Far Leftists DEFEND Hong Kong Police, Call Protesters Far Right Fascists
Far Leftists DEFEND Hong Kong Police, Call Protesters Far Right Fascists. The Hong Kong Protesters are demanding freedom of speech and the right to protest, among other things. From this there has been an escalation in clashes with police resulting in a viral photo and video showing police draw their arms against the protesters.While many in the US on the left and right condemned the shocking act, some far leftists have actually come to the defense of the police saying they were being attacked by a mob of far right fascists.Far left activists have increasingly begun to take the side of the communist party and police. This is party due to the fact that Hong Kong protesters use Pepe, Fly American Flags, Sing the US anthem, and have asked Donald Trump for help.While its important to stress that many on the left absolutely side with the protesters, it is even more important to note that those in the US waving communist flags have defended China and have actually engaged in similar behavior in the US.Its not necessarily a mirror image of the US, its basically the same thing. Pro communist activists in the US target pro freedom of speech activists here all the same.Both sides are worthy of criticism but in the end it seems that for some the issue is not about principle, freedoms, or opposing authoritarianism but in defending their "tribe"
Support the show (http://timcast.com/donate)
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
There's something truly astonishing and weird about the U.S.
view of what's happening in Hong Kong.
As you can see in this photo, there's a bunch of Hong Kong protesters waving American flags.
They carry signs asking for Trump to help liberate Hong Kong.
And they are fighting against police and this is being reinforced by the Communist Party of China.
So in a sense you have pro-democracy protesters pushing back on China all at a time while Trump is escalating the US trade war with China.
So it's no surprise then that I'm seeing far-left activists and media personalities condemn the Hong Kong protesters as far-right, as fascists, as violent mobs.
The other day, we saw police in Hong Kong draw their guns on protesters.
Protesters with sticks.
Now listen, I'll be the first to condemn mob violence.
I will do it here in the US, and I will call it out in Hong Kong.
I don't care where it is.
There have been circumstances where Hong Kong protesters have beaten a journalist because they thought he was a cop.
And that is absolutely detestable, deplorable, and wrong, and needs to be condemned outright.
Then there are more complicated situations, where a group of cops are fighting with a mob, and then it goes back and forth with the cops drawing their guns.
At that point, I kind of say, it's escalated beyond my own perspective on the matter.
If two groups are fighting with each other, and then someone draws a gun, I think they probably shouldn't do that, but at the same time, There's no real, you know, position for me to say, you know, who's right or who's wrong in a fight of this proportion.
When the police and the protesters are fighting with each other to an extreme degree, when the protesters are demanding something and they're being repressed with weapons, well, it escalates to a point where I can't tell you what is or isn't the right side to be on except for the general principle.
The point I'm trying to make is, both sides should not be engaging in violence.
The police should not have been beating and grabbing protesters, and the protesters should not be beating and chasing cops with sticks.
What do you do at this point?
I honestly don't know.
That's a conflict.
That's, you know, escalating to civil unrest, potential civil war, and at that point, Who are you gonna blame?
Who started?
I don't know.
Who's worse?
The guy with the sticks or the guy with the guns?
Can't tell you.
What I can say is, the protesters have a right to peacefully protest, which they have done in the past.
1.7 million people coming out in the streets.
The protesters have a right to demand democracy.
They have a right to be heard.
They have a right to self-expression.
And the Chinese government should not be coming in with massive police forces and brutalizing them.
The same is true for the U.S.
If a bunch of protesters, be it Occupy Wall Street or Black Lives Matter, whoever else, Wants to go out and march peacefully, I'm totally on board with it.
What we see in the US, however, is Antifa showing up to a peaceful American rally and instigating violence, for the most part.
There's certainly some blame to go around with some right-wing groups.
They've been charged.
But typically, you will see a right-wing group in the US march around with American flags and be attacked by communists.
What do we end up seeing?
In Hong Kong, American flag waving Hong Kongers being attacked by the pro-communists.
So while there's an inversion of the power structure, what it seems like we're actually seeing is actually a mirror image.
The anti-fascists in the US, for the most part, are waving communist flags.
Not all of them, but some of them.
And then they're going up to the guys with American flags, and they're fighting them.
Eventually, the guys with the American flags fight back with sticks, like basic stickmen.
And this is what you get in response.
So, in this capacity, I will say the police absolutely are in the wrong.
You can't start a conflict, you know, water cannons, tear gas, especially when the protesters have been as peaceful as they've been, and then, you know, draw a gun on them because this is your escalation.
You know what?
I said the same thing about the Proud Boys getting in a fight in New York, saying, don't escalate it.
If they're going to attack you, defend yourself.
But what happened then?
The Proud Boys ended up getting charged.
So let me show you this.
First, you can see the photo.
Hong Kong police draw guns in latest protest violence.
But I'm sure you're wondering, what is the more far-left, pro-communist activist response?
First, we have this.
Now, we have a tweet here from this man, Austin Ramsey, who I believe is a New York Times reporter in Hong Kong, saying, Amazing and terrifying photo by Lam Yuk-fei of the gun incident tonight.
Frightened just looking at this.
They drew their guns, more than one cop, and according to one video, it appears they may have fired a warning shot.
Ben Norton, who I will stress I do have many agreements with.
We've both been, you know, accused of, you know, ridiculous slander by the SPLC.
So, I disagree with him on this, but I will give him that respect.
I disagree with him.
He says, this New York Times stenographer in Hong Kong, of course, left out the context behind the photo of the police officer pulling out his gun, mobs of violent far-right rioters brutally attacking the police.
This dishonest propaganda is rewarded in the corporate media.
You know what I find so fascinating about this is that you now have someone who's more aligned with far-left politics defending the police because a mob came after them.
It is rather inverted because in the U.S.
you'll see Antifa fighting with cops and the right condemning Antifa fighting with the cops.
How does this flip happen?
How are they defending the police in this circumstance?
Well, Austin Randi said, did you read the story?
It's in the first line.
To which Ben Norton says, protesters who are charging them with sticks is totally ridiculous and simply inaccurate euphemism for a giant overwhelming mob of far-right violent nationalists actively hitting them with bats, metal bars, and rods, and blocks of wood, and clad in helmets and body armor.
Interesting.
So the police are in the right when they happen to be in favor of communism?
This is where I believe principle starts to break down for any tribe.
Certainly, you would expect those who claim to be anti-authoritarian condemning the actions of the police.
I'll stress the point I made just a moment ago, because it is rather confusing.
When you enter the fray at a certain point and just see two groups fighting, it's hard to know who's right and who's wrong.
But I will stress, if a guy's got a stick and you've got a gun, I'm going to ask that you don't escalate things.
Now, you can argue the police have every right to draw their weapon on a mob of, you know, swinging their bats, and it did effectively de-escalate the situation.
But I'm anti-authoritarian.
I don't care if you're a communist or a cop in the US, you shouldn't be drawing a gun with live ammo on these groups, and this is the fault of the establishment in Hong Kong and the mainland Chinese.
It's their fault for this escalation, in the long run.
That's what I think.
Look, people have a right to protest.
Left, right, top, down, whatever your alignment is, whoever you are, you have a right to express yourself.
We're now seeing an escalation in conflict that I think is wrong.
But Ben goes on to say, And there it is.
literal fascists in the Hong Kong Gorimbas. They are the anti-China ones meeting with
US diplomats, waving US-UK flags, singing the US anthem, torturing mainland journos,
and using Pepe symbols, and attracting US white supremacists like Patriot Prayer.
And there it is. Well, we can certainly see that Ian Miles Chong said you should have
been bullied harder as a child. I completely disagree with that, but here it is.
You may be wondering about the Patriot prayer and the flags and singing the National Anthem.
In this photo, we can see they're holding up signs saying, President Trump, please liberate Hong Kong.
Look at this big sign.
Please pass the bill, etc.
These are people in Hong Kong protesting, 1.7 million people, who appreciate democracy and freedom.
But let me show you something interesting.
Somebody posted this on Facebook in response- Someone I actually know.
In response to one of my videos.
Tim Pool backs the Hong Kong protests, so now I'm skeptical of them.
Really?
That makes me wonder.
Do you care about resisting authoritarianism and supporting the people demanding a wages of grievances?
Or is it about tribalism?
Simply, you know, they're saying, Tim Pool doesn't like communist authoritarians who are beating people in the street.
Therefore, I must not support the little guy.
He's gonna back the communists.
Well, there's more.
Check this out.
He additionally posted, And there it is.
It doesn't matter what they're fighting for.
working to promote and help organize Hong Kong Demo, I can't back the protests anymore."
And there it is.
It doesn't matter what they're fighting for.
It doesn't matter that the people in Hong Kong are resisting the authoritarianism of
the Chinese government.
It's a very complicated situation.
My general understanding, which is probably more so incorrect, is that, you know, for the longest time, Hong Kong was a colony.
It's a special economic zone.
It functions very differently from China.
But over the past 20 or so years, China has increasingly, they regained control of it, and have been increasingly trying to gain more control over how the administration is run in Hong Kong.
Eventually, the people there say, you know, they have a different culture, they believe in something else, and they resist.
They want freedom.
So they wave their American flags.
And in response, we can see the police, acting at the behest more so of mainland China, go out and start beating people with sticks.
Now it's true.
I will stress.
Ben Norton says they tortured journalists.
Well, I don't know about... I can't answer to that.
That sounds ridiculous, but...
I can say there have been instances where a journalist was detained and roughed up a little bit.
I don't want to say tortured, but they beat him up because they found business cards for cops.
Well, as a journalist, of course, he's going to have that.
And I condemned it outright.
I'll condemn it when Antifa does it.
I'll condemn it when those in Hong Kong do it.
I'll condemn it when Patriot Prayer or anybody else does it.
