Democrats And Leftists Are EXPLOITING The Crisis For Political Power, Many PRAISE China Censorship
Democrats And Leftists Are EXPLOITING The Crisis For Political Power, Many Call For No Free Speech. Democratic mayor of new York City Bill De Blasio recently targeted a minority religious community over their constitutional religious and free speech gathering.It was a funeral and he targeted thems specifically.The reason this is so shocking besides the obvious is that several times now New Yorkers have defied lockdown orders and gathered en masse but De Blasio just targets on vulnerable community.Across the country Republican governors are resisting authoritarian moves while Democrats are embracing them.While Trump and Bill Barr call for constitutional protections or "liberation" Democrats and leftist tribalists demand more lockdowns amid growing unemployment and pending economic collapse.
Support the show (http://timcast.com/donate)
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
In what may be the most shocking and egregious violation of civil liberties, the mayor of New York City, Bill de Blasio, targeted a Jewish funeral and threatened these people with arrests.
I'm sorry.
The Constitution is not suspended.
You have a right to peaceably assemble, you have a right to practice your religion, and the government doesn't have the ability to threaten you with arrest because of this.
But I understand.
We are facing very serious and desperate times.
But throughout the whole coronavirus pandemic, there have been a series of dramatic oversteps and violations of our civil rights.
Now, I certainly understand the importance of social distancing, and I would prefer it.
You're not going to see me out at one of these protests.
But we're seeing a very strange tribal distinction between who wants things to be locked down in ways that we aren't legally allowed to lock down.
I mean, we have a constitution and people who demand the economy be reopened.
It's very tribal.
Right now, media personalities and Democrats are calling for a suspension of civil rights in a manner of speaking.
Several outlets have said, maybe we do need to curtail free speech.
Maybe we do need to lock down certain areas so people can't assemble.
It's an emergency, of course.
It's for your safety.
People such as Bill Gates have come out praising China.
Now, it's not just the media, it's not every single person in media, and it's not every single Democrat.
There is some crossover.
We've seen some pretty ridiculous statements from some Republicans as well, but there is a tendency.
Many of the states that never locked down Had Republican governors.
In South Dakota, people actually organized a parade for the governor because she refused to lock down and guaranteed civil rights.
There's a serious challenge here.
We have a pandemic.
We don't want to get sick.
People should social distance.
And I don't think, I think it's actually quite wrong of these protesters going out demanding the economy be reopened to not wear masks and not social distance.
But you know what?
We have a constitution.
And no one in government has the right to tell you can't practice your religion, Or peaceably assemble, yet that's been happening.
And of course, it comes down to left-wing media personalities and typically Democrats that are doing this.
Even at a time when some Democrats are calling for an easing up of the lockdown orders, we still see others call for longer lockdowns and more strict restrictions.
So I don't want to make it absolute.
It's absolutely not.
There are certainly Republicans who are doing very, very poorly and Democrats who are doing very well.
But when we look to New York, we can see the worst of the worst.
I gotta say it.
I couldn't believe this story was real until I saw the tweet from Bill de Blasio singling out the Jewish community.
Now, I'll tell you what.
Some people might argue, listen, you had, here's what happened, you had all of these Jewish people organizing for a funeral, and Bill de Blasio, they came and broke it up, and he threatened them with arrest, and you can say they weren't social distancing, they're gonna get people sick, right?
What about when everybody in New York gathered for the Blue Angels?
Where was the call-out?
Where was the cry?
No, they ignored this.
You see, this is the problem.
Bill de Blasio targeting a religious community and ignoring the rest, ignoring all the other people.
Take a look at this story.
Outrage as NYC's Mayor Bill de Blasio singles out Orthodox Jews for breaking social distancing when he and his wife traveled 11 non-essential miles to go for a walk in Brooklyn and thousands gathered to watch Blue Angels fly over.
This to me is nuts.
Like how clear does it have to be that these people are violating civil rights?
Now before we read this, head over to TimCast.com slash donate if you'd like to support my work.
There are several ways you can give, but the best thing you can do is share this video.
I know, I know.
Look, I am biased.
For sure.
Fine.
Call me what you want.
But at least maybe if someone sees some kind of content or information, they normally wouldn't.
It would expose them to new information.
You don't have to agree with me.
You can absolutely disagree with me.
Comment below if you do.
But I think it's healthy that we see things that we, you know, we read the news and hear news we don't normally interact with.
It also really does help the channel.
And if you like content like this, make sure to subscribe, hit the like button, and the notification bell to get more videos like this.
They say, the lawmaker said Tuesday he has instructed police to arrest mourners at funerals and anyone gathering in large groups in a new zero-tolerance approach to stop the spread of coronavirus.
But just a few days earlier, the mayor and his wife, Shirlane McRae, were heckled by locals as they walked through Prospect Park in Brooklyn, despite living 11 miles away in Manhattan.
Others noted the crowds that gathered earlier Tuesday to watch a flyover by the Navy's Blue Angels and the Air Force's Thunderbirds to honor healthcare workers, but were not similarly treated by officials.
de Blasio had traveled to personally shut down an Orthodox Jewish funeral in Williamsburg after images surfaced on social media of massive crowds gathering for a rabbi who died of the coronavirus.
This, to me, was nuts.
I mean, come on, man.
People are mourning.
You can't control everyone.
People are reaching their wits end.
And you're targeting a religious community?
The Jewish community no less?
That is insane.
Take a look at this tweet he put out.
He said that his message to the Jewish community and all communities is this simple.
The time for warnings has passed.
I've instructed the NYPD to proceed immediately to summons or even arrest those who gather in large groups.
This is about stopping this disease and saving lives.
Period.
Specifically targeting the Jewish community.
Come on, man.
At a certain point, we gotta call out government overreach and overstep.
Well, of course, he received harsh criticism for this.
NYC mayor takes heat after lashing out at a Jewish funeral.
He did apologize.
Alright, so this is just, this is all this morning.
De Blasio apologizes for message to Jewish community after funeral gathering defends tough love.
He said a few wishy-washing things, saying, I regret if the way I said it in any way gave people a feeling of being treated the wrong way.
That was not my intention.
He then went on to say that if my passion and my emotion, I said something that in any way was hurtful, I'm sorry about that.
It was not my intention.
Okay, I understand you're sorry, Mr. Mayor.
My question is, why did you ignore the Blue Angels?
NYC ignores social distancing for Blue Angels, Thunderbirds, Flyover.
Why?
Because this is what he wanted.
He wanted to go for a walk.
He wanted to go 11 miles from his home to Prospect Park, which is in, I believe it's in Brooklyn, from Manhattan.
Because it's something he wanted to do.
You see the problem with extreme authority.
People will do what they want and tell you you can't do what you want.
How many times have we seen it?
The mayor of Chicago.
Well, I needed to get my haircut done because it's an essential service for me to look good.
No, it isn't.
Other mayors have done the same thing.
Going to a salon to get treatments for their hair or whatever because they need to look good while they're deeming other businesses non-essential.
We see it throughout history, and it's about time we learn our lesson.
Now, America, for the longest time, we did know our lesson.
That people who are... Look, power corrupts, and absolute power tends to corrupt absolutely.
What Bill de Blasio is doing is the surest sign of corruption.
I will do what I want.
I will have my friends and I, and you can gather around and look at my military parade, Yet if you want to mourn the loss of someone you love in a religious practice, I will come for you.
That's what he's saying.
Absolutely disgusting.
But we can look to other areas of the country to see just how bad these things have been.
Michigan governor considers extending coronavirus restrictions because of protesters.
Many people saw this as a punishment.
Protesters were demanding the economy be reopened.
And what did they get?
Well, in Michigan, the governor says, you know, we might have to actually think about extending stay-at-home orders, which is supposedly what they were protesting.
A slap in the face.
Spare me.
You had a bunch of people show up in cars in Michigan.
They were protesting while social distancing in vehicles.
Now you did have other protesters who weren't.
But you mean to tell me that you were going to extend the lockdown orders of your state for an additional month because, what, a couple hundred people in one location gathered?
I think we can see what's really going on.
Governor Whitmer is abusing her power.
These people are power hungry.
I don't know if you saw my segment from earlier about Joe Biden.
I'm not going to get into the full details.
But several feminist organizations have refused to say anything about the latest news dealing with Joe Biden.
Yet when it came to Brett Kavanaugh, it was all the rage.
You see how these people act and what they want.
They want power.
They don't care about you.
They want to punish you.
They want to feel that emotional satisfaction of causing you harm.
Why?
I can't tell you why, I don't know.
A lot of people have different motivations.
But I often wonder if these people just think they're smarter than you, they think they're better than you, and they don't understand the concept of empathy.
I find it particularly funny that you have so many people on the left arguing it's the right that doesn't have empathy.
Well, you can certainly argue there are elements of both sides that don't, but when we look to how these things are being handled by Democrats and Republicans, it becomes clear.
You understand why we have civil rights, right?
Because other people need to live and pursue their own happiness, and we can't determine what's right for them.
Apparently, Governor Whitmer and other governors don't understand this.
Ultimately, she did extend the stay-at-home order.
She is relaxing some restrictions.
But how do you think this makes people feel?
That when we stand up to your government overreach, I mean, look, they don't even have the right to lock down in the first place, in certain respects, I would say.
Now, if you want to order businesses to close, there's no constitutional right to running a business, necessarily, but if people want to assemble, you can't do anything about it.
Now, ultimately, Governor Whitmer did say, you know, if you're going to protest, please just exercise social distancing.
But look, if you come out and say, because of the protest, we may have to extend, and then you extend, what do you think people are going to see that as?
You abusing your power to punish people for exercising their constitutional right.
Sure, you can use loopholes to get around it, but let's see how people react to the Republicans.
South Dakota company organizes parade thanking governor for handling the coronavirus, for her handling of the coronavirus crisis.
Christy Noem, a Republican, was thanked by a construction company, as well as apparently... Let me just read this.
In a video posted to her Facebook page, Noem said the procession, organized by John Morris of Fort Pierre-based Morris Inc., was literally hundreds of cars, as well as fire trucks, tow trucks, and horse trailers, adding, "...it was overwhelming to me."
I just want to tell everybody thank you, and thank you to John for organizing it.
Just know that I'm extremely humbled to be your governor and blessed.
Thank you from the bottom of my heart.
