Ocasio Cortez Could LOSE Her Seat In Congress, Moderate Democrat Announces Primary Challenge
Ocasio Cortez Could LOSE Her Seat In Congress, New Moderate Democrats Announces Primary Challenge. Ocasio Cortez won her seat through the tactic of "primarying."With just less than 17,000 votes she outed Joe Crowley to become the Democratic nominee for her district. Because her district is so heavily Democrat winning the primary was all it took.Many republicans have stepped up to run against her but it is extremely unlikely these republicans can win the safe blue district. But now we have a new city council member with strong ties to the democratic party announcing a 'pro capitalist' challenge.Fernando Cabrera denounces AOC's socialism and said only a democrat can beat her, a moderate democrat.We know from the data that moderates performed substantially better in the 2018 mid terms than the far left and socialist candidates. Though some did legitimately win Ocasio Cortez got in via the primary. After losing the Amazon HQ jobs it is possible her district revolts and ousts her with a new more moderate candidate.We know AOC's funds are coming from outside her district as well. Perhaps she is not as popular locally as people think. Perhaps she has spent too much time courting national level activists instead of her own constituents.
Support the show (http://timcast.com/donate)
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is facing a real political opponent in her district in the primary race.
So this is a little bit complicated.
But the reason Ocasio-Cortez won when she did is because she defeated Joe Crowley in the primary, getting only around 15 or so thousand votes in a district of 750,000.
Most people Didn't primary.
Joe Crowley probably thought he was going to win.
He lost.
When it comes to the actual election, it's a D plus 30 district.
The Democrats not going to lose.
As Nancy Pelosi said, you can put a D on a glass of water in their districts, and they're going to win.
So here's the real challenge.
Cabrera kicks off primary bid against Ocasio-Cortez.
Now, this is not the first person to actually propose primarying Ocasio-Cortez, but it's one of the first local politicians with strong ties to the Democratic Party.
Ocasio-Cortez has been supporting primarying other moderate Democrats, trying to get moderate and longstanding Democrats removed from their seat.
And now she's facing the opposite.
Moderate Democrats challenging her, calling out socialism.
And this is the real threat.
Listen, I believe around seven or so Republicans are going to run against her.
But come on, in a D plus 30 district, do you think they're going to win?
Probably not.
However, the primary will be the real battle.
Ocasio-Cortez is raising a ton of money.
But as it turns out, according to one report, as far as we know, most of those donations are coming from outside her district.
People in New York are very unhappy that she lost them the Amazon deal.
She was a leader of some of the protests in the financial district.
She led that charge.
Now she wants to claim it.
She had nothing to do with it.
It wasn't even her district.
It doesn't matter.
New Yorkers are upset.
And New Yorkers might actually vote her out in the primary.
So let's talk about this.
Let's talk about who's challenging Ocasio-Cortez and why this is a real threat to AOC.
Listen, we can talk about Trump and the 2020 election all day and night.
I think Look, the Democratic contenders are all fairly weak.
Trump's going to win.
But here's the thing.
The primary challengers that are talking about going up against Trump, they're not going to win.
Trump's popular in this country.
Ocasio-Cortez, that remains to be seen.
Her approval rating in her district has gone up and down.
I believe it's mostly positive at this point.
So we will see.
In the end, what really matters is a primary race is substantially different from the actual election.
And if these local politicians, this local Cabrera who has strong ties to the DNC, if he can rally enough local people who don't like socialism, You might even see local Republicans voting for a Democrat if it means knocking out AOC from her congressional seat.
I believe this is the first true threat against her congressional seat.
Let's read the story.
Before we get started, head over to TimCast.com slash donate if you would like to support my work.
There's several ways you can do it.
There's a PayPal option.
But the best thing you can do, share this video.
Let's entertain this conversation.
Let's talk about whether or not AOC really stands a chance at reelection.
Because there's good arguments for why she does.
Share this video if you want to support me to help me overcome... Look, CNN, Fox, MSNBC, not only are they propped up by YouTube, they have big marketing budgets.
I don't have any of that.
I just have you guys.
If you like it, please share it and tell people why you think the conversation is important.
Let's read the story.
Politico reports, City Council member Fernando Cabrera is launching a primary challenge against Rep.
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the Bronx Democrat and pastor, filed with the Federal Election Commission to run for the congressional seat, which spans parts of the Bronx and Queens, and is formally kicking off his campaign today.
While a slew of lesser-known Republicans have already launched campaigns against the progressive firebrand, Cabrera becomes the most prominent local Democrat to take her on.
Now, here's the thing.
There is another Democratic primary challenger, but my understanding is it's an activist, not someone with political connections.
So listen.
When AOC, earlier this year, was talking about primary-ing moderate Democrats, basically betraying the party, I mean, I get it, I can respect wanting to get rid of the establishment cronies and stuff, but you're in the Democrats, like, you're in the Democratic Party, they expect you to work with them to pass policy, and she challenges them.
So they challenged back, there's a story from The Intercept, that the Democrats were planning on setting her up with, they were gonna either get rid of her district outright, so she'd have to run somewhere else, or Present a moderate challenger.
Now, I don't know if this is the DNC establishment fighting back.
AOC says it is.
But this is a moderate Democrat slamming socialism and saying she's more concerned with her Twitter following and pandering to national-level activists instead of her own district and bringing back jobs.
Let's read.
They say, quote, I mean, that's a fair criticism.
is going to be able to defeat her.
And it's going to be a moderate Democrat, Cabrera told Politico.
She's a no-show in the district.
She hasn't brought about anything except division within the party.
I mean, that's a fair criticism.
And it is true the moderate Democrats did resoundingly better in the midterms.
Make no mistake, she beat Crowley in the primary because Crowley underestimated her.
If Crowley actually tried, if he actually came out and considered her a real challenger, he probably would have won.
But AOC and the Justice Democrats specifically outlined this tactic called primarying.
They know that people don't turn out for primaries, and that's why AOC won with only around 15,000 votes in a district of 750,000.
It's crazy how that works, isn't it?
Let's read.
He plans to target Ocasio-Cortez for her democratic socialist views, and opposes her Green New Deal proposal as well as Medicare for All.
Socialism doesn't work.
I don't want it for my children, for my grandchildren, he said.
The council member said he was first inspired to jump into the race after hearing Ocasio-Cortez rail against Amazon's planned headquarters in Queens, a plan that was scuttled amid a flood of opposition.
It was staggering to me.
He set up for a tax on the $3 billion in tax break and subsidies the project was set to receive, most of which any company could have received on an as-of-right basis.
Basically, here's the thing.
It wasn't special.
The laws are set up to bring in industry to generate revenue.
Ocasio-Cortez actually thought, in a statement she said, imagine what we can do with those $3 billion.
Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa.
That's a discount, dude.
Like, if someone said I'm gonna give you a dollar off on a cheeseburger, you can't then go, wow, I have a dollar.
No, no, no, it's a discount.
You still gotta give me the money.
She came out, she had no idea.
She thought the city was literally giving money to Amazon.
They weren't.
They needed Amazon to come in and they offered tax incentives, which mostly already existed.
And Amazon would have generated 25,000 jobs.
She protested against that.
New Yorkers were not happy.
Check it out.
We have somebody who literally dismantled the possibility of us having 25,000 jobs.
And she has yet to bring any jobs into the district.
So I looked at the numbers.
I don't have them pulled up right now.
In the past year, from January 2018 till today, they've gained only a few thousand jobs.
It's not bad, okay?
So if it comes down to economics as, you know, who's going to win in any race, well, her district's doing slightly better.
But then you've got to weigh that to the relativity of losing the 25,000 jobs and how people will perceive this.
If people look at the current numbers, you might see a lot of people saying, I don't know anything about that.
I got a job.
I'm happy.
Unemployment is down.
Employment is up.
However, because of the news, you might have a lot of people saying, we lost jobs because of the potential.
You see how the framing is going to be important here?
They do mention that Cabrera's court controversy video surfaced of him in Uganda praising the policies of the country's government and other issues.
Cabrera pushes back, saying, Excuse me.
But my track record.
I've been very supportive every step of the way.
Like several of Ocasio-Cortez's Republican challengers, Cabrera lives outside the congressional district, so we'll see how this plays out.
The council member has close ties to the Bronx Democratic Party and hopes to court their support.
I can't see the party ever endorsing her because her and the Justice Democrats are running people against everybody in the Democratic Party.
She doesn't play well with local officials, he added.
They'll all tell you exactly the same thing.
We can't work with her.
She's impossible.
Well, here's the thing.
AOC has issued a response in a fundraising email.
This is from PIX11, New York local news.
Ocasio-Cortez responded in a fundraising email sent out Thursday night.
The email refers to Cabrera as a, quote, conservative Democrat, and coded this as establishment Democrats looking to get revenge.
I wouldn't be surprised if she's right about that.
But in the end, you have a Democratic district, heavily Democrat, Democrats gonna win.
You bring in someone who's moderate, and you may find that the outrage generated by AOC is going to attract those Republicans.
Listen, actually, I'll show you the Ballotopedia info in a second.
Let's read the quote.
Quote, she says, Ever since we defeated Joe Crowley, corporate Democrats have been waiting for their chance to strike back, the email states.
Our opponent doesn't play by the same rulebook we do.
He'll be more than willing to raise huge dollars from wealthy donors, take special interest PAC money, and pander to corporate giants like Amazon.
It was very unpopular, AOC, when you lost those jobs from Amazon.
While I think Amazon is very, very ripe for criticism, I don't think that's gonna play well for the general base.
Ocasio-Cortez initially rose to fame dethroning Crowley from his long-term seat in a primary upset.
Meanwhile, several Republicans are trying to win the seat in a heavily Democratic district.
Challengers include Ruth Papazian, Miguel Hernandez, Ray Solano, Antoine Tucker, Sherry Murray, and John Cummings are among the challengers from the right.
This is huge!
I mean, this is a district where my understanding is the past Republican, Anthony Pappas, didn't really even campaign!