It's wrong.
You shouldn't be instigating violence, especially against journalists.
The mob needs to simmer down.
People get all agitated and start attacking random people, and it's not a good thing.
Antifa does that, we'll call them out.
The difference is, Antifa in the U.S.
is attacking American citizens who are minding their own business.
If a group like the Proud Boys and Patriot Prayers wants to go wave their little American flags, okay, fine, you're allowed to.
When communists then come out, literally waving communist flags, like you can see here, this is a shot from Portland just in the past week or so at that rally, and this is from Subverse.
I can verify this, it happened.
Somebody waving a communist flag.
We can see that it's not about principles, it's about tribe.
Why are people on the far left defending communist China?
Because they're communists!
They're defending the police!
How is it that a group that normally aligns, I don't want to say everybody, but they're the ones who say ACAB, right?
Yeah, that means all cops are, you know, and then B word.
I'm avoiding swearing, but the word for when you don't have married parents, right?
That group now is defending the police.
If a group of Antifa charged the cops in the U.S.
with sticks and batons, these same people would be saying, yay, they're fighting fascism.
And they accuse the Hong Kong people of being fascist.
Well, something really fascinating has been happening.
Something truly fascinating.
Check this out.
From The Verge, Pepe the Frog, an unlikely ally of Hong Kong protesters at the world's largest gaming tournament.
I've got more stories about this.
But yes, the Hong Kong protesters are using Pepe, the frog that Hillary Clinton denounced so loudly.
That's been aligned with the fringe far right.
But now, we have American flag waving, U.S.
national anthem singing, Pepe the frog painting, protesters.
It's very confusing when you have these people resisting the authoritarian system of China, and the media doesn't know how to respond.
They're trying to say, wait, maybe they're reclaiming Pepe because it was a hate symbol.
No.
Perhaps.
You lied about what Pepe really was in the first place, and Pepe doesn't mean much of anything, it's just a meme used as a character online that's sometimes happy, sometimes sad, sometimes it's a bigot, sometimes it isn't.
If you go on Reddit, you will sometimes see posts that have nothing to do with politics.
Like, it's like almost every day.
The green text whatever subreddit.
And there's like one post where someone talks about how his mom made him chicken tenders and worked really hard and
helped him, you know, grow up to be successful.
And it's a picture of, uh, I think it's called, um, Helper.
It's a deviation. It's a, it's a, it's like a spin-off of Pepe. Basically Pepe.
And, like, people use the meme to mean different things. So everybody uses it.
The problem is, the left in our country doesn't seem to have the ability, I, I shouldn't say, like, all of the left,
but there's a section of the left, and it's, it's large and growing,
that doesn't understand general research and can't think critically.
I think this is why they don't understand humor, they don't get jokes, and they see something like Pepe and shriek, ah!
So now it's really confusing for them that Pepe is popping up all over Hong Kong.
And that's probably why we're seeing so many people say that the Hong Kong protesters are fascists.
They can't differentiate.
They can't understand the true meme behind Pepe.
Interestingly, they mentioned how this guy, Lacoste, was wearing a Pepe pin at this gaming tournament.
And they ask whether or not he was doing it to support the Hong Kong protesters.
Or maybe it's because Pepe is a meme and a lot of people wear it.
In fact, in Portland, there was a guy wearing a Pepe meme button who was silly, they silly stringed his face, and started running after him and throwing eggs at him.
Isn't it weird that the same, it's more likely to be communist aligned people attacking the
guy with the Pepe badge and that's the same thing happening in Hong Kong.
Well this guy ended up removing the badge later on.
I think they show it, I'm not sure.
Yeah, he ended up changing the pin to something else after a break or something.
I don't know why, but they're acting like this is a reclaiming of Pepe, when in reality
it's Pepe as Pepe was intended to be.
Now check this out.
Wired, very confused.
Pepe the frog means something different in Hong Kong, right?
Well, that's what they're trying to claim, but in reality, Pepe is just, it's whatever you make him to be.
Check this out.
You gotta see this.
If you're a very online American but not alt-right, finding a Pepe the Frog meme in a comment section feels like finding a Klan hood in the back of someone's closet.
What?!
Apparently these people have never been on Reddit before!
That's insane!
It's objectively goofy looking and the people associated with it have been banished by polite society?
Where are you from?
What world do you live in?
These writers live atop an ivory tower and they don't interact with the commoners.
But the symbol is so saturated with hate and rage and fear that just the sight of it is a shock.
Standards change, however, as you move about the globe.
No!
No, it doesn't!
It means the same thing to people online.
There are people at gaming tournaments holding up Pepe memes.
They were making the OK sign.
It doesn't mean what you think it means.
I think these people have no sense of humor and can't think critically.
So when someone uses something ironically, they can't tell the difference.
They have no concept of irony.
Perhaps it has to do with going to college and being institutionalized for 22 years.
In Spain, pointed white hoods are an uncontroversial feature of Easter celebrations.
In Hong Kong, Pepe the Frog is now a symbol of progressive resistance against an authoritarian state.
Mmm!
It's really confusing now, isn't it?
Look, I don't know what to tell you.
I really don't.
Wired is saying that Pepe is a progressive resistance, is a symbol of progressive resistance.
Meanwhile, other far-left personalities in the U.S.
are saying they're fascists, and they're supported by— Look, they— Listen.
I'm just, they're asking for Trump's help, okay?
I'm not going to align these people with progressives.
They're asking for the help of Donald Trump.
You know what I thought of when I saw this?
They're trying to justify why Pepe is being used.
And my only question is, when you see someone say something like this, Tim Pool backs the Hong Kong protests and I'm skeptical of them, it reminds me of that skit.
Where the two guys ask themselves, are we the baddies?
Perhaps you need to ask yourself that.
When those standing up to authoritarianism are waving American flags, singing our anthem, and asking Trump for help, maybe you should ask yourself if you are the baddies.
And then take a look at the flag that you're waving.
And take a look at the flag waved by those who are beating the protesters and resisting democracy.
Perhaps you're waving the same symbol as them.
Look, every group needs to reflect on themselves and recognize that no one's perfect.
The American flag has been waved in places where bad things have happened for sure.
But how can you simultaneously act like Pepe the Frog is a progressive symbol, but then also claim it's like finding a Klan hood?
How can the same symbol mean so dramatically different things in the wake of protest?
Perhaps it's because You're the baddies.
When you claim that these protesters are far-right fascists, another outlet claims they're progressive.
But in the end, you really live in this world.
Perhaps you're the baddies.
The question is, why is Hong Kong protesting?
Here is a story talking about their five demands.
So, I think, you know, I'll dive into this a little bit, just to give you the true context, and then you can decide for yourself.
Hong Kong belongs to China, CNN reports, but it has its own currency, political system, and cultural identity.
Many Hong Kong residents don't see themselves as Chinese, but rather as Hong Kongers.
That difference goes back generations.
The city was a colony and territory of the UK for more than 150 years, until the British handed it back over in 1997.
Today, Hong Kong's legal system still mirrors the British model, prizing transparency and due process.
A policy dubbed One Country, Two Systems enshrines this uniqueness.
Under the policy, Hong Kong maintains a de facto constitution known as the Hong Kong Basic Law.
It guarantees freedoms that are unavailable to Chinese mainlanders,
such as the right to protest, the right to a free press, and freedom of speech.
One of the most important tenets of the protest? Freedom of speech.
So why do they wave the American flag?
Why do they paint Pepe's?
Because they're protesting for basically the same thing as many people in this country are in the United States.
Free speech.
And it's no surprise then that they will be called fascists.
Fascists and white supremacists.
Seriously.
They say, the basic law states that Hong Kong shall safeguard the rights and freedoms of the residents for 50 years after the handover.
But many residents say mainland China is already starting to encroach on those rights, and that makes sense.
Now I think it was wrong for protesters to ransack buildings, to engage in violence, and it's wrong if they did it in the US too, and it's wrong when Antifa does it.
But you have to know that what we're talking about here is The principles of free expression, which more so mirrors the United States right than it does the left.
All you have is an inversion of power.
I truly believe if in the U.S.
we had a communist government, you would see the right-wing doing the same thing.
I think within reason, it is wrong.
Now, however, I've stated this in the past.
For me, for the most part, I recognize the importance of principle, and I also recognize that when a system becomes tyrannical, then resistance is important.
The problem, however, for the U.S.
is that you have people showing up and beating citizens.
In Hong Kong, there have been some instances of violence against citizens, like journalists, and it's wrong.
But they're going after a government building.
So it is rather different.
Still, I would question, you know, who's escalating what and why.
But in the end, here's what I think is important.
In the U.S., the right-wing groups are minding their own business and the left attacks them.
That's exactly what's happening in Hong Kong.
Now you're seeing that escalation.
The Hong Kongers are getting more violent and damaging property and fights are breaking out.
They're shutting down airports and things like that.
But there's now two people who have lost their eyes in Hong Kong.
They're going to talk about why they're targeting the airport, but I'll say this.
I can't tell you too much about Hong Kong.
I'm not an expert in Hong Kong culture and what they believe.
What I can say is, I don't trust the media in the U.S.
for the most part because they're heavily biased.
They can't understand basic concepts like Pepe.
They're simultaneously trying to claim that Pepe is a symbol of progressive resistance.
A group demanding free speech is progressive to you?
What world do you live in?
They're full of it.
They are full of it.
And I will say this, we are seeing the far left now turn on the Hong Kong protests, and it's only a matter of time.
It is only a matter of time.
Look at this.
Ben Norton also adds, shady pro-imperialist propagandists like Hong Kong Hermit peddle disinformation and help larger campaigns to break up and destabilize other people's post-colonial countries, are on the side of literal fascists who call mainland Chinese locusts.
What a weird world we live in.
