3311 Leftist Violence Against Donald Trump Supporters | True News
There are numerous new videos of white male Donald Trump supporters being attacked, sucker-punched and kicked in San Jose by mobs of angry Anti-Trump protestors waving Mexican flags. American flags were burned and trampled as Anti-Trump protestors flashed gang signs while chanted things such as “no more hate in our state,” “Trump is a fascist,” “American was never great,” and “Bernie, Bernie, Bernie.” As always with the mainstream media, somehow Trump supporters being attacked by an angry mob is the fault of Donald Trump. With the Regressive Left, facts don’t matter and will be explicitly ignored to suit their chosen narrative. An information war is being waged, and who exactly is on the side of the truth? Sources: http//www.fdrurl.com/3311
Hi everybody, this is Savan Molyneux from Free Domain Radio.
I hope that I can help you do not as well at the moment, because it looks like we have crossed the Rubicon.
It looks like the conflict, the schism, the seething, subdued hate pit in society has opened up and erupted and now I believe it is time to choose your sides to pick your friends to identify your enemies and to fight with all the intellectual and verbal might all the facts all the reason all the evidence you have at your disposal and I'm going to help give you some of that right now in San
Jose recently there was a little bit of a Donald Trump speech we'll put sources to all this below There are numerous videos of largely white male, some white female Donald Trump supporters being attacked, chased down, stomped on, sucker punched and kicked by an angry mob of largely Hispanic anti-Trump protesters all waving their Mexican flags.
American flags were burned and trampled as anti-Trump protesters flashed their gang signs and chanted things like, No more hate in our state!
Trump is a fascist!
America was never great!
Bernie, Bernie, Bernie, Bernie!
And even deport whites.
One man held a sign declaring, This is Mexico!
You are not welcome on native Mexican soil!
And accused Trump of white supremacy.
Another sign said, We are not paying for a fucking wall!
Fucking was spelt wrong.
And we, we, who are they identifying with?
We are not paying for a wall.
Trump says Mexico.
I'll let you riddle that one out.
A white male Donald Trump supporter was attacked from behind and bashed in the head with a bag full of rocks.
Splitting open a gash near his ear as the heavily Hispanic crowd...
Cheered.
Media crews caught up at the bloodied man and blamed the victim by demanding to know what the man could have said to the protesters to warrant such a reaction.
See?
It's your fault.
Because you must have done something.
You know how, like, women get raped.
They must have done something.
One individual was attacked by the mob, punched, and stomped.
And the beating only stopped when a black protester shouted, He's with us!
He's with us!
An angry mob of Hispanic men waving middle fingers and Mexican flags cornered a white woman who was wearing a Donald Trump jersey and pelted her with eggs, watermelon and bottles, an egg hitting her right in the eye.
When the eggs hit her in the face, the angry mob cheered.
CNN reporter Sari Murray said...
Protesters cornering Trump supporters as they leave.
This woman taunted them.
They cornered her and threw eggs at her.
See?
You've got to say that she taunted them first because, you see, I guess the protesters, for want of a better word, and we will in fact come up with a better word in a minute or two, the protesters have no moral agency.
They're like bulls with a red flag.
Well, if that is the case, there are certain conclusions to be drawn.
Now, people, of course, brought all their eggs.
So this is not a crime of passion.
This is not spur of the moment.
They came with eggs.
Unless they had just finished setting up an enormous egg benedict cookout, they had the eggs because they intended to throw them.
And that's a more serious breach of the peace than a sudden flash riot.
Remember when Justin Bieber threw some eggs at a house?
People went insane!
And the left went mad over Michelle Fields.
Who was crowding a presidential nominee, who was told by the Secret Service to stay back, who kept grabbing at him and was moved out of the way by Corey Lewandowski, who was responsible for Trump's security.
It could be said that she did a few things to bring about that altercation herself.
But if you are a Trump supporter, well, clearly you must have done something to anger the mob.
It's your fault.
It's not their fault.
It's like going outside when it's hailing.