This is a governor that was smeared and slammed by the press.
They were calling South Dakota the new hot spot.
You kidding me?
That's extremely...
Well, the population there is not particularly large relative to New York City, so please, calling it a hotspot?
They were going after her because she refused to lock things down the way they wanted, and everyone thanked her for it.
Will people be thanking these Democratic governors?
Some maybe, for tribal reasons, but let's talk about freedom and civil rights.
You want to argue that we should have the ability to suspend certain civil rights in certain circumstances and emergencies?
Okay, for sure, I'm listening.
It's happened before.
I understand the real dangers present to a society that refuses to unify behind a common cause when faced with a serious threat.
The people who are going out and ignoring these orders in New York and Los Angeles, for instance, going to the beaches, are threatening us, you know, and potentially going to make this pandemic worse.
But why is it that when these media personalities and Democrats come out, they criticize the protesters who are saying things like, my business is collapsing and we need to eat.
Yet they were ignoring the beachgoers and the Blue Angels spectators and those who rushed to the river to see the USS Mercy or the hospital vessel.
coming into New York. Where was the media criticism for them? Where was the media criticism
for the people rent striking? You can see how this is tribal. They're locking down these things
because they're targeting specific communities. In the instance of Bill de Blasio, he went further
than I could ever expect anyone to go, literally targeting the Jewish community. That is insane to
me. Take a look at this story from Politico. Coronavirus lockdowns pit Republican governors
against democratic mayors.
Republican-led states are looking to reopen their economies, but mayors in some of their biggest cities are not on board.
Now, I want to be fair.
There are some stories that show the inverse.
That there are Democratic mayors in Republican-controlled areas that are locked down, saying it's time to ease some things up, or at odds.
But for the most part, we can see in the news, this is the direction people are going.
And I've got quotes for you, alright?
From the BBC, more U.S.
states begin lifting virus lockdown orders.
The story says, eight states led by Republican governors, Arkansas, Iowa, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming, never issued mandatory orders to stay at home.
Michigan's Democratic governor, who has angered protesters with her lockdown orders, told ABC News that it is too early to lift mandatory orders in the state.
So listen.
It's not absolute.
Not every Democrat.
But listen, it is a tendency.
It is flowing in one direction.
Take a look at this top trend on Twitter.
Hashtag extend the lockdown.
Look at the image that pops up.
The pandemic is a hoax, this person yells.
I want to get my hair done.
I need a tattoo.
This is a caricature of what's really going on.
And the doctor saying see you soon.
As though they have the moral superiority and this is the only argument.
I'll tell you the most important argument.
You do not have the right to tell us we cannot peaceably assemble and we cannot practice our religion.
That is the first amendment.
Yet they're doing it.
And they're targeting people who would dare challenge that.
Let's take a look at what's going on now.
Hundreds of Americans line up for drive-thru food bank handouts in Los Angeles and Pennsylvania as a rise in unemployment leaves Americans struggling to feed their families.
Los Angeles and Pennsylvania.
This is starting to hit close to home, man.
It's getting scary.
It's hitting major cities.
People lining up in masses because they don't have food.
Certainly, there's an argument that this crisis is extending well beyond what a pandemic is, and we have a very serious economic crisis here.
Of course, if you're calling for opening up the economy, it must be because you want people to die, because you don't care, because you want to get your hair done.
But they ignore this, and here's what they say.
Democratic Rep.
Clyburn, it's a tremendous opportunity to restructure things to fit our vision.
Donald Trump called for liberation.
You want to criticize the guy for being too lax?
That's fine.
But it's not Trump calling for suspension of civil rights.
No, Donald Trump is being criticized for not using the Defense Production Act to force companies to start producing products.
And then when he does, because of the food supply chain collapse, they criticize him for putting workers' lives at risk.
I'm sorry.
The media, high-profile media personalities, not everyone in media, as well as many Democrats, are the ones exploiting the crisis and trying to take away civil liberties.
Yes, yes, yes, there are some Republicans as well, and yes, there are many in media who are calling for a defense of civil liberties, but I'm talking about the tendency.
I'm not trying to make a general statement of everybody.
We recently saw Rahm Emanuel reprising, never let a crisis go to waste, catchphrase amid the coronavirus pandemic with his op-ed in the Washington Post, March 25th.
Now, I understand.
You know, there can be some good.
Look, we've got a crisis.
I understand the sentiment.
But it's now the time to see these high profile Democrats say they want to use this crisis to take advantage of this.
Listen, Hillary Clinton said this would be a terrible crisis to waste, to not push for universal health care.
That, to me, is tyranny.
I understand that, faced with a crisis, we should learn some serious lessons.
Okay.
Following this, we'll have a very serious discussion, and we can look at what happened and discuss what we need to do.
But to use this in such a way that when people are in panic, you will restrict their civil rights, and you will force laws through, you will force funding through, you will demand access to resources, you will demand Trump use federal authority to force companies to produce things, that, to me, is shockingly terrifying.
I'm sorry.
You know, a lot of people want to call me biased for pointing things out the way I do, and I know I've kind of brought it up a little bit recently.
I think it's fair to a certain extent, but I'm sorry, man.
That's right.
Donald Trump's pick for the Attorney General, Bill Barr, is the one saying, no, the Constitution is not suspended, and you can't do these things, and he's right.
You want to talk about tyranny?
Let's talk about extending lockdown orders because you don't like the fact people are protesting you.
They have a right to, I'm sorry.
People in America can call you whatever names they want, assemble, and practice their religions.
Let's talk about Bill de Blasio doing possibly the most psychotic thing I've ever seen, specifically targeting Jews for their funeral.
And then you get Bill Barr saying, we must protect the Constitution, and Donald Trump saying, liberate these states.
And even Donald Trump said that Kemp in Georgia was moving a little too quick.
When I look to Trump, I see bad attitude, bad behavior, but let's be real.
It's reasonable to say we should slowly reopen.
Hey, Georgia, you're going too fast.
It's also reasonable to say that the states should reopen.
It's reasonable to say we have constitutional rights in this country.
These are not policy positions, necessarily.
You can argue that when it comes to an emergency, they are.
But we're not talking about traditional, conservative, or liberal.
If the left wants to argue for expanded government programs, congratulations, you've won this.
Republicans are on board with a stimulus package.
That is a left-wing proposal.
Now, Donald Trump, of course, wants to pay a tax holiday, saying maybe we shouldn't do another stimulus round.
I actually disagree with him, because I lean more towards we need stimulus.
Now, of course, there's still arguments about the problems, but we've given unemployment benefits to people, a guaranteed 100% benefit plus 600 bucks a week maybe goes too far.
But I don't think the solution is to just not do another stimulus.
I think the solution is a reasonable middle ground.
What do we get?
The Democrats want you to get your unemployment check plus 600 bucks.
That goes too far.
It causes businesses to compete with the government's free money and then people don't want to work.
And now we hear Trump saying maybe we should do a payroll tax holiday.
I also don't agree with that either.
I think many people aren't working.
They're not going to get a tax holiday and they need direct stimulus now.
In the end, though, we do need to reopen the government, and we have constitutional rights.
Where is that normal middle ground?
But let me be honest.
What Trump is proposing, what Bill Barr is saying, is slightly to the right of me in many respects.
I disagree with some of it, but the left has gone so far left, it's just out of the equation.
Bill Barr.
This was predicted.
December 24th.
Barr's loyalty is to the Constitution, not a party.
The unitary executive implies both a strong presidency and clear limits on presidential powers.
And where are we now?
Bill de Blasio and other Democrats abusing their power.
People in media calling for a rise of authoritarianism.
Let me show you the rise of authoritarianism.
And Bill Barr defending the Constitution.
I got no beef.
I may disagree with the guy on a lot of things he does, but if you defend the Constitution, that's what we're supposed to do, right?
Bill Gates says China did a lot of things right with coronavirus response.
I guess technically you can say sure.
They did.
Maybe.
But look at what they were doing.
They were welding people's doors shut.
They were barricading people in their homes.
But people agree with them.
Look at this Atlantic story.
Internet speech will never go back to normal.
In the debate over freedom versus control of the global networks, China was largely correct and the U.S.
was wrong.
In fact, this article argues it is good that private tech companies circumvent our civil rights.
That our rights are being eroded because the government has stepped back and these massive corporations have taken over public discourse and can now shut it down.
That's what they're arguing for.
The Atlantic says it's a good thing, our civil rights.
Look, civil rights groups tolerate these measures.
Emergency times call for emergency measures.
But are also urging us swift to return to normal.
We need to make sure that when we've made it past this crisis, our country isn't transformed into a place we don't want to live, warns the ACLU.
Amazing.
But what we see from the Atlantic and other personalities is, no, we need this.
They write, as surprising as it may sound, digital surveillance and speech control in the U.S.
already show many similarities to what one finds in authoritarian states such as China.
Constitutional and cultural differences mean that the private sector, rather than the federal and state governments, currently takes the lead in these practices.
which further values and address threats different from those in China.
But the trend toward greater surveillance and speech control here are toward the growing involvement of government is undeniable and likely inexorable.
In the great debate of the past two decades about freedom versus control of network, China was largely right and the United States was largely wrong.
Significant monitoring and speech control are inevitable components of a mature and flourishing internet, and governments must play a large role in these practices to ensure that the internet is compatible with a society's norms and values.
Welcome to the future, my friends.
This is what you can hope to get.
This is what you can expect.
The worst you could hope for, or what you'd hope not to happen, I guess.
CNN writes, China's model of control has been blamed for the coronavirus crisis, but for some it's looking increasingly attractive.
Incredible.
This is the future we're building.
Now, CNN isn't necessarily saying that they want it, but for some, it's looking good.
And the Atlantic certainly said it was a good thing, shined a positive light on the loss of our civil rights.
So when I say it's the media, and when I say it's the Democrats, I'm sorry.
I could single out one Republican and be like, look, the Republicans seizing our civil rights!
Or I can look to the fact that most states that had no mandatory lockdown orders, I'm sorry, the bulk of them, I think, no, actually, all of them were Republicans.
And the ones extending their lockdown orders and violating civil liberties are Democrats.
That's not a policy position.
That's literally what's happening.
And it's just going to keep getting worse.
YouTube and Twitter censor pharma company researching UV light treatment for Chinese virus.
