Mueller Testimony A DISASTER For Democrats, "Trump Must Be Gloating In Ecstasy"
Mueller Testimony A DISASTER For Democrats, "Trump Must Be Gloating In Ecstasy." That last quote from Michael Moore. That's right, progressive activist and filmmaker Michael Moore and even Bill Maher have come out saying the Democrats have lost this one.Robert Mueller revealed no new information for the most part except one extremely bad bit in information. Mueller did NOT investigate the origins of the RussiaGate hoax saying that it was outside his purview.While its not a perfect victory for Trump, he does come out as the clear winner in this battle as Democrats are consistently off message. Instead of Democrats challenging Trump and Republicans on key issues like health care, immigration, and the economy they become obsessed with overturning their 2016 defeat. This will certainly help Trump as it keeps them not only off message but it keeps the far left democrats front and center.
Support the show (http://timcast.com/donate)
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Yesterday, Robert Mueller testified before Congress.
And it was a disaster for the Democrats.
That's not my opinion.
That's Chuck Todd's opinion from MSNBC.
Chris Walls from Fox News said something similar, but of course he did.
He's Fox News.
But then you also have Samantha Bee saying it was, like, depressingly watching paint dry or something to that effect.
Yeah, it was pretty bad for the Democrats.
We now have Bill Maher, we now have Michael Moore, both coming out and saying this was bad for Democrats.
You know, I find it funny that when I talk about things like this, pointing out that Democrats keep losing and Trump keeps trouncing them, his strategies are working, his approval rating is up, the testimony looks bad for Democrats, you get people on the left saying, you must be right-wing for saying these things.
Why?
Because if you're on the left, you're going to lie to pretend like that was good for the Democrats?
Sort of, yes.
Because we are seeing some articles and forum comments where people are acting like yesterday was somehow good for the Democrats.
It wasn't.
Mueller didn't want to answer questions, and the one thing they thought they had was when Ted Lieu asked Robert Mueller, basically, you didn't indict Trump because of the OLC opinion, you can't indict a sitting president, he says yes, and then later, amidst their fanfare, he says, I'm walking that back, I withdraw, and now everyone is sad droopy face.
Here's the thing.
You're going to get a lot of clips and sound bites.
You're going to get people on the left saying, oh, Trump slam!
You're going to get people on the right being like, oof, Mueller is done!
The reality is, people are going to take this for whatever they want.
The fact that Ted Lieu asked Mueller You know, about indicting Trump.
And he said, effectively, yes.
But then later recanted.
Means we now have two soundbites.
But I'll get into all that because I don't want... You know, you might not be familiar with everything that went down.
So I want to stress, I'm not going to present to you everything that went down.
If you didn't watch the full Mueller hearing, well, I'm not going to show you the full Mueller hearing.
But I am going to go through the opinion pieces from various outlets on the left and the right, where they basically said Democrats lost this one.
It was bad.
Like, you got Michael Moore coming out and saying it.
So, what are you going to do?
I want to start with this story from the Hill.
The Hill is considered a rather neutral kind of centrist outlet, and they straight up said, the losers in this are the Democrats.
Is that wrong of me to say?
Am I not allowed to say that?
Do I have to pretend like I'm gonna- Oh, it was great for them.
Trump looks- No.
Let's be real here.
Two plus years of Russiagate investigation, nothing comes of it, and now the only thing the Democrats have to go on after this is, did Trump lie or obstruct, when Mueller says, we make no determination.
So let's get into all that because I don't want to just rant before we even get started on the facts.
Before we get started, make sure you head over to timcast.com slash donate if you'd like to support my work.
There's a PayPal option, a crypto option, a physical address, but of course, The best thing you can do, share this video.
YouTube deranks independent political commentary.
If you like what I have to say and think I do good, I rely on you guys to spread the videos through word of mouth.
Growth now is totally dependent upon viewership.
Like, you guys don't share it, no channel growth.
That's just what YouTube is doing to us while propping up CNN, etc.
Let's read the story from the hill.
Winners and losers from Robert Mueller's testimony.
The Hill writes, Former Special Counsel Robert Mueller sat for six hours of testimony on Wednesday, his first time answering questions about his investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election.
Mueller insisted on remaining within the confines of his report, issued earlier this year.
They say, still, his testimony provided some moments of spectacle and illuminated certain facts that could prove damaging to President Trump moving forward.
Here are the winners and losers of Mueller's appearance before the House Judiciary and Intelligence Committees.
Now, I want to make sure I stress, too.
The Democrats, in my opinion, as well as the opinion of many other people, came out as the losers on this one, but it doesn't mean Trump is getting unscathed.
There were some soundbites that will be bad for Trump, but I'm going to stress this before we move on.
I don't care about this.
I was at the skate park the other day talking to some dude riding around on his road bike, and we were talking politics and I asked him, and he says, I just don't care anymore.
I don't pay attention.
And that's what I hear from everybody.
This is inside baseball.
This is the left and the right acting like it's the biggest thing in the world, and it kind of is, but No one else cares!
No, I assure you, regular Americans aren't watching this.
It's gonna matter very little in the end.
The Democrats are wasting their time.
Get over it.
Get on message.
Trump is keeping them off message on purpose, and this was nothing but good for the man.
Why?
Because the Democrats are too busy talking about Russia, Russia, Russia, which no one cares about, instead of talking about healthcare, jobs, the economy.
Trump came out after the Mueller hearing looking good.
So not only does he have the Democrats off message, he looks good.
It doesn't look bad for him.
Look at this.
The Hill says, winners.
President Trump.
The president insisted in the days leading up to Mueller's testimony that he would hardly devote any time to watching the proceedings.
But he made clear Wednesday that he paid attention and approved of what he saw.
This was a very big day for our country.
This was a very big day for the Republican Party.
Could say it was a very big day for me.
Media commentary as the hearings played out largely focused on Mueller's lack of crisp, forceful answers and the absence of a trademark moment for Democrats seeking to bolster the case for impeachment.
These hearings were a disaster for the Democrats, said Brad Parscale, Trump campaign manager.
This entire spectacle has always been about the Democrats trying to undo the legitimate result of the 2016 election, and today they again failed miserably.
They do say there is some danger for Trump moving forward, as Mueller confirmed the President could be indicted after leaving office.
However, I pointed this out.
When people said, there's a clip of Robert Mueller saying we could indict afterwards, context is key.
Was he saying there was enough to indict him?
Or was he saying it is legally possible to indict should they continue to investigate?
So maybe, Trump's not completely out of the woods, there is some small risk, but in the end he won the PR battle.
They say Bill Barr came out looking good.
The Attorney General got into hot water during a hearing earlier this year in which he was asked about his handling of the Mueller report, specifically how he went about releasing its core findings.
Wednesday's hearing could have been a moment to highlight frictions between Barr and Mueller.
Instead, no real differences emerged between the two men.
They say John Ratcliffe came out looking good, a Republican.
And here are the losers, the Democrats.
Democratic leaders worked for weeks to secure testimony from Mueller, but in the end, Wednesday's hearings failed to deliver much of a signature moment for the party to use going forward.
The party struggled to land major blows, as Mueller avoided elaborating beyond the contents of his report and declined to engage with Democrats on questions about impeachment or other steps to hold the president accountable.
They say, some Democratic strategists felt Mueller's performance itself fell flat, as he repeatedly evaded questions and at times struggled to hear lawmakers.
He has been an exemplary public servant, as people on both sides attested, but he clearly was struggling today and that was painful, said former Obama adviser David Axelrod.
Today was not a total disaster for Democrats, the Hill says.
Having Mueller appear on camera for a broadcast spectacle viewed by millions will benefit the party, as many Americans likely did not read the special counsel's written report.
That's the opinion of the Hill, and I will disagree on that one.
Keeping in mind, right, When they say the Democrats are the losers, that's their opinion, too.
Take it all with a grain of salt.
I want to make sure I stress, to the upteenth degree, everyone is going to try and claim victory here.
But we have a lot of people on the left saying it was a failure.
And The Hill is saying, for the most part, it was a failure.
They're saying it's not a total failure.
But I disagree on this point.
The Democrats may have gotten Mueller on TV, but who cares?
The ratings for these shows are really low.
Granted, he was trending on Twitter, but who's on Twitter?
In the end, I think they made a spectacle of something.
And I gotta say, I see this as a Republican victory and a Trump victory because there just wasn't enough to substantiate the need for the hearing.
And the biggest attack, the biggest gain, in my opinion, came from Matt Gaetz challenging Mueller on why he did not investigate the origins of the Russia collusion conspiracy theory.
For years, he chased after this narrative, which was proven to be false, and when asked by Matt Gaetz, did you look into the Steele dossier, which triggered this whole thing, he said, it's not within my purview.
Effectively saying to me, the whole thing, quite literally.
Look, you want to say it's a witch hunt?
I think it was.
Based on what Robert Mueller said.
More importantly, Mueller didn't investigate the origins?
That blew my mind.
I was stunned when I heard Mueller say, I didn't investigate claims from Russians that Trump was involved in a conspiracy.
That started the whole thing.
He didn't do it.
Why?
That was his job!
I was shocked.
So they do go on to say that there could be some bad stuff for Trump.
So I would agree with that, but I disagree a little bit on what they're saying.
There's a mixed reaction for Mueller.
I feel bad for Mueller, I do.
Mixed reaction for Pelosi.
Mueller is doing his job.
He's frustrating.
But he's got everybody pulling on him on left and right, and he's trying to remove himself
to a certain degree.
I'm not a big fan of the guy, because I feel like this has been a nonsense spectacle for a long time that should have ended a while ago, but look, it is what it is.
He's an old man.
But I want to point something out.
Robert Mueller looked frail and weak, and that's not my opinion.
That's the opinion of Bill Maher, Michael Moore, and other pundits.
But he's basically the same age as Trump.
Come on, Trump has got a mouth on— There's a mouth on that guy, you know?
Way more energy.
Robert Mueller, low energy.
I want to highlight this as a key point as we move forward.
This is a tweet from Benny Johnson.
He says, Mueller is finished.
Toast.
Done.
Matt Gaetz buried him.
Gaetz, can you state that the Steele dossier wasn't Russian disinformation?