Now, the always courageous Mike Cernovich from DangerAndPlay.com exposed Tucson, Arizona sportscaster Paul Cicala for defending the violence.
Sakala tweeted, Hey, brother!
You aren't reporting that she was taunting protesters moments before, pointing to her Trump shirt, etc.
Please be fair.
Not okay, my friend.
Those protesters are definitely wrong.
But she has to be careful egging them on, or she sets herself up for that.
Huh, egging them on.
It's really fucking funny.
So, this is the...
The asshole, the yes asshole people, or you can call them the yes but people.
I support freedom of speech, but those protesters are definitely wrong, but she did point at her own t-shirt, so hey, you know, rapists are totally wrong.
However, she was wearing a low-cut top.
I mean, the yes asshole people or the yes but people, you just ignore everything they say before they say the word but.
A Trump supporter in a wheelchair It was also pelted with various items and can be seen on video angrily questioning the police nearby who did nothing.
Despite all the assaults and property damage, the protest only led to a few arrests, about a half a dozen, generally about two hours after the conflict began.
Now, if you have been channel surfing a little bit over the last day or so, have you found lots of examples of these unbelievably graphic examples of hideous activist leftist violence?
Not really, because you see the media is on the left, so all they do is make up hate crimes on the right.
They don't actually report existing hate crimes on the left.
San Jose Mayor Sam Liccardo, he is a Democrat and A Hillary Clinton supporter said, See, that's the problem he's pointing out.
If Donald Trump holds political opinions or his supporters appreciate political opinions that the left doesn't like, all the resulting violence from the left is the fault of Donald Trump and his campaign.
Right?
Like, if a husband beats up his wife, it's because of something she said, something she did.
You know, maybe his beer was warm.
Maybe his steak was cold.
She did something.
Maybe she criticized him.
Maybe she questioned whether he was being faithful to her.
Maybe she didn't like the fact that he shaved.
She did something, clearly.
The violence just happened.
She pulled the pin on the grenade.
That's the equivalent.
And that's the disgusting moral equivalency that the left is pretending to ignore.
Now Vox, a news site, Vox editor Emmett Rensen called for anti-Trump protesters to double down on their rioting.
Quote, advice, if Trump comes to your town, start a riot.
Call me old-fashioned.
I thought that inciting violence was kind of illegal, but, you know, that's just me thinking rationally.
He went on to say, and listen, I do tend to agree.
Trump is atypically threatening.
That's why I'm not going to condemn rioters.
Let's be clear.
It's never a shame to storm the barricades set up around a fascist.
All violence against human lives and bodies is categorically immoral.
Property destruction is vastly more negotiable.
So, you see, it's never a shame to storm the barricade set up around a fascist, which is great, because all you have to do then is call someone a fascist, and all violence against that person is justified.
You don't have to define how they are a fascist.
You don't even have to understand the word fascism or fascist.
You just have to call someone a fascism and open season!
And Vox, the website, later suspended Renson.
Didn't fire him.
It's kind of like a timeout, you know, for inciting violence.
ThinkProgress reported, quote, Trump-fueled violence continues as protests in San Jose turn bloody!
See?
They just continue.
Stuff happens.
It turns.
You know, like the world turns.
Like clouds roll through the sky.
Stuff just happens.
Nobody actually makes any choices.
Nobody decides to assault people.
It just happens.
You know, like bruises on a pseudo-reporter's arms just happened.
Never Trump Republican Ben Howe said, quote, Plenty of unacceptable violence last night, but, here we go, but I'm sorry, I refuse to think of egging a Halloween prank as violence against women.
Ah, okay.
So, I'm gonna just explain one or two things to you here, Ben, because maybe you've never been in this situation.
When you have an angry mob screaming, fuck you!
And throwing things at you when you're cowering up against glass, you don't actually know where it's going to go.
A Halloween prank, you throw some eggs.
You don't throw eggs at people's eyes on Halloween.
I don't know what kind of hellish neighborhood you grew up in.
You, you know, soap up the windows, your eggs.
It's not a big deal.
