Democrats New Smear BACKFIRES, Biden Accidentally Goes "Full MAGA" Supporting Trump's China Position
Democrats New Smear BACKFIRES, Biden Accidentally Goes "Full MAGA" Supporting Trump's China Position. In the latest ad from Democrats they claim that Trump is too soft on China and that his travel ban doesn't go far enough.The ad tries to claim Biden is tough on China when in fact he and other Democrats criticized Trump's actions for years.The only conclusion is that Joe Biden thinks he and the Democrats can beat Trump and the Republicans by "out trumping Trump"There is no way a sane person would think this would work. if anything the ad is pro Trump and demands he go further than he already did.
Support the show (http://timcast.com/donate)
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
In what may be the most insane political strategy I have ever seen, Joe Biden and the Democrats have decided to try to out-Trump Donald Trump on China.
That's right.
Taking the approach, in a new ad, that Joe Biden is tough on China, that China is the problem, and that Trump rolled over for the Chinese.
That's right.
The man who, for over a decade, has been ragging on China, supported politicians because of their anti-China positions, a man Who for a decade was calling for tariffs on China and then who got elected and did it.
He's rolling over for the Chinese.
You've lost the plot.
You know what's so crazy about this?
Is that for the past several weeks, the media has been smearing Trump saying that the Republicans and Donald Trump are using China as a scapegoat when it comes to COVID.
They called him xenophobic.
Joe Biden criticized the president for his travel ban.
Nancy Pelosi launched the No Ban Act.
They were not on board with Trump's tough call against China.
Did Trump do a good enough job in dealing with the coronavirus early on?
Well, that's up to your, I don't know, it's up to you, your opinion.
Hindsight is 20-20.
I honestly don't know if anyone could have done better, but I'll tell you this.
If you think Trump did bad and he wasn't strong enough, the Democrats were going the other direction.
Joe Biden tweeted, no travel ban is going to stop this.
We need to work together.
Nancy Pelosi, as I mentioned, had the No Ban Act.
So what makes you think that after 10 years of strong messaging from Donald Trump saying that China is a problem, you are going to win this battle?
My mind is blown.
The media gave them a free pass.
The media wanted them to say that Trump is scapegoating China.
But perhaps we're learning something else.
I don't think the DNC would launch these attack ads unless they had data behind it.
Now it's possible they're completely incompetent, but it's also possible the media is so out of touch with this country, the more they ran articles claiming that Trump was scapegoating China, the further away from the people they actually got and the Democrats know it.
Let's take a look at this.
I want to show you some of what's going on with the new Joe Biden Democrat attack ad, which I think I think they've lost it.
Listen, if the best you can come up with is China is bad and that's why you should vote for Joe Biden, you're supporting Donald Trump.
You're going full MAGA.
I mean, Trump's been talking about this for 10 years, so you might as well put on a MAGA cap and say, Trump's right, but I'm better.
That's the best you got?
I'm going to show you how the media played this, and I'm going to go back in time and show you how tough Trump has been, or at least several articles showing Donald Trump has really gone after China, man.
Check this out.
Brian Klass tweets, this is a devastatingly good Biden ad.
First of all, no, it actually isn't.
They show a clip from February 25th of Joe Biden saying, I would be tough on China and send people on the ground.
And then they show quotes from Trump from early in the month, like February 9th or something.
That's the wrong order.
You're supposed to show Biden before Trump criticizing China.
They don't play it out well.
But we have an article here from CNN.
They say Biden campaign launches counterattack.
Before we get started, head over to TimCast.com slash Donut if you'd like to support my work.
There's several ways that you can give.
I haven't got a physical address, but the best thing you can do, share this video.
YouTube has algorithmic pressure on me that suppresses my content and props up the mainstream media.
If you go to YouTube.com, you will see their fancy little COVID section with all the big mainstream media companies who get free press.
I don't.
I also don't have a massive marketing budget, so if you really like my content, sharing is the most powerful thing you can do, much more powerful than the YouTube algorithm.
Also, don't forget, hit the subscribe button, the like button, the notification bell, and hopefully, YouTube will actually suggest my videos to you or whatever.
Maybe you don't like my content, but I appreciate you watching.
Let's read from CNN.
The Biden campaign on Friday launched a new counterattack on President Donald Trump and his response to the coronavirus pandemic, zeroing in on his approach to dealing with China throughout the crisis.
In a pair of digital videos, the Biden campaign argues the president put the US in an ill-prepared position to deal with the outbreak and was not forceful enough in demanding transparency from Chinese leaders.
I really appreciate CNN framing this as a positive for Joe Biden, because he didn't just say that.
He said Trump rolled over for China.
I also appreciate CNN.
Well, we'll see if they mention Nancy Pelosi and Biden's criticisms of Trump when he tried to go hard on China.
Quote, The uncomfortable truth is that this president left America exposed and vulnerable to this pandemic, former Vice President Joe Biden said in one of the videos.
He ignored the warnings of health experts and intelligence agencies and put his trust in China's leaders instead.
In a separate video, Tony Blinken, former Deputy Secretary of State and Foreign Policy Advisor to Biden said President Trump went soft on China when it mattered most.
Joe Biden will insist that China live up to its responsibilities.
The videos highlight how the Biden campaign plans on making Trump's response to coronavirus central to their argument against him in the 2020 election.
Hey, you could do that.
There's tons of fake news floating out there making the president look bad.
But I'll tell you what, trying to claim he's soft on China is probably not the smartest way to go about it.
So, the coordinated effort comes as Trump and his allies have waged their own campaign to paint Biden as soft on China.
Responding to the former vice president's video Friday, Andrew Clark, rapid response director for President Trump's re-election campaign, pointed to more than four decades Joe Biden spent in Washington bowing to Beijing.
The American people won't forget that.
You want to know the other reason it is absolutely insane for Joe Biden and the Democrats to use this line of attack?
Because Hunter Biden has business dealings in China and Ukraine.
Now, of course, you can argue about Trump's business dealings in China and Ukraine, his family's, that's fine.
But it's still insane for you to walk into that conundrum.
You could have used that against Trump.
Instead, you have now opened yourself up to that criticism.
They weren't thinking, were they?
Or, they were.
It could be the American public knows that China is a real threat, no matter what the media says, and the Democrats had absolutely no choice.
If that's the case, yeah, there's nothing you can do.
You're gonna lose.
Let's read more.
Last week, the president's re-election campaign released an ad attempting to portray Biden as overly friendly with China.
But it included deceptive audio clips and images.
Oh, really?
Including suggesting Gary Locke, the former governor of Washington, was a Chinese official.
The Trump campaign has also tried to make issue of Biden's son, Hunter, and his past business dealings with China.
These media outlets don't have a unified narrative.
And so the problem is, I got one story I want to show you where they're actually criticizing Hunter Biden, saying it's going to drag Trump down.
That's from the New Yorker, a rather lefty publication.
They don't have the benefit, right?
Conservative media and Trump supporters are typically unified around their messaging, whether intentionally or not.
The left is absolutely not.
So while CNN frames things to benefit Biden, and the New York Times runs defense for Biden, downplaying the allegations against him, The rest, other left-wing media websites and companies aren't following the same message.
So it's just making everything look, I don't know, dejected and kind of crazy.
Quote, President Trump's false attacks on Vice President Biden are just another attempt to distract from the president's failure to stand up to China for American workers.
You are nuts.
If that's the line you're going for, man, you are nuts.
That's crazy.
Oh man, and more importantly, more immediately today is failure to prepare our country for the coronavirus pandemic.
Democratic Senator Sherrod Brown of Ohio told reporters on Friday, call for the Biden campaign, on a Friday call for the Biden campaign.
We know President Trump's playbook, divide and distract, the American people know better.
China and the coronavirus pandemic have quickly turned into top campaign issues for both sides.
On Thursday, pro-Trump America First Action announced a $10 million ad campaign in Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.
Which will target the former vice president over China.
The pro-Biden group, American Bridge, countered with its own $15 million ad campaign in the same key battleground states, slamming Trump for his approach to China during the coronavirus pandemic.
Throughout the crisis, Biden has criticized Trump's response to the pandemic on the health and economic fronts.
He recently accused the president of having a temper tantrum while Americans are dying.
The two men shared a rare moment of direct communication earlier this month when they spoke by phone about coronavirus with both sides describing their conversation as cordial.
Remember when Donald Trump said that we were going to have a travel ban?
And then Joe Biden said, travel bans don't work.
We need to cooperate.
The virus knows no boundaries.
And then a month later, Joe Biden said, I actually agree with the travel ban.
It's because they have no unified plan.
They don't know what the American people want.
They didn't know what the American people wanted in 2016.
And the media is keeping them in a fog.
Let me show you.
Take a look at this story from Salon.
March 30th.
Donald Trump needs a coronavirus scapegoat and right now it's China.
Unable to accept responsibility, Trump has to find someone to blame for his failure to prepare for the pandemic.
All right, let's take the story and frame it for Joe Biden's campaign ad.
With no real campaign strategy, Joe Biden relies on scapegoating China.
So in an effort to win re-election.
Because if you're going to operate from the assumption that China did nothing wrong, Salon, well then Joe Biden certainly must be scapegoating as well because he's in desperate need of some kind of wedge issue to set him apart from Trump.
Is that your argument?
But wait, there's more.
Check out this story.
April 14th.
Donald Trump's scapegoat hunt.
Blame China, blame Fauci, blame the governors.
Oh, blame China, you say?
You see, the media keeps up with this narrative.
How about Al Jazeera?
China emerges as coronavirus scapegoat in U.S.
election campaign.
Coronavirus has reshaped the political map of the presidential race, putting Republicans on the defensive in key states.
If an attack advertisement now being rolled out or any indication, United States President Donald Trump and his campaign managers have settled on a scapegoat for the coronavirus pandemic that has upended his re-election prospects, China.
So they go on to mention Joe Biden.
They say new advertisements now hitting three critical battleground states cast likely Democratic challenger Joe Biden as friendly to China while championing Trump's decision in January to ban travel from China after the country's coronavirus outbreak.
And then, of course, we know that Joe Biden ran similar ads.
We have this story from the New York Times.
This one's actually updated today.
A key GOP strategy.
Blame China, but Trump goes off message.
Republicans increasingly believe that elevating China's culpability for spreading the coronavirus may be the best way to improve their difficult election chances.
The president is muddying the message.
Difficult election chances!
New York Times, I am impressed.
Moody's Analytics, at last I checked, said Trump was going to win.
Because the economy.
Now, of course, because of the pandemic, they may be saying that it will be difficult for Trump.
I just don't really believe it.
I mean, this is unprecedented.
We don't know how voters are going to react to this.
The economy was doing really, really well, and now it's doing bad.
I guess we'll see.
When Trump had really great numbers, most people just assumed he was going to win because people wouldn't be out to vote.
But if people believe Trump is doing a good job on the coronavirus, they'll probably vote for him.
But hey, I don't know if it's fair to say he's got difficult chances, especially when his approval rating is higher than it was when he got elected, but it's been going up.
The big point, though, I will say, is that one of the factors for Trump's victory was the Hate of Hillary campaign.
People hated her so much that contributed a lot to Donald Trump's win.
If progressives who are mad at Joe Biden and the DNC turn and support Trump to punish the Democrats like they did in 2016, then I think Trump's gonna win.
Take a look at this story from earlier today.
I covered this on my other channel.
