Democrats Fall Right Into Trump's Trap, CHAOS Erupts In House Over Tweets
Democrats Have Fallen Into Trump's Trap, CHAOS Erupts In House Over Tweets. The tweet debacle continues as House Democrats are sent into complete chaos trying to denounce Trump's tweets.Vox's Ezra Klein recently came out to say that Trump is trying to force Democrats to prop up the far left socialists in order to frame the Democrats as entirely far left. It worked.Not only did Trump successfully distract from possibly the biggest story in his presidency, the ending of asylum for Central Americans, he forced Democrats to prop up Ocasio-Cortez ad the far left, and has now has the Democrats bickering with each other instead of getting anything done.At a time when we need Democrats unified Trump easily set a trap and sent Democrats into chaos.
Support the show (http://timcast.com/donate)
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Many people immediately got offended and said that his tweets were racist when he said these progressive congresswomen should go back to their countries, figure out what works, and then bring it back, tell us, you know, what they did.
Many people said it's an old racist trope about go back to where you came from.
Now I criticized Trump when he did this, as did many other conservatives, without realizing this was probably part of a bigger strategy.
See, Nancy Pelosi had been attacking Ocasio-Cortez, and there was a lot of bickering going back and forth.
This was showing the American people, the Democrats, were standing up to the far left.
Trump forced them to circle the wagons and put AOC and the other far-left Democrats front and center.
Even Ezra Klein of Vox said Trump is trying to frame his narrative that Democrats are far-left and socialist.
But Trump's plan has worked beyond even, I'd imagine, better than he could have even imagined.
Because now, the House is in disarray.
Chaos, they say.
In fact, here's the story.
House thrown into chaos after Pelosi decries Trump's racist tweets on the floor.
She broke decorum.
She wasn't allowed to speak.
That's my understanding.
We'll read the story.
And one Democrat even stormed out saying nothing was getting done for the American people.
Trump's plan.
Brilliant.
So I'll absolutely criticize his tweets as distasteful.
But you can't call him tactless.
It works perfectly into his strategy.
Aside from this news, we're going to be digging into these stories.
The biggest story, I believe, of Trump's presidency is that he's made moves to end asylum for Central Americans.
And where is the mainstream media?
Where is the outrage?
Where is the story?
Where is Nancy Pelosi bickering over tweets?
The madman's done it.
I'm shocked and impressed at the same time.
With only a string of tweets, he has been able to distract the press and the Democrats from a major story and send them into complete chaos.
So the first story we're going to start with is the House being thrown into chaos.
But I do want to mention one point from this New York Times story before we get started.
Head over to TimCast.com slash Dunnit if you'd like to support my work.
There's a PayPal option, a crypto option, a physical address, but the best thing you can do, share this video on social media, because YouTube no longer suggests independent commentators the same way they used to.
They actually de-rank us.
That means I rely on word of mouth if you think people should hear what I have to say, and I greatly appreciate it if you do.
The first thing I want to highlight, New York Times writes, Trump sets the 2020 tone like 2016, only this time, the squad is here.
Particularly, I want to highlight this passage.
They say, Trump has told aides, in fact, he is pleased with the Democratic reaction to his attacks, boasting that he is marrying the House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and the Democratic Party to the four Congresswomen known as the Squad.
For those that have missed the past couple of videos I've made, a poll from Axios came out showing that in swing states, people find AOC to be very unfavorable.
Around 72 or 73% of people know who she is, but only 22% like her.
Ilhan Omar only has a 9% favorability.
Trump knows he needs them to be the face of the Democratic Party so that he can win in 2020 and the Republicans can reclaim the House.
Well, this is the story I've gone over, so that's the context.
And here's the latest update.
It's worked better than Trump could have imagined.
The Democrats are fighting each other.
They're breaking House rules, throwing the Democrats into chaos.
Trump's over simple tweets.
Trump has caused massive damage to the Democrats.
And I gotta say, I'm shocked.
Let's read the story from Politico.
House thrown into chaos after Pelosi decries Trump's racist tweets on floor.
They say, The House voted along party lines to allow Speaker Nancy Pelosi to call President Donald Trump's tweets about minority Democratic lawmakers racist in the congressional record on Tuesday, overriding a parliamentary ruling and GOP objections.
Pelosi's comments were initially ruled out of order on the floor itself, a small victory for the Republicans during a tense day in which both sides exchanged accusations of racism, hypocrisy, and indecorous behavior unworthy of Congress or the country.
The drama over Pelosi's comments sure to rankle Trump played out before the House voted 240-187 to condemn Trump's weekend tweets about four Democratic members of color.
They go on to mention AOC and Rashida Tlaib, Ayanna Pressley, Ilhan Omar, etc.
House members aren't allowed to refer to Trump or his tweets as racist when speaking on the floor, even though the resolution they voted on Tuesday said as much.
These rules on floor decorum are part of a package the body approved on the first day of current Congress.
So listen, not only did Trump send the house into chaos, he got them to break their own rules and they got them to pass a resolution that actually they weren't allowed to say.
The resolution was decrying Trump as racist.
They weren't allowed to speak it based on their own rules.
This is ridiculous.
Not only do they have the far-left congressman, which many people don't like, front and center, they're fighting now.
Trump has just... He's just sent the whole Democrats... The Democratic Party is in chaos.
Let's read on.
That led to a bizarre scene on Tuesday.
Only clerks reading the resolution aloud were allowed to say the resolution condemned Trump's, quote, racist tweets, demonstrating once again how different lawmaking is from real life.
The chaotic dispute began when Pelosi went to the floor to bash Trump over his tweets about the squad, as the four freshman lawmakers referred to themselves.
Trump said the four Democrats should go back and help fix the totally broken crime infested places from which they came after incorrectly stating they were originally from the countries.
Trump's tweets caused an immediate uproar throughout Washington, but let's let's move on from this.
They say, Pelosi decided to push the limits.
Every single member of this institution, Democratic and Republican, should join us in condemning the president's racist tweets, Pelosi said during her floor speech.
To do anything less would be a shocking rejection of our values and a shameful abdication of our oath of office to protect the American people.
Republicans immediately objected.
Doug Collins asked Pelosi to rephrase her statement, and when she refused, he sought to have the words stricken from official record.
No speaker has had their words taken down, as the process is referred to in 35 years, and even challenging a speaker's comments is considered a serious breach of etiquette.
Colin's request led to a nearly two hour delay in floor proceedings.
Now here is the part where I was actually shocked.
Rep.
Emanuel Cleaver, Democrat, a member of the Congressional Black Caucus, who was sitting in the Speaker's chair for the dispute, didn't want to be a part of it when it became clear Pelosi was going to lose via a ruling by the House Parliamentarian over whether her comments would be allowed.
As Cleaver stormed off the floor, several Democratic members could be heard gasping.
Others turned to each other with confused looks.
Quote, This whole day, we haven't gotten anything for the American public, Cleaver later told reporters.
And at the center of this is just one man.
All this based on one man's words.
Well, without going into greater context, I want to give my personal respect to Cleaver, because that's spot on.
This is what the Democrats do.
Trump says naughty words on Twitter, and this is what they do.
Nothing was done for the American people.
Yes, Trump is worthy of some of this blame.
I criticize him.
I do not appreciate his tweets.
But I can certainly respect his strategy.
Okay, and I don't mean respect in a positive light.
I mean, the man knew what he was doing, and it worked.
Vox comes out with a story saying Trump is trying to force the Democrats to unify on purpose.
And now look at what's happening.
Not only has a fight reignited between Democrats Nancy Pelosi and Cleaver here now.
I don't want to necessarily frame it that way, but Cleaver storms out saying nothing's getting done.
So they're back to being in disarray.
But they've also now not only Are the Democrats fighting each other?
But now the four far-left Democrats are front and center.
One of the biggest criticisms of Trump's tweets was that the Democrats were fighting, and people said, just let them fight.
They look terrible.
And when Trump tweeted, they unified.
Now, I criticize that, as did many others, and I failed to realize what Trump's true play here was.
He wants the far-left front and center.
Think about the outcome of Trump's plan now.
Not only is the far left front and center, but the Democrats are still fighting.
And they look ridiculous.
Bickering over whether or not to denounce Trump's tweets, instead of actually doing something for the American people.
Trump played, you know, I said the other day, he played the media like a fiddle.
He played them for fools.
But it is even beyond what I could have imagined.
I'm shocked to see this story.
They take the bait every single time.
They take his bait and it works.
We know Trump does this.
We know.
When Trump got elected, people were saying he played the media and got $5 billion in free press.
You know, look, man, people want to claim that Trump is an idiot.
He is not an idiot.
He may be.
He may shoot... How do I... Impulsive, perhaps.
Impulsive.
Maybe a bit boorish, but not stupid by no means.
I'm sitting here and I, you know, I pride myself as being a person of... I don't want to say I'm the smartest person in the world, but I think I'm clever, right?
I study, I read, I play mind games and strategy games to try and keep myself sharp, and I couldn't see this coming!
All I saw were Trump's tweets.
I was played.
I said, oh, here goes Trump mouthing off again.
And now look where we are.
This is, this is, I'm, I'm flabbergasted to say the least.
Let's, let's, let's read more about what they say.
Democrats then scrambled to find someone to take Cleaver's place.
Members of the Congressional Black Caucus, several of whom were on the floor for the debate, refused, not wanting to be the one to strike the Speaker's comments.
Butterfield, a former CBC chairman, briefly stepped in, followed by House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, who read a parliamentary ruling when announcing that Pelosi's comments were out of order.