Like apparently didn't have like a website or anything.
In the primary race, AOC, I wonder if they actually show the primary race in here.
Let's go down.
AOC in the Democratic primary had 16,898 votes.
Joe Crowley had 12,880.
I ask you this.
Joe Crowley had 12,880.
I ask you this, what happens when these Republicans register as Democrats or I don't know if New
York is a state where you need to register.
I think you do for the primary, I'm not sure.
But what do you think happens if you have 19,202 Republicans who know the only way to dethrone AOC is to support a Democrat challenger?
I'd be willing to bet these 19,000 or so people Not all of them, because a lot of them are probably just general voters, but a decent amount will come out in the primary and support Cabrera.
Or an opponent.
Because listen, in this district, look at that, 78% to 13%, no way is a Republican going to take this district.
It's New York City.
But a moderate Democrat could.
And so those Republicans might actually recognize your best bet is, look, you want to win.
You want to slam dunk, grand slam win.
You're not going to get a candidate who's a Republican who believes everything you believe.
But you want to take as much as you can.
I wouldn't be surprised if they recognize that.
So think about it this way.
Your choice is a moderate or a socialist.
And I think a lot of conservatives would be like, dude, I'll take the Democrat over the socialist, right?
So check this out.
Let's do this.
I want to highlight this because it's not the first time a Democrat primary challenge was announced.
The thing is, Cabrera is a serious contender with ties to the Democratic Party.
He's a council member.
This individual, my understanding, is an activist.
I could be wrong, but let's read.
He's a Democratic activist.
Ocasio-Cortez primary challenger, Badrun Khan, comes out swinging in first televised interviews.
Now here's the thing.
Even though this individual may just be an activist, I don't know what her political career is, it's still serious.
There's going to be multiple primary challengers.
Now I'll give a warning for those who are trying to dethrone AOC.
You might split the primary vote.
Think about it.
You put her up, you put up Cabrera, and you might get, AOC's gonna have her celebrity fanbase.
You're gonna need every vote to go towards that one candidate to defeat her in the primary.
And if you have two Democratic challengers, this could be good news for Ocasio-Cortez, splitting the vote, giving her the slight majority.
If they split the vote evenly, and every person gets 33%, but AOC gets 33.1%, guess what?
AOC wins.
But if those two candidates challenging AOC, one of them drops out.
That means the people who don't like AOC would give all of their votes to Challenger.
I don't know what the actual numbers are going to be.
It's entirely possible AOC is gonna generate a ton of buzz.
She's a celebrity.
It's also possible that celebrity is offensive to a lot of people.
Look man, I don't know about you, I don't know about the people in the district, but if it were me, I want a representative talking about where I live.
Not talking about California.
Not raising money from Californians.
To me, that is an egregious violation of what you're supposed to be doing.
Why?
And it's not just AOC.
It's people like Beto.
And that woman who tried winning in Georgia, whatever her name was.
Why are they raising money from outside the state?
From outside their district?
I get it.
You have a right to associate in this country.
You know, we're one nation.
But if you're supposed to represent New York 14, shouldn't you be raising money in New York 14?
I got some really funny information to show you guys though.
It's gonna be hilarious.
Check this out.
Guess who the biggest contributor to AOC is?
Why?
It's Google Incorporated.
Now I want to stress, these organizations are not themselves donating.
The money comes from the organization's PACs, their individual members or employees or owners, and those individuals' immediate families.
The biggest, by far, with nearly double the next, Google Inc.
Why is that?
I genuinely find that strange.
Google Inc.
The biggest contributor according to Open Secrets as of right now for the 2020 cycle.
Incredible.
You then have the Machinists Aerospace Workers Union.
That's actually pretty cool.
Whatever.
I'm not surprised the union's supporting her.
Celindian Gay is a law firm, I believe.
But then you have Facebook Inc.
Facebook is the fourth biggest.
Guess what?
Amazon.com is the, I believe, sixth largest contributor to AOC.
Isn't that weird?
Kaiser Permanente?
Really, really interesting donations coming in, AOC.
Look, I can understand the unions, the law school, I can understand the state of California, indivisible action, but man, Google Inc., that's interesting.
Now, AOC will talk about all the corporate money.
She says this guy Cabrera is going to take all this corporate money.
Excuse me, ma'am, have you looked at where your contributions come from?
Their PACs, their individuals, their employees, their owners, and their immediate families.
Now, I get it.
I'm not going to claim that AOC is getting money from the big Google machine because the wife of an employee donated to her.
But I think it would be important for her to address this because it's entirely possible a large amount of this money does directly come from these corporations or their PACs.
You wanna play a game about special interests?
Perhaps you should talk about where this money is coming from and be legit about it, right?
Be real about it.
I do think it's fair to point out AOC's been very, very firm on, uh, you know, raising money from individuals.
But in the end, I do find it kinda hilarious that the money's coming in this direction.
Now here's the thing.
Let me, uh, let's see if this is the, the, okay, yeah, we got the right story here.
Virtually no one in Ocasio-Cortez's district has donated to a re-election campaign, report says.
Now this is from two months ago.
It may have changed, right?
The cycle is—it was still early, but the report was interesting because the squad members—AOC, you know, Ayanna Pressley, Ilhan Omar, Rashida Tlaib—most of their donations were coming from outside their districts.
Like, a lot, a lot.
And this is reported, so I think this is mostly larger donations.
Here's the thing.
When they compared the average, the average amount raised in their district using the same standard, the average congressman was raising over $100,000.
I think AOC raised like a thousand bucks or some ridiculously low number in her own district.
Check it out.
Let's see if they have the number.
The FEC only requires that political campaigns disclose the names and addresses of individuals who contribute over $200 to their campaigns during an election, the Daily Caller News Foundation Andrew Kerr reported.
The $1,525.50 Ocasio-Cortez received from her New York constituents represents less than 1% of her campaign's itemized contributions reported to the FEC.
Less than 1% of the reported donations she got, over 200, came from her district.
Isn't that amazing?
And check it out, the average freshman representative's re-election campaign received $107,000 in itemized contributions from their constituents.
AOC, in my opinion, she raised 1.4% of that average.
I do not believe that AOC is popular in her district.
I know the polls say that she's above 50%, I believe.
Here's the thing.
It's New York City.
It's not the poorest of Americans.
I understand that people in New York might be living in certain impoverished conditions to an extent.
Because of the cost of living.
However, people in New York City are much more likely than people in the rural areas to be able to give her this money.
How is it that she's raising just 1.4% of the average for what other freshman representatives were raising?
It sounds fishy.
Something isn't right.
But check it out.
Look, I really do mean it when I say that she might actually... Okay, so this is the wrong story.
Where's the... Oh, I'm sorry.
Here's the right one.
She might actually lose her seat.
This is serious.
AOC leading GOP challengers by nearly 500,000 in campaign donations.
Hold on a second.
Let's check this out.
They say Rep.
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez hauled in an astonishing $1.43 million for her first re-election campaign.
GOP donors have collectively given $1 million to the five candidates.
Let me explain why that's significant.
You may be saying, Tim, she raised $500,000 more.
She's doing way better.
That's 50% higher than the Republicans.
Interesting.
That the Republicans were able to raise, out of all the money raised, right?
We've got 2.5 million.
AOC has just around, what, like two-thirds of that.
That's interesting when you look at how she actually won in that election, or how many votes she got.
This says to me that AOC has lit a fire under the moderate and conservative base.
So if they're gonna raise a million bucks, it's comparable.
You know, it's, okay, they're down 500, right?
So she's 50% higher in terms of what she's raised.
But that's a dramatic difference.
The difference seems to be... Look, I understand votes and money are very different.
You know, it's possible that the Republicans just have one guy who, you know, to a PAC or whatever.
Or you have a bunch of really rich people donating because they don't like her, and she's raising for more smaller people.
But the point is, this says to me that while yes, of course, she as an individual has the advantages of being an incumbent and raising all that money for herself, it does show that opposition enthusiasm is quite high.
But I won't say it's good news.
I will say it's to an extent good news that they're, you know, they're keeping up to an extent.
I mean, a million bucks is pretty good.
In the end, AOC is still winning.
Let's be real about that.
Now, I'd like to see what Cabrera can raise.
That will be interesting.
But who knows?
Who knows?
But let's do this.
Let's flip now to the national stage, because I want to say something.
We have two big races.
AOC is more of a symbolic race in 2020.
Trump, I think, is good to go.
He's gonna win.
Now, that may change.
You know, betting odds are changing.
It's really slim, but Trump still is the favorite to win.
Fine.
Incompetent advantage, strong economy, but the impeachment stuff is hanging over.
We'll see what happens.
But we need to pay attention to AOC's district, because this represents the civil war in the Democratic Party.
We know for a fact that in 2018, moderate Democrats did substantially better.
In fact, the reason the Democrats won the House is because moderates won in districts that Trump previously held.
The far left is not popular.
The data shows us.
But if AOC wins again, it's going to set a trend moving forward.
Or I shouldn't say it'll set a trend, but it's a powerful message that the far left wasn't a fluke and they're here to stay.
If she loses, it'll show us just that.
It was a fluke.
It was an accident.
She won through a primary challenge, not a legitimate run.
Okay, I get it.
Primary is part of the legitimate process, but she won because the district only votes Democrat.
John Voigt said this.
Trump will win 2020.
Democrats have no heroes today.
He's right.
However, AOC may not be running for the president, but she is a hero of the far left.
And so that's why she's raising so much money.
Let me go back to this story and now present a point that I'm sure a bunch of people were sitting here and saying things like, Tim, you've got it wrong.
You missed a very important detail.
The important factor in this is that while AOC did raise nearly $500,000 more than the GOP, we know she's raising a lot of money outside the district.
That's the important factor that needs to be discussed.
Is the GOP raising money outside the district?
I don't know.
But we do know AOC is substantially below average, like 98.6% below average.
Isn't that crazy?
For fundraising in her own district.
I'd have to bet, I'd be willing to bet a decent amount, that Republicans have raised more money in the district than she has.