I can't really tell you, uh...
what to believe, but there's some truly unhinged people, and nothing seems to make sense.
But I will say this, based on what we see from Wired, it shows me that they don't care about
principles, they don't care about truth, they care about tribe. Is their tribe winning? Yes?
Well then they're good. Is their tribe losing? Well then their principles will flip on a dime.
And now we see people on the left defending the police. Wow.
What a weird world.
I'll leave it there.
Thanks for hanging out.
Stick around.
Next segment will be coming up at youtube.com slash timcastnews at 6 p.m.
And I'll see you all then.
Three people are at a bar.
They're standing up, having drinks.
Across from them is another group of people, both separate, minding their own business.
Eventually, for some reason, the group exchange words.
We're not entirely sure why.
They end up getting into a heated argument, things get really bad, and the manager intervenes and says, please keep it down, stop fighting, or I will have to ask you to leave.
The manager leaves.
But sure enough, the arguments escalate, and eventually the groups are at each other's necks again, just yelling at each other.
So the manager comes out and says, both groups need to leave now.
I don't care why, you're both fighting, get out.
Well, one group leaves, says, fine.
The other group says, no, and refuses to leave.
So the manager says, if you do not leave, I will have security remove you.
And the group says, no.
So security guards come up and remove that group.
That story probably happens in the United States every single day.
And it's not news at all.
Who cares?
You got kicked out of a bar?
Congratulations, I've been kicked out of a bar.
And I didn't do anything wrong.
And I walked away.
There have been circumstances where people get into an argument, and then I'll walk over to my friends and be like, guys, guys, please chill.
Stop fighting.
And the manager comes out and says, all of you just go.
I don't care why you're causing a disruption.
And we say, fine.
And we all leave.
In this instance, one group didn't want to leave.
But here's where it gets complicated for our culture, our society.
One of these groups in this story, at least, had transgender women in it.
And so they are claiming, essentially, it's discrimination.
There is now a CNN story Reitz, which was the headline, LAPD is investigating after video shows security forcefully removing transgender patrons from a bar.
Why does that matter?
I don't care if you're a man, woman, trans, Mexican, Chinese, whatever.
If you're getting removed from a bar, you're getting removed from a bar.
But because the people removed are transgender, we have a CNN story written by two people, a video posted going viral.
And this is now a bigger issue?
Why?
Because the assumption is discrimination.
The assumption is that transgender people deserve special care or special treatment.
Now, it's true there's discrimination against trans people.
Perhaps that was, in this case, there was discrimination.
Perhaps the argument which started, according to the story, was due to one group disparaging the other.
I can't really say for sure.
But I don't know why it's news that someone got kicked out of a bar.
Except when you add the transgender issue.
I do not believe we as a society can continue on like this.
We can't have every single interaction boil down to identity.
What if someone shoplifts, and then someone catches them, takes the candy bar out of their pocket, puts it on a shelf, and then grabs them by the collar, and throws them out, and then all anyone sees is a video of someone being pulled by the collar and thrown out, and then everyone goes, that is discrimination, oh, they're discriminating against this person, and all that stuff.
And they say, but they were shoplifting.
Doesn't matter.
Identity comes first, and that's why the wave of outrage, identitarianism, in my opinion, is extremely bad.
So let's do this.
Let's actually read the story and try and figure out what's going on.
But the point I want you all to leave with today is that how can we solve normal social interactions if instead of focusing on why something happens, we focus on the who it happened to?
Let's read.
Now 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 can send things to.
But of course, the best thing you can do is share this video.
Boy, I gotta say.
The deranking comes hard.
I can tell that, you know, YouTube is making changes and it has a serious negative impact, but I'll stress this point.
I have three YouTube channels for a reason, I diversify, and I can see that that has allowed me some protections, but my main channel is getting smacked in the face hard, and I know it's not...
You know, just like national issues or external issues, because this channel is doing great.
So something weird's going on, but hey, it is what it is.
I'm gonna run my business to the best of my abilities.
If you like it, please share.
Let's read.
CNN reports the Los Angeles Police Department is investigating an incident recorded on video and widely shared on social media that shows security staff forcefully removing transgender patrons from a downtown bar on Friday.
A group of eight employees from Bestar Bienestar Human Services, which focuses on health issues in Latino and LGBTQ communities, were celebrating at Las Perlas Bar after the first day of a local LGBTQ festival when a couple began directing transphobic slurs at their table, Chloe Rios told CNN.
Rios is the manager of Transgeneros Unidas, the Benestar team focused on advocacy for transgender and non-binary people.
Do you want to trust this group?
By all means, you're allowed to.
But should we?
Like, what if someone started yelling things like, you know, just calling me general slurs and insults?
Is that a different issue now?
Is it that they were trans and they're being insulted for being trans elevates it beyond someone just yelling slurs at another person?
Like, non-identity-based slurs?
Is the fact that they have an identity, and that's where the slurs originated, putting them in a special bracket where this becomes news?
Well, the answer is yes.
But the question is, should it?
I honestly don't know.
I think people should be treated as individuals, and in this case, we just have people who've gotten to an argument.
If someone starts yelling slurs at you, walk to the manager and say, please, they're directing slurs in our direction.
That's why I kind of lean towards perhaps they didn't address the situation correctly.
The manager's not going to know why anything's happening.
All he's going to know is people are fighting.
Get out.
Everybody, get out.
So I'll give you this advice.
While it may not be fair, or you may not like it, the best thing you can do is if someone across the table starts insulting you for any reason, just walk over to the manager.
Excuse me, they're yelling slurs at us.
And the manager will walk over and say, can you please stop?
Otherwise, we'll have to ask you to leave.
And then you can carry on your night.
Let's read.
Rio said that at first, she and her group, which included transgender women of color, gay men of color, and a gender non-conforming person, told the couple to leave them alone.
The two seemed drunk, Rio said, so her group didn't take them very seriously.
Then Rio said the man became physically aggressive towards one of her co-workers.
She said her group immediately tried to protect their co-worker from being harmed.
We just wanted to protect each other.
We were trying to get them off our backs.
We didn't want no confrontation, but they were being violent.
Rio said the bar's manager and security personnel soon arrived and tried to de-escalate the situation.
She said they asked the couple to leave and started gently escorting them outside, but handled her group forcefully.
I gotta say, I don't care who or what you are.
I don't believe this.
I really, really don't.
Okay?
In downtown Los Angeles, an extremely mixed area, you want me to believe that a bar just got handsy with you for no reason?
I really doubt it.
I'm willing to bet the manager saw the conflict and said, just, guys, everyone go, and they said, no, we didn't do anything wrong, so they said, you're a big group and we're getting you out.
They say in the video recorded by Rios that when viral, one person is seen repeatedly screaming, don't touch me like that, as they are forcibly grabbed by bar security, slammed against a wall, and thrown out, which is a normal thing when you get into it with bar security.
Another security staff member is seen grabbing another individual in a chokehold, dragging them across the bar, and also throwing them out.
What happened?
The individual being dragged out can be heard asking.
Said Moses, CEO of Porn with Heart, the hospitality group that owns Las Perlas Bar, said in a statement that the manager on duty asked two groups of guests to leave after an escalated verbal altercation broke out.
He added that the company has zero tolerance for this type of behavior.
The guards removed the guests that were not compliant with the manager's request to leave and did so in accordance with company policy.
And you know why I believe that's probably what happened?
Because these restaurants aren't in the culture war.
They have no idea what's going on.
Now I will stress, we are entering really dangerous territory in the culture war right now, and I may do a bigger segment on this for 4pm.
There's a viral tweet with 50,000 retweets accusing Olive Garden of supporting Trump.
And Olive Garden's like, what?
No we don't.
Doesn't matter.
50,000 retweets.
So herein lies the problem.
You're gonna get culture warriors saying, we know this bar was transphobic and threw them out for no reason, when in reality it was just a silly bar altercation.
That's why I told you this story in the beginning.
Why is it news?
I've been kicked out of a bar before and I did nothing wrong.
I'm sure you have.
I'm sure many people have been thrown out of a business and you're like, dude, it wasn't me.
And they're like, I don't care, guys.
I'm sorry.
Please just go.
And you go, fine.
We'll go find a different bar.
That's it.
End of story.
But all of a sudden you add identity politics and now it's CNN front page news.
I'm saying front page hyperbolic.
I don't know if it's actually, you know, front page news.
The point I'm making is CNN has a viral video.
They have this story and they have quotes from these people saying it's discrimination.
They were targeting us all.
But in reality, you watch the video and it's unruly guests yelling at security guards saying, don't touch me.
And they're like, you have to leave.
And they refuse to leave.
If this was a bunch of guys, people would be laughing at the dude and going like, oh, dude got thrown out, ha ha ha, it's funny.
But make it trans women and all of a sudden it's like, oh, they were being discriminated against.
This is a problem.
I believe we should be judging people based on their character, not their identity.
And this is a good example of this.
Let's read a little bit more.
Rio said her group wasn't asked to leave until they were already being escorted out.
Okay, and?
They asked the husband to take the wife to go outside, and they just turned to us and start picking up, she said.
They never asked us to leave.
They asked us to leave when we were being pushed out.
Rio said the police eventually arrived at the scene, but that the other people involved in the incident had fled by then.
Fled by then?
Come on.
She said her group filed a hate crime incident report with law enforcement.
You see where we're going with this?
Now it's a hate crime!
LAPD acknowledged the incident on Twitter and said it could not comment on an ongoing investigation.
Whether in public or inside a private establishment, all Angelenos deserve the freedom to coexist in harmony.
Dozens of people protested outside the bar on Saturday evening, chanting, No justice, no peace, and trans lives matter.
Others online urged a boycott of the bar.
