Democrats in FULL Panic Mode Over Trump's Rising Support From Black Voters
Democrats in FULL Panic Mode Over Trump's Rising Support From Black Voters. Donald Trump and the GOP have launched a consistent effort to court Black voters in the upcoming 2020 election.According to the media class and pundits this is just an effort to steal votes from Democrats.But is it possible Trump is actually doing right by African American voters? Regardless of his motivations it appears to be working at three highly credible polls put Trump around the 30% number. The reason this is causing Democrats to panic is that the rule has always been that if a Republican gets at least 20% of the Black community to vote for them Democrats will never win, ever.While these polls are shocking a new poll out today claims over 83% of African Americans view Trump very negatively its hard to know which polls are more accurate.In the end I'd place my bed on Candace Owens and Kanye West. With that level of high profile support I think it is safe to reason Trump's approval among the Black community is likely high and Democrats have a good reason to panic.
Support the show (http://timcast.com/donate)
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
They say that for the longest time, the rule in politics has been, if black support for a Republican ever reaches more than 20%, a Democrat will not win ever again.
Naturally, we're seeing several stories emerge where Democrats are kind of freaking out.
Because there have been three different polls from fairly accurate organizations, like actually very accurate organizations, saying that Trump's approval in the black community has reached 30%.
Now, many Democrats are saying, no way it's true, no way it's true.
But in this op-ed from the Wall Street Journal, they highlight, well, they have to say that.
That if the number really is over 20, they're going to lose and there's nothing they can do to stop it.
What I find fascinating in this story is the absolute rejection of this idea that Trump could gain any support from the black community.
Now, I'm going to make it painfully clear to all of you, I really don't know anything about the feelings or the black community at all, right?
So this is coming from the opinions of opinions of other people and polls.
And so I'm sure you will find many more people that can speak way better to this phenomenon than I could.
But I think it's fair to say Trump has absolutely been trying, he's been trying as hard as he can to court black voters.
And what I find really strange about it is that the response is kind of, it's not necessarily ambivalent, but kind of negative that Trump would do it.
There was a story not that long ago that said Trump shocked black voters by actually trying to get their vote.
Well, why not?
Shouldn't he?
I view this as kind of a good thing.
Isn't it a good thing that a Republican president would actually do community outreach to black communities to try and figure out what they need and how he can help improve their lives?
That says to me that we're actually making progress in terms of race relations in the United States.
Now again, don't take it from me.
I wouldn't know.
I will read you these stories and break this stuff down.
And the question I have today is, You know, whether or not you believe it's true, these polls say it is, but how will this impact the election come November?
I think it's fair to say these numbers... Look, I lean towards these numbers being accurate.
It's possible they're blips, but it does seem accurate.
However, there is a new poll out today that says 83% of African Americans view Trump as racist, in which case, One of the reasons I really wanted to do this segment is that, you know what man, I have no idea.
I have no idea what's going on.
Anybody who claims that I think I'm some objective genius who's gonna tell you about the realities of the world...
I'll tell you what, man.
I read the same news as everybody else.
I try to do my best to break this down and figure out what's happening.
And I think it's important to address this issue.
Now, I will also add, impeachment is in the news.
And you know what?
I don't care.
I'm not going to talk about it.
Trump just lined up this all-star team.
He's got Ken Starr.
He's got Dershowitz.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
I get it.
And I'm looking at these stories like, no way.
I'm not doing this.
Here's what I want to know.
I wanna know which poll is real.
Does Trump really have record black support?
You know, over 30%?
Or do most black people think he's racist?
Look, I don't know, man, because I'll tell you this.
Individuals are individuals.
You might find Candace Owen tells you, yes, the support is there, yes, it's there, because you see Kanye.
I gotta say, man, After Kanye came out in support of Trump, it really does seem very, very likely his support base grew.
I saw this one podcast where these dudes, it was a podcast with a couple of black guys, and they were talking about Trump, and I kind of feel like it's legit.
The Democrats have to say it's not true.
Because they're gonna lose if it is, so they need to resist this somehow.
But I will tell you this, too.
I don't think it has to do with race, really.
I understand, you know, Trump actively is looking for support in the black community, but I think it's really about the Democrats spiraling out of control.
You gotta understand, man, when these stories came out about black support for Trump, it talked about the churches and how churches are really important in politics, particularly the black communities and their religious affiliation.
The Democrats don't really have that.
You know, you look at the religious right, you look at what Kanye West is doing, he's preaching gospel.
And that's one of the reasons he supports Donald Trump, for religious reasons.
I think it's no surprise Republicans are going to start using their connection.
To the religious community to try and court voters.
And if this is effective, not just in terms of religion, but economics and hip-hop, I think the Republicans are doing a good job and it stands to reason this support level is likely accurate.
So here's what I want to do.
I want to read some of this opinion piece from the Wall Street Journal.
I want to show you a breakdown of the polls, but check this headline out from December.
Democrats are freaking out about pro-Trump messaging to occasional black voters.
I think it stands to reason when even BuzzFeed says Democrats are freaking out over this, I think Trump's got it.
I really do.
But I will tell you this, man.
Look, I'll say it again.
I am absolutely the first as a relative, you know, as a decent lefty to point out I am not a part of this community.
I know very little about the day-to-day ongoings or how they feel, and I want to make sure I respect that as, you know, look, I'm part of a different community.
Many of you know I always talk about how I'm mixed race, so I have my, you know, opinions on a lot of these issues.
But I'm just going to be reading for you the opinions of other people, okay?
So take it for what it is.
I don't want to act like I'm some authority who knows better than the actual communities themselves.
But let's get started.
Let's read about what's going on and why Democrats are in panic mode.
Before we get started, head over to TimCast.com slash donate if you'd like to support my work.
There's a PayPal option, a crypto option, a physical address.
But of course, the best thing you can do is just share this video.
Look, I don't think I'm the smartest person in the world.
I don't think I have all the answers.
I'm going to show you conflicting polls.
They're not necessarily debunking each other, but they are kind of at odds.
I want to do my best to try and break down what's really happening in politics.
And if you think I do a good job, sharing this video is the best thing you can do.
Or just hang out, subscribe, watch.
Let's read the story from the Wall Street Journal.
They say, Biden, Sanders, and Warren would say these new minority jobs fell like manna from heaven.
The workers getting them may credit the president.
The Wall Street Journal says, What if in November, enough black Americans voted for Donald Trump to re-elect him into the presidency?
This unlikely straw has been in the political winds recently because in three opinion polls, Emerson, Marist, and Rasmussen, President Trump registered about 30% support among black voters.
Asked to respond by InsideSources.com, former Hillary Clinton advisor Joel Payne said, quote, I have a better chance of jumping center for the Celtics tonight than Donald Trump having 30% support in the African-American community.
He may get the call.
The reason this unlikely 30% number breaks the seals in Democratic heads is that for years it has been a rule of thumb in politics that if black support for Republicans ever reached 20% of the vote, a Democratic presidential candidate would not be able to win Ever.
A Gallup analysis of the Roper Center's exit poll data has Republican candidates averaging around 10% of the Black vote since 1976.
In 2016, Mr. Trump topped out at 8%.
Still, one wonders if Mr. Trump's potential pull from Black and Hispanic voters may be the sleeper issue of the 2020 campaign, the way conventional wisdom missed the 2016 Trump vote in Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin.
He goes on to say, during the latter election cycle, one of the most important least noticed events was a July 2015 speech by former Texas Governor Rick Perry, in which he said it was time for black Americans to reconsider their political loyalties.
Quote, Democrats have long had the opportunity to govern African American communities.
He said, it is time for black families to hold them accountable for the results.
And I'm here to tell you it is Republicans, not Democrats, I don't know if that's true.
I will tell you this.
It is true that for the longest time, African Americans have voted for Democrats.
I then would ask, because I don't know, has this really improved their circumstances?
The argument for Republicans is that it's not.
And I would defer to say Candace Owens, Kanye, or Diamond and Silk when they say it hasn't.
And that it's Republicans who are actually offering up real solutions.
Now these are just some high-profile Trump supporters.
Of course, they support the president, they have those opinions.
It doesn't necessarily mean it's true.
But again, I would defer to their opinion over many other people.
Of course, there are still many anti-Trump black personalities who would say it's not the case and Trump would just make things worse.
But the point is, If there are people in the black community who feel like they haven't been succeeding or that they have been held back by this system, at a certain point they're going to reflect upon the people they've elected.
And it might not be that they're going to say Republicans will do better.
It might actually be a punishment vote.
Think about the Bernie or Bust people.
They said, I'm going to vote for Trump because screw you, right?
How many people, and I'd imagine there's a decent amount, who are probably sitting here saying, how many times have you come and made promises you didn't keep?
I'll tell you this, man.
I grew up on the South Side of Chicago.
It was a very mixed area.
And I have seen firsthand the lies from the Democratic politicians.
Probably the reason, one of the reasons I've always explained to people as to why my political views are likely the way they are, among many reasons, is that I grew up in a Democratic stronghold.
We didn't have Republicans.
I don't agree with them.
But they were never never an issue.
They didn't show up.
It was always the Democrats in power promising things and then never delivering.
And I felt mistreated, lied to, and abused.
These crony elites in power.
That's how Chicago is.
It still is.
And so I have disdain for these elites who made all these promises and never delivered.
I can only imagine that my neighbors, you know, nearby in the African-American community felt similar things.
Not all of them.
Maybe only a minority.
But if it's true that even 10% felt that way, and today they're hearing this from, say, Candace or Kanye, they're gonna flip for Trump.
Not even necessarily support the guy, but maybe even just asking the question, let's give it a shot.
Or let's send a message to Democrats, if you betray us, if you don't fulfill your promises, we'll vote for the other person.
Because we have a choice in the matter.
A limited choice, I'll say that, but, you know, a choice nonetheless.
They say.
Last Friday, stories on the December jobs numbers noted that the unemployment rate of 3.5% was at a 50-year low, with the unemployment rate for African Americans and Hispanics hitting historic lows, both under 6%.
In a 2015 speech in The Economy, Hillary Clinton talked about the jobs landscape then.
A quarter of young black men and nearly 15% of all Latino youth cannot find a job.
Those numbers are much better for them now.
They know it, and their voting parents and grandparents know it.
One anecdote.
He says, I was walking through a neighborhood food court in Manhattan last month and noticed a new counter that sells smoked fish behind it.
Learning the operation were five employees, all in their 20s and all black or Hispanic.
A thought occurred to me.
That's the Trump economy.
That is the reality behind the monthly jobs numbers.
An entrepreneur got a loan to open a small business and gave these five what looked like their first jobs.
Also reported in the past two years is how workers in their first or second jobs are moving up the pay scale into higher level jobs.
In the Democratic presidential debate Tuesday night, There was virtually no recognition that any of this was happening.