When asked whether Cleaver's abandonment of the chair was unprecedented, Hoyer said, I've not seen this before.
There was a lengthy delay after Collins' request, during which leadership on both sides of the aisle, the parliamentarian and various members involved in the debate consulted.
That led to Hoyer's announcement and a party-line vote.
That vote allowed Pelosi's remarks to remain in the congressional record as part of the official debate, even though members still can't call Trump a racist on the floor.
Afterward, Collins said the House prizes decorum, and he hopes we recover that confidence soon, and more forward with respect for the American people who sent elected officials, including the President, to represent them in Washington.
Pelosi, however, remained defiant.
I stand by my statement, Pelosi told reporters, as she walked back onto the House floor.
I'm proud of the attention that is being called to it, because what the President said is completely inappropriate against our colleagues.
Well, congratulations, Nancy.
The Democrats look crazy.
They're fighting.
People are storming out of meetings.
You're propping up the far left.
The Axios poll shows us whatever your crit— Look, Ezra Klein criticized it.
Of course they're going to try to criticize it, but let's be real.
People don't like AOC and Ilhan Omar.
Certainly, a lot of people do like them, but they are contentious— They're controversial figures.
Okay?
While some people really like them, a lot of people really, really don't like them.
And that's what Trump wants.
He wants them front and center.
And you did it.
I want to point out a couple funny things here.
This tweet from Yashar Ali.
Yes, Nancy Pelosi is.
And what is she doing?
She is falling for the bait.
Yasha responded, isn't the woman third in line to the presidency and with the singular
ability to start an impeachment inquiry technically the power?
Yes, Nancy Pelosi is.
And what is she doing?
She is falling for the bait.
She is playing right into the hands of Donald Trump.
And what so let's let's talk about why Donald Trump wants them to be front and center.
Well, there's a story.
This story from this morning.
You may ask, outside of the squad being less than favorable, are there examples we can look at that show why they're so unfavorable?
And yes, we have this post from Mediaite.
Watch.
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Rashida Tlaib blame Speaker Pelosi for attacks and death threats.
Progressive Democrat members of the Squad laid varying degrees of blame for attacks and death threats at Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi's feet during the group's first interview since Trump's racist tweets.
They implied that Nancy Pelosi was racist because she was singling them out.
You can't even criticize these people without being called racist.
That's the game they play.
And Trump wants Nancy Pelosi playing that game all day and night.
So look where Nancy is now.
She's being accused of bigotry, of essentially provoking death threats against these people, and then she steps up to defend them, looking weak.
He's put her in an untenable situation.
There is nothing Nancy Pelosi can do to come out of this on top, and he played it perfectly.
He even defended Nancy Pelosi, saying, of course she's not racist.
Now Nancy Pelosi, a Democrat, is being slammed by the progressives, defended by the president, and now she's attacking the president.
It is complete chaos.
And what's the point?
Trump's base is not going to abandon him over this.
They're laughing.
They're laughing all the way to the ballot box.
They love what he does.
They love that he's playing these games.
On the left, they're attacking themselves.
They're in a circular firing squad, and Trump's spinning around in circles.
The story says, On Wednesday morning, CBS aired Gayle King's extensive interview with Ocasio-Cortez, the squad, you know who they are.
Toward the end of the interview, King asked the group if there existed a fracture between the squad and Speaker Pelosi.
I don't feel a fracture, Rep Omar said, and AOC agreed, saying, I don't, I don't.
I think that just as there are members of Congress that did not vote for the Speaker on the House floor on the day of our swearing-in, just as there are members who challenge her conclusions, who disagree with her, so do we from time to time.
But that does not mean that there is a fundamental fracture or a dehumanizing going on within our caucus.
When you say things like the Speaker of the House is being disrespectful to women of the color, is she, according to you, being disrespectful to women of color because of your color or because she doesn't like your policies or the tactics that you are all taking to make your point, King asked?
Right, and I'll clarify.
I did not say that she was disrespectful of women of color.
Ocasio-Cortez said, but adds, But the important part of the story comes from Rashida Tlaib.
When she says that she is Speaker of the House, she can ask for a meeting to sit down with us for clarification.
Singling out on the basis of one vote was creating an opening.
But the important part of the story comes from Rashida Tlaib.
When she says that she is Speaker of the House, she can ask for a meeting to sit down with
us for clarification.
The fact of the knowledge is, and I've done racial justice work in our country for a long
time, acknowledge the fact that we are women of color.
So when you do single us out, be aware of that and what you're doing.
Especially because some of us are getting death threats.
Because some of us are being singled out in many ways because of our backgrounds, because of our experiences and so forth.
What did she say right there?
Well, it's very simple.
You cannot criticize them for their wrongdoing because they will get death threats because of it.
Think about that.
When they do something wrong, they get singled out.
Right.
If someone else does something wrong, you criticize them for it.
I will criticize them all day and night.
I don't care what the color of your skin is, if you're worthy of criticism, you will get it because I'm an equal opportunity critic.
I will give you praise when praise is due, but this idea that you can't criticize them because they're women of color is absurd.
And that's what Trump wants front and center.
He wants to keep putting them in front for several reasons.
For one, people don't like them, like I mentioned.
But more importantly, no matter what they do, they use the Identitarian card against the Democrats, causing serious problems.
What would any other Democrat do?
They would apologize.
They'd keep it under wraps.
But these people are above criticism because you're a bigot if you criticize them.
And now we can see what may be one of the funniest developments for the Democratic Party.
And I don't mean this to be disrespectful, but we have this story that I will end off on.
So let me wrap up everything we've seen so far in that last segment before I get into this one.
Donald Trump has played the media and the Democrats and they're falling into disarray.
It's incredible.
It's like he pulled up, it's like a Jenga tower and he pulled up that block and the whole tower came crumbling down.
Again, I'll stress, I didn't see it.
I didn't.
And now I can see the damage he's caused the Democrats with his tweets.
While Trump does look bad to a lot of people over what he said, it doesn't matter.
Trump's base doesn't care.
They don't.
They're going to support him through this.
You cannot insult the man.
There's been smear after smear against Trump.
He's been called every name in the book.
And his approval rating is higher now than it's been in the past two years.
Trump knows the smears don't work.
So he knows he can send you into disarray by finding that attack vector.
And there it is.
So Trump, he's played them.
Plain and simple.
And it's, I'll say it for the last time, it's probably worked better than he would have imagined.
But now let's take a look at this last little tidbit that I think is actually quite funny.
Marian Williamson is now polling ahead of Beto O'Rourke, Cory Booker, and Kirsten Gillibrand in New Hampshire.
New Hampshire primary voters don't care for any of these Democrats.
We can see that Marianne Williamson is actually pulling ahead.
It's impressive.
But it shows us something about the Democrats.
They're fractured.
You've got these personalities that are running that no one cares about.
And to me, while I mean no disrespect to Marianne Williamson, I think she's a very lovely individual, We can see that in the end, the Democrats are all over the place.
Completely all over the place.
And what's going to happen, I don't know.
But I will say this.
Trump knows how to push their buttons.
Perfectly.
And it works.
Period.
And there you have it.
So I'm going to wrap up there.
This one has been kind of all over the place because I've had some distractions and some, you may have noticed the jump cuts, but it is what it is.
Stick around.
The next segment will be at youtube.com slash timcastnews starting at 6pm.
Thanks for hanging out and I will see you all next time.
CNN has been hurting pretty bad.
The ratings are down.
They're in a credibility crisis.
They're being slammed by Fox News and many others.
And in their desperation, what did CNN do?
They brought on Richard Spencer.
Now, first, let me say something.
I see a lot of people on the left and the right slamming CNN, saying you shouldn't have done this.
Well, they shouldn't have, but the people criticizing them are criticizing them for the wrong reason for the most part.
By all means, you can interview Richard Spencer about issues that are relevant.
I don't think we should blame journalists for talking to people because they do it to me all the time.
Simply because CNN wants to hear what Spencer has to say doesn't mean they did anything wrong.
Except, it proves they're complete hypocrites, and it does show how desperate they are.
There is a good reason why CNN should not have had Richard Spencer on, and it's because according to their own standards, you shouldn't be platforming right-wing extremists.
So now, in CNN's complete and total desperation, what have they done?
Dare I say it, they have unified left and right.
And there are few things in this world that can actually get the left and the right to come together.
And what I mean by left and right is like the Twitter, political, you know, left and right.
Most people left and right probably get along just fine.
But when it comes to the online culture war stuff, you actually have an agreement, essentially, Or I should say left and right in agreement that CNN platformed Richard Spencer uncritically and let him just say whatever he wants.
Now, here's the thing.
CNN, in my opinion, had him on because they were trying to smear the president, essentially.
Trump made some tweets.
He's being slammed and accused of racism.
It's causing this big controversy.
And I may have another story on this later, a bigger story about the, I don't know, the Democrats are in a downward spiral.
But let's keep it to CNN for this segment.
So, what really happened is that Richard Spencer effectively said he didn't like the president and he thought it was nothing.
CNN brought on Richard Spencer, presumably, at least in my opinion, because they wanted to align what Trump said with white nationalism, and Spencer's response was, Trump didn't do anything.
He's doing nothing for white nationalists.
He's just saying stupid things that your drunk uncle would say.
In effect, CNN allowed a white nationalist to go on their platform and say, no, Trump isn't actually doing anything for white nationalists other than throwing out red meat.
So let's take a look at this first story and then we'll get into the criticism.
But the first thing I want to highlight, just so you have the context so I don't bury the lead, is it was this tweet from Oliver Darcy.