This is why I think she really does stand a chance of losing her seat.
I think she won based on the primary, and, you know, we'll see what happens.
But I'll leave it there.
Let me know what you think in the comments below.
Stick around.
Next segment's coming up at youtube.com slash TimCastNews starting at 6 p.m.
I'll see you all there.
Last night, Donald Trump held a rally in Minnesota, and there was a massive turnout.
I believe it was Ilhan Omar's district.
Well, apparently, dozens of Trump supporters got attacked.
It's not surprising.
Massive protests turned out.
There was pepper spraying, police, several arrests, some journalists were pepper sprayed.
And in the end, we see some videos.
This video, for instance, which is on the screen right now, is, for those that are listening, There's a man wearing black and a man wearing blue, and the man in black is actually striking the man in blue.
According to a reporter, I don't believe they have their name up, but The Daily Caller tweeted this, a man leaving tonight's Trump rally in Minnesota was spotted by a group of protesters who yelled, there's a Nazi over there.
They then attacked the man, slapping and pushing him until he ran away.
This is not the only thing that happened.
According to, I believe, who do we have reporting on the ground here?
We had, I believe, Elijah Schaefer.
That's right.
Anti-Trump protesters in Minnesota stole about 40 hats off the heads of Trump supporters and then lit them on fire at the Trump rally.
They then left the ashes as a vigil against fascism, leaving a F Trump sign on the top of the pile.
This is tolerance.
This is the left.
So here's the thing.
Let me just, I want to make sure I go through this real quick again, where you can see the guy actually strike.
So, for those that are watching, you can see the man in black, and there he hits the man in the face, on the head or something.
So, you know, getting attacked, a lot of people might make assumptions about what that means.
Let me just, let me clarify the phrasing.
My understanding is that we have at least one video of someone being physically attacked, and around, and reports of around 40 or so hats being stolen.
So yes, people are being attacked.
This is not new.
This is exactly what happened in 2015.
It's gonna get a lot worse.
In 2015, I was at a rally in San Jose.
I watched a random guy get punched in the mouth, face covered in blood.
And he was interviewed, he said he wasn't even a Trump supporter.
They just punched him anyway, they didn't know.
There was one kid who was literally, I don't even know who the kid was, but he was being chased, like a 14-year-old kid was being chased by the mob.
I watched an elderly couple be knocked to the ground, their hats torn from their heads, Set on fire.
And it's exactly what they do.
In San Jose, there was a more particularly viral moment that I filmed in which a man... So I saw this guy leaving the Trump rally in San Jose.
This was, I believe, 2015.
He was wearing a neon yellow polo shirt, and people were screaming and spitting at him, so I started filming.
He turns the corner, and someone comes up behind him with a bag, presumably a bag of some heavy object, and smacked him in the back of the head, hitting his ear, and blood started to pour out.
So I got an interview with the guy, and that video got like 1.2 million views overnight.
It took off.
I've seen this stuff firsthand, and let me tell you, it is going to get worse.
Way worse.
And when Trump gets re-elected, it will be substantially worse.
January 20th.
In Washington, D.C., you had hundreds of people in the Black Block going around, smashing stuff, throwing bricks, starting fires.
200-plus people arrested.
I was in the crowd that got arrested.
I got released without being processed.
So, yes, I think people like to argue what arrest really means.
But let's do this.
Let's hop over to the RealClearPolitics and go through what actually happened.
We've got a series of tweets, and then we can talk more about Just how bad it's going to become.
I want to stress, these are the images that will be used by the Republicans and Donald Trump for his re-election.
I assure you.
And there is even a tweet here from a woman who says, like, I don't even have an opinion on Trump and they were attacking me.
Yep.
That's what it is.
That's what it is.
So we have this tweet, the first one, protesters burn Trump hats and flags outside Trump rally in Minnesota.
RCP reports, protesters burn red Trump hats, hold anti-police chants, and destroy property outside a Trump campaign rally Thursday night in Minneapolis.
Protesters yelled, F you guys, and animal abuse at law enforcement officers sat on horses.
Now, I'll stop here, and instead of the normal shout-out, I'll tell you this.
We've got on-the-ground footage.
We had a reporter there interviewing people and filming, so we've got a bunch of exclusive coverage.
On the ground, that should be up tonight at 7 p.m.
at youtube.com slash subverse news.
So again, sub, s-u-b, v-e-r-s-e, news on YouTube.
Go subscribe.
We are going to have a video, I believe it should be out...
Hopefully by 7 p.m.
We'll see.
We're aiming for it.
We've got a ton of interviews.
We've got a lot of footage.
We've got police pepper-spraying stuff.
We've got people fighting, I think.
But yeah, we had a reporter on the ground, so make sure you check that out.
7 p.m.
tonight.
Matt Finn tweeted, Outside Minneapolis Trump rally, protesters lighting MAGA hats on fire, rushing police, calling them pigs, escalating scene.
Trump hats post fire.
This is the tweet from Elijah Schaefer, which I referenced already, that they stole around 40 hats off the heads of Trump supporters.
People were also maced.
Elijah said, My producer and I were bear-maced in the face while
reporting on the quickly dilapidating situation outside the Minnesota Trump rally.
Arrests have been made.
Antifa is present.
Violence is commonplace at this point.
Typical end-of-the-night anarchy.
The situation outside the Trump rally in Minnesota is quickly deteriorating.
Left-wing protesters are destroying barricades.
A protester can be seen waving the Chinese flag in front of riot police while people in Hong Kong wave American flags for freedom.
We wave Chinese flags.
Think about that.
Think about the NBA.
Listen, you need to understand this.
Everyone keeps saying, you know, they make up these points where, oh, the NBA will talk about the bathroom bill in North Carolina, but then they bow to China.
It's all the same movement.
These protesters who completely agree with boycotting businesses over their bathrooms are also waving Chinese flags.
It's not a coincidence.
Okay?
These big businesses don't care.
They care for nothing but money.
So they're going to bend over backwards to whoever is going to give it to them.
And they think this is the safe route.
These people waving the Chinese flag, they're not going to criticize their ideology.
They're going to support it because they want the money from China.
You see how this is working?
One person reported that Trump supporters are fleeing the event after it ended to avoid being attacked by protesters.
So this is actually a different angle of the first video.
Elijah Schaefer reports, Trump supporters are literally fleeing the event after it ended as protesters are waiting around attacking attendees as they leave the arena.
It is not safe in Minneapolis any longer for Trump supporters.
Please stay away from the vicinity and do not come out with branded gear.
Let me just make a point, man.
Isn't it strange that you don't see major coverage of this?
Is CNN gonna show this clip and say, you know, these anti-Trump people are insane or anything?
They don't.
Sometimes, sometimes, but rarely.
And why is that?
Why is it assumed you're a Trump supporter for saying, these people are nuts?
I don't care if you want to wear a MAGA hat and go see what the president has to say.
Mind my own business.
If you come out, I won't even acknowledge you.
It's not a respect.
I walk past people without saying hi all the time.
It doesn't mean anything.
But these people scream Nazi at this dude, and they chase him down, start hitting him, and he runs away.
How is that acceptable in our society?
It's not.
These people want to burn it down and destroy it.
And what's remarkable to me is that during Occupy Wall Street, the occupiers actually denounced a lot of this behavior.
Not all of it.
They would talk about the diversity of tactics, but many people were opposed to this.
And I think that's why Trump gets elected.
These people, you know, back from Occupy, who are down there on the ground protesting the 1%, Trump is an anti-establishment character.
As a matter of fact, he's a billionaire.
He was going after the system.
But more importantly, a lot of the former leftists were looking at this as insane.
All of this violence and this bad behavior was hurting the cause and hurting everybody, and it's only getting worse.
So when you lost that, you had those people on the left at Occupy who said, stop the violence.
We don't support this.
That cut these people in check.
When they left, Bernie or Buzz, I'm out, no one was left to stop these people.
No one was left to tell them, we're not going to support you.
So they just, they went nuts.
Check this out.
This Twitter user, Kali Finch, said, In this riot of anti-Trump,
I was just trying to get through with my brother, and I've never been called a racist so many times,
let alone ever.
I've never been shoved for just walking through, for thinking I was a Trump supporter.
I don't have opinions on Trump, but this was whack.
Apparently, this person on Twitter was just walking by and got attacked.
And that happens.
That absolutely happens.
As I mentioned, when I was in San Jose, there was a guy who they claimed was a Trump supporter, and he wasn't.
He was even Latino.
He was a Mexican guy, I think.
And they punched him in the mouth, and you could see blood coming out of his mouth.
They don't care.
It is violence.
It is chaos.
It is anger.
And I'll tell you what, man.
Let's get to the important point.
These videos are going to go viral.
This video is going to get a ton of play.
Regular people, like that Cali woman, who aren't in politics and don't care, are being attacked, are being, you know, threatened.
And they're going to go tell their friends and family.
And they're going to say, I don't understand what happened.
And their friends and family are going to be like, what's going on?
This is insane.
And you know what they're going to think?
They're not going to think, I like those people who attacked my friend.
They're going to think, wow, these people have gone nuts.
We need someone who's strong who could protect us.
And who do you think they're going to vote for?
In times of national emergency, you know, security issues, violence, terror, and all that stuff, people tend to vote Republican.
Because the Republican tends to be the strong national security type.
Not always.
Obama was one of the worst strong national security types in terms of, you know, killing Americans and drone bombing people, but you know, whatever.
The point is, These are the people that oppose Donald Trump.
And they start fires, and they attack people, and they attack people who aren't even Trump supporters.
And it's going to get worse.
If you think this is bad, I assure you, it has only just begun.
As Trump continues to ramp up his rallies, especially in big cities, don't be surprised when we see this escalate.
Now, Trump is definitely going to be targeting a lot of rural areas.
However, in 2016, You know, Trump got to these people and he spoke to them about bringing jobs back.
He's won them.
The economy's better.
He doesn't need to go and tell them anymore, for the most part.