Moses called the incident rare and unfortunate and added that Las Perlas would donate all profits from this weekend to Binistar Humans.
How can we as a society carry on when you can't even kick people out of your bar when they're unruly?
Look, man, I'm against discrimination.
I believe people should be able to, you know, drink in peace.
And if these other people start yelling at him and insulting him, well, that's wrong.
But how do I know what happened?
Stories like this are so common, they're a dime a dozen.
And now guess what?
The group that got kicked out just got all the profits from the bar from what, that weekend?
Is that what he said?
From that weekend.
Congratulations!
The grift is alive and well.
How can we as a society continue on like this?
When people are calling for a bifurcated economy, where only people, like you've got establishments for the left, establishments for the right, and a group can go in and say, you discriminated, therefore give me your money, and they'll do it.
That is insane.
Wow.
Absolutely nuts.
I think I'm going to do a bigger story expanding upon this for 4pm.
We'll see what I dig up.
Thanks for hanging out.
Man, I'm getting worried about all this, I gotta admit.
So look, I'm putting on an event, for those that know, I should say I'm sponsoring an event, I'm not the organizer.
But I'm sponsoring an event, and it's by my house, and the far left is trying to get it shut down.
So what are we supposed to do?
Can there only be venues for people on the right and only be venues for people on the left, even though our organization is bringing together left and right?
How does that make sense?
How can anyone function if I try to go to a venue and book?
We booked, uh, the organizers booked an event at a small brewery for 60 people, and protesters want to show up to this!
It's insane!
And so is this.
And now they're claiming, you better bend the knee to us, hand over your money, or we're coming for you.
And they do it.
You know what I'll say to this bar?
I'll tell you what.
Grow a pair, tell them to buzz off, and give them nothing.
Okay?
If you want to kick someone out of your bar, you're allowed to.
This doesn't look like a story of discrimination.
It looks like people who are fighting in a bar and got asked to leave.
If this was a group of eight guys who work for a local union, nobody would be talking about it, and they wouldn't then donate the money to the union.
That's insane.
Stick around.
Next segment will be coming up at 1 p.m., and I will see you all then.
Normally I reserve the pop culture segments for the end of the day, later at 6pm, but there's a new video out about Star Wars The Rise of Skywalker, and in it, there's an image of Dark Rey.
That's right, Rey is in a hood with a double-bladed lightsaber that folds out into a, you know, two-sided, whatever, bow-saber, I have no idea.
All I know is, I am not going to see this movie.
And, uh, I'm gonna—we can talk about why, but the most important thing that most of you know is that The Last Jedi was one of the worst films I have ever seen.
If you watch my content and see me talk about it, The Last Jedi just literally made no sense in any capacity, and it was like—it was like a hodgepodge of random scenes that made nothing—like, nothing made sense.
Literally nothing.
Now here's my theory.
Showing Dark Rey in the trailer is on purpose because Star Wars is desperate.
I believe, I believe they're very desperate.
One of the biggest fan rumors before The Last Jedi was that Rey and Kylo would switch.
That Kylo would come back to the light and Rey would go to the dark and that was kind of alluded to a little bit when she like goes down in that cave or whatever and then like the whole nothing sequence that didn't matter at all happens.
I'm spoiling The Last Jedi but I'm assuming you've seen it.
Basically, there's a point in the movie where she goes down into this dark side pit or something.
Here's the thing.
First of all, let's entertain the idea that in the next movie, come December, Rey actually does turn to the dark side.
I don't care.
She's random nobody.
They even said it in The Last Jedi.
You're just a nobody.
You're an orphan.
Okay?
So who cares what side she turns to?
It's just a three-movie arc explaining how a random person eventually decided to turn evil, when she wasn't necessarily good in the first place.
She has no character identity.
She just has magic powers.
You know, at the end of The Last Jedi, she just, like, snaps her fingers, and then all of the boulders fly in the air.
It was like, well, Luke Skywalker couldn't even lift the ship.
He was, like, training and trying— I mean, if I'm remembering the movie correctly.
But I have this article.
They say, from Inverse, watch Dark Ray in Rise of Skywalker.
Six theories ranked, breaking down what it is.
And guess what?
A lot of people are saying it's going to be a dream sequence.
We are being strung along by a marketing campaign to make you go, oh no, is she going to join the dark side?
Oh, because that was a big theory.
But I'm willing to bet the Rise of Skywalker is going to be a generic piece of trash, just like the last two movies were.
And I'll say this, look.
Force Awakens was fine.
It was fine, okay?
It was basically a shot-for-shot remake of A New Hope, but whatever, at least it was an okay movie and it was fun to go see.
The Last Jedi was one of the worst movies, if not the worst movie I've ever seen, and I really mean it.
And I watched those weird B-movies on Netflix that are filmed on like a Handycam from Best Buy for a hundred bucks, okay?
At least those are like, that's an interesting concept.
I've seen some low-budget films where you're like, That was actually a decent story.
It was poorly acted with poor effects, but I liked the idea and I liked the arc and the movie itself as bad as it was production-wise.
The Last Jedi is an inversion of that.
It was a ridiculously huge production and just trash that made no sense.
Can I ask a few questions?
Energy blasts are arcing out of space.
I'm not gonna rehash the old stuff.
Let's read the story and take a look into the theories about Rey and why she's on the dark side, one of which is she's possessed by Palpatine's spirit.
Oh my!
They, uh, so I guess they don't, uh, it's blocked here.
You can't see it.
Well, they're saying a twist about Rey seems imminent.
Yeah, I'll tell you my theory.
After The Last Jedi was, like, panned by so many people, and it was very controversial, it made a lot of money, for sure.
It's Star Wars, it's gonna make money.
But boy, were people like, that movie was bad.
Objectively bad.
And you had all of these media critics pretending like it was a good movie.
Oh, spare me, dude.
Access journalism is trash.
They pretend the movie was good, and crossing their fingers, hoping they get an early screening of the next one.
Not interested.
Let's hear what the real people have to say.
But here's what I think happens.
Afterwards, they're sitting there going like, well, that movie sucked.
Why?
Why are so many people upset with it?
Why are people like me saying, I'm not, I've, you know, I haven't seen Solo.
I have not seen it.
I'm not going to.
I won't watch it.
I've been told by people it's actually pretty good.
Don't care!
I just, you don't understand.
I was sitting in that theater in The Last Jedi, and I was just like, please, I want to leave, but I can't because it's a cultural, like, phenomenon.
So, they probably ask themselves why people like me, who I've been a fan of Star Wars my whole life, because, I mean, it's Star Wars, right?
And I'm a big fan of Star Trek, too.
Why am I out?
Why am I out?
So they go online, and they find a fan theory.
Rey turns to the dark side, and they go, oh, that's actually a good idea.
We should do that.
And then, lo and behold, we get a trailer snippet showing her in robes with a red lightsaber.
Spare me.
Spare me, dude.
It is a marketing ploy.
It's gonna turn out to be a dream sequence.
Here's what they're gonna do.
The movie's gonna start with her in that robe, and she's gonna have to do a lightsaber, and then she's gonna unfold it and go, and then, like, kill a bunch of children, and then she's gonna wake up.
And then she's gonna be back to normal, because, listen.
They want to sell toys.
They want Rey to be the hero, they want to sell toys.
It would, in my opinion, be bad for them if all of a sudden their heroic Rey with the blue lightsaber toy doesn't make sense anymore.
So no, I think we're being misled.
Let's get to the fan theories.
She's possessed by Palpatine's spirit.
Well, in one of the posters it does look like they're going to bring back the Emperor because They're desperate.
Nothing they're doing is working.
I mean, no, no, no.
I should say this.
They're making money.
At the end of the day, your business makes money.
Congratulations.
But Solo?
Solo was bad news.
I think they made, like, a little bit of money, but when you factor in the marketing budget, it was a failure, and they were just like, how did this movie fail?
They try to claim it's fatigue.
B.S.
It's because your movie was trash.
You know, they have no idea.
I'm so sick and tired of sequels.
I'm sorry, prequels.
Bring on the next episode, right?
But they ruined it.
They ruined it.
So now they're doing, you know, a prequel series.
I don't care because we already know what happened and I'm tired of seeing prequels.
Please, advance the storyline.
So, they think she may be possessed by Palpatine's spirit.
If Palpatine's dark side spirit has taken control of Rey's body even briefly, then suddenly Rey holding a double-bladed saber and acting like a Sith makes complete sense.
They say this.
The scene is not in the movie.
Check it out.
They say, I know I know this feels like a cop out here, but what if this exact shot of Goth Rey isn't even in the final cut?
Check out this.
They say Kylo Ren in an early Force Awakens trailer, this exact shot was not in the final film.
And they do this all the time.
Take a look at what they did with Avengers Infinity War, where it showed the Hulk running in Wakanda, and that never happened.
That was not in the film.
It was just a promo shot, and we never got it.
That was direct—that was misdirection.
There were people who were like, oh my god, it's gonna be so cool to see the Hulk fighting Wakanda, and then it didn't happen.
Now, were people ultimately mad about that?
Not really.
I mean, I'm kind of upset about it.
It's like, why would—that's not—I don't know, I don't like that idea, that you're gonna mislead people about what the movie is so that they go see it and then something different happens.
I get you want people to be, like, surprised or whatever.
But come on, it's different.
Like, with this shot not being in the film, with the Hulk not being in Wakanda, sure, it's possible.
Dark Rey trending on Twitter right now is just a marketing ploy, and that's my bet.
I swear to God.
My bet is it's a marketing ploy, it's gonna be a trash sequence that has nothing to do with the story, because they've also released her and Kylo fighting, and she's got a blue lightsaber, so no, I'm not buying it.
You think they're gonna show the major twist of the end of the movie in a trailer?
I doubt it, unless they truly are desperate.