Mueller, dossier is before my time.
Gaetz, So were Manafort's crimes.
You charged him.
Mueller responds, not in my purview.
And then Gates says, it is in your report.
I'm not going to play the full clip.
It's two minutes long.
But I recommend you search this out.
Benny Johnson on Twitter has it.
Find it.
Because it's basically what I just said.
Gates is saying, why don't you know?
Why didn't you investigate the Steele dossier?
Essentially, they claim that Russians told Christopher Steele, or something to this effect, that Trump is engaged in a conspiracy and there was evidence.
That started this whole thing.
How does Robert Mueller not know?
In my opinion, not only did Mueller look bad, did the Democrats get nothing, but it was a slam dunk for the Republicans, at least on that front.
But let's take a look at some of the criticism.
Samantha Bee on Mueller's testimony, like watching depressed paint dry, Samantha Bee notoriously anti-Trump, did a segment where she even mocked and belittled Mueller, insulting him for being old, I mean, she's making jokes.
I'm not saying I'd be offended or anything, but she was just digging into Mueller and straight up, it was like watching depressed paint dry.
Well, that's her opinion.
Clearly, she feels like they didn't get anything out of it.
We then have this.
Chris Wallace.
This has been a disaster for the Democrats and for the reputation of Robert Mueller.
Well, he's Fox News, right?
Now, a lot of people do view Wallace as being fair, but what are you going to do?
Now here's the thing.
Chuck Todd, MSNBC, he said Mueller hearing an optics disaster did not advance the cause for Trump impeachment.
He does go on to make the point that Mueller stressed the OLC opinion, I believe it's OLC, that he couldn't indict a sitting president, but I want to stress this point.
This guy on Twitter, Andrew Lynch, I'm not familiar with who he is, but he has a viral tweet right now.
First we can see this tweet from Seth Abramson he posted.
Abramson.
Abramson said, We'll see how your take holds up as the day goes on, Siraj.
The Lou Muller exchange is historic and will lead every news broadcast tonight, domestically and internationally.
And then, just about a couple hours later, Muller is now withdrawing the statement he previously made earlier to Ted Lou, I expected he would do this.
To reiterate a point from earlier, Ted Lieu asked, you didn't indict the president because of the OLC opinion that you can't indict a sitting president.
Mueller said yes, but later went on to say, that's not the right way to frame it.
We make no determination.
I want to stress a very, very important point.
In the way I see this, and it is a political battle, Robert Mueller did not indict Trump because of the OLC opinion.
Okay, let me try and refrain this because I want to make sure I can make this very very clear for everybody.
Robert Mueller said they made no determination.
If Robert Mueller felt he could have indicted the president, then he would have said in his report, we would have indicted the president, that is our determination, but we didn't because of the OLC opinion.
Right?
Okay, so what Mueller is effectively saying is that Even if Trump is out of office, he will not be indicting him.
He would have made a determination.
I want to make sure that's very, very clear.
Okay?
I'm taking it slow.
Let's move on.
Politico.
Euphoria.
White House, GOP exult after a flat Mueller performance.
Well, the Republicans and Trump are cheering.
How about this one?
The New Yorker.
Finally, Washington sort of agrees on something.
Mueller bombed.
How about this one?
Mueller couldn't even remember who appointed him.
Not only did it look bad in terms of getting nothing for the Democrats, when asked a very basic lead-up question, just trying to get some background on Mueller, he didn't know who appointed him to the U.S.
Attorney's Office in Boston?
That was... He was being asked some basic questions.
How long did you serve?
Things like that.
Who appointed you to the U.S.
Attorney's Office in Boston?
He goes, uh, Bush?
Uh, no, it was actually Reagan.
Mueller couldn't even remember something about his own career.
So I'm not trying to be a dick to Mueller, I get it, you might forget it, it was a long time ago, but that looks worse.
Oh man, I gotta say, if you can't even answer a question about your own life, why would I expect you to know anything about what's going on in this investigation?
It does, it is kind of sad.
And finally, we have a more straightforward.
Mueller testimony fails to move the needle on impeachment.
Well, what can you expect?
I mean, I don't know what to tell you.
The New York Times whither impeachment?
Mueller did not help advocates much, if at all.
But that won't stop the forums from lighting up with claims that it is good news for everybody.
We have all of these stories on r slash politics.
You know what I love about Reddit?
r slash politics might as well be the Donald for the left.
There's no real discussion on this subreddit.
It's just garbage.
They've got talking points memo up here.
They post things from like common dreams.
I get it.
You're a bubble echo chamber of news you think you want to hear.
The comments on a lot of these things are talking about how Mueller was a genius, saying the way he was answering questions was perfect, and I'm like, dude, everybody disagrees with you guys.
This is an example.
I mean, I'm not going to pull up the comments because I don't want to drag people's usernames.
But you've got all these stories about calling for impeachment, Mueller's job is done, now Congress must do it.
They're saying, you know, Mueller, we believe... It's all these pro-left stories.
And the comments praising Mueller.
And I gotta say, when even Bill Maher, Michael Moore, all of these outlets are saying basically the same thing, it's good for Republicans, bad for Democrats, you guys are in a ridiculous bubble.
We have this story from Vox.
The last minutes of Mueller's testimony made the best case for the Russian investigation.
Yes, talking about Adam Schiff.
But I want to make something very clear.
A judge recently ruled that Mueller and Barr himself were mischaracterizing what the actual troll campaigns in the internet was.
It wasn't Russia.
It was a private company.
It's a complicated story, but I'm just highlighting this because everyone's trying to act like everything that happened with Russian interference was literally the Russian government.
It wasn't.
Russia didn't interfere, so don't get me wrong, right?
Make sure that that is clear.
I do have a tweet pulled up where I wanted to highlight the segment where they asked if he would indict the president after leaving office.
Another bombshell that people are claiming will help the Democrats, but my point is, is the context that Mueller was saying that after Trump leaves office, if the investigation finds more evidence, they could indict him?
Or was he saying, once he leaves office, we can indict him based on information we have now?
I can't tell you what the answer is.
I don't know.
Mueller has certainly confused everything.
What I can tell you is that the left and the right will view these in both of these ways.
It's like Scott Adams said.
Same screen, two different movies.
But let's move on now to the more fun stuff.
Bill Maher.
If this Mueller testimony was supposed to be the movie, it's a Terrence Malick movie.
Democrats are a political party that does not know how to do politics.
I love this man, Bill Maher.
I have been seeing more and more comments from him.
He's calling out the social justice regressive left.
He is saying what I am saying, but I'm more willing to say it.
I disagree with Bill Maher on a lot of things, but the reason I'm praising him now is because he repeatedly calls out what needs to be called out.
The Democrats are awful at this!
They have no charisma, no leadership.
The Obama era is over and the Democrats need something stronger.
They don't have it.
They keep losing.
Bill Maher's got another tweet here.
I can't watch this anymore.
Go home, guys.
You made OJ try on the glove and it just didn't work.
You can still win the election, but I wouldn't bet my own money on it.
Bill Maher wouldn't bet on the Democrats.
I agree.
And you know what?
When I do, they say Tim's an antagonist, they say Tim's right-wing.
No.
No, I'm just where Bill Maher is.
Because Bill Maher is, like, a good barometer for where the Democrats are supposed to be.
And I'm close—I'm actually to the left of Maher on some issues.
Like, I grew up a young progressive, and Bill Maher was kind of a, like, straightforward, moderate Democrat type.
Atheist.
And here he is.
I wouldn't bet my own money on it.
Hey, man.
I don't blame you, Bill.
I agree with you on the regressive left stuff.
You call it out same as me.
He had Milo Yiannopoulos on his show.
I have tremendous respect for Bill Maher.
Look, I disagree with him on a lot of issues.
And I think he does get triggered a bit, too.
And he doesn't hold himself to... You know, he screws up.
He's not a perfect guy.
But I'm gonna tell you this.
Credit where credit is due.
This is a guy who's still a liberal, who still defends free speech, still calls out the regressive left, and can point it out without fear, the Democrats are awful at this and are gonna lose.
That's my opinion, even though we agree on a lot of policy.
Doesn't make either of us right-wing, of course they call Bill Maher alt-right.
But now we get to Michael Moore!
This is probably one of the dirtiest takedowns I've seen.
A frail old man unable to remember things, stumbling, refusing to answer basic questions.
I said it in 2017, and Mueller confirmed it today.
All you pundits and moderates and lame dems who told the public to put their faith in the esteemed Robert Mueller just STFU from now on.
He said it was gonna be the biggest F you to the establishment.
He was right.
He's saying Trump's gonna win again.
He's right.
He's saying the same thing now.
Michael Moore, you don't have to like the guy to recognize that while you firmly disagree on all of these issues, Michael Moore is not blind to these problems.
And I can respect that.
Because you've got these people on these forums, plugging their ears and going, la la la la la, while all the bad stuff, while everything just falls apart.
The Democrats are in trouble.
And at least they can see it.
But Michael Moore didn't stop there.
He said, Trump must be gloating in ecstasy.
Why is it that when I say this, they're like, Tim's right wing?
No!
No, I agree with Bernie Sanders, Michael Moore.
Like, listen.
It has been said by Democrats over and over again.
And for some reason, they refuse to accept it.
Not because of the failure, so he goes on, not because of the failure that is Robert Mueller, his report is still a damning document of crimes by Trump, but because Trump understands the power of the visual, and he understands the Dems aren't street fighters, and that's why he'll win.
Yes, Michael Moore, yes!
How many times do I have to say this?
And it's funny, because the Trump supporters are sitting back laughing going, we know!
We've always known!
And the left can't see it.
The Democrats can't see it.
So they think they're playing checkers while Trump is playing chess.
There are still some people on the left who know it.
We have another tweet from Michael Moore.
He says, Come on fellow Americans, Trump can be beaten.
Just because he outwitted the DNC once and is in the process of trying to do it again doesn't mean squat.
If we the majority rise up, get active, and inspire a nation to make America the America we want it to be, we know how to do this.
This first response, Dems are finished.
I appreciate Michael Moore coming out and saying, we must, we must.
He's right.
We need to have a sane, rational conversation.
