Armed Antifa Fire Bombs ICE Facility, Is Shot And Killed By Police
Far Left Publishes Praise Of Antifa Terrorist Who Attacked ICE. It was reported yesterday that a man named Willem Van Spronsen armed himself and firebombed an ICE facility. He was shot and killed by police.Following this many far left groups sang his praise openly on social media, particularly on Twitter. A far left group from his area wrote a letter calling him an inspiration and stating how they hoped for more.We now know following the publishing of his "goodbye letter" that he used a home made "ghost" weapon and it seems he intended to cause maximum loss of life with reckless disregard for the migrants being detained in the building he sought to ignite.The dominoes keep falling, its entirely predictable. Where do you think it goes next? So long as these far left social justice types downplay antifa and praise their actions the escalation will only get worse.
Support the show (http://timcast.com/donate)
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Yesterday, it was reported that shortly after an anti-ICE rally, an armed anti-fascist man showed up with firebombs and a rifle and began throwing incendiary devices at the ICE facility and vehicles.
He was shot and killed.
And I hate to say, I told you so.
It's not something I wanted to have to do, but this is exactly what I said was gonna happen.
Over the past couple years, there's been an increase in violence.
There was one incident where a man planted bombs on a Confederate statue.
At that time, I said, it's not going to stop here.
The main reason I think it won't stop is that no action is really being taken to stop them.
And American cultural establishments, the media particularly, excuse and defend Antifa every step of the way.
Which means, so long as they are given clearance by the left to excuse their violence, they'll continue.
There's no real ramifications.
And thus we see the results of the rhetoric of people like Sean King and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and others who said these detention facilities are concentration camps.
Before I read this, let me just say one thing.
The conditions at these facilities, some of them are bad, really bad, but they're not nearly as bad relative to our actual prison system.
Why would we see people calling for the liberation of these camps and not our actual prisons where men are raped and beaten and killed?
It just doesn't make sense.
It's political extremism.
The only end goal is just being political extreme.
These people are blind and they're crazy.
And thus, one of them showed up to an ICE facility armed with firebombs.
And now he's dead.
And what's even scarier, Antifa is still allowed to operate on Twitter.
People are calling for more.
So I ask you, where does this go next?
Because I think the answer is obvious.
When Ocasio-Cortez said they are concentration camps, I asked, where does this go next?
We then see Sean King say they must be liberated by any means necessary.
I ask again, what happens next?
And here we are.
From Fox News.
Now before we get started, please head over to TimCast.com slash Donate if you'd like to support my work.
There's multiple ways you can do it.
PayPal, crypto, physical address.
But of course, share this video because YouTube certainly won't.
I assure you the language I'm using is going to result in a deranking and demonetization.
There's two different things.
Because of the words in this, it'll probably be found not suitable for audiences, which means it won't appear in recommendations or searches nearly as much as other channels.
It'll absolutely be demonetized.
Let's read.
Armed man shot killed after throwing incendiary devices at Washington ICE detention center.
Police in Washington State say an armed man was shot and killed early Saturday after trying to attack a local ICE detention center.
The Seattle Times reported that the unidentified man appeared outside the Northwest Detention Center in Tacoma with a rifle and threw incendiary devices at both the facility and nearby propane tanks, at one point setting a vehicle on fire.
Officers responded to the incident around 4 a.m.
and called out to the man before shots were fired.
It was not clear how many shots were fired or whether the man fired at police.
Police spokesman Loretta Kuhl said the officers weren't wearing body cameras, but the area is covered by surveillance cameras from the detention center.
The four officers involved were placed on administrative leave in accordance with the department's policy.
None of them were injured.
ICE said in a statement that no employees were harmed nor involved in this tragic incident.
The shooting took place hours after a rally in front of the detention center to protest planned mass deportation raids around the country.
The Tacoma facility, which is run by the Department of Homeland Security, holds migrants pending deportation proceedings.
The detention center has also held immigration-seeking parents separated from their children under President Donald Trump's zero-tolerance policy, an effort meant to deter illegal immigration.
They say GEO Group, which runs the 1,575-bed Northwest Detention Center, in an email to the Associated Press, said baseless accusations about how detainees are treated at its facilities have led to misplaced aggression in a dangerous environment for our employees, whose safety is our top priority.
Violence of any kind against our employees and property will not be tolerated.
We are thankful for the quick and brave action by the Tacoma Police Department, which prevented innocent lives from being endangered.
They're going to talk about planned ICE raids.
The ICE raids are going to be carried out.
These are people who have court orders to leave the country.
There's an interesting thread by Sean King.
I want you to take a look at this.
This is his pinned tweet.
As of right now, I just took this screenshot.
History has taught us that concentration camps should be liberated.
We cannot and should not wait until 2020 with the hope that we defeat Trump to free these children.
We should liberate them now by any means necessary, he says.
My latest for The Intercept.
Where do you think it goes after you say any means necessary?
Any.
We end up seeing Antifa showing up and making these attacks.
Journalist Jake Hanrahan tweeted about the incident, and he followed up.
The guy who attacked the ICE detention center was a 69-year-old anarchist named Will Van Spronsen.
This is him.
He says my source is not the police report, by the way.
It's been confirmed to me who he was.
Vance Spronson was a longtime anti-fascist.
Written by Vance Spronson in 2011, he said, Are we really willing to submit to laws regulating every little detail of our existence on this planet?
Inane laws imposed by those who simultaneously allow and encourage the exploitation and despoiling of the planet and life upon it for the sake of progress and growth?
And a house of cards called The Economy?
He says there's staggering change on the horizon.
This is an old post.
J.K. Henryhan then says, it looks like Willem van Spronsen was also a member of the anti-fascist
John Brown Gun Club of Puget Sound.
That's him on the left from their Facebook.
In this, you can see him wearing the John Brown Gun Club hat.
This is significant because what I've talked about before, there was articles from Vox saying the left needs to get armed to defend their communities.
What do we see?
What comes next?
How many times do I need to ask?
It is staring you in the face.
And Twitter allows this.
I'm not exaggerating.
I'm not being hyperbolic.
It does.
Take a look at this tweet.
This person says that they hope it results in more.
This is from this morning.
I'm legit thinking this is the start of something big.
The black flag in their account.
Twitter allows this.
Here we have a story from Legal Insurrection with just a little bit of details I want to highlight.
A statement from someone who claims to have been a friend of Vance Bronson.
The Seattle Times reports.
Deb Bartley, a friend of Vance Bronson's for about 20 years, described him as an anarchist and anti-fascist, and believes his attack on the detention center intending to provoke a fatal conflict.
He was ready to end it.
I think it was suicide.
But then he was able to kind of do it in a way that spoke to his political beliefs.
I know he went down there knowing he was going to die.
She and other friends of Vance Bronson got letters in the mail just saying goodbye.
He also wrote what she referred to as a manifesto, which she declined to discuss in detail, but predicted would be taken by authorities.
They say Maru Mora Villapando, an activist with the group La Resistencia, which has frequently protested the conditions of the detention center and broader immigration policy, said she did not know Vance Bronson himself, nor was La Resistencia involved with the June 2018 protest at which he was
arrested.
The 2018 protest involved about 160 people outside the detention center.
About 40 people blocked a police car that had arrived, prompting the officer to call in backup.
In court documents, Vance Bronson was accused of lunging at a police officer's neck
to help free a 17-year-old protester who was being detained.
Vance Bronson refused to comply with officers' orders, and he was led through the crowd of protesters.
Police said he tried to pass the baton to another protester.
Vance Bronson was punched in the face at least once during the altercation.
Nine other people were arrested as well.
He pled guilty in Pierce County Superior Court to one count of obstructing an officer, gross misdemeanor, etc.
I bring this up because we know now he was Antifa-aligned, but also member of an armed anti-fascist gun club.
Vox wrote a story talking about how the left needs to get armed to defend their communities, and this is what we can see.
The way I explained it was, you know, I've seen some of these armed groups left and right before, and they seem to be disciplined.
They seem to understand how to be safe with their firearms, and they're in their legal right to go out with their firearms.
What I said is that outside of those who are trained and have discipline, you will eventually get a crazy person who won't think twice or care, and they will fire that gun.
We're not quite there yet, necessarily, but we are seeing that someone who, according to images on the Facebook of the Puget Sound John Brown Gun Club, had the hat, seemingly a member, showing up with a gun and firebombs at a federal facility and lobbying them at propane tanks, and the building, setting a car on fire, being shot and killed.
We can hop over here and take a look at what Twitter shows you when you search his name.
Robbie Starbuck tweets, Did dangerous rhetoric from Democrat activists, media, and politicians inspire William Vance Bronson?
What did they think would happen if they recklessly compared the border crisis to concentration camps?
We have Ocasio-Cortez, we have Sean King, which I highlighted, and then we have Vox.
She's right, they say.
Vox has not only said they're concentration camps, they've also gone on to say you need to get armed.
Take a look at this story from The Intercept.
Sean King writes at the end of June, history taught us that concentration camps should be liberated.
We can't wait until 2020.
I don't necessarily want to read the entire thing.
I don't know how long it is, but he goes, but let's read a little bit.
He says, yes, we do have concentration camps began at the stinging critique of the Trump administration's immigration detention facilities.
It was written earlier this week by the editorial board of the Salt Lake Tribune in the reliably conservative state of Utah.
Andrea Pitzer, author of the definitive book on the global history of concentration camps, agrees.
So do people who were once forced to live in another era's concentration camps.
Full stop.
There have been Holocaust survivors who have come out and said they're not.
There have been, I believe it was the Holocaust Museum, pushed back on AOC.
It doesn't matter.
Sean King will find the sources that fit his worldview and he will push them and he will call for violence.
That is what he is doing.
He is calling for violence and he is calling for escalation.
And every single time we say enough, stop them, they don't.
They point the finger at the fringe extremists on the right, of which many of us moderate conservative center-left also disagree with and say, enough, stop them.
But they don't.
They don't stop the left.
They point to people like me and claim that we're in favor of extremism while advocating for extremism.
It's interesting.
I can sit here and say to you, I don't care if you're left or right.
These violent extremists and those who seek to accelerate and push towards civil war should be stopped.
And what do they say?
They say, you're the bad guy to those of us calling for non-violence, calling for an end to the violence, and then they call for violence.
They are the bad guys.
They are.
They are trying to destroy our way of life.
They are trying to upend the system and cause complete and total chaos.
Their motto, by any means necessary.
And that is what Sean King has said himself.
How this man is being propped up by Glenn Greenwald's The Intercept, how he is allowed to post this on Twitter, it's mind-blowing.
It is.