For those listening on the podcast, you'll hear this later.
Crenshaw and Maher clash over Trump.
Is the goal to make President Trump look bad or to get to the truth?
In this segment, Bill Maher criticizes Donald Trump For not being tougher on his travel ban.
And it's the weirdest thing to see people on the left take this position.
They criticize Trump when he bans travel from seven high-risk nations or however they call it.
A moratorium on travel was, I believe, suggested by the Obama administration.
They say it's bad.
Because of this, when Trump enacted the travel ban on China, Joe Biden criticized it, many people criticized it.
News outlets across the board said it wouldn't work.
Right now, we're seeing the complete inversion.
We're seeing them say, in this ad from Joe Biden, that 40,000 people still entered from China because Trump's travel ban wasn't strong enough.
So let me get this straight.
Trump enacted a travel ban.
And you don't like that he did.
But you criticized him for it.
And that's the interesting question that's brought up.
Dan Crenshaw in this interview with Bill Maher says, those 40,000 people were passport holders.
Americans being repatriated.
I guess if you want to make the argument they shouldn't have been allowed in, you can.
But he wasn't allowing Chinese nationals to enter the country.
These were passport and green card holders.
So it's being misframed by Joe Biden.
But it's the strangest strategy, I must say.
Perhaps they realize there's no way out.
We see this tweet from Cecilia Wang.
She is a civil rights lawyer, former public defender, currently deputy legal director, National ACLU.
Here's what she tweeted.
Wow, Joe Biden, already trying to out Trump Trump.
This kind of fear mongering is causing violent attacks on Asian Americans.
If you're trying to reform your past history of racist policymaking, like your 1994 crime
bill, you had better do some homework.
This ain't it.
For those who can't tell the difference between any two people with an Asian face and who don't know me, I am no fan of either the U.S.
government or the PRC government.
Don't at me.
Be gone.
All of you trolls and bots.
She says, I desperately want Joe Biden to beat Trump.
Of course I do.
But I don't want him to foment racist scapegoating.
And I want him to build a platform all of us can fight for.
And in carrying it out for us, Once he's in office.
Once again, this ain't it.
Of all the ways Trump has actively obstructed a sensible public policy on COVID, causing countless lives lost in the US, Joe Biden's going to fixate on the PRC angle and put out propaganda, put out a propaganda film that will fuel racist attacks on Asian Americans?
No, I'm not having it.
She's actually, you've got progressives and the ACLU slamming Joe Biden over this.
Perhaps the Democrats have learned you can't chase after woke progressivism to win.
Maybe this is the big shift.
Well, I got something for that, too.
But let's move on, because I got another tweet here.
Sarah Lazar, who is a reporter for In These Times magazine, anti-China nationalism is hampering international cooperation in response to the COVID-19 crisis, being used to push for further U.S.
militarization of the Asia-Pacific and fueling a spate of racist attacks on Asian Americans.
This right-wing talking point needs to stop.
Bravo, Joe Biden!
You thought you could out-Trump Donald Trump on China?
The people on the left, the Democrats and the progressives, think you've just gone full-on MAGA!
I mean, look, if they're going to argue that he's trying to out-Trump Trump, then I'm going to say it.
Joe Biden might as well put on that MAGA cap because he's agreeing with Trump's policy positions.
Don't believe me?
Take a look at this story.
April 29th, 2011.
Mother Jones, a left-wing outlet, Despite the fact that some of his clothing is made in China, Trump bashed the Middle Kingdom.
If elected president, what would his message to China be?
Listen, you mother effers, we're going to tax you 25%.
Trump said that in 2011.
Oh, I got more for you.
How the Donald could incite a trade war.
April 18, 2011.
Trump's call for a 25% tariff on Chinese goods is winning him a lot of attention as he weighs a presidential run in 2012.
How about this story from CNN?
Trump, US is a laughingstock.
Once again, February 10th, 2011, talking about Trump slamming China.
He wants to put a 25% tariff.
I went back to 2011 and Donald Trump has been saying this stuff.
Donald Trump campaigned on this message.
He promoted it for years before even running.
And Joe Biden thinks he's going to co-opt that message.
Okay, so Joe Biden really isn't going full MAGA, but he's certainly going fairly MAGA to the point where progressives are criticizing him for pushing right-wing talking points.
I love it, man.
And here's another one.
Did Donald Trump endorse Mitt Romney because of China?
At first glance, Mitt Romney and Donald Trump seem an odd couple.
But Mr. Trump's pugnacity is more Gingrichian than Romney-esque.
Those are terrible words, by the way.
Yet there was Trump bestowing a blessing on a smiling Romney.
And they say one word, China.
How are you going to try and claim that Trump is weak on China when we literally mock the dude for saying China all the time?
China.
It's a meme.
There's a meme of Donald Trump's lips being pursed all nasty-like and China slowly coming out of it.
You can't.
What is Joe Biden doing?
I love it, man.
Here's another story from The New Yorker.
Will Hunter Biden jeopardize his father's campaign?
Joe Biden's son is under scrutiny for his business dealings and tumultuous personal life.
July 1st, 2019.
Oh yeah, how about this one?
They talk about... Let me read it.
In 2012, Archer and Hunter talked to Jonathan Lee, who ran a Chinese private equity fund, Bohai Capital, about becoming partners in a new company that would invest Chinese capital and potentially capital from other countries in companies outside China.
We have numerous highlighting of his business dealings with China.
Secret Empires, which details Hunter's activities in China and Ukraine.
Blah, blah, blah.
You get the point.
Here's one.
Oh, let me read it.
Schweitzer asserts that Rosemont Seneca Partners had been negotiating an exclusive deal with Chinese officials, which they signed approximately 10 days after Hunter visited China with his father.
In fact, that deal had been signed before the trip, according to the BHR representative.
It was a business license that came through shortly afterward, and Hunter was not a signatory.
Hunter and Archer said they had never met with any Chinese officials about that fund.
Well, listen.
You want to argue about Hunter's business dealings, what he did or didn't do, whether it was good or bad, the narrative is certainly an explosive one.
Hunter Biden had business dealings and they've been dealing with the bad press for a while, so much so that it was almost a year ago they were concerned that Hunter Biden was a liability for Joe Biden.
Why then would Joe Biden try to use the China attack ad?
Honestly, I couldn't tell you.
But I got bad news for the progressives.
The Hill reports progressives look for concession with Biden from running rate.
Are you serious?
He just turned his back on you and went full on Donald Trump's China position.
He doesn't care what you have to say, and he's not going to bring it up.
So you might as well give up on this one.
I don't understand why they would use China, but I can say it seems that they've realized the American people do not trust China, view them as a threat, and probably, in all likelihood, blame them for the coronavirus.
I'd imagine the DNC is spending a lot of money to figure out what people are thinking.
The media, not so much.
News organizations and outlets like Salon or whatever, when they write these articles claiming that Trump is scapegoating China, they're responding to clicks, shares, analytics, right?
So if you have a large audience of people that respond very well to these kind of talking points, you're going to roll with it.
Joe Biden is trying to get everybody, which means their consultants are looking at hard data.
And what do they find?
Well, they found the American people really do think China is to blame.
And that means Joe Biden's only choice was to go after Trump on China.
I bet I bet they know they're going to lose.
I bet they absolutely know.
They are going to lose.
Because they can't win.
Trump's a decade in front of Joe Biden.
Joe Biden was behind the curve only a few months ago.
And how do you think the American people are going to respond to this?
These ads aren't in a vacuum.
Joe Biden's advertisements are going out alongside Donald Trump's.
They're both accusing each other, but I'll tell you what.
Trump supporters have Trump's back.
They agree with him.
They are saying straight up, Trump has been hard on China.
The left is tearing Joe Biden apart over this.
They will not vote for you.
Well, I can say this.
Respect to Joe Biden and the Democrats for finally getting the message.
You cannot win by courting the far-left woke crowd.
Now, I don't think you can win by abandoning even, you know, I don't know what to call them.
They're not moderates.
These people on Twitter.
But there's a difference between the ultra-woke activists like AOC and Democrats who are trying to play tribal politics.
There's going to be a lot of people on the left and in media who are not ultra-woke but won't adopt this message and they won't support you in it.
They will criticize you in it.
In which case, a lot of Democrats, many of whom are not paying attention or watching the news, are not going to vote for you.
The progressives certainly won't, no matter what you do.
So it is smart.
They can try and take away some of the votes from Donald Trump by going for the middle ground.
That is the smart move to make.
But in the end, Biden, you've lost it.
You could have been on board with what was correct from the get-go, but you weren't.
The only option they have now is to try and siphon away what Trump is already doing.
I find it fascinating.
You know, I wondered why it is the left went so far left, and I think it's because Donald Trump campaigned on many moderate positions.
That meant if Donald Trump came out and said, we want to help the workers, we want to have a border barrier, whatever, the Democrats had no choice but to oppose him to present some kind of alternative.
It was a mistake.
There's no harm in saying, you know, I agree with Trump on this issue, but I disagree on this issue.
Instead, they went after everything he says is wrong.
Maybe this was part of Trump's strategy.
He's very, very bombastic and sensational.
You know, he says things that are very direct, forcing his opponents to abandon them.
That way when he walks back to a middle ground position, lightens the rhetoric, they've already
disagreed with what he's saying.
I'm not saying it's 4D chess, maybe Trump's just naturally good at whatever it is he's
doing.
But if you come out and say something really ridiculous like we're going to ban everyone
and build a giant wall, a big beautiful 30 foot concrete wall, well then you get the
Democrats saying that's ridiculous, no wall.
Then Trump says, I mean, you know, what I really meant is we're going to secure it properly with a fence.
The Democrats have already adopted the position, no wall.
In fact, in order to win the nomination, Beto O'Rourke, for instance, had tear the wall down, the exact opposite of what Trump was doing.
Yet the Democrats before Trump were in favor of a border barrier.
You see how Trump tricked them into supporting the opposing position that made no sense, whether it was on purpose or not.
And that brings us to where we are today, with Joe Biden trying to literally take Trump's position.
I think they're learning.
And congratulations, they're finally learning.
It's correct.
China is at fault.
I think you're wrong in trying to blame Trump.
You're not going to win this fight.
But at least now they're realizing they can't just say everything Trump does is wrong.
Although they're kind of saying what he does is wrong, they're attacking the strength of his plan, not the direction of it.
It's a smart move.
But not good enough.
So perhaps they realized what the American people are thinking.
Perhaps they realized the media is incorrect.
And perhaps they're going to lose anyway.
I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up at 6 p.m.
at youtube.com slash timcastnews.
It is a different channel.
And I will see you all then.
The media has been working overtime to rewrite history on the coronavirus and how Donald Trump responded.
In the past, I've been critical of Trump, recognizing hindsight is 20-20.
At the time all of this was breaking out, I said I think Donald Trump needs to take it more seriously.
We now know that based on information Trump received back in January, in all likelihood, the reason Trump was kind of downplaying things is because, as Dan Crenshaw says in this segment, calm breeds calm, panic breeds panic.
At first, I didn't think so.
I thought Trump was just being overconfident.
I thought he understood what was happening with COVID, but I thought he was being overconfident.
Well, we learned that he actually got the memos.
He actually took action to shut things down and try and do something.
The coronavirus task force, the travel ban, not perfect, but hey, I think he was concerned that if he came out right away saying, this is starting to freak us out, then people would get freaked out.