I wonder why this was only written about, for the most part, in Breitbart.
Now Breitbart is certified by NewsGuard as being a credible news outlet.
Of all of the outlets to write about this, Breitbart, I believe, was the only one I found that was actually considered to be a certified news agency talking about the fact YouTube and Twitter took down a legit company that sells medical devices because they want to use some kind of UV light internal treatment around the time Donald Trump talked about it.
Did it make Donald Trump look good?
And these companies removed it.
I don't know what it's going to take to get people to realize what's happening.
A lot of people, I guess, don't want to hear it.
They don't follow the news.
Or they only follow certain stories that feed them negative information.
But let me tell you something.
I read through a ton of stories in order to produce this segment.
I have a bunch of stories pulled up.
Some of them talk about Democratic mayors arguing with Republican governors.
For sure it exists.
And then ultimately it comes down to Bill de Blasio.
Now there was a mayor in California, I heard, that basically threatened people with prison for violating these orders.
And yeah.
That's a violation of civil rights.
There's a Republican area in California apparently, like, interning homeless people.
I called that out in a video too.
But there is a serious tendency here.
Bill de Blasio is the mayor of the biggest city in the country and he's targeting a religious minority over their constitutional freedoms.
At a certain point, you have to point that out as being substantially worse than a small-town mayor.
A major state, massively populated states, with Democrat governors locking people down in this way, and the less populated Republican states protecting civil liberties.
I'm sorry.
That's just what is happening.
I'll leave it there.
Next segment will be coming up at 6pm at youtube.com slash timcastnews.
It's a different channel.
And I will see you all then.
We're now starting to see the unintended consequences of giving everybody an extra $600 on their unemployment checks if they're not working.
As part of the CARES Act, everybody is supposed to be getting full unemployment benefits 100% for four months plus $600 a week.
This created a big problem.
Many businesses are now struggling to get their employees back because the employees would rather be unemployed.
Now, recently I appeared on the Joe Rogan podcast and I told Joe this story about a salon owner.
Joe said, well, that was one story.
There are many, many more.
Now we can see this story from the Wall Street Journal.
Coronavirus relief often pays workers more than work, but it actually gets worse.
Some employees now becoming used to the double or maybe 60% increase in their salaries.
Are saying, you know what, if I'm gonna come back, they gotta match this number, because this number works for me.
Now, I can respect it to a certain extent, right?
Let's say you are not having your needs met, you can't afford certain goods, you struggle to pay your rent, you don't make enough money.
All of a sudden now, you're getting this amount of money and you're like, I finally feel secure, this is where I should be.
You want me to come back and work, you gotta pay extra.
Well, I'll tell you what's gonna happen.
These companies will ultimately just fire these people.
And for the time being, because of the CARES Act, these people will be fine.
They won't be when they go back to work.
There's a whole lot of problems that arise out of this.
People wanting more money.
And then it comes to statements from people like Ocasio-Cortez, who fundamentally do not understand how any of this works.
And it's mind-boggling to me because she apparently has an economics degree.
Look, man, I'm not an economist.
I'm sure there's a lot of stuff she gets I don't.
I just don't understand how she can say the things she says.
Check this out.
So, I want to read you this story.
This is a really, really fascinating story to see how people have responded to making more money not working and other businesses are trying to deal with this.
There's a lot of problems that arise from this.
But Ocasio-Cortez tweeted in response.
This guy Neil King says, this is bonkers.
Roughly half of all U.S.
workers stand to earn more money and earn more unemployment benefits than they did their jobs before the pandemic.
She said, maybe we should pay people more.
What?
That doesn't change anything.
Oh, man, I got to do it.
You know what?
I was sitting here thinking, like, why am I always ragging on AOCs?
You know, I rag on her fairly often, okay?
And I'm wondering if it's fair, because, you know, I could certainly rag on, I guess, Ted Cruz or something.
It's like, no, not really.
Look, man, there are Republicans that I have policy disagreements with, and some of whom I think are kind of dumb, but AOC really takes the cake because she's like Trump.
She opens her mouth all the time.
Let me just say it.
If we pay someone more money, they still get the $600.
It doesn't change anything.
So I don't know exactly what her point was supposed to be.
But if the problem is that these businesses are supposed to have their loans forgiven, if they hire their staff back, making sure that people have access to the economy, they're competing with free money from the government.
Well, printed money that eventually devalues the dollar.
I think we're saying something truly fascinating.
When you look at how regular people respond to finally getting more money, and I know that the Yang guys, the UBI people, don't like me conflating the PPP with UBI.
Let me just say, man, This, in my opinion, gives us a small glimpse, I'm not saying a complete picture, a small glimpse into how some people would react if the money was provided to them, no strings attached, they would choose not to work.
This is reality, okay?
Will some people want to go back to work because they'll get the UBI plus their salaries?
Sure.
Many people will not.
And many people, like, these companies will then be forced to compete with the government, driving up the cost of wages.
Hey, you say it's a good thing, fine, but it lowers the value, the purchasing power of the dollar.
Oh, I'm not even an economist.
Listen, man.
If you have a society and you have 10 people that make apples, they pluck apples, and it costs $1 per apple to pluck, that means the cost of the apple is $1 plus transportation, stocking, anybody else.
Let's say just $1 covers the basic cost of that apple.
If you increase the wages of the people who pluck that apple to $2, the cost of the apple becomes $2.
Because you have to pay the people!
The labor!
It's not magic.
It's that simple.
If you crank up the minimum wage, this is what happens.
Now, minimum wage increases have been advocated for by a lot of people, and this is what you'll get.
Now, there is a big net benefit to the working class, to minimum wage workers, when it comes to imported goods, because that won't see the same cost increase if it's made in China or something.
But that's changing.
Things are coming back to this country.
Not everything is going to be made outside, and services in this country, a massive, I believe the major portion of our economy, will go up dramatically.
So you will see everything skyrocket.
The purchasing power of the dollar will tank, and we will be back in the same position we were already in.
What we need to do is figure out how we as individuals value people more.
Maybe you can't do it.
All right, all right, all right.
Let's read the story from the Wall Street Journal.
They say roughly half of all U.S.
workers stand to earn more unemployment benefits than they did at their jobs before the coronavirus pandemic shut down swaths of the U.S.
economy, a result of government relief that employers say is complicating plans to reopen businesses.
The package of coronavirus stimulus laws Congress passed and President Trump signed in March included a $600 boost to weekly unemployment benefits through July 31st.
As that support is added to state benefits over the coming weeks, the average weekly payment to a laid-off worker should rise to about $970 from the nearly $370 the Labor Department said was paid on average last year.
Now, that's awesome, man.
Look.
There is a really good upside to this.
We're trying to get people to stay home to beat this thing.
We don't want people begging to go back to work, necessarily.
We do need to start making goods again, so this is a stopgap that won't last for a very long time.
There's a short-term benefit in that people will say, hey man, I'd rather stay home.
I don't want to go back.
I'd rather stay home.
And that means we will slow the spread of this thing.
But at a certain point, the people who aren't working, the people who aren't producing goods or providing services, cause irreparable damage to the economy.
We need the exchange of goods and services, and if they're left out for too long, they eventually cease to exist.
Many companies are collapsing.
This is why we did the Paycheck Protection Program, to make sure that people would still have access to the economy, meaning they can buy goods for the time being, And the companies wouldn't collapse.
The problem is we're giving money to people saying what is currently in the supply chain you can buy.
But no one is adding to the supply chain.
Now Trump is set to invoke the Defense Production Act to make sure these meat processing companies stay open.
I kid you not, it's the craziest thing to me because you've literally got these meat plants begging to stay open.
Begging, please.
And the left is arguing Trump shouldn't do this.
You know what, they demanded the president do this with the defense production.
I start invoking this.
Make sure certain critical infrastructure remains open.
And now when Trump does it, they're actually saying he's putting workers' lives at risk.
You know, I cannot, I cannot, I can't do this, alright?
People come to me and they're like, Tim, you talk about Democrats all the time, you're so biased.
Yeah, okay, fine.
But what the am I supposed to say when Trump is like, I don't want to use the Defense Production Act?
And then they're like, Trump is too weak.
He must invoke this to maintain critical infrastructure.
Then Trump goes, we're facing a major food shortage.
People will starve.
I'm going to invoke this to make sure the food plants can stay open.
Trump is putting workers' health at risk.
Why would he do this?
There's no answer.
Okay, it is bad faith insanity.
Either we need to have critical infrastructure open or we don't.
Pick one.
I'm just so sick and tired of this fake argument that, oh, you must be biased if you're criticizing the Democrats.
Oh, please, dude, AOC just said pay people more money.
That would just mean they would get the more money plus the $600.
You know what?
Maybe I'm wrong on the finer details of the bill.
Maybe that's it.
Maybe I'm crazy.
I don't think so.
Because I'll tell you what, I saw them all screech, Trump is an authoritarian weak man.
He won't even use the DPA.
Now they're screeching that because he is, low-skilled workers will be put in these dangerous conditions.
Shut up!
You know what, man?
I don't know whether he should or shouldn't, okay?
Maybe he should, maybe he shouldn't.
But when you sit there screaming, up is down, left is right, every single day, then you're not making any real arguments to me.
You're just a whiny, pouty child saying, orange man bad.
That's all you're saying to me.
We're having no real conversation about what this means.
Now, I will say, my shout-out to the Yang people, because when I had a conversation with Joe about this, I got a bunch of really thoughtful and rad responses.
And maybe it's because I'm a Yang fan, they cut me some slack, but I think that there's something about the Yang base that is very much into having legitimate discussions about solving problems.
While I certainly think many of the supporters who have tweeted at me are wrong, I appreciate real conversations.
We can actually figure out what are the pros and cons of the fact that we are now having businesses compete with the government and their employees don't want to come back.
So I've explained to you the basics of this, right?
Check this out.
Tom Hoffman Jr.
found out last week that his Hoffman car wash locations in Albany, New York qualified for a government small business loan.
To get that loan forgiven, he is recalling the more than 500 employees, many who worked part-time he furloughed when state officials ordered car washes to close and sales fell sharply at his nine oil chain shops.
While he is happy to have the loan, Mr. Offen knows some of his workers will be worse off financially.
Our interior cleaning staff are going to have to come back on the payroll rather than making the equivalent of $23 an hour to stay home.