To a woman and a man, Elizabeth Warren, Amy Klobuchar, Bernie Sanders, Pete Buttigieg, Tom Steyer, and Biden believe all the widely reported job and income gains the past three years have fallen into the hands of guys in top hats, cutaway coats, and spats.
Senators Sanders and Warren are wallowing in depression philia.
But maybe some of these minority voters, maybe even the additional numbers Mr. Trump needs to earn, 15-20% of the black vote, don't think work grows on trees or out of federal transfer payments, and do believe this president's policies have contributed to their paychecks and improved prospects.
Well, I'll tell you this.
I don't know about all that.
I really don't.
I can only read you the opinions of some other people who are in the community, who have experienced it.
What I can say is, whether or not those stats are true, because I'm going to show you a conflicting poll, What stands to reason is, first, Kanye, Diamond and Silk, Candace Owens, high-profile, influential, charismatic individuals in the black community advocating support for Trump.
Donald Trump doing this event at the White House, inviting in young black people to hear what he has to say, and them cheering for him.
There are a lot of people on the rise who support the president in the black community.
That influence alone, I really do think Kanye lit people up and got people to think maybe Trump is the right answer.
But check out this story from BuzzFeed.
Democrats are freaking out about pro-Trump messaging.
They say, quote, we haven't yet found the right language that makes the community feel as if we understand where they're coming from and what's actually happening to them, a DNC official said.
This is from BuzzFeed News.
Democrats are getting increasingly worried Black Americans with an uneven voting history may tune out Democratic candidates in 2020 as fringe messaging campaigns and disinformation breed cynicism of what the party has done for Black Americans.
Democratic National Committee sources told BuzzFeed News the party is tracking a new set of loosely organized online movements that officials believe are trying to steer Black voters away from the party or from voting altogether.
The groups are varied in their approach, but share a common thread of deep suspicion of the Democratic Party and an apparent determination to seize upon the hypersensitive political moment in a country with a deeply troubled racial past.
Let me tell you, man.
Steer voters away.
What does that mean?
Tell people why they should vote for someone else?
That's normal.
I'll tell you this, though.
While my experience absolutely is not the same as people in the black community, I do feel Growing up on the South Side of Chicago, I have a deep suspicion of the Democratic Party.
I do not feel like they actually care about me.
Now, Republicans were never a part of my community, like I stated earlier.
So I never cared.
I disagree with them.
I wouldn't vote for them.
But I grew up in a city that was dominated by Democrats.
And I felt I was not being represented.
So let me show you something first.
In the Wall Street Journal story, here's the really important part if we're going to make predictions about 2020 and the black support for Trump.
They say, Emerson, Marist, Rasmussen.
Let's do this.
I will throw it to 538.
This is an updated November 5th.
It's a little bit old, a couple months old.
But we can see Rasmussen reports appears to be, out of the most polls analyzed, 78% accuracy.
That's particularly high, not the highest.
SurveyUSA's got a 90%.
That's amazing.
We can go, even Zogby's at 78%.
That's amazing.
We can go down, and we can take a look for Marist.
84% accuracy, and Emerson, 81%.
I'm sorry, man.
We've got Marist, Emerson, and Rasmussen.
All.
Rasmussen at 78, but the other two, above 80% accuracy in their races called correctly.
I'm gonna have to say, If they're claiming... Hold on, what's the rating?
Marist gets an A+, Emerson an A-, and Rasmussen a C+.
So Rasmussen's not the best, but Marist is an A+, according to FiveThirtyEight.
If Marist is saying this is true, Democrats must be shaking in their boots.
What are they gonna do?
I don't know, man, but I will point this story out from the Washington Post.
This is from January 6th.
Three things Trump is doing that should scare the hell out of Democrats.
Now, they say this, despite how approval ratings, they talk about money.
I'm going to skip over this, right?
Latinos for Trump.
I'm going to come back to Latinos for Trump.
But number three is blacks for Trump.
The writer says, nothing was more hilarious than when candidate Trump claimed during the 2016 presidential campaign, he would win 95% of their vote in 2020.
With an approval rating sitting at 11%, it's safe to say the president will fail, especially after a litany of racist things he has said and done since his inauguration.
And yet, the anemic level of black support is higher than the 8% he garnered in the presidential election three years ago, or the 6% won by now-senator Mitt Romney during the 2012 campaign.
That's why when Trump launched Black Voices for Trump at an event in Atlanta in November, I gasped, Lord Jesus!
Politically, it's a smart move on Trump's part.
Just as with the Latino vote, Trump's outreach to African Americans isn't about winning a majority of their votes.
It's about shaving off enough votes from the expected Democratic hold on the black vote to eke out a win.
The drop-off in black votes that happened between 2012 And 2016 happens again in 2020.
Trump will win.
And there it is.
Washington Post, January 6th.
But let me just say something, man.
Why does every, every intention have to be evil?
Look, I do not trust politicians.
I do not trust their campaigns.
And I especially don't trust Donald Trump.
Now, there are some things Trump deserves credit for, but I don't view Trump as any better.
Well, actually, I'll tell you this.
I actually kind of trust Trump more than many Democrats, because it was Jimmy Dore was on Joe Rogan.
I think it just came out the other day.
And he says Trump just blurts things out.
He's like, yeah, we're sending troops to Saudi Arabia.
They're sending us good money.
It's like he just said it.
And I'm like, it's true, man.
Trump just says it.
A lot of people like that.
That's what they liked about George Bush to an extent, but Trump literally just says it.
But I'll tell you this, man.
Well, I like what Trump is doing.
Is it fair to say, perhaps, he really is just trying to figure out what African Americans are looking for?
Does it need to be all about his maintaining power?
I definitely think it's fair to say, when it comes to politicians, they're all about just maintaining power, for sure.
But I do think there are some politicians, I don't feel that way.
Tulsi Gabbard, Dan Crenshaw, Rand Paul, I don't think, to them, it's all about maintaining power.
I think they operate on principle.
Trump?
I'm not gonna argue.
I don't know about that.
But I will say, I'm gonna give the benefit of the doubt and say, at a certain point, couldn't we just say Trump is finally saying the Republican Party needs to do right by the black community in America and figure out what they're looking for?
Isn't that fair?
We can always assume everyone's evil, fine.
But one of the problems I have with the media is how they frame everything.
You know, I was talking to a friend and I said, if a Ukrainian oligarch came out right now and said that Trump was dirty, and it's all true, the headline would be, oligarch confirms Trump is dirty.
If the oligarch came out and said Trump has never worked with us, he's on the level, the headline would be, corrupt oligarch tries to play cover for Donald Trump.
It would always be framed against him.
So while I agree with this writer on the fact that if Trump can maintain the swing, he's gonna win the black vote, it's gonna get him over that hump, isn't it possible that Trump is just trying to do the right thing?
It is!
You know, my position is always Trump is not my first choice, probably not even my fifth or sixth choice, but he's not that bad, right?
It's a weird position to be in.
When saying I don't really like the guy, I'm not a fan, I do think he's funny, but I don't think he should be, like, listen, I think Tulsi Gabbard's a bit harsh on Trump when she says he's not fit to be president.
My answer is actually, I mean, the economy's really good.
You know, he's proven something right.
He's just not my choice for president because I think he's a bad representation of American culture.
Like, he's the worst of our culture and Hillary Clinton was the worst of our government.
That's how people explained it.
So I'd choose somebody else.
But I'm not a lunatic.
I'm not going to screech and be like, he's evil.
I think it's fair to say that while Trump might be crude, crass, boorish, oafish, all the bad things, it doesn't mean he's not genuinely thinking, like, can we make life better for Americans when the economy is doing well?
Anyway, I now want to bring you to the latest poll, which has Democrats kind of cooling off.
Black Americans deeply pessimistic about country under Trump, who more than 8 in 10 describe as a racist.
And this is from Washington Post-Ipsos.
So here's what I want to do first.
To be fair, let's find out where the Washington Post-Ipsos falls as a rating for 538.
And they say it's 71% accurate and a B-.
for 538 and they say it's 71% accurate and a B minus.
Now here's the thing.
We got three polls so far, an A plus, an A minus, and a C plus saying Trump's
support in the black community around.
Ipsos is a B-, so it's not as good, according to FiveThirtyEight, as two of the polls we already have.
Stands to reason I have to side with the larger data set here.
I think this poll is less likely to be accurate than the other polls that FiveThirtyEight has rated higher.
In which case?
I would place my bet on Trump gaining, making massive gains in the black community.
Don't take my word for it, though.
I'm just, you know, I'm Tim Pool, mixed race, Southside Chicago.
I am not a part of that community.
And there are many people who can probably speak better.
But I've seen the viral videos.
And I'll tell you this, man.
I don't know who's right or wrong, but when you see Kanye West come out, one of the most, whether you want to admit it or not, Kanye is one of the most influential people in the world.
He wants to run for president.
If he comes out and he speaks to a lot of young black people because he's a Chicagoan, he is successful, he shows that you can make it, and he says, you want to be like me?
Here's what I think.
People are going to be like, yeah.
I'll tell you what, man.
For the longest time, You know, the idea of America, the American dream, to a lot of people was Donald Trump.
I know, I know, he was born to a wealthy family, he got a loan from his dad, but no, he's got beautiful women all around him, he's a billionaire, he's got his name everywhere.
The idea that you could start from scratch as a poor person or just a regular American and work your way up, that means a lot, but I'll tell you this.
Kanye West represents that idea way better than Donald Trump.
Now, I know.
My general understanding of Kanye is from the suburbs.
But he wasn't born into a family like Trump.
Kanye West was a dude who made music people loved, and he got rich, and he's super famous, and he's part of an elite celebrity family.
You know, I think, while not perfect, it represents better how anybody can rise up, even someone like, you know, Kanye.
So if he comes out and says, this is what I'm all about, there's going to be a lot of young, impressionable people saying, yes, absolutely, I agree.
So I'll tell you this.
If it's true, Donald Trump has gained the support.
He's gonna landslide.
Because, like they were saying in the Wall Street Journal, if black support for Trump breaks 20%, Democrat won't win.
Ever.
And that's why they're freaking out.
Now, this poll may be some good news, but I would pass off a warning to Democrats and leftists because, like I said, Marist and Emerson are rated A-plus and A-minus by 538 with 81 and 84 percent accuracy, and Ipsos is at 71 percent accuracy with a B-minus.
All right?
To reiterate, that means this is less likely to be correct than the other two, but I don't know for sure.
I will say.
If you want to lose 2020, be it Democrat or Republican, be complacent.
Think you've won.
That's when you will lose.
Because this may be true.
Black Americans may really, really hate Trump.
And Trump needs their vote.
He really does.
I gotta say, though, man, I think the sane and rational prediction Is that with Candace Owens, Diamond and Silk, Kanye West, among other people, Trump's got enough.
He really does.
Now, I did say I wanted to go back to Latinos for Trump, alright?
I'm not going to dive, I'm not going to do a deep dive on this specifically because it's a whole other issue.
But I'll read a little bit.