That's Bill Maher's mistake.
the economy which would damage people's lives and he was trying to mitigate that
damage. No I don't think Trump's response was perfect. I think you can point to
things and criticize him but I think you got to recognize that right now hindsight
is 2020 and that's Bill Maher's mistake. In this segment Dan Crenshaw,
representative from Texas and comedian Bill Maher go into the timeline of what
happened with Donald Trump.
And it breaks my heart because I've been a big fan for Bill Maher for a long time, you know, since I was a teenager watching real time.
And Bill Maher is just, he's really lost his way.
But he's not as bad as everybody else.
I still really like, you know, his work.
Let me break this down for you.
Dan Crenshaw does an incredible job, and it's embarrassing for Bill Maher how bad this is.
Bill Maher says on this day Trump did this, on this day Trump did this, and Dan Crenshaw basically just steps in, doesn't even really do much, just says, and then this.
And also this.
When you selectively pull dates and actions, it's easy to make Trump look bad.
But what Dan Crenshaw says, he basically says hindsight is 20-20.
The news sources you get your information from, Bill, have soured.
And the more you just believe what they say, the more wrong you look.
You can tell the dude's got principle.
He's like, man, these woke leftists are nuts.
We can call the China virus the China virus.
We can blame China.
But then he sees this timeline of what Trump did in the coronavirus, and he's like, oh man, now that is the Gelman amnesia effect at play.
For those that aren't familiar, it's basically Bill Maher sees the news and says, look at this woke nonsense.
They're telling me I can't call the China virus the China virus.
That's insanity.
Then he turns the page.
Donald Trump does bad job.
And he goes, wow, Donald Trump did a bad job.
Did you just forget that you were reading bunk news with bad opinions?
That's the Gell-Mann amnesia effect.
Well, let's read this and I'll show you what Dan Crenshaw says.
And I got some bad news for Donald Trump.
Crenshaw and Maher clash over Trump.
His goal to make President look bad or get to the truth?
I don't necessarily think that Bill Maher's goal is to just make Trump look bad.
I think Bill Maher won, to an extent, yes, because he has Trump derangement syndrome, but he's also getting his information from bad sources.
Case in point, the Covington kids.
You remember that?
The Lincoln steps, the kid with the MAGA hat, the Native American guy?
Bill Maher got it wrong.
He got it wrong because he read fake news.
The news is not good anymore.
You can argue it was better before the age of Facebook and woke outrage, but how- I don't understand how Bill Maher could simultaneously complain about this wokeness and then ignore the fact that all these outlets are pushing this dogma and they're using it as the basis for what their articles are about and how they're framed.
So it's like he can see one side of the coin, but not the other.
I like the guy.
His principles are there.
But dude, come on, Bill.
Start reading the news.
And this is why he gets embarrassed.
Look, I want to read this, but I just... I can't hold it back.
Bill Maher is fluttered.
unidentified
He's like, well, Trump's got a... He's too optimistic.
Let me read you this because I'm getting worked up.
Rep.
Dan Krenshaw of Texas had a fierce debate with real-time host Bill Maher on Friday over President Trump's handling of the coronavirus outbreak, one that examined the president's style of communicating versus the substance of his policies.
During the discussion, Crenshaw said some fundamental questions need to be asked whether anyone criticizes the president.
When people make these accusations, Crenshaw said, I have to ask them, is the goal to make Trump look bad or is the goal to get to the truth?
Because there are two separate sets of answers for that.
Maher began by pressing Crenshaw, who served as a Navy SEAL to defend his support for Trump, a president who Maher said has passed the buck lie finger point and shirk responsibility tendencies.
I actually agree with that, but I think the scale, like if you put on a scale of 1 to 10, Bill Maher's got Trump at a 10, I've got him at like a 5.
Crenshaw responded by expressing his support for the country and acknowledging that the president's success is certainly tied to the success of this country.
The congressman added that he and other GOP lawmakers are frequently asked by the media to defend their support for the president.
He said, Republicans always get asked this question.
And no, I don't, Crenshaw said.
I can't defend everything.
He doesn't have the same style as I do.
I don't consider him to be my spiritual guide by any means.
I don't, Crenshaw said. I can't defend everything. He doesn't have the same style as I do. I don't
consider him to be my spiritual guide by any means. I like this Dan Crenshaw guy.
The real time host then grilled Crenshaw on Trump's actions instead of his style,
pointing to reports the president was warned by various aides about the severity of the
coronavirus outbreak weeks before it became a global crisis.
Crenshaw pushed back, pointing to Trump's travel ban on China.
Marr then challenged Crenshaw, the travel ban, accusing Trump of lying about it, since people are still coming in from China, and said Trump's order affected only foreign nationals.
The reality is, about 40,000 people came in after that, Crenshaw said.
These were U.S.
citizens and green card holders and passport holders being repatriated.
So you have to make the argument that we shouldn't let them in.
It sounds to me that you're fully agreeing with President Trump on this one, and everybody else does disagree with him, he told Mar.
And if you're saying that the travel restriction should have been more extreme, then fine.
You clearly had the foresight back then, but nobody else did.
Mic drop, Dan Crenshaw, woo!
Amazing.
I'm sick of this line.
They're saying, Trump let in 40,000 people.
Joe Biden just ran this ad, and it was a huge mistake, a huge mistake, okay?
Terrible.
I'm watching this, and I'm seeing all these leftists praise Biden's team for this ad.
It's basically praising Joe Biden's responses to, let me start over.
It's claiming China's at fault, saying Trump rolled over for China, putting the blame on China, and then saying that lie, Trump instituted a travel ban, but 40,000 people still got in.
And I could not believe what I had just seen.
A Joe Biden ad saying Trump's travel ban wasn't extreme enough.
What is going on anymore?
Joe Biden saying Trump is rolling over for China.
If you want to make China the villain of this cycle, you go ahead and do it with my blessing.
Because Donald Trump for a decade plus, as long as I can remember, has been ragging on China.
You think you're going to win that argument?
You think you're going to try and argue that Trump's travel bans weren't good enough?
Man, you are really confusing the issue.
Because I'll tell you what, Dan Crenshaw brings this up in his conversation with Bill Maher.
Bill, it sounds like you agree with Donald Trump, he says.
Bill Maher's face is like, whoa, wait, what?
Because then Dan Crenshaw brings up, I wonder if they point out, check it out.
Crenshaw then knocked former Vice President Joe Biden, who disapproved of Trump's travel ban at the time, as well as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, for posing legislation to stop it!
Bill, you gotta read the news, man!
This is the position I find myself in.
I am very much principally in a similar space to Bill Maher.
Liberal leaning, free speech, anti-wokeness, and the media is full of it.
Bill Maher just ragged on the media relentlessly about panic porn, he called it, saying that they're just trying to get us all riled up.
I don't try to make overly sensational stuff, but if you think I do, feel free to criticize me.
I don't think I'm perfect.
But I know the media does.
And the way I view this is that everything Trump does is the apocalypse.
They say, when Trump tried to shut things down, they said, how dare he?
Nancy Pelosi tried passing the No Ban Act.
I kid you not, he brings it up.
So if you want to disagree with Trump, you're mad that he wasn't more extreme?
Joe Biden running this ad, when Nancy Pelosi tried to stop it?
That's my point with the Democrats.
This is them saying the travel ban is wrong.
It's Vox.com saying this is not a pandemic.
Travel bans are wrong.
This is every outlet running a story saying travel bans don't work.
Now we're at the point where people want to start lifting things again.
Trump is wrong.
I'll tell you what.
You see all these protesters around the country.
And they're saying, open things up.
And what do we get from the progressive left?
They don't base anything on reality.
They have become the Christian conservatives of the 90s and the aughties, at least how I grew up seeing them.
People who just don't pay attention and just say things because it's tribalistically funny.
You know, they like to point to these old photos of people holding up a sign saying, like, Morans and stuff, and it's like, that's you right now!
You're them, Bill Maher!
You've become what you've always railed against!
People who don't investigate, don't look for facts, and then just complain about what you want to be true!
The orange man is bad, he's done everything wrong!
Did you research that, Bill?
You didn't.
And that's what breaks my heart.
Because Bill Maher used to be a voice of reason.
But now we can see the cracks in the armor, I guess.
You see, back then, he was basing his information off of these news sources, which have gone completely sour.
They are obsessed with hating on Donald Trump.
So let me go back to this point.
You get all these protesters out in the streets, right?
And they're saying things like this one that's going viral.
It's a woman holding a sign that says, my body, my choice, Trump 2020.
And the left is making fun of her.
And I'm like, but she's right.
And I'm pro-choice.
It is her body.
It is her right to go out.
And if she gets sick, she gets sick.
You can make fun of her.
You can call her stupid.
But how are you advocating for a draconian lockdown?
No sense.
The same sign.
The point made by the protester, spot on.
It's meant to be a mirror image of what the left does.
When they say, my body, my choice over abortion access, the left is saying the government shouldn't have the right to restrict what you do with your body.
She was saying the same thing.
It is principally the same thing.
And they're making fun of her for it.
It brings up an interesting question about how they view government.
Should people be forced to stay home?
Or, if you don't want to get sick, should you choose to stay home?
You know, back when the cigarette ban was happening, I was very much in the libertarian side of this.
If a business wants to allow cigarettes in their building, so be it.
If I don't like cigarette smoke, I just won't go there.
But these people are very different.
They're authoritarians.
They say, no, if I don't like smoke, everyone must not have smoke.
Which brings me to the main point I'm trying to make.
Florida opened up its beaches.
And you know what happened?
Within 30 minutes, the beaches were flooded with people.
You know what that says?
These people don't agree with you.
You look at Donald Trump's approval rating, and it's been fluttering.
And for a brief period, the media was shocked, aghast, clutching their pearls that Trump's approval rating on the coronavirus was above 50%.
His approval rating has continually gone up.
You know why?
People like Bill Maher eventually are forced to see the light.
And I think this interview was really, really great.
Dan Crenshaw, amazing job.
Seriously.
Because Bill seemed flabbergasted.
At the end of this segment, or after this argument, the only argument that Bill Maher can make is, well, Trump was, you know, he was saying, I don't think it's going to be that bad.
And then he says to Dan Crenshaw, you were in Fallujah.
Would you want to be there with a commander who's telling you, don't worry, I don't think the enemy's not really there, it'll be fine?
And Dan says, it's amazing, he basically says, I wrote about this in my book.
Yes, that's exactly how we train SEALs to be.
Calm breeds calm, panic breeds panic.
But I got one more for you, Bill.
Let me see if they have that in there.
So they don't actually get into that point.
But Bill Maher basically loses the argument, drops any point of fact because he doesn't have them on his side, and goes for Trump's attitude.
Okay.
Trump was too optimistic.
He says to Dan Crenshaw, would you want to be in a combat situation with a guy telling you everything's going to be fine and all that?
Dan says yes.
But let me give you a better point.
Bill Maher, when he says this, the analogy is not you're in combat and your commander is telling
you it'll be fine. The analogy is the commander is telling the wife of the soldier. Donald Trump
wasn't speaking to frontline doctors and nurses directly. I know they were a part of the message
for sure. Trump's got the CDC, the health guidelines. So the people who are getting
hospitals are getting these guidelines from the government.
And yes, they're hearing what Trump has to say. But when Trump stands up for the American
people and he says things are going to be okay.
He's not telling the soldier on the front line, don't worry, there's no enemy.