He's going to campaign, but I assure you, Trump needs to target big cities, bigger cities.
He needs to find that base and rally them in areas that he can try and gain ground in.
The people who live in the rural areas, who already tend to be Republican, or who already got his support, Trump doesn't need to go prove it.
Trump could simply say at any rally to everybody in, you know, X county or whatever, your jobs are back, you know, blah, blah, blah.
And they're going to be sitting there watching their TV, not at a rally, but they're going to be cheering.
Yes, they are.
So I get it.
They might want to see the president to be happy that he's come to their town, but he doesn't need to anymore.
He's already won to them.
The economy is better.
Unemployment is down.
These people have jobs again.
Trump is going to go and target the areas where these protesters are.
But I'll tell you this, it could also be strategic.
Look at these videos that are going viral.
Look at the violence.
These people going out and beating people.
Look, they're writing the Trump campaign ads themselves.
Trump need only go up to a rally, bring all these people into the stadium, and say, thanks for being here, have a good day, and he could walk out.
That's it.
He could say nothing.
And they would show up, all this footage would get released, and they're gonna compile it all, and they're gonna run it on TV.
And that's it.
The ads write themselves.
In this political era, which truly is terrifying in my opinion, policy is out the window, for the most part.
Now, Trump does talk about a lot of core issues, and the economy is doing better.
So, in my opinion, when it comes to a political debate, like an actual one, Trump is slightly ahead of the Democrats.
Trump will actually talk about immigration.
He'll actually talk about the economy.
He'll also talk about Antifa on the far left.
And the Democrats will talk about impeachment and scandals.
There's very little substance in this political cycle.
And this is part of the problem.
But you know what?
I'm not going to blame Trump for those that are giving him ammunition.
It's their fault.
Trump is the president.
Trump won.
Fine.
Whatever.
How about you stand outside, shake hands, and offer up conversation, and try and explain why there's a better way.
I assure you, you'll convince... So this is why I don't trust these protests, right?
If I stood outside of a Trump rally wearing a button-up shirt and I waved the smile to a nice little old lady and her family with Trump hats on and shook their hands and asked if they had a few minutes just to talk about politics and explain to me why they like the president and then I could explain why I like someone like Tulsi Gabbard and see if we can find common ground, I assure you, in that way, you will end up convincing a handful of people to vote for your candidate.
I guarantee if I went to a Trump rally, I would meet some people who are like moderates, are undecided, not diehards, and we'd have a conversation, and I might actually convince them.
Absolutely.
Because a smile and a handshake goes a really, really long way.
But I'll tell you what.
These people are Trump supporters.
I say that somewhat facetiously.
I made that joke last time.
I was at, I think it was around San Jose, I jokingly referred to the protesters as Trump supporters.
And much to the offense of literally everybody, Trump supporters are like, how dare you call Antifa us?
I'm like, I'm making a point, man.
These people showing up in burning hats are doing the best possible thing they could do to make sure Trump gets re-elected.
That's the joke, get it?
They don't really like Trump, I understand that.
The point is, If they showed up with a smile on their face and handed out muffins and candy bars, and then said, just consider checking out, you know, another candidate.
People would smile and be like, I appreciate that.
I appreciate you engaging me, you know, civilly and cordially.
And then what would happen is, a couple of people would go online and be like, I think I'll vote for, you know, Yang or Tulsi.
Instead, we get this.
This is the most destructive thing.
It's almost like, it's called black propaganda, right?
I'm not actually, I don't actually think it is.
I think literally these people are insane, because I know many of them, and they go out and they attack people.
But black propaganda is when you, it's like a false flag, right?
If Republicans hired people to wear masks and go out and start the violence, that would be black propaganda, so they look bad.
However, let's be absolutely clear, they don't need to do that.
Antifa acts a fool all the time.
And that's why I jokingly say they are Trump supporters.
The idea being, if you want to get Trump re-elected, do this!
Steal hats, beat people, start fights, fight with cops, and burn things in the street.
And you're going to find that there are going to be a lot of people in their homes, scared, saying these people need to stop.
And they're going to vote for Trump because of it.
So, you know what?
Trump couldn't ask for a better circumstance.
And that's why I think we'll probably see a lot more Trump rallies in bigger cities.
Trump is going to target not the big cities, necessarily.
Like, he probably will.
You know, he went to California.
I don't know which city in California.
I think he went to, like, the L.A.
area.
I'm not sure.
Was it Bel Air?
I don't know.
Anyway, the point is, I think Trump—like, Minnesota and Minneapolis are not the biggest cities in the country, but it's a big city.
Trump's going to target these, you know, these bigger cities, not the big three, though.
That way you get more of this.
I'd be willing to bet Trump goes there for several reasons.
He needs to target these heavier blue areas.
He needs to find an expanding base.
He's already won the... Well, he hasn't won the... He needs to go to the suburbs.
But he's already won the more rural areas.
This gives him an opportunity to now attack a new front.
In 2016, he went to those rural areas and he said, trust me, And the people just barely did.
They slightly did.
No, seriously, his margins were razor thin in some areas.
But he won.
And now I believe it's fair to say he's proven himself to these areas by bolstering the economy.
As far as anyone's concerned, you can make every argument in the book about how it's not really Trump making the economy better.
It doesn't matter.
What matters is the economy is good, and people are going to say, don't rock the boat.
Whatever it is, keep it going.
This is going to open up Trump to go to these areas.
And so he has an opportunity now.
He doesn't need to go to all these rural areas.
He probably still will do some.
But the new opportunity is that he can get viral clips and viral videos, and I assure you, you know, in the early campaign of 2015, Trump was saying, what did he say?
Something like, you know, I'll pay your legal bills or whatever.
I know it's contentious and people are going to argue what he really said, and I'm not trying to get into a political debate about, you know, fake news, but there were fights.
You know, there were protesters and Trump was rowdy.
But the media turned.
You know, that was bad.
And Trump learned very quickly.
He said, no, no, no, you know, calm down, just get him out of here, let him, you know, don't fight, don't threaten him.
All that stuff.
He realized it was bad.
He learned quickly.
Now I think Trump and his people know full well.
I really do believe Trump, his campaign staff, his managers, they know basically the same thing I do, right?
I wouldn't be surprised if they're watching this video right now when they, like, they know.
We all know.
When a regular American is sitting at home eating their popcorn and watching a flick with their family after work, and they see this video being shared on Facebook, they're going to be shocked.
And they're going to think about the safety of their family.
And they're going to think about that young woman who was attacked, and that father's going to be like, I do not want that for my daughter and my son.
Walking down the street?
This is insane.
This needs to stop.
And what do you think's going to happen?
They're going to be like, it must stop.
Therefore, I'm going to agree with those who attacked my children.
No!
They're going to say, we need to make sure Trump, you know, stays in and does something about this.
I think it's fair to point out, some people might be like, this has only gotten worse because of Trump, and maybe we should give in, because some people, you know, I don't know, illogical, cowardice, whatever.
I think, for the most part, you will find these protests are fodder and fuel for Donald Trump, and he knows it, and his campaign knows it, and they are gonna use these videos, and they are gonna use them for all they are worth.
I'm gonna leave it there.
Stick around.
Next segment's coming up at 1 p.m.
on this channel, and I will see you all there.
Last night, CNN hosted an LGBTQ town hall, and Chris Cuomo offended everybody by making a joke.
Several protests—a couple protests—erupted.
I want to make something clear.
I believe it's extremely important that we protect the rights of the LGBTQ community.
We have these discussions, and I appreciate the idea.
of having this town hall.
Now, that being said, I believe CNN was making a spectacle of these people, of this community, and causing real harm.
I will criticize to an extent the protesters, but for the most part, I can respect the protest, by all means.
If you want to say something and you want to be heard and you take that mic, okay.
The problem is, CNN knows what they are doing.
First of all, Chris Cuomo is being slammed for saying he used female pronouns.
He had to apologize for it.
We'll come to this story.
A black trans woman took the microphone away from a transgender child and started yelling, you have erased black trans men for the last time.
Okay.
I believe CNN did this on purpose.
I believe they know who these people are.
They knew this was going to happen.
They have security for this.
Listen.
Another protest erupted, where they held up flags saying, we are dying.
Again, I can respect that.
But this is a spectacle.
CNN is doing this for ratings.
Let me make something clear.
Anderson Cooper with millions of dollars, Democratic 2020 candidates like Pete Buttigieg, Beto O'Rourke, Kamala Harris.
You think that anybody entering this building wasn't screened?
No.
They were screened.
In fact, in most... I went to an RNC debate early on in Miami, and they wouldn't let you bring anything inside.
Because the answer is, I believe CNN was well aware and wanted the viral clips, wanted the viral articles, wanted to generate attention because they don't actually care about passing laws to help people, they care about generating traffic and clicks.
I get it.
That's what the media does.
The media is in the business of getting your attention so they can sell ads.
And this was the best way to do it.
But I must admit, I feel like the protesters were used.
Okay?
It's just my opinion.
Maybe CNN really didn't know and they're terrible at what they do.
Fine.
What I mean to say is, I think CNN was like, ooh, we got protesters coming?
Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah.
Don't take their flags away.
Yeah, let them do it.
It could have been as simple as we better not take their flags away because they'll get outraged and they'll attack us.
Fine.
Take a look at Chris Cuomo.
Kamala Harris said, her pronouns are she, her, and hers.
And Cuomo said, mine too.
And then Kamala Harris was like, all right, uh-oh, you just said something offensive.
There's another moment here where a woman had her name mispronounced and got, you could see it in her face, shock, it was a trans woman, and she was called Shay, and she said her name is Shia, and that it was violence to mispronounce their name.
When I see this, I will absolutely state I am critical of those who... It's not violence to mispronounce someone's name.
It's called normal life, and some people mispronounce names.
Chris Cohen made a stupid joke.
Please, can we calm down?
And these protesters.
This protester took the microphone away from a child who was transgender, asking a question to a presidential candidate.
This is disruptive, and it's disruptive of an event where they were literally talking about what you wanted to talk about.