So they say it's not even the movie, and the next one is, it's a force vision or dream sequence.
Oh man, spare me if that's the case.
Seriously?
Say, uh, we know what the Jedi mind tricks look like, but what about Sith mind tricks?
The Rey we see in the trailer might not even be a real person at all, but instead a kind of idealized evil version of her created by Palpatine to freak out the good guys, or it's just, yeah, a trash dream sequence to waste our time.
Like they mentioned, the stupid Rey's vision, is she a clone?
I, I, look man, They wasted our time with The Last Jedi.
They revealed nothing, nothing happened, all they did was kill people.
It was like, oh, Luke Skywalker's dead, ooh.
After what, nothing?
Sorry, you wasted my time, you advanced the story very little, if at all.
And I don't, I'm not interested in the next movie.
Can I also point out, how does any of this make sense?
The resistance.
What do you mean, the resistance?
Resisting what?
The empire was wiped out.
So you mean, like, you're the army?
It's like the National Guard?
They have done such... It's been a failure.
I really, really hate it.
So, they say it's a clone.
Rey is a clone, okay.
They say in the Timothy Zahn-penned Star Wars novel The Last Command, Luke Skywalker was cloned by the bad guys, resulting in a crazy version of our favorite Tatooine farm boy called Luke Skywalker.
Yep.
In old legend Star Wars canon, an extra vowel in your name meant you were a clone.
Okay.
And look, I will stress, the extended universe was way better than what they're doing now.
So maybe it is a clone.
They all say Rey has turned to the dark side, leaving Leia to save us all.
Yes, maybe, but I really doubt they would give away a major plot twist in a trailer like that.
I really doubt it.
I mean, could you imagine people go see this movie, and they're like, I'm waiting for that scene where she turns to the dark side, and then she just does, and you're like, yeah, okay.
Like, I don't know, you told us that.
And I'll stress, too, we have no emotional attachment to Rey as a good person.
She's never been a good person.
She has no character.
There's no character development.
We don't know who she is, why she is, why she can do what she do.
We don't know anything about her.
We know that she's some chick in a desert who has, like, eaten portions, whatever that means.
It's like a Star Wars thing, I guess.
So I don't know anything about her.
I don't care.
Luke Skywalker, on the other hand, we learn a lot about him.
Orphan, farm boy, raised by his aunt and uncle.
And then, you know, his family is killed and he's forced to go on an adventure.
Yeah, it's the hero's journey.
We know about Anakin.
He was the prophesized, you know, bring balance to the force.
And then he... And I gotta admit, even the prequels weren't that good, but at least we had like a realized story.
I felt like they could have turned Anakin to the dark side a little bit better, but I see it, right?
He falls in love he's not supposed to.
He's gonna have kids, so he gets desperate and scared.
Yeah, I understand that, right?
Who is she?
What is she doing?
Two movies!
And I don't know anything about her!
I don't know that she can move rocks!
But, and then, you know what bothers me, man?
When people talk about, like, a Mary Sue, they get all offended, like, really, it's not a Mary Sue.
It's like, dude, listen, listen, okay?
She's just some chick from a planet who snapped her fingers and had force powers.
Okay?
Sure?
I guess?
Even though in the past films, we know that it actually takes training and practice to become, you know, able to use the force.
Whatever.
We don't know where she comes from or why.
We don't know what she has to do with any of this.
It's literally just she was a random woman on a planet.
And then, in the second movie, in The Last Jedi, Kylo Ren just says, you're nobody, you're nothing.
Oh, and then, you know what they're gonna do now?
They realize how much everyone hated that, and they're gonna be like, the reality is Kylo lied to you.
You are someone.
You are the daughter of Luke Skywalker or some other nonsense which won't make sense.
It's gonna be something so dumb.
What does the rise of Skywalker even mean?
Leia?
I have no idea.
Even though her last name's Organa.
Well, okay, there we go.
So they say, um, let me read this.
Abrams has said that Leia is the heart of the movie, which could mean that if Rey goes to the dark side, the Skywalker who will rise and save the galaxy could be Leia Organa Skywalker.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
1.
Rey has brought balance to the force.
What does that mean?
They say if the Rise of Skywalker truly ends the episodic Star Wars saga, then the notion of bringing balance to the force feels urgent, back when it was just episodes 1 through 6.
It seems like Anakin brought balance by destroying the Sith in the Return of the Jedi, but the Force Awakens in Last Jedi ended up that.
According to Luke, there was balance for a little while, but then Kylo Ren and Snoke showed up and everything got screwed up.
Obviously, if Palpatine is back from the dead somehow, or he never died, I don't know, and then Anakin Vader didn't destroy the Sith, which means the Force is unbalanced, oh, you know what?
Spare me, dude.
If they bring back the Emperor, I'm already mad at everything they've done to Star Wars and how it doesn't make sense.
They're not progressing the story.
It's just a huge waste of time.
If they actually bring back the Emperor, wow.
You must truly be desperate if you're gonna bring the Emperor back, and it sounds like they are.
Oh, man.
And they're gonna say, you didn't really complete the saga and ruin the original trilogy.
Because there was an arc, you know, it ended, the emperor is gone, woo!
And they're not, and you know what, man?
So, you see in this sequence, she's fighting Kylo Ren.
But then there's the dark ray, ooh!
Nah, we're being screwed with.
It's marketing.
I am not going to go see this movie.
I will, however, because I'm not a crazy person, wait for the reviews to come out, and if the reviews from my trusted sources say that it was actually not that bad, I'll consider going to see it.
A few people have told me Solo is good, but I just can't bring myself to watch it.
I was finally like, you know what, I'm gonna watch the first five minutes because I heard it's not that bad.
I just couldn't do it.
I was just like, oh man.
Everything they've done with the universe has ruined it, as far as I'm concerned.
Just ruined everything.
Listen.
The Force Awakens was so generic.
It was fine.
Like, I saw a movie and I'm like, yeah, okay.
But again, shot-for-shot remake.
Their YouTube video is showing it as a shot-for-shot remake of A New Hope.
Fine.
But The Last Jedi was worse than the worst thing I've ever seen.
In fact, The Last Jedi may be worse than that Simpsons thing they just did with Trump and the squad.
See, now we got politics involved.
I don't know if you saw that one, but that was like... I tweeted out that was the worst thing ever made.
Now I'm thinking back like, you know what?
No, The Last Jedi may have been the worst thing ever made.
No, no, I'm sorry.
I'm sorry, take that back.
I gotta admit, in The Last Jedi, the scene where the hyperspace jump rips through all the ships was beautiful.
It was really, wow, it was really, that was like the only time in the movie I was like, whoa, nothing else made sense.
They like, Phasma gets obliterated.
They're being held captive on this ship and then she rips through it and then all of a sudden they're all scattered on the ship and all the soldiers are gone.
Nothing made sense!
Okay?
I'm not gonna go see your trash movie.
I'm not gonna do it.
And I can't believe they're actually entertaining the idea of another trilogy with Rian Johnson.
Never gonna ha- I'm not gonna go see it.
You know what?
Fine.
I don't matter.
I get it.
I'm just one person.
I'm one ticket.
You can put my ticket in the trash.
I am not gonna go see it.
I'm sure a lot of people will, and I'm sure it'll make billions of dollars.
Because it's Star Wars.
So yeah, but hey, you're allowed to make your movie, I'm allowed to not like it, and other people are allowed to enjoy it.
So let me end by saying, if you like all of this, you don't gotta listen to anything I have to say.
You can just say I'm a, I don't know, I'm just somebody who's being a negative Nancy.
That's fine.
I'm gonna say what I think about a movie I think was trash, and how the Star Wars franchise is going on the gutter, and then I'll end by pointing out that their Star Wars Galaxy Edge may close and get rebranded.
This is a rumor from a couple weeks ago, but there were reports, so it's actually complicated, there were reports that nobody was showing up and they were really worried, and at first they blamed it on low attendance, like, well, people aren't going to theme parks anymore, and I'm like, no, I think the Star Wars universe is just boring and lame.
Because think about it this way.
Ray just has, like, infinite powers, apparently.
She's just like, I'm on an adventure!
And then, whoosh!
And she can throw boulders a million feet.
Like, I feel like, at least for me growing up, one of the coolest things about any journey was earning your power.
You know, becoming the best.
Meaning, like, here's the way I see it.
How many young people today see Ray and think, I don't have powers?
And that's it.
But think about RPG video games, or heroes, and a hero's journey, and think about how Luke Skywalker started as nothing, but through training eventually became the best.
For me, it then says, hey, I don't have powers, but maybe if I train as hard as Luke, I can be great like him.
When you get a Mary Sue character, or a Gary Stu, I think it's called, something like that, it's like the male version, you have, as far as I can see, you either have the powers or you don't.
There's nothing you can do, there is nothing to be inspired by, and there is nothing to strive for.
Luke Skywalker becomes a Jedi from a farm boy.
That means you, a nobody, living in the gutter, can work hard and become something.
So people think, I can be Luke Skywalker too.
But then you see Rey, and she can just do it, and you're like, well, I can't just do it, so there's no point in trying.
And that's what I think the big problem is, with one of the problems.
I'll leave it there.
I'm done.
Look at this.
They're bringing the Emperor back.
No, get out of here, dude.
I don't want to hear it.
I'm not... You know what it is?
They want to sell toys.
They want to... Oh, what is this?
A Star Wars The Rise of Skywalker poster?
Rips off Palpatine hot toys?
What is this?
I didn't even plan on talking about this one, but you know what?
It confirms my bias, so I'm going to click it.
Look at this.
Yeah, looks like they just showed the toy.
They say, uh, artist Ethan VanSkyver blasts Disney over Star Wars The Rise of Skywalker poster.