He's telling the family of the soldier, I'm gonna make sure that, you know, Bill, John, whoever this is, that they're gonna be okay.
He's reassuring the non-combatants, the people of this country, when they're scared that their son, their daughter, is now in this conflict, the President is saying to them, your son is gonna be okay.
Don't worry about it.
I'm very confident.
Because, well, could you imagine If there was a commanding officer and they were deploying some guy, like Dan Crenshaw, and then he goes to the family and the friends and the community of someone like Dan and says, well, let's be honest.
There's a lot of bad guys out there.
They're going to blow him up.
He's going to die.
They'd be like, oh, they'd freak out.
No, you don't want that.
You always want to tell people, hope for the best, prepare for the worst.
I am not, I am not gonna sit here and pretend that Donald Trump's reaction to coronavirus was completely perfect.
But I also think you gotta, hindsight is 20-20, man.
Dan Crenshaw, really, man, 10 out of 10 on this one.
He points out, come on, let's be real.
In February, we were in fact-finding mode.
Nobody knew this, and he points out something amazing.
That you basically had 102 people, I don't know if they have it in the story, There we go, he does say it.
He says, uh...
The GOP lawmaker also asked Maher whether the American people would have accepted a lockdown of the country sooner when there were only 102 cases of coronavirus in the US on March 3rd.
He said, I provide all that context as we try to basically accuse this man.
He's been accused of having blood on his hands.
And the context is so important here.
If we're going to criticize somebody's actions, we have to do it with the facts they knew at the time.
So I'm just trying to be fair here.
I don't really care about defending him or his actions.
I just care about letting people know the truth.
And when people make these accusations, I have to ask them, Is the goal to make Trump look bad?
Or is the goal to get to the truth?
Because there are two separate sets of answers for that.
I 100% agree with Dan Crenshaw.
I don't care about whether you want to criticize Trump's attitude or what he should have, should have done.
I care about you having all the facts.
Then you can criticize.
Bill Maher and many people in media are taking this timeline.
On this date, Trump did this.
On this date, Trump did this.
It's amazing how bad Bill Maher does in this.
It's really embarrassing.
I'm gonna say, it's embarrassing.
He says something like, Dan Crenshaw says, look, would we really lock down?
Would the American people accept it?
With only 102 cases?
He says, Italy and Spain didn't lock down until like March 14th or like the 11th or something.
And well, he gives the specific numbers.
I don't know the number, the dates at the top of my head.
And Bill Maher says, why would we take our cues from Italy and Spain?
And Dan says, because that's where the epicenter was at the time Boom!
Mic drop again!
You know what, man?
What's really amazing about this discussion between Crenshaw and Maher is how calm and collected Dan is, and he's not antagonistic, he's not insulting, he's very respectful, and he doesn't even make hard, opinionated points.
He does ask some opinionated questions, but I think they're fair, but he just says, okay, well, like, you know, if we're here in the U.S.
and Italy and Spain are the epicenter and they're not locking down, are we gonna be like, we better do it?
Yes.
Some people would say yes.
That's fair.
So I think hindsight is 20-20.
If we knew it was really gonna get this bad, we probably would have.
Everyone's trying to argue that Fauci said if we lock down sooner, blah blah blah.
And they're trying to make it seem like Fauci and Trump are fighting all the time.
Dr. Fauci, my understanding is in February, he said it won't be that bad, we don't need to lock down.
Nobody knew!
Even the first video I did, January 23rd, I said I didn't think it was going to be that bad.
I quickly changed my tune.
I don't think I was perfect.
There were many, many people in conservative media who were on this before I was, pointing out that it was going to get bad.
I was wrong about it.
I have no problem saying that.
Why can't you just say it, Bill Maher?
Why can't you say, you know what?
I think Trump is a nasty guy.
But, you know, how do we really criticize a guy when no one knew this was coming?
Nobody did.
So for me, I was a little bit, you know, I was saying I thought I was thinking it was going to get really bad.
At a time when Donald Trump was saying it won't be that bad.
And that's my criticism.
So I'm like, hey, if I could see it, why couldn't you?
Again, I'll go back to that point that we now know that Trump actually had intel on this.
I'm pretty sure he had intel on this before I even did a video in which I said things were fine.
I think Trump was trying to keep everybody calm.
I really do.
But I got bad news for Donald Trump.
According to Pew Research, two-thirds of Americans think Trump acted too slowly to fight the coronavirus.
The media messaging is working.
They're making it seem like Trump didn't do a good enough job fast enough.
And you know what?
A little bit of the responsibility does fall on Trump.
We're all responsible for our choices and our actions.
If it's true that Donald Trump was trying to downplay this to prevent panic, I can understand and respect the choice, and now it's going to backfire on him.
Because now people think he didn't do a good enough job fast enough.
And that's all you can really say.
Pew found 65% of Americans think he responded too slowly.
That doesn't necessarily mean they're mad at him for it, though.
I think Donald Trump acted too slowly.
I also think hindsight is 20-20.
I look back based on the information we have now, and it's kind of a bummer.
It's like... Let me tell you a story, actually.
I used to go and buy a pick-three lottery ticket every day.
Every day I'd wake up.
This was when I was like 19.
And I would go and get like, you know, some breakfast or something, and I would get for $1, I'll pick three.
And the numbers I would pick are 386.
March 1986.
Those are my numbers.
I wake up every day.
I did it for like a year.
Because it was a buck.
I didn't care.
I know.
I wasted like $300 that year.
I get it.
So one day, I wake up, and it's a little later than usual.
And I think to myself, oh man, I don't feel like going to the store today.
So I didn't buy my typical 386 lotto ticket.
And do you know what the pick three numbers were that night?
I'd wake up, go to, you know, go grab like a milk and a donut or something, buy the ticket, and I didn't do it.
And I sure wish I did.
And that's hindsight being 20-20.
I can look back and say, wow, You know, if I went back and picked those numbers, I'd have won.
If I went back and actually bought that ticket, I'd have won.
Yeah, it's easy to do now.
I woke up thinking, dude, every single day, I buy the ticket, it never wins.
Why would I bother buying?
It's one day, who cares?
And there it was.
The same can be said for what happened early on.
Trump saying, you know what, man?
We've seen tons of these things.
We shouldn't overreact.
We shouldn't, you know, rupture the economy or anything like that.
It'll probably be fine.
And this time it turns out the number came up and we weren't as prepared as we could have been.
If we go back to January and Trump goes hardcore lockdown, I'll tell you what, the media would have torn him to shreds calling him an authoritarian dictator and all this nasty stuff.
There was no right answer.
So the best thing he could have done, I guess, is what he did.
No, I actually think he could have done a little bit better.
There's ways to warn everybody without inciting panic, but it's easy for me to say, again, because we're in the future.
So at the time, no one really complained about it.
Let's be honest.
They were talking about impeachment.
In January, people weren't saying, why won't Trump lock us down?
In February, people weren't saying, why won't Trump lock us down?
Near the mid to end of March, they were saying, why won't Trump lock us down 100%.
But you can't blame Trump for what happened in January because you also weren't there in January.
It's almost like Nancy Pelosi is saying, why wasn't Trump clairvoyant?
Yet neither were you.
I will tell you this though, Dan brings it up.
Nancy Pelosi was trying to pass the No Ban Act.
Trying to prevent Trump from banning travel.
It wasn't specifically about China.
I think it had more to do with Muslim countries and stuff like that, but it would have impacted Trump's ability to institute travel bans.
So while Trump was actually doing something, Nancy was doing a negative, making things worse.
By all means, let's criticize the president, say he could have done a better job.
You know what, Bill?
Fine.
I'll give you that.
And then you know what we really have to accept?
That Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats have failed us immeasurably.
That Donald Trump may come lacking, But at least you were at, you know, like, on a scale of 1 to 10.
With Donald Trump, we're at, like, a 5.
And with Nancy Pelosi, we're at a negative 5.
She was trying to reverse course.
So are you gonna keep voting for that nonsense?
Not me.
I got one request, man.
Bill Maher, when you call out China, I applaud you.
When you call it woke insanity, I applaud you.
When you stand up for principle, I applaud you.
But when you read bunk news and regurgitate garbage talking points that even your audience seems to know is bunk, you look like a fool.
I watch Real Time periodically, and I see the audience cheer for the pushback on the woke insanity.
Look, Bill, if you came out and said something like, I really don't like this guy, I think it's apparent, but the lies have to stop.
People would respect you for it.
I'm sick of playing these games.
I'm sick of how the, you know... I don't think it's because Bill's trying to make money.
You know, some people have said he's tied to this cult-like audience.
I don't necessarily think so.
I think Bill reads trash news, and he believes it, and his sources are bunk.
And Dan Crenshaw, bravo, good sir.
I'll leave it there.
Next segment will be coming up at 1pm on this channel.
Thanks for hanging out.
I'll see you all then.
I remember when Jon Stewart did a segment called The Audacity of Grope, where he mocked Joe Biden for groping women.
After he goes through the videos of Joe Biden groping women, he grabs a bottle of hand sanitizer and pretends to put it in his eyes.
It was funny, because Jon Stewart would go against anybody.
Now, of course, he often ragged on conservatives, but he's mostly going after powerful elites.
And that's funny.
Why would you punch random, regular people?
Something strange happened in the past decade or so, where it turned from class issues, like we can mock and belittle the elites who are wealthy and protected, and we don't mock and belittle regular people.
Because of intersectional feminism, it changed, and now it's kind of just like, well, white people are fair game, but not brown people, but white rich people, but not, you know... Anyway, the point is, We now have celebrities, people like Patton Oswalt, who instead of doing jokes about the wealthy elites, those in power, those of means, it's going after poor people because of tribe.
In this story from the Daily Caller, they say, Insulated Hollywood Bubble Dweller.
Patton Oswalt dragged for tone-deaf tweet mocking shutdown protesters.
Patton Oswalt doesn't really know what's going on.
That's probably the easiest way to explain it.
He sees his tribe on Twitter mocking and belittling regular working class people, so he wants to join in because he wants to get those sweet juicy retweets.
I think it's funny because the tweet was kind of a virtue signal and I get accused of virtue signaling for saying I don't like it when people, you know, punch down for the most part.
That's true of all jokes, including homophobic ones and racist ones.
That's right.
I don't like any of that stuff.
Though I agree with his right to free speech.
By all means, Patton Oswalt, make all of the stupid jokes you want.
You're not going to see me demand you be shut down for it.
You can keep doing it.
And I'm glad you did because now I can see your disdain for working class people.
Here's the tweet.
Here's what he says.
It's so funny!
Yes, comparing yourself to Anne Frank.
Okay, fine.
two years hiding in an attic, and we've been home for just over a month with Netflix,
food delivery, and video games. And there are people risking viral death by storming
state capitol buildings and screaming, open FUDruckers!
Haha, it's so funny. Yes, comparing yourself to Anne Frank. Okay, fine. Whatever. I
I really do love the insulated Hollywood bubble dweller comment, but Robbie Suave had probably the best response I had seen.
Check this out.
When Patton Oswalt says they're storming the state capitol screaming,
open Fudruckers, he said, some of them work at Fudruckers or places like it.
Not everyone can afford the luxury of staying home, ordering takeout,
and watching Netflix for two months. We can't all be wealthy, overrated comedians.
Well, I don't think you need to call Patton Oswalt overrated.
He's a famous comedian, so he certainly makes money.
People like what he does.