Trump swooped into Miami last Friday to rally evangelicals.
That's hardly a surprise since two weeks earlier, the now former editor of Christianity Today thundered in an editorial that Trump should be removed from office.
What was noteworthy was where the president did the rally.
Ministerio Internacional El Rey Jesus in a megachurch with a predominantly Latino congregation.
Well, like I said, I'm not going to do a deep dive, but I just want to point this out.
If Trump can pull enough of the Latino vote and the African-American vote, and if his path to this is through religion, I would not be surprised if it's true he's shaved off enough of these groups that he's going to win and the Democrats can't do anything about it.
But I'll end with one final thought.
I tell you, this man, in my experience, speaking as an outsider, so again, you know, I could be wrong, The people I've met in the black community do not take well to what the far left is preaching, like intersectionality.
A lot of this stuff is deeply offensive to the sensibilities of the people I know and grew up with.
I can't speak for the community, so again, I will stress, I'm an outsider.
I could be dead wrong.
But there have been posts, I have seen, you know, commentary.
I have listened to podcasts about what people in the black community have been talking about.
And I think the far-left fringe is seriously causing damage for the Democrats from Latinos and from the black community.
I can also speak as, finally, a mixed-race liberal, disaffected liberal from the South Side of Chicago.
Dude, you know exactly who my position is.
So if that's worth anything, there you go.
We'll see what happens.
I really get frustrated.
I do think it's fair to say the Republican Party is overwhelmingly white, for sure.
But the Democratic 2020 lineup is whiter than the Republican 2016 lineup.
Isn't that crazy?
I mean, at a certain point, sure.
But I'll tell you this, man.
I do not take well to the pandering, and that might not be true for everybody who has a similar background to me, but at least you're hearing it from me.
We'll see what happens, come November, as the polls come in.
Stick around, next segment's coming up at 6pm, youtube.com slash timcastnews, and I will see you all then.
A new migrant caravan is heading for the U.S.
border.
This group of at least 1,300 people have entered Guatemala in a new U.S.-bound caravan from Honduras, authorities said on Thursday, putting pressure on the region to satisfy Trump administration demands to contain northbound illegal immigration.
Now, it was just a couple of weeks ago I produced a segment called The Migrant Crisis Is Over and Donald Trump Has Won.
And there were two big points.
Well, actually, there's probably three.
I can add one.
I've talked about it before.
Basically, Mexico and Guatemala are taking action to prevent these migrant caravans from making it through their countries.
Well, Honduras, they've gone through, they're entering, the Honduran migrant caravan is heading into Mexico, and I have a story from Fox, Mexico is going to stop this.
And so it's not just about whether or not Mexico is going to take action, that's one point.
The next point is that border apprehensions are way down.
Many of these migrants who made it to the border were told to remain in Mexico under what's called the Migrant Protection Protocols, and many of them just left.
So right now, from the left, they're basically claiming the only reason it's not an emergency is because it's not close enough to a U.S.
election.
At least that's what New York Mag is saying, the same— I believe it was New York Mag that also claimed Donald Trump may have been an asset of Russia since the 1980s, so we'll take what they have to say with a grain of salt.
But we'll read the story, and I want to tell you this.
I don't think this migrant caravan is an issue.
I think Donald Trump has won on the migrant crisis battlefront, mostly because this migrant caravan is not going to make it through Mexico.
We'll see.
But we have this story from Fox News.
Mexico says it will block migrant caravan en route to U.S.
from Honduras.
That's why I think Trump won.
Less migrants are coming.
Trump is winning on building 100 new miles of border wall.
People on the left keep trying to claim That Trump hasn't actually built any new wall.
And this really funny viral photo of like, what's basically a stick, like seriously, a big stick propped up at like four feet.
And then the 30 foot high bollard fence.
And so I think it was Stephanie Grisham, I'm not sure, telling people that yes, you can technically say Trump is replacing old fence.
There's a big difference between a four foot high wooden stick you could just go under or over and a 30 foot high bollard fence.
So there's several other stories that have come out.
There's one from Axios saying Trump got his wall.
It's a administrative wall.
And the Huffington Post basically said the same thing a month or two ago, that the real issue for migrants isn't a physical barrier, but Trump is restricting 70% of all immigration from the previous year.
So I'll put it this way.
I'm telling you all this because I'm going to read to you about the migrant caravan, and I'm going to tell you why this is not an emergency.
Not at all.
Now, like I said, New York Mag is saying, it's just because it's not close to an election.
No, no, no, no.
It's because Trump won.
You know, they don't want to accept it.
They're saying, oh, the Republicans aren't freaking out anymore.
Yeah, because Mexico is saying they're going to intervene, and they have been.
And Trump's new policies and rules have been stopping a lot of the illegal immigration.
Or, you know, if you're a fan of what Trump is doing in terms of the refugees and asylum seekers, Trump won that fight.
I'm not saying he's right or wrong.
I'm saying he literally won.
The left has lost this.
The migrant caravan's probably not going to make it.
And if they do, they're going to stay in Mexico.
Many are going to go home.
That's it.
Let's read the story from Pluralist.
They say, Mexico's government is bracing for the arrival of hundreds of Central Americans on its southern border in coming days, an event likely to be closely monitored by the U.S.
government, which has made curbing illegal immigration a priority.
Arriving in Guatemala chiefly via crossings on its northern border with Honduras, around 1,350 migrants had been registered entering legally by late morning, said Alejandra Mena, a spokeswoman for Guatemala's National Migration Institute.
President Donald Trump has put Mexico and Central American nations under pressure to accept a series of migrant migration agreements that aim to shift the burden of dealing with asylum seekers to them and away from the United States.
The bulk of migrants caught on the U.S.
border with Mexico depart from Honduras, Guatemala, and El Salvador, seeking to escape chronic poverty or gang violence.
Unlike Guatemala, Mexico has refused to become a so-called safe third country, obliging it to accept asylum claims from migrants that set foot on its soil.
Still, Trump has threatened trade sanctions if it does not contain the flow of people.
Guatemala's new president, Alejandro Giammattei, said on Wednesday that Mexico's foreign minister, Marcelo Ebrard, had told him Mexico would not allow the caravan to pass.
Mexico's foreign ministry has not responded directly to that assertion.
However, Interior Minister Olga Sanchez said the border would be policed and that the Mexican government would not be issuing any visas or safe conduct to the migrants.
That's very clear, she told reporters.
So already we now have Mexican officials are straight up saying, never gonna happen.
I'll jump to the story from Fox, I don't know if they have more context to what they say.
Actually, let's just go straight forward.
Fox News reporting Mexico says it will block migrant caravan en route to U.S.
from Honduras.
When Mexico finally agreed to work with the U.S.
to block these wave after wave of caravans, many Trump supporters saying Mexico is the wall, and that Trump is going to pressure them to basically stop this.
And I will say, this is the first news we've had about a migrant caravan for a long time.
Migrant apprehensions on the southern U.S.
border peaked in May, and they have dropped dramatically.
Many of these people are not crossing.
Border security is being bolstered.
And you know what's crazy to me?
I don't know what they're trying to prove, many of these leftists, when they claim that Trump is just replacing existing barriers.
Are you trying to convince yourself or your friends, the people who don't watch the news?
Because Trump supporters are actively paying attention to what Trump is doing.
I don't know who you're trying to convince.
The people who already don't like Trump and aren't going to be paying attention?
I don't understand, right?
There's one image.
It was like corrugated steel.
I think it was like from the Vietnam era or something.
It was like leftover, reused, corrugated steel.
It was a very porous and high-traffic point of entry for illegal immigration.
Trump replaced it with three layers.
A very high bollard fence and then, you know, two other fences and razor wire on top.
The leftists were saying, this is Trump just replacing existing fencing.
And it's like, well, listen, this is what's crazy to me.
I'm going to say it again.
Are they just trying to convince themselves?
Because anybody who's actively paying attention to what Trump is doing understands what he's doing and why you would do that first.
Think about the basic logic of securing our borders.
Would you go and build a wall in the middle of the desert?
Or would you secure the points that are highly trafficked?
Duh.
So Trump and the DHS and ICE and whatever and CBP identified key points that had fences that were ineffective.
And they said, this is where most people are coming in.
We secure this first.
Then we start securing the less trafficked areas.
But for some reason, the left is obsessed with the idea that Trump needs to build a wall in the middle of the desert first.
Who are you trying to convince?
I don't get it.
Like, dude.
If you already don't like Trump and you're not paying attention to the news, sure.
That's the thing about echo chambers, man.
Like, look, I'm not here telling you whether it's right or wrong.
Moral and moral, I'm telling you there's a very simple logical reason why Donald Trump is going to build a fence in these key areas.
And now they are expanding into, you know, less trafficked areas to create a more secure border.
That's exactly what Trump supporters wanted.
I'm confused by who you're trying to argue against.
Do you think a Trump supporter who's paying attention will hear what you're saying and go, wow, I didn't realize that what Trump was doing made sense actually doesn't make sense.
Anyway, let's read.
The country's interior ministry said it would not grant tourist visas and would check the status of each migrant, but would welcome those interested in staying there.
Mexico is not only a transit country.
In no way we have transit visas or safe passage, said Mexico's interior minister, Olga Sanchez Cordero, who warned the migrants would be met by special operations and immigration agents.
She told journalists that an estimated 600 migrants had left on doors on Wednesday, so we know all this stuff.
Let's see what the New York Mag has to say about the incoming caravan.
Here's what they say.
As the 2018 midterms bore down on the American people, many were alarmed to learn of a menacing stowaway, a caravan of migrants heading north from Central America, roughly 7,000 men, women, and children.
Well, it was actually primarily men.
But no, for sure.
I think it's fair to say the election played a role.
whatever belongings were practical to carry on foot and evacuated the Northern Triangle,
El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras, seeking refuge from gang violence and economic hardship.
Several such caravans had made the same journey before, including earlier that same year.
What distinguished this one was its unusual size and, more importantly, its proximity
to an American election.
Full stop.
Maybe it was the size.
But no, for sure.
I think it's fair to say the election played a role.
I mean, a lot of people were like, oh, look, people are alarmed by this, right?
So of course you're going to tell your constituents you're going to do something about it.
They say it had been projected to shift the balance of power in Congress, riveting President Trump's then-united Republican government and installing a Democratic House majority, which it did.
The conservative political class and its media organs responded accordingly.
Trump and his surrogates sought to recast the group of refugees as an invading army bringing crime, terror, and disease to the United States.
Hold on a second.
Now, many of these people are criminals.
That's a fact.
Not all of them, and not even the majority, but many.
Yes, it's fair to point out.
I don't know about terror.
There were some accusations.
I think those proved to be dubious.
However, on the border, Where these camps stopped, there was disease.
There was a ton of disease.
I think it was Luke Rutkowski, We Are Change, independent journalist, not a Trump fan, actually went down to the border, I think it was in Tijuana, and it was filthy.