You don't get violent, destructive, dangerous, angry mobs to throw water bottles and eggs at people's heads while screaming, fuck you at them.
Because also you don't know where that's going to go.
You don't know if it's going to escalate from there.
You don't know if you're going to...
I mean, she flashed a peace sign at them, which of course seemed to make them even angrier.
So that's not really a Halloween prank.
That is violence.
Against women, right?
So just look for the word but and ignore everything before that.
And, you know, I would say that if you spit on people, if one woman had her forehead cracked open, it seems to me that's battery if not assault.
Spitting on people is certainly battery.
A female CNN reporter said, protesters cornering Trump supporters as they leave, this woman taunted them.
They cornered her and threw eggs at her.
So, see, you've got to get the sequence.
The protesters are cornering, and they're protesters, see?
They're not rioters.
They're not violent.
They're not criminals.
They're not illegal immigrants.
Whether their status is known or not, I don't know.
It doesn't really matter.
Some of them probably are, right?
They're protesters, so they're just protesting.
Now, see, a protest is when you hold up some signs.
You know, the signs might have some thought-provoking arguments or ideas.
Maybe you chant a few things that are designed to stimulate the neofrontal cortex of your listeners, to get them to view things a little bit of a different way.
Throwing eggs at someone, spitting on someone, cracking someone's head open with a bag full of rocks, that's not protesting.
That is not protesting.
That is assault.
That is attack.
That is mob violence.
And that is another word that you could argue starts with a T, which we'll get to in just a few moments.
So, a female reporter justifying a female Trump supporter being attacked.
Is there no hole deep enough for the left to say, I think we've gone deep enough?
See, when the left calls you racist or sexist or homophobic or whatever, just remember this.
This is their moral high ground.
This woman was attacked because she taunted a feral mob.
Not the feral mob is false.
Nobody made any choices.
She just got what she deserved, you know.
You taunt them, they're going to hit you.
Daryl Lind writes in Vox that supporters of Republican presumptive nominee Donald Trump will continue to be menaced at campaign rallies because their Democrat assailants view Trump as, quote, an existential threat.
Trump threatens them apparently existentially.
Hey, I've got a good idea.
Um...
Dara, why don't you do this?
Go down to one of these, I guess you could say protesters, go to one of these feral mobs and ask them if they know what the word existential means.
I'm pretty sure they'll think it's a gringo for please punch me in the teeth.
I don't think that's the case.
Also, if we're going to replace debate and conversation and voting with assault, I wonder if that threatens America at all existentially.
I think you could make a case that it does.
You know, when you've got a mob burning the American flag, hoisting endless numbers of Mexican flags, and say, we, we are not going to pay for this wall, and saying that this is actually Mexican territory, that may be somewhat of a threat to America, existentially, I mean.
Now, I don't mean to prejudge, but I'll just tell you what's going on at the base of my brain.
When I look at these thugs, these mobs, these gangs, I find it hard to imagine that they're overburdened by getting up to work the next morning.
You know, you could argue, make an argument that best way to disperse this mob is to hand out, I don't know, job applications, library cards, I don't know.
There were a lot of gang signs and so you could make the case that a lot of these people may in fact be on welfare.
It's hard to think people with that level of aggression and that little impulse control and that capacity for violence being really good accountants and lawyers and doctors.
I don't really think that's the case.
So if there are a fair number of them on welfare, well, I wonder if Americans feel that their tax money is being spent in a productive and positive manner.
Now, Prior to the violence in San Jose, potential never-Trump independent presidential candidate David French said, The leaders of the party that ended slavery now endorse a man who bullies women, lies habitually, and incites violence.
My heart breaks.
Ah, what are you going to do?
Birds are going to fly.
Cucks are going to cucks.
Now, for those who don't know, San Jose is a sanctuary city for illegal aliens.
What that means is that basically immigration laws aren't enforced.
Now, I wonder if there are other cities, which are sanctuary cities for people who say don't want to pay federal income tax, or who don't like affirmative action, or who don't want to subsidize gangs.
No sanctuary cities.
It's not a sanctuary city.