And a lot of people that are retweeting this, they like what he has to say.
But we can criticize him.
And that hit the nail on the head with the hammer.
They're pounding on the door, screaming, Open Fudruckers!
Is the joke supposed to be that they're just complaining because they want to make their silly little burger?
Or is it because that's where they work?
He doesn't get it.
The people screaming... Yeah, I'm sure they are screaming, Open Fudruckers.
Because they work there.
And because they lost their jobs, and now they don't know where their food is coming from.
I'm not a fan of this kind of stuff, man.
I'll take a look at some of these Smackdowns, but there's a bigger story I want to get to.
The one world, one people's thing, which I find horribly out of touch and in bad taste.
So Greg Gutfeld says, rich fat guy sitting on a mountain of cash tells you to suck it up.
Fox News contributor Dan Bongino said, insulated Hollywood bubble dweller with zero awareness of what goes on in the real world, where working men and women don't get swag bags for waking up in the morning.
And there were plenty more for where that came from.
Now listen, I'm not surprised that we're seeing tribal dividing lines on this.
It's Trump and Trump supporters, conservatives, who are mostly saying reopen the economy, but of course, because they're very much, you know, pro-worker, pro-economy, pro-job.
My stance on the First Amendment has always been clear.
When the protesters came to DC, the Extinction Rebellion people, saying, you know, blocking the intersections and saying, we want, you know, climate change policy.
You know what?
I agree with their right to protest, and I think they did the right thing.
Nonviolent civil disobedience.
Guess what?
You obstruct business, you bother people, they hear about you, and then you get arrested.
Not always.
Sometimes the people just get, you know, removed.
There were some people who had a dumpster on fire and pushed down the road.
No, that's not okay.
I'm totally in agreement with the right to peaceably assemble.
If you obstruct a roadway for your climate change protests, more power to you, congratulations, you have a right to do so.
To protest, and assemble, and then guess what?
You're obstructing a roadway, and you get a slap on the wrist charge, and they clear you out.
You pay the price for your protest, and you come out a few days later, you pay a fine or something, typically it's just all washed away, right?
You do get in trouble a little bit, but let's be honest, no one deserves prison time for standing in the middle of the road for, you know, a couple hours.
We give them a slap on the wrist, that's protest.
So when the conservatives come out, Trump supporters, and other people who want to see the economy reopened, and they're banging on doors, I say, you have a right to protest.
Whether they're smart or stupid, it doesn't matter.
Right now, there's a bunch of progressives mocking this woman.
She's got a sign that says, my body, my choice, Trump 2020.
And they're like, wow, these people are morons.
They're so stupid, blah, blah, blah.
Why are they stupid?
She's right.
Her body, her choice.
This is what really, really bothers me about all the tribalist, complete BS.
When a woman goes out with a sign for pro-choice protesting, my body, my choice, I say, okay.
Now, I understand the conservative argument about the other body within her body, but it's a very, very complicated process.
But when she says, my body, my choice, I say, alright.
When the conservative woman comes out saying, my body, my choice about whether she has a right to go out during a pandemic, I say, fair point.
There you go.
You got me on that one.
I can't tell you what to do with your body.
If you want to risk getting sick, well, more power to you.
I'm going to stay home.
It's that simple.
If you want to protest, you're free to do so.
I disagree with it within reason.
I do think that the governors are getting very draconian.
But I'm not... I don't want to get sick, so I probably won't go out and protest.
That being said, when the Raleigh police tweeted protesting is not an essential activity, I've never wanted to protest more in my life.
F you!
No, the First Amendment doesn't come with an asterisk.
It says... It says what it says.
So a bunch of people dragged Patton Oswalt.
This Thaddeus Russell says, The wealthy comedian would like you to know that he and Anne Frank are morally superior to the ignorant and tasteless peasants who want their jobs and businesses back.
Kurt Schilling said, STFU Frodo.
Most of this country despises you and all that you stand for.
You're the definition of entitled white trash.
You have Netflix, food delivery, video games, and little boys at your disposal.
Much of this working nation has lost their jobs, paychecks, and more.
I don't like the absolute anger against the guy.
I think Patton's being stupid.
You know, I look at Ryan Reynolds and Ricky Gervais, who love trashing celebrities and elitists, and people tend to like that.
But I got a better point to be made.
Patton Oswalt is chasing after tribalism.
He sees the left making fun of conservatives, so he goes, heh heh, open Fudruckers!
Man, Robbie with that excellent point.
Some of those people work there, bro.
That was not a good joke.
You're allowed to make the joke, don't get me wrong.
But when Florida reopened its beaches, within 30 minutes the beaches were flooded with people.
Guess what?
People want to go out.
It's not even about work.
A lot of the people, these people aren't protesting, they're just going to the beach.
Because as soon as they say we're opening up, people get out of their houses.
What side are you on?
This is the weirdest thing.
Twitter is not real life.
Regular people are going out and about.
Regular people want to go out.
In Los Angeles, they were defying the stay-at-home orders.
In many other areas, too.
They started ignoring it.
So the governor's like, I guess we gotta reopen.
So who are you on the side of?
The random internet strangers on Twitter who give you magic points on your tweet?
That's the stupidest thing.
You know, these people who chase after numbers, you are being roped into a tizzy by a random fringe faction that doesn't actually care or know what's going on.
You sit on the internet on your high horse going like, I have Netflix, and you know, blah blah blah.
Meanwhile, regular people are already defying the lockdown orders.
And I'm not talking about the protesters, I'm talking about the people driving in California.
The people who got arrested or fined for going for drives.
So I had a tweet.
I believe it was like a couple weeks ago where I said, we're facing one of the most serious crises, crisis, you know, challenges of our generation, and we just have to sit around, you know, watching, you know, playing video games or watching TV.
That's, that's, you know, relatively nothing.
The point I was making is the greatest challenge of the greatest generation was dying on a beachfront in Normandy, or worse, Pearl Harbor and things like that.
So while we are facing a serious challenge, many of us are sitting at home bored.
I understand not everybody has that luxury.
And my point wasn't about people being wrong to call for the economy to be reopened.
My point was that, you know, we are kind of lucky that the biggest challenge we face is the economy being shuttered instead of us being shelled by, you know, German forces or something.
Today, it is a lot easier than it was a hundred years ago.
That being said, people are still frantic and panicking.
So look, Patton Oswalt can make his jokes, fine.
People are going to drag him for it.
Check out this one though.
The who lied and people died. Anger at star-studded benefit to raise $150 million for group
and its under fire chief who Lady Gaga called a superstar despite claims organization was
complicit in Chinese coronavirus cover-up. They were. We know they were.
Many outlets are now finally coming around and saying they were.
intelligence is investigating whether the coronavirus emerged from a biolab in Wuhan.
Sources tell Fox News, as well as other outlets, that they believe that to be the case.
And a Rutgers University professor giving a quote to the Washington Post said it is possible that Wuhan has this biolab and this happened.
Tom Cotton, a senator, said we should entertain the possibility.
So why would we cherish and champion the World Health Organization?
Well, it's true they do other things.
They work with doctors on the ground.
At the highest levels of leadership, they're doing a bad job.
It slowed our reaction down.
China lied and the WHO parroted that nonsense and didn't do their job to figure out what was really going on.
And to this day, they are still getting the back of China.
These celebrities, I really, really don't like them.
Uninformed, privileged elites who know better than you, who want to laugh at you because your fast food restaurant where you work was shut down.
That's what they think about you.
Now, I like Lady Gaga.
I think she's a great, she's the queen of pop.
Her music's actually fairly enjoyable.
I like pop music.
I don't, if I choose to listen, I tend not to choose it, but hey, you know, it's good poppy stuff.
And I think she's all around a decent human being.
I think she's trying to do right.
So, I got no beef.
Nothing personal against any of these celebrities.
Pat Nozzle, on the other hand, didn't have to mock and belittle the little guy.
But you know what?
Even to that regard, he just doesn't know.
None of these people do.
And that brings me to the really frustrating thing.
You know, I mentioned this in my segment on Bill Maher.
You have these very high-profile celebrities.
They talk about things they just don't know anything about.
I don't know everything, and that's why I'm rather milquetoast on a lot of my positions, because I just don't know.
I'm not going to come out and tell you how you should live your life.
That's why I fall on the liberty side of things.
If you say my body my choice, I back away and say, I guess.
I guess I will agree with your right to be free from government intervention.
I understand there's moral and ethical arguments for both sides on this, but the argument right now from the left over this woman who's protesting was not that she was right or wrong, they just called her stupid.
You're gonna get sick and die.
Yes, she might.
And?
Does that change the fact that she has a right to go out and protest?
No, it doesn't.
So by all means, you wanna go do something dumb, like, you know, this is my position on even, like, contraband substances.
I gotta be careful about how I say this.
Look, if something's against the law, don't do it.
There are various things that we can protest, and sometimes protesting breaks the law, that I understand.
Civil disobedience.
If there is a substance that you would like to put in your body that would cause your body harm, I fall on the liberty side of things.
Your body, your choice.
Just don't go selling stuff to kids.
You're doing illegal things.
And we're seeing these laws change around the country.
So, if you are someone of principle, you will agree with their right to protest.
Well, anyway, I'm deviating now.
I want to go back to the World Health Organization.
So they actually ended up raising at least $150 million for the World Health Organization.
They're going to disperse that money to various other non-profits.
A bunch of celebrities.
This is the most mind-breaking, annoying thing I have ever seen.
Remember that thing where, like, the celebrity sang Imagine by the Beatles or John Lennon or whatever?
That was awful.
People called it cursed.
This is the same thing.
Sorry, your at-home trash videos where you sing or whatever.
I don't want to see this.
Okay, I didn't watch it.
Now look, if people like it, that's fine.
You're allowed to have your opinions.
I disagree with you.
I'm just sick and tired of the elitists telling us how much they're smarter than us and what we should be doing, how they know better.
Here's a comment.
Someone said, Here's a comment.
Someone said, I was thinking about this earlier today.
Amnesty International has now repeatedly tweeted that calling the virus the Chinese virus or the China virus is racist.
No, it isn't.
Shut up, you blowhards.
It's the Wuhan virus.
You know why I call it the Wuhan virus?
It emerged in Wuhan.
And even Bill Maher pointed this out.
Zika came from Zika.
West Nile, from the West Nile River, I think it is, or from the West Nile region.
Ebola, a place.
These virtue-signaling celebrities And organizations have no problem pointing to a virus and naming it after a region in Africa, but when it comes to China, they clutch their pearls.
Makes you wonder, doesn't it?
So if they think calling this virus the Wuhan virus, China's virus, Chinese virus, is racist, what does that say about them when they refer to all the other diseases in Africa by their location?
Man, that's a whole lot worse, don't you think?
And that's coming from someone of East Asian descent.
By all means, you want to rag on China?
You want to point out that the CCP lied about this and the World Health Organization backed up their lies?
Do it!
Do it, please.
Because they were lying about this.
And that's bad.
And they deserve all the credit.
So I'll tell you what...
You want to call the virus something?
People are calling it the CCP virus, the Chinese Communist Party virus.
But how do we have all of these high-profile individuals, politicians, celebrities, saying Trump is being racist by calling it the China virus?
Wow!
What does that say about you when you tweet about Zika, Ebola, West Nile, etc.?
It says you're really, really racist and against black people.
That's disgusting.
The fact is, we name viruses after the location.