And there were people wearing masks, and there were medical teams, and there was waste all over the streets.
Yeah, that literally happened.
And these people aren't vaccinated.
I'm not trying to be mean to them.
They're literally not vaccinated, okay?
So they're likely going to be able to spread disease.
Why would, you know what, man?
I'm talking about it right now.
And I guess it's fair to say, you know, we'll see if Republicans and conservatives start talking about the migrant caravan, and if it's really about an election.
But I'll tell you what, we're entering an election year.
Now that the caravan's here, they're going to say, oh, surprise, surprise, 2020 comes around, and sure enough, the migrant caravan's an issue again.
You think it's a conspiracy?
I've heard the conspiracies that, like, the left and George Soros are funding the migrants.
I don't believe it, man.
I understand there are non-profits seeking to aid the migrants, but I don't believe the intention is to flood America.
There's also the conspiracy that conservative groups are doing it to create a boogeyman, or that it's only being talked about because the election's coming up.
You know what, man?
I did a story about this.
I've done many stories about the migrant crisis.
And I've talked about Trump imposing new rules on immigration.
I have repeatedly covered the story.
All right?
The fact remains, Trump won this fight.
He secured the border.
And now migrants are coming again.
So what's your story?
It's a conspiracy?
Or maybe it's a new year.
I don't know why they're coming in winter.
Maybe it doesn't matter.
But now more people are coming.
It's fair if you want to criticize it.
The United States can't just have 7,000 people standing at its border trying to come in.
The border will be shut down, they say.
So for a month leading up to the elections, airwaves from Trump's rally speeches to Fox News' evening shows to the Twitter accounts of imperiled Republican congressmen were clogged with lies and conspiracy theories about what ills the migrants heralded.
They're impending arrival was a national emergency.
You know, we had that moment where the migrants stormed the border, like running full speed illegally across the border.
We had a moment where I think it was in Texas.
They actually charged and attacked our law enforcement, our border patrol.
Yeah, so I think people are worried about that, right?
They said, The impending arrival was a national emergency, to hear the
president tell it.
Unknown Middle Easterners peppered their ranks.
They were being bankrolled alternatively by Venezuela, George Soros, the Democratic Party.
This will be an election of Brett Kavanaugh, the caravan, law and order, and common sense,
Trump bellowed at a rally in Montana that October.
For many voters, this scaremongering had its intended effect.
What's to stop them?
One Minnesota Republican asked the New York Times.
Let me stop.
We have a lot of people who live on lakes in the summer and winter someplace else.
When they come back in the spring, their house would be occupied.
Let me stop.
Let me stop right here.
Listen, Donald Trump campaigned on the wall, OK?
This was actually kind of bad for Trump in a lot of ways.
Because, to an extent, I actually think it was overwhelmingly good, but there was the negative of Trump saying he was going to secure the borders, and then all of a sudden the country was being besieged.
Oh, now I'm going to get flack from the left.
But yes, waves of caravan, thousands and thousands of people.
Okay?
Many of them asylum seekers.
I believe less than 1% actually had legitimate asylum claims.
And the whole time they're coming, these are people like even Shep Smith on Fox News, formerly, saying, these are just people seeking a better life.
Yes, you're right.
Okay?
But that's not a reason to declare asylum status.
Vox.com, V-O-X ran a story Where one of the people in the caravans said they wanted Buffalo Wild Wings.
Dude, I was just in Mexico City.
They have Buffalo Wild Wings.
I love B-dubs, by the way.
Get to watch a good game.
Have some chicken wangs.
It's great.
I understand why you'd like it.
I also understand Mexico has them, too.
Mexico City's awesome, by the way.
But for some reason, these migrants, when they make it to Mexico, and Mexico offers them asylum, there's this video where they're like, no, we're going to America!
Because they want American luxury.
The left pretends they're all asylum seekers, even Shep Smith does.
They are not.
They are regular people.
They are economic migrants.
I respect that.
America is awesome.
I don't believe it's about the election.
I do believe it was used during an election.
But what's the conspiracy?
That all of these migrants just happened to, like, okay, man.
Here's the point.
Are they seriously arguing that conservatives hired the migrants to come just before the election so they could win?
Well, it didn't work, and that's an insane concept anyway.
I can't tell you why the migrants decide to come when they do.
Some people are saying it was a left-wing conspiracy.
I don't think that makes sense because Republicans absolutely were using this and saying, we need to secure the border.
The fact is, there's no conspiracy.
There are people who want to come to America.
America's great.
Everybody wants to come.
They travel in large groups because it's safer, they get press attention, and they're hoping they can put pressure on the U.S.
to help them come in, and Trump said no.
It just so happened that for the lead-up to an election, it was happening.
It's happening now again.
But here's the point.
Trump already won.
They're not going to make it through Mexico in all likelihood.
They're going to be met, you know, and blocked.
And even if they get to the border, Trump's going to say, no dice.
The border's not going to let them in.
And many of these people do not have legitimate asylum claims.
And I will say one other thing.
Look, man, I'll quote Bernie Sanders.
My God, there are too many poor people.
We can't let them all in.
Yeah, Bernie was right when he said that.
I don't know what he's talking about now.
He's like flip-flopping, of course.
But yeah, Bernie said we couldn't do it.
In 2015, Bernie said open borders was a Koch brothers' proposal, and that's why people liked him.
He was talking about protecting American jobs.
The fact is, we can't just open the door to literally everybody.
Literally everybody would come.
America's great.
All our resources would be extracted, and everyone's standard of living would drop dramatically.
I am totally in favor of legal immigration.
Infinite, essentially.
Let them come.
We have immigration for everyone in the world within limits, right?
We can only support so much.
We only have jobs for so many people.
And I think one of the things contributing to the good economy of the United States is the fact that Donald Trump is going harder on immigration.
There's a video right now I believe it's from Indiana.
Locally, they say, you know, it's going viral among Indiana residents.
And it's a black Trump supporter saying, listen man, you know, people in our community are looking for these jobs, landscaping, looking for these jobs in, you know, fast food, these low-skilled jobs.
And when these illegal immigrants come, they take those jobs, they get paid lower wages, it drives wages down, and he's like, nobody in the community can get those jobs.
When Trump comes and tells these people, you can't do this, it's illegal, all of a sudden now their jobs are up.
This dude said, he's like, my family, we never owned a house, now we own a house and we got a couple cars.
That's the Trump economy.
I'm not saying Trump is a good person.
I am telling you straight up, there's a reason why people like what he's doing.
There's a reason why what he's doing is working.
And it's insane to imply that the only reason anyone talks about it is because of the election.
Nah.
That would imply these people leaving right now decided to come here during the election.
Okay, you know what?
There's no conspiracy.
It's just happening.
In 2018, it was happening.
Trump imposed a bunch of strict rules and it simmered down.
Trump started, you know, apprehensions were stopping.
Mexico got more involved.
And now it's not going to happen again in 2020 because even though they're trying to come, Mexico's going to put blocks on it.
So you know what?
You get the point.
The left right here.
New York mag has become a conspiracy rag.
Like, the left, I tell you what, man.
Nancy Pelosi is saying now Bill Barr is rogue and a puppet.
Mitch McConnell is an accomplice to Russian conspiracy.
What is going on, man?
I'll tell you what's going on.
It's actually quite simple.
Alex Jones gets banned.
Rachel Maddow gets promotions.
As long as the media and social media is going to say, no, Alex Jones, but yes, Rachel Maddow, don't be surprised when the left keeps pushing insane conspiracies implying, like, listen, if you think that the only reason people talked about migrant caravans was because of the midterm election, that would imply the migrant caravans were being, like, pushed here during the election?
Because after the election, they just stopped coming.
Are you saying that it's because of the 2020 election?
So there's a group of Republicans that are funding this and encouraging it?
Get out of here, man.
I'm so sick of this.
There's a lot of factors why they choose to come when they come.
They do.
And it gets talked about when they do.
We'll see what happens.
But please, drop the conspiracy nonsense.
Rachel Maddow needs to be booted off the air.
She's insane.
She props up insane people, she has insane stories, and they argue in court.
It's not real news.
Okay, so I'll tell you this again.
When Alex Jones gets banned, you can see how they're like, the right-wing conspiracy stuff has to go.
Well, the left-wing conspiracy stuff, let's do more!
Money, money, money!
So these left-wingers are watching psychotic nonsense from Maddow, they believe it all, they hear nothing else, and they write nonsense like this.
Keep in mind, the same dude who claimed Trump was an asset of Russia in the 80s, potentially, was on MSNBC talking about it.
And this is NYMAG.
So, you know what, man?
They try to claim that they're real news.
No, you're not.
It's just that no one's putting you in check because they all hate Trump, so they let you run around with it.
That's the bias against conservatives.
The social media companies are like, well, Rachel Maddow's legitimate because the media said so.
No, she's not!
She's nuts!
Glenn Greenwald calls her out.
Progressive calls her out.
Please.
She needs to go, and many of these other whack-a-loon leftists who push insane conspiracies need to go, too.
Pelosi needs to be voted out.
I'm sorry, man.
You know, there is a progressive running against Nancy Pelosi, and she's a Green New Deal progressive, but I'll tell you what.
Her name is Agatha Basilar.
I would much prefer that over, over, over loony conspiracy Pelosi getting out her golden pens on silver platters.
She has crossed the line with her insane rhetoric about Mitch McConnell being a Russian accomplice.
Like, you know what, dude?
She needs to be primaried.
Get rid of that, okay?
I'd rather have an argument with a socialist who actually believes in socialism than a kooky conspiracy lady giving out golden pens on silver platters.
But you know what?
I will end by saying this.
I am concerned that you replace her, you get something worse.
So I don't know, man.
I'm bowing out of this one.
This is insane, okay?
I'll see you all at 1 p.m.
on this channel in the next segment.
And I also have big news.
The studio, the new studio, it's almost ready to go.
Like, I can actually record on it.
I got the monitors, I got everything set up.
I'm really excited.
So we'll see.
I might switch over at some point.
Much higher quality audio, yadda yadda yadda.
I'll see you all at 1 p.m.
on this channel.
Thanks for hanging out.
Gun control regulations are on the rise in Virginia, and I think over 100 counties at this point, maybe it's 95, last I checked, 95 counties or more have declared themselves Second Amendment sanctuaries, saying they're not going to enforce these gun control measures.
Well, there's going to be a huge rally in Richmond.
They've declared a state of emergency.
Things are getting hot, and what may be one of the weirdest stories I've ever seen.
Antifa group to march alongside pro-gun protesters in Virginia.
That's right.
Antifa flags and MAGA hats side by side.
Pure chaos.
See, I thought Virginia was going to spark the revolution.
I thought it was going to be civil war and a lot of people were concerned.
With the Democrats in power in Virginia, them seizing guns, you would see conservatives take action, defend themselves.
There was talk about the National Guard coming in, conspiracies run rampant about the UN soldiers and all this other nonsense.
Likely not true, by the way.