You would simply call that a city that is refusing to enforce the law, and that would be a different matter.
Now, I have rejected or criticized the word protestors.
Thugs is a bit generic.
There are lots of thugs who don't have political motivation.
So what could we possibly call people who use violence and threats to intimidate or coerce for political purposes?
What could we call people like that?
Well, let's look at the following definition and see if we can get somewhere.
Three characteristics.
Three characteristics that we could perhaps look at.
Number one, Do these people or do their actions involve acts dangerous to human life that violate federal or state laws?
Yes, I believe that I'm not a lawyer, but I believe that would be a yes on that.
Number two, do these acts appear intended, one, to intimidate or coerce a civilian population, two, to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion, or three, to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping?
Well, It doesn't need all of these.
Are they attempting to intimidate or coerce a civilian population to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion?
Or, not and, or, or to affect the conduct of a government.
Now, it's true, assassination and kidnapping and so on, no, not yet.
But the other is fulfilled.
And do these actions occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States?
And I think the answers to all of this would be yes.
Yes, involves acts dangerous to human life, violate federal or state law, appear intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population.
To influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion, in which case, ding, ding, ding, we have a winner!
You have got the label, domestic terrorism, according to statutes, which again we'll post the links to below.
Domestic terrorism.
And just so you can get a sense of how crazy this is, imagine this.
Let's go on a little journey.
Let's imagine crossing into Mexico illegally to disrupt their election process by throwing eggs and bottles and hitting people and so on.
What would happen?
You'd be rounded up and thrown in jail for years.
Here's the key thing to remember, and this is why it has come to this.
The leftist mainstream media, if they see violent actions that they like, they call it protest.
They basically label it speech.
However, speech that the mainstream media dislikes is labeled violence, which is why when Trump supporters get attacked by being hit on the heads with bags of rocks, Well, they're called protesters.
A protester is somebody who speaks in objection to something, objects to something.
So that violence is called speech.
When Donald Trump says he wishes to enforce laws by deporting illegal immigrants, that's called violence, and that's responsible for the rather aggressive speech of the, quote, protesters, who legally, it seems to me, could be described as domestic terrorists.
Now, the San Jose Police Department spent two solid full days in preparation for the event, which resulted in about a half a dozen Again, according to the heroic Mike Cernovich, you should really follow him on Twitter, quote, San Jose Mayor unlawfully ordered police to allow Trump rally attendee to be attacked.
This is a federal civil rights violation because the police seem to have had some stand-down commandments or orders, and there's some reports of that.
Just for me, when you watch a horde of brown people chasing down a white guy who's fleeing for his life, it's happened a couple of times, it's hard not to think of the word lynching.
Now, the media coverage of this is unbelievably appalling.
I mean, American citizens attempting to exercise democratic rights, brutally assaulted by interlopers, and the police, the Justice Department does virtually nothing.
And the reality is, these people could not be helping Donald Trump's campaign more if they tried.
Why did the police do nothing?
Well, a police source told BuzzFeed News that officers were under orders not to break ranks.
And that while, quote, nobody wants to see somebody beaten, we had a global plan.
Apparently that global plan involved...
Not being police.
The source added that the department did not want officers to step in for several reasons, notably out of fear for individual officers' safety.
See, that's important.
If you're a policeman, you're supposed to serve and protect, and I think that your primary goal is to secure the safety of other people.
And if you're not going to police because you're afraid of Something dangerous, I think you're kind of in the wrong job.
You know, it's like, I'd love to be a boxer.
I don't want any punching.
Well, fireman, yes.
Fire, no.
No, that's dangerous.
I mean, isn't that what you get paid for?
Isn't that kind of the job?
They also had another reason, I guess you could say.
They said, there were concerns that breaking up a fight may end up escalating.
So according to a statement to BuzzFeed News, police at the event, quote, had the difficult task of weighing the need to immediately apprehend the suspects against the possibility that police action, quote, would further incite the crowd and produce more violent behavior.
See, that's, I guess, the let it burn mentality that happened in other locales last year in America.