Darcy said Trump inviting right-wing extremists and trolls to the White House is maybe the clearest example of him seeking to validate fringe political allies.
He's also boosting those people, of course, while working simultaneously to tear down legitimate news orgs.
It's alarming and dangerous.
Boy, am I embarrassed for you, Oliver, because, listen, you want to have that opinion about the White House?
Fine.
But you work for a network that just uncritically aired the thoughts of Richard Spencer.
So who now is validating fringe political beliefs?
Is it the White House for inviting me when I went on to rag on the president, as did many other conservatives over these tweets?
Is it because conservatives showed up to his event?
And I'll say this too, the White House Social Media Summit just felt like a VIP Trump rally.
I felt it was rather ineffective and kind of a waste of time.
But hey, I appreciate being invited to the White House.
So Oliver Darcy wants to smear those attendees and say, oh look, Trump's inviting extremists.
Yeah, no, I'm sorry.
I can't speak for other people there because I don't really know, but I'll tell you this.
Will Chamberlain and I, far from extremists.
We've been called very tep—we've been criticized of being too tepid, for the most part.
Somewhat, um...
Someone referred to Will, not in a disrespectful manner, but just said he was as extreme as the vanilla yogurt they were eating.
Yeah, because Will is just like a moderate Republican guy.
He's just kind of, and I mean this with all due respect, Will is just a regular dude who has opinions that happen to be conservative, and he is not, by any means, far-right at all.
And I'm your go-to milquetoast fence-sitter with social liberal policy positions.
And Oliver Darcy wants to paint this as extremists.
Okay, congratulations, Oliver Darcy.
Well, if that, then I don't know what you are.
You must be so far off the Overton window working for CNN, which is actually platforming white nationalists.
It's silly, listen.
By all means, you can interview people.
But the problem is, we know that they're doing it because they're trying to push a narrative.
unidentified
All of these white nationalists supported Trump's tweets.
And so they bring on a guy to then counteract that narrative?
It makes absolutely no sense.
So let's see what happened.
What did the left and the right have to say?
Now, before moving on, make sure you go to TimCast.com if you'd like to support my work.
There's a PayPal option, a crypto option, and a physical address.
And the reason I need to promote this, and I need to ask you to share this video if you like it, is because the news today is considered unworthy on YouTube.
I kid you not.
This is a story that's being picked up by left, right, center, everybody's talking about this.
Except YouTube doesn't allow us to talk about it.
It makes literally no sense.
Do they think advertisers don't want to exist?
Okay, this is politics right now.
This is the hill.
Okay, it's not extreme.
But of course, simply by talking about these issues, YouTube says, we don't want none of that.
Okay, we get it YouTube, you hate news.
Well, all that really means is if you like what I do, please share it because we rely on word of mouth.
Let's read on.
The Hill writes, CNN was the subject of widespread criticism Tuesday after white nationalist Richard Spencer appeared on the network to give his commentary regarding President Trump's recent tweets attacking four minority congresswomen.
Spencer's name appeared with the title White Nationalist in the on-screen chyron as he discussed what the neo-Nazi community of which he is a part.
Actually, I don't know if that's necessarily true.
Look, depending on where you stand, a lot of people will just claim he is a neo-nazi, but I think there is a distinction.
Now, from like a mainstream, and I know I'm pulling hairs here because it's just that Spencer does something different that I think is important to criticize.
He puts on a suit, he puts on a tie, and he's very presentable, and he approaches this from a very mainstream political approach.
However, his ideas are very supported by many people in, you know, Neo-Nazis and things like that.
So, I don't know how you actually quantify what Spencer is other than a white nationalist.
So, well, I'll give it to the hill, okay?
Whatever.
You want to call him that?
Fine.
I don't know, maybe it's pointless to even try to differentiate between the two because they're so similar.
But let's read on.
They had him on to talk about what he thought about Trump's tweets, which have been widely condemned as racist.
He said that many white nationalists will eat up this red meat that Donald Trump is throwing out there.
Spencer labeled the tweets in which Trump told the four progressive Democrats to go back to their countries, As racist, but he said he thinks the attacks are meaningless and cheap.
He gives us nothing outside of racist tweets.
And by racist tweets I mean tweets that are meaningless and cheap and express the kind of sentiments you might hear from your drunk uncle while he's watching Hannity.
And I think that's an interesting point, actually.
I think it's a very important point that Spencer actually brings up.
He's right.
There's a lot of drunk uncles and family members who are racist and would sit there and say the same things as the president, and they don't see it as racist.
Now, here's the thing.
A lot of people are going to say that what Trump said wasn't racist, and there's a few funny points that I want to bring up.
Trump never called them out by name.
They stood up and everyone assumed they knew who he was talking about and that's kind of a funny thing because let's be real we know who Trump is talking about but it is kind of funny that he didn't say their names and they all stood up so it's like well they stood up in the sense that they you know did a press conference and called him out but the thing is Right now, there is a schism in American culture over racism because, in my opinion, the left has cried racism so much, nobody's buying it anymore.
I certainly think there is an argument to be made as to why Trump's tweet was racist, okay?
Because these four progressive congresswomen, of which we can only assume he was talking about, Are not white.
And we've heard this over and over again.
In fact, you can see videos all over the place of people yelling, go back to where you came from.
Admittedly, it's not like only white people do this.
You can be racist towards anybody, but typically you're making the assumption that who you're yelling at isn't from here, or you're telling them to leave because it's your country or something like that.
The phrase isn't always racist, but I can understand why people would think in this context it is, right?
That's the important distinction.
So here's what happens.
Trump supporters say he's talking about countries, okay?
He's not talking about race.
You can tell a white person to go back to Ukraine and fix their country and it means the same thing and it's not racist because Ukrainians are white.
But the left, which views the world through a lens of racism, will say this is racist because let's be real.
In certain contexts, this is absolutely racist.
The assumption that certain countries aren't as good.
But I will say, too, Europe is kind of in disarray as well, so... The main point I'm trying to bring up is that obviously Trump supporters are saying it's not, and Trump haters are saying it is.
So what do you do?
You're now going to have a left saying a responsible journalist is going to say it absolutely was, and the right saying if you're responsible you say it wasn't.
There's no way.
There's no way to address this in kind of a balanced manner.
Other than to just pick your opinion, you know?
So, it is what it is.
So listen.
Let's take a look at some of the tweets, because I don't want to prattle on too much about this.
I want to show you how the left and the right are equally upset with CNN.
Steve Krakauer says, Today, on its valuable airwaves, CNN gave a platform to white nationalist Richard Spencer.
There is literally nothing productive Spencer brings to the conversation.
Whoever made this shameful decision should be fired.
Rahim Kassam points out the Oliver Darcy tweet.
He says, bad.
Ex-Muslim Rahim Kassam, Kassam, black conservative at Ali, David Harris Jr., Jewish Office of Mike, Christians, Mormons, and everything in between.
But what CNN does think is okay is Richard Spencer.
And he puts CNN contributor in stars.
And then he says, RT if you think we say CNN contributor Richard Spencer from now on.
Carlos Maza tweets CNN invited an open white supremacist on national television today.
This isn't a news network with journalistic ethics.
It's a circus that's willing to help promote open racists for attention.
Wow.
I kind of agree with Carlos Maza on this one.
CNN isn't bringing him on because they think his opinion is valuable.
They're bringing him on because it fits a narrative, and they're bringing him on for the shock value because they're desperate.
And someone tweeted this.
I wonder if they have this tweet.
No.
I don't remember who tweeted this, but I want to mention it.
They said something like, this is what the bottom of the barrel of ratings looks like.
This is what desperation looks like.
So here's the thing.
Let me say, and I want to pull up the next story so we can actually talk about what Richard Spencer did say, and actually address it, which CNN did not do.
CNN should not be criticized for having someone on to speak their opinion.
CNN should be criticized for two things.
They're using Richard Spencer for shock value to smear the president, and they should be criticized for Oliver Darcy's tweet where he ragged on the president for bringing conservatives and right-wing individuals to the White House.
That was shocking to Oliver Darcy?
I'm embarrassed for you, okay?
Because what your network did is way worse.
Bringing on Richard Spencer to validate his fringe political views, as you describe it.
Now let's be real.
That's not what's happening, okay?
CNN is trying to use him because he'll generate ratings.
They want people to look at this, and they want to show white nationalists like the president.
They didn't do that, though, right?
So in the end, what ends up happening is CNN puts on Richard Spencer, who then rags on Trump.
All they've done is actually show that one of the most prominent voices among white nationalists doesn't like the president.
Congratulations, CNN!
It's compl- it's- it's- oh my god.
Let's take a look at what Spencer actually said, though.
So the Daily Caller writes, CNN gives white nationalist Richard Spencer airtime to dissect Trump's tweets, and he's not a fan.
So I did read what he said that, you know, it's basically what your racist uncle would say, but I just want to show you some of the context.
They show a bunch of tweets from, you know, white nationalists and others.
They say, from the ADL, prominent white supremacists, neo-Nazis, and anti-Muslim bigots have fully embraced Donald Trump's recent tweets.
But in what the network called a twist, white nationalist Richard Spencer was among those who are turning on Trump.
Wait, what?
CNN decided to kind of defend the president?
I'm confused.
What was their goal here?
Seriously, what was the intention that CNN had with doing this?
The interview was pre-shot, they edited this, and then they actually said that white nationalists are turning on the president because he doesn't do enough for them?
It's almost like they're trying to defend Donald Trump.