Let's read a little bit more what he says.
Let's move on now.
Let's go to the point where he says, cruelty is the point. It's not an accident.
These systems are cruel by design. The idea is to make it miserable to deter people from
coming to the US. These detention centers are reckless and dangerous. As many pointed out,
we need to remember exactly how and why the teenage diarist Anne Frank actually died.
She was not gassed to death.
Instead, she died of neglect, malnutrition, and disease.
It is believed that she and her sister Margot contracted and died from typhus.
In 1944, a minor miracle occurred when Annette Blitz, a lifelong childhood friend and classmate of Anne's, was transferred to the Bergen-Belsen camp where the Frank sisters were being held.
She was no more than a skeleton by then.
She was wrapped in a blanket.
She couldn't bear to wear her clothes anymore.
There's a difference.
He's trying to make it seem like what America is doing is the same.
It's not.
These are people who've traveled great distances and spent thousands of dollars to come to the United States, full well knowing that these camps are overcrowded, And they'll be separated from their children.
I am absolutely not defending the policies of Donald Trump.
I'm making a straight point about people who would come from Angola in Africa, spend thousands of dollars flying across the Atlantic to Brazil, then traveling up thousands of miles through South America, through Central America, through Mexico to come to our southern border and then be detained.
There is a stark difference there between what Germany did rounding up its own citizens based on religious beliefs and arbitrary life aspects, and then putting them in camps where they subsequently were killed or died.
There's a huge difference.
In fact, what ISIS is trying to do is send these people back to their homes.
They're being deported.
They're not forced to stay here, but they're coming anyway.
And they would have you believe it's the same thing.
He says right now we have prison camps across the U.S.
where the same thing is happening.
Incorrect.
Absolutely not.
This man is a dangerous extremist.
Sean King may be one of the most dangerous extremists in our culture today.
And I say that only based on what we're seeing now.
And it should have been apparent to those when he made these tweets.
He is a high profile individual.
He is lying and manipulating the conversation.
He is pushing outright extremism and calling for violence.
I will say this with no fear.
It is a statement of fact that when he says, by any means necessary, he is saying, get violent and liberate these camps.
And that is dangerous.
And we see where it goes.
Here's where I am.
If we have doctors, historians, and leading congresspeople, callings facilities, torture facilities, and concentration camps, what exactly are we going to do about it?
For all the years we've read and heard about them, yada, yada, yada, that's exactly where we are right now.
I swear, I am not trying to be inflammatory.
I don't mean this as a threat of violence or physical force, but I thought that concentration camps were supposed to be liberated.
You see the caveat?
unidentified
I'm not saying you should, but aren't we supposed to?
It seems like our game plan is to focus on defeating Trump.
You didn't do anything about Obama when he was doing this.
Okay?
I'm glad you're concerned about it now, but this is what's so dangerous and disingenuous.
I absolutely did call out Obama for what he was doing.
Absolutely.
As did many journalists.
But where was Sean King and his ilk?
They were nowhere to be found.
And now the problem has escalated because the Democrats laughed at the border crisis and called it a hoax or a manufactured crisis.
They now use the problem they've created.
I don't mean like the moderate Democrats who are now agreeing with it.
They're kind of oblivious.
I'm talking about people like Sean King who mock and ridicule Trump.
And now the problem has gotten so bad they say it's a concentration camp and then call for liberation by any means necessary.
He said, I always wondered how concentration camps lasted for so many years during the Holocaust, but now that we have our own, I see how.
It's a mix of fear, indifference, and a lack of political will.
We see the consequences of doing nothing, but it seems as though we've put all our eggs into the basket of a far-off election, and I don't feel good about it.
What do you think's going to happen when Donald Trump wins in 2020?
Do you think it will end there?
We saw riots.
In DC, on Inauguration Day, people, hundreds of people setting fires, smashing windows, hundreds of people were arrested.
I was one of them.
I was released before being processed, and I was never charged.
But I was in that group, I got out because I had a press pass.
Now, a lot of these people say, Tomb was never arrested because they conflate being brought to a jail with being arrested.
No.
I was told specifically I was under arrest.
I was then released without charge.
That happens a lot.
It wasn't a detainment.
I was not free to go.
I had been arrested, and I was in the corral.
I got out.
I asked for a supervisor.
It's a complicated story.
Hundreds of people were arrested in these riots, and they said the government was wrong to try and charge them with conspiracy.
And you know what?
There are civil liberty arguments there.
But we have a problem when you have hundreds of people dressing in uniform in an effort to obfuscate their identities and hide perpetrators of crimes from the police.
And now we have Antifa attacking an ICE facility.
You know a bomb was planted at a police department in the Pacific Northwest a couple months ago, following an incident where a far leftist drew a gun on police and was killed.
Protesters came about a week later, saying the cops had killed a comrade, and about a week after that a bomb was found.
Kid you not.
Take a look at this story from the other day.
Protesters tear down American flag from ICE facility and replace it with Mexican flag.
When Ocasio-Cortez said these were concentration camps, I called it.
There's gonna be some wacko who's gonna say it must be done, and they're gonna do it.
And it's terrifying.
And now I'm telling you this.
Donald Trump, because of these things, will win.
I think he will.
I could be wrong.
Okay, I was wrong about the midterms.
I thought the Republicans would do better.
I don't think I'm the smartest person in the world.
But I look at a story with the American flag being pulled down from an ICE facility and a Mexican flag being raised, and I think about regular Americans and what they're thinking about all this.
A lot of Americans aren't paying attention, won't know.
They won't know this happened.
So I'll say this one more time.
If you made it this far, share this video so people know what just happened at this ICE facility.
We can talk about far-right extremists all day and night.
We do.
The media covers it heavily.
But they provide excuses and cover when Antifa does these things.
They act like it's just nothing.
Don't worry about it.
It's certainly not me.
You can blame some conservatives for downplaying far-right extremists.
Of course.
Not me.
I made three or four videos about Charlottesville when it happened.
Now that this happens, I'll make a video about this.
But there is something to be said.
When the far-right engages in their acts, you know, far-right, whatever you want to call them, you get the mainstream media across the board shrieking.
When Andy Ngo was viciously beaten in the streets, a gay Asian journalist, we had New York Times journalists excusing what happened, saying he should have known better.
That's the New York Times.
That's where we are in this country.
And that's why it's so damn dangerous.
Because Antifa is allowed to operate with impunity on Twitter, calling for escalation.
And it's not an exaggeration.
Here's someone calling for escalation.
Let's pop over here.
Take a look at this.
Remember who the real terrorists are?
Republicans, they say.
You've got this post.
Ian Malchong is highlighting there's a lot of people calling for more.
Let's just scroll down.
Look at this.
People ignoring what happened, blaming the right.
People saying, thank you for your bravery to this man.
Saying he reminded us all.
Saying that they're calling out the right and they don't care about this.
There are people actually saying, saying that they want more.
They're saying, shocked that people would disapprove of this man.
I kid you not.
When you search the hashtag, it's what you get.
I don't know what else to say.
But I'll tell you this.
What do you think happens when Sean King says, by any means necessary?
People will carry it out.
So I'll end with one more thought.
Where do we go from here?
A few possibilities.
I can make a few predictions.
I think actions like this, the escalation, the beating of people in the streets, the tearing down of an American flag, it's going to send a signal, a terrifying one, to Americans.
I have friends who are just moderate liberals from urban, you know, from cities.
It's where I'm from.
And I've talked to them.
I'll tell you what they're concerned about.
It's their paycheck, paying rent.
They're not as concerned about undocumented immigrants as woke Twitter would have you believe.
Woke Twitter is just giving a pass to violent extremism while regular Americans are scared of what's happening.
While certainly many blame Trump because they believe the rhetoric they see on the news, this becomes undeniable.
Sean King said, by any means necessary.
And then we see this man.
He does this.
I'll tell you this.
People in America, regular citizens who aren't paying attention, you know they're concerned about health care.
They are.
They want to make sure that they can go to the doctor when they're sick.
They're not concerned about paying taxes to provide health care to non-citizens who just got here.
Some are, for sure.
I'm not saying those people who care aren't American.
I'm saying most middle Americans are thinking, if I pay into taxes into the, you know, Medicaid, Medicare, Social Security, am I going to get those benefits?
The Democrats all raised their hands on the stage saying they would give health care from the government to undocumented immigrants.
I almost said something that didn't make sense.
Undocumented immigrants.
What do you think that says to American citizens?
When Obama promised universal health care, the debate was that it was too expensive.
We couldn't even provide it to our own citizens.
What do you think is going to happen now when someone who has a decent private insurer and likes it, and they're a Democrat, is told Their private insurance will be abolished and their tax money will go to pay for the health care of non-citizens.
I assure you, they won't be voting Democrat.
I've talked to a few people I've known who are older and lifelong Democrats who said they'll likely be voting Independent.
They hate Trump, but the Democrats have lost it.
What do you think is going to happen now with these stories?
I tell you this, my prediction.
Trump will win 2020.
I could be wrong.
I don't know what the probability is.
I just feel like with all these stories, you know, maybe I know more than the average person.
I think that's fair.
But I think it's going to come to a point when we look at these Democratic debates and people are going to be like, I don't know what I'm seeing anymore.
Even the New York Times saying Americans feel like strangers in their own country.
Trump wins.
These people will be emboldened.
You saw Sean King saying, what are we supposed to do?
Hope that we can defeat Trump?
Okay, great.
For those that do.
What do you think will happen when they don't defeat Trump?
They're going to escalate.
And it's gonna get worse.
Let me know what you think.
Comment below.
We'll keep the conversation going.
Stick around.
More stories to come.
And I will see you all in the next segment at 1 p.m.
on this channel.
Thanks for hanging out.
Share this video because I assure you it'll be demonetized and deranked.
Thanks.
I'll see you next time.
There are several updates in the story on the anti-fascist man who attacked the ICE facility just yesterday.
For those that aren't familiar with the story, I did a segment on this first thing at YouTube.com slash TimCastNews, but I am going to go over the gist of the story, not as in great detail, because I want to update you on what's being said.
Now, the response From Anarchists, Antifa, and some information that I found that may actually show potentially what a motive may have actually been.
Now, according to a document released, tweeted out by journalist Jake Hanrahan, which many people are calling a manifesto or goodbye letter, it's a direct call to arms.
This is a man who threw firebombs at an ICE facility, was armed, Was explaining how he had a ghost AR-15 and was calling on other people to step up and do the same.
And this is probably...
The most dramatic escalation in whatever you want to call the culture war that we've seen just yet.
Now, I've talked about dramatic escalation in the past, street violence, but it was only a couple weeks ago, I believe, that Andy Ngo was brutally beaten in the streets.