This idea that, well, these people are rioting, they are beating people up, they are hitting people, they are assaulting people, there's lots of battery going on.
We don't want to stop them because we're afraid that it's going to escalate from there.
So, basically, the violence is like a portrait and the police are at a gallery.
They're just looking at things because they don't actually want to do any policing because they're afraid that it will produce more violent behavior.
I don't even know what to say about that.
Well, we don't want to put out the fire because if we put out the fire or try to, it could produce more fire.
Of course, to be fair, the cops do remember Baltimore and the degree to which cops attempting to subdue non-white people may face a very exciting time with the media and what could be described as trumped-up charges that all seem to fall apart over time.
Now, this kind of reversal, I mean, it's so boring to have to keep doing this, but you really do need to get this.
Imagine what the media would be saying if...
A mob of violent, angry, destructive Trump supporters started chasing down, attacking and beating up people of color at a Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders rally.
Imagine!
The Nazis, KKKs, lynch mobs, you'd see this on an endless loop until you could close your eyes and see it as you slept.
That's all they would be talking about, how evil the Donald Trump supporters were because all the white people were chasing down all the brown people and beating them up because they disagreed with their political viewpoints.
However, because these particular thugs are on the left, they're ghosts.
They don't exist.
Or if there was any altercations, it's totally the white people's fault.
It's almost like there's a pattern.
Almost like when white people attack non-white people, it's white people's fault.
When white people are attacked by non-white people, yeah, it's white people's fault.
I mean, have you heard of any Republicans attacking Democrats at their events?
If Republicans did attack Democrats at their events, would the media say, well, it's really the Democrats' fault because of the rhetoric used by the Democrats?
I guess the logic of these worm-tongued sociopath media people is saying, well, you know, the Republicans have blood, and if they didn't, they wouldn't bleed, so they brought it on themselves.
What we saw, what all of us saw in the streets of San Jose, is mere tribal violence and racism, anti-white racism, which is encouraged by an establishment media.
And they're doing their best to circle the wagons and protect a threatened political class that has ruled America for decades.
That's on the left and the right, but a little bit more on the left.
And, you know, if you're opposed to Donald Trump, Well, these ugly scenes of violence and this standoffishness of the police and so on, millions of people are going to turn out to vote for Trump.
After the political riots in Chicago in 68, there was a definite swing to the right, and that's one of the things that propelled Nixon into power.
Americans, or you could say people in general, European-derived people in general, don't like to see a class of people who seem to be above the law.
You know, whether that's migrants or Hispanics, they don't like to see people that the police are afraid to touch because it basically turns society to crap.
Now, the left have erupted in violence because their verbal arguments have failed.
What do we say to kids?
Use your words, not your fists, right?
Their verbal arguments have failed.
The evidence is in.
Socialism is a disaster.
Leftism is a disaster.
So this violence is likely only going to escalate.
And this...
Escalation is going to occur unless and until there is some pushback.
How that pushback occurs, I don't know.
But I did want to point out one last thing, or second to last thing.
First and foremost, the idea that this mob of largely Hispanics, that they have no moral agency, is...
Kind of horrifying.
I mean, I really don't hate anyone enough to want to strip their moral agency from them.
But there is some data that is interesting and potentially casts a light on this issue.
So a friend of this show, Jason Richwine, has been on the show twice.
He did some calculations of scores from a 2003 New Immigrant Survey.
A subtest of the Weschler IQ test.
So these are for the children of legal permanent resident immigrants in America.
So white natives have an IQ of about 100, with a standard deviation of 15, which means 50% of the population falls within 85 to 115.
So white natives have about 100.
European legal immigrants' kids are tested at 99, right?
So exactly pretty much the same.
The kids of legal Northeast Asian immigrants clock in at 106, which is why a lot of Asians tend to have higher per capita incomes than whites do, even in white societies, because IQ is pretty important.
Southeast Asian kids clock in at 104.
Sub-Saharan African kids clock in at 89.
Central American and Caribbean kids clock in at 83.