In reality, I think what they're trying to do is just get ratings, and it's kind of sad.
CNN has become so just disgusting and desperate, they've actually got left and right unified against them for once.
You know, for the longest time, let me say this, progressives don't like CNN.
It's not like this is a new thing.
Conservatives don't like CNN, but CNN was typically seen as, like, kind of okay by mainstream leftists.
Now they're just viewed as a circus, like Carlos Maza said.
CNN is in a downward spiral.
And here's the thing.
While CNN does really well on YouTube, that is nothing.
It is nothing in terms of how much money they actually need to survive.
So I'll tell you this.
We can look at CNN's ratings on TV and see how just abysmal they are and how horrible things are going for this network.
You look at YouTube and they get it.
They get hundreds of millions of views.
They get like millions of views per day.
That's great.
They're probably making a decent amount of money on YouTube.
But I tell you this, the amount of money they make on YouTube is nowhere near what they need.
And I'll add this too.
When CNN sells an ad on their network, they get, you know, basically 100% of that ad.
I don't know how they break it down or what partners they have.
When they sell ads on YouTube, they get 60% of that.
They might get more, they might have premium access, but they're giving a cut to Google, which means not only are the ad rates lower, they're not selling ads necessarily.
So the point is, if CNN can't make it on TV, they're not gonna make it on YouTube, man.
So, I will add one more thing.
I am interested now to go and check Facebook.
Facebook bans this kind of content.
Seriously.
You cannot post these videos to Facebook.
I wonder if CNN actually did.
Because that would be a violation of Facebook's rules.
The only way you're allowed to have someone like Spencer on is if you explicitly condemn them.
They don't.
They let him say whatever he wants and spread the opinions of these people.
But of course, you know how it works.
Big corporate players are protected, and they get to do whatever they want.
Simultaneously calling people like me an extremist, but then giving airtimes to actual white nationalists and acting like that's fine.
So, again, I will stress, but by all means, interview Richard Spencer.
I think it's silly, you know, that people are criticizing.
I've seen conservatives say, like, how dare you uncritically air his opinion?
It's like, nah, come on, man.
You know, news organizations need to do this.
Sunlight is the best disinfectant.
The real problem is the hypocrisy.
The real problem is CNN acting like you shouldn't platform people, like Alex Jones shouldn't be allowed to be, you know, on YouTube at all, but then when it comes to them, they actually put on someone who's a white nationalist and act like that's okay.
So look, it is.
Alex Jones should be allowed on the programs, Alex Jones should have a YouTube channel, and so should Richard Spencer.
And we can see what they have to say, and then talk about how we don't like what they have to say, but they have a right to freedom of expression and speech, and massive corporations shouldn't dictate what we can or can't say or think.
CNN doesn't have any principles.
So it's rules for thee, but not for me.
So, I don't know, whatever, man.
Richard Spencer has his own opinions.
He's allowed to talk about them.
CNN is allowed to have him on.
Donald Trump is allowed to invite people to the White House, and everyone's allowed to speak up their minds.
So when you get on your high horse and try and play the game like you shouldn't platform people, CNN, well then don't be surprised when you get slammed by the left and the right for doing just that.
But I'll leave it there.
Stick around.
Next segment will be coming up at 1 p.m.
on this channel, and I will see you all then.
Celebrity, famous actor Chris Pratt was seen wearing a t-shirt.
That's the story.
There's nothing really here.
But of course, in today's day and age, you can't do anything without bothering someone and having some ridiculous media outlet try and stretch whatever it is you did into, drumroll please, white supremacy.
Yes, when you have one random cartoon avatar Twitter account say that you're a white supremacist, apparently you are now!
Because Chris Pratt wore a t-shirt.
I'm not kidding.
But here's the point I want to make with this story.
For one, we will go over what happened with Chris Pratt and his choice of t-shirt.
It's the Gadsden flag, by the way.
A symbol of freedom and resisting tyranny.
But sure, they're going to claim it's white supremacy.
But it's stories like this that I think are extremely bad for the Democrats.
Because look, Whether progressives and the left or Democrats want to admit it, this is associated with them, not Republicans.
This story about Chris Pratt being slammed over wearing a t-shirt is not attributed to Republicans.
It's the woke left.
So here's the thing.
Chris Pratt is famous, and beloved, and funny, and he happens to be religious, and my understanding is a bit conservative.
If you attack someone like him, he's one of the highest paid celebrities in the world.
Actors.
When you target him, you're putting a target on regular people.
You know, I said this about Joe Rogan, too.
You know, they try and smear Joe Rogan.
I'm like, that's a bad, bad play.
You know that, right?
Joe Rogan's a celebrity.
He's very famous.
He's a funny guy.
And he's like a lefty.
He's like almost a socialist who wants universal basic income.
They try and smear him.
Joe Rogan is more representative of regular Americans than these people realize.
Stories like this is bad, bad news for the Democrats.
It really is.
And I know it's getting kind of cliche at this point to say another woke thing means bad news for the Democrats, but we'll get into this.
First, let's take a look at what Chris Pratt did.
I mean, he wore a t-shirt.
And we'll look at some of the tweets that apparently warrant making a news story about it.
They don't, but sure, let's talk about it.
Before we get started, head over to TeamCast.com.
If you'd like to support my work, there's a PayPal option, a crypto option, and a physical address.
But of course, the best thing you can do, share this video.
I rely on word of mouth.
YouTube is de-ranking independent commentary.
If you think my video is good, or even better, Then CNN, Fox News, MSNBC.
Well, I rely on your word of mouth to help spread my content around because YouTube certainly is not going to help.
They're actually propping up the big corporate players.
But, feel free not to.
Let's read the news.
Yahoo apparently writes, Chris Pratt is facing criticism over a t-shirt he was pictured wearing featuring a controversial symbol.
Is that a joke?
The Gadsden flag controversial- Oh, gee, you know what, man?
They said the Betsy Ross flag was controversial.
They're making it up!
It is fake news!
The Marvel Stars- The Marvel Stars top shows the American flag with a coiled snake over the top and a message underneath which reads, Don't tread on me.
The writing and snake combo on its own is depicted on the Gadsden flag, a symbol created by Christopher Gadsden, a Charleston-born brigadier general in the Continental Army.
It came to prominence during the Revolutionary War of the U.S.
by colonists who wanted independence from Great Britain.
And look at this!
Hunter Harris, I have no idea who this person is, showing this photo of Chris Pratt wearing a shirt that says, Don't tread on me.
It's a Gadsden American flag.
That is just typical conservative and libertarian fare.
There's nothing racist about it.
It's a symbol of freedom and resisting tyranny.
That's about it.
Now, let's read on.
Although it is one of the symbols and flags used by the U.S.
men's soccer team, Metallica, as well as some libertarian groups, over the years, the flag has been adopted by far-right political groups like the Tea Party, as well as gun-toting supporters of the Second Amendment.
Wait, wait, wait.
Oh, no!
This is... Look, man.
If the Democrats and left-wing personalities don't speak out against this, they're sacrificing themselves.
This is insane.
Listen, you can disagree with gun-toting supporters of the Second Amendment, but if you're not trying to claim that Americans who support the Bill of Rights Are far right?
Okay, okay, hold on.
You know, you've lost the plot here.
If you're going to claim that the U.S.
men's soccer team is now aligning with the far right, soccer is one of the most popular, I think it's like the most popular sport in the world.
They've lost it.
You know, the media every day puts out this ridiculous nonsense, and it is a downward spiral to the left's destruction.
Because, again, it's not conservatives screaming about this stuff.
This fake outrage for profit is making the left look insane.
It's making many people on the left insane.
And here I am, a moderate liberal, former Bernie supporter, Obama voter, okay, you can criticize me for my positions now, but that's where I was, now looking at this saying, you've done lost the plot.
Plain and simple.
They say, it has therefore become a symbol of more conservative and far-right individuals, and according to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission of the U.S., it also is sometimes interpreted to convey racially tinged messages in some context.
Oh dear lord.
American history is racist.
Everything is racist.
Dogs are racist.
Time is racist.
Chris Pratt, famous celebrity, Guardians of the Galaxy, Infinity War, Endgame, like, he was in Endgame, right?
Yeah, he's in all of these big movies, some of the highest grossing movies of all time.
Okay, great, now, sure, that's where we're at.
You know what, man, I tell you, I warn you, they won't listen.
Regular people, of all colors and creed, go to see Marvel movies and rather enjoy them.
And Marvel's Infinity War made like a bil- almost two billion dollars.
Do you think now smearing Chris Pratt, one of the stars of said films, is a good idea?
You're gonna look crazy!
They're gonna be like, what?
Chris Pratt's not a white supremacist!
You're nuts!
Oh, man.
Let's read on.
It's why some people are critical of Pratt wearing a t-shirt featuring the Gadsden flag iconography.
Many have posted their feelings about it on Twitter.
First of all, who is this guy?
And why do I care about his opinion?
Second of all, you shouldn't even care about my opinion!
And I get a ton of views on the internet.
What does it mean?
You know, people spend too much time looking for other people's opinions, and it's getting really crazy.
It's one thing when it's like, here's a famous individual who has success.
They've successfully done X, Y, or Z. That's why I'll hear their opinion.
Or, this person is a religious figure, or a political figure.
Their opinion is important.
Now, I certainly can respect the opinions of common, you know, regular people, but to act like these people are indicative of the greater public is absurd.
You can go on Twitter and find someone who will criticize chocolate cake.
Are you then going like, their chocolate cake is wrong and we should ban it?