Former DC Comics artist Ethan VanSkyver laughs about it on YouTube.
It's so funny.
I thoroughly enjoy this.
Thoroughly enjoy this.
This is a no-no.
This is so embarrassing.
How did Star Wars, how did Lucasfilm go from Drew Struzan to this?
How the hell?
Well, there you go!
So, uh, it looks like it's just... They took the toy, and they just took a picture of it, and then... Oh, wow!
Look at that!
Pathetic.
Absolutely pathetic.
I'm not gonna watch The Mandalorian, either.
I thought that looked dumb.
The thing is, the Star Wars universe was cool until, like, they just trashed everything.
And now I look back at the old stuff and I'm like, I cringe.
I cringe at everything in Star Wars now because you have a more complete picture and you're like, wow, what a garbage story.
So nothing about it is cool to me.
Not at all.
Marvel, on the other hand, is awesome, so I'll go watch Marvel.
Okay, I'm gonna wrap it up here.
Thanks for hanging out.
Main segment coming up.
YouTube.com slash TimCast at 4 p.m., and I will see you all then.
The year is 2030.
The U.S.
government is obsolete.
We all live in a nightmarish dystopia ruled by a few corporations with a fringe and ridiculous ideology.
You go to the grocery store.
You decide to buy some milk, bread, and eggs.
As you get to the checkout counter, you pull out your tap card or phone or whatever, and you tap the device with a smile on your face, and the cashier looks at you smiling when you hear a...
Shocked, she looks to the machine.
What does it say?
I'm sorry, your card has been declined.
You're in violation of the terms of service.
See, at some point you were having a conversation with someone with an earshot of an Amazon device that you can talk to and they accidentally overheard you say something negative.
About a certain group of people.
I'm sorry.
You've now been banned from this financial service.
That's the future we're looking at.
I know it sounds silly, but at least there is a visible path to this future.
In fact, many people have already been banned from financial services for saying naughty words.
And now, we have the story from Fast Company.
Silicon Valley is building a Chinese-style social credit system.
Well, I do want to point out that a lot of people have overhyped the Chinese social
credit system. My understanding is that it's being trialed and it's not fully implemented. A lot of
people are acting like literally everyone in China is living in the system and that's not true. I
could be wrong, this is what I've heard, but we do have something being built just like this. The
reason why I said the government is obsolete.
It's that most of our social functions are happening through private companies, the internet, the economy.
A lot of people have jobs that are based on the internet.
Case in point, me!
I make a living doing this.
I do not want to live in a future where the people have no say and no way to stop massive multinational corporations with no allegiance to the people.
The government is made up by the people, and it can grow corrupt and too powerful.
It needs checks and balances.
Private corporations need to be able to operate to compete and eventually create, you know, better and better services and technologies and devices.
However, we're looking at an increasingly, the increasing centralization of this tech power, and eventually, due to natural trends in human behavior and things, these companies are trending towards complete authoritarianism, and if no one can speak, There won't be an election.
What does it matter if you can vote if no one knows who to vote for or why because Google has banned everyone on one side of the debate?
And that's where we're going.
So for those of you that don't care, I hope you're looking forward to your future where one day you can't buy anything from a grocery store.
Or, when all the cars are automated, your car won't turn on because you've been banned from the TOS.
By the TOS.
You've been banned from the company.
You know, the other important thing to remember is to Your phone?
You don't own the software on that phone.
You license it.
And if you violate terms of service, they could just brick your phone and say, hey, the device is yours, but not the software.
Well, let's read this story from Fast Company.
Before we do, head over to TimCast.com slash donate if you would like to support my work.
There's a PayPal option, a crypto option, a physical address.
The best thing you can do, just share this video so we can, I don't know, break through the barrier.
YouTube is deranking my content.
And it's kind of funny because now I'm railing on them.
And yeah, they don't like it.
But let's read.
Fast Company writes, Have you heard about China's social credit system? It's a
technology-enabled, surveillance-based nationwide program designed to nudge
citizens toward better behavior.
The ultimate goal is to allow the trustworthy to roam everywhere under heaven while making it hard
for the discredited to take a single step, according to the Chinese government.
In place since 2014, the social credit system is a work in progress that could evolve by next
year into a single nationwide point system for all Chinese citizens akin to a financial credit
It aims to punish for transgressions that can include membership in or support for the Falun Gong or Tibetan Buddhism, failure to pay debts, excessive video gaming, criticizing the government.
Oh, great.
Late payments, failing to sweep the sidewalk in front of your store or house, smoking or playing loud music on trains, jaywalking, and other actions deemed illegal or unacceptable by the Chinese government.
And of course it will only get increasingly restrictive from there.
We have social norms now, but through this system there will develop newer social norms and everyone will be panicked all the time.
No chewing gum!
It's not worth it!
Hey, in Singapore, you can't!
I'm pretty sure gum is illegal in Singapore because they don't want people spitting it.
Littering in Singapore is a crime and also not flushing the toilet.
Seriously.
They say it can also award points for charitable donations or even taking one's own parents to the doctor.
Punishments can be harsh, including bans on leaving the country using public transport.
We get it.
Come on, fast company, do better.
But let's read on.
I want to hear about what's going on with Silicon Valley.
They say many Westerners are disturbed by what they read about China's social credit system.
But such systems, it turns out, are not unique to China.
A parallel system is developing in the US, in part as the result of Silicon Valley and technology industry user policies, and in part by surveillance of social media activity by private companies.
Here are some of the elements of America's growing social credit system.
Insurance companies.
The New York State Department of Financial Services announced earlier this year that life insurance companies can base premiums on what they find in your social media posts.
An Instagram pic showing you teasing a grizzly bear at Yellowstone with a martini in one hand and a bucket of cheese fries in the other and a cigarette in your mouth could cost you.
On the other hand, a Facebook post showing you doing yoga might save you money.
They say insurance companies have to demonstrate that social media evidence points to risk and not be based on discrimination of any kind.
They can't use social posts to alter premiums based on race or disability, for example.
The use of social media as an extension of the lifestyle questions typically asked when applying for life insurance, such as questions about whether you engage in rock climbing or other adventure sports.
Saying no, but then posting pictures of yourself free-soloing El Capitan could count as a yes.
Patrons scan.
A company called PatronScan sells three products, kiosk, desktop, and handheld systems, designed to help bar and restaurant owners manage customers.
PatronScan is a subsidiary of the Canadian software company Serval Biometrics, and its products are now on sale in the US, Canada, Australia, and the United Kingdom.
They say it helps spot fake IDs and troublemakers.
When customers arrive at a patron scan using bar, their ID is scanned.
The company maintains a list of objectionable customers designed to protect venues from people previously removed for fighting, assault, drugs, theft, and other bad behavior.
According to its website, a public list is shared among all PatronScan customers.
This is the most terrifying thing I've read yet!
What, really?
So someone who's banned by one bar in the U.S.
is potentially banned by all bars in the U.S.
Look, you might say it's only 1% of bars with PatronScan, but what happens when they have a similar system in the future?
What happens when Facebook rolls out something similar, trying to compete with the market?
And then you go to a bar, and they say, ooh, we saw that you got kicked out of a bar, you know, last month.
Sorry, you can't come in.
What happens when a bar uses a software that somehow recognizes you, and they say, look, we have no problem with you, but you were banned by Facebook for making a nasty post, and we use Facement Payment Processing Systems, Libra, in order to sell beer, and they won't allow us to serve you?
You're free to stand here, but we can't do anything, I'm sorry.
That's the future we're walking into.
They say Uber and Airbnb.
Thanks to the sharing economy, the options for travel have been extended far beyond taxis and hotels.
Uber and Airbnb are leaders.
We get it.
Does this fast company really need to define what Airbnb is?
Come on!
They say Airbnb can disable your account for life for any reason it chooses, and it reserves the right to not tell you the reason.
The company canned messages include the assertion that this decision is irreversible and will affect any duplicated or future accounts.
Please understand that we are not obligated to provide an explanation for the action taken against your account.
The ban can be based on something the host privately tells Airbnb about something they believe you did while staying at their property.
Airbnb's competitors have similar policies.
I actually totally deleted my Airbnb account when I was staying at a place, the person who owned the place sent a bunch of ridiculous lies and demanded that I send them like a thousand bucks over PayPal.
And then when I refused, saying this is a lie and it's a shakedown, Airbnb tried to charge me personally for it.
They tried charging me without my consent.
Fortunately for me, the card I had on file was already expired.
But then I was just like, dude, Airbnb is... I do not want to enter into the system like this.
I've also had an Uber, where I was at the airport and I called it, I see the car on the map, And then the car leaves, and I have no idea what happened.
And then it drove a little ways, and then the trip ended, and it charged me 12 bucks.
I was like, what?
I didn't even get in the car!
And I have no idea why.
There are problems with unaccountable technological systems like this.
Outside of everything you know about the social credit system, right?
Let's point out the fact that there's no recourse because there's no one to talk to.
You try telling the robot, hey, this was a mistake, and the robot says, denied.
You can talk to a human and explain in great detail why they were wrong to ban you, and maybe they'll listen.
But they don't have humans at these companies.
Facebook bans you based on an algorithm.
So does Twitter, and so does YouTube.
People have been removed from the YouTube Partner Program because of an algorithm.
Their revenue, their income, stripped.
And they don't know why.
And YouTube says, we can't tell you why.
And then what?
This is the world being built.
If we don't do something about it, a social credit system is growing all around us.
Whether or not it's on purpose, we are doing it.
Something needs to be done.
And you know, at least they're talking about it, but they say...
If current trends hold, it's possible that in the future, a majority of misdemeanors and even some felonies will be punished not by Washington, D.C., but Silicon Valley.
It's a slippery slope away from democracy and toward corporatocracy.