So, I don't care who you are, where you come from, I am an equal opportunity critic, okay?
If you want to disrupt an event for you, go ahead and do it.
Don't be surprised when you get some criticism.
But again, I think the bigger responsibility falls on CNN, who allows this to happen.
And I think they do it because they want the shock spectacle.
They want the outrage videos, they want conservative controversy, and then they want to say, see, look at all the bigots.
Now, listen.
They absolutely could have gotten anybody to come up and speak about these issues without being disruptive, without getting offended at the use of their name.
Now, I understand there's gonna be a lot of conservatives who say, no, Tim, these people are just like this, and I'm gonna say no, no, no, no, no.
There are conservative trans people.
They exist.
Trans people are not a monolith.
They are individuals, and we should absolutely do what we can to protect the rights of the LGBTQ community.
We shouldn't be forced to bring in conservative trans people, but I think it's fair to say you can bring on good advocates and bad advocates.
When it comes to doing interviews, you know what really, really bothers me?
And let me break this down for you in a larger context with a better analogy.
I see video after video of conservatives who go out to interview people and ask them questions about politics, and it's like, all these people are so dumb.
You see the same thing Jimmy Kimmel does.
He goes out to Hollywood, and he grabs random people, and they take a highlight reel of how dumb people are.
I went to the March for Our Lives, okay?
It was the big 2A protest thing from the Parkland kids, and I found that many of the people I talked to didn't know much about how these weapons work.
And when it was clear, I would say, okay, you know, some of these I will use for interviews, but some people would just be like, oh, I didn't realize.
I'm like, okay, that's fine.
I'm not here to make a hit piece that makes you all look crazy.
I'm here to find people who have ideas about this and will explain themselves calmly and fairly.
And I found a decent amount of people who knew enough to have a conversation and say, here's what I think.
I understand, you know, they would say, I don't know a lot about this issue, but I do know about these, and here's what I'm thinking.
And it was actually surprising to me that I could find a decent amount of people and not make them all look like morons.
I can't stand this.
They go to Trump rallies and they go, look how dumb the Trump supporters are.
They go to the protests and say, look how dumb the protesters are.
I get it.
There's a lot of dumb people.
But stop strawmanning and start steelmanning.
That means, instead of going after the weakest to make you look right, actually go after the real argument.
Ignore the crazy people.
So you know what this was to me, CNN?
This was CNN, in my opinion, taking people, selecting for their audience, who they knew would make a spectacle.
Because let me tell you something.
When Bernie Sanders Did his town hall.
And all of these audience members asked questions.
It turns out they worked for the DNC.
And then CNN apologized later.
Oh, we didn't know.
Yes, CNN knows who is in the audience.
It is not just like people are open the door and anybody can come in.
No, they know what's going on.
You're searched, you're screened.
There are presidential candidates.
And CNN chose people they knew would cause a scene.
And now you're getting articles making them all look crazy.
This is not what we need for the actual conversation.
What we need for conversation.
Now, of course, CNN did have those people.
There were only a couple protests.
But I must stress, when they bring on the person who is shocked and offended their name was mispronounced, when they bring on the person who takes the mic away from a child and starts yelling about, you know, trans black women being erased, which is literally what the event is talking about, and when they bring in people who are allowed to have flags do something, we are dying.
That, to me, is CNN saying, what can we do to get ratings?
I know!
Let's find people who will cause a scene.
But guess what happens?
By highlighting unreasonable behaviors, protesting your own event, you know, taking the mic away from a child.
Look, I don't care if you're white, black, you know, gay, straight, whatever.
If you're gonna act a fool, I will criticize you.
Most of the people at this event were absolutely fine, and they did a good job talking about their positions.
My criticism is not at those who want to protest because they are passionate.
My criticism is not at the anti-Trump protesters who are just uninformed, very dumb, or at the Trump supporters who are also very dumb.
I think dumb people exist, stupid people exist, irrational people exist.
The point is, we should not be focusing on this in exchange for clicks.
Okay?
I'm gonna ask again.
How did that flag get into CNN?
How did they get that into the CNN, on the CNN set?
I mean that literally.
Do you really believe their security is that lax?
I don't buy it.
They knew what they were doing, they knew it would get clicks, and they knew it would be controversial, and then they have this big viral moment where USA Today writes it up, and to me, it is just, it's media strategy.
Complete media strategy.
They were literally talking about these issues.
So it doesn't make sense.
But I'll tell you what does make sense.
USA Today, writing a story about the protests.
Pundits, controversy, generating outrage.
That's the point.
So yes, there are a lot of people that I really don't like on YouTube, who purposefully target stupid people.
Or, it's not that they purposely target stupid people, it's that, yeah, I get it, a lot of people are stupid.
And they'll make these videos and be like, ah, look how dumb people are.
And I'm like, dude, I get it.
There are a lot of people who don't pay attention to politics.
Yes, they probably should in a certain capacity, but for the most part I don't blame them.
It's a horrifying reality to live in.
Politics is a nightmarish battle.
Why don't you go out and find real people who you can actually challenge?
You can actually have a conversation with and actually, you know, prove your ideas right.
This is not just a right or left thing.
This is a spectacle thing.
I know that if I go out onto the street and I film, you know, how dumb everyone is, then people will be like, confirmation bias.
I knew group X was dumb.
I think that's what CNN did.
I think they wanted this to happen.
Because I'll stress, they know who their audience members are.
You get it, man.
I said it 50 times already.
I detest CNN.
They say audience members interrupted.
Oh, you know what?
You get the point.
I don't need to read for you the breakdown of exactly what happened.
But trans protesters hold flags and chant.
He's now addressing how diverse and challenged the LGBTQ community is, and that it must be open to acceptance.
Listen.
In any other event, would we tolerate protesters protesting the very ideas we're talking about?
For the most part, no.
Would we hand them the microphone?
Would we say, yes, please continue?
The answer is no.
Events are set to take place for conversation.
So let me point out, not only were the flags allowed in, or they have no security in there, and that's insane, they were allowed to bring the flags in, and they were allowed to continue their protest, as was this other trans woman.
But how is any of this, you know, I don't know, conducive to the conversation that we're going to solve these problems?
In my opinion, this wouldn't be tolerated in any other circumstance.
Could you imagine if they did a town hall on, you know, a standard Democrat town hall and a bunch of people stepped up with flags?
Has it happened?
Maybe it's happened before.
Maybe CNN really just is really bad at what they do.
I don't know.
Fact check me.
Google it.
Have people broken out with objects and signs and whatever at a CNN town hall?
I know people have yelled things.
People yelled things at, like, Elizabeth Warren or Kamala Harris or whatever.
Yelling things I get.
You can't stop that.
But what about people bringing in objects?
You know, a flag or something.
And when these things happen, what do they do?
They shut the protesters down and kick them out.
When people start yelling, they say, OK, we know, we know, keep it down, and then eventually you'll see them get escorted.
Here, they didn't do that.
So I'll end with one final thought.
I agree with the town hall.
I think it was a good idea.
I think it was a very good idea.
I just wish CNN wasn't so disingenuous.
I agree with the idea of having these conversations.
They need to be had.
It's very difficult often.
I'm willing to bet this video is going to get slammed and people are going to criticize me, saying, how dare you criticize the protesters?
Well, I don't care.
We're going to solve these problems when we sit down for a conversation.
And that means if you want to be disruptive, you are hurting the process.
And in the end, this spectacle that CNN puts on is fodder for conservatives who are going to be like, see, look at these people who are nuts.
And you're going to find a lot of moderates being turned off from the conversation, saying, I don't want to have anything to do with it.
You know what, man?
That's crazy.
I don't want to.
So here's the problem.
To the people who actually protested themselves, like their own event, you have to understand it's not helping, okay?
It's fuel for the other side.
And to CNN, who wants the clicks and the traffic off it and allows it to happen, that to me is disgusting.
I'm done.
Next segment's coming up at 4pm, youtube.com slash TimCast, and I'll see you there.
China is a very controversial place, to say the least.
You know, right now they have concentration camps like actual ones where they've gone and rounded up their own citizens because they happen to be Muslim, made disparaging remarks about what they believe, and many of these people are being re-educated, they say.
Let's take China's word for it.
Okay, not really.
China is horrifying.
What they're doing is terrifying.
And people in Hong Kong do not want to live under this system.
And I can respect that.
While it's very controversial and very complicated and I can respect the nuance, let me just say I think we as Americans recognize why Chinese censorship is nightmarish and why what they're doing to the Uyghurs is also extremely nightmarish.
We're Americans!
This country was founded on, particularly, freedom of religion.
What China does with censorship and these camps flies in the face of everything we believe in, or at least our most important tenets.
That's why Steve Kerr is a coward, the NBA is trash, and wait till you see this.
Now, you may have heard about the NBA bending to poor China, shaking in their little urine-soaked boots, terrified because they want to make money.
You know what?
I've never been to an NBA game, so I'm sure they don't care.
But I'm not going to go to one from... You know what?
The only way I would actually consider going is if I actually went holding up a sign saying, Free Hong Kong.
I wouldn't really do that because I don't do the whole protester type thing.
But hey, man.
I understand the nuance of Hong Kong and I respect the right for, you know, free speech and free expression and to resist communist China.
I get it.
I get it.
Steve Kerr finally breaks his silence and he says, Well, when I went to China, nobody asked me about AR-15s.
I could not believe it.
He decided the best thing he could possibly do is compare the fact that some crazy people sometimes get weapons and take the lives of many people.
And it is nightmarish.
Don't get me wrong.
Don't get me wrong.
It is horrifying and one of the most serious problems we face as a nation when these crazy people get these high-powered rifles and go take the lives of the innocent.
I'm not going to downplay that for a second.
And that's why I'm so offended, I guess, that Steve Kerr would dare compare these moments to what Communist China is doing to the Uyghurs.
When China is censoring people, when China is, you know, look, China is doing a lot of really horrifying things.
Let's put it that way.
You cannot compare them to the problems we face.