But let me go back to, I believe it was in this video, sometimes, I was at a skate park talking to somebody about politics, and he said he's just not in it anymore.
And I was like, but you're the rational, liberal guy who needs to be speaking up and calling out the BS.
They don't want to play the game.
They're gone.
So you have conservatives and Republicans who are standing up and fighting as hard as they can, and you have the woke, regressive left, and a weak, frail Democratic Party.
They're not going to get it done.
Now, I'll admit, you got Ocasio-Cortez, who is bombastic as bombastic can get, but Americans won't support her.
We really do need someone like Obama.
I didn't like him for a lot of reasons.
I voted for him the first time, not the second time.
And I think he did a lot of things wrong.
But what I mean is not his policies.
The Democrats need a strong, charismatic leader.
They don't have it.
I got a couple more things I want to point out.
Donald Trump says even Michael Moore agrees the Dems and Mueller blew it.
Well, Michael Moore did respond saying, yes, the proof they blew it is that you're tweeting from Air Force One.
You shouldn't be on that plane or in the Oval Office.
You should be wearing a jumpsuit that matches your face.
The DNC and Mueller may not have known how to stop you, but millions of voters and I do.
Get ready.
So, look, I disagree with Michael Moore on a lot of issues.
Full disclosure, a long time ago he did donate to me.
I disagree with him, but I got respect for the way he's coming at this.
He's coming at it honestly.
Honestly saying, Trump won.
Trump won.
We get it.
We've got to do something better.
That's the messaging we need.
Pointing out the flaws on the left, admitting the mistakes.
Michael Moore, much respect.
I'm gonna end with one final tweet from Michael Tracy, which you can clearly see I have liked and retweeted because this is one of the funniest and most spot-on takes for the whole Mueller testimony.
And I want you to walk away from this podcast, video, whatever, remembering this.
Michael Tracy said, Given his poor memory, sluggishness, and lack of familiarity with his own report, we now have more insight into why Mueller allowed this two-year investigation to spiral out of control and devolve into absurdity.
I saw that, and I laughed.
Not because it's like, it is funny, but I'm not laughing because it's a good thing or I'm happy.
No, I'm laughing because it is the best way that you can view this whole thing.
The Mueller testimony did provide us insight.
We saw a dotering old man, and I'm not trying to be mean because I do respect him and his career, and I'm not trying to be disrespectful and personal, but he didn't even remember who appointed him to the U.S.
Attorney's Office in Massachusetts.
He didn't remember.
He couldn't recall certain things.
He kept asking to repeat the question.
It didn't seem like he was... Well, for one, look, he didn't want to be there.
Clearly didn't want to be there.
This is a backfire on the Democrats.
It was bad.
It was bad, bad, bad.
And don't take my word for it.
Take Michael Moore and Bill Maher.
They're the leaders.
They're leaders on the left.
But, of course, the left is completely fractured.
So, if anything, I can say this.
The substance of the Mueller hearing, for the most part, was nothing.
It was just people trying to reframe his report, which he said he wouldn't read from anyway.
We did get some big information, and that is when Matt Gaetz challenged him.
Why didn't Mueller investigate the origin of the conspiracy?
That, to me, is damning.
Because without that, the whole investigation was a waste of time.
But you know what?
Bill Maher and Michael Moore can see it.
Don't take my word for it.
It's not a right-wing opinion.
High profile progressives and liberals are saying it right now.
To you.
To everyone.
To the left.
And if you don't accept the Democrats are failing this game, you will lose again.
But you know what?
Far be it from me to issue the warning.
To the Democrats, again, because it seems to be what I do most of the time.
Look, I'm never going to pretend the Democrats are winning so it looks like I'm a Democrat or on the left.
That's ridiculous.
And that's apparently what people want.
Because when I make a video saying Trump won, his approval rating's up, they say, oh, there goes Tim, making clickbait for the right wing, and I'm like, it's not false!
It is true!
Trump's approval rating is at a near all-time high.
I didn't make that up.
Trump is winning.
But because these people are in their bubble, they refuse to listen.
They refuse to listen to reason.
I don't care what my politics are.
I am telling you what's happening.
And if you won't accept it, you get this.
You get a situation where you even have to have Bill Maher and Michael Moore coming out and saying, guys, listen.
It's not working out.
But far be it from me, I don't care.
I'm going to make videos I care about.
I'm going to talk about what I think is rational and close to the truth as I can get.
And this is it.
The Mueller hearing was a disaster for Democrats.
Because you've got people on the left saying it.
Now you can be on one of these forums, you know, in your little circle, claiming in your, I'm going to avoid adult language, sitting around Pleasuring each other with your beliefs that Mueller somehow did something good for the Democrats, but they didn't.
It was a disaster.
An unmitigated disaster.
In the end, Trump wins.
He's got the Democrats off message, while his approval rating skyrockets, and they just look foolish.
I'll leave it there.
Stick around.
The next segment will be coming up at youtube.com slash timcastnews starting at 6 p.m., and I will see you all then.
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez was seen in these viral photos crying and looking sad, but it was a weird plasticky kind of fake sad if you were to ask me.
Then photos emerged showing her looking- they showed the full frame and you can see it was just like a road and it was facetiously referred to as just a parking lot.
Fact-checking organization PolitiFact says this is false.
Why?
Because it was a toll plaza.
What?
I believe it was Scott Adams who said that we're all watching, you know, the same screen, but there's two different movies playing for us.
People see different things.
Yesterday, I made a video addressing some of my concerns out the left.
It was made in response to a video from David Pakman, which I recommend both videos, both mine and his.
Check it out.
It's on this channel.
In this, I show a graph where the left predominantly gets their news from only left-wing sources, whereas moderates and conservatives have a balance of both.
And surprisingly, conservatives get just over 35 or so percent of their news from liberal sources.
Moderates get a little bit more than half of their news from liberal sources, and then a little bit less than half from moderate sources.
I'm sorry, from conservative sources.
So here's what I think happens.
There are two movies being played.
I'm sitting in between the left and the right, and I'm asking them, like, what do you see, and then going interesting, and then trying to convey, like, what's being said in a rational way to those who aren't watching the movie at all, or are on either side.
Now, what we can see in the culture war is that I'm just going to say it.
I'm not going to pretend.
The left is hostile.
They're very hostile.
Conservatives love arguing.
They love debating.
They want to go on.
They beg for interviews.
Let me come on.
I will refute your ideas.
I will challenge you.
And the left says, let me get permission first or I'm not going to do it.
That makes it really hard to tell a left-wing individual, here's what's playing for the right.
Here's what you're not seeing.
Moderates can see it.
Because moderates do get most of their news from left-wing sources, but still a decent amount from conservatives, so they're like, oh, I get it.
So here's the reason I bring this up.
PolitiFact's fact-checking is ridiculous.
They take everything so literally.
I wonder how they function in the real world.
Let me tell you something really interesting about machine learning and artificial intelligence.
I read this really great passage, it was from this book on like technology and quantum physics, and they said one of the things that AI lacks today, sort of, it's getting better, is assumptions.
The ability to make an assumption.
So the best example is, when you need to drive a screw into a piece of wood, what do you do?
You take the screw, you take your screwdriver, you eyeball it, depending on what you're doing.
I mean, you want to measure twice, cut once, they say, right?
But let's say you just want to put a screw in, so you find a good place, you push the screwdriver in, and you just push it and twist, and then eventually the screw's in, it's tight, you feel good about it.
How many calculations did you do?
How much math did you do?
Not that much at all.
In fact, what you really did was make a ton of assumptions.
Now, when a computer or a machine has to do it, everything has to be perfectly precise.
To what degree, you know, to what range does the screech ever go up?
How many rotations?
How much force?
There's a ton of calculations in this.
So, interestingly, and trust me, I have a point, there was a really interesting development recently where they said that AI couldn't beat the game Magic the Gathering because there were too many variables.
The computers couldn't make enough assumptions.
They had to calculate every possible path.
And that leads to the inability to play the strategy.
If you're not familiar with Magic the Gathering, it's a card strategy game.
It's fantasy-based for the most part, and it's basically like you and your friends are battling, and it's like, uh, the best way to describe it, chess and poker combined.
Well, AI couldn't do it because it didn't have the ability to see the nuance, the context, and make assumptions.
It has to literally calculate everything precisely.
This is why I wonder, how do these people function when they take everything so damn literally they can't understand the actual idea being conveyed?
And this is a really good point to bring up when we talk about how the left can't meme.
Memes are pocket-sized ideas, okay?
So take, for instance, one I often cite is Trump saying Pocahontas.
Many people on the left are offended by it.
They see it's a racial slur.
But when Trump says Pocahontas, the idea being conveyed, the memory highlighted in the brains of those who can hear it, isn't just an insult.
It represents everything Elizabeth Warren did, from her bar, you know, her license or whatever that said Native American, to being labeled a Native American.
Trump has condensed that whole story down into a single word that he can invoke every time he says her name.
It's very effective memeing.
Trump knows how to do this.
Take for instance, like, you'll see a lot of memes from like, it'll say, um, a clip from The Office.
People know what happened in the office, they understand the context, so when the meme is presented in a political context, people immediately say something like, I totally get the idea you're trying to convey.
We're not literally talking about the office, we're talking about the idea that was in the episode.
So, the point I'm making, with the AI and all this, when we look at this story from the Daily Wire, they say, PolitiFact's fact check on AOC crying in front of an empty parking lot is utterly hilarious.
Here's what they say.
No, this isn't a photo of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez crying over a parking lot.
Because they go on to say that essentially it was a toll plaza, but she was actually crying about the camp on the other side.
Do you remember during the debates when Donald Trump said that Hillary Clinton acid washed her server?
NBC News put out a fact check saying, false.
Hillary Clinton did not use a corrosive substance on her computer.
And I'm just sitting there like, what?
Well, of course he didn't.
Trump's using a metaphor.
He's just exaggerating.
He's saying acid wash.
It's a way to describe, in fact, the software used was called Bleach Bit.
Trump was just making a point saying that she aggressively scrubbed her server, and they said it was false.
And here is the big divide between what the left and the right is today for the most part.
Why can't the left meme?
Because they don't under- like, it's like, it's- man, I'm gonna say it, and I know it's gonna trigger a lot of people.