Are you then going to write an article being like, you know, or how about apple pie?
Write an article saying, people turn on apple pie, say it's bigoted.
They do it.
You get one person claiming dogs are racist, they publish an article.
You get one professor saying time, the concept of time is, I'm not exaggerating, and they run it.
And here you get a picture of Chris Pratt just walking down the street wearing, he probably got this shirt at like a gift shop in LA.
He probably walked in and was like, I just need a shirt real quick.
I was at the beach and he just grabbed it off the shelf.
And now they're like, oh, heavens!
Go to New York, go to Hollywood.
These shirts are probably everywhere.
Because it's just a show, it's just a Gadsden flail, oh my god.
But trust me, I may sound frustrated, I'm actually amused by this stuff.
Tim Burns, whoever this guy is, says, I like him, but all these small things about his politics make me wonder when he'll say something transphobic, tank his career, and do the full heel turn into a Fox commentator.
And this is the message we send to the left.
This is the message we're sending to people in this country from the left.
We're telling them, you know that shirt that's in the gift shop at the Liberty Bell Museum or whatever in Philadelphia?
That shirt you can buy and that picture of Thomas Jefferson?
All racist!
You can't wear it anymore!
It's a gift shop t-shirt.
Here's someone saying, Ellen Page called him out, and some of y'all didn't listen, now look at this.
Great.
That's everyone's fave, Chris Pratt, wearing a snake logo recently associated with lads from the Tea Party and the depths of 4chan.
Hot take.
It sucks this flag is now associated with alt-rights rather than those who appreciate John Locke's philosophies.
Whoa, whoa, whoa, but John Locke, you go on that, you're Sargon of Akkad now.
You're far right.
This person said, Although Pratt has not come out as a supporter of the Republican Party, it seems he shares conservative viewpoints on the gun lobby and is a member of the Hillsong Church, which has been accused by ex-members, as well as Ellen Page, of being homophobic.
The actor attends the church with his wife Katherine Schwarzenegger, who he married in early June.
Brett has most recently been promoting the first trailer of Pixar's new animation, Onward, in which he plays one of two teenage elf brothers alongside Tom Holland, who embark on an extraordinary quest to discover if there is still a little magic left in the world.
Sorry, Chris, there isn't!
And whatever is left is just ridiculous Twitter outrage from people who probably don't represent a greater public, Yet still, Yahoo is gonna crank out this story, and I'll tell you this, it's not only Yahoo.
Other people have been writing similar stories, saying, Chris Pratt was seen wearing the Gadsden flag.
Oh, heavens.
Is that all?
You know what, man?
We need a principled left wing in this country to push back on conservatives and republicans and the right.
And when they do this, what do they say to the left?
We're crazy.
We've lost the plot.
So why would someone support this?
It's nuts.
I assure you, there's gonna be some like, moderate liberal dude, sitting in his living room, just like, sipping on a Bud Light, watching the game, and this story pops up, and you know, his wife is like, do you see this story about Chris Pratt wearing the white supremacist t-shirt?
And he's gonna be like, whoa, really, Chris Pratt?
And then she's gonna be like, yeah, take a look, and he looks, and he's gonna see this symbol, and he's gonna be like, wait.
Wait, what?
And he's gonna look over on his wall, and there's gonna be a flag, or the same shirt, and he's gonna be like, these people are crazy.
Like I said, man, I'll leave it here.
You can buy the dang shirt in a gift shop.
These people have lost the plot.
So, you know what, man?
I hate to repeatedly say like, oh, it's bad for Democrats, but I'll say this, without trying to make it too circuitous, the point I'm trying to make Is that when these things happen and it's the woke left and then you see the debate stage, the Democrats parroting the same narrative.
Okay, regular people are going to be like, I don't have anything to do with these weirdos because that doesn't represent me.
And I'll tell you this, you know, if you're on, if you may be, you may be on the far left, progressive left, whatever you may say, Tim, I don't like you criticize the left too much.
Fine.
I don't care.
I should be the canary in the coal mine, as should Dave Rubin.
Because we are both people who are like lifelong Democrats who are now like, what's going on?
Like, you guys have lost it.
And let's even say this.
Let's say the Democrats haven't even gone that far left.
They have.
But let's just say that even if they moved a little bit to the left, They still lost to the moderates.
Period.
That's bad.
And it's stuff like this that makes me say, look, man, unless you come out and tell these people to STFU, I don't have anything to do with you.
I'm not a fan of Trump.
I don't like his tweets.
I'm not going to vote for that guy.
I don't like what he's doing for the most part.
He gets credit where credit is due because I'm not a crazy person, but this is nuts.
This is crazy people.
So I'm out.
But, uh, but I will say this, look, it's not all Democrats, but unfortunately this will reflect on Tulsi and Yang as well.
And I think they're principled and good people.
I like them.
I do.
You know, surprisingly, I actually did like Cory Booker for a while, but after the Kavanaugh thing, that's when I lost it for Booker.
I was just like... Was it Kavanaugh?
I can't remember.
I think it was Kavanaugh.
And I just was like, you know what, man?
I don't trust this guy anymore.
And I'm not gonna say I was a big fan of his, but I leaned like, you know, I kinda think he's alright.
I disagree with him.
Now I'm just out.
I think the Democrats are...
This is insane.
Something's got to be done to bring the left back to reality.
I blame the media.
I blame digital media selling fake outrage for clicks.
But there it is.
Stick around.
Next segment will be youtube.com slash timcast starting at 4 p.m.
I will see you all there.
A new challenger approaches to face off with Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez in her district.
And this woman is a Republican immigrant person of color.
It'll be interesting to see how AOC goes up against her.
And more importantly, AOC's district is heavy, heavy blue.
As Nancy Pelosi put it, a D on a glass of water would win in this district.
So can Sherry really defeat Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez?
Well, I'll say this.
She's certainly going to take away one of AOC's most powerful weapons.
The Woke Identitarian Playbook.
The race card, essentially.
When AOC goes up against Nancy Pelosi, she says, oh, she's singling out a woman of color.
Well, she's not going to be able to do this here.
Because Cherie is a woman of color herself.
So let's take a look at what's going on, and I've got some other funny commentary on Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, but we'll start by learning about who Sherry is and what's going on with this congressional run.
Now, before we get started, head over to TimCast.com 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, share this video.
YouTube has deranked independent commentary, so I rely on you to tell all your friends how cool I am, because that validates it.
I'm kidding.
If you like what I do, please share it.
Otherwise, just don't and leave a comment telling me you hate me.
But let's read the news.
Ocasio-Cortez gets a new 2020 challenger, a Republican immigrant from Jamaica.
Sherry Murray, a New York businesswoman who immigrated from Jamaica as a child and is active in state Republican politics, is launching a campaign Wednesday for the congressional seat held by Rep.
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Fox News has learned.
In a phone interview, Murray, 38, confirmed her intention to run for the New York congressional seat as a Republican.
There is a crisis in Queens, and it's called AOC, Murray told Fox News.
And instead of focusing on us, she's focusing on being famous, mainly rolling back progress and authoring the job-killing Green New Deal and killing the Amazon New York deal.
Now, let me say something.
I do not live in this district.
Although I have lived in New York for quite some time, and I'm still in the tri-state area, now I'm back up in Connecticut.
Sherry Murray sounds kind of incredible so far.
So look, I never would judge a person's character, I'm sorry, I would never judge a person based off of the color of their skin, always the content of their character.
But I can point out that she is an excellent example of the American dream, of a successful businesswoman.
So let me point something out.
She's going to effectively neutralize the woke identitarian card to a certain extent.
I know it doesn't matter.
The rules don't make sense.
And I would never use that as a pro or a con.
Sherry is a businesswoman, already a net positive.
She is 38.
Well, I don't think age necessarily guarantees, you know, wisdom or success.
There is a factor at play when you're of a certain age.
So that is a smaller net positive.
She's active in politics.
So let me put it this way.
She's active in politics, and she's a businesswoman.
I believe right off the bat she's got more qualifications than AOC.
Now, I will commend Ocasio-Cortez for challenging the system and winning.
I absolutely believe she deserves respect for that.
In this country, the working class individual, a bartender, can challenge the long-time incumbent and take that seat away, and that makes me feel really good.
It's one of the reasons I love this country.
Now, unfortunately, I believe AOC was given her shot, and it's only been, like, what, six, five or six months, and she's really, in my opinion, done a bad job.
Now don't take my word for it, because I don't live in this district.
I don't know what her constituents think about her.
I've seen polls.
They've ranged from positive to negative.
And it's up to them, not me.
I think Ocasio-Cortez absolutely is doing what Sherry says.
She's trying to be famous.
She's got this ridiculous, the Green New Deal is just a weird economy-shifting bill.
And she killed the Amazon deal.
But I will say this.
Sherry is a good example of the sentiment of her constituents, because Sherry is a constituent of AOC, and it seems like she's not gonna take it sitting, you know, she's not gonna just sit there and take what AOC is dishing out.
She's gonna challenge her.
And, well, props to her.
So, I'll say this.
I'm not someone who has skin in the game, and I really find it strange when we have these, you know, California-types backing Congress people in other places.
That, to me, is wrong.
It's absolutely wrong.
You can take a look at who helped prop AOC up, and it was Cenk Uygur of the Young Turks in California!
But AOC is supposed to be representing people in New York, so I don't like that.
So I'm not gonna- I don't endorse anybody, okay?
I don't know enough about who Sherry is, but I do- I do believe she looks respectable, and when it comes down to the vote, it's gonna come down to who has a better message.