We get it.
We have problems.
We need to empathize and sympathize with those who are victims.
But Steve Kerr in an interview goes, I mean, when I went over there, they don't ask me about our human rights abuses.
OK, listen.
The U.S.
does have human rights abuses.
Why don't we go back to the George W. Bush era?
I can tell you all about it.
Even the Obama era.
I get it, man.
But how are you going to defend China simply because two wrongs don't make a right, dude?
We all sit here and call out what everyone has done.
Donald Trump just sent 3,000 troops to Saudi Arabia.
Bad move.
Don't like it.
Barack Obama drone-striked American citizens.
Bad move.
Don't like it.
George W. Bush, Abu Ghraib, we get it.
The problems exist, and we don't like them.
That doesn't give you an excuse to go, well, I know China's bad, but hey, so are we.
Therefore, I don't gotta call out anyone.
No, dude.
No, dude.
It's quite simple.
And you know what?
Check this out.
Portland Trailblazers join boycott against Israel.
Team severs ties with company that works with Israeli Defense Forces.
October 10th, 2019.
Really?
The NBA has no problem?
As the NBA is facing outrage over the general manager of the Houston Rockets capitulated to censorship by the Chinese government, the Trailblazers quietly severed ties with the manufacturer Leupold, which is a contract to produce accessories for the Israeli Defense Force.
You know what I said?
Listen.
The other day, there was a video that went viral, where these guys showed up to an NBA game wearing free Hong Kong shirts, holding up a sign saying, Google Uyghurs.
These dudes, I don't know who they were, security or something, said, what is this?
You've got to leave.
You can't have this.
And he said, I'm just telling people to Google what the Uyghurs are.
I was like, no, you can't.
And they explained.
They are Muslims who are being detained in China and re-educated.
I'm doing air quotes because you know what they're really doing, like torture chambers and stuff.
But the guy goes, that's a political statement.
You've got to go.
Oh, is it a political statement?
You know what I said to that?
I said, I'd be willing to bet if they held up a sign saying impeach a drumpf, nobody would have complained.
These companies—one of the best tweets I saw was that the NBA gave North Carolina more flack over their bathroom bill than they do give China over their actual genocide.
How are you going to tell me that, Steve Kerr, how are you going to tell me, well, they don't ask me about it, and then we literally have, I know, I know you're not the Portland Trailblazers, that's fine.
But you see, this is the point.
They have no problem bending the knee, you know, during the national anthem and saying, oh, America bad, oh, we do all these horrifying things.
They have no problem saying, oh, Israel bad.
That's fine, man.
You want to call out Israel?
I'll say to you, hey man, more power to you, man, free speech and all that, right?
I think the Kaepernick stuff was silly.
I think it's silly that he protested, but I also think, like, you know, that's just my opinion.
Do you protest, man?
I support his right to do so and everything.
You know, fine, go for it.
Absolutely.
Speak your mind.
But when you then, you know, when you have no problem being like, man, America is colonial and all these problems, and then China comes knocking, you go, whoa, ain't nothing wrong with China, though.
Give me a break.
These companies, you think they care about social justice?
They don't.
They care about their bottom line, and they're betting against you.
That's the point.
They're not gonna bet against communist China, the Chinese government.
Because like, I'm not gonna, I'm gonna lose that fight.
Authoritarian Chinese government's gonna come take my products away, I'm not gonna make money.
But think about it.
They know.
In the United States, media, the popular opinion, will always be to side against the conservative position.
Not always, but typically.
So here we are.
Here we are.
It's fascinating.
They'll say Israel bad.
Oh, we're going to boycott Israel.
And I ask, will you hold your principles in the face of everything else?
No, it's not about principles.
This is about appeasing their urban liberal fanbase.
But I'll tell you this, man.
It's funny because I assure you most of the urban liberals who watch, they don't care.
They don't care about you boycotting Israel, dude.
They're probably like, I don't care.
But I'll tell you what, man.
You want to know what sounds really, really bad to those urban liberals watching a basketball game?
When you bend the knee to China.
You know what, man?
Let's do this.
You know who really knows how to stand up?
These guys.
I'm gonna say this, man.
Huge inspiration.
These guys are incredible.
Matt Stone, Trey Parker.
Wow, man.
My level of respect for these guys has gone through the roof over this.
South Park trolls China after country bans the show.
I give you a standing ovation.
Because not only did they make an episode slamming China and the industries that bend to them, but in the next episode just the other day, you know what they did?
They had Randy State F the Chinese government on the show!
That's what I'm talking about.
That's the anti-authoritarian stuff I grew up with.
These dudes, Matt Stone and Trey Parker, very wealthy, right?
They've succeeded.
They've made a ton of hits, and South Park is that flagship.
And they have no problem using that show and risking everything to give the middle finger to China.
Bravo.
I will admit though, I really, really, I really hope This can be an issue that brings us together.
China is doing so much, so much bad stuff that we need to be talking about.
I did a whole video on it.
It didn't get as many views as it normally gets, like half as many views as it normally got.
I get it.
It's fine.
Some people blame, some people are like, dude, I think it's YouTube suppressing it because they support China, whatever.
Maybe.
I think it's because most people aren't paying attention.
We've got to change that.
Listen, man, I think it's insane that you're going to join these left-wing protests and then bend the knee to China.
I know not individually, it's different people, but the NBA and these big companies, it's a game they play.
Matt Stone and Trey Parker have no problem saying F you.
We should all have that mentality.
We should recognize that the fight we have in this country politically is nothing compared to the fight we have with China and what's going to happen and where this escalation will take us.
They're pressing in the South China Sea.
Okay, they're violating, they're building military bases on these atolls.
They're violating the agreements of, I believe it's the Paris Agreement.
They're building coal power plants.
They're not playing by the rules.
They're stealing intellectual property.
They're exploiting trade laws and taking away, extracting the manufacturing base of countries, particularly the U.S.
Well, Trump is seeking to reverse all that.
I can't tell you if it's going to work or not, but I know that at least he cares, right?
Perhaps.
Well, perhaps there's two things.
Perhaps we just aren't focused on the real threat that is China's expansion, and what that means for us and our culture when an authoritarian, censorious government who detains Muslims in concentration camps is gaining power.
You want to complain about Trump being a xenophobe?
I'll tell you what.
You know what scares me more?
If the U.S.
loses its position and China takes over, expect to see more concentration camps popping up.
We cannot ever allow that.
So to Steve Kerr, you want to compare the tragedies in the U.S.
that we try to stop versus the tragedies in China they purposefully enact?
I can tell you where you can go take that basketball.
That's disgusting.
100% disgusting.
Look, man, we can fight about culture, we can fight about politics, you can call the orange man bad all day and night.
But I think we all can see what China is doing.
We can all see what the threat facing Hong Kong is.
And I think we can all agree.
Obviously not all of us, but at least enough of us can agree we won't stand for that.
And something must be done.
Whether or not that brings people behind Trump, I don't think so.
I don't.
But I'll tell you this, man.
There's a military threat from China.
There is.
There's a military threat, okay?
And it's been talked about for quite some time.
There have been stories about, you know, Chinese warships in the South China Sea pressing on international waters, and the US doing a show of force, and it's terrifying.
China has been stealing our intellectual property for, what, decades now.
And nothing's been done.
Instead, you know what we got?
We got businesses and politicians in America who sold out this country in exchange for personal wealth when they arranged these deals.
And they tried pushing through TPP, the Trans-Pacific Partnership, and it was a nightmare.
And people stood up to it.
You know who stood up to it?
Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump.
You don't gotta like the Orange Man or Crazy Bernie, but at least there was a message.
People were on the same page.
Enough.
Enough of these slick snake oil salesmen saying, trust me, I'll help you out.
And then turning around and selling out their country to the highest bidder.
So you want to argue about whether or not Trump is doing the right thing with the trade war and it's hurting us?
I'm down to hear it, okay?
I don't got a very strong opinion one way or the other.
It is affecting farmers, there's subsidies going in now, and some people say it's bad.
We'll see what happens.
But that means jobs have to come back.
Many people argue the tariffs are a bad idea, but I'll tell you what's worse.
Giving away our money, borrowing money from China, You know, China, Foxconn for instance, where they manufactured the iPhone, people were walking off the building in mass suicide.
Okay?
I do not think that's a place we should ever arrange that deal with so they can do more of it.
You know what, man?
I'll leave it there.
I'm disgusted by these American companies.
Absolutely disgusted.
This is the kind of slime that is hurting our country and the world.
We are not perfect.
America has done so many things wrong.
But I'll tell you what.
Concentration camps?
What we did in the 50s with Japanese internment was horrifying.
And we're never going to do it again.
We'll never allow it to happen again.
This is a country that, no matter what the left is going to tell you, we don't want fascist authoritarians.
But China's another story.
They're building more coal power plants.
They are 50 years behind the rest of us, and they're becoming more powerful.
I expect any visa to China from me at this point will be denied.
But you know what?
I don't care.
It's about time we stood up and said, y'all need to stop.
And these pathetic, spineless cowards shaking in their urine-soaked boots need to step up and make a bold statement.
We will not stand behind you, we will not support you, and you will not make a penny from us if you keep locking people in concentration camps, if you keep censoring people and shutting down protests.
It's a two-way street, man.
But he wants that green, you know?
He wants that sweet, sweet green for his bank account.
I get it.
That's called evil.
Okay?
In my opinion.
Stick around.
We got some more evil coming up in a few minutes.
It's one of those days.
I'll see you in a little bit.
I don't care if you're on the left or you're on the right.
The fact is, the establishment loves some juicy war.
They can't sit by, you know, I imagine they're sitting there in their chairs with their veins popping out of their foreheads just waiting to drop a bomb on some civilians.
You know what I mean?
They love it.
They love the war.
There's the anti-war left, there's the anti-war right.
The populists tend to oppose it.
But for some reason... You know what I love right now?
There was a story in April.
Ocasio-Cortez signs a letter with Rand Paul and Ilhan Omar praising Donald Trump for calling for the withdrawal of U.S.
forces from Syria.