Those workers earn about $13 an hour, which is above the state minimum wage law.
He will use the loan to pay them their regular wages, but will ask them not to report to work.
State regulators recently allowed exterior car washes to reopen, but still prohibit interior cleaning, limiting on-site staff to two.
The problem is there's nothing for them to do.
Figures on prior earnings of the more than 26 million Americans who sought unemployment benefits from March 15th to April 18th aren't yet available, but the initial wave of job losses were concentrated among restaurants, hospitality, and retail workers, whose median hourly pay is less than the minimum now paid under enhanced unemployment benefits.
Take a look at this.
This was mind-blowing to me.
2019 unemployment payment.
So we can see where people were, what they were actually getting in these various states.
And when you tack on 600 bucks, kaboom!
People in Massachusetts now getting, what, close to 1200 bucks a week.
And look, man, I get it.
Right?
On the surface, you're thinking, I mean, this is a good thing.
I think there are a lot of people who... You know what, man?
Like, when I was talking to Joe about this, and he said that shouldn't there be some, like, basic dignities covered?
And I'm like, I want to have that.
Absolutely do.
I am 100% for universal healthcare.
I just don't know if it's possible.
Well, maybe that's a bit of an exaggerated, like... I think you definitely need... You should have a private healthcare system.
You should have base-level coverage.
The way I've argued it is that I think the solution to universal health care is very much like universal basic health care.
And that would be if you break your arm.
You know, a doctor knows how to set that and put a cast on it.
That stuff's really basic.
You go and you're like, my arm's broken.
And they're like, all right, let's fix you up.
That would create a strain on hospitals because there would be a lot more people coming in.
But, I mean, then maybe we need to invest and build more hospitals.
Maybe there's some solution there.
I don't like the idea of people breaking their arm and be like, I'm not going to get my arm fixed because I can't pay for it.
That's messed up.
Now, there are some more expensive treatments we can't cover.
Like, we just can't do it.
There was one story I read about a dude, a young man, who had a treatment that could be cured for, like, $4,000,000.
And the state refused to pay for it, saying, like, this is ridiculous, like, I'm sorry, like, we'd love to, but it's $4,000,000!
And that's something you can't give to everyone.
It's a hard and rare procedure.
So, I look at it like that.
So, Joe mentioned having some kind of basic dignities covered, and I really do like that idea.
But it's difficult.
It really, really is.
Look, I'd love to see a solution to the problem, but let me show you this.
The $600 bonus payment was intended to make sure the average worker had full wage replacement in the months following mass layoffs that caused the pandemic.
Last year, state's unemployment benefits replaced about 45% of laid-off workers' wages, according to the National Employment Law Project, which advocates for low-wage workers.
I don't want to read through that because I want to show you there's a woman who basically said that if she wants... Let me just read.
Tracy Jackson started receiving unemployment benefits after losing her job as a cook at a college.
Her benefits total $1,200 every two weeks, almost twice what she would earn in the job.
She wants to return to work, but being stuck at home has given her time to reflect.
The extra money she receives in unemployment benefits has made her conclude she had been underpaid at her previous job, earning $10.30 an hour after five years.
I like the college, I really do, she said.
But they're going to have to come with more money if they don't.
I'm not going to be here.
Still, Ms.
Jackson is itching to go back to work.
She inquired about a night shift position at a factory making plastic containers, but there were no openings.
I just can't sit here, she said.
I ain't never in my life been out of work.
This is a really, really good quote.
It's amazing.
She wants to work.
An excellent point to the UBI folks.
People do want to work.
People want passion.
I think we've got to figure out a way to get people to feel passionate about the things they do.
Now there's a challenge there in that some jobs just plain suck.
They really do!
So it becomes difficult and potentially untenable.
But here you can see a woman who's saying, you know what, after getting this money and seeing what I have access to, they don't pay me enough.
Alright, now that's problematic.
Because what's the school gonna do?
Are they going to come back to her and say, okay, we're going to match you an extra 600 bucks a week.
That means in order to cover the costs, they're going to raise the cost of all of the food in the cafeteria wherever she works.
She works at a college and she's a cook.
I'm assuming they sell food in the cafeteria.
So now all of that food becomes more expensive to cover her costs.
Now the college students need more money from loans.
Do you want your school loans to go up?
All right, let's say some of the college students are just working side jobs.
Now they're gonna go to Starbucks, McDonald's, they're gonna go to their restaurants, wherever they're working.
I'm not trying to be disrespectful, I mean, many of them are probably working, you know, like, service jobs.
And they're gonna say, they just increased the cost at my college, so I really need a raise.
You see how this cascades?
What you need to understand about money is that the money itself, it's not just, like, it's not magic, man.
What you're really talking about is how much you value low-skill labor.
No matter what you set that arbitrary number at, it doesn't change what you can get for it.
If right now we increase the minimum wage, there will be a short-term period where people feel good, and they're like, I'm getting more money, but then costs will start quickly rising and inflating.
The purchasing power will start decreasing.
I don't know ultimately what that means in the long run.
I'm just telling you, if every single person gets the same, then purchasing power starts going down, because it's just what we value low-skill labor at.
Now, there's really important questions about how we handle stuff like this, but I think it's fair to say it's not all about exploitation.
It's certainly creating a serious problem when you have business employees who don't want to come back to work, people who, you know, would rather stay home and get the extra money, We've got to figure out what we're going to do about this, I guess.
Well, let me just keep reading, and then maybe I'll pull up another story about Ocasio-Cortez.
Nothing is going to be the same, she said, adding that she nonetheless wants to return to work.
There's only going to be a few tables and too many servers.
We make money because we have a lot of tables, but social distancing is going to change that.
People aren't going to come out.
So are they going to pay you more money, and then no one shows up, so then they're not making any money?
That means the business goes under.
They go out of business.
The enhanced payments creates a tricky situation for restaurant owners, especially in states such as Georgia and Alaska, that are looking to restart businesses in the coming weeks.
Nationally, median hourly pay and food service becomes... Okay, you know what?
Here's what I'm going to do.
I don't want to read that.
I want to show you this again.
I want to talk about this woman's view on things.
Talk about the potential for universal basic income or socialism.
They're very different, but similar in certain respects.
Take a look at this.
For those that are listening, we're looking at a chart showing that people made substantially more money with a $600 benefit.
Now you look at what this woman said.
She does want to work, but she realized they got to pay her more money.
The standard of living she's become accustomed to with these big checks.
I don't blame her.
She gets more money.
She's like, this is what I'm owed.
So what I imagine might happen is something similar.
If the US government gave a guaranteed base income of $600 a week, which is not even what Yang was proposing.
He was proposing like $250 a week, $1,000 a month.
You would see these people now saying, this extra money I'm getting, My company's gotta pay me more.
Or, like, if I'm gonna come back, they gotta pay me more.
Now, I get it.
I get it.
Because in this instance, I know people are already revolting.
Based on what I said.
In this instance, the $600 is based on not working.
If you're getting a universal basic income and you're working, you get that money on top.
So, maybe.
Maybe that will be a very different circumstance.
But what I end up seeing is that you have businesses then competing with the government.
Which means the business portion of this will have to go up dramatically.
It reduces the proportion.
Like, man, it's... I hope I can explain it properly, but... Right now we can see that the bar on the left is hard wages, and the bars on the right are government bonus.
In order to compete with the government bonus, even if you were making it at the job, the wages side would have to, like, double in size to overcome the benefit you receive from the government at 600 bucks a week.
In which case, the value of the government benefit is reduced down to only like 30% of what it's actually worth.
In which case, you are negating the value of the universal basic income.
I'm not an economist.
I'm just a dude who's got opinions, and many of them are probably wrong.
This is just how I see it.
But I'll tell you what, there's one thing I can't see.
The very strange circumstance of Ocasio-Cortez voting against stimulus, which has got a lot of people confused, even Republicans.
I don't know why, man.
The New York Daily News editorial board, that's very lefty, wrote, Enemy of the Good.
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez makes the wrong choice.
Debating the latest coronavirus aid package on the House floor, AOC put, you know, blah, blah, blah.
You know what she said?
It doesn't go far enough.
She said it doesn't go far enough, and the argument from the Daily News was basically, if we waited for every bill to go far enough, we would never have a bill.
We need to accept that it's not going to be perfect.
There will be problems, and it won't get us everything we need, but we need to act fast.
I actually agree with that.
You know what, man?
I long for the days of the sane Democrats.
I really, really do.
And I think this is one of the reasons why AOC gets singled out so often.
Look, there are some kooky Republican dudes, but they're not influential.
Like, there's that one guy, I'm not gonna name him, but he said a bunch of crazy things and everybody got mad at him.
Republicans censored him and stuff.
And I'm like, why am I gonna complain about a guy that most people ignore and don't care about?
AOC's got 6 million followers.
She's very, very famous.
Very, very influential.
And she does things like this.
So, look, I get it.
I could rag on Trump all day and night.
Yeah, I don't make... I'll be real.
I don't make very many videos dedicated to just pointing out the things I think are absurd about what he says or does.
But looking at things like this, I think it's just... I don't know.
It's just me.
It's my bias.
I'll be honest with you.
I look at what AOC does and I see it as stranger and more ignorant.
And I see Donald Trump as like... I mean, I gotta be honest.
I don't like the guy's attitude.
I don't like his character.
I would not choose him to be president.
But that's the best I can say.
When it comes to policy, I see traditional Republican policy on top of some successful moderate policy.
And that... You want to say I'm wrong?
You're allowed to say I'm wrong.
This is my opinion.
You disagree with me on it?
Yes, fine.
You're allowed to disagree with me, argue with me, but drop the whole grifter BS.
Come on.
That's actually how I feel.
I look at AOC, and she deviates even from where the other Democrats are at.
Now, look, don't get me wrong.
Nancy Pelosi is out of her gourd, and many of these Democrats are as well.
And that's why I say I long for the days of the sane, rational Democrats, which we haven't had for a minute, for a while.
And you know what, man?
We need Democrats... Here's what I'll say.
Take somebody like Donald Trump, okay?
Similar policy positions, better tact, better articulation, and you'd have a really good Democrat.
You would.
Somebody who's maybe a little left on healthcare policy stuff, a little left on cultural issues, but when it comes to domestic policy, border protections, economics, trade, then you'd have a great candidate.