They're drones.
It's robotic.
Everything is surface value.
This is what it is, period.
They can't see beyond the surface.
And that's why, in my opinion, we see things like, they all want a $15 minimum wage.
Well, did you think about what comes next?
Okay, it made sense before.
I don't think we should get rid of it.
I understand why we have it.
But automation is at play now.
Things have changed.
This is why Andrew Yang, a Democrat, opposes it and says we need better solutions.
You can't just claim to be on the, it's like, it's like, For one, I think there's a lot of people who just say they're supporting the minimum wage because Democrats are supposed to.
No, you can be on the left and be for sensible policy and change your views with technology.
They don't.
They don't think about what comes next.
And this is what we see here.
It's like...
These people... Here's how I imagine what happens with this fact check.
They see someone tweet, Ocasio-Cortez crying over a parking lot.
Well, parking lot was just meant to be hyperbolic.
It was meant to kind of just belittle what she was doing.
It was an insult, kind of.
It's hyperbole.
It's exaggeration.
But of course people know it's not literally a parking lot.
It's a toll plaza.
It was the driveway up to the facility.
We know the facility was there.
These people from PolitiFact see this and they're like, wait a minute.
That's not a parking lot.
There's a camp on the other side.
Well, obviously!
The point was, she couldn't see anything, right?
Off in the distance were tents.
And she was crying about it.
But what was she looking at that she was crying at?
There's nothing there.
That's the point.
The point was that we think it was fake.
You don't have to be... So this is what's crazy right now, because, you know, people talk about the left and the right divide, and I think it really comes down to, do you have the ability to understand nuance?
And so I think this is why it puts me, as like a moderate, more in line with the worldview of conservatives.
And it's why my stories are framed the way they are.
Even though my opinions differ from conservatives, even though my policy positions differ, I'm paying attention and I can think a few steps ahead.
I don't think that's inherent to conservatism and not to liberals.
I think whatever happened in these past few years has pushed the people of this mindset to the conservatives and people without this mindset to the left.
And I think memes have a lot to do with it.
There were a lot of conservatives who got on the meme train quickly and understood how this worked and had fun.
This attracts people.
Donald Trump understood this.
Think about it.
When Trump gets on the debate stage and uses, like, the power of memes, and his base does, regular people identify those memes, understand the context, and say, that makes sense.
Regular people then see NBC claim Hillary Clinton didn't use a corrosive chemical on her server, and they're like, Well, that makes no sense.
Remember when someone asked Hillary Clinton, did you wipe your server?
So that was the perfect example of how I think Hillary Clinton knew exactly what she was being asked.
But that behavior?
Think about the modern liberal today who really thinks it was a parking lot, like literally, completely.
When they heard her say, with a cloth, they go, huh, Hillary Clinton wiped her server with a cloth?
That's ridiculous!
And there you go.
Those people who can't understand complex thought, make assumptions, and reason beyond the literal, were attracted to the Democratic Party.
At least, for now.
And that's why there's a lot of walk-away people.
People who can actually question what's happening.
So, look at this.
They say, Cortez said she would never forget that day.
It was the moment I saw with my own eyes the America I loved was, what was, uh, With my own eyes, that the America I love was becoming a nation that steals refugee children from their parents and cages them.
Boy, is she something special, I gotta say this.
First of all, they're not refugees, and stolen.
Man, I love the emotional manipulation these people do.
And it's another reason, you know what, man?
Why they probably will view me and say I'm not left is because I do not play the emotional manipulation game.
But I do play the intelligent research game, and have found in my research and my own personal morals, having grown up the way I did, I fall into the left-wing policy for the most part.
And I shouldn't even say for the most part, it's like slightly to the left.
And I say it all the time, but it's a point I'm trying to make to differentiate between why we have a left and a right watching different screens.
Because the right can see the joke and understand the context and the intent.
And the left takes it completely literally.
Ricky Gervais brings this up in his episode, his thing with Jay Seinfeld, where he says,
these people believe the joke is my actual opinion.
It's actually really fascinating.
I think we should do, like, a study on this.
Really.
Like, maybe Pew could... I don't know.
I don't know.
Maybe I should do it.
Actually survey people.
Because you have all of these different circumstances where we can now see the left-right divide really comes down to, do you understand complexity, context, intent, hidden meaning, metaphor, or is everything black and white literal?
Ricky Gervais makes a joke and they say, you're a transphobe.
And he was like, it was a joke.
It's not meant to be literal.
It's not how I feel.
They don't know that.
They don't understand this.
This is why they're offended by everything.
They actually believe it's someone like, like, I'm surprised they don't go after Family Guy.
But let's read this right here because I want to see what, I want to show you what PolitiFact says.
Critics pounced.
Oh, I love when they say that.
Posting to social media that Congresswoman was crying over nothing more than a parking lot.
Among the stories echoing that sentiment were two shared on Facebook.
Both Facebook posts were flagged as part of Facebook's efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its news feed.
We reached out to blah blah blah.
It isn't a parking lot, Aguirre said.
It's the road leading to the camp.
Duh.
Duh.
Parking lot is called hyperbole, okay?
People were being hyperbolic.
They were exaggerating the point to mock Ocasio-Cortez because she wasn't looking at a camp with children.
She was looking at a driveway, and off in the distance was a camp.
And the joke was, the criticism was, You couldn't see what she was looking at before, so people were trying to make it seem like she was looking at children.
We knew that wasn't the case, and when the photo emerged that she was crying while holding a chain-link fence and just a driveway in front of her, people made fun of her for that.
But these people can't understand that.
I'm really impressed.
In an effort to corroborate that claim, we looked at photos and other coverage from that day.
Now, it's possible This is what she was looking at.
It's a toll... It's a toll plaza.
What is... It's a port of entry?
What?
How is this... How is this refuting?
How is this false?
They take the literal claim of parking lot and say, well, technically it was a toll plaza.
So, yes, there were cars parked on the side of the road in a driveway with no children in visible sight, but it's not a parking lot.
It seems like it's done politically on purpose, often, right?
But I will say that when you look at Ricky Gervais' statement, when you look at the outrage culture, when you look at the NBC News fact-checking, when you look at this story, there's probably a political element.
Some people know they're covering for Ocasio-Cortez because most people are headline readers and they won't read the deeper context.
But I really do think whatever it is that is separating the left and the right comes down to an inability to understand context and nuance.
And thus, you can see the left saying you're either a Nazi or you're not.
It's like, well, dude, there's way, way, way, way, way more political ideologies from here before you get to Nazi, right?
Nope, not to them.
It's either, like, you're a liberal or you're a Nazi, period.
It's why I think the game Secret Hitler is really funny.
I don't know if you've ever played it, but it's hilarious and I absolutely recommend it.
I think it was made by, like, anti-fascist people.
It's called The Werewolf Game, where in the beginning of the game, everybody gets a card packet, and you're either a liberal or a fascist.
And it's part of the reason the game's hilarious, because there's so much more that you could be before you're a liberal or a fascist.
But anyway, the game's funny because someone is secretly Hitler, and you have to figure out who it is, and then it's a guessing game, everyone's lying.
It's a really great game.
I don't care about the politics behind it.
Awesome game.
Good job.
It's really fun.
But the reason I bring it up is that it's so hilarious they made a game where it's literally like two things you can be, liberal or fascist.
And that's the mindset.
That's what exists.
That's why they say everyone's a fascist.
Because they don't understand, they don't understand what libertarianism is.
They don't understand what authoritarianism is.
All they know is good, bad.
Black, white.
That's it.
So when it comes to this, you're either being led by the Pied Piper and you're an idiot, or there is no Pied Piper and this woman, Sierra O'Rourke and Stephanie Poselides, sorry if I'm pronouncing your name wrong, don't understand what nuance is.
Don't understand that there are shades of grey in life and that black and white is an extreme view.
In the end, they give a big false.
No, this isn't a photo of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez crying over a parking lot.
Thank you for your framing.
We understand that.
Please get in on the joke.
Perhaps you don't have the ability.
So let me clarify to end this video.
It was a video of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez standing outside of a plaza which led to a detention center.
There was nothing in front of her, just cars.
She was crying and it looked fake.
She was mocked for that.
When it then came out that she was looking at essentially an empty road, people jokingly said she's crying over a parking lot because they were exaggerating the point that she wasn't actually looking at children, she was just standing outside of a parking lot and had no idea what was going on inside that camp.
For all she knew, they were playing Xbox and eating pizza.
That's the point.
She wasn't looking at kids and crying.
She was looking at nothing.
I don't care what you want to call it.
She was looking at a road.
But you know what?
If you don't understand nuance, I won't be surprised when you fall in line and act like
the Democrats are doing a good job. So you know what? The video I'm going to do for the 4 p.m.
segment, I'm going to be going over my view of the Mueller testimony yesterday. I hate doing
day late stories like this, but there's a lot to go through.
And I'm going to say it, you know, the Democrats are losers.
They are losers.
And I want to stress Obama was a winner.
That man had charisma.
That man did horrifying things.
He was tough and he was bad in a lot of ways.
But boy, he was a leader.
He was strong.
He was tough.
He got some things done.
He did some really bad things.
But the reason I bring him up so often these past few weeks is to highlight the contrast.
The Democrats of today versus where they were in Obama, during the Obama era.
They don't have it.
And I'm not gonna back down and shy away from it because I understand there's nuance in this world.
So stick around.
Next segment will be at 1 p.m.
That segment will be at 4 p.m.
And I will see you all at 1 p.m.
on this channel.
On the surface, it seems like the ASAP Rocky story is not justice.
It's not fair.
According to the videos put out by ASAP, it seems like he wasn't the aggressor, but let's back up.
For those that aren't familiar, this has been a pretty big story.
A$AP Rocky, very famous rapper, I believe.
And he's been held in Sweden since July 3rd.
He's now being charged with assault and is facing two years in prison.
Donald Trump tried to intervene.
Many celebrities have tweeted out support for him.
And he's not being allowed bail.
Because Sweden, my understanding is, they think he's a flight risk, considering he's very well off and could just leave.
Now here's the thing.
The guy who allegedly was attacked can be seen in video apparently attacking A$AP's bodyguard or entourage.