In other words, in the future, law enforcement may be determined less by the Constitution and legal code and more by end-user license agreements.
Did you know?
You can be in a car speeding.
A camera will take a picture, and they won't give you a criminal charge.
They'll just fine you saying, here's a photo of your car doing this.
We can't prove it was you personally, but we can fine your license plate.
And that's apparently legal.
And you can say that wasn't me and say, doesn't matter.
It's not a criminal charge.
Pay the fine or else.
We'll put a boot on your car.
Anyway, there are a lot of people on the left and the right who want this future.
There are people on the right who say, we shouldn't interfere in a private business.
And there are people on the left for some reason saying, but my private company.
Well, I hope you're all ready for it because it's the future we deserve unless we do something.
I can't tell you what to do, but at least something has to change.
Anyway, stick around.
I got a couple more segments coming up for you in a few minutes and I will see you all shortly.
In my previous segment, I talked about the rise of the social credit system, but how, so anyway, In my previous segment, I talked about the rise of a social credit system, how we're building it all around us.
One of the issues with a U.S.
version of the social credit system compared to China's is that we're not doing it deliberately.
That means people are getting negative marks that are nebulous, that are vague.
Someone gets banned from Twitter or Facebook for saying a mean word, we don't really know why, and they can't come back.
What happens?
What happens when someone falsely accuses you of something and no one cares if it's true or not?
Take a look at this tweet up here from Denis Edgerton.
Now, normally I'm not one to highlight tweets from random individuals and private citizens, but you can see it's got 48,000 retweets.
And it says, Olive Garden is funding Trump's re-election in 2020.
It would be terrible if you shared this and Olive Garden lost business.
The only problem?
Olive Garden says, We don't know where this information came from, but it is incorrect.
Our company does not donate to presidential candidates.
Look at this!
This person responded, I love the zuppa toscana and shrimp frita at Olive Garden.
Oh well.
I love democracy more.
Goodbye Olive Garden.
Hashtag Boycott Olive Garden.
Why?
What?
Is this a joke?
Well, apparently boycott Olive Garden is a thing that's gone viral, and Newsweek highlights other boycotts.
But what did Olive Garden do wrong?
They were accused of supporting Trump.
They've denied it.
I can't tell you if, you know, maybe someone at Olive Garden, maybe an executive did this, but is this the future we want?
Here's the interesting thing.
Let's talk about how scary things really are getting in this country.
Yes, there's a rise of a social credit system.
But Silicon Valley is squarely on the left.
The establishment left, right?
So there are certainly anti-war far-leftists who are concerned about this.
But for the most part, I think if you're a moderate or conservative and you believe in free speech, you have more to worry about.
But let me tell you what truly is scary.
For one, we can see there have been many boycotts dancing with the stars.
Mulan, Equinox, SoulCycle, Blink Fitness, Tucker Carlson, Home Depot, CVS.
Look at this.
Is that it?
Are there more?
People on the left are bisecting our economy into pro-left and right businesses.
And I think I have, um...
So here's a story from Salon. I've got a bunch of stories, but let me try and find the one I really want to show you a
list of.
There's a story I have somewhere.
Here it is.
In this story, the secrets behind which chain restaurants support liberal or conservative views revealed.
So if you see me starting to get thinner and toned, don't ask me why.
He then posts these.
It says, here are some sources for everyone asking.
Well, in reality, it seems like this person just doesn't understand what they're talking about.
We can see Chick-fil-A among federal candidates.
You can see who they donated to.
The issue is, as a business, they're not, they're not, the organizations themselves did not donate.
Let me stress, the organizations themselves did not donate.
Rather, the money came from the organization's PACs, their individual members or employees or owners or those individuals, or their immediate families.
I'm sorry.
Look at this.
This guy is saying these businesses are supporting Trump's re-election.
And then he says, here are the sources.
Okay.
Well, the source shows us that, first of all, Chick-fil-A, it's $36,000 for the 2016 cycle.
That is nothing compared to what he spent.
But more importantly, the organizations did not donate.
It's just the staff.
So you want to know what?
Yeah, Chick-fil-A's closed on Sundays.
There are probably a lot of conservatives who want to work there, and they'll make conservative donations.
And they try and make it seem like it's the businesses themselves that do this.
Here's food and beverage from Open Secrets.
I'm willing to bet they have a very similar disclaimer.
Well, they don't.
But I'm willing to bet it's actually the same thing.
Check it out.
They say, McDonald's overwhelmingly, more so, donates to Republicans.
Fast Food Systems, which I don't know what that is, donates almost exclusively to Republicans, and I don't think they donate at all to Democrats.
Coke is 50-50.
National Restaurant Association is Republican.
You can see most of them are Republicans.
But here's the thing.
Are they talking about the business?
I would say probably not.
Well, this one might be, because this is general Republican, so they might be giving them multiple campaigns.
The point I want to make is, typically when people say a business supports this, what they're really referring to is someone who works for the business.
And it's not even that much money.
And it might even be a family member of someone who works there.
That's how insane things have gotten.
So we've seen there are multiple boycotts, but there's more.
This guy Kosta says, For everyone newly following me, only 5% of my tweets are political.
I don't care about that.
He says most of them wanting to break someone's daughter's back.
In-N-Out and Chick-fil-A I get, but y'all really getting upset over Taco Bell?
Y'all must have a digestive system made of steel, because I'd be ready to die on the toilet after eating their LMAOOO.
Well, of all the things you tweeted I disagree with, that one I do agree with.
Taco Bell, it's got some good food, but I just don't eat there because it doesn't sit right.
He says, unrelated, but if you single and trying to eat right together, what it do, baby?
This is what we can expect.
People using information that makes no sense, making wild claims, and getting a quarter million retweets.
Why is this information of relevance to anybody?
Who cares if someone at Pizza Hut is donating?
Well, Chick-fil-A 10 years ago had some staff members who donated something like $25,000 to anti-LGBTQ groups or whatever.
Now everyone blames Chick-fil-A as a whole.
We've even seen... I think there's a lawsuit because they're trying to keep Chick-fil-A out of, like, airports.
But Chick-fil-A tastes great and people like Chick-fil-A.
In fact, my understanding is Chick-fil-A is America's favorite fast food chain right now.
But these boycotts are insane.
And I'll tell you what's gonna happen.
Take a look at this story.
I don't know if you saw me cover it.
Gillette shifting the spotlight after losing $8 billion.
Well, it was an $8 billion write-down.
But Gillette was doing socially conscious ads, and then they realized it was a bad idea.
And now they're trying to walk back away from that.
But people don't care.
People want conflict.
People want to believe this.
And then the business... Look.
Businesses need to learn to ignore the outrage mobs.
Otherwise, they will get hurt.
If you bend the knee to the crazy outrage mobs, you will lose money and you will cease to exist.
And now Olive Garden will reap the benefits of the mob outrage.
You know, there are venues.
Who are telling us they're concerned about, you know, protests and all that.
Admit it, but again, I will stress, the event is on, like, you know, everything's fine.
But there is a concern over outrage, as we've seen from not just what's going on with my event, but with tons of other events.
With people saying they're going to either ban someone's account due to outrage, and then ignore someone else.
We can't function this way!
We can't live in a country where Alex Jones will be banned from Twitter for saying naughty words, but Sean King won't!
There's no standards, there's no rules.
And going back to the point I was making in my past segment, if you saw it, about a social credit system.
When the rules are ill-defined, this is what you get.
Could you imagine having no sound justice system?
You don't know if what you're doing will be considered right or wrong by anybody.
You can do nothing, but they'll blame you anyway, and then people will share it?
it? 247,368 retweets, 555,000 likes. Are you seriously not gonna eat at Pizza Hut or Wendy's
anymore because some random dude on Twitter falsely accuses these businesses of supporting
That's how insane everything is getting.
A Taco Bell pack maxed out its Giving to the Trump campaign.
So what?
Who cares?
Who cares?
And then we can see just boycott after boycott after boycott.
Well, I'll tell you what, man.
If you want to live in a world where you can't have a chicken sandwich because somebody who works at a chicken sandwich company likes Trump, I'm sorry.
We are headed towards some kind of total collapse.
I don't know.
Look, I say civil war, but I don't mean like the old civil war.
I just mean some kind of urban civil conflict.
We're in it now.
We've heard it said.
But if we're at a point now where the left is demanding boycotts of Olive Garden because some random person on Twitter claimed it, you deserve it.
You absolutely deserve what you get.
And maybe we all deserve it.
That's it.
I'll tell you what.
Here's what I'm gonna do.
I'm gonna- I got one more segment after this, so stick around, and then I'm gonna go to Olive Garden.
Because they have these fried mozzarella things, they're really good, and the pesto sauce is great.
Because I don't care if someone's gonna accuse them of supporting Trump.
It's an endless pasta bowl.
It tastes good.
I mean, there's probably a better local business I could support, but anyway.
Stick around.
I'll see you all in the next segment.
From the Daily Mail, Border Patrol unveils 60 quote new miles of Donald Trump's border wall in drone footage and expects another 450 miles to be built by the end of 2020.
There are people who don't like the president.
Did you know this?
This may come as a shock to you, but some people have what's referred to as Trump Derangement Syndrome, meaning no matter what Trump does, they hate it, they oppose it.
It's insane.
The joke is Trump could come out 4 oxygen and people would hold their breaths.
Here's the thing about this story.
They put new in quotes.
And there are many people who hate Trump saying, it's not new wall at all, it's just an upgrade on the old wall, or it's a replacement of existing wall.
Here's the thing.
They built new 18 foot high bollard walls, which is the fencing at see-through, which was the right thing in my opinion, and they did it in areas with really weak fencing that was really low and ineffective.
So yes, I would say it's fair to point out that what was there before wasn't really a thing at all, and it's pointless to try and claim it was a wall.