And I think that's one of the reasons Bernie Sanders was so popular initially, but he flip-flopped.
He went after the far left, and it got pulled out from under him.
I think if the Democrats found someone like Trump, maybe even somebody who is a bold braggart, but had slightly left policies, they'd probably see them win.
I think what the Democrats need to understand is that Donald Trump has populist positions on trade and economics and labor and stuff, and the American people like that.
But the American people don't like the way he acts.
Now, I know there's a bunch of, like, dire Trump supporters who, you know, will criticize me, you know, or whatever.
Look, man, I think, based on the conversations I've had with literally around the country, most of the people I've met, MAGA hat-wearing folks, were like, yeah, you know, Trump needs to learn how to keep his mouth shut sometimes.
There's some good things about it, but definitely needs to keep his mouth shut sometimes.
Now, as for AOC, she's, I call her like Lady Trump.
She's like a mini version.
She can't keep her mouth shut, she blurts things out, things that often make no sense, and she's wildly famous.
Trump's substantially more famous, so, you know, he deserves criticism too, but whatever.
I'll leave it there.
Interesting problem we're seeing now.
The backfiring of the coronavirus package.
I guess we'll see how things play out, but I'll leave it there.
Next segment will be coming up at 1 p.m.
on this channel, and I will see you all then.
They call us biased because we question the integrity of these individuals, because we stand by principles, and they say that because you only ever criticize this, you know, the Democrats or these organizations, you are biased.
Yet when it comes down to it, we can see just how fake the whole thing was, and of course, once again, we are all proven correct.
You see, I was actually a big fan of the Me Too movement.
There were excesses and there were problems.
Some innocent people got accused.
We want to make sure that doesn't happen.
But boy were many of us happy to see these disgusting monsters, you know who I'm talking about, face criminal charges and get held accountable for the disgusting things they did to women.
Yet, many of us knew that this was a political cudgel.
That these people were going to immediately abandon any semblance of principle the moment it turned on them.
They pointed the finger at innocent people.
They falsely accused people.
They weaponized this.
And passive leftists stood by and did nothing.
We called it out.
What did they say?
You're biased.
You are biased.
You're right wing.
You're conservative.
No, I'm sorry.
Calling out lies and deception and fraud is not fake news.
Stacey Abrams on Tara Reid assault allegation.
I believe Joe Biden.
I wonder, what happened to the phrase, believe all women or believe women?
Oh, well, Stacey Abrams.
See, she wants to be the vice president.
She doesn't have any principles.
She is just a sick monster who wants power and who will manipulate whoever they need to in order to get it.
The New York Times said the story was incredible, even though there's new corroborating evidence.
You see, this woman, Tara Reade, has multiple people coming forward saying they remember when she said it.
There are documents about the complaint filed by Tara Reade that could be released if Joe Biden deems it so.
He won't.
And they won't release the documents until two years after Biden is out of public life.
I do not believe Joe Biden is required to prove his innocence.
What I am talking about here is not whether Joe Biden is a good or bad person.
I am talking about the integrity of those who attacked and tried to destroy Brett Kavanaugh, among many other innocent men, and now turn their backs on an alleged victim, throwing any semblance of principle into the garbage disposal and turning that switch on as fast as they can.
They never cared.
They don't care.
They want power and they will do anything to get it.
It's not about Stacey Abrams.
It's not.
I get it.
She wants to be the vice president, so of course she's gonna come out and say, I believe Joe Biden.
Oh, yeah.
Keep kissing up to this man.
Maybe he'll pick you.
Fine.
But take a look at this story from the Daily Beast.
Now, I'm rather surprised.
Typically, I find myself at odds with a lot of the Daily Beast's writing, notably because they have several reporters who literally just make things up, and I can confirm that, but we'll leave that aside.
They've made up a bunch of stuff.
Why have women's groups gone dead silent on Biden assault accusation?
In the wake of the MeToo movement, prominent women came forward expressing regret they didn't take allegations against then President Bill Clinton seriously in the 1990s.
Well, you see, these people hate Donald Trump.
Joe Biden offers them really nothing other than a warm body for which to vote.
So they will not.
They will not call out what they see as what should be aligned with their values.
Now, the Me Too movement, at its core, outside of the exploitation of these groups, I think did amazing things.
Bravo.
Some of these awful dudes, man, I'm glad to see them go.
That's not the way that our culture and companies should be working.
They're gone.
Congratulations.
To the innocent men who suffered under this, that's horrifying.
I'm sorry I had to go through this.
And I'm glad that many people were proven to be innocent, and we did see this taken too far.
Many people saw it.
There was one video I did about Keanu Reeves hover-handing everybody.
You ever see that?
Keanu Reeves, he goes up to women and he just has his hand hovering.
He won't touch them.
And a lot of... Look, you know what, man?
Some people try to argue just because he's a gentleman and he wants to respect women.
I don't buy it, dude.
Look, come on.
You can take a photo with someone and give them a hug.
Keanu Reeves is a wealthy, famous celebrity.
So what happens in the wake of the MeToo movement?
He's not touching anybody, and he's a smart guy to do so.
Because you never know when someone's going to be like, oh, how about what happened with Neil deGrasse Tyson?
He looked at a woman's tattoo, and she later came back 20 years MeToo.
Well, I'll tell you what we're seeing now.
These MeToo feminist organizations refuse to say anything about Joe Biden.
In fact, the Time's Up organization told Tara Reid, this is one of the big MeToo foundations, the big MeToo organizations, nonprofits, whatever, Well, Joe Biden's running for president, so we can't represent you.
It would be a conflict of 501c3 to 501c4.
Non-profit rules and regulations.
You get it.
We can't interfere.
Sorry.
Joe Biden is immune from accountability.
The dude is on camera, touching people in creepy ways.
He's apologized for it.
We know he does this.
Now, okay, I'm gonna stop here.
I'm gonna stop.
I don't want to make this about Joe Biden, necessarily.
I want to make it about all of these organizations which we can now see are frauds.
Take a look at this story.
The Daily Beast of all outlets, women's group and prominent feminist figures have remained almost universally silent over a former staffer's accusation of misconduct against former Vice President Joe Biden, including those individuals and groups who came to express regret for how the Democratic Party handled similar accusations made against Bill Clinton in the 1990s.
You see, Bill Clinton's long gone.
So when people started calling out Bill Clinton, Saying, oh, you want to talk about Trump?
What about Clinton?
You never called him out.
They came out and said, oh, we should have called out Bill Clinton.
Oh, we're so regretful.
You know, we will make sure to do better next time.
And the reason they did that was because Bill Clinton doesn't, he's not in public life.
He's not running for office.
They had nothing to lose by saying this.
Oh, Joe Biden?
Yeah, see, he's running for president.
Well, now if they call him out, they'll hurt his chances.
No principles.
You ask me why so often my videos are pointing the finger at the left and Democrats.
Let me explain something to you.
Breitbart and The Federalist do not have massive institutional power to swing how major advertisers act, how major social networks act, how politicians act, for the most part.
They do have some influence in conservative circles, which do not have influence over universities.
All of these organizations working with high-profile celebrities, influencing magazine covers, late-night TV hosts, that's establishment power.
I don't care what one small conservative blog is doing.
That in no way affects me.
You know what does?
When numerous high-profile, powerful, Democrat-funded organizations lie to gain power.
That's what I call out.
Has nothing to do with policy or team.
It has everything to do with corruption.
You want to call out Brett Kavanaugh?
I think you're wrong.
I didn't think there was any evidence there.
You want to call out Joe Biden?
I also think, for the most part, it's wrong.
Innocent until proven guilty.
And as a 30-year-old delegation, I'm not interested in playing.
But now you have to reap what you've sown.
And these organizations don't want to, because they never cared about what they claimed they cared about.
It was a weapon against the right to accuse them of being pigs and evil.
And that's the point.
They get away with this.
Now, to be fair, The Daily Beast is calling this out.
A news organization that I've absolutely been critical of numerous times, even just a couple minutes ago.
So I hope.
I hope we can get some accountability from these people.
But I really doubt it.
Because many of them believe in winning by any means necessary.
And they hate Trump that much.
Here's what they say.
The collective non-response from mostly Democrat-aligned groups comes as potential female running mates struggle themselves in responding to the Biden allegation, which has the potential to upend his campaign against President Donald Trump, Who has been accused of misconduct by dozens of women in alleged incidents spanning decades.
And it echoes the division among progressives when the MeToo movement revived scrutiny of Clinton's own misconduct.
The Daily Beast contacted 10 top national pro-women organizations for this story, including EMILY's List, Planned Parenthood, Action Fund, Narrow Pro-Choice America, and the National Organization for Women.
Most organizations did not respond to a detailed request for comment about the allegations made by Tara Reid, a former staff assistant in Biden's Senate office, who has accused the former Vice President Oh, forcibly?
Let's just keep it one family friendly.
Assaulting her with his fingers in the 90s.
Others replied and did not provide a statement.
One prominent women's political group cited a scheduling conflict and asked to be kept, quote, in mind for other opportunities.
And you know what?
The Daily Beast will probably give it to him.
When pressed if the following day would work better, an associate said it would not, citing another scheduling conflict.
We're just too busy to give you a couple sentences about the allegations we all know about.
Thank you.
Yeah, right.
The near total lack of acknowledgment from nearly a dozen leading pro-women organizations comes as new corroboration has emerged with respect to the allegation, which the Biden campaign has categorically denied.
Neither the Biden campaign nor Reid responded to requests from the Daily Beast for comment on Tuesday.
It is also taking place as prominent elected women in the Democratic Party rally to Biden's side.
On Tuesday, Hillary Clinton became the latest to offer her endorsement of Biden's candidacy, a symbolic passing of the torch from one presidential candidate to another, but a moment that also served as a reminder of moments in recent party history when accusers were almost uniformly dismissed.
Here we go.
In 2017, attorney Patricia Ireland, who served as president of the National Organization for Women for the entirety of the Clinton administration, told the Washington Post that she wished she had done more to be supportive of Paula Jones, the former Arkansas state employee who made allegations against Bill Clinton during his time as governor.
For Paula Jones, there were nice distinctions that people made.
She didn't work for him.
He didn't have the power to hire or fire her, Ireland said at the time, but that ignores the reality that he was a very powerful man.