And here we are, following a rally against ICE, calling for the dissolution of ICE and the liberation of the people detained.
A man showed up with firebombs and a gun, and he lobbed them, burning a car, trying to light propane tanks on fire at the building.
and police shot and killed this man. I'll go over a little bit of the gist of the story here,
but I've got statements and more evidence. Before we get started, head over to timcast.com
slash donut if you'd like to support my work. There's a PayPal option, a crypto option,
and a physical address, but of course, the most important thing you can do is share this video.
I assure you, it will be de-ranked.
It's going to be demonetized.
I am talking about sensitive issues.
I get it.
Nothing I can do about it, but YouTube is going to rule it not suitable for audiences, which means if you think this information is important, you need to share this.
And I can assure you, finding this story, it's not running front page, front and center.
On any of these mainstream news outlets, for the most part, you're not going to find.
You got to do a little digging.
That's kind of shocking.
Imagine what the news cycle would be if this person was a right-wing individual.
It would be everywhere.
Right now the media is kind of being dominated by Trump, who put out insensitive tweets, to say the least.
That's the news.
I'll cover that in the next segment, but we need to talk about this and how people are calling for more action.
I want to say one thing.
As we're entering this, it was only two weeks ago that Vox put out a story saying the left, this op-ed that essentially says the left needs to take up arms to protect marginalized communities.
What did we then see?
Exactly that.
So I'll read just a little bit here from the Washington Post to give you some context.
Armed man throwing incendiary devices at ICE detention center killed an officer involved shooting police say.
They say at 4 a.m., 69-year-old Willem van Spronsen threw lit objects at buildings and at cars in a parking lot, causing a vehicle to go up in flames.
Court records show the man was arrested last year at a protest at the privately owned detention center, and Immigration and Customs Enforcement called the man an anti-immigration enforcement protester.
At this point, we're going to say it.
He's not a protester.
He's a terrorist.
He was threatening the lives of everyone.
If the detention center went up in flames, there's innocent people, not law enforcement, like people who were actually detained who could have been hurt by this.
This was reckless and dangerous, and calling for more is only going to make things worse.
They say the man, a Vashon Island resident, died at the scene after shots were fired.
This could have resulted in the mass murder of staff and detainees housed at the facility had he been successful at setting the tank ablaze.
So right away, I want to stress, it didn't seem like he had any regard for the people detained in these facilities, even though his letter would claim otherwise.
The actions he took could have resulted in the death of these undocumented, these detained migrants.
Well, let's move on now because you can get the bigger context in my earlier video.
Go to youtube.com slash TimCastNews.
It's the 10 a.m.
video.
But here we have a statement published by Puget Sound Anarchists.
They say that they are the fire that will melt the ice and to rest in power.
Taking this photo, fire to prisons.
Rest in power and to stop deportation and end incarceration.
I'm not going to read this for the most part.
I do not need to read their pro-war, pro-violence, pro-death statements.
These people are unhinged, dangerous, violent extremists, and I don't need to spread their message.
I just need to give you the important context, that is, they're praising this and calling for more.
They say that they are grief-stricken, inspired, and enraged by what occurred.
They say that they only have the police statement, which they don't necessarily believe.
They say that The facilities must be destroyed, and the prisoners must be freed.
They said we do not need heroes, only friends and comrades.
Will was simply a human being, and we wish that he was still with us.
It's doubtless that the cops and the media will attempt to paint him as some sort of monster, but in reality, he was a comrade who fought for many years for what he believed in, and this morning he was killed doing what he loved, threatening the lives of detained migrants and law enforcement agents.
It's important to note ICE enforces the laws set forth by Congress.
It is a complicated system, and by no means a perfect one.
Just because something is law doesn't mean it's just.
And I can certainly understand wanting to improve the situation in these centers, and I personally am very much opposed to private detention centers.
I do not believe we should be in the business of allowing market incentives to determine how the law is being upheld and how people are being detained.
But I would certainly never suggest such an action, such violent and dangerous actions, be taken as they could result in the loss of life for those who are simply enforcing what Congress tells them to do.
That includes Ocasio-Cortez, Rashida Tlaib, Ayanna Pressley, Ilhan Omar, etc.
These people in Congress are the ones who are putting these laws in place and ICE enforces them.
But if the Democrats won't vote on a bill to fix the situation, then what can we do?
It's their fault too.
It's simple to point fingers and claim one side is evil, but it's not how it works.
And the solutions aren't simple.
But I tell you this, the best path forward will, it's going to involve suffering and
that's unfortunate.
But I tell you what, firebombing ice can result in way more immediate harm and danger and
threats and can escalate the conflict and make everything worse.
These people are dangerous.
But you get it.
They straight up say numerous times in this that they are inspired by what he has done.
Ending by saying, rest in power from the back of a truck.
They say... Oh, that was the sticker on his car.
We've seen other tweets going viral.
Twitter allows this.
RIP to anarchist fighter Willem van Spronsen, they say.
They called it proportionate action against enslavers and internment camp operators.
Twitter allows this.
They took down all the Proud Boys, but Twitter allows this.
Let's move on to the note put forward... My understanding is it's by...
Van Spronson.
Jake Hanrahan, journalist and filmmaker, tweets, I'm not going to read this in its entirety, just pointing out important bits of context.
He cites Don Pritz, John Brown, and Emma Goldman.
And, as you know if you watched my earlier video, Jake Hanrahan points out that it looks like Willem Van Spronson was also a member Here's him from their Facebook page.
We can see there's a photo.
Now, a bit of important... Actually, let's do this.
Before I get into the motivations, I believe his motivations may not have been political, although he definitely took a political action.
Many people believe this was an intentional suicide, but let's check out some of this letter.
The important bits are that he is saying, one, the government is fascist, and Jeff Bezos, Warren Buffett, Elon Musk, Tim Cook, Bill Gates, Betsy DeVos, George Soros, Donald Trump are the benefactors of the fascist system.
He says he's a joyful revolutionary.
He knows that his time is up.
He goes on to talk about, you know, he says, He's calling on patriots to stand against the travesty against everything that you hold sacred.
I know that in your hearts you see the dishonor in these camps.
It's time for you to stand up to the money pulling the strings of every puppet pretending to represent us.
He then highlights they are for-profit concentration camps.
Well, I think it's fair to point that out.
I am absolutely opposed to for-profit prisons and detention centers.
What he did was absolutely wrong.
The first line in the letter is, it's time to take action against the forces of evil.
He directly calls out Proud Boys.
Maybe this is on the second page.
And it was this paragraph here where he says it's a call to patriots to stand up to stop them.
And then he goes on to say that he disavowed, he disassociated from other organizations because of the choice of tactics.
He used a ghost AR-15 unregistered.
He made it himself.
Home built.
Your laws did nothing.
The gun laws did nothing.
He says keep the faith, etc.
Now, I found something interesting that I believe may shine some light on his possible motivations.
In the initial reporting, we had a statement.
Let me see if I can find it.
Deb Bartley, who said she was a longtime friend of Vance Bronson's, told the Seattle Times that she believes he attacked the detention center on Saturday, intending to die.
He was ready to end it.
I think this was a suicide.
But then he was able to kind of do it in a way that spoke to his political beliefs.
And this is where I believe it actually gets very scary.
This man is putting forth a call to action to get people to go and commit violent acts which can result in loss of life of everyone, even the innocent.
Look, I have very little respect for somebody who would uphold an unjust law.
But I am at the arbiter of morality and don't know where the line is.
But what I can tell you is vigilante justice and threatening the lives of the actual migrants does nothing.
That's what this man did.
The people detained could have been hurt.
Thank God he was stopped.
But I found this.
It wasn't very hard, actually.
It's an Indiegogo.
Legal defense for Will Van Spronsen.
Ariel Vanspronsen writes, Will is currently legally unable to spend more than four hours per week with boots.
Please help him to afford an attorney so that he can be properly defended.
They say in March of this year, my dad's wife, Shelly, left him and accused him of domestic violence.
I can't imagine what prompted Shelly to take such a dramatic action, but Will has never ever been threatening or violent in the entire time I've been alive.
Now, I can't say whether he was or wasn't violent.
He was accused by his wife, according to this Indiegogo, of domestic violence.
He was not able to see his son.
Now I'm being told it has been confirmed by multiple sources that this is in fact the same man who lives in Seattle.
I was able to verify some of the details myself and believe that this is true.
What really may have happened, a contributing factor to his suicide by cop, was that he was separated from his son.
Now, I don't know where this went from there, right?
It wasn't ever completed, but it was a flexible goal, meaning I believe they got the money.
I don't know when this campaign is from, necessarily.
So I don't know where he was at with his son.
But this is a potential motivation for his, you know, his behavior.
While it is fair to point out his letter is strictly political.
It's a call to Antifa.
He says he's Antifa.
Straight up in it.
He talks about, you know, growing up in the post-war world and vowing to himself the whole time he would never allow concentration camps.
I've got to say, there is blame to go around here.
And I'm not one to normally do this.
But he said he wouldn't stand by as concentration camps formed.
These are not concentration camps.
They are not concentration camps.
The people who are coming to this country know full well the circumstances.
They're coming from far off lands.
They're coming from Africa.
These are legal detention centers, similar to a jail or a prison.
I understand if you want to make the argument they're a concentration camp, fine, do it, but then you have to explain to me how a prison is not, how a jail is not, and how you overlooked the prison system and never took action against them.
Listen.
The prison systems we have in these countries are detestable.
I find private prisons completely detestable, and I believe we should do away with them.
It's why I'm a big fan of Tulsi Gabbard, who says, plain and simple, we have to get rid of them.
She wants to end the war on drugs, she wants to end private prisons, end the wars, defend free speech, fight big tech.
I like her, what she's doing.
And she is not a radical.
Unfortunately, there are people who refuse to listen to those who would be reformists.
It can be done.
What this man is doing and what Twitter allows, when Twitter allows this kind of stuff to propagate direct calls for terror, it is nightmarish.
Look, Twitter has tried to take down, you know, the Middle Eastern terror types, the French far-rights, but they've taken down the Proud Boys, but not Antifa.
And we've known Antifa has been a problem for years now.
They have been rallying.
They fly a banner.
They have a symbol.
They show up together.
They recently beat a gay journalist viciously in the streets.
And Twitter does nothing to stop these groups.
Nothing.
As they cheer this on.
And now here's what we get.
A man with firebombs.
I ask you, where will it go from here?
But in talking about blame, this is what I highlighted earlier.
Vox, the New Republic, mainstream.
NBC is funded by NBC.