But Antifa agrees with the conservatives on the Second Amendment.
They view the Democrats as establishment imperialist cronies who are going to take away their rights.
And now, what may have been the start of the Civil War may actually be the end of it.
Look, man, for the longest time, the establishment has been assailed left and right.
Bernie Sanders, Donald Trump.
The establishment media and the Democrats tried to cheat.
They stopped Bernie, but they could not stop Donald Trump.
Now we're seeing, although there is fierce anger between these two factions, they're both united against the Democrats taking away their weapons.
I'll tell you what, man, it doesn't make sense.
It's as weird as it may be, It makes sense.
Antifa is about challenging the system.
They don't like Democrats.
They hate liberals, too.
And if the liberals are going to take away their means of self-defense and empower police who they view as racist, of course Antifa wants to defend gun rights.
This is one thing that a lot of people on the left don't understand.
When these establishment types in media defend Antifa, I'm laughing like, you know they come for you first, right?
Antifa spray paints really offensive and terrifying threats on the walls at Berkeley, I can't repeat.
Threats against liberals.
Because the liberals are the intellectual elites who stand in their way.
The ones who agree with the system.
Who want to reform the system and stop them from having their revolution.
Naturally, they're going to stand side-by-side with anybody who allows them to have weapons.
Now, conservatives view it more as a combination of our traditional rights, our constitutional rights, and one thing standing in the way from a tyrannical government.
The difference between the two, in my perspective, having talked to and understanding these peoples, the far left wants a revolution.
If they want to do that, they need weapons.
If the government and the, quote, racist police come and take their weapons away, they can't have the revolution.
Conservatives want to defend their system, their freedom, their liberties from the encroachment, the encroaching tyrannical government or from even foreign threats, right?
Therefore, they will defend their constitutional right to have firearms.
But there is an overlap.
Both are concerned about tyrannical systems, which is the craziest thing to me, right?
I was in Berkeley a couple years ago.
It was the Battle for Berkeley.
You guys remember that?
I was talking to some Antifa dude who had a weapon.
And he was saying that all the Trump supporters, everybody there, they were fascists.
And I was like, you think these people right here, I pointed at the park, I was like, you think they're fascists?
Like, they are fascists.
And I was like, you realize they're like preaching right now about the Second Amendment and gun rights because they're terrified of a tyrannical government taking over and they want to resist that.
And the dude actually was like, Oh, yeah.
Like, wait a minute.
Look, they might not be communists, but where Antifa and conservatives agree is that if a tyrannical government has power, it must be stopped.
Now, the problem with Antifa is they think regular Americans represent the government.
It's insane.
And then they go and actually attack people who would probably agree with them.
Listen, you know what was really crazy to me?
There was this dude, I think it was in Minnesota, I'm not sure if it was Alton Sterling or what the guy's name was, but there was this dude, he was a black dude, legally allowed and permitted to be carrying a firearm.
A cop killed the dude, man.
He gets pulled over.
The cop's like, you know, what's going on?
Talks to him, and the dude, doing everything right, says, I also have, you know, my gun on me.
And the cop pulls his gun, freaks out, and he's like, don't move, and shoots the guy.
You know what's crazy to me?
A lot of conservatives stood up and said, where is the NRA?
Where are the other conservatives defending this guy's right to bear arms?
He was killed by a cop when he was legally carrying.
And I was pissed off at that.
I was seriously mad.
The left, of course, came out saying Black Lives Matter.
And there were a lot of conservatives.
But I would have preferred to see a major movement from people saying, this is wrong.
Cops shouldn't have done this.
Because when the government kills you because you were legally armed, whether it was a panic
moment or because they just are evil people, it needs to be condemned.
Now back to the main point.
The problem with Antifa is they're a bunch of, you know, stupid kids for the most part.
They have no idea what's going on.
I can respect their fear of tyrannical government, but I can't respect them bashing innocent people over the head.
I can respect them wanting to defend the Second Amendment, I got that.
You know, my position is kind of like, I'm more moderate on gun control, but I do think the Constitution is the Constitution.
As much as I might not agree with, you know, some of the weapons that exist and, you know, some of the regulations that are in place, I kind of feel like, man, I like my rights under the Constitution.
I can't advocate for taking anyone else's away because they'd advocate for taking mine away.
So as long as two-way exists, hey, you want to ratify, you want to change, amend the Constitution, you got to do that first.
Anyway, let's read this story.
From the Daily Caller, they say Antifa group to march alongside pro-gun protesters.
A diverse gathering of pro-gun protesters set to descend upon Virginia's capital on Monday would include an unlikely ally, a local Antifa group.
In what Vice called a bizarre meeting of the minds, Richmond-based Antifa Seven Hills also strongly opposes the gun measures now likely to become law since Democrats won control of both Virginia houses last year, and they, too, want Democratic leaders in Richmond to know.
I think it's been pretty important for us to focus on the fact that gun control in America has a legacy of racist enforcement.
An Antifa Seven Hills spokesperson called James, a self-identified anarchist who withheld his real name for fear of getting doxxed, told Vice.
Like taking guns away from black people because black people were perceived as a threat to property and the sanctity of the state.
This is our fight as much as anyone else's, James continued.
It's our state and we are left largely out of the debate.
The presence of an armed left is not discussed.
It's not understood.
I'll tell you something, man.
I've seen some videos, and I believe, it's fair to say, because I've been down to gun rallies, I was down in Texas, the armed and trained left have been the most cool-headed out of any of the left-wing protesters.
Not always, not always.
But you look at the right-wing militia groups, they tend to have good discipline.
They're calm, collected, and they try and keep things simmered down.
Like in Boston, there were three percenters and oath keepers trying to stop people from fighting.
I have seen some videos where there's left-wing armed factions, and they look very similar in terms of the right-wing militias, although they have, you know, sickles and hammers and stuff.
But they're much more cool, calm, and collected in trying to simmer things down.
than the average protester on the left. That's a fact. I think it has to come with understanding
the power that, you know, and the responsibility of having a firearm. You have to be calm,
collected, and disciplined to wield it properly. So I'm not saying all of them.
I've seen some dumb kids trying to go out and get weapons.
But these older guys who are actually trained, actually go out to ranges and stuff, yeah, they're probably equally shocked by this, by these laws in Virginia, because they understand what happens when the state takes away your weapons.
To the armed left, gun control represents the rise of a police state and the oppression of minorities made powerless by disarmament.
But it's a class issue as well.
But I think the right would agree largely with you on this.
Maybe not so much about the racial stuff, but to an extent, yes, absolutely.
I'd be willing to bet.
You go and talk to a conservative.
Well, if you're a conservative, correct me if I'm wrong.
But I'd imagine, if you had a bunch of people on the left complaining about an oppressive police force, and they said to the government, how do we stop this?
They said, well, if evil people, not necessarily cops, I'm saying if, like, you need to defend yourself from a tyrannical government, what do you think 2A is for?
Now, the challenge to that is, everyone always says, and it's mostly the establishment left, what are you going to do, go after cops?
You can't, right?
And this is what gets scary.
Because when police are breaking the law, how do you stop it without escalating or going after cops?
This is a serious, serious challenge.
And I gotta admit, I don't think Antifa or most conservatives are willing to step up and do what they have to do.
There was one viral video recently.
Where cops were going to serve like a red flag law, and the dude completely disarmed himself, and he was like, I don't got anything on me, but you better not come in here.
I think that probably was the right thing to do, but at a certain point, if we did have a tyrannical government, which I don't think we do, I think these people overreact, what would anyone really do?
I don't know.
I don't know where that line is, they say.
In the case of Antifa Seven Hills, they believe they've got more in common with working-class white Virginians, regardless of their political bent, than they do with many of the moderate Democrats who helped their party win control of the legislature in November, for the first time since 94.
Vice reported, adding that the group sees the coming January 20th rally as an opportunity to extend an olive branch to other gun owners, at least those who don't align with far-right militias or white supremacists who are also expected to show up at the event.
I'll tell you this, man.
Yeah, those people will probably show up, but listen.
If you're defending your individual liberties from a tyrannical government, you're gonna find you're standing side-by-side with people you don't agree with.
I think all that matters is that you believe in individual liberty.
Now, these Antifa groups tend to be communists, while some of them are anarchists, far-left anarchists.
But listen, if your group wants to go do their thing, set up a farm and have your farm, defend your farm.
Protect your way of life.
I respect that.
Just don't tell me what I have to do.
That's authoritarianism.
While Antifa groups in other areas, particularly the West Coast, often practice and condone violence against their political enemies, and have even been called a major organization of terror by Donald Trump, James says his group takes a different approach.
I think what's particular about the Self is that we have to be a bit more creative and sensitive to the people around us, instead of fulfilling some sort of meme of what Antifa is.
That's really what we're trying to work against right now, especially by talking to conservatives and showing we aren't just a black-clad group of rabble-rousers who are out for attention and have jobs funded by George Soros.
I think this is a hot-button issue, man.
the group's plans should white supremacist groups join the protest.
Virginia Governor Ralph Northam has declared a state of emergency and banned
firearms on Capitol grounds. I think this is a hot-button issue man I mean
this this is a chance to really really light up. We have a state of emergency
being declared over this.
Ralph Northam is a disgusting person, if you were to ask me.
His tepid non-answer on the Virginia abortion bill, his history of certain photographs, and now what he's doing with gun control.
This dude is an establishment Piece of trash.
You know, I typically avoid insulting people, but I am no fan of this guy.
I think he's a weaselly, awful dude.
And this is what you get when you vote... Listen.
You know my problem right now with liberals is?
Of course I got a problem with the democratic establishment.
My problem with liberals is that basically they're passive and they vote for, you know, in their naivety and their ignorance and selfishness when they ignore these things.
You end up with politicians who exploit you to get what they want to empower themselves.
Make no mistake, these politicians are armed, their guards are armed, but they will take away your right to protect yourself and your family in two seconds.
They will vote to increase their salaries.
They will vote to empower themselves and to shut you down.
They don't care about you.
They will lie, cheat, and steal every second of every day.
So I'll hand it to that Antifa group.
You got my respect if you want to defend individual liberties in the Constitution, by all means.
I got no problem if you're a communist, man, right?
If you're a communist, but you denounce the violence and want to have a conversation, man, we can talk all day and night.
I think it'd be a great conversation.
But when you come out attacking people with clubs and promoting violence and stuff, well now we got a problem.
Here's what I say to people, and I'll wrap it up here.
I don't care if you want to dress up like a clown and walk around the street juggling bananas.
You go do your thing.
It's when you start throwing those bananas at people, that's when I'm going to intervene to stop you.
So when Antifa wants to come out and they want to protest against somebody, they want free speech, they want to defend, even hear gun rights?
My respect, you do you.
You want to engage in civil disobedience, sitting in a street, blocking cars?
I'm even down with that, absolutely.
You get arrested for it, because I believe civil disobedience can be a good way to press on the system.