We can see A$AP on Instagram saying, we don't want any beef with this guy.
They won't stop following us and harassing us.
One woman claims the guy even groped her.
All of a sudden then we see another video from TMZ where you can see the A$AP crew attacking this guy and his friend, I think.
That is now resulting in them being held and charged.
But here's what's crazy.
Even though we can see this dude harassing them, even though we can see this guy attacking ASAP's bodyguard, that guy's not being charged.
And get this, a new report from TMZ, the victim has a previous assault charge, and my understanding is he may have drug charges too.
We'll read into this story.
So here's the thing.
I think Sweden is a very, very creepy place.
I made a video about it not too long ago.
When I see this story, I'm not surprised.
Sweden is creepy.
They are... I'm just gonna say my opinion right now before I read the news.
It looks like they're protecting this other guy, even though he can clearly be seen harassing ASAP and his crew.
Asap on Instagram being like, hey, to the camera, we just want to let you know we don't want to be with this guy.
We don't want this.
Okay, great.
Something happened.
This guy, a woman's claiming that this guy groped her and he's not being charged.
Let's read the story.
A$AP Rocky has been charged with assault and could face two years in Swedish prison.
The rapper has been held in jail since July 3rd, despite many celebrities and President Trump's calls for him to be released.
They say, Rapper A$AP Rocky was charged with assault Thursday over a fight before a music festival in Stockholm last month, a State Department spokesperson told BuzzFeed News.
He could face up to two years in jail, according to the AP.
The June 30th fight allegedly broke out after two men began following the Effing Problems rapper, one of the songs, after he broke a pair of their headphones.
A court- Okay, but here's the thing.
I don't know why BuzzFeed is asserting that.
They say, according to footage first obtained by TMZ.
I don't know what they're specifically referring to.
What I did see, you can see this fight breakout, right?
But in the video from ASAP, the guy attacks, it looks like, okay, I could be wrong, but it looks like the guy, the victim, the guy, you know, attacks one of ASAP's bodyguard or entourage, and ASAP says, dude, you hit him with the headphones, and this guy won't leave.
Let's read on.
They say, A woman who was with Rocky that accused one of the two men of groping her earlier.
The rapper and his crew could then be seen pummeling a man, throwing him across the ground.
Two other individuals who have not been named face the same charges.
All three have been held since July 3rd.
In a statement about the charges, prosecutor Daniel Soonason said Rocky and the two others were suspected of assault causing actual bodily harm, having come to the conclusion that the events in question constitute a crime and despite claims of self-defense and provocation.
Many celebrities have gotten involved in the case, with Justin Bieber, Nicki Minaj, and Post Malone just a few who have posted in support of the rapper.
Now, here's what's interesting.
They mention that, you know, Donald Trump stepped in, Kanye West was involved.
They say that the Prime Minister said A$AP will be treated fairly.
I completely doubt it.
Let me just stress, for those that may not be familiar with what I did in Sweden, we went to an area We had a camera.
We were warned by the police.
I asked the police if they could follow us out, if that would be smart.
The police said it would be smart for us, like, something of that effect.
It's been a while.
I said, okay.
The police got in their van, and we walked out, and the police went out behind us.
I said, the police escorted us out of Rinkeby.
Later, the police denied it.
On TV, they denied it.
They called me a liar.
Even though I had footage, they said I was a liar.
I do not trust them.
It is a creepy, creepy country.
The journalists in that country seemingly lied.
I'm not going to rehash this whole thing, but let me just stress that.
I have experienced there something I have never experienced before.
A seemingly coordinated effort from journalists to deceive me and then lie about what happened afterwards.
I had journalists in that country tell me they had been attacked in that suburb area.
And then after I get escorted out, they all just say, oh, he's lying, it's not true, the police are denying it.
I'm like, but you're the... It's creepy, man.
Trust me.
Let's read this.
Check this out.
Apparently, someone's saying they're violating the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations.
Rocky's attorney and manager previously said the artist acted in self-defense after a group of men continued to follow, harass, and then physically assault them.
Video footage shows the assailants following Rocky while he pleads to them that he does not want any issues.
Rocky volunteered to go to police for questioning, John Amen, the rapper's manager, said in an Instagram post.
On the day of his arrest, I spoke with the U.S.
Embassy Consulate, who informed me that his request to visit Rocky was rejected by police, which violates Article 36 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, to which Sweden is a signatory.
They add.
Emin added that Rocky is being held in horrific conditions, including 24-7 solitary confinement, restriction of amenities for the most basic of human functions, lack of access to life-sustaining food, as well as unsanitary conditions.
Prior to Thursday's charges, the rapper's team had tried to get him released from jail, but siding with the prosecution, a Swedish judge ruled last week that he would remain incarcerated because he was a flight risk.
Now here's where it gets creepier.
The dude who was harassing Rocky, and I'm gonna say it, you can see it in video, won't back off, has a previous criminal history.
Check this out.
The man at the center of the A$AP Rocky assault case, the man who provoked the rapper and even attacked him before A$AP reluctantly snapped back, was convicted of criminal assault in Sweden three years ago.
Mustafar Jafari, Rocky's alleged victim, was convicted of striking a man in his forehead and beating the victim's face in 2016, when Jafari was 16 years old.
It happened on the streets of Stockholm, the very place Jafari harassed and assaulted A$AP and his crew earlier this month.
TMZ even saying definitively, this guy attacked and harassed A$AP.
Jafari was prosecuted and convicted of assault and is sentenced 30 hours of community service.
He was also ordered to pay his victim around $500 in cash.
Jafari was also convicted of two minor drug offenses, one in November 2017 and the other in May 2018.
He was ordered to pay a fine for both but serve no jail time.
As we reported, Jafari was the instigator in the ASAP Rocky incident.
He's the guy in the white shirt.
Prosecutors have cleared him, claiming he was acting in self-defense.
Rocky, who pled with Jafari to leave him and his crew alone before finally snapping, has now been charged with assault and could face two years in prison.
So it looks like TMZ is going on the record saying that this guy started the fight.
Uh, let's review this update real quick.
Law enforcement sources tell TMZ police are actively investigating the fight.
Yadda yadda yadda.
I want to see if it's, uh... They say the video shows Rocky in a white hoodie and green shorts absolutely toss one of the guys like a ragdoll.
You can also hear someone smash a bottle during the fight.
Three other men, apparently on Rocky's side, jumped in and joined the beatdown, punching and kicking the guy.
Our sources say Rocky and his crew then took off, leaving the guy knocked out on the ground.
I gotta say, man, based on the videos and based on what I experience in Sweden, I will never trust the Swedish government.
I gotta say man, based on the videos and based on what I experience in Sweden, I will never
trust the Swedish government.
Here's the thing.
Justice needs to be served.
It's that simple, right?
But in the U.S., we have a system, and actually, well, unfortunately, they used to have it in the U.K., where we have the presumption of innocence, and you get bail.
Sweden doesn't operate like this.
Apparently, you don't get bail, or I should say that, what I've read, no one can intervene, and he's gonna be held until trial.
So he's now being held for, what, three weeks over what's a street fight.
Man, I'll tell you, you know what would happen in the U.S.
if this went down?
Cops would probably be like, go home.
That's it.
They'd say, go home.
Come on guys, get out of here, go home.
Now granted, this dude was apparently knocked out.
But I think the, well actually, they're charging him with assault, which means the prosecutors believe they have evidence he committed a crime.
Even with videos showing this guy was harassing them.
Think about how crazy that is.
You could be walking down the street, some guy won't stop yelling at you, harassing you, attacking one of your guys, and then when you finally fight back, you're in trouble.
Now it's true this kind of like litigious behavior stuff happens in the U.S.
too.
We hear stories about someone starting a fight and then the person defending themselves could get in trouble.
And there was an argument to be made that ASAP went too far, and I think that's what Sweden's gonna say.
But let me just stress, Sweden is a creepy and, in my opinion, kind of...
I don't know.
I don't want to say... They have a weird kind of frail, elitist racism about their country.
So there was some tweet, I think.
It may have been... I don't have it pulled up, but I think it was A$AP's mom saying Sweden is racist.
Let me just end this video by saying, unequivocally, in my opinion, Sweden is racist.
It is extremely, extremely racist.
Extremely racist.
One of the most racist places I've ever been to.
Let me explain what that means and why.
I spoke with some people in Sweden who are from the U.S., who now live in Sweden.
And they said, Swedes think they're better than everyone else, but they pretend they're not because that's part of the elitism.
So, what I was told is, even if you're white, they don't want to hire you.
Unless you're a national Swede, like a white, Swedish-speaking individual, they discriminate against you.
Full force.
But the reason they allow the refugees in is because they want to pretend to be better than everyone else.
So this is what people were telling me.
And in my experience, I believe this to be the case.
The reason they have so many refugees and migrants coming into Sweden?
Because the Swedes like to put on this air where they're like, look at all the good we're doing.
We're so much better than everyone else.
But then what happens?
They put all of these refugees and migrants into their own neighborhoods, basically isolating them.
And they treat these people like migrants, even though many of them were born in Sweden.
So one of the things we encountered When I went to Sweden a couple years ago was that you have teenagers and people in their early 20s who were born in Sweden from Somali parents and they are called migrants colloquially by people in Sweden even though they were born there.
So, you have these Swedes acting like they're doing this great thing, but then actually treating these people like second-class citizens.
And it's hard for them to get a job, they don't integrate, they don't learn the language, and they form enclaves, and that results in a kind of state within a state where these neighborhoods, they're like, you don't respect us, we don't respect you, why are we gonna listen to you and do what you say?
Get out of here, you're not part of our community.
I don't know what you'd expect.
Look, I had white people telling me, if you're not a native Swede, they won't hire you.
What's gonna happen with these refugees and these migrants or these kids who were born in Sweden and are discriminated against based on their race?
So I gotta say, that's my experience of Sweden.
Look, it can be a lovely place.
You can walk around and get ice cream.
It's nice.
But there is a creepy, creepy feeling that I got from being there based on how they... Man, it's creepy how they walk in lockstep to lie and smear, at least in the U.S.
We do see this weird, creepy behavior from journalists where they all just kind of, you know, repeat each other's talking points without facts.