But of course, we live in the age of every technicality being stretched to a ridiculous degree, and there are people saying that a 5 foot high fence WAS a wall, and that this isn't new because it's replacing a 5 foot high fence.
Okay, I'm exaggerating a little bit, but we can see in the images they've posted here, they've replaced what was like...
You want to argue whether or not they should have a wall?
Bring it somewhere else.
I'm here to talk about how they're criticizing Trump saying he didn't build new wall when he did.
reinforced on the back. In some areas it is triple barriered.
There's a reason why they built walls here first. Look, you want to argue
whether or not they should have a wall? Bring it somewhere else. I'm here to talk
about how they're criticizing Trump saying he didn't build new wall when he
did. Listen, the first thing Trump's gonna do is reinforce the areas that need the
most enforcement.
You don't need to build new wall in areas where there's no concern.
You need to make sure that the walls in these areas need to be beefed up because they weren't working.
You can see this.
It says, images show illegal crossings in O5 and the new triple-layer enforcement.
So they're actually saying, well, Trump just replaced this nine-foot-high fence with a triple-reinforced 18-foot-high fence, so it doesn't count as a new wall.
It does.
And look, the other wall, people were jumping over it.
So, look, if you gave someone a list and said, which areas should we prioritize?
This area is an empty desert.
This area has a nine foot high wall, but people are jumping over it.
You'll say, well, the one where people are jumping over, right?
Well, of course, critics are going to claim Trump didn't build any new wall.
He's tricking you.
The funny thing is, it's like the left is just patting themselves on the back, as if Trump supporters don't already understand what Trump is doing.
You have to recognize, if someone's a fan of Trump, they're probably reading about what the man is doing and why he's doing it.
But here's what we get.
The left is not trying to insult Trump supporters.
They're not trying to convince Trump supporters.
They're just trying to insult and denigrate Trump supporters to their own tribe.
See, look how dumb they are.
Trump didn't even build a wall, and then people go, wow, really?
I can't believe they believe that.
And then Trump supporters are like, wow, Trump reinforced an ineffective fence with a triple-layer barrier.
All right, well, let's read the story, excuse me, before we do.
Head over to TimCast.com slash donate.
If you would like to support my work, there's a PayPal option, a crypto option, a physical address, but the best thing you can do is share this video.
Seriously.
Like, comment, subscribe, and share to help overcome the hurdles placed in front of me by YouTube who likes CNN better.
Let's read.
The Daily Mail reports U.S.
CBP has unveiled a stretch of what it called New Wall on the southern border, saying it has completed at least 60 miles of border wall in total.
The section of wall near San Luis, Arizona, consists of an 18-foot steel bollard barrier.
CBP says the new triple-layered enforcement zone is more effective at deterring illegal entry than the former single 10-foot barrier.
I was off by a foot.
I'm sorry.
That means it is not, in fact, a new wall, but a replacement for the existing barrier.
The agency has yet to say when it will build at any entirely new border barrier.
You see, the media— Look, the Daily Mail is not super anti-Trump for the most part, but that's what the media likes doing is framing things.
Hold on, let's stop here.
They're saying it's not new.
It is.
It's new.
If I have a 50-foot concrete wall and I knock it down for a 1-foot high fence, I still have a new fence.
But they're trying to say it's not a new wall because it's just bad for the president.
As I stated earlier, if you're going to ask someone to build a fence, you're going to say, let's reinforce the areas that need it most.
That's the first thing you do!
Why would you build a- Like, listen.
You have like a graph showing you hot zones.
We'll build the better barrier in the hot zones because Trump's goal is to stem illegal immigration.
But I guess, look, if your goal is to just, like, pander to the press or to your base and claim you're doing something that's ineffective, Trump would be building wall in empty areas.
This says to me the plan from CBP is actually about reinforcing our existing border barriers and stemming illegal immigration, not putting on a show.
They'll try and claim Trump is trying to build the wall just to convince his base he's doing something even though it's ineffective.
No, I think this says the opposite.
They go on to say the agency says it plans to build at least 450 miles of new border wall by the end of 2020 and has projects underway in California, Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas.
But you know what?
I'll say this.
You guys know how the game is played.
Look, I look at this objectively.
I believe CBP is giving advice on the most effective way to enforce the border and Trump is just saying go for it and the media will smear him no matter what.
I'm not here to make a point about the effectiveness of the wall necessarily or whether or not I support it, but to point out this makes total sense.
It's like a Chinese finger trap problem.
It's counterintuitive.
They think you're supposed to pull as hard as you can.
Well, why don't you build new walls in the desert?
Because there are hot zones with more illegal immigration, and that's Trump's goal, and it's been his goal the whole time.
And so they built a triple-layered 18-foot fence to replace a 10-foot fence.
The wall near San Luis is in the Yuma sector, which is the third busiest along the southwest border.
Gee, doesn't that make sense?
A majority of the tens of thousands of people who came to the U.S.
over the last year are Central American families with children who immediately claim asylum.
Many travel in large groups, and the high volume of people has overwhelmed Border Patrol, resulting in slow response times and dangerously overcrowded detention facilities.
Five children have died while in Border Patrol custody since December.
So I want to make a point here.
So, uh, they're going to talk about what they're already doing.
We get it.
We get it.
They're going to build more, more fencing.
But here's the thing.
I see these comments from time to time where they're like, Tim Pool defending Trump on the border barrier strategy, the border wall strategy, but still saying he's going to vote Democrat, blah.
Listen.
Dan Crenshaw and Tulsi Gabbard are awesome.
I really, really respect both of them.
I think they're great.
I just so happen to agree with Tulsi.
I don't like the Democrats for the most part.
Tulsi is a Democrat.
I do like Tulsi.
I think she's a good, I think she's smart, I think she's principled, and she believes in a lot of the same things as me.
We're not playing a game of tribes here.
I'm not.
I mean, they are, for sure.
So when people come to my channel and comment and say, after all of this, Tim will still vote for a Democrat?
Yeah.
I'll vote for a Democrat like Tulsi Gabbard, who defends free speech, who calls out big tech, who opposes private prisons, and who opposes foreign war.
Yes, I will.
That's my kind of candidate.
Someone with principles.
Now here's the thing.
So is Dan Crenshaw.
But I disagree with Dan on a lot of issues.
So I'll absolutely defend Dan Crenshaw in videos where people mock and belittle him because he's a good guy who's principled and honest, and we happen to disagree.
Two of my favorite politicians right now, probably Tulsi and Dan, and I hold them to equal levels of respect.
Because they're both rational, privileged individuals.
Principled, not privileged.
Principled.
Yeah, we're talking about... When we get into the politics, you can see the slip there.
But no, principled.
So here's the thing.
Dan Crenshaw on Joe Rogan said he opposes recreational marijuana.
I believe we should be legalizing things like that because, as Joe points out as well, you just breed a black market.
I don't smoke.
I'm not a fan of smoking and I'm not a fan of recreational use.
Whatever.
But I am more about freedom.
And if I have friends who smoke, I really don't care, man.
Do your thing.
And I think prohibition results in, you know, black market violence and extra, you know, extra legal activities that are just not good.
Well, Dan's on the other side.
He says, we gotta see a reason.
You know, the cat's out of the bag on alcohol, but not on pot.
I disagree with him.
He says we need a presence in the Middle East.
I disagree.
But I respect that he's been there and he has the experience.
So here's the thing.
I can absolutely point out that the left is insane and lying about what's going on with the wall, and that it makes more sense to replace the ineffective bears in the hot zones than it does to just build walls in the middle of the desert.
But it doesn't mean I wouldn't— Look, Bernie Sanders defended border security.
Bernie Sanders denounced open borders.
I think Bernie Sanders has gone full establishment, and I'm not a big fan of the guy anymore because he's playing the political game.
But I believe border security is a longstanding— it's been a longstanding issue supported by the Democrats.
So yes, I will support a Democrat that believes in the same things as me.
It's not about tribe.
It's about who most aligns with where I am.
And I gotta admit, that's Tulsi.
She said identity politics is divisive and it's bad.
She's right.
She's suing Google for violation of her speech and her campaign.
She's right.
She's called this out.
She's right.
It's not about whether you're a Democrat or a Republican.
It's whether or not I'm more likely to agree with you on most policy issues.
I lean, I'm very moderate on the wall, because I don't think we need 450 miles of big beautiful border barriers, but this makes sense.
If a Democrat proposed reinforcing the Yuma sector with a triple barrier, I'd be like, makes sense.
Especially when Bernie Sanders has said we needed to do it.
Okay, well now we have a bunch of crazy Democrats who believe crazy things.
I'm not going to vote for any of those.
I'm not going to vote for those crazy people who want to give healthcare to non-citizens.
That's nuts.
But it's not about being a Republican or a Democrat.
It's about who makes the most sense for me.
So here's the thing.
Trump, this reinforcement of this area, was the right thing to do.
End of story.
It was the right thing to do, whether you're a Democrat or a Republican.
Now you want to argue about building border barriers and 450 miles stretch of the desert?
Maybe.
We'll talk about the amount of people, we'll talk about the cost, we'll talk about whether or not it can be maintained, and whether or not someone might not just throw, like, you know, you could throw, like, a rope over this and then pull it from the other side and climb up and climb over.
Or someone could drive up with a big ladder.
No, seriously, I really mean it.
Like, you could get a big ladder.
So I don't know what the right thing to do is, but I will say reinforcing a known hot zone makes sense, and it doesn't mean I should or shouldn't be supporting a tribe.
I can call out the lies from the left where they're trying to smear Trump.
There's even people on the right smearing him for this, saying, he's not building any new wall.
He's just replacing existing wall.
Yeah, but it's kind of like to a pretty strong degree, I'll call that a replacement.