To a certain degree, we do have to break the law when laws are unjust.
But when Antifa comes out clubs, now you've crossed the line.
Now you're becoming like statist authoritarian monsters.
I'll leave it there though.
Crazy story.
Stick around.
Next segment's coming up at 4 p.m.
YouTube.com slash Timcast and I will see you all there.
Watchmen is officially over.
HBO is not going to be pursuing a new season after the creator bows out.
And I'm sure there's a lot of people who have mixed feelings about this.
I'm a big fan of Watchmen.
Now, I got my introduction into Watchmen from watching the movie, and then I went back and read the comic.
It was a really, really long time ago.
And Watchmen is a really, really great piece of intellectual property.
A lot of people have been trying to figure out if they can do more with it.
Apparently there was like a sequel comic or something.
But what this show did was not Watchmen.
Like, it was about the Tulsa, Oklahoma attacks, and it was about, like, racial justice and cops.
Cops wore masks.
I admittedly did not watch it.
But I saw this unfold, and I'll tell you the main reason I didn't watch it is because it seemed like a woke iteration that had nothing to do with Watchmen.
I quite honestly didn't, like, I saw the trailer, I started watching one of the episodes, and I was just like, I understand how they tried tying this social justice story to the Watchmen past, but it doesn't quite seem to make sense, and they may as well just made a new show.
I think it's fair to say, to an extent, like, at least someone tried something new.
But apparently, well, it's not going to go anywhere.
So here's what I'm going to do.
I don't know exactly why Watchmen is over.
However, I do think it's fair to say it won't go broke.
Now, I can't definitively say the dude quit the show for these reasons, but Watchmen was another one of these bits of content where the critics love it!
And they're screeching and praising about, you know, there's talk about like racial justice.
Dude, I think it's really cool if they're gonna do a story talking about what happened in Tulsa, Oklahoma back in the early 1900s.
It was like 1930-something.
And there was a lot of racial injustice.
I'm down.
But it's not Watchmen.
So you end up getting this really low audience score.
It's actually not that bad compared to a lot of the disparities we've seen.
But again, it's another one of these stories where the tomato meter from the critics is really high, and the audience not really digging it.
And why is that the case?
Well, I'll tell you this.
Critics just say what they have to say because it's access journalism.
They want to get advanced screenings, they want to toe the line for their bubble, and they all believe the same weird things.
But I'll tell you this.
We will read this story, but let me just say to anybody He's not familiar with cultural politics and what's happening.
I will just tell you this.
The media is typically in urban centers.
They typically hire college grads, so they all have a very similar bubble, and they don't relate to the average American.
So, all of the critics seem to have the same opinions about most things when the audience really doesn't.
And that's why you'll see movies like, I don't know if you guys ever saw the movie Death Wish.
It's Bruce Willis.
It's an old revenge film.
It's like, you know, his wife gets killed.
He goes and buys some guns.
He gets revenge.
Typical, right?
Audience loved it.
I think the audience score was like 80-something.
I went and saw it.
Had a good time.
It's a popcorn flick.
It was great.
Bruce Willis is a rad dude.
Loved it.
Critics hated it!
They called it a gun nut masturbation film.
I'm sorry for using that word if you have kids.
Listen, I try to be family friendly.
But anyway, let's read the story.
We'll see what's going on with HBO.
USA Today reports HBO won't pursue second season of Watchmen after creator bows out.
Watchmen won a loyal following and critical acclaim as the superhero comic series was adapted into a politically relevant drama about race and the criminal justice system.
Let me just ask, why?
This is what I don't get, man.
Why is everything a hand-me-down?
Right now they're talking about whether or not James Bond could be a woman.
I don't care, for the most part.
People have asked whether James Bond should be played by Idris Elba.
And I'm like, that's a cool choice.
I think Idris Elba's awesome.
He was great in Thor.
So I'm cool with that.
Apparently, there was some fake drama over the fact that Idris Elba's black, and like, I guess, James Bond's supposed to be white.
I don't think anyone really cared about that.
Now they're saying James Bond should be a woman, and I'm like, is James a woman's name?
Because, what, is Janet Bond?
Like, you're making a new character, man!
I don't understand why every time they do something, it's gotta be some kind of adaptation, some kind of swap or change, instead of just making new intellectual property.
Like, that's what I don't understand, right?
Listen.
You want to do Watchmen.
It's very simple.
Watchmen.
It's got Dr. Manhattan in it.
I know he's in the show, I guess.
But it's about something different.
It's about vigilante justice.
It's not about race relations.
Ozymandias.
It was kind of asking a moral question about, you know, was it right to kill all these people?
If you're not familiar with the story, I guess I'll spoil it for you.
Ozymandias stages a fake alien invasion, uniting the U.S.
and Russia, essentially averting World War III and nuclear holocaust.
And the question is, is it morally justified to kill these millions of people or not?
Rorschach, the character he's got, you know, he's in this Watchmen show, there's like people who dress like him, I guess.
He was a moral absolutist.
He was kind of a cringy weird dude, but people really liked him as a character.
His attitude was basically, Never compromise, not even in the face of Armageddon.
It is wrong to lie to people.
He does not believe that you have the right to kill all these people, kill a person, and lie to them to justify your vision of the future.
I kind of agree, right?
Because the ends don't justify the means.
And then you get Ozymandias who is like, if you tell the truth, you'll undo this.
That was an interesting concept, which is right.
Is there a scale?
It asks that, you know, thought-provoking question.
You might say to yourself, there is never justification for taking one life, and then you think about, like, total and nuclear annihilation of every life, and would you then take the Spock route of, you know, the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few?
Well, this is something different.
The Watchmen show ended up becoming some kind of, like, racial justice thing.
Talking about, like, cops wearing masks, which is more of, like, a... It really is in line with, like, mainstream social justice.
The reviews come in bad, and now the show's flopping.
Look, I'm not gonna... I think a lot of people really liked it.
I don't know if the reason why the dude's leaving has anything to do with social justice, but I do feel like it was embroiled in controversy as much as many people liked it.
My question is, why not make a new show?
Why do you have to take existing IP, turn it into social justice?
Why do you have to take a superhero, turn it into a woman or a person of color?
Why can't you just give people their own heroes?
That's what I never understood.
So, going back to the James Bond thing, I saw a friend of mine tweeting, like, excited that James Bond could be a woman, and I'm like, dude, I don't care if they make James Bond a woman.
I think it would be weird to see a woman named James, but I'm sure they're a woman named James, so fine.
You could argue that James Bond is a codename, fine, but my question is, at a certain point, aren't you gonna get upset that the character you're being, like, this iteration of James Bond is a hand-me-down?
Like, we had James Bond for 60 years, now that we're not as into it, now we'll give it to the women and the people of color.
I don't understand that.
Some people like James Bond for what James Bond is, let them keep their James Bond, and if you want a new spy, why can't they make new intellectual property with new characters, people of color, and women?
I don't understand why they have to do this, and I'm sorry for getting wrapped up and not actually reading the story, so let's read the story.
They say.
But don't look for a second season of the drama, which wrapped up its nine-episode run last month, largely because creator Damon Lindelof isn't interested in doing it.
HBO programming chief Casey Bloys told USA Today Wednesday that Lindelof, the co-creator of ABC's Lost, who also created HBO's The Leftovers, brilliantly took the graphic novel and just kind of broke it open and created a whole new world.
You see what I'm saying?
In which Regina King starred as a masked cop in Tulsa in a 2019 when Robert Redford was president.
It's a new show!
It has nothing to do with Watchmen.
So now you've basically taken the IP.
And I feel like... Here's how I feel.
Maybe some fans feel this way.
I feel like now...
The opportunity for a true sequel, show, or movie is... it's gone.
Because you've effectively done this.
This is what you've made.
And now the show is essentially about racial justice.
Had nothing to do with the original IP.
Doesn't ask those same questions.
I think it's fair to say you can take IP and you can expand upon it.
Maybe this dude was thinking, how can we ask similar thought-provoking questions?
What can we tackle today that would kind of make people think about this?
And you know I think Watchmen, correct me if I'm wrong, I think the comic was put out in the 80s when we were concerned about nuclear holocaust.
Maybe that's what he was trying to do.
Focus on a political issue today and make something of it.
But that's just, in my opinion, look, Watchmen came out kind of as a different iteration of what DC Comics already had with Batman and the masks and all that stuff, and they addressed a political issue.
Don't take Watchmen that people really like and turn it into something else, because then I feel like you're just giving people hand-me-downs.
You know what, man?
This is what I don't understand.
I'm gonna say it again.
I would imagine social justice activists would actually be saying, can we get something new?
Can you invest, you know, the millions of dollars into a new intellectual property?
They want to say it's really in Damon's thinking about what he wants to do.
If there's an idea that excited him about another season, another installment, maybe like a Fargo True Detective take on it, or he wants to do something different altogether, we're very proud of Watchmen.
But what I'm most interested in, what Damon wants to do, the answer, nothing.
Wendeloff told USA Today this week that he's told the story he wants to tell and has no interest in a second season.
I thought it ended with a cliffhanger.
It ends with a cliffhanger.
What do you mean he told the story?
He didn't finish the story.
He told the story he wants to tell, so no interest in a second season, though he's given my blessing to HBO should it want to pursue a new installment with another writer-producer.
But Blois can see that's unlikely to happen.
It would be hard to imagine doing it without Damon involved in some way.
Sorry, fans, but the season-ending cliffhanger will likely never be resolved.
So here's why I think this is a get-go-broke.
The dude is saying, I've told the story I want to tell, but they're saying it ended with a cliffhanger.
And I gotta admit, I didn't watch it because I started watching the first one and I really was not into it.
You know, the thing is, I was like, oh cool, Watchmen, I'll watch this.
And then I started watching it and I'm like, this is not Watchmen.
I'm bored.
It's cool if people like the story.
I got no beef.
If you liked Watchmen, check it out.
So let me show you the reviews.
96% from the critics, but out of 6,763, 54% liked it, 46% didn't like it.
I think it's fair to say a lot of fans of the original Intellectual Property were not happy with this weird, new, like, this weird story has nothing to do with any, like, it barely has anything to do with it.
I know they took the original characters, they adapted them and changed them, but it felt just, like, different, you know?
And so, anyway, I know a lot of people like it.
If you like it, I guess I'm bummed for you, you're losing your show.
Let me tell you the main point.
I'll wrap this up, because I do keep these segments a little shorter.
Can we get new characters?
Like, no studio is willing to take the risk.
I think that's the problem.
So they just adapt old characters.
Well, it's about time we just made new ones, man.
I'll leave it there.
You get the point.
I personally think he's wrapping this up abruptly because of the controversy and the bad audience ratings.
I know some people liked it.
I don't know if they were making money or what the issue was.
I know it's HBO, so it's subscription-based.
But if you were to ask me, leaving the show With a cliffhanger, claiming they finished it?
I think it's fair to say the most likely circumstance is probably just not getting along with the directors or the company.