We also have, during the same period, feminist icon Gloria Steinem told The Guardian that she regretted some parts of her aggressive defense of Clinton during the Monica Lewinsky scandal, according to the New York Times op-ed, which she dismissed allegations of misconduct against the president.
Even if the allegations are true, Steinem wrote in 1998, the president is not guilty of harassment.
He is accused of having made a gross, dumb, and reckless pass.
President Clinton took no for an answer.
Steinem told The Guardian that, quote, I wouldn't write the same thing now because there's probably more known about Othermen now I'm not sure.
What you write in one decade, you don't necessarily write in the next.
Okay, I can actually respect that 100%.
I think it's silly to go back 30 years, well in this case it's over 20 years, and say, haha, you should have known.
Well, hindsight is 20-20.
Now that she knows about the Othermen who have come out against Bill Clinton, perhaps she's having second thoughts.
That I can respect.
What about Joe Biden?
Why aren't people gonna call him out?
I think it's clear to all of us.
What they want is to manipulate the delicate and good nature of the average American, many of whom don't pay attention.
And I'll tell you what scares me about the idea of mail-in voting.
Now listen.
I'm not on your team.
I hope this is clear to everybody.
I'm not on the team for the Republicans or the Democrats.
Now, the Democrats and the leftists like to say, oh, Tim Pool's clearly in the bag for Trump.
No, sorry, that's just not the case.
I am just looking for what makes the most sense.
Your team means nothing to me.
Now, I've heard from many people on the right, there's a fear of fraud when it comes to mail-in ballots.
It's 100% true.
There is.
You'll get some parent filling out or something.
You'll get a person.
Getting the ballot in the mail for, say, their kid or their parent, and being like, I'm just gonna fill this out.
But even before that, we have a serious problem in this country.
Should people who don't want to vote and don't care to vote actually vote?
There are some arguments for and against compulsory voting, but I certainly think we have a problem with people who vote when they don't want to, because they don't know they don't care.
Now, a lot of people who do want to vote also don't know.
A lot, you know, like don't know anything about politics.
Take a look at these stories.
The allegations made, the fake news, the people who are unwilling to call out Joe Biden.
And what do you get?
You get manipulation and corruption.
Imagine now, These ballots are mailed out, and you get a bunch of 18-year-olds who don't know or care about any of this, and didn't even want to vote.
You get some activist parent who sees all the outrage from all the feminists.
Me too, Donald Trump, orange man, bad.
And sure, he's got accusations against him.
But they won't call out Joe Biden, and so this goes over the heads and is completely missed by the people who might otherwise be angered by it.
This manipulation will be used against Republicans.
I think with mail-in voting, one of the big problems you'll see is that people, and listen, Democrats, listen, Republicans can do the same thing.
You are going to get people who normally don't care and don't want to vote being tricked into voting for stupid things they might not want.
I think ultimately it'll be bad for Republicans because we can see this.
Now, do Republicans have sly, underhanded, manipulative tactics?
Everybody does.
It's called politics, man.
But come on.
We can see how the New York Times defended Biden.
We can see how they write hundreds of articles against Brett Kavanaugh.
But Joe Biden gets a freebie.
Stacey Abrams gives him a freebie.
All of these prominent organizations, like Planned Parenthood, give him a freebie.
And now that no one's gonna hear about it, they're gonna say, well, we gotta go with Joe Biden just because.
What if you knew?
What if these people had real principles and weren't trying to trick you and to steal your support?
That's what I'm not interested in.
Now, I'm not saying that Republicans wouldn't be necessarily the same thing.
I think, ultimately, this is one of the biggest problems with mail-in voting.
Because you will certainly find in conservative districts and areas, older people telling, once again, people not interested, you gotta vote for the Republican, you gotta vote for Trump.
We don't want that, do we?
That's why I ultimately don't think it necessarily matters all that much, but I don't like the idea of people manipulating to gain power, and this is exactly what we're looking at.
They have completely abandoned their feminist values, what they claimed were their feminist values, because they like Joe Biden.
They want Biden to win.
Neither Ireland nor Steinem responded to a request for comment about Reid's accusations against Biden.
So all of that puff talk from Gloria Steinem, I should have been a bit more serious and I wish I knew better about Clinton, but I'm not gonna question Joe Biden.
Nah, sorry.
Yeah, no principles.
Speaking to Fox News on Tuesday, Reid accused Hillary Clinton of enabling a predator.
Hillary Clinton has a history of enabling powerful men to cover up their predatory behaviors and their inappropriate conduct, Reid said in a response to Clinton's endorsement.
We don't need that for this country.
We don't need that for our new generation coming up that wants institutional rape culture to change.
Reid first accused Biden of keeping family friendly.
During a podcast, she accused Joe Biden.
Two other people, including Reid's brother and a friend who has remained anonymous, told various outlets that Reid had told them about certain aspects of the alleged assault and her subsequent dismissal from Biden's office over the years.
On Monday, Business Insider quoted a former neighbor of Reid's recounting that the ex-staffer had disclosed details of the alleged assault when she lived next door to her in the mid-1990s.
This happened, and I know it did because I remember talking about it.
Linda LaCasse, Reid's former neighbor, told the outlet.
On April 24th, Reid told The Intercept that her mother called into Larry King's cable news program.
They found the episode.
Raid said on Twitter.
That was her mother's voice.
This is my mom.
I miss her.
Biden's defenders have argued that Raid's story has changed over time.
She previously had said only that she felt Biden had inappropriately touched her and made her feel uncomfortable.
But assault victims' advocates have noted that it is common for victims to hold back on details as they recount their traumatic experiences.
You got no out.
You can say whatever you want.
Sorry.
No dice.
Remember when Christine Blasey Ford said, I am scared to fly, and then was asked, don't you fly all the time?
Yes.
Or, oh, she said, I have to have two doors on my house because I've been traumatized by this moment from when I was younger.
And then someone said, isn't she using her house as like an Airbnb or something?
That's why she had two doors?
Now, maybe I'm wrong.
You know, I'm sorry.
I mean, those were all pointed by the people.
Maybe those questions were incorrect.
Okay, that's fine.
What about this?
Maybe the points made about Tara Reade are also incorrect.
I'm not going to play silly games about Joe Biden and 30-year-old allegations because we're playing politics and politics is dirty and it can go in every direction.
But to see the level of institutional power that was dropped on top of Brett Kavanaugh, he probably didn't see it coming, I'll tell you what.
Fight this disease, give me a second.
To see that level of institutional power is absolutely, it's insane.
And then sure enough, as we expected, many media outlets rushed to the defense of Joe Biden.
The Washington Post says, Trump allies are doing this.
CNN says, well, Joe Biden does need to account for this, but it is mostly from conservative circles.
Nevermind the progressives.
Nevermind the Daily Beast or Mother Jones.
They're trying as hard as they can, it's not working.
But you know what?
Here's the big takeaway.
The claims of feminism, these beliefs, these principles, we now see through the veil, the facade, the lies.
They're not feminist organizations.
They're power-hungry megalomaniacs.
They will say whatever they can to gain power.
Look, I worked for several non-profits just over 10 years ago, and I thought by working for these organizations, environmental organizations, civil rights organizations, I thought I'd be doing good.
I thought that we could raise money for good causes, and this was the right way to change the world.
And boy, did I learn fast.
Because these were just companies that were willing to lie, cheat, and steal to gain whatever power they wanted, and they didn't actually solve any of these problems.
It was all about keeping the sickness available.
You see, a non-profit organization, like many of these, should eventually cease to exist.
Not all of them.
Some of them provide ongoing services.
But when you have a mission, and you say your mission is to accomplish something, non-profits' goal should be to run themselves out of business.
We want to save this species, blah blah blah.
Well, eventually you raise enough money, you launch a campaign, you get some laws passed.
Maybe it takes a long time, a couple decades, but eventually the species has been saved!
Your job is done.
What do these companies do?
What do these non-profits do?
Do they say, we've done a good thing?
We've accomplished our goals.
Thank you to everyone who supported us.
There's nothing left for us to do.
No, they change their pick.
They change the tune.
They say, oh, but the new fight is this.
Now we must do this.
Because people don't want to lose their jobs.
I get it.
You want to keep making money.
You got something good going on.
You got name recognition.
You got brand power.
And that's what they do.
Now, the story goes on to mention that various aides have said they have no recollection of any assault incident happening.
And you know what?
That's fine.
Because I personally... I don't care.
Look, I don't like that Joe Biden's being accused.
My respect to anybody who's a victim who's saying, this happened to me.
I hear you.
But there is a statute of limitations.
There is...
Innocent until the presumption of innocence.
Joe Biden, I don't think, should have this held against him.
I really don't.
I don't like Biden, I don't think he's all there, but this is ridiculous.
I'm sorry.
Just as ridiculous as it was against Kavanaugh.
But that's not the issue here.
The issue here is that we can see just how fake the activists really are.
How fast the feminists abandon their purported values when it becomes politically inconvenient.
I'll leave it there.
My next segment's coming up at 4 p.m.
YouTube.com slash TimCast.
It is my main channel.
And I will see you all then.
I am shocked the conspiracy theorist within me that I keep suppressed can't believe that Don Lemon actually challenged Stacey Abrams asking her, are you applying a different standard?
Because Stacey Abrams believes Joe Biden.
Joe Biden was accused, but Abrams herself called out Brett Kavanaugh.
I am surprised to see a story in which CNN does their due diligence and the little conspiracy theorist devil on my shoulder is saying, this must be a ploy, setting up Joe Biden to fail because they know he's not a viable candidate and they need to switch him out.
No, I don't think so.
I think it's just, here's the reality.
Defensive Joe Biden has become untenable.
If you dedicated so much coverage to going after Kavanaugh, you now realize you're facing this recoil effect.
You wanted the standard, you got it, and now, unsurprisingly, many people have no choice but to live up to it.
So it was surprising for me to see the Daily Beast and now CNN actually pushing back.
Of course, people like Stacey Abrams will still completely abandon any semblance of principle, and here's what I love.
They used the New York Times as their defense.
Well, the New York Times said it wasn't credible.
The New York Times story was written before a bunch of corroborating evidence came out.
Try harder.
Well, let's read the story.
I gotta say, I am no fan of Don Lemon, but I can respect that he actually pushed back on Stacey Abrams.
Now look, a good journalist should do that.