And you know, I'll say to that, I'll say, AOC, thank you.
Thank you, Ocasio-Cortez, for coming out and saying this.
But guess what?
When Trump actually does it, she then criticizes the move, saying, you're abandoning our allies.
Oh, you know what, dude?
I've had it.
Okay?
You know, Rand Paul.
He goes on The View.
Check out the story.
Rand Paul goes down in flames on The View.
Don't mansplain.
The Republican senator's flailing performance did not win over anyone on The View Friday morning.
Apparently Matt Wilstein loves that sweet, juicy war.
Rand Paul gave an outstanding performance, explaining exactly why it's time we got our soldiers out of Syria.
Because there's 50 of them.
How many Kurds are there and what can we really do?
And he gets slammed by everyone on The View saying, do we just abandon our allies?
And Rand Paul correctly states, Turkey's our ally.
Okay, the FSA was our ally.
What do you mean?
We're in the middle of something complicated and it's about time.
We shouldn't have been there in the first place.
He's right.
And then what does this guy Matt Wilstein write?
Rand Paul goes down in flames?
He didn't win over anyone?
Apparently he didn't actually watch the segment when people clapped several times for Rand Paul, and he gave a calm and measured response as to why Trump was right to get our troops out of Syria.
But don't think I'm going to sit here and cut Trump any extra slack.
They just announced he's putting 3,000 troops in Saudi Arabia.
It may be less.
Some people are saying Fox News reported 1,000.
I don't care.
You can't tweet out, Trump, that you're going to end the Middle Eastern wars, and that it was a waste of time and money, and then turn around and send our troops to Saudi Arabia.
You know what, man?
I'm telling you.
This is why I don't want to support anybody.
Anybody at all.
But I'll tell you what.
I'll support the circumstances.
Rand Paul gave a stellar performance on The View when he explained the complicated nature of these wars and why we need to pull out of Syria.
So I'll tell you this.
I do not support Trump when he wants to send troops into Saudi Arabia, but I will support him when he wants to pull them out.
I do not support him when he wants to send troops to Saudi Arabia.
But I will support him when he wants to take troops out of Syria.
I'll take what I can get because I'm not a crazy person.
I don't think I will ever get everything I want.
So I'll settle.
But I'll tell you what, taking 50 troops out of Syria may be good news, but 3,000, maybe 1,000, whatever the numbers are, Man, there's no end, right?
This is what you get.
This is the machine.
I don't really blame Trump for it, I gotta be honest.
I don't really blame Obama for it for the most part, or even to an extent Bush.
I blame Bush a whole lot more, I'll be honest.
But I think it's the office.
You know, I had a conversation with Steven Crowder.
I think this may have been like an extended bonus episode, I don't know.
But I said, you know, I said, I think it's the office.
And he said, you know, Crowder said is he thinks that once you become the president, you realize how bad things really are, that you're told all of the you promise all these things like I'm going to get us out of these wars.
And I'm going to bring our troops home and we're going to save money.
And then when you get an office, they hand you that packet and you open it up and you're like, whoa, we definitely can't leave.
That's a really good point, and I understand it.
I agree with it for the most part.
But I believe there's a more important aspect to this.
I believe that it's not so much, you know, you learn how bad things are.
It's that you learn about the power you have to do something, and you don't want to give it up.
It's a fact, man.
People with power don't want to lose it, no matter what.
They will claw and scratch and fight, and they refuse to lose their power.
I'm inspired by the story of, um... Oh, what's the, um... I'm forgetting the Roman dude's name.
He was appointed, he was appointed, like, supreme chancellor, emperor, with, like, supreme authority in wartime, and he quickly gave it up, saying he didn't want it.
And that, that, that's inspirational, right?
It's this, this, you know, it's like, um... It's like the story of Gladiator, the movie Marcus Aurelius, or whatever his name was.
Where he's like, I don't want to be king, and they're like, and that's why you should be.
The people with power, no matter what that power is, don't want to give it up.
So what happens is somebody comes into the office, and they're handed all this information, and they're like, wow, things are really bad in the world.
And then the general says, but sir, you have drones.
You can change this.
And they accept it.
And they say, you're right.
I can.
I can send that drone strike and go blow up that restaurant, kill that 16-year-old American citizen.
Bravo, Obama!
You guys hear that Greta Thunberg didn't win the Nobel Peace Prize?
Red-headed Libertarian made an excellent joke.
If you follow her, you should follow her on Twitter.
She said, perhaps, something, okay, I'm gonna paraphrase here.
But she said, Greta didn't drone bomb enough civilians to win a Nobel Peace Prize.
And I'm just like, yes, standing ovation.
Thank you very much, Josie, red-headed Libertarian.
Excellent, excellent joke.
Barack Obama.
What did he win the Peace Prize for?
Okay?
These people in office, they want war.
But I'll tell you what, let's get back to the story.
Rand Paul discusses withdrawal of U.S.
troops from Syria, and it was calm and measured, and there was clapping for both sides.
Now, here's the problem.
In this episode, Rand says, it's not so much about abandoning our allies, but realizing we're allies with Turkey in a complicated situation.
They ignore everything he says.
They just ignore it.
And then, I kid you not, the apparent headline is Anna Navarro yelled at him for mansplaining to her because they were asking him about his opinion on Syria.
You know what, man?
Why is it the establishment neoliberal, whatever you want to call them, social justice people are pro-war?
I'd like to know.
Let's read a little bit.
They say Meghan McCain skipped out on Rand Paul's appearance on The View Friday morning citing personal reasons, despite accusing the GOP senator of having Kurdish blood on his hands in Syria the day before.
You know what somebody said in response to Donald Trump sending troops into Saudi Arabia?
You get, I can't remember what they said, somebody tweeted this, you get promised some
person and then you end up electing John McCain.
As people get into office and they're like, let's roll.
And here we are, with troops heading to Saudi Arabia, man.
We have been in this perpetual state of war for two decades.
And I look at all the problems and all these arguments we have and I'm like, dude, if you want to talk about healthcare, how much money can we reallocate from spending money overseas building infrastructure in countries we don't live in?
How much of that money in those troops going to Saudi Arabia could be spent on fixing the roads in Detroit?
I get it though.
Saudi Arabia pays cash money.
But hey man, maybe we should bolster our economy internally.
I thought that's what Trump was all about.
I thought Trump was going to bring the jobs back and get that economy flowing inside.
He has.
Well, what's the point of sending these troops to Saudi Arabia?
How much money is it worth?
The oil?
I guess, man.
You know what?
I would rather, in my opinion, live poorly if it meant I was responsible for myself and took care of myself.
And that includes my country, too.
If that means, you know, if we have the opportunity to maintain our global, you know, oil wealth or whatever, because Saudi Arabia's gonna toss us those bucks, we're gonna trade for oil or whatever, and that allows us to live more cheaply and more... I don't care, man.
Maybe that's just me.
I don't care if I'm living in a van down by the river, as long as I'm taking care of myself and responsible for myself.
I don't care if I'm working 16-hour days down on the farm with my family, so long as I'm responsible for myself.
Now, I believe in community.
I get it.
But I ask, why are we traveling all over the world and doing these things?
Now, let's do this.
I'll make a counterpoint.
I understand the severity and the complexity of international conflict and war.
I know that if we aren't, guess what?
China would be.
And this is the most challenging problem.
I understand this argument, I do.
And I lean away from it.
If we aren't in these areas, if we aren't arranging these deals, China gains more power.
And that's what's truly terrifying.
To me, it seems like we're heading towards a cliff and we can't stop.
The United States could back away and say we're going to leave all these regions and they'll be devastated in a lot of ways.
Fine.
But we shouldn't have been there in the first place.
I understand that.
And then China swoops in, picks up the scraps and gains more power.
So what do you do?
I don't know.
But in the end, I lean towards how about we just don't go and blow up civilians in foreign countries?
How about we don't send our troops into harm's way?
50 soldiers in Syria.
You know, I know I was going to talk about Rand Paul.
If there's anything that bothers me more than anything, it's these TV warmongers.
It's these people who don't know or care about the real cost of life, the cost of our country, of our people, and those that get killed because we drop those bombs.
Much respect to Rand Paul for his calm and reassured defense of getting our troops out of Syria.
So, you know, for it, he gets smeared and slammed, and I'm just so sick of it, man.
It's one of the most frustrating things that our country has been for 20 years, nearly 20 years, in Afghanistan.
Enough.
Right?
Enough?
But all we ever hear is the same excuse.
If we leave now, what will happen to the country?
I don't know!
We shouldn't have been there in the first place, huh?
I'll point the finger, no problem, at the people who caused the problem.
I'll say you started this, that's your fault, okay?
And we're stopping it now.
You don't just... I think it was Ron Paul, Ran's dad, who said, if you're prescribed the wrong medicine, you don't just keep taking it, you stop!
Well, that's the truth.
And there may be withdrawals.
And you may get sick.
But you gotta stop.
I'm sorry, man.
I'm sorry for being frustrated in this one.
I'm just like, I'm so sick of the establishment pro-war.
What is wrong with these people, man?
And I'll say this straight up.
It is not a left-right thing on this show.
Meghan McCain made these comments, right?
And you can see the left and the right are both Lindsey Graham.
I get it, man.
The Republicans have been pro-war.
I'm not surprised by that.
But the left was supposed to be anti-war.
I learned my lesson with Barack Obama.
He won the Peace Prize for what?
Sending more troops to the Middle East and blowing up kids?
Please.
Spare me.
I don't trust any of it.
I don't trust any of you.
I think you're all liars.
I'm talking about the warmongers.
The warmongers who'd say, we're gonna give Obama a Peace Prize, then he goes and blows up kids.
And I mean that literally.
Abdul Rahman al-Awlaki, a 16-year-old American citizen at a civilian restaurant, blown up by a drone strike ordered by Obama.
Spare me.
It's all BS.
Props to Rand Paul.
Much respect.
Everyone else, you're insane.