It has nothing to do with race.
It's just about knowing where it emerged.
And that's where the Wuhan virus came from.
These people don't care about you.
They have no principles.
And you know what?
I did that whole segment on Bill Maher.
And I like Bill Maher.
I've been a big fan for a long time.
But he is really, really falling into this pit trap.
Where he's saying things that are just wrong, not true, because he's got Trump Derangement Syndrome.
Now the World Health Organization stuff, these celebrities singing, it's all well-intentioned.
They want to raise money.
We should be investigating the World Health Organization and why this happened.
We absolutely should.
You want to do an oversight committee of Donald Trump, Adam Schiff, Nancy Pelosi?
Fine.
I think you're useless.
I wouldn't vote for it.
But if you're going to do it, okay, fine.
Alright, I propose then an investigation into the World Health Organization to see why they gave us bunk information.
The AP reported China knew about this and withheld the information.
At the same time, the World Health Organization published false information.
So let's investigate that.
Some conservatives have proposed the World Health Organization leadership should be removed and they should still be funded with new leadership being brought in.
Perhaps that's the answer.
Don't look at me, I'm not the expert.
But a lot of people are trashing these celebrities.
And more to the point, my biggest issue is...
We're supposed to defer to the experts, which is supposed to be the World Health Organization.
Well, we can't trust them right now.
I would absolutely defer to Dr. Birx and Dr. Fauci when it comes to medical issues.
When it comes to economic issues, I'm not going to defer to them at all.
They're not experts on the economy.
They can tell us we might get sick, that's a fair point, but who's going to tell us how we get food to people?
This is the problem with all these celebrities and media people.
They don't actually care about learning what's going on.
As Dan Crenshaw said, this is about making Trump look bad or getting to the truth because there's two sets of, there's different sets of answers for each of those.
And he's right.
What these people are saying when they attack Trump and these protesters, It's that instead of researching and being correct, they're more interested in just mocking Trump and his base.
Well, we all know how that worked in 2016, so by all means, keep doing it and just see what happens.
I'll tell you what, the more they do this, the worse things will get.
Because I'm sure there are a lot of Americans right now out of work, desperate and hungry, wondering why it is they're being insulted and berated by someone like Patton Oswalt and these celebrities.
They're wondering why it is the World Health Organization said there was no human-human transmission on the 14th.
They're wondering what's going to be done to help them.
And instead of getting legitimate answers, they get disdain from the elites.
That's all they've been doing for the past several years.
Twitter has really brought up the worst of these celebrities.
So you know what?
My honorable mention to Ricky Gervais and to Ryan Reynolds.
Because they just mock the celebrities.
Thank you for doing so.
You gotta point out your own faults, man.
You know, Ryan Reynolds did this segment where he's like, I want to thank the celebrities, because we all know that's who we need right now.
And it's like, bravo, good sir.
He gets it, man.
You know, all of these celebrities are doing these quarantine videos in luxury.
They're like, we all must stay home and quarantine.
Meanwhile, they're in a mansion with the help cleaning the windows behind them.
It's so easy to say when you've got a job, when you've got cash, and you've got nothing to worry about.
And that's the point Pat Nozold is making.
That tweet he said about opening Fudruckers is, have the maid do it person- uh, exemplified in a joke.
Have the maid do it, he says.
Ha ha ha!
Fudruckers!
Okay.
Yeah, tell all their employees they don't deserve their jobs.
And in turn, don't deserve to eat.
I'm sure if you asked him, he'd say, no, no, no, of course they should have food.
Because the people defending him were like, Tim, everybody understands he's making fun of those storming the Capitol and not those who are desperate or hungry.
Do you think there's a difference?
That the people who are protesting just took off work for the day?
No.
The people who are protesting don't have jobs, dude.
They have no money, they have nowhere to go, so they go out and protest saying, give me back my job.
But they don't get it.
If they're wearing a MAGA hat, they must be evil villains who are always on the side of privilege and elitism.
Dude, the people supporting Trump are white working class people.
Have you lost your minds?
These celebrities sitting in their infinity pools do not know what it's like to go hungry.
Spare me.
I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up at 4pm, youtube.com slash timcast, and I will see you all then.
In the media, framing is anything.
You could take something positive and make it sound negative if you say it in a certain way.
And right now we have the story from CNN.
Trump's approval rally has disappeared.
Many stories have started popping up about Trump having his approval rating diminish or go down, or the lowest we've ever seen.
I try to avoid individual polls.
I don't always do it.
Sometimes I use it because I think it's relevant.
But typically, I try to go by the aggregate polling, all the polls together to see what's really going on.
But of course, for political expediency, many news organizations claiming they're doing news will say, whoa, Trump's approval rating has tanked.
But they don't talk about when his approval rating is at its all-time high.
Or sometimes other people do, supporters of Trump, and they focus on one or two polls.
I don't like doing that.
This is just framing.
People who like or oppose the president will claim things are better or worse.
The reality is things are really, really, really good for Donald Trump right now.
Don't let the media stories convince you otherwise.
If you're somebody who doesn't like the president, believing things are bad for him means you will lose in November.
Take a look at this story from CNN. CNN says a new Gallup poll finds President Donald Trump's
approval rating stands at 43%. His disapproval rating is 54%.
Trump's approval rating is down significantly from 49% in March, while his disapproval
rating is up nine points. What's the point?
Trump received a clear boost in his approval rating as the coronavirus pandemic began to grip the country.
His net approval rating among voters shot up to its highest point since the first month of his presidency.
But now, just weeks later, Trump's popularity has been dropping.
Looking at the data, Trump seems to have had one of the fastest retreats of a rally around the flag effect in modern polling history.
Trump's net approval rating stood at minus 10 points among voters in the aggregate polls as late as March 11th.
Less than three weeks later, it got up to minus 4.
Now, the important point that I want to bring up with this story—actually doing a fairly decent job of this analysis, pointing out aggregate polling makes more sense—but Trump's approval ratings started to go down the moment the news outlets stopped covering his rallies.
And that's the important point.
The media will frame things to make you angry, or to make it look bad, and then when Trump actually talks about it, and when you see him actually say what he needs to say, then people actually like what he has to say.
It's very important that the media control the narrative, especially if they want to try and shape things like we know they do.
He says, even at its peak, the jump of just six points is weaker than any well-known rally around the flag, yada yada.
I don't ultimately care for the most part.
A lot of people are pointing out this Gallup poll.
And I do think that Harry over here at CNN does a good job to bring up the aggregate.
Because when you look at the aggregate, you can see that although Donald Trump doesn't have the highest approval rating he's ever had, that peaked at around 47.3, 47.4 it looks like.
And that was just a week or so ago.
We can see that currently, Donald Trump in the aggregate is at 46%.
Compare that to any point of his presidency, and he is higher than he has been on average in the past several years for the entirety of his presidency.
I mean, his peak when he first got into office was just at 46.
So you want to talk about the significance of these polls, that's fine.
The reality is Trump is doing really, really, really well.
And they still try and frame things like it's really, really bad.
Check this out.
Trump's fundraising slows amid outbreak, still sets records.
That's great contacts, okay?
I appreciate that.
You can say it's slowing down, and this is fine, this is ABC News, but you gotta be careful about how the pundits try and frame things.
Are things good or bad for Trump?
Well, there are some reasons to believe things are kind of bad, but overall really, really good.
They say President Donald Trump's record-setting fundraising pace has slowed slightly amid the coronavirus outbreak, but remains strong as he stays on track to top Democrats.
I mean, look, compare Joe Biden's follower count and interest to Trump's, and it's just, it's not even there.
It's like the difference between a human and an ant, okay?
The height of a human versus the height of an ant.
It's ridiculous.
Joe Biden doesn't even exist on the map.
Sure, he's raising some money.
Bernie raised way more.
Joe Biden has almost no internet followers relative to Trump.
He's got like 6% of what Trump has.
But also think about conversation.
How many people care to talk about Joe Biden versus care about talking about Trump?
Everybody and their mother wants to talk about Trump, not Joe Biden.
So ABC says, Donald Trump's record-setting fundraising pace slowed, we read that.
The Trump re-election campaign and the Republican National Committee raised more than $212 million in the first quarter of 2020, according to figures first obtained by the Associated Press, bringing their total to more than $677 million since 2017.
Their haul for March, even as the nation's economy began grinding to a halt to slow the pandemic, was more than $63 million.
Trump's base is more fired up than ever.
You cannot say the same thing for Joe Biden.
I'd be interested to see a Joe Biden victory just because who wants Joe Biden to be president?
You've got a lot of people who don't want Trump to be president, but is that enough to fire up Joe Biden support?
No.
We'll see how things play out.
Right now, there's a story going around that even though the pandemic has slowed things down, Trump's actually still getting a lot of small donations from people, many of whom are out of work.
Some people have called for Trump supporters to dump their Trump bucks into the Trump campaign.
That would be a major, major boost.
But I don't think Trump needs the money.
I think right now, for the most part, people have really made up their minds.
I guess there's some people in the middle that need to be convinced.
I don't know.
People on the left aren't going to just drop the orange man bad rhetoric.
They're going to push whatever fake news they can, even though Trump's approval ratings are pretty good.
And the people who support the president aren't necessarily going to be changing their mind.
I think it's probably fair to point out.
The swing in Trump's approval really does have to do with the people who aren't entirely sure.
The reason Trump's approval rating is below 50% is obvious.
Democrats will never like him.
So what's really starting to work for Trump is that, well, I should not say all Democrats, but most.
With Trump and the coronavirus, he actually started gaining support from Democrats and from independents.
The swings we're seeing in this aggregate here is probably from moderate voters, because the Democrats have made up their mind.
This graph, I believe, the whole thing, the whole aggregate for Trump is misleading.
When we look at support for the president, when we look at support for the media, we can see that tribal lines have dictated everything.
So if you were to compare Trump to Obama, I'd be willing to bet that Trump technically is a bit higher than Obama in a certain respect.
Meaning that Obama's aggregate polling didn't have, it did have tribalism involved.
But you had a lot of people who were like, eh, you know, whatever.
Today, it's orange man bad or nothing.
They don't care about Joe Biden.
They don't want to elect Joe Biden.
It's literally just, is Trump good or bad?
In which case, you have a lot of people who, no matter what, will say Trump is bad.
It doesn't necessarily mean they're going to vote.
And Trump's base is bigger than it was when he got elected.
So if Trump's favorability is static, which it is, and his approval rating is up, up, up, even if it goes down in the past week or so, I think Trump's on track to win.
Especially when you look at his donors.
The important factor is, when progressive pundits and the media run these stories like, Trump's approval rating has taken a hit!
Like, you take a look at this CNN story.
And while it's not the worst thing in the world, they do lead with the Gallup poll saying Trump is doing bad.
They say his rally has disappeared.
And I guess it's fine if you want to report on the short term of what happened with his rally.
But you gotta look at the aggregate.
I think it's more important to tell people that Trump's doing better than ever.
If you only ever get pundits, progressive or people in the media, saying Trump just did bad, they really do just believe everybody hates Trump and it's worse than it's ever been.
There's a viral tweet that I see all the time, where someone said, can we all just admit that the experiment to have a real estate TV mogul, you know, a reality star as president isn't working out and things are really bad.
Something like that.
And it's funny to me because this person is clearly only getting passive information from those who frequently write about how bad Trump is doing.
The truth matters.
So I'll put it this way.