Just didn't want to do it because it was a crappy working environment.
But I do think the backlash from core fans played an issue.
Like, I think this dude was trying to figure out how they could do something similar to what Watchmen originally was, and it didn't work with the fans.
And then it just becomes toxic, you know what I mean?
So I'll leave it there.
But I will mention one more thing before we go to the next segment.
You may realize, sound is different.
I'm in a different place.
I'm gonna give you guys a bonus for those that made it through.
Look at that wide shot.
There's going to be a new show coming up soon.
I will be recording in the studio.
There's still a lot of design work that has to go into what's going on.
A lot of trial and error.
We'll figure it out.
I got this little monitor screen for what I'm reading on.
So stick around.
Next segment's coming up in a few minutes.
And I think this is it from now on, but I'll see you all in the next segment.
You haven't seen anything yet, says Greta Thunberg, warning world leaders at Davos.
That's right.
Swedish teenager who has the ability to travel around the world, go to UN meetings, and apparently go to the World Economic Forum at Davos is going to give a stern scolding to world leaders over climate change.
Now listen, man.
I think we got a lot of problems.
I think we do.
I think, you know, if we don't catch ourselves and do something, we're gonna be acting like yeast, where we just consume and toxify our environment until we die.
But I'll tell you this.
My main position on my disdain for Greta Thunberg is her abrasive behavior.
She is mean.
She is angry.
She scowls.
And I hear from the left, they say, but Tim!
She has a right to be angry!
The world is on fire!
Yeah, let me tell you something.
The world may be on fire, but you don't convince people by screeching in their faces, okay?
You do not.
We are dealing with a problem that people can't see.
Oh, I know, people say, but look at Australia, Tim.
No, no, no, you don't understand.
You're talking about weather patterns versus a macro problem, okay?
It's not gonna work that way.
And now we can see just how bad it really gets.
I'll come back to the Greta Thunberg thing, but here's the big news.
Court quashes youth climate change case against government.
Apparently, a bunch of kids, they sued the government.
It had something to do with like, you know, you're destroying our future.
And the court was like, we need to get out.
Like, what are you doing?
You know what I mean?
And so, everyone knew this case was going to fail.
But the judges were sympathetic, saying like, yeah, we're on a dangerous track.
But this is not really, you can't, this doesn't make sense.
You know what I mean?
Let's read the story from the New York Times.
They say, The Federal Appeals Court has thrown out
The landmark climate change lawsuit brought on behalf of young people against the federal government.
While the young plaintiffs have made a compelling case that action is needed, wrote Judge Andrew D. Hurwitz in a 32-page opinion, climate change is not an issue for the courts.
Reluctantly, we conclude that such relief is beyond our constitutional power.
Rather, the plaintiffs' impressive case for redress must be presented to the political branches of government.
Two members in the majority of the three-judge panel thus agreed with the Trump administration that the issues brought up in the case Juliana v. United States did not belong before the courts.
The appeals court decision reverses an earlier ruling by a district court judge, Anne Aiken, who would have let the case go forward.
Instead, the appeals court reversed her decision with instructions to the lower court to dismiss the case.
In a lengthy and impassioned dissent, Judge Josephine L. Stanton wrote that quote, the government accepts as fact that the
United States has reached a tipping point crying out for a concerted response yet presses ahead
towards calamity. It is as if an asteroid were barreling toward earth and the government decided to
shut down our only defenses. While no case can single-handedly prevent the catastrophic
effects of climate change predicted by the government and scientists.
A federal court need not manage all of the delicate foreign relations and regulatory minutiae implicated by climate change to offer real relief.
What are we going to do?
What is the US government going to do?
I think the biggest polluter right now is China.
We're basically banning straws in our own country because other countries are polluting.
Listen, man.
I'll tell you this.
Pollution's bad.
I love the environment.
It's beautiful.
I love nature.
Going out to the forest?
I'm sure most of you do, too.
If I saw somebody throw trash in the street, I'd go give them a tongue lashing.
Throw their trash back at them.
I don't like pollution.
I personally don't pollute.
But we're looking at other countries doing this.
So America has this inverted response for whatever reason.
Where the real issue is not going to the courts and suing the US government, complaining about climate change.
It's going to other countries.
It's using international relations and making demands.
But I'll tell you this, man.
China's doing a whole bunch of really messed up stuff and ain't nothing getting done about it.
While these kids are coming here and complaining to the UN, China's running amok.
They're building coal plants.
They're polluting.
They got the Uyghurs in the concentration camps.
Yet Greta Thunberg comes here and scowls at Donald Trump.
It's complete BS.
I'll tell you this, too.
I get it, I get it.
Let's see what Greta Thunberg has to say, but I want to tell you something.
A Facebook glitch recently occurred.
And it turns out the posts on Greta Thunberg's page were being written by her dad.
I know a lot of people were like, aha, this proves it.
I didn't really do a segment about it, because I'm like, yes, so what, dude?
She basically said, listen, many of the people signing are children and we're taking great risk.
Don't take our words out of context.
Quote us directly.
It's really funny because I did.
I tweeted saying this is contemptible.
While I respect you calling out the fake news for their smears, just because you're a child doesn't mean you are more or less deserving of public scrutiny.
And then all of the woke lefties were like, oh, Tim, whoosh, doesn't understand.
It's like, dude, I understood her perfectly.
I don't like when the media lies and smears people, but she's using I'm a child as a defense.
When you enter the fray, prepare to take scrutiny.
Okay?
You chose to enter the public sphere.
And now people are coming at you like you are an adult.
Let's face it, dude.
Greta Thunberg, boy, she's 17 years old.
People are acting like she's 12.
Dude, she's 17.
Okay?
That makes her technically... She's not even a minor in many jurisdictions in the U.S.
because they do this weird thing at, like, 17.
You're, like, both legally adult and not.
I don't know.
Whatever.
Point is, if you want to complain about the fake news and put out a tweet, just do that.
All you have to do is put out a tweet saying, Hey, media, quote me on what I said.
Don't take me out of context.
Instead, she's like, remember, we are children.
We are just children.
We are taking gr- No, no, no, no, no, no, no.
Sorry.
I don't care if you are 12, okay?
If you decide to enter the fray, you will be challenged the same as anyone else.
Now, The media is trash.
That I understand.
You know, they're gonna manipulate what you say and smear you.
We're in agreement.
But just stop pretending like being a child is a defense.
That's what they do.
Nah, I don't play that.
Let's see what Greta Thunberg has to say to Davos.
This is from the DC Examiner.
Swedish climate change activist Greta Thunberg warned world leaders at the Davos World Economic Forum that they haven't seen anything yet.
We are now in a new year and we have entered a new decade and so far during this decade we have seen no signs whatsoever that real climate change is coming and that has to change, Thunberg said.
She said, we have seen no signs that real climate action is coming and that has to change.
Thunberg, 17, is in her 74th week of protesting climate change as part of her Fridays for Future campaign.
The teenager finished second in the Nobel Peace Prize voting for 2019 and stared down President Trump at the United Nations meeting on religious freedom in September.
Trump told Thunberg to chill and go see a movie with friends.
First of all, She's 17, okay?
I'm so sick of this.
We are children, how dare you?
No.
No, you're 17.
When you were 16, you were fair game for public scrutiny, okay?
Now again, I don't like people lying.
Fine, but you're not a child.
You're a young adult.
Quote, we need to make clear that this is just the beginning, Thunberg said, to the world leaders and those in power.
I would like to say that you haven't seen anything yet.
You have not seen the last of us.
We can assure you that.
Let me go back to that.
that uh... glitch on facebook after we found out it was actually her dad writing her
posts for her she had something like
oh no it's just you know reposting my things from twitter or something like
that and then it turns out that it was actually this uh... this
dude named like adarsh or something who actually made the page
and she said oh no it's just you know he made the page for me and then i asked if
i could be involved and i'm like yeah yeah yeah i don't believe it
Listen, man, I understand that may be the case.
Happened before.
You know, I know people who, like, their Facebook pages were made by fans, and then they gained a bunch of traction, so they handed it over.
Fine.
But the dude who made the page worked for the UN, and I'm just like, yeah, maybe.
Like, it's probably the case.
But I also think it's probably, I think it's likely, and I don't know about more likely, that she is a mascot.
They found someone who they thought they could use as a face.
They saw her doing her strike and said, we'll use a kid.
They always have these kids come out, man.
And then they complain that people are criticizing children.
It's like, dude, first of all, They did it with the Parkland kids.
Like, how dare you target children!
Now with Greg Thunberg, she's just a child.
Dude, they're teenagers, man.
They're old enough to go, like, egg your house on Halloween.
Or to graffiti or commit crimes.
They're old enough to be tried as adults for certain crimes.
If they want to enter the fray, and espouse their views on global policy, then don't be surprised if people challenge that policy, the same as anybody else.
We're not going to give you special treatment, I'm sorry.
So, they say Thunberg apologized in December.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, we get it, we get it.
So anyway, I'll wrap this one up, keep this one short.
Look, when it comes to the courts, I don't know if- I'm surprised it actually passed in the first place and made it to appeals.
I don't know what you think the U.S.
government's going to be able to do, like the judiciary.
What are they going to do?
Okay, we hereby say that the law is upheld?
Or like, I don't know, there's no law, right?
Bernie Sanders, I think, tweeted something about jailing energy executives.
Listen, man.
Can I be real with you?
The problem isn't the corporations.
The problems aren't even the governments.
The problems are us.
What people desire and demand.
Here's the thing.
I'll throw this reference out.
You know, there's this funny story that people have been sharing for a while about how, at the turn of the century in the US, there was a concern of the horse poop crisis.
Because more and more people were bringing horses into, like, New York City, they were like, the poop is everywhere, and we have a poop crisis.
They estimated, like, in ten years there will be mounds of poop on every street.
And the car got invented.
So here's the real issue.
Human demand for certain luxuries.
We use tons of resources, we burn tons of fuels, tons of energy.
We need new technology.
Greta Thunberg screeching in people's faces about how she's a child and how dare you is not going to solve the problem.
It will do nothing.
The solution is going to be technological innovation.
I'll leave it there.
Stick around.
I got one more segment coming up for you in a few minutes and I will see you all shortly.
From the Daily Beast, Trump just hired Jeffrey Epstein's lawyers.
He's got Ken Starr.
He's got Alan Dershowitz.
I don't know.
They say, the men who helped Jeffrey Epstein walk free in a sweetheart plea deal and allegedly abuse again are now on Trump's high-powered legal team for his impeachment trial.
First of all, it is not the lawyer's fault that they represented someone.
Everyone is entitled to legal defense.
Secondly, Trump's gonna win.
Trump's gonna win.
First of all, we knew Trump was gonna win because the Senate is controlled by Republicans, but can I just say Trump is gonna win because he hired Epstein's team?
Dude, if they could get that guy off, you'd think Trump's gonna- Trump's not even accused of a crime here.