I got one more segment coming up.
I'll see you in a minute.
The UK is in a very strange place, I must admit.
Manchester teen faces offender status for touching 17-year-old on the arm and waist.
Quote, touching someone's arm to get their attention I would have thought was normal.
Well, apparently it's not anymore.
Boy oh boy, United Kingdom, what is wrong with you?
It just feels like everything is coming to a nice end, doesn't it?
It's chaos.
There used to be order and now it's falling into chaos.
How can we live in a system?
Actually, you know what?
It's more like order is becoming... It's too much order.
It's so much order that it's becoming chaotic.
This is a rule.
Part of a system.
Quantification of what you can or can't do.
And it's resulting in people being like, what can we do if you can't do anything?
If everything is against the law, then technically nothing is, right?
I don't know.
This dude's facing a crime because he tried meeting a girl who then cried later because she felt unsafe.
Man, y'all got problems.
But don't get me wrong, I know we got the same problems here in the U.S.
for the most part.
Let's read.
From Reason.
Last fall, in Manchester, England, an awkward 19-year-old male student touched a 17-year-old female classmate's arm on the street during the daytime.
He later said he had wanted to make a friend.
This rattled the young woman so much that she went to the police.
Yeah.
Now the young man is facing possible jail time and could be placed on the offense registry.
The complainant's evidence was very clear, logical and without embellishment, a magistrate told the young man.
We can think of no motivation for you to touch the victim other than, you know, they're saying it was an adult offense.
Had she not taken evasive action, the assault was likely to have been even more serious.
Oh, really?
At his hearing, student Jamie Griffiths was convicted of two charges of... I'll just say it.
I'm gonna get deranked on YouTube, but you know what?
Sexual assault.
In part because the accuser, now 18, said that she had no doubt that had she not moved away from him the first time he touched her arm, he would have gone on to touch her breast.
She's just speculating and they're convicting him on that?
What happened to English common law, fellas?
Hey man, we come from the same place as you.
Y'all lost it.
As she told the court, I was just set on getting home and reviewing for my mock exams.
But as I was coming over the bridge, I saw him facing a hedge, and I thought it was really weird.
He wasn't doing anything.
He was just facing the hedge, staring at it.
As I walked towards him, I was watching him, and he suddenly swung around so he was facing me.
I remember it happening so fast.
As soon as he moved, I moved, and I said stop.
It does sound like weird behavior.
arm. I sort of jolted out of the way and went into the road to avoid him and he very quickly
walked away. I forgot about it for a while because I had my exams. I just thought it
was weird behavior. It does sound like weird behavior. Does it sound like a crime punishable
by possible jail time and a placement on the offense registry? No!
The accuser reported the incident to the police.
In a second incident, the young woman was walking to school when Griffis walked in front of her and touched her side.
It was quite a while.
Three to five seconds, she said.
He smirked at me.
He didn't stop.
He just touched me and walked off, and I broke down crying in the street.
It was quite traumatic.
Are you serious?
Listen, man.
We have major problems if you break down and cry in the middle of the street because someone touched you for a few seconds.
What?
What?
This is nuts.
The accuser had since read about some other incidents on a local Facebook page and thought that perhaps the encounter was related to them.
So she and her mom filed a crime report.
Afterward, she said, What?
Every time I started working, I would cry because I would think of it.
I felt very unsafe even in my own home.
What? Dude, if this is this is you need therapy, okay?
This is not a matter for getting someone arrested.
You need therapy.
You need someone to walk you through this and stop being so paranoid.
What is happening?
Stories like this keep happening.
This is somebody who is dangerously unwell.
We hear these stories of people crying about Trump winning, thinking he's gonna go and round people up and all this other insanity.
It's like, dude, these people have lost their minds.
You know what, man?
The analogy I often use is calluses from playing guitar.
When you're young, you need to exercise that strength, that independence, okay?
Self-reliance, no matter if you're a man or a woman.
You can talk about how men are stronger on average, and so men have less to fear, all that argument stuff.
Yeah, fine, fine, fine.
Okay?
Women carry pepper spray and they defend themselves.
You've got to be responsible.
The world is the way the world is.
But I'll tell you this.
I don't care who you are, which side of the aisle you're on.
We cannot allow people who break down crying from thinking about someone touching them for a few seconds.
We cannot allow them to push these laws and these precedents and get people arrested over it.
Grow up!
You want to go out in the middle, go for a hike.
What do you think these people are going to say when they go for a jog and a mountain lion pops up?
Are they going to go, oh no, and they're going to cry because a mountain lion is there?
Too bad.
How about you actually learn how to control your emotions and survive a true traumatic experience?
Look, I get it.
Most people confronted with a mountain lion aren't going to survive.
The point is, this is not that.
This is a dude who walked by you and smiled.
Oh, he touched you for a few seconds.
Oh man.
I've had women put moves on me that have been overtly, like, non-consensual.
But, dude, look.
Like, I've been to parties and girls will, like, grab me and, you know, it happens.
I'm absolutely positive it happens more to women.
The point I'm making is, fine, you can argue that because I'm a guy I don't care, but I think there's a point at which you're like, I'm not going to report every little incident, nor am I going to cry about it.
She was applying to college, Oxford University, and was hampered by the stress.
Well then, you need to go home and sit in a padded room where you can be safe, alright?
Both incidents happened when the accuser and the accused were at school together, studying for their A-levels, which are more or less the English equivalent of the SATs.
As for Griffiths, he had been dealing with something on the side, unbearably lonely.
He told the magistrate he googled how to make a friend.
It was good to start off with a joke, he read.
He decided to give it a try.
I went to touch her arm to start a conversation, and she just walked off.
My intention was to make a friend.
All my friends had left.
I was lonely.
I just wanted to speak to someone.
Except, he explained, the words just didn't come out.
What she read as a smirk, he says, he intended as a friendly smile.
As for the physical contact?
Touching someone's arm to get their attention I would have thought was normal.
It is.
Excuse me, and you touch them to get their attention.
Nope, not anymore.
Man, you know, normal or not, touching someone in public on their arm or on their waist does not seem to rise the level of sexual assault.
Just because something is abnormal or upsetting doesn't mean it's a crime.
The magistrates in Manchester disagree.
Griffiths now faces a possible maximum sentence of 10 years in jail.
Well, bravo, UK!
You locked up a Scottish dude for making a YouTube joke, then fined him 800 pounds, and now you got a dude I'd be willing to bet... Well, I'll leave it there.
Listen.
Now you got a dude who... You know, you probably read... He probably read that when meeting somebody, touching them creates a connection.
However, what you probably didn't read is that in today's day and age, these, like, young people are terrified, frightened hamster people who just cower in fear, looking around in a pool of their own urine.
Like, dude, I'll tell you what, man.
I've had actual crazy-looking... I've been mugged.
And my response wasn't to break down and cry.
I'll tell you what, ma'am.
Or, I'm sorry, young naive ignorant child who cries at this stuff.
You're crying over this because someone touched your arm?
Let me ask you something.
When you have someone grab you and brandish a blade and tell you that they're going to hurt you unless you hand over your money, what do you think this world is, okay?
You know?
There are people who are actually mugged and hurt.
There are people who are actually punched and smacked.
There are people who are abused by their own families.
And here you had a guy who walked past you and touched your arm.
Young people in this country, I'm loathed to see the world in 10 or 20 years.
But I'll tell you one thing.
Let's wrap this up.
Thinking about all of the people who refuse to have kids because of climate change.
Thinking about all of the people who break down in tears and cry because they can't handle being touched.
What do you think is going to happen in 20 years?
Now, part of me believes it could be a world of everyone wearing, you know, padded suits made of styrofoam because they're scared of everything and they need to protect themselves from naughty words so they're wearing earmuffs too.
Or it's possible that the weakness can't survive.
If these people aren't going to have kids, their ideas will, for the most part, leave with them.
And if they're going to freak out and panic over someone touching their arm, I'll tell you this, man.
If you can't handle having an arm touch, you're going to lose on every career opportunity to a person who can.
What do you think happens when someone goes for a handshake and they go, When they recoil and start crying, oh, it's because someone touched me once and he went to prison, they're gonna be like, you can leave.
It can only go so far.
So part of me believes this will all backfire and collapse, but I don't know.
What I can tell you is, boy, the UK.
I'm glad we have a constitution, huh?
We've got that First Amendment, we got that Second Amendment, we got that Third, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, Eighth, you know, you get the point.
We got a lot of them.
And many of them have to deal with protecting us from an overbearing government.
That's just it.
You know, the 4th and the 5th?
Absolutely beautiful.
And the 1st?
We can go tell them to screw off if we want.
This is a country founded by rebels, but we're becoming soft.
Now, the UK?
You got it worse, okay?
Because, admittedly, think about what happened, right?
People in England who came to America?
Those were the brave pioneers.
Probably, like, the more working class types.
And they said, I don't care where I live, I just don't want to live by you.
But that was brave.
Many died on the way here.
Then you have the people who stayed behind.
So think about it.
All of those people willing to risk their lives left.
The weaker of them, and I mean this respectfully, didn't make it.
They made the journey.
So that left only the strongest to create the United States.
One of the most powerful nations in the history of the world, if not the most.
And what's left in the UK?
Well, everyone we left behind.
So, I'll direct this to you, Sargon.
You may be one of the few people with a spine left in the UK.
I know, I know, there are many.
And it was once the biggest empire.
I believe it was.
It might have been France, but it was a huge empire.
And well, when all those people leave for other lives and other countries, what's left?
A small island where a 17-year-old girl cries because someone touched her arm.
Welcome to the future.
Man, isn't that sad?
Think about, like, the might of the British Empire.
And now what's left?
17-year-old gets a dude arrested because he touched her arm and she cried about it.
Man!
I'd love to see, you know, like, a Londoner, some, like, high-profile London, you know, political personality from the 1700s looking now at where they are and just, like, see their reaction.
I'll see you guys tomorrow on this channel at 10 a.m., podcast at 6.30.