Keeping in mind, Sherry is at a MASSIVE disadvantage, but in my opinion, with the antics pulled off by AOC, there's a good- there's a good chance that Perhaps there's a hole in the market for a Republican to actually win.
Let's read on, however.
They say, Murray, who was born in Jamaica and moved to the United States when she was nine, is officially launching her campaign Wednesday, that's today, with an introductory video that takes sharp jabs at the 29-year-old Ocasio-Cortez.
Your representative in Washington chooses self-promotion over service, conflict over constituents, resistance over assistance.
Queens and the Bronx need someone who will create jobs instead of turning them away.
I mean, that's a fact.
Everybody needs that.
And it's kind of weird that AOC, you know, she went after Amazon and New York wanted Amazon there.
It's kind of crazy.
They need it.
Their infrastructure is crumbling.
Asked about Ocasio-Cortez's brand of democratic socialism, Murray said,
I think it's far, far to the left and it's not connecting with everyday Americans.
I believe that's true as well.
As for Medicare for all, which Ocasio-Cortez has embraced, the Republican said,
Medicare for all. I think a lot of people are happy with their current health insurance
and on the Green New Deal.
The left-wing proposal to address climate change pushed by Ocasio-Cortez, she said, we know that it certainly will kill jobs.
Right, it will.
The Green New Deal is absurd, and here's my favorite part about it.
Guaranteed jobs.
Look, let me inform you guys about something.
I went to Venezuela in 2014, okay?
This is important.
And I saw firsthand how bureaucratic jobs guarantees is terrifying.
For one, the mall I went to, look, I didn't go on some Potemkin village tour.
I didn't have government minders.
I had a local guy who was like, hey, let me take you to the mall.
Tons of empty shops.
We ate with no problem.
This is true.
We went to a restaurant.
It was actually great.
I got an arepa and it was like avocado and chicken mashed together.
Really, really good.
And you can get them around in the US.
It's a fantastic dish.
So, in Venezuela, however, I went to go get a cell phone, and that was a nightmare.
There were like five or six different counters I had to go to, because, my understanding, I could be wrong, but what I was told by locals was, hey, look, you know, when you need jobs, this is what they do.
In the United States, I walk into T-Mobile or whatever, and I say, I need a cell phone, and the guy says, here you go, here's your phone, I sign a paper, swipe a card, I'm good to go.
In Venezuela, I had to go to the front desk, and like, tell them what I was looking for, then go to that specific desk, Then they would say, okay, now you've picked your plan, now go to the acquisition desk.
Then I'd go to, like, it was just weird bureaucracy.
And my understanding, I could be wrong, but it seemed like that's what you get with government mandated jobs.
The locals told me, the guy who was, like, showing me around, when you need to have jobs, they just make them up.
So instead of having a streamlined and simple process, they just jam people in places where it doesn't make sense so they can justify having a job.
But I'll tell you this, that strains resources.
You are then allocating resources to people who are doing things that don't need to be done and it slows everything down.
It's a bad idea.
So no, government mandated jobs, not a good idea, but let's read on.
Murray joins four other Republicans who have filed to run for the seat.
Former police officer John Cummings, medical journalist Ruth Papazian, construction contractor Miguel Hernandez, and entrepreneur Antoine Tucker.
No Democrats have yet announced a primary challenge to Ocasio-Cortez.
Though there's been speculation that establishment Democrats could rally behind a primary challenger.
Ocasio-Cortez shocked the political world in 2018 by defeating longtime rep Joe Crowley.
My understanding is he didn't even debate her.
That was a mistake, but I guess he didn't want to give her the time of day.
Well, you lose.
There you go.
Whichever Republican candidate emerges from the primary field will face a steep uphill climb in the overwhelmingly Democratic district.
But Murray and others are looking to paint Ocasio-Cortez as more of a celebrity than a lawmaker while stressing their ability to work across party lines.
Murray's new campaign video, which doesn't mention Trump or the Republican Party, portrays Murray as a bridge builder.
She is a former state committee woman of the New York State Republican Party.
So let me just take a look.
Look, I don't know who these other people running are, but there's going to be a primary.
And I got to say, Sherry sounds kind of incredible.
She's got political experience.
She's a businesswoman.
And I mean, right off the bat, that's spot on.
I mean, she's gonna have real experience in politics, working with communities, and running an actual business.
It's a lot more than Ocasio-Cortez has to offer.
So, I'll reiterate what I pointed out earlier, like, by all means, respect to Ocasio-Cortez for winning, but look, you're gonna face a real challenge from somebody who's got real experience, and your progressive bona fides aren't going to be what you need, in my opinion, to win.
Keeping in mind, heavy Democrat district, so she's got a major advantage here.
It's gonna be tough one, especially when you consider how famous AoC is.
I'm sure there are people in her district who just love the fact that she's famous and they don't care about anything else.
AoC only needs to get, like what, 15,000 votes because that's what she got last time?
I think she can be able to command it.
But we'll see.
It's possible her district doesn't like her and way more people come out.
Let's read on.
They say, asked during the interview if she considers herself a Trump supporter, she said yes.
She said she is in the process of talking with the national Republicans about her campaign, including South Carolina Senator Tim Scott, a prominent black Republican in Congress.
She expressed disgust over the recent spat between Trump and Ocasio-Cortez and her allies.
Trump has taken heat for telling Ocasio-Cortez and other minority progressives to go back to where they came from, provoking accusations from Democrats that Trump's comments are racist.
I think it's disgusting to be quite honest, Murray said of the controversy, without specifying which part of it disgusts her.
I think we are missing the point of why we are elected to public office.
To legislate on policy.
To deliver results to those kitchen table issues that are affecting everyday Americans.
Spot on.
You know, I disagree with a lot of the Republicans when it comes to the basic conservative principles, like pro-life, for instance.
That's one of the big ones.
But here's the thing.
In blue districts, Republicans tend to be moderate liberals.
They tend to be on the left.
But to the right of the Democrat.
And so I think, I could be wrong, but you have like Southern Democrats, the Blue Dog Democrats, they're kind of Republican, but they're to the left of where the Republicans are.
I could be getting that all screwed up, forgive me if I'm wrong.
The general idea is, expect to see Sherry as a rather progressive individual, but sane.
And because of that, I'd be surprised if I didn't agree with her on a lot of issues, as I, you know, from like a national perspective, lean slightly to the left on a lot of policy issues.
You know, you guys know I'm a big fan of Tulsi, even though I think Tulsi goes a little too far In the democratic policy side.
And surprisingly, you'll find a lot of moderates agree.
Even conservatives defend Tulsi because her core issue is one of the most important issues for most Americans.
Ending this BS war machine where we waste all of this money.
You want to talk about healthcare for Americans?
Great, let's stop spending it in foreign countries for whatever nonsense.
I get it.
It's a global, you know, there's a lot of controversy and stuff.
But I think that's a big issue for a lot of Americans, and that's why she's respectable.
Sherry, I think, you will end up seeing her policies being fairly moderate.
I think she will be politically centrist, and that will attract a lot of Republicans who probably don't vote, and it'll actually attract a lot of people who maybe don't like Ocasio-Cortez because she's too far left.
So they're going to talk a bit more about Murray, but...
She, you know, well, I will read a little bit more just to, you know, clarify.
They say, Murray clarified her thoughts on the back and forth, saying, Trump's tweet, is that how I would have worded it?
No.
Do I think the president is racist?
No, she added.
But I wanted to, I want to get back to the core of why we're even talking about this.
There is a crisis at our border.
It seems like Sherry is being honest, and I want to make one more point, because I don't want to make this video super long.
People often point to my content on the left and say, aha, Tim supports this policy, therefore he's right-wing, and I'm like, wait, wait, wait, wait, hold on, hold on.
If Trump says something that's factually true, and then I say, okay, I guess he's right, that doesn't make me right-wing.
Think about that perspective.
Simply because I will acknowledge there are true things, like there's a border crisis.
I have said, yep, there's a border crisis going back, because we had evidence of it.
It doesn't make me right-wing to recognize facts.
No, it doesn't.
So there is a problem for many on the left, not the entirety, a lot of many, when they'll say, if you agree with this fact that makes you right-wing, okay, you've lost it.
So I look forward to seeing what happens with Sherry.
I'll have any updates if that happens.
But I do have some more stories about AOC that I want to get into.
So stick around.
That segment will be coming up in the next few minutes, and I will see you all there.
The Trump campaign and the RNC has raised more than $100 million in the second quarter.
This is really good news for Donald Trump.
And let me just say, I find it so hilarious that simply by pointing out Trump is kind of winning, The left gets mad at me.
Look, I'm a centrist.
I, you know, lean slightly left on my policies.
It's not a secret.
But boy, are they salty at me for pointing out the president is doing things that help him.
You've got, look, the North Korea thing was great.
Canceling the attack on Iran was fantastic.
A lot of people have criticized him saying, well, he called the attack on Iran anyway.
Yeah, well, so what?
Like, a lot of presidents do these things.
Good on him for backing out.
I'm going to praise him when he does the right thing, even if he's the one who called for the attack in the first place.
He stopped it.
Good.
Do more of that.
North Korea thing looked great.
Now you've got this whole bickering fight thing going on with AOC, and Trump's plan is working!
Even Vox is saying he knows what he's doing.
And now he's raising a ton of cash.
There's no recession in sight.
Maybe.
Maybe.
Some people have predicted it.
That'll be bad for Trump.
As it stands right now, He's doing well.
His approval rating is higher than it's been in the past two years.