It doesn't mean Don Lemon supports or opposes her.
A journalist can ask a question without being on one side or the other to give the person an opportunity to respond.
Perhaps Joe Biden was lofting up a softball so she could crank it out of the park and make it seem like she's being rational because the New York Times says so.
Take that into consideration.
Let's read.
The Daily Caller reports, CNN's Don Lemon addressed former Vice President Joe Biden's assault allegation Tuesday in an interview with former Democratic Georgia gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams.
Abrams is one of Biden's vice presidential hopefuls and was grilled by Lemon about the allegation against Biden on CNN tonight.
Lemon is one of the only hosts from legacy outlets to ask a potential vice president about Biden's allegations.
I'm stopping.
I'm sorry.
Don Lemon, much respect. 100%.
Well, I will state, I am no fan of this man.
I have been very, very critical of this guy.
Credit where credit is due.
If I see somebody do something good, they're going to get praise from me.
Don Lemon being one of the only people, he's the only one who did it, is that what they're saying?
One of the only hosts to actually talk about this.
How many times has Joe Biden been interviewed and nobody asked him?
So you know what?
I'm glad to see somebody doing it, and I'm not going to say this is going to make me a fan of Don Lemon, but he does deserve respect for doing it right.
Former Senate Staffer Tara Reid accused Biden of assault in the 90s.
We know this and Biden has denied it.
Quote, As someone who wants to be his vice president, I think it's important that we speak about something that's in the news now, Lemon said.
CNN has now spoken on the record with her former neighbor who says Reid told her about the allegation within a few years of the alleged incident.
Biden's campaign says untrue, never happened.
Is this a credible allegation?
Lemon asked.
Abrams stood by the former vice president in a response.
Abrams said that although women deserve to be heard and listened to, she thinks the allegations have to be investigated by credible sources.
Oh, please.
The vice presidential hopeful then mentioned a New York Times investigation published April 12th, a couple weeks ago, that deemed Reid's allegation to be not credible.
The New York Times claimed to have done a thorough investigation, but more evidence has surfaced in the past two weeks that corroborates Reid's allegation, including footage from CNN.
1993, August 11th, Larry King.
Abrams continued on to repeat talking points that the Biden campaign allegedly distributed about the matter, according to BuzzFeed News.
The talking points reportedly advised people to say that Reid's allegation did not happen.
I believe Joe Biden, Abrams said.
I believe that he is a person who has demonstrated that his love of family, his love of our community, has been made perfectly clear through his work as a congressional leader and as an American leader.
I know Joe Biden, and I think he's telling the truth, and that did not happen.
Lemon continued with his questioning, and pointed out that Abram's comments appear to be a double standard.
Wow!
He noted a 2018 tweet from Abrams where she wrote that, quote, That was investigated, that found no corroborating evidence, that had no witnesses, that she didn't even remember for the most part.
Blasey Ford's courageous and compelling testimony that was investigated, that
found no corroborating evidence, that had no witnesses, that she didn't even
remember for the most part. Now that was courageous and compelling testimony.
After the courageous and compelling testimony from Dr. Christine Blasey Ford yesterday, it is shameful that Kavanaugh's nomination is being rushed forward.
I believe women, and I believe survivors of violence always deserve to be supported and have their voices heard.
Are you applying a different standard now, Lemon wondered?
Abrams pushed back on Lemon's question, saying, not at all.
She said that Reed deserved to have her story listened to and investigated, and suggested there was a difference with Ford's accusation.
Abrams said there was no investigation, and a rush to move the conversation forward to prevent an investigation of Ford's case.
Not at all, she said.
Deserved to have her story listened to and investigated.
I love it.
When it comes to someone making an accusation against someone you hope to be your boss, you can say, we will absolutely listen to and give a figurative investigation, you know, not actually ask anybody, not actually look for records, and even when you do have corroborating evidence, claim it's not corroborating evidence.
I love this.
In the New York Times story, there were a couple interns who claimed that Tara Reid abruptly was no longer supervising them.
And Tara Reid claimed it's because she filed a complaint and then got punished for it.
Interesting.
That sounds like corroboration from witnesses.
That sounds like more corroboration than Christine Blasey Ford had.
Even though Joe Biden's not gonna win, she wants her name on that ticket, and she'll get it.
I'd like to give a special shout-out to all of those woke celebrities who are propping her up.
Where do you stand on all of this?
Are you going to come out now like Don Lemon will?
And the Daily Beast will?
Calling out the fact that these feminist organizations won't stand up to Joe Biden?
Nah, they want to win.
That's all they want.
So you've said you've heard her.
You've heard enough.
You don't believe her.
You believe Joe Biden, Lemon summed up.
Abrams reiterated her past comments about the New York Times investigation and said that she believed, quote, the Biden I know.
She added that she thinks he will make women proud as well as America and did not agree that Biden should address the situation better.
There are a series of tweets by some resistance, never-Trumper-type Democrat people, one of whom I actually know, who went insane.
I'm not kidding.
I know this woman.
She went totally nuts.
She thinks Russians are everywhere.
It's nuts how crazy she went.
She told a story about how in the 90s she was assaulted by a politician, who apparently died or something.
And she said, this man who assaulted me, if he was still alive, I would vote for him a hundred times before condemning Joe Biden or something like that, or voting for Trump.
They don't care about what Donald Trump has done.
They don't care about what Brett Kavanaugh has done.
They didn't care if there was or wasn't any serious qualms with Brett Kavanaugh being, you know, with his behavior.
They just want to win.
The only thing they care about is their power, and they will take it by any means necessary.
They don't play fair.
And I think it's because they know if they play fair, they'll lose.
Here's a quote.
You didn't say that about Brett Kavanaugh.
Let's talk about playing fair.
Donald Trump wins.
What do they say?
intend to take and I support that approach," Abrams said.
Again, we don't want women to ever be afraid to come forward, but we also have to recognize
that allegations should be investigated and that those investigations need to be borne
out.
You didn't say that about Brett Kavanaugh.
Let's talk about playing fair.
Donald Trump wins.
What do they say?
Change the electoral college to a popular vote.
They want to change the rules because they lost.
Now what's happening?
We should have mail-in voting for all states.
It should be in the bill.
They want to change the rules instead of playing fair.
You know, Republicans, you got a serious problem.
Maybe the problem is that Republicans won't stand up to these people.
Maybe Republicans need to argue similarly.
I don't know.
I can't stand any of it.
Right now, you have a set of rules set by these people in media and by Democrats.
If you're accused, we're going to take that seriously and use it against you.
When it comes to Biden, they don't use those rules anymore.
They say, no, no, we don't want these rules anymore.
We all have rules in the election, the Electoral College.
When Republicans win, oh, it's not fair, the rules need to be changed.
Every single time.
When Obama wins, they don't say anything.
You've got to win these places.
Now, here's the big problem I have with the mail-in voting thing, because it's kind of been a subject that I've been bringing up quite a bit, it's been popping up.
It's a rule change.
That's all I care about.
Stop trying to change the rules and just try and win.
Oh, what's that?
You can't win?
You're losing the argument?
Changing the rules is not a principled way to actually win on ideas.
What do we want?
Do we want politicians who are in power because they want power?
Or do we want politicians who said, okay, here's what I got to do to win.
I'm going to make sure I do everything I need to do to win within the system and within the rules in front of us.
I don't necessarily like either.
I want a politician who's going to say, here are some good ideas, please respect them.
But the reality is, elections are popularity contests.
You know what?
And I can expect and respect that within reason.
Fine.
That's the way it is.
But to come out and constantly argue the rules should change for you is the most immature, childish BS ever.
And that's all they seem to do.
And now here we are, once again, watching the Democrats say, in this instance, the rules should be applied differently to us than they would be to you.
So you know what?
No.
You will not get my support.
In fact, you will get my opposition, because you're hypocrites with no principles.
While I don't agree with Republicans on policy ideas, at least they're presenting their ideas in playing fair.
That's all I can really say.
Now, if you've got a good idea, argue it, and maybe you'll win.
Nah, they don't want to.
Maybe they have no good ideas, and maybe they know their ideas wouldn't win over the American people.
I guess we'll find out, come November.
Stick around, I've got a couple more segments coming up for you in a few minutes, and I will see you all shortly.
Ohio Representative Joyce Beatty beats back progressive challenger to win primary.
Oh, I'm so surprised a moderate Democrat beat a progressive and crushed the progressive.
No, I'm not surprised.
This progressive insurgency While many of these people have good populist ideas, have bad economic policy ideas.
So I can certainly respect all of the Bernie supporters, the AOC supporters, you know, many of these progressive YouTubers, because they're calling out the establishment cronies and the cheating and the DNC and all that other nonsense.
But come on, man, what we need is an actual mirror to Donald Trump's populism.
Look, Bernie Sanders is not.
He adopted a bunch of ridiculous far-left policies.
We need a moderate Democrat with populist positions who will challenge the establishment and the elites.
We don't have that.
So what do you get?
You can choose to vote for Trump because he's closer to moderate than anybody else, or the wingnut far-left, which nobody wants to do.
So instead, they just prop up the crony establishment types.
And that is the game being played.
Maybe we'll never get a populist moderate type.
Maybe that's that's the doom of the left.
Now you'd win.
You'd win.
We all know it.
I mean, you've got Vox saying it.
Vox saying Donald Trump ran as a moderate.
Let's take a look at this story and see exactly what happens.
And I want to talk about everybody's favorite Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and her moderate challenger who is now being smeared.
That's right.
Michelle Caruso Cabrera incoming hit pieces because she's threatening to dethrone Ocasio-Cortez.
And I think she just might.
Because she's a moderate.
Reagan Democrat type, huh?
Check this out.
Rep.
Joyce Beattie won the Democratic primary in Ohio's 3rd, beating back a progressive challenger as she seeks a 5th term in the seat.
She won with 68% to 32%, saying, I'm proud to be a voice for the district, and I am grateful to have won my primary tonight to be able to continue to stand up, give back, and get things done for the 3rd congressional district.
And I'm looking forward to November.
Short on Twitter.
I will continue to fight on the issues that matter to the people of the 3rd District, from healthcare to housing to supporting our small businesses.
The work continues.
Now take a look at this graphic here from Mr. Michael Tracy.
Just another Democratic primary, where the progressive challenger gets absolutely thrashed.