We do have free speech.
We do have a justice system that provides bail.
And we do have an independent media, to an extent, that pushes back, and at least that's possible.
But in Sweden?
Creepy place.
Don't go there.
Go to Norway.
Norway was awesome.
I love Norway.
I went to Bergen.
Amazing.
Ridiculously expensive though, so keep that in mind.
It was like 50 bucks for fish and chips.
I kid you not.
But Bergen was fun.
It was really cool.
It didn't get dark out until like, I think it was like 11 something.
It was crazy.
Yeah, anyway.
I'll leave it there, man.
Thanks for hanging out.
I hope A$AP Rocky gets out.
He seems like a good dude.
Like, the video I saw with him, I'm definitely on his side on this one.
But, you know what?
I'm an American, so I'm biased.
But, uh, stick around.
Next segment will be at 4 p.m.
YouTube.com slash TimCast.
Different channel from this one.
And I will see you there.
Tulsi Gabbard is suing Google for $50 million over election meddling.
I love this woman.
Tulsi Gabbard is fighting back.
This story both angers me and excites me at the same time.
This is exactly what I've been talking about whenever I say these big companies have too much power.
Google shut down the advertising account of Tulsi Gabbard just after the first debate, when she was the most searched for candidate.
That means when you search for her name, you didn't see her website up top on Google, among other things.
But I gotta say, I'm furious.
Because you see it happen to conservatives.
Of course, they still consider Tulsi to be conservative, I guess for whatever reason.
The left does.
But now it's starting to encroach on my territory.
And it's going to get everyone else on the left unless we do something about it.
Now, I don't know what kind of regulation that needs to be.
Most people are in favor of some kind of regulation, but Tulsi is not taking this sitting down.
She is a strong individual, and that's why I think she'd make a great commander-in-chief.
She's a major in the National Guard, and she's given Google the big F.U.
They say the long-shot presidential candidate from Hawaii said in a federal lawsuit that Google infringed on her free speech when it briefly suspended her campaign's advertising account after the first Democratic debate in June, when she was the most searched for.
They've effectively inhibited the ability for people to learn about her, and you wonder why she's not doing so well in the polls when she's got this kind of weight against her.
Google.
Before I read on, make sure you go to TimCast.com slash donate if you wanna support my work.
There's a PayPal option, a crypto option, a physical address, but of course, and I mean this one, you better share this video.
I'm shocked, I'm impressed, I'm angered, but look, I'm talking about Google here.
Google has deranked independent political commentary.
So there's a bit of a catharsis in seeing her fight back because there are so many of us on Google That no, there's no other game in town.
I'm not going to act like Google has to be, you know, propping up my videos or anything like that.
But we see the bias.
We know it's real.
And Tulsi Gabbard is taking the fight to the courts.
So you better damn well believe they're not going to appreciate this video.
Let's read on.
They say, The lawsuit filed on Thursday in federal court in Los Angeles is believed to be the first time a presidential candidate has sued a major technology firm.
In a twist that reflects Mrs. Gabbard's unorthodox political views, the claim that her speech was stifled by Google is similar to complaints made over the last year in Republican circles.
Few, if any, Democrats have raised similar concerns.
Makes you think, doesn't it?
Hmm, pretty weird, isn't it?
I want to stress this point.
The people on the left either aren't speaking up against the bias and the censorship because they're benefiting from it, or because they are being led by the Pied Piper of the lying media that there's nothing going on, nothing to see here.
Let me just stress, Gizmodo broke the story as far as I know in 2016 that these firms were biased against conservatives.
Literally saying bias.
I know you've heard me say it a lot, but I want to make sure it's clear in this video for this context.
Now, for some reason, these same outlets are saying, there's just no evidence.
It was your evidence, dude.
We know what's happening.
So when these tech firms are biased against conservatives, for the most part, the left isn't going to say anything because they're reaping the rewards.
At the same time, they're saying, but the private business, why is the left defending massive corporations that are meddling in our elections?
I am the faintest.
Well, I can assume it's because they're the ones benefiting from it.
But Tulsi Gabbard is the anti-war left, and I've stressed this point numerous times.
Anti-war leftists get the brunt of this, too.
It is the creepiest thing.
In the James O'Keefe Pinterest story, what did we see?
The anti-media was also blocked, same as live action.
For some reason, they banned anti-war content.
Don't ask me why, but that's creepy.
Let's read on.
They say big tech companies like Google are getting increasing scrutiny by lawmakers and regulators around the world for a wide variety of issues, including their influence on political debate, their handling of consumer data, and the aggressive way they compete with smaller companies.
A day before the Gabbard lawsuit was filed, Facebook said the FTC had opened a formal antitrust investigation into its business practices.
Earlier in the day, the FTC announced that Facebook was fined a record $5 billion for deceiving users about their ability to control the privacy on their personal data.
Tulsi Now Inc., the campaign committee for Ms.
Gabbard, said Google suspended the campaign's advertising account for six hours on June 27th and 28th, obstructing its ability to raise money and spread their message to potential voters.
After the first Democratic debate, Ms.
Gabbard was briefly the most searched for candidate on Google.
Her campaign wanted to capitalize on the attention she was receiving by buying ads that would have placed its website at the top of its search results for her name.
The lawsuit also said the Gabbard campaign believed its emails were being placed in spam folders on Gmail at a disproportionately high rate when compared with emails from other Democratic candidates.
Google, what was the, um, I could be wrong, but I believe Google employees disproportionately supported Hillary Clinton in 2016.
Let's just, let's just say something real quick.
That may just be support for Democrats in general, but Tulsi Gabbard stepped down from the DNC as an FU to the Democrats when they stole it from Bernie.
Because she wanted to support Bernie, period.
That's principle.
You don't gotta like either of their policies to know someone's got integrity here and it's not Google, it's Tulsi.
Here's a quote.
Google's arbitrary and capricious treatment of Gabbard's campaign should raise concerns for policymakers everywhere about the company's ability to use its dominance to impact political discourse in a way that interferes with the upcoming 2020 presidential election, the lawsuit said.
Ms.
Gabbard and her campaign are seeking an injunction against Google from further meddling in the election, New York Times is phrasing, and damages of at least $50 million, and boy, I hope you get it.
Let me just flip Lindsey Graham's statement on this one.
Tulsi Gabbard is facing against the powers that be, hoping to get some power, and boy, I hope she gets it.
You know the Lindsey Graham thing where he said, you guys want power and I hope you don't get it?
Well in this instance, I hope Tulsi gets every penny and more.
Google can afford it.
Google declined to immediately comment on the lawsuit.
No other campaigns have publicly claimed that Google has suspended their advertising accounts.
Interest in Ms.
Gabbard, who has served four terms in the House and is an Army National Guard veteran and major, mind you, New York Times, spiked after the debate.
I should have done this in the beginning, but full disclosure, I've donated to Tulsi, okay?
I've supported her.
I think she's fantastic.
Let's read on.
She entered the presidential debate as a relative unknown and is still polling at less than 1% according to the New York Times polling averages.
But her appeal has crossed traditional party lines.
She has drawn support from both the right and the left because of a staunch anti-war message.
She has also received favorable coverage from influential conservative news media like Drudge Report, Fox News, and Breitbart.
Because maybe, just maybe, she's a common-sense candidate who, while she may have left-wing policy positions that the right doesn't like, they respect her integrity, her anti-war message, and they respect her defending free speech, calling out the censorship, and now challenging Google.
Let me tell you what some of the most important issues to me are.
Anti-death penalty.
100% more than anything else.
Yes, I'm going to do a segment on Bill Barr and the death penalty next.
Anti-war.
In line because of the death penalty.
Free speech opposing big tech monopolies.
Those are bipartisan issues.
Conservatives are on board with that, full stop.
And Tulsi Gabbard is championing that.
Let me just also add, Tulsi has spoken out against private prisons.
I am completely, completely in agreement with her on this issue.
Although we disagree, unlike the minimum wage stuff, I gotta say, I don't vote based on who I think should, like, I don't vote against people.
I'm not gonna vote for the lesser of two evils.
I'm not gonna vote for some Democrat because they might beat Trump.
I'm gonna vote on principle.
And Tulsi Gabbard most aligns with my values, even if I disagree with her on some things, there are more things I agree with her on than basically any other candidate.
And I gotta say, with her stepping up now and giving Google the finger, Oh man, do I like Tulsi Gabbard.
Finally someone fighting back.
And I can say this to Trump's credit too.
A lot of people support him for fighting back against the PC outrage mob.
And I can respect that.
Tulsi Gabbard, while not so, um, you know, hasn't been as vocal as Trump has, she has denounced divisive identity politics.
Although she's not perfect, I know.
She's for reparations and even her own base has criticized her for that.
But she has absolutely defended free speech.
Numerous times.
I love it.
They say, talking about favorable coverage, moving on, Ms.
Gabbard's campaign is historic, even in a race with many potential firsts.
She was elected to the Hawaii House of Representatives when she was 21, becoming the youngest woman to join a United States state legislature.
When she was elected as a representative for Hawaii in 2012, she was the first Samoan-American and first Hindu member of Congress.
They do say that her views are unusual, and this is old news and this is not fair.
They say she had a history of making anti-gay statements and worked for an anti-gay advocacy group, though she apologized.
Yeah, Hillary, Clinton, Obama both opposed gay marriage too.
It's like they always bring this up to smear Tulsi.
And she has tapped into increasingly bipartisan passion.
Weariness of big tech.
Yes.
Yes, please.
Respect to Elizabeth Warren on this issue as well.
I'm not a big fan of Warren, but you get credit when you do the right thing.
Okay?
And I'm also going to throw this out for seemingly no reason, but Cory Booker apparently is a big fan of TNG.
He gets my respect for that.
Look, you don't got to be a fan of the guy.
And here's a side note.
I tweeted about this, and like, no one really cared.
Listen, man.
Booker and I can disagree on politics, although I don't think we disagree on too much.
I'm just not a fan of his character.
I'm not- I don't really trust him.
I don't know if he's like, mm.
But, politics be damned, okay?
When we're all said and done, the thing is, we need to be able to sit down and be Americans and enjoy things.
Star Trek The Next Generation.