He's got a historical moment with North Korea, and look how much money he's raising.
So look, if you're a Trump supporter, it's good news, but I will say this.
Hubris.
You can still lose.
And don't forget, Hillary Clinton had all of the arrogance that the world had to offer, and she lost, and nobody expected that.
But let's read the story and see what's happening with Trump, and I may have some other funny tidbits I might get into.
The Daily Caller reports.
Actually, before we get started, head over to TimCast.com slash donate if you want to support my work.
There's a PayPal option, a crypto option, a physical address, but you know it.
I say it all the time.
Just share the video.
YouTube de-ranks independent commentary right now, so if you think my content is worth, you know, people hearing, then I rely on word of mouth and you guys just hit that share button.
Otherwise, don't, and leave a nasty comment and tell me I'm ugly or whatever.
It's your free speech right to do so, and I will respect it.
But let's read the news.
The Trump campaign, in coordination with the Republican National Committee, raised more than $100 million in the second quarter the president's re-election campaign announced Monday.
Three Trump entities—Donald J. Trump for President, Inc., Trump Victory, and the Trump Make America Great Again Committee—raised a combined total of $56.7 million, with the RNC raising a total of $51.3 million during the time period.
Additionally, the joint fundraising committees between the Trump entities and the RNC reported a total of $123 million cash on hand at the end of June, with $80.2 million coming from the Trump entities and $43.5 million coming from the RNC.
And I want to stress too, I'm fairly certain Trump is outspending every Democrat on Facebook ads.
He is attacking this full force and he is sending the Democrats into chaos.
He is running full speed for 2020.
He does not want to lose this one.
You thought it was bad in 2016 when he won?
Wait till he wins again in 2020.
Let's read on.
President Trump's record of success for America is drawing unprecedented support from across the nation, Trump campaign manager Brad Parscale said in a press release.
As the Democrats continue their race to the left, Americans are responding to the president's pledge to keep America great.
And let me stress, The economy is doing really, really great.
Now, some people have said, Tim, you're wrong.
It's fake news.
It's Trump manipulation.
OK, look, CNN covered this.
Like, I remember one day I was in my room and I had CNN on because, yes, I try to watch as much as possible from many different networks.
And they had an assignment talking about, like, a record economy.
And I'm like, is CNN praising the president right now?
Wow, the economy must be really good.
But record low unemployment?
Record low unemployment for certain marginalized communities, Latinos for the black community.
It's all really good news, but now consider this.
Two things.
When the economy is doing really well, you will find that many people now have some disposable income.
You will also find that people enjoy having that disposable income and can donate some of it to the president they feel is responsible for their good fortune.
So when the economy does well, a lot of people are going to say, don't change it.
And they will say, we better put our money where our mouth is and make sure, you know, they want, they want Trump to get reelected because things are going well for them.
Now, certainly some people are having hard times, but I find it so weird when the Democrats go on the debate stage, you see like Bernie Sanders say, oh, the economy is doing well, but for the 1%.
And that's not true.
I went over this in a different segment where paycheck growth is actually, it's good.
Like people are seeing raises, they're seeing their taxes go down, they're seeing their wages go up, and the economy is doing better than ever.
Yes, Wall Street is reaping the benefits with the Dow and the stock climbing higher than we've seen in a long time.
Things have been a little weird and kind of shaky, but across the board everything seems to be going great.
Now, there is concern that the debt is growing, and this may all just be kicking the can down the road.
Maybe things are going to go great because you got a bandaid on a bullet wound, and then come 2020 after Trump gets elected, things go off.
But I'll tell you this, none of that matters.
You can criticize all that all day and night, say, hey, a recession will come.
Hey, Trump's policies are leading us in this direction.
Fine.
I'm not saying you're wrong.
But I am going to say this.
Regular Americans aren't going to be thinking that far ahead.
All they're going to know is, hey, man, My paycheck's a little bigger, and I got a job.
My kids, we're saving now.
That's good news for me.
Let's not change it.
So Trump's got the incumbent advantage, just because the incumbent always has an advantage over the challenger.
He's also got the economic advantage.
And now we can see, as a part of that economic advantage, $123 million cash on hand, raising over $100 million in the second quarter.
They write, the fundraising haul came largely through small donors.
That's also huge news.
The Trump campaign said they received roughly 957,000 individual donations.
With over 98% being 200 or less, the average donation was $41.48.
With over 98% being 200 or less, the average donation was $41.48.
Now, this is another seriously important metric.
If it was a bunch of big donors, then you know it's only the elites who are supporting the president.
But this data shows, with 98% less than $200, Trump's support is coming from working class individuals.
It's coming from the ground level.
And that may translate into massive public support.
Let me stress again, according to the Washington Post ABC News poll, Trump's approval rating now is higher than it's ever been.
And according to what we've seen from the averages, It's not as high as it's ever been, but it's like a second highest we've seen in the past two years.
So as much as the media wants to smear and slam this president, I don't think it's translating.
This is a lot of money.
Think about like what the other Democratic candidates have raised.
Yet another record-shattering fundraising haul gives us a major advantage over the crowded field of Democrats as the RNC continues investing in our world-class field programming and growing our incredible grassroots army, RNC Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel said in a press release.
As enthusiasm for this president continues to grow, these resources ensure President Trump and Republicans up and down the ballot are in a strong position to win heading into 2020.
So let's keep in mind, the RNC also wants to use some of this money for other candidates.
But let me make one important point on top of all of this.
The Democrats may be raising a lot of money.
First, let's be fair.
While Trump has raised all of this money, he is the Republican candidate for, you know, I don't think anyone's gonna challenge him, that'd be weird, but he's gonna be the candidate, right?
Now think about all the money raised by the Democrats.
The Democrats may be raising, you know, 6 million here, 10 million here.
Add that all up, and that is the Democratic support.
So right now, the Democrats are supporting a massive field.
And in order to get an accurate reading on whether or not Trump has an advantage or not, we need to look at all of the money raised by every Democratic candidate.
So that's a fair way to look at it, and I think you can see that Trump will have a challenge.
But let me make one more point.
The Democrats will be spending this attacking each other.
And that's it.
Even if they raise more money collectively, like the Democrats all combined raise more than Trump, they're going to be fighting each other on the debate stage.
They're going to be disagreeing.
They're going to be slamming each other.
Look what Kamala Harris did to Joe Biden.
She slammed him hard.
But guess what?
It worked in New Hampshire, at least.
She's polling in second place and Joe Biden is down.
And that's what the Democrats are going to have to do.
Now, one thing that I find really fascinating is Marianne Williamson.
Bless her heart, she is a lovely woman.
And I think whether you're on the left or the right, you can agree with her, disagree with her, you can recognize, she actually is a pretty wholesome, hokey, hippie lady.
And you can't help but just like that, right?
You can't really hate her.
You might be frustrated by her silly, hokey, crystal opinions or whatever.
But the reason I bring her up is her approach.
And check out her interview on Dave Rubin's show, The Rubin Report, because I found it really fascinating.
She won't attack the Democrats.
She's like the odd person out.
She's calling them all lovely people and saying she respects them, but humbly disagrees.
And I'm like, that's an interesting approach.
It's the opposite of what Trump did.
So let me say this.
While Trump is doing phenomenally well, you know what I would absolutely love to see more than anything, and I truly mean this?
Marianne Williamson, Donald Trump debate, head to head.
While I would much rather see someone like Tulsi Gabbard, in being nominated. I know that's just not going to happen,
right? She has my support, right?
Financial and my vote. Because anti-war, it's huge to me.
It's very important. And she's also called out big tech, defended free speech, said identity
politics is divisive. Much respect for Tulsi. She's great. But here's the thing. Democrats are
going to cheat. Yang and Tulsi will not be allowed, and neither will Marian, let's be honest.
I believe she even said her mic was cut off, right?
So for those that aren't familiar, the Democratic debates, Andrew Yang's mic was cut at some point.
You can see him talking and no sound coming out, and you can see people turn to look at him, so clearly they heard him.
But we didn't.
It's weird, right?
And Marianne said something like that happened to her as well, so I doubt they'll let her, but for the sake of entertainment, I would absolutely love to see Marianne versus Trump, because it's like night and day.
Now, I think Trump is a heavy hitter, okay?
When it comes to the debate, Trump is gonna knock out all of these Democrats.
I don't care if you like him or not.
I can be honest with myself.
Uh, I think Tulsi would do really, really well against Trump, but Trump is not, he doesn't debate the way these people expect him to.
You can stand up there poised, you know, making the presidential fist saying, we've got to defend healthcare in our nation and fight for those who are poorest among us.
And Trump's going to be like, the crazy hippie lady over here doesn't even know what she's talking about.
She wants socialism and blah, blah, blah.
And that's going to work because Trump speaks at, at, he speaks the language of the working class.
But I will, I do find it interesting, I think it would be amazing to see Marianne Williamson go up against Trump.
So I'm not gonna, I'm not gonna prattle too much on this, I just wanted to highlight, um, wrap up this video, okay?
Trump is, is, is smashing, just, just, boom!
Massive numbers, right?
Good, good news for him, good news for the Republicans, incumbent advantage, economic advantage, his, his approval rating is way up, and he's coming in 2020 at full force.
Maybe even better than 2016, so...
Look, most people are saying he's gonna win.
Michael Moore said it.
And if the Democrats don't get their act together, he will.
But let this be a warning to the Republicans, too.
Don't get arrogant.
You're gonna get a lot of people who might sit it out, be like, ah, Trump's gonna win, I'm not gonna come.
Oh, and then you'll be surprised.