Vox News is funded by NBC to the tune of $200 million.
And they may have money from other places.
And they run an op-ed saying, I'm a left-wing anarchist, guns aren't just for right-wingers, calling for people to take up arms.
I ask you, where does it go from here?
And it's simple.
Take a look at these stories I have.
Explosives found outside Eugene Police Station.
This was back in January after a man showed up and he had a gun and he pulled it out on the cops and the cops had to shoot and kill him.
Vox running this story saying that, you know, people should buy guns.
And then we have this.
This story from the Daily Call just the other day.
Multiple fake bomb threats.
We have the fake bomb threats, we have violence in the streets, the beating.
Andy Ngo is a moderate by any basic standard.
He is.
And they call him a fascist and they beat him in the streets.
And we have people in media justifying this.
When Vox can run a story saying, go get your guns, and then what, two weeks later a guy shows up and actually tries to use it?
What do we have?
Look, I think there's blame to go around on the right, especially when they don't call out when you see right-wing extremism.
A guy sent a bunch of fake bombs to a bunch of high-profile personalities, and while we did see condemnation, it's fair to point out that people are making a bigger case From this, out of what he did.
But there is a difference, and I will say this.
The difference being that this was a legitimate terror attack with weapons.
Not saying that the MAGA bomber guy wasn't legitimate.
It was meant to be terrorism.
It was sending fake bombs to people.
But this was a direct, you know, the intention here was a step up.
I guess what I want to say is, here's what I see.
When some fringe right-winger does something, of course conservatives call it out.
The left then blames everyone, even moderates, for it.
They say, oh, you're enabling it.
When Andy Ngo was attacked and brutally beaten, we had people in the New York Times defending it, saying, well, violence is bad, but... but, they said.
They defended it.
When it comes to left-wing extremism, we don't see it.
We don't see it on the front page of Vox.
They'll talk about how the left should get their guns, but their front page doesn't have the story.
They talk about ICE raids.
They don't talk about a guy who literally just died showing up with Molotovs.
I believe it was Molotovs, I could be wrong, but firebombs.
Maybe they have written about it.
I'm scrolling down and I see Stuber, I see progressives, I see them ragging on Trump.
I guess not.
I guess not.
So Vox can write a story, funded by NBC, saying, go get your guns.
And then when someone does, what do they do?
Nothing.
They say nothing.
It's gonna get worse, and it's worrying.
I believe this man may have been motivated by depression, and he may have taken it out on the federal authorities, but when Ocasio-Cortez says, never again, which is a reference to World War II Germany, where do you think it goes?
Where do you think?
So, we have a bit of his motivations, we have a bigger update here.
Uh, they're praising it.
The anarchists, the Antifa types, they are praising what just happened.
So, I guess, I'll leave it there.
I didn't really want to do another video on this, but it is a huge story, and we did have the update of the statements being put out, so, you know, there you have it.
I'll end by saying this, listen.
I have no doubt this video will be deranked, demonetized, and all of that.
So if you like it, share it.
What I mean by that is, if you think it's important that people hear this, Share it, because as I showed you, Vox isn't.
It's not there.
And look, yes, other outlets may be writing about this.
Of course, it exists on other platforms.
Like, Washington Post was the first one I brought up.
It's going to get buried.
It's going to be memory hole.
And then what?
When this gets worse, who will know to call it out?
So, you know, tell people.
Stick around.
More videos coming up.
YouTube.com slash TimCastNews starting at 6 p.m.
And I will see you all in the next segment.
If you can't keep up anymore, don't worry.
It's by design.
Nothing makes sense.
Everything's offensive.
Other things aren't offensive.
There's no rules.
And that's the point.
That way, no matter what you do, you're wrong.
Remember not that long ago that Scarlett Johansson was supposed to play a trans man in a movie and the left got angry and then she had to cancel?
Now Scarlett Johansson is saying, I can play whoever I want.
I agree with her.
Anyone can play anyone.
I really don't care.
We have this story.
Scarlett Johansson says she has the right to portray any person she wants.
And of course, the left today is outraged.
But you know what I can't quite understand?
Right now, the left is overtly saying, we cast a black woman to play Ariel, who was a traditionally red-headed white woman Danish.
I mean, granted, she's a mermaid.
What do they look like?
Maybe they're green with scales.
Ultimately, look, I don't care.
If a black woman, a Mexican woman, an Asian woman, or anybody wants to portray literally anybody else, I really don't.
And I don't base whether or not a movie is good off of the gender or race of the individual.
I base it off of the pandering, politics, and the trailers, to be honest.
Even though I know trailers are kind of deceptive.
Here's the problem.
How can you have it both ways?
But don't worry!
It's not just- I'm assuming you read the title.
It's not just about Scarlett Johansson and Ariel.
We have this.
Lashana Lynch will play 007 in new James Bond movie report.
Cool!
Seriously don't care actually I'm kind of excited.
I thought she was she was I think actually really good in Captain Marvel So I'm really interested to see how they pull this off, but I do have one problem with Color washing be it white black brown whatever okay?
Stop giving hand-me-down characters to people of color.
And I mean that sincerely, right?
I was talking to some activists, it was an activist guy out in LA, and there was, look, one thing that I think white people might not understand when it comes to being a person of color, and again, I'm still mostly white, But I was having a conversation with people, and what I said was, I'd imagine, if you grow up in this country, especially, you know, 10, 20 years ago, and on TV you only ever see white people, it's everywhere, every billboard, every movie, and there's very little representation, you'll feel weird, you'll feel a different way when you see someone who actually is more like you on TV or otherwise.
And I understand a lot of people might not understand that.
The feeling exists, right?
So, you know, for me growing up, yeah.
I mean, I grew up in a mixed-race family.
And I think because of that, I never really cared entirely that, you know, they use the same kind of male and female models of the same race for the most part.
And I don't think it's necessarily intentional.
Like, the issue is just that the country is majority white.
Now, that's in decline.
But I think because of that, majority of what you see will be, you know, up on a billboard.
Let me put it this way.
The people who make it to those billboards are rare.
Very few people have what it takes to be famous celebrities.
And that means you're going to see a very, very tiny amount of successful individuals in a predominantly white country.
I don't think it's a grand racist conspiracy.
But it does mean something to people of color when you see representation, when you see someone from your community who looks kind of like you.
You know, now doing something.
Granted, I think it's absolutely absurd, like, when that movie Crazy Rich Asians came out, there was one woman who said, she tweeted, like, that she was crying, and she said something like, is this how white people feel all the time?
And I'm like, dude, please?
Like, there are Asian actors.
They exist.
Like, you can see the representation.
It's silly to see an all-Asian movie and then cry about it, okay?
Let's be adults here.
But the point stands, right, that I'm trying to say is, you might not realize that if you're white, that other people will feel this way.
Now here's the thing.
I think if, when, when you realize that, you will, you will now understand exactly why there is a double standard when it comes to castings.
Plain and simple.
They're excited to see someone like LaShonna Lynch portraying 007.
Not James Bond, mind you.
My understanding is that James Bond, like, hands the code to her.
Honestly, I don't care.
Like, I'm leaning towards like, okay, this will be cool.
I might check it out.
I'm not a big Bond fan.
But I will stand by when it comes to the issue of representation needing new characters and
not doing hand-me-downs.
So, let's go—let me go back to that point about the double standard.
When you recognize that there are people who may be Latino, Black, Asian, or otherwise, and for the most part on TV you see nothing but white people, they feel a certain way, like, oh hey, that person looks like me, maybe it means something to me.
I'm not saying you have to agree with their feeling, I'm not saying this country is holding them back, I'm just saying, you know, that's how media has been rather dominated, just because of the history of this country.
Because of that, when we hear that 007 will not be played by a black woman, everybody on the left claps and cheers saying, oh, good for you, you have representation.
It is a little pandery when you get these white, progressive, wealthy individuals acting like white saviors.
And at the same time, they get angry and say, why should you be, you know, oh, Scarlett Johansson, you shouldn't be allowed to do this.
People need to have representation.
It's taking it too far.
It's not the right reaction.
It's not the adult reaction.
The reality is, Scarlett Johansson is an individual.
It's not her fault if she's white.
She should be allowed to play whoever she wants.
The same is true for Lashana Lynch.
It's not her fault that she's black, and she should be able to play whoever she wants.
Now, let's talk about this idea of hand-me-down characters, which I don't like.
Okay?
I don't like.
Look, if you like it, by all means, you can like it.
Here's the thing.
They're absolutely racist people who are like, how dare they change 007 to a black woman?
It's such an SJW thing.
And I'm like, I honestly don't care about that, as long as the plot is good, and they don't play into, like, stereotypes, and they just make a good character with good motivations and a good story.
You could be, you know, like, I don't care if you're a 7'5", you know, like, I don't know, bow-legged cowboy man playing 007.
I really don't care what you look like.
They could have a clown do it, as long as it makes sense for the story.
Right?
And I gotta say, I think, you know, race and gender, sex, irrelevant, for the most part.
There's gonna be motivations based on these characteristics because people of different characteristics will view the world differently.
Someone who's tall will have a different perspective than someone who's short, etc.
But why can't they?
Make new characters, new franchises, new intellectual property.
I honestly feel like, for me, it's more offensive that instead of saying, we're gonna make a new story and we're gonna give representation to characters, they just turn a character brown.
Right?
So 007 is not the worst of the worst, right?
Casting Ariel, uh, casting a black woman as Ariel, for the most part, I don't care about.
But I look at it like a hand-me-down.
You know what I mean?
Like, we get it.
Ariel was a character.
But by doing this, you're not, in my opinion, being progressive.
You're being a white savior.
You're being like, aw, let's give you something we, we did a long time ago.
No, no, no, no.
These people, look.
I guess the problem lies in the fact that our culture is stagnating and we're doing remake and adaptations and like 007 movie like we got 50 of those can we make new intellectual property and it's kind of like for the most part we're not really seeing it everything's kind of redundant you know one question I ask people or maybe redundant isn't the right word but like Monotonous... I don't know.
Here's what I ask people.
When was the last time, like, a Christmas song was written?
Most people tell me Mariah Carey's All I Want for Christmas is You.
I'm like, okay, how old is that?
No, but for the most part, every Christmas we play songs from the 50s.
Okay, I get it!
In the 50s, those songs were new.
Why do we still play them today?
So that's the big problem.
So here's what we need to do.
We need new intellectual property with new characters written by new people.
Look what happens when they gender-wash Ghostbusters.
It was a bad movie!
And that's the problem.
Why couldn't you give... Like, Kristen Wiig, I think, is fantastic.
Why couldn't she get her own movie with her own character?