South American kids, 86.
And the children...
Of legal immigrants to the United States who come from Mexico, their children clock in at an IQ of 82.
82.
Now, the average black in America has an IQ in the mid-80s.
So, it's worse than that, sadly.
Now, an IQ of 82...
Fairly safe to say that that's pretty much too low to function well in a modern, advanced, free market society.
So is it really any wonder that there's a general decline in areas that get overrun by recent Mexican immigrants?
See, these are the kids of legal immigrants, right?
So legal immigrants have to fill out all the forms and do the waiting and have the patience.
They have the deferral of gratification and their kids clock in with an IQ of 82.
Now, arguably, you could say, well, we have no more testing and so on, but it's not great.
It's certainly not up at the Asian levels, right?
So illegal immigrants...
Where would they clock in as far as IQ goes?
Well, I'll let you ponder that one.
I would not necessarily look at the clouds, but perhaps a little further down at the toes.
So when you get areas that are overrun by recent Mexican immigrants, what do you get?
Graffiti, gangs, increased crime, all these run-down areas, you know, the cars that are up on blocks, squalid homes, trash, littering, all the usual corruption, drug gangs, gang membership, teen pregnancy, school dropouts.
Why?
Well, because that's what IQ82 people kind of do.
I mean, you know, there's not much you can do about it.
You know, what do they do?
They drop out of high school.
They get pregnant when they're in their teens.
They pump out kids who join gangs.
There are lots of single moms.
This is what happens.
This is IQ 82.
It's got nothing to do with Mexico fundamentally.
Whites with an IQ of 82 kind of do the same white trashy stuff.
What happens over time?
Well, the educational levels of second-generation Mexican-Americans do improve significantly.
However, The third and fourth generations not only fail to surpass, to some extent, they actually fall behind the educational level of the second generation, right?
So first generation, you know, come in and they don't have a lot of history with education and so on, and they work generally median jobs, their kids do better, and then begins to fall down.
The educational levels of all Mexican-Americans still lag way behind the national average.
Now, for this, to understand all of this, you need to understand regression to the mean, which is smart people, they do give birth to smart kids, but not as smart as they are.
Like somebody with an IQ of 150 may give birth to a kid with an IQ of 115 or 120, and then that kid will give birth.
Everything goes back to 100, eventually, over time.
There's lots of, you know, less intelligent parents will give birth to more intelligent kids and so on.
So there's a regression to the mean.
You know, like the tall Chinese...
Basketball player doesn't give birth to kids as tall as he is, and eventually it just goes back to the Chinese average.
I know that's a generalization, but this regression to the mean.
So sub-Saharan Africans have an average IQ of 70.
But the very smartest and most ambitious come to...
Europe or come to North America and, you know, they're great.
However, there are kids, there's more of a regression to the mean.
And there's some effect in environment, but there's no evidence that it's all environmental.
IQ estimates rain from sort of, based on hereditary, 50 to 80 percent, depending on what you measure and what stage of life people are in.
Later on in life, IQ tends to be more heritable or more genetically determined than earlier on.
So the economic status of Mexican Americans does improve from the first to second generation, but stalls in the third and fourth generation.
And this is stuff like ownership and income, occupational status and so, are still alarmingly low for later generations.
Now, One argument is to say, well, low levels of schooling amongst Mexican Americans are the main reason for this lower income, occupational status, and other indicators of low socioeconomic status.
But of course, if the IQs aren't that high, then the level of schooling isn't going to be that high either.
As far as assimilation goes, well, most Mexican-Americans identified as either Mexican or Mexican-American even into the fourth generation.
Only about 10% of Mexican-Americans identified as just American after that period of time.
And of course, many Mexican-Americans feel their ethnicity is super important.
They want to pass it along to their children.
So as far as integration goes...
I don't know.
I mean, America's a nation of immigrants and so on, but if they're mostly European, how do you know if someone is Polish after the second or third generation and so on?
Well, but you still know someone's Mexican, you still know someone's black.
The degree to which races integrate remains somewhat of an open question, even after eight years of the magic race-healing presidency of 1B... Obama.
