is legal and part of the Constitution, with using the justice system for political gain, which is a totally different thing. Andrew kept repeating that presidents already make big decisions and use executive orders all the time, trying to make Trump's actions look normal. On the other hand, Destiny's point was that this is not the same as pressuring the DOJ to push fake election claims or do things for political survival. Destiny also brought up that the DOJ is supposed to be independent. So if a president tries to control it for personal or political reasons, that's where it becomes a problem. Andrew didn't really have a strong answer to that. So he just went back to the military argument again. And honestly, when someone keeps going back to the same point after it's already been answered, it usually just means they don't have a better reply. And I personally think Destiny handled it pretty well, but he could have made his argument a bit tighter on the definition side. Andrew Wilson wasn't really defending Trump directly. He was more just pushing Destiny to define his terms more clearly. And while Destiny's definition is solid, it was still a bit loose in a way that gives room for people to poke holes in it. Like the main mistake is Destiny didn't start with a best academic definition of fascism. Instead, he made a quick definition on the spot like ultraism plus authoritarianism, and that made it easier for Andrew to challenge him instead of defending Trump. A stronger move would have been using a well-known historian's definition like Robert Paxton, who explains fascism as a pattern of behavior. Things like weakening democratic systems, putting power under one leader, and using force or threats to silence opposition. If Destiny had started with that, Andrew couldn't easily dismiss it as just your opinion because it comes from academic history. Also, instead of debating abstract ideas, Destiny could have used real examples from Trump's own team, like reports from his own defense secretary and acting attorney general who claimed Trump made comments about using force on protesters and pressuring officials about the election. Those are direct insider accounts, not opinions.

[00:15:27]On nationalism, Destiny was too careful when talking about whether Trump's rhetoric had racial elements. But there are clear public examples people point to, like calling immigrants criminals, supporting travel bans on Muslim countries, and making controversial comments about countries and protests.

[00:15:43]If those are brought up directly, it becomes harder to dodge the topic. The biggest missed opportunity is that Destiny didn't frame everything as a pattern. Instead of arguing one point at a time, he could have said fascism isn't about one action. It's about a repeated pattern over time, attacking institutions, questioning elections, putting loyalists in power, and trying to bend legal systems. Then he could have argued that Trump fits into that pattern. And even people inside Trump's own government have warned about it. But I've got to really praise Destiny for the way he handled this. I've said this in a few of my videos before, and I'll say it again. To actually live a good life, we need love and peace. That's what really makes life better. Because honestly, there's no stronger power than love. And now guys, let me know what you think about all this. And please don't forget to share this video so we can grow his community.