Why couldn't they do... Like, even... You know what I would even accept?
If they did a Ghostbusters 3 with the original characters who recruit the women.
And it's just incidental that they're women.
Give them their own characters in their own arc that plays into the universe.
Now, that's still a hand-me-down, right?
And then I'm kind of like, yeah, okay, I get it.
That's kind of what they're doing with 007.
And that's why I'm like, yeah, okay, this isn't the worst example.
You can't simultaneously have outrage over Scarlett Johansson and praise for 007.
And if you think I'm making it up, allow me to show you the Gamer Ghazi subreddit.
Gamer Ghazi, they define themselves as SJW.
You can see it right here, it's very small on the screen.
And they have one post that says, Scarlett Johansson says she has the right to portray any person she wants, with 73 comments.
Let's open that up.
We then have Lashana Lynch will be introduced as the new 007 in Bond 25.
The same subreddit!
It's got 20 comments, let's open this one up.
And I assure you, irony is not lost on these individuals.
Now, I'm not trying to be a dick to this subreddit, I think they actually do have really good points a lot of times.
And they do have posts that do push back on the ironies and absurdities of the other side.
And so that's why, you know, I know about it, because I go To Gamerghazi as well as, like, the Gamergate subreddit.
I try and look at every, you know, all of the different subreddits from, like, the communist one to the anarchist one.
See what they're talking about.
But let me just stress the absurdity of being outraged by... Read the room!
And they talk about how, like, essentially that just because you can doesn't mean you should.
I think they actually say that somewhere.
Someone says, like, she doesn't understand that she can do it, but she shouldn't do it.
And then we have this one.
And then check this out.
Top comment.
Oh, there's going to be some incredible rage from the right on this.
Grab some popcorn, people.
Irony.
From the social justice warriors.
Self-described.
I'm not trying to call them that.
I get it.
And I think the way to help you understand why they do this, and there's no double standard here, is because the standard they're operating on is obfuscated by the conversation they engage in for the most part.
They'll say things like, a character doesn't have to be white.
A character can be any race.
They're not really saying that.
What they're really saying is, we should have more minority actors.
And that makes it confusing.
I've often found that the left and the right are speaking different languages.
I think the solution to this is to stop hand-me-downing characters, right?
You got a character, it looks a certain way, don't change that character, that character is that character, and you get someone who's kind of like that character to play it, that's fine.
Then, we make new characters, right?
When you have a new character, what that means is the right won't be angry at the new character, and the left will have a new intellectual property that represents somebody who may have been, you know, not represented in major media historically.
Win-win for everybody.
But I think, you know, what it comes down to, especially on the left, is that it's an emotional response.
It's a victory!
Ha ha!
Lashana Lynch is the new 007!
There will never be enough popcorn for the amount of whining and rage!
But what about Scarlett Johansson trying to play a trans man, literally, on the subreddit at the exact same time?
Like, just right now, within a day of- not even a day of each other, they don't seem to understand that on principle, the structure of what they're arguing is against themselves.
If you want to argue that Lashana Lynch can play any character she wants, even taking over the role of a traditionally white man, you can't get mad at Scarlett Johansson for arguing basically the same thing.
So here's- I'll make my final point to kind of like reiterate what I was saying earlier.
When you think about individuals, when you think about the rights and liberties of a person, then it kind of breaks down racism.
And it's one of the most important things you can do, recognizing that everybody is different and you can't all just assume they're the same based on the color of their skin.
When you do that, you realize Scarlett Johansson is not at fault because she has white skin, and she absolutely can play whoever she wants, and the same is true for Lashana Lynch.
I think... I mean, I actually kind of like the idea.
I'm actually really interested to see how they do this with James Bond, and I think it'll be kind of cool.
Again, never been a big Bond fan, but at least in this regard, they're doing, like, a literal passing of the torch instead of just, like, a reboot with, like, a gender swap race swap.
But I guess, you know, that's my point.
My point is, the individual to me is what matters the most.
So if, you know, Hal Bailey, I think her name is, is playing Ariel, cool.
In fact, I got another article I'll show real quick from Reason.
The backlash over the Little Mermaid casting a black Ariel is fake news.
It is.
Robbie Stove says, few people who tweeted not my Ariel were actually upset about Halle Bailey portraying the Mermaid Princess.
There were some people, let's be real, but it was like fringe nobodies.
No conservative of merit, no centrist or liberal of merit was upset about the race swapping.
Nobody cared.
There were a few fringe accounts, and they did the same thing with Ocasio-Cortez dancing.
Remember that?
When there was a video of her dancing on the rooftop?
It actually got praise from conservatives.
There were conservatives warning, like, oh, this is making Ocasio-Cortez really endearing and personable, and they were like, ha, you just don't like her because she's having fun.
Republicans hate fun.
And it's like, what are you talking about?
Nobody cares.
For the most part, there's a few fringe people, few and far between, who actually care about this.
So, you know, the way I see it is, man, look, I don't know if I care for The Little Mermaid as it is.
I don't care for The Lion King either.
Aladdin wasn't that good.
I thought Beauty and the Beast was, like, okay.
I'm not a big fan of the Disney live-action reboots as it is.
Never been a big fan of 007, but actually, you know, I gotta say, I'm pretty interested to see how they do this, because typically what they do with 007 is they just make a new 007, they get a new actor.
So it'll be interesting, because they're kind of retiring James Bond himself.
Which may spark outrage, and that's why I think, in the end, for the millionth time, I'm sorry.
I know I reiterate sometimes.
New characters, new IP.
Because now all you're doing is, like, you're getting rid of Bond?
I'm really bummed that Jessica Jones got canceled.
I really, really liked that show.
I think they did everything right.
I kid you not.
I mean, the second season was a little, like, dragged out.
The third season was pretty good.
I like... Let me say this.
The season one of Jessica Jones, Kilgrave is one of the best villains ever.
Because he's just like...
If you're not familiar, Killgrave has the ability to command anyone to do anything just by saying it.
It's like he can't control it.
If he tells you to do it, you do it.
What was cool about that character was you could see how growing up with that ability made him a, you know, he had no empathy or conscience because he just didn't care.
It was just always so easy for him.
What Jessica Jones did really well in terms of like hitting the social justice points without being overtly regressive SJW, is that they passed the Begdahl test very simply. There was
no pandering. It was literally just, Hogarth is like the boss of this big firm, is a woman, and
she talks to Jessica Jones about their case and there you go. It's like, not about a dude. They
did a ton of representation in Jessica Jones that wasn't pandering over the top and it was awesome.
And I'm like, that's what it's supposed to be like.
Like Static Shock, if you remember that show.
I've praised Static Shock over and over again.
You can absolutely make a show that is preachy, like Static was, without making it cringey and bashing people over the head for being white.
And as most of you know, it's really funny that, it's like, if I'm right-wing, man, heaven help the rest of you conservatives, because I'm like, I'm in favor of social justice representation.
I'm kind of looking forward to the Lashawna Lynch thing.
I just think it's silly to have a double standard.
I think it's silly to attack people based on their race.
That's racist, and I'm all about the individual and freedom.
And I think that's what separates me from the authoritarian left.
I'm not a collectivist.
I think there should be cooperative markets.
I lean to the left in a lot of policy, which means I do, to an extent, believe in collectivism with the individual coming first.
So anyway, I'm not gonna rant on this.
This is pretty long, so... Well, I did rant on this.
I'll leave it there.
Thanks for hanging out.
Stick around.
Next segment will be coming up at 4 p.m.
YouTube.com slash TimCast, and I will see you all there.
A new internal poll has been circulating, and it's really bad news for Democrats.
The poll looks at swing voters and how they view the Democratic Party.
According to the poll, it would seem Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is one of the most visible individuals in the Democratic Party, and this group of individuals really, really doesn't like socialism.
Which is one thing I've been saying for a long time, so of course it's evidence towards my own bias, confirmation bias, but we'll read it anyway.
Listen.
I am a moderate leftist, right?
To them, to the Ocasio-Cortezes and others, I don't exist.
I must be a right-winger because there's no center.
It's really funny, isn't it?
Like, we know centrists exist, right?
So why is it that I can't be one?
I don't know.
I've praised left-wing policy while criticizing the left.
That's typically what I do, and because of that, they say I must be right-wing.
It makes literally no sense.
I am the voter they need to get if they want to win in 2020, and they have done nothing!
Now Tulsi Gabbard has done a lot.
I really like Tulsi.
But they're not going to give her the nomination, and we all know it!
The same is true for Andrew Yang.
I wouldn't vote for Gravel, because I think he's kind of being silly, and I don't agree with him for the most part.
And I wouldn't vote for Marianne Williamson just because, while I think she's hokey and wholesome, I wouldn't vote for her.
So, what's going to end up happening?
Me?
I'm probably gonna vote independent or not vote at all.
I actually think I'll probably vote, like, independent or something.
I might just, you know, write in Tulsi if she doesn't get the nomination.
Maybe, I don't know, vote for myself because it's better than not voting and at least I know what I believe in, right?
Here's the point I always make with my videos.
If they weren't so busy trying to excise people like me, they might realize what they need to win.
But I will say this before we read through the poll.
One of the big bets the Democrats are making is that by waking up progressive voters, they will solve the problem of losing moderates.
But let me just stress, as I have many times, when you lose a moderate, The Republicans probably will pick them up.
So if you gain one on the left and lose one on the right, and the right gains one on the left, congratulations!
The Republicans are up one and you're at zero.
But let's read this.
Before we get started, head over to TimCast.com slash donate if you'd like to support my work.
There are multiple ways to donate.
PayPal, crypto, and a physical address.
But of course, share this video because YouTube doesn't suggest my content the same way they used to.
They've deranked everybody, so if you think this video is important, I rely on you to get the word out.
From Axios, exclusive poll, AOC defining Dem in swing states.
They write, Horrible, horrible bad news, I might add.
showing that one of the House's most progressive members, Ocasio-Cortez, has become a definitional
face for the party with a crucial group of swing voters.
Horrible, horrible bad news, I might add.
Horrible.
Why it matters.
These Democrats are sounding the alarm that swing voters know and dislike socialism, warning
it could cost them the House and the presidency.
The poll is making the rounds of some of the most influential Democrats in America.
Think about what just happened.
Let me say this.
AOC. It could put the House majority at risk, said a top Democrat who is involved in 2020
congressional races. She is getting all the news and defining everyone else's races. Think
about what just happened. Let me say this. Ocasio-Cortez starts mouthing off about concentration
camps. She refuses to back down.
She calls CBP a rogue agency, and then a dude literally shows up at an ICE facility with weapons, and you know how that went.