So, this is the reality.
If the Mexicans are going to come in, this is the reality you're going to deal with.
Low CSU economic status, bad neighborhoods, high crime.
The sweet spot for criminality is around IQ 85, which is one of the problems with ethnicities as a whole, other than whites, Asians, and Ashkenazi Jews.
So, this is the reality.
You know, this is the conflict that is finally erupting to the surface.
Where people, of course, were willing to give up tax money in the welfare state to say, okay, well, we'll help bring these people up to our level.
Fantastic.
It's not working.
It's not working.
When you're starting to talk about the fourth generation, still way below whites and Asians and Jews in America, the fourth generation of Mexican-Americans, still way below I think after the fourth generation, is it not okay to say, I think we should revisit this whole question?
I mean, really, come on.
Fourth generation, I mean, that's like a hundred years.
Okay, like after a hundred years, if equality has not been achieved, maybe we're just going about it wrong.
Maybe it's something we're not facing, not understanding.
And that's why I love the media right now.
I love the media for what they're doing.
In this war.
Look, only 6% of you out there believe or have any trust in the mainstream media.
And so I thank the mainstream media for the race baiting, for constantly coming up with race hoaxes, for constantly coming up with rape hoaxes, you know, all of the ones, for constantly coming up with all this terrible stuff that doesn't pan out, that's always following the same white men, bad, Republicans, bad, white women who are Republicans, bad, Trump, bad, all bad, left, oh, angelic and good and wonderful and always innocent and no matter what they do, it's always provoked by those white people.
I mean, I love the media for this because they're just driving more and more Of the audience to me.
You know, we passed 200 million views and downloads recently.
We just rocketed past 400,000 subscribers.
We're going to continue to grow because the media continues to think this stuff is going to work.
It's like they don't even know that there's a whole internet out there that's fact-checking all of this crap.
And has...
Some tools at their disposal to fight back.
All legal and all justified, I would say.
And that's why, you know, people come to listen to what I'm saying.
Because I'm not going to lie to you.
I am going to be straight with you.
I'm going to be honest with you.
I am not going to back down.
I will go wherever the facts, the data, the evidence, and the arguments go.
I'm not going to be afraid.
I'm not going to be beaten back.
I'm not going to be beaten down because I really want to solve these problems.
Solving problems means relentlessly focusing on facts, arguments, and evidence.
So I no longer believe the media.
And in interracial conflicts...
I certainly don't believe the media.
In conflicts involving rape or sexual assault, where there's gender involved, I simply no longer believe the media.
Sorry, I hate to say it, I'm just siding with white males.
I'm just siding with Republicans, because I just assume that everything else that media comes up with is a lie.
I'm open to evidence, you know, I'm still, you know, I'm just, that's where I start, that's where I start, doesn't mean where I end.
I'm innocent until proven guilty whenever the media accuses anyone of anything.
Oh, the media, oh...
Rape culture, rape culture.
Rape culture is so bad, we need to figure out how to get more men into women's bathrooms and locker rooms.
How can you be expected to be taken seriously?
There's no rape culture.
We love Hispanics.
You know, in many places in Mexico, the age of consent is 12, to which one can only say, 12!
In many of the states in Mexico, you're unlikely to be charged with rape if you get your victim to marry you.
And finally, most fundamentally, and I invite you to join me in this thought space, I no longer believe that white people are racist, except against themselves, which is arguably their greatest weakness.
I no longer believe that there's a patriarchy.
I no longer believe there's a rape culture.
I no longer believe in ethnic egalitarianism.
And I no longer believe in white racism.
You gotta grow up.
I have to grow up.
When a person is a child, they play with childish things.
When you grow to be a man, you must put your childish things away.
I no longer believe in these lies.
I no longer believe in these manipulations and these falsehoods and these narratives that are undoing the very heart and soul and mind of Western civilization, which is pretty much the only civilization I give a damn about anymore.
I invite you to join me with the facts, the reason, and evidence, and armed with simple reality and basic truths.