After everything Epstein did, and they- they- he got away with it, Trump didn't even do anything.
Like, literally, Trump did not do anything.
And what I mean by that is, of course Trump's physically done things, but he has not been accused of a crime.
So he's gonna win.
It's so dumb.
But he's bringing on Alan Dershowitz.
And you know, it's crazy to me that people are dragging Dershowitz for representing people.
That scares me.
It scares me how the left views, you know, jurisprudence.
Like, you're not innocent until proven guilty.
They say, you know, believe all women, don't... No, no, no, no, no.
Hold on, man.
You gotta have evidence.
Everyone's innocent until you prove otherwise.
And they're even now getting mad at the lawyers for representing people.
Nod.
I mean, dude.
When people are represented, Right?
That's just because they have a right to representation.
It's not the lawyer's fault.
We're trying to ensure everyone has a fair trial.
Think about all the people who can't get lawyers.
Think of the people who, like, lawyers won't even represent.
Yeah, you have a right to legal representation, man.
They say the president bolstered his legal team Friday with attorneys Alan Dershowitz and Kenneth Starr, who helped Epstein evade prison time in a now infamously lenient plea deal with Palm Beach prosecutors.
Epstein originally faced multiple charges of soliciting and trafficking underage girls, but escaped with just 13 months of house arrest in a deal that caused Trump's Labor Secretary Alex Acosta to resign under pressure last year.
A suit unveiled by Virgin Islands prosecutors this week alleges Epstein continued to traffic and abuse girls on his private island until 2018.
Okay.
We got a... Oh, they even go on to say that he died of suicide.
No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no.
Okay.
That one... We just had that guy... What's his... I can't remember the guy's name.
He went to Dr. Oz and he showed evidence to contest that argument.
So I'm not saying it's true or it's not.
I'm just saying Daily Beast should be a little, you know...
They want to say Dershowitz, who has also represented controversial celebrities like OJ Simpson and Patty Hearst, will present oral arguments at Trump's Senate trial, a spokesperson for the president's legal team told CNN.
He previously helped negotiate the non-prosecution deal for Epstein and continued to represent him until at least September 2018.
He was also accused of abusing one of Epstein's victims, Virginia Roberts Joffrey.
I think I'm pronouncing that right.
Joffrey?
Dershowitz has denied the allegations.
Wait, what?
That's... You know what, man?
And I don't know much about Dershowitz, but I'll tell you this.
He issued a statement on Twitter.
He's a Hillary Clinton voter.
I think he said he wanted to support Biden in this election.
But he's come out against impeachment because he thinks it's a dangerous precedent.
I don't know a lot about the guy.
Maybe he's a bad dude.
Fine.
Whatever.
I don't know.
You think he's a Harvard professor?
Starr is known for leading the investigation into former President Bill Clinton, a man with his own Epstein ties.
Oh, here we go.
That ultimately ended in the president's impeachment.
Starr joined Epstein's defense in 2007 as the disgraced billionaire was facing possible federal charges.
He has since defended the same actions of Acosta.
The Palm Beach prosecutor at the time saying he played tough with the defense team in negotiations.
Trump also added Robert Wray, Starr's successor at the Office of Independent Counsel, to his legal team Friday.
His defense is currently being led by the White House panel Pat Cipollone and his personal attorney Jay Sekulow.
The president has his own ties to Epstein, who was seen partying and socializing with Trump at Mar-a-Lago as recently as 2000.
Trump previously called Epstein a terrific guy, but has since claimed he wasn't a fan of the offender.
Attorney General William Barr, whose own father was Epstein's boss at Dalton, is now investigating the circumstances around his suicide.
And we'll go to the next story about how Bernie is being knocked down by this, but I want to point out some really funny things.
The conspiracy around Epstein goes in every direction.
There's photos of him with, like, Bill Clinton.
There's photos of him with Trump.
Trump supporters say that, you know, it's Trump who actually is leading the charge.
And during the Obama administration, Epstein, you know, nothing happened to him.
And during the Trump administration, the dude actually went to jail.
I think it's a fair point.
I'm not gonna play any of these silly games, but I do think it's kind of hilarious how the left is like, William Barr is covering it up, and the right is like, Hillary Clinton and her people, they're covering it up.
Like, dude, I don't know who's covering up what.
All I know is everything's fishy and everybody's kind of nuts.
But I'd have to say this.
I think the evidence kind of leans towards it was under the Trump administration that it was actually getting arrested, so...
Credit goes to Trump, I guess?
But Bernie Sanders!
Here's the big conspiracy.
We'll wrap up today with this talk.
Bernie Sanders is the one being primarily negatively impacted by this.
I mean, sort of.
There's this conspiracy theory going around, and I see, like, you know, Donald Trump Jr.
tweeted about it.
And there was, uh, who else tweeted about it?
I don't know, a bunch of people.
Kevin McCarthy was talking about it.
The idea is that impeachment is designed not to hurt Trump, because it's helping Trump.
It's designed to hurt Bernie Sanders.
I want to believe it's true, but it's really hurting Klobuchar and Warren and Bennett.
Not like Bennett really matters, but Klobuchar and Warren are like, you know, top contenders for the Democratic primary.
Here's what's happening.
This story from Town Hall.
Sanders gets candid about how impeachment trial is affecting his campaign.
They say the United States senators took their oath of office before Supreme Court Justice John Roberts on Thursday as the impeachment trial against President Trump gets underway.
Four of those senators are running against him in the 2020 presidential election, raising questions about if and how they can be impartial jurors as they pledged to be that in the constitutional oath.
I think that's a really, really great point to be brought up.
They're complaining about Mitch McConnell because he said he's going to work with the president's legal team.
What about the fact that four senators stand to gain politically by impeaching Donald Trump?
They're Democrats.
So they say that Trump was investigating Joe Biden, his political rival.
Okay, well, you guys were investigating Donald Trump.
This is a double standard, right?
They say that Trump was going to politically benefit from the investigation.
Well, they're politically benefiting from impeachment.
Shouldn't they recuse themselves?
I mean, look, it's already going to swing in favor of the Republicans, for sure.
But, yeah, Bernie, Klobuchar, Bennett, and Warren should not be jurors on this one.
They want Trump impeached.
They're running for office.
The more damage they can do to him in a trial, the better off they will be come November.
So, I think it's fair to say.
That's a good point.
But here's the thing.
A lot of people think the real goal from Pelosi had to do with, you know, hurting Bernie Sanders.
That the establishment is so desperate, excuse me, so desperate, To stop Sanders, they will also take down Klobuchar and Warren, and they want to prop up Joe Biden.
But here's the thing.
Joe Biden doesn't do well on the campaign trail.
So maybe they're hoping that, like, by stopping Bernie, it's gonna slow him down a little bit?
I don't know.
I'll tell you this.
Nancy Pelosi had commemorative pens at the impeachment signing, and I saw a funny tweet.
It was like—I can't remember who tweeted it, so forgive me if I'm not crediting you.
They said something like, uh, Maybe this is why she withheld the articles of impeachment.
She was waiting for her monogrammed pens to come on a silver platter, and it was a special order, so it took a couple weeks.
She had to wait for the holiday to finish.
Once the holiday was over, they started manufacturing the pen.
Once the pen was ready, then she delivers the articles.
Dude, I do not think there is a conspiracy here.
I think Nancy Pelosi is incompetent.
She tries to shush the Democrats when they vote for impeachment, but then she goes and have commemorative pens made while laughing and taking, like, pictures with people.
I think it's actually— I think it's actually more likely Nancy Pelosi held the articles so she could wait through the holiday season to get the commemorative pens made.
And I think it was all set up— I think she rushed through it because she wanted to make sure impeachment was official before she went and got the pens made.
I mean, it sounds silly, but I mean, it kind of makes sense.
Look, If Joe Biden gets called as a witness, it's gonna hurt him too.
Bernie's being hurt by it.
Warren, Klobuchar, Bennett, they're all being hurt by it.
Trump's fundraising off it.
I don't know how long it takes to make monogrammed commemorative pens and serve them up on silver platters, but I mean, like, maybe that's the real conspiracy that Pelosi— Is it completely incompetent?
And that's her game plan?
I don't know, man.
But here's the main point of the segment.
I'll wrap this up, okay?
Taking it easy right now as we're rolling out the new studio setup.
You may have noticed, some of you may not have seen the earlier video, new studio setup.
The main point, Trump's got a crack legal team, an all-star team of experts who are so good, they were actually able to get Epstein off with some kind of like sweetheart deal.
Not that I'm happy about it.
But, hey man, everyone's entitled to legal representation.
And the government really needs to prove their case if they want to secure, you know, a conviction.
So Trump's got a great legal team.
Meanwhile, the Democrats are flipping around like lunatics.
You've got four senators who have a conflict of interest in the case.
I mean, they're the ones trying to impeach Trump.
Trump didn't call for this.
And now they're smearing him over his lawyers.
They're saying, oh, because he got these great lawyers, that proves... You know what, man?
I'll tell you what.
Trump's going to win this to waste time.
It likely will hurt Bernie Sanders and Warren.
I don't know if it's going to help Biden other than it's going to hurt Bernie, and maybe that's all they need.
But I'll wrap it up.
Trump's going to win, and I think the real issue behind all of this is that Nancy Pelosi— I don't want to say I think it's the real issue, but I think it's more likely Nancy Pelosi wanted to get those sweet pens with her name on it.
It's like gold and black.
So anyway, there you go.
Whatever, man.
So listen.
Check this out.
For those that watched the 6 p.m.
segment, we got a new studio.
Look at this.
You can't see it, but there's a ton of stuff on this table, like cables and bags, not quite set up.
Couple cameras, we got lights, we gotta organize everything.
I got this little mini monitor here, it's really, really cool, so I can just read the stories right in front of me, and I got a monitor to my right, you can't see it.
But I'm going to be doing a new show.
It's YouTube.com slash TimCastIRL with my buddy Adam.
And I'm going to keep... These are going to go same as normal.
So you're going to see my 4 p.m.
at YouTube.com slash TimCast.
My cultural and political stuff here at TimCast News.
The new show, TimCastIRL, we're probably never going to say the words Democrat or Republican, right?
So I think there's, uh, National Treasure 3 was announced.
It's gonna be silly, but we're gonna talk a lot about unknown things.
So it's kinda like, we're gonna talk about cool science, we're gonna talk about, um... I'll put it this way.
In terms of subject matter, I think it is fair to say, like, I'm definitely inspired by Rogan, Joe Rogan.
He talks about all sorts of stuff.
But it's gonna be focused on news stories, so it's gonna be like me leading with the news story, and then Adam and I will just like riff on various stories, and so it's gonna try to avoid politics, but it'll be very news-heavy.
So, yeah, that's what we're planning.
That's why we have this setup with a wide shot, and I've got, you know, a couple different buttons for things, how it works.
We're getting it set up!
Almost there, almost there.
So probably sometime next week, but I'll leave it there.