Any fan of that is a friend of mine.
Even if we disagree.
You can be, you can be a far left, whatever.
When I hear, like, excitement for Star Trek, I'm willing to have that conversation.
I'm a big fan.
That's gonna help bring us together.
Commonality.
Okay?
So, if it's Star Trek or otherwise.
Let's read a little bit more.
So, uh, apparently there's a statement where she's joining Elizabeth Warren.
Google's discriminatory actions against my campaign are reflective of how dangerous their complete dominance over internet search is, and how increasing dominance of big tech companies over our public discourse threatens our core American values.
This is a threat to free speech, fair elections, and to our democracy, and I intend to fight back on behalf of all Americans.
For so long, dare I say it, the only real threat to Donald Trump is Tulsi Gabbard.
Of course, I don't think she can beat him, but let's be real.
She has conservatives saying, you know what, all other issues aside, the anti-war message is very, very important.
And Trump hasn't been perfect, though he's got some good things behind him with the anti-war stuff.
I can give him credit for around North Korea, not for some other things, but credit where it's due.
Tulsi Gabbard might be the only real, in my opinion, challenge to Trump, but they'll never give it to her.
The media hates her.
They smear her all day and night.
It'll never, you know, but that would be... I gotta say this, look.
Outside of policy that I agree with, I've gone through her page, I've donated to her.
You can tell she has strength behind her when she speaks.
She is presidential.
She served in the National Guard.
She is a major.
She has experience.
She has my respect.
I think we can...
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
They go on to start rehashing, you know, other stuff with, like, uh, Ted Cruz.
And, um, we have a quote here.
What is this?
The campaign said it opened the Google advertising account in February and has bought ads, blah blah blah, yadda yadda yadda.
Quote, to this day, Google has not provided a straight answer, let alone a credible one, as to why Tulsi's political speech was silenced when millions of people wanted to hear from her.
I just want to make sure I get to the meat and potatoes here.
But I think you get it.
Um, you guys know that I'm a big fan of Tulsi.
There have been people who are, it's really funny when they're like, why would the right support Tulsi at all?
And I'm like, well, for one, because she's principled and honest and she served in the armed forces, like those things show real integrity.
It's like they think conservatives are all just like evil demons who don't understand that you can be a good person and disagree politically.
And I think that's the perfect example.
That right now, whatever's going on, the center and the right, for the most part, are like, I disagree with you, but I do think you're a good person.
Right?
There could be a progressive YouTuber where it's like, we disagree, but I think they're okay people.
Tulsi Gabbard.
Just like that.
Not to mention anti-war.
That's huge.
That's bipartisan.
I'm going to leave it here.
I am excited about this.
I want to see Tulsi win $50 million.
Stick around.
I got a couple more segments coming up.
In a few minutes, I will see you shortly.
From CNN, Bill Barr directs federal government to reinstate death penalty, schedule the execution of five death row inmates.
And I am going to say no as loud as I can.
This is the one issue that I hold more truly than any other issue Period.
Look, there's a lot of issues.
Minimum wage, right?
Where I can like, we'll have an argument about it, and I'm kind of like, man, I kind of feel like this.
Death penalty?
Nothing.
Nothing will ever get me to support execution by the state.
For so many reasons.
We're gonna read the story, but we're gonna start with some philosophy.
And here's what I want you to do.
And this is what, you know, I thought about when I was younger and said, we cannot have this.
I want you to imagine right now, You are in a room.
You can't move.
It's dark.
There's no windows.
You're in jail.
You're in prison.
And two men come up, and they take you out of the room, and they tell you, you are now going to die.
What your existence is, your thoughts, your life, your passion, your knowledge, will cease to exist because we've deemed it so.
There's no chance of escape.
It doesn't matter if you're innocent or guilty.
You are going to die.
And I want to imagine them strapping you down to the table, laying there in the cold with the white bright lights, as they tell you now, we are going to inject you with a chemical to end your life.
I want you to really, really think about what that would mean.
We don't know what is beyond life.
We don't.
Some people have faith, but faith isn't knowledge.
Faith is... It's a belief that something will be true, not knowledge that it is.
So there's a lot of people, I think, that might say, you know what?
These people forfeited their lives by doing something.
No, no, no, no, no.
Stop.
I don't care.
I don't think that even, no matter how vile someone may be, no matter how deranged... Actually, I take that back.
There are very, very... I'm not an absolutist.
I recognize there are exceptions to these things.
But I think in almost all circumstances, if you have successfully restrained and detained and stopped the threat, to then decide the state can come in and take away what is the most important thing in existence, life.
I will not accept that.
And this puts me at odds.
Yes, I understand with pro-life and pro-choice, it is a very disturbing and difficult ethical conundrum.
I totally understand that.
But when it comes to the death penalty, straight up, you will never get me to agree to that.
The choice thing is complicated because it comes to two different entities, and it comes to state enforcement.
And it is always about the state imposing their will on your life.
And I will never be for that.
And when it comes to the state deciding you will die, I will never, never be for that.
So maybe you don't agree.
Comment below if you're on YouTube and let me know you don't agree.
I'm not saying you have to.
I'm just letting you know that this is something, this is the hill I will die on.
I won't budge from this.
I have read philosophy, I have sat down, I have meditated on the issue, and I have thought about it, and this is one of the strongest decisions I will ever take.
So I will say unequivocally, I oppose Bill Barr, Donald Trump, the Trump administration, in reinstating death penalties at the federal level and ordering the execution of these inmates.
Beyond all of that, I will defer to Blackstone's formulation that it is better that ten guilty persons escape than one innocent suffer, and the potential In any capacity for the state to end the life of an innocent person to me is shocking, amoral, wrong, and should be stopped at all costs.
I will never, never be happy and okay with my resources, my life, my work being given to the state, in some capacity taxes, so that they can decide they have the authority to take life away from somebody else.
Sorry, it's never gonna happen.
I would love to have a conversation to expand on this and other ideas, including how this pertains to choice in life.
I understand it is an ethical conundrum of which there is no easy answer, but I always defer away from allowing the state to have the authority to dictate an individual's life or take it away.
The state authority.
That's why the choice life thing is complicated for me.
I don't know the answers.
I don't.
This is just my personal, moral, and philosophical position.
And this story, to me, was... I don't know, man.
This is the kind of stuff that makes me angry and freaks me out.
But let's read the news, now that you've listened to me rant about how I feel about the death penalty.
CNN reports.
Let's zoom in real quick.
The federal government has ordered the death penalty to be reinstated for the first time in nearly two decades, as Attorney General William Barr directed the Bureau of Prisons to schedule the execution of five inmates after adopting an updated execution protocol.
After 16 years without an execution, Barr has directed the head of the Bureau of Prisons to execute five death row inmates convicted of murdering, and in some cases, torturing and raping, the most vulnerable in our society, children and the elderly.
Absolutely not.
Absolutely not.
This is not justice.
This is not rehabilitation.
This is simply emotional retribution.
upholds the rule of law and we owe it to the victims and their families to carry
forward the sentence imposed by our justice system.
Absolutely not.
Absolutely not. This is not just, this is not right, this is not justice. This is
not rehabilitation. This is simply emotional retribution. I do not have any
sympathy for these men who have committed the worst crimes imaginable.
But I'm also terrified of the prospect of the state being given the ability to
to enforce whether you are allowed to live or die.
And the fact is the government has, can be, and can be wrong.
It has been wrong.
We can condemn all of these people.
They've been judged by a jury of their peers, by a judge, etc.
But in the end, I just can't see it.
I cannot see us being able to restrain and detain an individual who can never commit harm again, and us deciding you should no longer be allowed to have life.
That, to me, is shocking.
I can't get past it.
The move represents a dramatic reversal after more than a decade-long hiatus in the federal use of capital punishment, as President Donald Trump has taken on the issue and called to bring back the death penalty.
The death penalty is legal in 29 states, the federal government, though there have been no federal executions in nearly two decades, and the number of people facing state executions has been on the decline.
The debate over capital punishment has been longstanding, with advocates arguing it's a deterrent against serious crime and that justice is served for the victim's or victim's families.
It's not.
It won't bring back.
It won't do anything.
I don't want to rant on this.
Opponents, however, point to the racial disparities of death row inmates, the financial costs, and wrongful convictions.
Look, I understand you want to talk about racial disparities, whatever, financial costs.
I just can't imagine being that person.
No matter what you've done, no matter what, you are under the control of the state.
Okay, they have you.
You can't hurt anybody.
Don't let them out.
But I understand it costs money, I do.
But just because we can't afford the burden, we want to end someone's life, I can't see it.
And I really do implore you to imagine it is you sitting on that cold table as people stare at you, knowing that you will cease to exist.
I can't imagine what non-existence would feel like.
I can't imagine anyone determining they have the right to take that away from you.
I can't do it.
I just cannot see it.
They say at bar's discretion, the Bureau of Prisons has adopted the Federal Execution Protocol Addendum, which, quote, replaces the three-drug procedure previously used in federal executions with a single drug, pentobarbital, the Justice Department announced.
Thursday's announcement by DOJ to schedule the executions of five death row inmates follows an effort begun by former Attorney General Jeff Sessions for the federal government to restart executions by lethal injection.
They just go into detail, I don't think we need to go into overt detail, but let's read more about the prisons.
A federal Bureau of Prisons spokeswoman told CNN that per statute, the director of the BOP designates the date and time for an execution.
BOP will continue with planning and administrative steps to ensure the execution is ready to commence on the designated date and time.
An official from the federal prison in Terre Haute, Indiana, where each man is scheduled to be executed in the coming months, deferred comment to BOP.
There are currently 62 inmates on federal death row, with about the same number of white and black federal death row inmates, according to the Death Penalty Information Center.
Capital punishment is legal in 29 states.
They said that already.
There are about 2,600 death row inmates, with California detaining the most.
According to the Center, of the five men named by Barr Thursday, three are white, one is black, and one is Native American.
Only three federal inmates have been executed in the United States since the federal death penalty was reinstated in 1988 after a 16-year moratorium.
Louis Jones, a Gulf War veteran, was the last federal inmate executed in March 2003 for the kidnapping and murder of 19-year-old Army Private Tracy McBride.