I certainly hope you do.
Ocasio-Cortez is a bloviating blowhard, loudmouthed narcissist who has no idea what she's talking about.
And this is coming from someone who praised her when she first won the primary, and that's not an exaggeration.
You can look on this channel and go back and see my half an hour video where I'm like, woo!
She did it!
She won!
Yes.
I praised her.
And now we get to see her character as time goes on.
She's a bad person.
She refuses to accept when she's wrong.
She pushes nonsense.
She accuses Pelosi of singling a woman of color, which we know what that means, and then denies it.
No, it's not about racism.
Oh, please, dude.
You're a card-carrying member of the Democratic Socialists of America who have protested four open borders, holding signs saying no borders and abolish profits.
What do you think that means to middle America?
It means the Democrats have lost it.
Let's read on.
Hey!
That includes me!
Oh, no, no, no, no, I'm sorry, I'm not white.
latest run-in with AOC and the three other liberal house freshmen known as
the squad included a thousand three likely general election voters who are
white and have two years or less of college education hey that includes me
oh no no no I'm sorry I'm not white yes and I mean this seriously it's I I don't
know like actually how it works but I know that because according to like the
census because I'm part Korean I'm literally just Korean Like, they don't count white in that regard.
So I'm just Korean.
But let's read on.
They say.
These are white, non-college voters who embraced Donald Trump in 2016 but are needed by Democrats in swing House districts.
The group that took the poll shared the results with Axios on the condition that it not be named because the group has to work with all members of the party, with all parts of the party.
The findings.
Ocasio-Cortez was recognized by 74% of voters in the poll.
22% had a favorable view.
Oh my god!
Swing voters do not like her.
Rep Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, another member of the squad, was recognized by 53% of voters.
9%!
Not a typo, they write!
Had a favorable view.
Oh, Lord, help us!
The Democrats have lit themselves on fire.
And I'll tell you, you know, the easiest example, the easiest bit of proof, is how they throw me under the bus.
I am by no means a far-left progressive.
I am just your run-of-the-mill social liberal, the typical, moderate, working-class, uneducated folk from the South Side of Chicago, who is looking for a real solution, and doesn't quite know what these great ivory tower elites have in store, but I would like to find something that makes sense.
So I don't like the wealthy, privileged elites, I want something for the working class, and what do we get?
We get wacky nonsense, identitarianism, and socialism.
Sorry, that's not what me and my friends and family want, so you've lost us.
This poll is really funny because it's like a reflection of who I am and where I come from.
Although I'll say this, my friends and family are in Chicago, not a swing district.
Now here's the crazy part.
Socialism was viewed favorably by 18% of the voters and unfavorably by 69%.
Capitalism was 56% favorable, 32% unfavorable.
I think that kind of describes where I'm like a mixed economy person, but I kind of lean a little bit more towards the cooperative side.
I don't like saying socialist because socialist is a legit like a hard form of economy.
I say cooperative versus competitive because it's like it's nuanced, right?
But cooperative means you lean a little bit more towards socialism and away from free market capitalism, but I'm like a centrist, you know, so I'm not.
I think you got to have a right balance right in the middle because free markets run amok, cause damage, you get massive, you know, tech oligopolies like Google, Facebook, Twitter, etc.
But without a free market you get, you know, No food and no phones and stagnation and death.
So there's got to be a good balance where we have government regulation that can restrict the worst impulses of the free market while making sure we can still maintain healthy competition and that bad industries die.
Because that's what you need.
You need an evolution in the marketplace.
But let's read on.
Socialism is toxic to these voters of the top Democrat.
Between the lines, Democrats are performing better with these voters than in 2016, although still not as well in 2018.
So party leaders will continue to try to define themselves around more mainstream members.
Sorry!
AOC takes the cake!
To the other side, three members of the squad, they say Omar, Rashida Tlaib, and Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts defended their approach while appearing in Philadelphia yesterday on a panel at the annual Netroots Nation conference.
I was once invited to that.
I think I was a speaker.
I never, I didn't go though.
AP's Joanna Summers reports, we never need to ask for permission or wait for an invitation to lead, Omar said.
Adding later that there's a constant struggle, oftentimes, with people who have power about sharing that power.
Listen, there's this weird mentality these people have.
It's really annoying.
They don't care for facts.
They don't care about what actually works.
They don't care about what will solve problems.
They're just overly emotional, and I'm not talking... No, here it comes.
Oh, I said it.
Now they're gonna go, oh, Tim's a bigot, he's blaming them for being women.
That's what they do.
When Nancy Pelosi singles them out, they say, it's because we're women of color, because that's their attack factor, Nancy Pelosi is white.
When I say they're acting on emotion, they're gonna say, he just said, that's a dog whistle to being a misogynist.
No, seriously.
When you refuse to fund the border wall, and then, I'm sorry, not the wall, the border crisis, like the humanitarian aid, and then complain there's a crisis, it's like, dude, listen, Check this out.
From RealClearPolitics a couple days ago, Ocasio-Cortez says, this is a manufactured crisis because the cruelty is manufactured.
Oh dear lord, help me.
Ocasio-Cortez is despicable.
Completely despicable.
The Democrats were mocking the idea of a crisis at the border.
Mocking it.
Laughing.
Refusing to fund it.
And now here we are, and they're gonna be- Listen.
I'm gonna tell you something.
From a policy perspective.
When I say I would like money In humanitarian aid from the government.
That is a social program where I want the government to fund humanitarian aid.
A... I swear to... It's a left-wing position, you silly Democrats!
Oh my god.
Ask, like, listen, I am opposed to private detention centers, and I speak out against them, and I would like the government to fund aid to help this, solve this problem.
Is that, what universe are we in?
These people have lost it, and that's why, look man, They can mock me all day and night.
They can ridicule me.
They can push me aside, marginalize me, my friends, and the space in politics that I am in.
But I tell you this, my friends and family who grew up in support of the LGBT community, who defended progressive rights, who are now shrugging saying, what is going on?
We are the people you need to vote for you, and you are losing us, and you don't care.
You mock, you belittle, you smear, and I'll tell you what happens.
Brandon Straka.
I think I'm pronouncing his name right.
Walk away happens.
People just say enough and they walk away.
Look, I am not on board with the Democrats at this point, and I flat out said I'll probably be voting independent.
Well, I might just vote for Tulsi no matter what.
So I don't want to say necessarily that I'm leaving, right?
But the Democrats have gone nuts.
Plain and simple.
Look at the tweets they put out.
It is a nightmare.
An absolute nightmare.
And here's what's gonna happen.
I got another segment coming up for you.
Donald Trump tweeted some stupid nonsense.
Ugh.
And you know, and people on Twitter are mad at me.
It's like, I don't care, man.
You know, they expect me to like, you guys know I don't like Trump.
So I ragged on his tweet, and I got ratioed hard.
And I don't care.
And some people are like, why are you posting all this left?
I'm gonna save this for the next segment.
But the next segment isn't necessarily about Trump tweeting stupid things.
And the thing is, look, Trump, I think Trump tweets a lot of stupid things.
It's how he's goaded the left into blaming the Democrats for Trump's tweets.
What is going on?
I will see you in a few moments in the next segment.
Earlier today, Donald Trump put out tweets that I find, I don't know how to describe it, distasteful, poorly made, and I gotta be honest, I really don't care.
Donald Trump tweets all the time.
Some of them are funny memes.
You ever see that Carpe Dantum meme, where it's at the Democratic debates and the lights shut off, and then it starts playing Black Sabbath?
And then Donald Trump walks out with smoke?
It's hilarious!
So Donald Trump's Twitter account is silly nonsense.
But he puts out this tweet, and I'm just like, oh my god, you couldn't just let the Democrats tear each other apart?
And now something fun- I'm gonna say- I'll get into the critique of that in a second, but something funny!
The left in this country, they can't just let Trump do something wrong, right?
Look, you guys watch my channel.
You know I'm not a big fan of the guy.
I don't have Trump Derangement Syndrome.
I'll criticize him when I think he should be criticized, and I don't care if I get ratioed on Twitter for it.
I'm gonna say what I think is important.
For the most part, I don't care when Trump tweets stupid things.
Look, but this one was really bad.
He basically said to the progressive Democratic Congresswomen, he says, you know, originally
came from countries whose governments are a complete and total catastrophe.
Okay, full stop.
It's one.
It's Ilhan Omar and the rest are from America.
So there's a lot wrong with this tweet and I'll criticize it.
But here's the thing.
You may have seen him tweet this.
Here we have Karen Atiyah, Global Opinions Editor for the Washington Post saying, make
no mistake, Nancy Pelosi's dog whistling snipes at AOC, Ilhan Omar, Rachida Tlaib and Rep
Presley helped pave the way for this vicious racist.
Couldn't you just let me rag on the president for once?
No, I kid you not.
I'm sorry, let me finish the tweet saying... Okay, she's saying Nancy Pelosi dog-whistling, which means she's a white supremacist or something, helped Donald Trump tweet racist things.
Oh my god, there's just so much going on here.
You know, it's this kind of thing that it finally makes me just say, like, laugh.
I see all this craziness in the world and all the politics is just it's all insane and then and then Karen comes in with this amazing tweet and I just can't help but laugh and just think everything's not gonna be alright but at least it's funny right yeah at least it's funny it's it's it's insane Look at this, she says, See how quickly we have moved from two powerful white women, Maureen Dowd and Speaker Pelosi, helping each other to attack women of color over a nice box of chocolates, to the president telling them to leave the country.
What people need to see in this newly formed Maureen Dowd, Speaker Pelosi, Donald Trump axis of sheevil!
Oh god, help me!
Is that white supremacy relies on dismissing, silencing, and undermining women of color.
Putting them in their place by any means necessary.
She actually said sheevil.
Okay, let me, for those on the podcast, S-H-E-V-I-L.
She, ah!
This is one of the funniest things I've ever seen.
I was, I kid you not, You know, they always say, Tim, why don't you make videos targeting the right?
And I'm like, because for the most part, they're just doing what Republicans always do, and it's not shocking to me.
I don't feel like there's any real development.
The Republicans aren't moving far right.
They're not.
The polls and the graphs and the data, it shows that the Republicans are kind of moving a little to the left, if anything.
So Trump tweets this thing out, and I criticized him for it, and I get ratioed, it's like a 10 to 1 ratio, like a thousand people responding saying, Tim, you're wrong on this, you're wrong.
Trump basically said, he didn't say go back to where you came from, that's a hyperbolic take on it.
What he said was, go back to your home countries, try out these policies, come back and show us how it's done.