That tweet that goes viral, people really believe things are worse than they've ever been.
Meanwhile, we had a record economy up until the coronavirus.
So here's what happens.
You have media companies that want to write the negative because they know negative gets clicks.
They argue that I simply want to write the negative about Democrats because it gets clicks.
I would say it's true that much of my content is critical of Democrats, but I have actually praised and given respect to Cuomo and Bill de Blasio amid the coronavirus pandemic for trying to do their best.
I am very critical of Democrats.
And this does create a problem in basically both directions.
If you only watch my stuff and see me talking about how I feel about Democrats, you'll probably think Democrats are in the gutter doing the worst possible they could ever have done.
But as I am frequently to point out, I was wrong in 2018.
They ended up winning.
I didn't think they would.
One thing I missed was that the moderate Democrats were going after Trump supporters with moderate policy.
Today, the point I'm trying to make is be careful about what you watch, even if it's just my stuff.
The Democrats right now are convinced Trump is losing because CNN and the Washington Post and these outlets only tend to write negative.
So the perception people have of Trump is that he's doing really, really bad and things are really, really bad.
But if you actually look at the hard numbers, Trump is doing well.
Now, as much as I will be self-critical and say that I often rag on Democrats, I think I'm actually right.
Of course, they think they're right too, but I have data to back it up.
If Donald Trump today's approval rating is higher than it was a couple months ago, then it stands to reason Trump is doing well.
If he's getting less donations because of the pandemic but still breaking records, it stands to reason he is doing well and the American people like what he's doing.
That's the side I'm on.
So as much as I'll criticize the other side, I think I'm based on the facts.
They certainly think they are too, and technically they're right.
But I'm not going to call out anyone specifically, but I've seen progressives put out stories like Trump's highest disapproval of all time, the worst, and they're like, wow, Trump's doing so bad, this is so terrible.
But if you show someone one poll and ignore all the rest, you're not painting a full picture.
And then people are going to think they're on track to win, and they're not, and they're going to lose.
Here's what I'm trying to say.
You know, what's the saying about stupid people being confident and smart people being so full of doubt?
I think there's reasons to criticize the stuff that I do, because I'm playing a similar game that they're playing.
But I'm willing to look at the hard data, so I think the reason I'm on one particular side of this is because the facts are on my side.
If you're willing to watch me, you're more likely to see the aggregate picture, the bigger picture, pulling back to seeing how Trump is doing, and he's doing really well.
But if you were to be like one of these regular people who just passively watches CNN, you'd only assume then that Trump is on track for defeat.
And he's not.
Because you're not getting the big picture.
You're not understanding what's really going on.
The main reason I wanted to do this is because I'm sick and tired of seeing this Gallup poll.
Everybody keeps saying, you know, the Gallup poll, the Gallup poll, Trump's worse than ever.
And I've had some people ask me, like, why won't you talk about Trump's worst polling?
And I'm like, this is it.
It's one poll.
Give me a week.
We'll see how the aggregate turns out.
And right now there's no news.
It's not news that Trump's approval rating isn't as high as it's ever been, but it's still higher than it was over the past several months.
Like, what do you, what do you want to be said about it?
Long story short, even when they try and point to a negative, even when they try to attack the president, he's still doing better every day.
It really is.
You gotta look at how the aggregate plays out.
As much as Trump does have ups and downs, he is trending upward.
I'll leave it there.
I guess you get the point.
The media frames things.
They want you to be convinced that there's a world where Trump is losing, but he's not losing.
I got a couple more segments coming up for you in a few minutes, and I will see you all shortly.
Donald Trump's incompetence may have just saved the world, kind of.
And you gotta see this story.
It's an opinion piece from CNN.
Will COVID-19 save the world?
By Ira Helfand, Arun Mitra, and Tilman Ruff.
They say, Ira Helfand is an emergency medicine physician and co-president of the International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War, which won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1985.
I'll give you the gist of it.
We'll read some of this.
surgeon working in the city of Lon, Giana, India and co-president of IPBNW, which is
the same organization.
And I believe they all work for the same organization.
I'll give you the gist of it.
We'll read some of this.
The general idea is because world leaders, including Donald Trump, have flubbed the response
to coronavirus.
It may have given people a shock that the coronavirus isn't the worst possible thing
It's not the big bang of viruses.
In which case, the serious crisis we're facing is bad just enough to shock us into realizing the world is not all candy canes and rainbows.
The argument is, first, under the assumption Trump was incompetent and did a bad job, which many people think, you end up with an argument that it was a good thing.
It's kind of funny.
We've heard from many people, you know, Joe Biden especially, that Trump didn't do a good enough job in how he handled the coronavirus.
Bill Maher said, look at this timeline of all these things Trump did and didn't do good enough.
So the argument is this.
If the coronavirus was immediately stamped out by the United States, many people would not pay attention and not improve the system.
The argument being that we need a much more robust and resilient pandemic response team.
The article criticizes Trump for disbanding two groups that were supposed to deal with pandemics within the White House, National Security Council and the Department of Homeland Security in 2018.
What they don't mention here is that Trump put those jobs on other people.
So it's not like he just got rid of the jobs.
He just spread them out.
But the point is, we are not prepared enough.
If Trump reacted much more quickly, and we didn't get a lockdown or an economic disaster, then we never would have improved the system.
And when the big bang of viruses actually came, we would be unprepared.
Thus, Donald Trump's incompetence, it could be argued, has saved the world.
Because now we're going to take things seriously and increase our security.
Well, actually, let me read what they say, because I'm being, I'm exaggerating a bit.
They write as doctors responding to this crisis.
The past few weeks have been filled not just with treatment and crisis management, but with frustration.
Frustration because the COVID-19 pandemic did not just sneak up on us.
Public health experts have been warning us for decades we simply chose not to listen.
The Trump administration has been rightly criticized for its epically inept response to the crisis.
First, the administration disbanded two groups that were supposed to deal with pandemics in the White House.
Second, President Trump ignored warnings from the intelligence community on a potential pandemic as early as January.
And consistently, this administration has downplayed the seriousness of the crisis and the need to take decisive action to contain the epidemic.
However, this catastrophic short-term failure is only part of the story.
He goes on to say that it's because of other serious crises, we took action and had things such as like, you know, denuclearization or anti-nuclear policies.
He says, for decades, experts have been telling us that it was not a question of if, but only a question of when the next great pandemic would strike.
As early as 1992, an Institute of Medicine report drew attention to this danger.
And as a more recent report by the World Health Organization observed, Few doubt that major epidemics and pandemics will strike again, and few would argue that the world is adequately prepared.
Despite these clear warnings, world leaders failed to prepare, and the general public did not mobilize to make them take action.
It is not possible to prevent the emergence of new pathogens capable of causing global pandemic, but it is possible to prepare an adequate response to these diseases when they do emerge.
We didn't.
And now the world is paying a terrible price.
In the middle of a pandemic, like the one we're going through now, it's hard to imagine things could have been worse.
We could have been afflicted by a greater and much more devastating kind of virus with a much higher mortality rate.
It could have been even more contagious than COVID-19.
The next pandemic, and there will be others, may in fact be more intense.
We can and must learn from this disaster and prepare better for future outbreaks.
The point being brought up, as I interpret it, is that basically, people are complacent.
Everything is good, so no one cares.
It's like the head and shoulders commercial.
You know what I'm talking about, where they go, head and shoulders, they see it in the bathroom, but you don't have dandruff.
Oh, get it?
Because, you know, using the head and shoulders, you don't get dandruff, right.
So a bunch of people right now are saying, why do we need coronavirus pandemic response?
Why do we need pandemic response?
There's no pandemics.
In fact, many people are arguing, why are we even locked down?
There's not that many people dying.
Well, the reason there are not that many people dying is because we locked down.
Essentially, that if you believe Donald Trump has done a bad job, you are actually potentially adding to the argument that this is a good thing that will help the world.
Think about it.
As we go through this major crisis and the economy takes a hit, people are going to demand action on this, which means Trump, if he gets reelected or the next president, will campaign on, we will be prepared.
We will bolster the national stockpile.
We will have a better pandemic response team.
And then when a more contagious virus emerges, we'll be ready for it.
Think about the alternative.
If Donald Trump reacted perfectly, all they would do is criticize him, and there would be no evidence of any damage.
They would say, Trump locked us down and nothing even happened!
Of course they would, it's tribalism.
But then we wouldn't improve the system at all.
In fact, we would argue we didn't need it in the first place, because look, everything was fine.
And that's a mistake.
And then when the really bad virus comes, we'd get wiped out by it.
So, I guess you could argue Trump did a bad job and saved the world by doing so.
Here's what they write.
If there is one lesson we can learn from this crisis, when the experts tell us the sky is going to fall if we don't take action, we'd better take action or the sky will really may fall.
And we must apply this lesson to two other existential threats the humanity faces.
The climate crisis and the growing danger of nuclear war.
Now I champion, well to an extent both of them, but I think the problem with the climate people is that they're injecting this weird social justice stuff into it.
He talks about, in the case of the climate crisis, the warnings from the scientific community could not be clearer.
If we don't stop relying on fossil fuels and achieve net zero carbon emissions by 2050, we are dooming the planet.
Well, let me tell you something.
The message is working.
And many countries are weaning off of fossil fuels.
It's not even about carbon emissions.
It's about energy independence.
What we really want are countries like our country to be strong enough to withstand any kind of assault or attack on our supply chains.
If we can't get petroleum, if we can't get coal or whatever it is we're using for electricity, well then we have no electricity and that's really, really bad for us.
If we can create a distributed electrical grid using renewable sources, it's better for the economy.
So you don't even need to necessarily say the world is going to end to convince people to do this.
But the point he's making is that now that people are realizing we weren't prepared for the pandemic, it goes beyond just pandemic response into nuclear war, for instance.
Here's what he says.
In relation to the danger of nuclear war, the warnings have been equally clear, though they have received much less attention.
Former Secretary of Defense William Perry has said repeatedly that we are closer to a nuclear war than we were during the Cold War.
The expert panel at the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, which includes 13 Nobel laureates, Assessed that the international security situation is now more dangerous than it has ever been.
This year, they set their iconic doomsday clock to 100 seconds to midnight, or a potential global catastrophe, the closest to planet-wide apocalypse that it has ever been.
I don't know if I care much for their opinions, because it doesn't mean anything.
But, you know, certainly experts are concerned nuclear war is a real possibility.
They say the healthcare community is buckling under the strain of the current pandemic.
It would collapse if even a single nuclear bomb were used against an urban target.
A nuclear war, even a limited nuclear war, would be a disaster for the entire planet.
So here's the argument.
Now that we're realizing the world isn't all candy canes and rainbows, perhaps we need national defense.
Perhaps we need strong diplomacy.
And perhaps we need to solve... We need to secure our country in many more ways than just one.
I don't know if it'll actually work.
I don't think it'll actually save the world.
But I think it's kind of funny that through the lens of Trump's ineptitude, which is literally what they're saying, it's saving the world.
Recognizing this danger, 122 nations around the world voted in 2017 to adopt the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons.
We may be able to prevent the emergence of some new pathogens.
But for most, we can only prepare.
We can actually prevent the looming climate disaster and a fatal nuclear war.
We need to move with all possible speed to eliminate further release of greenhouse gases, and the nine nuclear-armed states need to join the TPNW and promptly negotiate a verifiable, enforceable, time-bound plan to eliminate their nuclear arsenals.