There are a lot of challenges when it comes to this, because I know there is still a rational and fair point in terms of how much it costs to detain people.
That's one thing I've heard a lot, saying it costs too much money, it's a burden on the taxpayer, and these people committed atrocities.
But when I hear that, my question is, should the state end someone's life simply because they don't want to pay to detain them?
And I feel the answer is no.
And that's not particularly... It's an interesting question of whether it's a liberty or authority question.
Is it authoritarian to say that the people of society should be forced to pay for the internment of an individual because we don't want to kill that person?
It's a really complicated question.
These moral and ethical situations are never easy.
They're not.
But deep within my core, if you were to ask me to empathize and envision that situation, I would never support that.
The state using its authority to end someone's life is the most egregious violation of authority that we could, in my opinion, experience.
We grant authority to the state for particular reasons.
Common defense, Is one.
I as a social liberal do think that we can empower the state for some governmental programs as well, at odds with many classical liberals and libertarians, fine.
But I can't imagine why we would ever elect to empower a state above us that could choose, at their discretion, with safeguards I understand, to end our lives.
Think about the fake news.
Think about how easy it would be for the fake news to smear you and for people to come and try and end your life.
That's not the way we do things, no matter how bad of a person you are.
You know, I'll add one last thing, in all fairness.
It's really easy to have these principles when the crimes are without specifics, you know?
I don't know what these men who are on death row were convicted of.
I don't know exactly what they did and I wasn't there to experience it.
And I'd have to imagine if I was watching someone commit one of these crimes, I would, if I had to, in the defense of others, end someone's life.
I get it.
But what about when we've already stopped them?
What about when we've already got them locked in a room and they can't leave?
Let me know what you think.
I don't see myself ever budging on that issue.
I really don't.
Stick around, I got one more segment coming up for you in just a few moments and I will see you shortly.
We got a couple stories, and this one mostly because we're waiting for the details on the breaking news.
And that is, according to Ryan James Gerduski, he's a New York political correspondent for OANN, he says, scoop, Rep.
Gosar, who is Paul Gosar of Arizona, is introducing Stop the Censorship Act this week, which will revoke unwarranted immunities given to big tech, which would revoke Oh, he said it twice.
For censoring objectionable conservative content.
This is not the Hawley Bill.
I'll be sure to tweet out the language when the bill is released, but this bill should stop the censorship by Big Tech without granting the government the power to dictate what is and isn't objectionable.
So this is the big news. And then we have this tweet from Paul Gosar himself, who said on the 20th
that Twitter suspended, when Twitter suspended an angel mom for posting about illegal immigration,
he said, this is blatant censorship and viewpoint discrimination. I am pursuing
legislation to stop this. He says, John Binder lays it out.
Twitter suspends Angel Mom for posting about illegal immigration.
So when that news breaks, I will have the update.
But another really big story from just the other day is, I don't know, a bit of a cathartic release for many people who may be upset with big tech.
Earlier on, I did a segment about Tulsi Gabbard suing Google.
I am excited to hear the news that someone is fighting back.
But here's another big story.
It was recently reported that there will be an antitrust probe into Big Tech, as well as, I believe, an FTC investigation into Facebook.
Check this story out.
The DOJ's latest probe erased $33 billion from Amazon, Apple, Facebook, and Google.
That's emotionally satisfying to see these big companies reaping what they sow But I but I do want to point out that value is like I don't know people who hold socks and shares So it's not necessarily a good thing, but I do think it's good that we're finally seeing action taken against these companies for a anti-competitive practices, their powerful monopolies,
violating the rights of a presidential candidate, Tulsi Gabbard, silencing political speech they don't like.
It's about time something is done. So let's read this story.
Before we get started, head over to timcast.com slash donate if you'd like to support my work.
There's a PayPal option, a crypto option, a physical address.
You know the drill.
But the reality is, YouTube deranking independent political commentary,
which is another reason why you probably should share this.
Google's not gonna be too happy with today.
I've done a bunch of videos criticizing Google, and I have to imagine they might not be super happy about it, because I am a pretty big advocate for Something being done to stop the power from these big tech, multinational, billion-dollar corporations, and how they silence our speech, and they manipulate our elections, and they have undue, unelected power.
You can imagine they're not gonna like that, so if you do think this message is important, then I ask you to share this video, and I do mean that sincerely.
Growth now is reliant upon you guys.
We're deranked.
They're suggesting us less.
If you like it, share it.
See, Business Insider reports, Billions of dollars are set to be wiped from the value of America's biggest tech firms after the U.S.
Department of Justice took the unusual step of announcing an antitrust investigation.
The DOJ on Tuesday said it was launching a broad investigation into whether online platforms were illegally harming their competitors and stifling innovation.
They are.
Gab is a really great example.
You don't have to like Gab.
You don't gotta like the politics of the people on the platform.
We can talk about principle.
Gab didn't break any rules.
The latest banning of Gab.
I mentioned this the other day.
In a press release, the Justice Department did not name names, but said it would focus on market-leading companies, meaning it is likely to encompass Amazon, Apple, Facebook, and Google, and potentially Twitter, I might add.
The share prices of those four companies took a hit in after-hours trading Tuesday, and the losses continued into pre-market trading on Wednesday morning.
Here's how things stood at 530 a.m.
Eastern.
Alphabet down about 1%, wiping $7.6 billion.
Off its value.
Again, emotionally satisfying.
I don't know if it's in the end really good news.
I mean, it's bad for the economy overall.
There's going to be individual stockholders who are hurting from this, but doesn't it feel good to see some kind of accountability, even if it's not necessarily going to stop them?
Amazon down 1%, a $9.8 billion hit to its market cap.
Apple, 1.04%, a $6.8 billion drop in value.
Facebook, taking the biggest hit, 1.46%.
But at the same time, let's keep in mind, there's other news about Facebook.
They are apparently being, I did mention this in the other story, but with Tulsi Gabbard, maybe I'll bring this up as a FTC investigation.
So I do still have the original story from Tulsi, but I want to make sure, I do believe they mention The FTC investigation which is really important here.
So they say that Facebook said the FTC opened a formal antitrust investigation into its business practices earlier in the day and they were also fined a record five billion dollars for deceiving users about their personal data.
So this is some important context.
We'll come back to this in a second but let's get back to the They say, put together, the losses represent around $33 billion of lost value.
We get it.
They say lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have been agitating for an investigation into the power of the tech companies, and President Donald Trump has long hinted that he shares these concerns.
He has said Google, Amazon, and Facebook might be very anti-trust.
Whatever that means.
And he has repeatedly attacked against Google over unproven claims it shows bias against conservatives.
Unproven!
They always do this in media.
Do your job, journalists!
Okay?
Jake Cantor, I implore you to actually do a simple Google search and look at the evidence.
I swear to God, whenever they write this stuff, it's like someone sitting in their room and saying, no one's ever proved it.
Yeah, because you don't do your jobs.
I'm so sick and tired.
Sick and tired of these fake journalists who don't do work.
Could you imagine if you had a broken toilet, so you called the plumber, and the plumber came in and said, your pipe's not broken.
And you're like, dude, it's leaking water.
I don't see any water.
Did you look for the water?
No, I assumed it was fine.
That's what they're doing.
That is exactly what they're doing.
I'm sorry.
I'm frustrated by that.
Dave Ives, an analyst at Wedbush Securities, said the DOJ's investigation represented a shot across the bow for big tech but was unlikely to result in drastic action.
He added, however, that it could be an overhang on stocks and said investors should focus on the fundamentals of the firms involved.
Now, I do want to mention this.
Here's a tweet from Pew Research Fact Tank.
51% of Americans said in a May-June 2018 survey that major technology companies should be regulated by the government more than they are now.
And I agree.
Here's the image.
It's not very big.
They didn't do a good job of posting the image.
But for the most part, it's actually Democrats wanting it more.
So, Democrats tend to be less favorable, it would seem.
And the next big story is the Facebook antitrust federal trade- Wait, wait, wait, is this?
Antitrust inquiry.
Oh, okay.
So, they say, New York Times says, Facebook came under siege on multiple fronts Wednesday, agreeing to new layers of oversight and two fines to settle privacy and disclosure violations, even as it acknowledged that it was under investigation from the Federal Trade
Commission for antitrust concerns.
So I'm not sure if this is the same probe because I want to make sure it's clear.
In the initial reporting on the antitrust probe for big tech, they said it could lead to an
investigation.
If Facebook is saying they are being investigated, well then it's pretty, pretty much, you know, there it is.
It's happening.
The story says earlier in the day, the company was penalized by the FTC with a record $5 billion fine for deceiving users about their ability to control the privacy of their personal data.
Let me, I just need to, I just need to say something.
Listen.
At what point Does the, is the left going to step up?
Granted, I understand we're seeing now Tulsi Gabbard, we're seeing Elizabeth Warren.
Much respect.
It is becoming a bipartisan issue.
But I am sick and tired of the but my private platform.
But my private platform.
No!
They violated our privacy.
They sell our data.
They grant access to our private messages to third-party companies.
I kid you not, it happened.
They have shut down the account of a presidential candidate when she was most searched for.
They are silencing political opinions they don't like.
They are enforcing arbitrary rules.
They are unelected.
I'm going to give a special shout out to Ocasio-Cortez, who in a recent congressional hearing, grilled the Libra, Facebook currency people, over the fact that they are an unelected council of corporate power that want to create a currency.
Help us.
No.
Absolutely not.
I am no fan of Ocasio-Cortez, but she absolutely deserves credit on grilling them fine.
I don't care if we disagree on a bunch of issues.
I don't care if I've criticized you.
I don't care if you insult me.
You could be the craziest anti-Tim Pool stalker, and if you stepped up and said something must be done about this, and asked for my help, I will gladly give it.
I can criticize anybody, but in the end, if we can push back on the authoritarian encroachment of these massive tech companies that are shutting down political speech, that are stifling presidential candidates, then I will be there to fight back.
So you know what?
Let me end with one point.
It feels good to see they're losing billions of dollars.
It does.
But I don't think that's the action needed.
I just think that's gonna make us feel good.
We need some real tangible results here.
Stick around.
Next segment will be coming up tomorrow at 10 a.m.