He was basically saying, you know, if you guys have good ideas, why don't you go back to these, you know, to the countries you came from to try it out.
So technically, you know, Technically, they're right, but there's subtlety here, okay?
I think it was a horrible tweet.
I think, you know, look, man, the Democrats are tearing each other apart, and all Donald Trump had to do was sit back and let it happen.
He could just sit and watch, and what do we get?
Check this out.
I think this is the right one.
Melanie Zenona of Politico said, every time Dems are on the brink of civil war, Trump throws them a lifeline.
We then have this one.
Trump does have a penchant for snatching defeat from the jaws of victory sometimes.
The Dems were in-fighting all week between the Squad and House leadership, and Trump goes in there to make some outrageous characterization about the Squad that will serve to rally Dems together.
Yes, that was my criticism.
Look, It's ridiculous when anyone says, go back to country or leave America.
It is insane to me when the left says, if Trump gets elected, I'm going to move to Canada.
No, you're not.
Shut up.
You're going to go with Starbucks and order a caramel frap and cry to your friends about how we're in a fascist country.
You will do nothing.
You are an armchair activist on Twitter.
And then other people saying, if you don't like America, why don't you leave?
And it's like, no, stop.
Come on.
Man, America is built on amending the Constitution.
It is a brilliant system.
The Founding Fathers were very, very smart.
They had many flaws, but they did a goddamn great job of crafting a living document that we can amend to make this place better, and we have.
So, no.
If the country's bad, I'm gonna stick around to make sure it works.
And it's a funny thing, really.
Because, you know, I'm just... I'm not saying it's everybody on the left who's threatening to go to Canada.
Of course not.
It's not everyone on the right saying, leave the country.
Of course not.
Most people are sane.
This one's just for the weirdos.
Listen.
America is a country that becomes better over time, okay?
So leaving it when Trump gets elected is the stupidest thing you could say because you're supposed to stick around to fight to make it better.
And telling people to leave it because they don't like it is the same thing!
So anyway, what Trump said, let me pull up his tweet and let's go through it, okay?
Because look, I have no problem being critical of Trump.
I do it all the time.
It's really funny, I might add, too, because people on YouTube have no problem when I go into a tangent about what I don't like about him.
But people on Twitter weren't having it.
They were like, Tim, you're wrong on this one.
But they were nice, okay?
And that's the thing, too.
I think the important thing to consider Um, for anybody watching on YouTube, is that when I say something that I don't like about Trump, and I mean it, and I have facts behind me, the response I usually get from Trump supporters is like, well, I disagree with you, but I understand your opinion.
Because, listen, I'm where liberals used to be back during the Obama era.
Like, not that long ago!
And, for the most part, that's kind of the conversations I had with Republicans.
I would, like, go to my friend's house, like, in a suburb, and the Republican, and we would talk, and I'd be like, and we would get heated, and then we'd have pizza and stuff, and, like, watch a movie.
That's how it used to be when I was growing up.
I remember going to my friend's house, and their family was all pro-life, and I've always been pro-choice, and they were like, oh, you're wrong, like, you need to understand, and we talked, and I was like, you know, I really do feel like our opinions aren't that far apart.
We just have fallen slightly on these two different sides of the issues, and I don't know what we can do.
And we ultimately, like, you know, we just say, well, you know, I guess agree to disagree.
This is America, and we'll take our argument to the ballot box.
I remember the first time I truly understood and heard a pro-life person, it was at my friend's house, where these conversations could happen.
I guess when you live in Chicago, there are a lot of Republicans and Democrats.
They live kind of close to each other because the suburbs are kind of Republican.
So, uh, it's interesting to me that when you still engage on this level of, like, being honest and trying to have a conversation, then the worst thing I get, like, most of the responses aren't really that, they're not being mean, they're not insulting me, they're saying, Tim, you're wrong, X, Y, and Z. Well, I disagree.
So look at this tweet.
He says, so interesting to see progressive Democrat congresswomen who originally came from countries who governments are a complete and total catastrophe.
The worst, most corrupt, and inept anywhere in the world, if they even have a functioning government at all.
Here's the thing.
There's only one progressive congresswoman who's come from a country like that, and that's Ilhan Omar.
I believe she's a refugee from Somalia.
The rest of the squad are all American-born.
He says, now loudly and viciously telling the people of the U.S., the greatest and most powerful nation on earth, how our government is to be run.
Why don't they go back and help fix the totally broken and crime-infested places from which they came?
Then come back and show us how.
Show us how it is done.
These places need your help badly.
You can't leave fast enough.
I'm sure that Nancy Pelosi would be very happy to quickly work out free travel arrangements.
Let me tell you the problems I have with this.
For one, as I mentioned, telling someone to leave for whatever is silly.
Come on.
Ilhan Omar is an American citizen.
She came here.
She's a refugee.
She has every right to be here.
There's legal asylum for which she did it.
Like, I'm gonna say this, man.
Trump says, come here legally.
ICE Director Homan, I believe his name is, grilled Ocasio-Cortez.
Boom!
Fire!
When he said, if they want to come, they can come here legally.
Well, Ilhan Omar did come here legally.
We can talk about the Star Tribune claiming she may have married her brother.
That seems like a weird thing for a mainstream paper to claim.
But if that's the case, it's a whole other issue.
She came here legally, she's an American citizen, and we should defend the legal immigration process.
That's another reason why I'm like, nah, not having it, man.
The argument we're having right now, like the sane, rational argument is, we need border security for the illegal immigrants, and we want people to come here legally.
So then telling them that maybe they can go try to fix their own countries is like, no, no, no, no, no, no, no.
Legal asylum, man.
You get legal asylum, we respect that process.
So I will disagree with Trump on this one.
The bigger issue is less about Trump being Trump, okay?
Look, I don't care that Trump tweeted this in the sense that, like, Trump tweets things like this all the time.
The issue is that he is giving, he is snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.
Is that what she said?
Pension for snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.
Just let the Democrats, look, I don't like Trump, but I don't have Trump derangement syndrome.
That's how I normally frame it.
My political position on Trump is like, I think he's bad, but he's not that bad.
Okay?
He's not that bad.
All right?
You know, I wouldn't vote for him.
But that's like, when you think about American politics, you have Obama and Trump.
I don't think either of them are like, you know, Stalin or, you know, World War II guy.
I can't say that one.
You know what I mean?
I think they're two people with slightly different opinions for the most part, and we need to figure out which one we like better.
I think Trump has got an attitude problem.
I disagree with some of his policy and I disagree with some of his tweets.
So I'd prefer not to vote for him, I'll vote for somebody else.
I vote on principle, I don't vote to win.
Period.
If at the end of the day I voted for myself, it's voting on principle and that's how I will always act.
So if I wanted Trump to win, you know, sure, I'd vote for a Republican, but I'm not going to.
It's just not what's going to happen.
There are still some Democrats I think are worth, you know, voting for, even if it's me voting for Tulsi and she even drops out.
Don't care.
I vote for who I think is right for the job.
The point is, from where I am kind of in the middle, Trump has... Hold on, let me go back.
From where I am kind of in the middle, I'm looking at the Democrats, and I see Nancy Pelosi, who is this wealthy elitist, and I'm like, I roll.
And then I see the fringe, wackaloon, far-left squad members, and I'm like, please, these people are destroying the left, make them stop.
And they're infighting, and I'm like, okay, maybe this is the Democrats' immune system weeding out the wackos.
Thank God the Democrats are finally standing up to these people and pushing back because they are going to cost us elections in 2020.
They're going to cost us the House.
Okay, that's the big issue.
Trump's probably going to win, fine, but at least the Democrats might get some sane moderates in the House, right?
Nope!
So here's the thing, hopefully they can get rid of him.
Ah, and then Trump comes in with this tweet, and then Nancy Pelosi jumps to their defense.
So I'm gonna end this video right now and say this.
None of it matters.
None of it matters because in the end, what we get is the Washington Post opinion editor blaming Nancy Pelosi for Trump tweeting, calling it the Axis of Sheevil.
Ah, we're done.
It's, look.
Trump can tweet this and Trump supporters don't care.
They don't.
They're ratioing me on Twitter saying, Tim, you're wrong.
Okay.
I get it.
You like Trump.
You agree with him.
I don't.
All right.
But I'll, I'll respect your opinion and I will do what I can to push back on what I think is wrong.
It doesn't matter, though.
I live in purgatory, apparently, where there's no sane left to actually align with when I disagree with the president.
I can get ratioed by Trump supporters, and then I turn to the left and say, hey guy- Oh, you're blaming Nancy Pelosi for this one.
Welcome to politics in 2019.
Isn't it a hoot?
I love it.
Stick around, I got one more segment coming up for you in a few minutes, and I will see you all shortly.
The media has been slowly dying off, from ratings collapse to the collapse of print, layoffs across the board.
It's just not been great since the digital revolution.
Now, fortunately, channels like mine are doing better and better.
There are pros and cons to this.
In that local papers are going out of business, and that's dangerous because we do need journalism in this country.
Unfortunately, people now just lump all of the woke Twitterati types and journalists in the same bucket, it's kind of their own fault, and then just say good riddance to everybody.
But I'll say this, real journalists working for real newspapers are good people for the most part, and it's a job we desperately need.
And that's why this news is really, really bad.
The collapse today is newspapers.
Check out this story from the New York Times, not from Starbucks.
Extra, extra!
Starbucks will stop selling newspapers.
New York Times.
I wonder how they feel about this.
They say, beginning in September, the coffee giant will no longer carry copies of three national newspapers and select local papers.
Why?
I'd be willing to bet it's because nobody reads them anymore.
We just go on the internet.
And that means people are going to lose their jobs.
Before we read into this, and there's also some other news here, another brutal week for American journalism, more layoffs, head over to TimCast.com slash Donate if you'd like to support my work.
There's a Bitcoin option, a crypto option, a PayPal option, a physical address, but of course, share this video.
And let me just say something.
I have been smeared mercilessly since I went to the White House Summit, but I will add, they really didn't have anything on me.
They claimed that I pushed the Seth Rich conspiracy because I doubted Fox News.
I kid you not.
Fox News published a story saying it was essentially true, and I went, I don't know about that.
I'd only give it a 55 to 65% chance of being the case.
The point I was trying to make is I don't believe it.
I am skeptical.
Show me the proof.
They took a sound bite and they're like, aha!
He pushed the- oh yes, sure.
Here's the point that I want to make with this video.
And I made it before.
Their desperation is showing.
And as they're drowning, they want to make sure they pull us down so that we suffer with them.
But this is the cycle.
This is how progress works.
They had the opportunity to be Netflix.
They chose to be Blockbuster.