If we listen and take the experts' warnings seriously, we can avoid these calamities.
If we don't, the sky may really fall.
We will survive this pandemic, and if we learn from it, perhaps COVID-19 will save the world.
Now let me throw in the kind of more, I don't know, deontological versus utilitarian kind of perspective.
Is it... Can we criticize this guy for arguing that all these people needed to die for us to get with the program?
I think that's kind of something, something you might see from people who want to argue.
But I do think it's fair to say, you know, we can highlight the positives in the darkness, the light in the darkness.
As much as no one would encourage the COVID pandemic to actually happen, well, I mean, crazy people might.
We don't want it to happen.
We don't want people to die.
But if something good comes out of it, well then we can accept that and point out at least there's, you know, a light here.
There's something beneficial to all the negative.
It's an issue of whether or not you would want something bad to happen.
We don't.
But if we're stuck in the situation, can we look for positives?
In this instance, the perspective is, perhaps people will now understand that we should listen to experts.
How we do that, I don't know, but I will tell you one thing.
When it comes to the climate, it's very contentious and difficult to implement.
And so long as we have divisive figures like Greta Thunberg who want to end colonialism and rant about this stuff, we're not actually going to solve those problems.
When it comes to nuclear war, I think most of us agree we need to figure out better treaties for this stuff.
Perhaps, in the end, these doctors are correct.
Perhaps we should actually be looking at this and saying to people, listen, if experts are coming out and saying we need to do something, perhaps we should do it.
Unfortunately, humans are short-term thinkers, and I don't think it'll work out that way.
I think people are going to continue to ignore the long-term damage to the planet and to our lives, and just wait until the very last minute, because that's what we're good at.
I'll leave it there.
I got one more segment coming up for you in a few minutes, and I will see you all shortly.
If there is one thing the Democrats are good at, it's a good old hoax, taking fake news and running with it no matter how many times you're fact-checked, and it's proven to be false, just keep saying it over and over.
Because if you repeat the lie enough, eventually people just assume it's the truth.
From Town Hall, surprise, surprise.
Pelosi is pushing a coronavirus lie, even though it's been debunked by the Democrat Media Complex.
Oh, I love that, the Democrat Media Complex.
Well, listen, I think I'm guilty of accusing these journalists of being Democrats because how often they run defense for them, but a little much on the Democrat Media Complex thing.
Though, I think it's fair to point out, many people keep pushing this lie, the lie that Donald Trump referred to the coronavirus as a hoax.
He never did.
And PolitiFact, for instance, fact-checked Joe Biden.
I believe the Washington Post gave Joe Biden four Pinocchios.
This was a lie, they said.
Yet, of course, why would Nancy Pelosi give up a weapon in the political fight in 2020?
She wouldn't.
She's gonna use it.
I'm afraid he's going to act on the set basis of what he's acted before.
It's a hoax.
It's magically going to disappear.
claim that President Donald Trump said the Wuhan coronavirus is a hoax.
Quote, I'm afraid he's going to act on the set basis of what he's acted before.
It's a hoax.
It's magically going to disappear.
And that's why I set up the letter that I did after Easter.
Easter gave me time for reflection and prayerfulness about, OK, we don't want to keep harping on
what he did wrong because he's failed.
He's failed in the testing and the rest, and it's a hoax.
It's going to magically disappear.
That's not based on science.
This isn't magical.
This is scientific.
According to the speaker, if the president makes decisions based on his earlier false premises, then the American people are in trouble.
And his earlier delay and denial caused deaths, she said.
Pelosi made the case that decisions should be based on scientific data and not whimsy magic hoax allegations and placing blame instead of taking responsibility.
She said she decided to send the letter after Easter because it became apparent that Trump was drawing strength from his own view of what his falsehoods were gaining him.
And we cannot, we cannot fight a pandemic, and we cannot open up our economy based on falsehoods.
Here's a clip from the RNC Research Twitter account.
Nancy Pelosi continually lies, pushes debunked hoax narrative, gets no pushback from George Stephanopoulos.
They write, Democrats continually run with this narrative that President Trump said the Wuhan coronavirus was a hoax.
But that is completely false.
Even the Washington Post gave that for Pinocchios when Joe Biden's team used the clip for a campaign ad.
Now I want to point something out.
Nancy Pelosi is calling Trump a failure. If Donald Trump is a failure, meaning at least like a,
you know, his, his score of zero out of a potential 10 points, then the Democrats went
negative a long time ago because Nancy Pelosi was going against Donald Trump's actions.
So if Trump didn't do enough and failed, you were running the other way, dude.
You're further out than he is!
Could you imagine?
Like, this is how I see the Democrats.
Nancy Pelosi is like a ball and chain strapped to Trump's ankle, holding him down the entire time, just complaining about everything.
Are they getting anything done?
No, but she's certainly going on TV confusing constituents, making it harder for us to understand what's really going on, and then just weighing down the president, and then complaining about the fact that you weighed him down.
If Trump is slow in his responses, well, maybe it was because you guys impeached him, and we were going through that BS trial, wasting our time, and now you want to blame him for the stupid campaign you pulled us through?
They are literally just bricks in Trump's pockets as he's trying to walk and he can't get rid of them.
So we have this.
We know that Washington Post gave him four Pinocchios.
But I bring you now to a sort of an addendum on the main segment I did for my channel, youtube.com slash timcast.
If you haven't seen it, go check it out.
It's my other channel.
You can subscribe.
Here's what they write.
CNN says last week, the president's reelection campaign released an ad attempting to portray Biden as overly friendly with China.
But it included deceptive audio clips and images, including suggesting Gary Locke, the former president of Washington, was a Chinese official.
Suggesting.
That's an opinion.
The Trump campaign has also tried to make issue with Biden's son, Hunter, and his business dealings with China.
Joe Biden launched his presidential campaign with a lie.
The Very Fine People Hoax.
Donald Trump specifically said that there were very fine people on both sides, and I am not talking about, you know, the alt-right or whatever the quote is.
He says those people should be condemned totally.
Well, I think the context of what Trump was saying was clear.
That there were some regular Americans who didn't want the statue torn down in Charlottesville, And some other people were nasty people, and he said condemn them totally.
Yet Joe Biden runs with the hoax by stringing different quotes from Trump together.
Now I'm going to go back and talk about that Democrat media complex comment.
There's a reason I pointed it out.
It's because of this.
Politifact says about Donald Trump's very fine people hoax.
We have this fact check in context.
Donald Trump's very fine people on both sides.
Could they have just said false?
Trump did not refer to these people as very fine people.
They mentioned that, you know, look.
On April 25th, 2019, Joe Biden declared his candidacy for the Democratic nomination and the presidency by recalling the events of Charlottesville and Trump's comments.
With those words, the President of the United States assigned a moral equivalence between those spreading hate and those with the courage to stand against it.
False.
Plain and simple.
Donald Trump said some people didn't want a statue torn down.
That has nothing to do with standing against hate.
That has to do with people saying, respect our traditions, respect our history.
You can argue it's hateful, but it's not a group of people targeting race.
There were people there who were, and Trump condemned them.
And PolitiFact's response was very, very obvious.
Full context is needed.
Thank you, PolitiFact, for not saying true, I guess?
You could have just said false.
Joe Biden was wrong and launched his campaign on an out-of-context statement.
False.
Trump didn't say this.
Instead, what do we get?
Full context is needed.
That's right.
When you look this up on the internet, on Google, it says, fact check, colon, full context needed.
So the average person doesn't just see that it's false.
There was one thing the PolitiFact did a long time ago.
It's really funny.
Bernie Sanders said something about youth unemployment in the black community, and they said it was mostly true.
Donald Trump said basically the exact same thing, and they said mostly false.
Well, some of this is true, it's not entirely correct.
That's how framing works.
So Nancy Pelosi can come out and lie, And what happens?
Or let me put it this way.
Bernie Sanders and Trump can say the exact same thing, and you get it.
Donald Trump gets the negative, Bernie Sanders gets the positive.
Up until Bernie Sanders tries to become the president, because then you know the Democrat media complex, as it was referred—I'm saying that facetiously, by the way—will come out and try to annihilate him.
This is a piece for RealClearPolitics by Michael Tracy.
How Sanders was Russiagated out of the 2020 race.
Michael writes, Just about six weeks ago, before the coronavirus consumed every aspect of American social and political life, Bernie Sanders appeared well-positioned to win the Democratic presidential nomination.
The reason for his campaign's swift demise will be debated for years to come, and they are certainly multifaceted.
However, One of those reasons is fairly straightforward.
Yet as received little attention from his supporters, detractors, and the wider media, he got Russiagated.
It happened at a critical juncture.
Just as his electoral strength was reaching an apex, rather than fend off this damaging attack, though, Sanders accepted the premise behind it, thus solidifying the attack's potency and arguably sealing his fate.
Of course, to even turn the neologism Russiagate into a verb is a bit of a farce, but that owes to the general farcical nature of Russiagate, a political virus that has infected the U.S.
body politic for four years now, before being superseded, at least temporarily, by the current biological virus outbreak.
Basically, I say, at 4.16, Michael says, Eastern Time on February 21st, word leaked to the Washington Post that Russia was trying to help the Sanders campaign.
You see, the media, they play this up.
Hoaxes, lies, misleading, you know, so if you want to call it the democratic media complex, I think it's funny, I wouldn't, but I get it.
They destroyed Bernie Sanders.
And Bernie Sanders was weak.
It's his own fault, to be honest, and that's kind of the point.
By accepting the premise of this narrative, you embolden it.
Trump, for instance, just rejected it, and so did his supporters, saying, get out of here with this stuff!
Bernie was like, oh no!
Here's what Michael says.
The resulting article was thinly sourced, inflammatory, and played into the most sinister perceptions of what Sanders might be up to.
So, of course, it rocketed with warp speed across the entire media ecosystem.
People familiar with the matter were quoted as relaying that U.S.
officials had briefed the senator to inform him of Russia's efforts to interfere once again in American democracy.
Evoking traumatic memories of 2016, at least for anguished liberals, and that he, Bernie, was the alleged beneficiary.
Everything about it was straight out of the well-rehearsed 2016-2019 Russiagate playbook.
Vague.
Unverifiable claims.
Reckless granting of anonymity.
Credulous media acceptance of a scintillating but empirically flimsy narrative.
What did this latest round of so-called Russia interference even purportedly consist of?
It was never clarified.
And that's by design.
Because we know past allegations of Russian interference had largely consisted of scattered Facebook posts and Twitter bots that were spuriously linked to the Russian government.
Virtually zero accountability was ever imposed on the innumerable political and media actors who were responsible for propagating evidence-free Russia hysteria as it related to Donald Trump.
However, so there was very little appetite to apply any real skepticism to these new Bernie-related charges either.
You know why Trump won?
He rejected the lies.
Bernie accepted the lies.
Bernie bent over backwards and let the machine do its thing.
There's a reason why I highlight the Bernie story.
Look at what Nancy Pelosi is saying with her hoaxes.
Look at what Joe Biden is saying with their hoaxes.
The media, along with these establishment Democrats, just lie all day, every day.
And they get away with it.
Mostly because people like Bernie aren't calling them out.
Because people like Cenk Uygur and other progressives are fake and letting the media run amok until it comes for them.
Maybe y'all should stop and stand up to the lies from the establishment.
I'd like to see it.
In the end, rest assured, there will be more lies to come.