That's how Hillary lost.
But keep this in mind.
The people who thought Hillary couldn't lose, who didn't vote, they're coming out to vote.
That's bad news for Trump, but I don't know what's gonna happen.
All I know is it'll be a fun and funny race.
Hopefully, it's just a... Look at that smile on that man's face.
That's the kind of attitude I think we should all have.
Unfortunately, the Democrats don't have that attitude.
They're really angry, but we'll see what happens.
Stick around.
One more segment coming up for you in a few minutes, and I will see you then.
Recently, a Google rep was testifying before the Senate, and Ted Cruz thoroughly embarrassed them by presenting a document showing that even Google thinks they are censors.
I kid you not.
Check this out.
Look at this thing that, look, it says, tech firms are performing a balancing act between two incompatible positions, an unmediated marketplace of ideas and a safe and orderly space.
And he shows this chart where Google actually views Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, Google as censors.
They called it the good censor.
So there's a lot to go through here.
But man, props to Ted Cruz for taking these big tech companies to task.
And I'm also going to give a shout out to Elizabeth Warren as well for calling out Big Tech as well.
This is not a partisan issue.
I believe credit is due when credit is due, and anybody willing to challenge the massive tech oligopolies, you are going to get my support when you get it.
There's a lot to criticize Cruz for, there's a lot to criticize Warren for, but when it comes to this fight, if you're on the side of principle, I'm right here with you.
So let's see how Ted Cruz thoroughly embarrassed Google.
And also, I have another story that I might get to.
Actually, I'll just show it right now.
It's hilarious.
Google trying to convince Congress there's competition in the search industry, but stats show it owns 92% of the market.
Yeah, come on, Google.
You own the verb.
When people talk about a nation, they say, Google it.
You want to claim you're not a monopoly?
Nice try.
What do they call that?
gen-ture- um, um, gener- genericide?
Generification or something like that?
Now before we read this, head over to timcast.com slash donate
if you want to support my work.
There's a PayPal option, a crypto option, and a physical address.
And the reason I must stress this is because I am making a video ragging on Google
and saying they should be broken up or regulated or something
and they were embarrassed on a Google platform.
And as you know, well, YouTube has deranked independent political commentary
and propped up major corporate players.
I can only assume YouTube and Google are not going to appreciate this video, so I rely on you to share it.
Let me tell you something else.
I made a video ragging on Facebook, a competitor to Google, right?
Google, YouTube demonetized it, and I thought it was a mistake.
There's nothing offensive in it, I don't swear.
It's just political commentary on big tech.
Certainly it was an error.
And I click, please review this, and sure enough it came back, confirmed demonetized.
What?
They didn't like the fact that I was calling them out?
I can only imagine.
So good on Ted Cruz.
Let's see what he had to say and how he thoroughly embarrassed Google.
Ted Cruz confronts Google with an internal presentation showing how tech companies are leaning toward censorship.
In his first line of questioning for Google during a Senate hearing on Tuesday, Senator Ted Cruz displayed a Google presentation dated 2018 suggesting that tech firms, including Google, were moving away from unmediated free speech and toward censorship.
Google Vice President for Government Affairs and Public Policy, Karen Batya, appeared before the Senate Judiciary Committee to discuss censorship through search engines on Tuesday.
Google has faced concern from Republican politicians, including Cruz, who allege the company censors right-leaning search results.
Cruz showed a presentation slide that read, Tech firms are performing a balancing act between two incompatible positions.
The slide included logos from Facebook, Twitter, Google, and YouTube, which is owned by Google.
The balance illustration described an ideal balance of unmediated marketplaces of ideas and well-ordered spaces for safety and civility.
The following slide showed a tilt toward censorship.
And we can see here it reads, create well-ordered spaces for safety and civility, politicized editor-publisher.
They even view themselves as editors and publishers!
In response to Cruz's questions about whether the illustration was real, Batya stammered and admitted it was.
But he said that he thought the internal documents came from marketing teams who were brainstorming and not reflective of the company as a whole.
Let me stop you there, Google, and point something out.
I love how they use this excuse, and it is so infuriating.
They say, that was just one person at the company, that was just one team.
What do you think your company is?
Do you think there is a man named Google who makes decisions and presses buttons?
No!
A company is made up of individuals who guide the company in certain directions.
If one person at a certain level presents a document saying, this is what we're doing, it's what your company is doing!
If you have a company with a thousand employees and one of those employees writes an email saying they believe PragerU, Ben Shapiro, and Jordan Peterson are bad people from a World War II era...
What do you think your company is doing?
Oh, but our leadership don't feel that way?
I don't care.
Your employees are doing this.
That is a company action by a company actor, period.
Nice try, though, trying to deflect.
This is your own document.
Google employees view the company doing this, whether it's brainstorming or otherwise.
This was a big test for Bhatia there, right?
A former senior official for the George W. Bush administration.
It's his first testimony before a Senate Judiciary Committee since joining Google about a year ago.
Bhatia already hinted at his arguments in preemptive opinion article he wrote for Monday for Fox News.
He was visibly nervous early on in the hearing, and that didn't change much as the questioning continued.
Members asked Badia whether Google is working with China on a censored search engine to which Badia said the company has a, quote, small amount of work it's doing with China, but that it abandoned plans for a search engine in the country.
He also continued to say the company does not intentionally censor speech in the U.S.
The members' responses suggested they distrusted Badia's answer.
I'm gonna stop you right there, Badia.
You have a document from your own company that you admitted is real saying you do.
It says this, but tech firms have gradually shifted away from unmediated free speech and towards censorship and moderation.
You made that.
Like obviously not you personally, your company made that.
Now, I can extend respect to you as an individual and say I hear you out, but listen.
See that Google logo on the dock saying you guys are censoring and moderating content?
How dare you then sit before Congress and claim we don't censor speech even though our internal teams think we do?
What are we going to do?
Are we going to sit here and say, well, so long as the CEO isn't doing it, that means the company doesn't do it.
You can say you don't, and it only takes one person to say you do for us to say Google does this.
Does it always do it?
No, but some employees at Google do.
Therefore, Google as a company has government, I'm sorry, has company actors taking censorious actions.
Let's read on.
Committee members continued to grill Batya on a number of issues, some of which weren't entirely related to censorship, often cutting him off if he didn't answer with a concise yes or no.
You're doing something remarkable, and that is you're speaking less candidly than Mark Zuckerberg, Cruz said at one point.
Mark Zuckerberg is an alien, and boy do I lo- Hold on, I'll get into the memes in a second.
Okay, let's finish the story, because one paragraph left.
Cruz ended the hearing advising Google to follow up with more detailed answers and to take an independent third-party audit to see if its search tools yielded biased results.
I can respect that, but of course, I don't see it playing out.
But let me do something, as we've got a few minutes left.
We can go into the story, and I'll read a little bit of this, but I wanted to just rag on Mark Zuckerberg for a second.
Many of you may have seen the Area 51 meme that's going around.
The idea is people want to storm Area 51 and find the aliens.
My favorite meme out of all of this was something about Mark Zuckerberg supporting and, like, pushing the event because he wants to confront his father.
Get it?
Mark Zuckerberg is an alien.
And there was another really, really funny meme where it was a week or so after the Area 51 raid.
It's the Joe Rogan podcast.
And it shows Joe Rogan asking, have you ever smoked DMT?
And then it shows an alien leaning in saying, in this solar system.
And then Joe Rogan being like, whoa!
I don't know.
I just wanted to mention that because I love ragging on Mark Zuckerberg as an alien.
But we do have a little bit more.
And I'm not going to read through the entire article because I try to keep these 6 p.m.
segments rather short.
So this one is about Google trying to convince Congress that it doesn't dominate the search market.
So the story from Business Insider says, Google is trying to make the case there's competition in the search industry, but the stats aren't looking in the tech giant's favor.
In his opening remarks before Congress on Tuesday, Adam Cohen, Google's Director of Economic Policy, said that when it comes to search, consumers have choices.
In our core search business, consumers can choose among a range of options.
Bing, DuckDuckGo, Yahoo, and many more, Cohen said.
Specialized search services are strong competitors too, including companies like Amazon, eBay, Kayak, Travelocity, Yelp, and others.
But recent stats paint a different picture.
According to StatCounter, Google accounts for over 92% of the search engine market share worldwide.
Because let's be real, when you want to search for eBay, Amazon, or otherwise, you go in the search bar, you type in the word and press enter, and Google pulls it up.
Okay, we're using Google for everything.
There was a funny story where Google went down briefly, and like 80% of web traffic just stopped because people don't go directly to these websites.
So, let's just read the... I guess that's it for the most part.
Google, I think, is kind of... well, what's the word I can use?
Slimy?
They're a bit slimy?
They're a massive corporation, so is Facebook, and I think they're... well, they're playing Congress dirty.
They send in these people to say, oh, we don't do that, and they're lies.
And they can feign ignorance.
But something needs to be done.
Whether it's Ted Cruz, whether it's Elizabeth Warren, I don't know.
All I know is we can't allow tech oligopolies to dictate morality.
And they do.
We know they do.
Ted Cruz shows exactly what they're doing.
They view themselves as the good censor.
It's not good.
They don't have a right to control our speech and dictate morality.
But I'll leave it there.
Thanks for hanging out.
Stick around.
Next segment will be tomorrow at 10 a.m., the podcast, every day at 6.30 p.m., wherever podcasts can be found.
And share the video, TimCast.com slash donate.
I will see you all in the next segment tomorrow at YouTube.com slash TimCastNews, this channel.