So congratulations, you go down with everyone else.
The media is collapsing.
The new media is rising.
I remember when I was relegated to the side stages at journalism conferences.
They said it was a side show, this social media guy doing his thing with his little phone.
They said we could do his job way better than him.
He's not a real journalist.
And then I got invited to the White House and they went, you're a bad man, you conspiracy theorist.
Oh, my source for that story was Fox News.
Right?
And I said I didn't trust it.
All you're really saying is that you guys in the mainstream media push nonsense and you don't have fact checkers.
So too goddamn bad.
But let me get back to the news.
The company said this week that it would stop carrying print editions of the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, USA Today, and local newspapers at its 8,600 locations.
Starbucks did not give a reason for the change, but said it would also remove shelving fixtures that display whole bean coffee and grab-and-go snacks.
We're always looking at what we offer our customers and our stores and making adjustments.
Let me say this.
There are still people who buy newspapers.
It's probably gone way, way down.
But some people still buy them.
It's gonna suck for them.
They can't get their paper anymore.
But for the most part, this means there were sales happening for these papers.
Starbucks is huge.
It is the, like, I don't know, is the biggest coffee chain?
All of these newspapers, the New York Times, they're going to take a hit from this.
Now, I'd imagine they've already insulated themselves from losing money on newspapers because we've known for a long time that paper is obsolete.
What could a newspaper hold?
Like, I don't know, like a hundred kilobytes of data?
Some ridiculously low number?
I think like a 500-page book is like a megabyte?
No, I'm sorry, that's totally wrong.
A newspaper is probably like 10 kilobytes, some ridiculously low number.
Anyway, let's not get into computer science because I'm way off and I probably sound like an idiot, so let's read on.
Jordan Cohen, a spokesman for the Times, said in a statement, although disappointed by the
decision, "...we're confident that given our wide retail distribution,
readers will have no trouble finding the New York Times for sale at nearby outlets."
The newspaper had an exclusive arrangement for many years with Starbucks, but the chain
began selling other papers in 2010.
The journal was discussing other ways Starbucks customers could gain access to the publication, said Colleen Schwartz, a spokeswoman for the Dow Jones.
Maybe you could do something where, like, if you log into Starbucks Wi-Fi, you get the New York Times, right?
Like, that's actually really simple, and then you're on your iPad or whatever.
Uh, they say print circulation has declined across the country according to data published in July.
Ooh, this is interesting.
Let's pull this one up.
Let's hop over to Pew Research before heading over to Columbia Journalism Review, which is a fake news publication, I might add, as they have published actual fake news.
I will say that as a statement of fact.
Newspapers fact sheet.
Show me the data.
And there it is.
So, in the 40s we can see things started to go up.
Let me see.
Weekday and Sunday papers.
Sunday papers had a huge spike in the 80s to the 90s.
But everything's down, down, down.
And it's really bad.
I'm surprised it's as high as it is.
Check this out.
In 2018, nearly 30 million.
Weekday and Sunday papers being distributed.
No surprise, though.
Media's on the decline.
And I'll tell you this.
One of the reasons we are seeing the woke left take over is because of the desperation.
So don't blame journalism.
Like, don't blame the whole of these media companies for the most part.
Like, you can blame them for the hiring, but check it out.
A good journalist is expensive.
I know how to research things.
I know how to find- I'm not trying to be hyperbolic.
I could literally find you personally, okay?
I could find your name, your address, everywhere you've lived, your phone number, your parents' phone numbers.
I could find your social security number, your pri- I could find literally everything out about you in like a day, okay?
I can use that to learn everything else.
Like, I know how to dig in and actually fact check and find and source information, and I know what ethics are.
A good example is, when I do stories, I find the source of the claim and use the initial source.
What does most media do?
They just cite each other in a big circle called cytogenesis, where someone makes a false claim.
So let's say NBC lies, or makes something up, then, you know, the Daily Beast will cite them, and then Deadline will cite the Daily Beast, and then NBC will cite the Daily Beast, making a fact with no actual source.
It's just a nebulous cytogenesis.
I don't do that.
If I can't find the actual claim or evidence, I say I won't use it.
I won't confirm it.
However, someone like me, you gotta spend a lot of money.
I'm sorry.
A good journalist costs money because there's training and talent involved.
So here's what happens.
As these papers begin to lay people off, and they are, we then see an opportunity for digital
outlets that produce rage bait.
Then you can hire someone who's fresh out of college who wants to work for 30 or 40
grand, who has no idea what they're talking about and just garbles nonsense all day and
generates clicks.
When the business becomes about money, not journalism, what happens?
It's very simple.
They say whoever gets the most clicks wins.
We're going to keep you on board.
We're going to fire other people.
So you then end up seeing woke, rage-bait articles that drive you insane.
Even Columbia Journalism Review is guilty of this.
They're fake news.
They've done it.
I will never do that, but I admit this.
It is a big challenge for Subverse, which I don't have pulled up, but youtube.com slash subverse videos and subverse.net is the news enterprise for which I am helping build.
Admittedly, it's being run mostly by Emily, whose producers worked with me in the past, so give her the credit.
The intention is to be straight news, and we're probably going to be launching a dedicated podcast for Subverse.
It's going to be, like, centrist... I don't want to say IDW-type, but, like, the goal is to make it more rational IDW-type commentary on news events and culture and things like that.
Very similar to what I'm doing, but with more people.
So that's going to be coming up soon with Subverse.
And our goal is to never just be a rage bait outlet.
The news is going to be what we think is important.
And if you look at our videos now, it's really funny how people like to point to my videos and be like, look, he only talks about, you know, hating the left.
And I'm like, I got three channels, dude.
And sometimes I talk about aliens.
I have talked about aliens on this channel more times than I care to admit because it was in the news and it was interesting.
And on Subverse, where we dedicate the actual news content to, I have hosted Over a hundred or several hundred maybe at this point?
Maybe a couple hundred videos?
No, maybe like a hundred.
I don't know.
Just straight news videos, and you've probably seen them.
Rather boring.
So yes, I do legitimate journalism outside of political commentary.
Just because political commentary sells better doesn't mean I don't do journalism.
These people are nuts.
We face a challenge in that, admittedly.
Because we're not going to make rage-bait content.
You know, when we do videos about Mark Zuckerberg and Facebook hurting, people love it, and we get tons of hits.
And I'm like, well, I can't control what people are interested in.
We're not going to make a channel dedicated to hating on Facebook.
We'll present news on Facebook without our opinions when it's relevant.
And there's a lot of negative news about Facebook.
So we say they're getting fined a bunch of money, they're bleeding users.
Facebook is not viewed favorably by most of the public, so there's a lot of stories coming out.
What happens with these outlets is they'll be like, ooh, hating Facebook does well, do more!
For us, it's like, well, we care about tech issues, sci-fi, and on-the-ground reporting, so if we're going to do an on-the-ground report, then we're not going to cover the Facebook stuff.
But this does put us at a huge disadvantage.
We do a video about, like, biology, and it'll get 15,000 views.
Not bad, but not good.
We'll do a video about Facebook, we get 70,000.
None of those videos will have our opinions in them.
Which means it's hard to stabilize and figure out exactly how we can make a sustainable platform.
We're aiming for subscriptions, like subscribe to us because we're not trying to woke you, like we're not trying to produce woke rage bait to drive traffic.
We're just trying to present important news and, you know, science, technology, security, and cultural politics.
But when we see the decline of these news outlets, The media companies that want to make money, the investors, just get woke rage-bait artists to make nonsense, and it works better than we'll ever, you know, experience, right?
On my channels, I have produced videos that I know, like, probably won't do as well, because my intention is not to make rage bait.
Although, like, admittedly, for an individual, I talk about what I care about.
I'll say this.
You come to my channel, you're gonna see a lot of my personal focus on, like, identitarian leftists and the damage they cause and anti-fuck.
Because I'm an individual, and it's what I think is most important.
When you look at Subverse, we have people arguing over what we think should or shouldn't be on top, and thus, it becomes more diverse.
The difference between what I do as an individual and what Subverse does as an organization, compared to these outlets, is that these outlets do the same thing as me as an individual, but at a corporate level with a flow chart and a plan.
There was an expose showing that Mike told their employees, produce woke rage bait.
So while you can absolutely criticize me for focusing on core issues, I'm a person with personal opinions opining on the things I care about.
It's different from a corporation, a business, that tells their staff, this is what makes money and we want you to do.
Subverse talks about what a variety of individuals working for Subverse thinks are important, and no, we're not chasing a narrative.
The company has no opinion.
Subverse doesn't have one.
We have our biases where we think this story about biomolecular technology is more important because we'll talk about it.
Sure.
But you look at these outlets like Mike, and we saw, I think it might have been from Tablet, I'm not sure, where they said employees had a formula they were told they had to follow to generate traffic.
So, while we're not perfect, and I'm not going to say what I do is any better than these companies, I will say it's a difference when it's an individual opining.
I can talk about whatever I want, man.
I'm going to make videos all day and night expressing my personal opinions.
I am not being funded by NBC to the tune of $200 million to do so.
I am an independent creator.
Subverse, which I am funding, I purposefully removed myself from for the most part so that it can be a legit news organization.
So, look.
Long story short, print is dying.
And I'll wrap this up.
And while we can laugh at these companies for doing it to themselves, you know, New York Times publishes some fake news.
They did a front page fake news story about YouTube.
There you go.
There it is.
The desperation makes them just nasty.
Well, you shouldn't do it.
And you deserve what you get when you do.
And even CJR, Columbia Journalism Review, published overt fake news.
Legitimately.
Fake.
Completely made up.
Fabricated.
It is what it is.
We'll try and do best.
Go and follow us over at YouTube.com slash Subverse Videos if you want to see straight news reporting.
I'll tell you this now.
Expect it to be rather boring, but that's the point.
It's not supposed to cater to you and your feelings.
It's supposed to inform you, and that's what it does.
But I will add, right now there's a plan for like a Sunday podcast, which will be very much like what I'm doing now, but with the other Subverse, you know, team members.
So there will be pushback and kind of the goal is to make a centrist, you know, like podcast talking about what we like.
Like I think it's important to talk about centrist opinions and moderate, you know, left-leaning positions because I'm one of very few people who actually does it and I need other people to balance out a get away from what I think is important, right?
So it's an expansion.
I'll leave it there.
But anyway, I'm gonna wrap this up.
Stick around.
Next segment will be tomorrow at 10 a.m.
on this channel.
Podcast every day at 6 30 p.m.
Except I'm terrible because I can't schedule them and I forget.
But thanks for hanging out and I will see you all in the next segment.