Known as your typical Tuesday.
And here we go.
Now, this is what I don't get.
You see how they do this purple bar, and then the blue bar is like microscopic?
That seems weird to me.
And so I think it's fair to point out, when many progressives and populists and Trump supporters, you call it the media for being full of it, sure.
Look, Joyce Beattie got 68.3.
Morgan Harper got 31.7.
But doesn't this look a little odd to you?
Yes, we can criticize the media.
This looks like it might be the New York Times, I'm not entirely sure.
But, let me just be real with y'all.
And then we'll talk about Ms.
Ocasio-Cortez.
Moderate policy.
Sane, rational, reasonable.
We gotta work hard.
We gotta fight for those in need.
We gotta be sympathetic and empathetic to those who need our help.
And you know what?
We're pro-choice.
We think the wealthy should face a higher tax bracket, things like that.
Those are sane and rational arguments.
Now, I understand conservatives will say, those arguments are bunk.
And then what happens is, we'll vote on things, and you go back and forth, and sometimes if you're on the left, you'll lose out on your positions.
Sometimes if you're on the right, you'll lose out on your positions.
But those are real arguments.
What about when these progressives step up and say, we should completely overhaul the government, shutting down all fossil fuels in the next year, giving money to people who are unwilling to work, and getting rid of airplanes?
And then you're like, that is not an argument.
I know, I know, I'm exaggerating.
Calm down.
Calm down, progressives!
But you take a look at the Green New Deal and they put a bunch of ideology and social justice in this stuff.
And that's what a lot of people, at least one person said, they are too woke on social issues.
Yeah, you might actually win with universal healthcare as a policy position if you stop talking about the color of people's skin.
Well, AOC has a primary coming up in, what, like a month?
Over a month.
Okay, it's almost two months now.
She's got a primary coming up.
And Michelle Caruso Cabrera is the moderate Democrat type.
I say type because things are weird and I don't know where to put people.
Who is challenging her?
Now, earlier this month is what we saw.
Michelle Caruso Cabrera raises $1 million in bid to topple AOC.
I've read a little bit about this woman, and I gotta say, I actually like where she stands.
Not completely.
I think she comes out in support of Nancy Pelosi too often when Pelosi is playing politics.
I'm not a big fan of empowering Democrats, right?
Like, if I had to choose between a Democrat and a Republican, There's a good chance I'd probably vote for the Republican for one reason.
When the Moderates were given power in the 2018 election, they used it to launch this ridiculous scandal against Donald Trump.
Now, it really depends.
Look, I personally am pro-choice, and I believe in certain progressive and left-wing policy ideas on economics.
Not completely.
And I would also probably... I'm not a big fan of a lot of the Second Amendment measures proposed by Democrats, because I feel they're disingenuous.
So I'm kind of in the middle, you know what I mean?
But I'll tell you what.
I'd be willing to throw my weight behind a Republican if I was going up against someone who would waste my time and money.
You want to get elected and then go impeach?
I'm not going to play that game.
But I'll tell you what.
Full disclosure.
I have donated to Michelle Caruso Cabrera.
She's in a district where it's going to be a Democrat no matter what.
That's the assumption.
Well, I'm not a big fan of empowering people who are going to waste time and just spin in circles, you know, launching scandal after scandal.
If it's going to be a Democrat, it's going to be a Democrat.
But I can say, I personally find Ocasio-Cortez to be damaging to national discourse.
She's sporadic.
She doesn't seem to have a cohesive strategy on what she's voting for, why she's voting for it.
And I think she got elected based on an exploit.
I think when you look at what Michelle Caruso Cabrera has to say, I long for rational Democrats, right?
I want a real argument.
I don't want someone to step up and say, we're just going to impeach the president.
That's what I want to do away with.
Now, unfortunately for the Democrats, you've lost my confidence.
I don't believe that if I did vote for you, you'd actually do the right thing because you've had multiple opportunities and you haven't done it.
You've done ridiculous, nonsensical, orange man, bad BS.
I believe Michelle Caruso-Cabrera has tweeted some things where I'm like, yeah, yeah, yeah, I get it.
She's a Democrat.
She's a Democrat.
But she has said several sane things, and actually she's getting dragged for stupid things.
So here it comes.
As we know, The moderates stand a much better chance of targeting progressives.
We can see, of course, progressive media and certain conservative outlets, they're gonna go after her.
Well, for conservatives, it's targeting a Democrat, trying to, you know, call her a hypocrite.
But for the progressives, it's to stop the moderate from winning back the seat.
You gotta understand, AOC only had about 17,000 votes in a district of 750,000.
That's how she won.
In the general election, it swings Democrat.
The Republican barely ran on it to get a website or something.
So, of course, she won in the general, but she got the seat from a primary.
Michelle Caruso Cabrera, AOC's challenger who used to live in Trump Hotel and called for privatizing Medicare and Social Security.
Now, I don't know about all that privatization of Social Security and Medicare stuff, right?
But if you're a conservative, maybe you'd be like, hey, I like this woman, you know, maybe she should get some support.
I previously supported a progressive challenging Nancy Pelosi, and now I'm supporting a moderate challenging AOC.
And I look at this not necessarily because of their policies, which I disagree with both of them on different issues, but I look at just getting rid of problematic people.
Get him out.
Get him out.
I don't care who it is.
Maybe someone might be worse.
We'll give him a chance.
But I'll tell you what, Nancy Pelosi is a huge problem right now in Congress.
She has no idea what she's doing.
Everything that Trump does is wrong.
I'm not convinced you could get anyone else who would do better because the Democrats love playing this game.
But I'll tell you what, you mess up, someone else can come in.
The same is true for Michelle Caruso Cabrera.
But take a look at this.
While they want to claim, you know, oh, she worked at Trump Hotel, whatever, I don't care about that.
And they want to say that you want to privatize these things.
She wrote a book called, You Know I'm Right.
In it, she says, the answer is less government, not more.
Less spending, not more.
And getting the government to stay out of our pocketbooks and out of our private lives.
You Know I'm Right addresses the problems created by government overreach and speaks to the minds and hearts of nostalgic Republicans, those who believe in the strategy and approach used by Ronald Reagan.
But it will also appeal to Clinton-era Democrats frustrated by the current level of exorbitant spending and excessive interference in the economy.
Citing faults with both political parties, Caruso Cabrera puts a magnifying glass on government structure, healthcare, education, underscoring how we have gone wrong, and more important, where we need to go for a secure and prosperous future.
I'm sorry.
You want to call me conservative for saying I like the sound of that book and what this lady is proposing?
It's not.
She's what Democrats used to be.
You got Democrats who flipped for Reagan in the 80s.
I understand times change and social, you know, society changes too.
Social justice issues emerge.
But what am I looking for?
Look, when I talk about economic policy, I'm not talking about whether you're liberal or conservative, I'm talking about what actually works.
To come out and be like, we hope to eventually one day do away with planes, and we want to get rid of fossil fuels.
I'm like, dude, that doesn't work!
Now what she's saying I don't 100% agree with, but at least she's talking about things that make sense.
Stop interfering and overspending.
Yeah, you can't do that.
What do we get instead from the progressive wing?
People like AOC?
Spend more?
Pay people more?
None of that makes sense.
Look, there is no politician who will ever speak to me 100%.
I doubt the same thing would be for you.
I'm not saying I think she would be the best politician in the world.
I honestly have no idea.
But I will tell you, I think she's got a serious chance of winning.
And I think the reason is, moderates win.
Look at how many times we've got to see it.
The reason AOC won, it may have been a fluke, I think so.
And it's because she was, look, the dude didn't take her seriously.
Joe Crowley?
He should have.
He did not take her seriously.
He didn't think he needed to muster support for, you know, he didn't think it was going to matter.
Well, there you go.
Hubris will always be your downfall.
I don't know if she can win.
AOC's become a household name.
She's a celebrity.
So maybe she'll get a ton of people in New York to go out to vote for her because she's a celebrity.
I gotta be honest, though.
While I don't know, and I say this seriously, who knows if... I don't know what Michelle Crystal Cabrera would end up doing, I would prefer to see her right now to AOC.
And maybe, then Michelle Crystal Cabrera gets elected, and she goes nuts, and she's worse than AOC, and I gotta own that if that's the case.
Because, again, I've donated to her.
But I'd like to see some return to normalcy.
Some people have argued that about Trump.
They've said that the reason why you vote for Biden is a return to normalcy.
I can respect and understand that, but I disagree in that regard.
Because Trump is not that bad.
Joe Biden is that bad.
There are certainly other candidates I wanted that were not Donald Trump.
But Donald Trump is not that bad.
He's not my choice for president, but I'm not going to screech and cry and pretend like it's the end of the world.
Now AOC is too far out there.
Donald Trump is moderate on policies with a bad attitude, bad behavior, and no filter.
There are things he's done that have been better and worse than past presidents.
Not my choice.
But you know what?
AOC is so far out there, I don't even recognize what she represents.
Michelle Crusoe-Cabrera absolutely looks normal, to me at least.
I don't know, we'll see what happens, right?
I'm not trying to do like a big campaign endorsement or anything, nothing like that.
I just think having adults have conversations, and yes, that's a criticism of Trump and AOC, is a good move towards, you know, a better political future.
And I'll make sure to remind all of you.
I've said it over and over again.
If the Democrats ran someone who had very similar policies to Trump, slightly to the left, and he had a better attitude, they had a better attitude, I think they'd win.
But Trump's policies are very much in line with what the Democrats used to be.
And that's one of the reasons he wins.
Now Trump is on track for re-election.
I got another segment coming up for you in a few minutes.
We'll talk about this.
So let's extend it there.
Stick around and I will see you in a few minutes in the next and last segment.
Despite all of the negatives due to the pandemic and all of the problems they've caused for Donald Trump in terms of, you know, political discourse saying he didn't react properly and it's his fault.
His polls have gone down a little bit since they since they pulled his press briefings in spite of all of this.
Donald Trump is still on course for re-election, even if he loses the popular vote, according to a new analysis by Joshua H. Salmon, who's done a projection, saying Donald Trump is on track to win.
I cannot say I'm surprised, but I can say I'm sure it's not the only assessment.
I'm sure there are other people who have done projections who say that's not necessarily true, and Donald Trump may not actually be on track to win.
So we will see how things play out, but let's read this.
It's getting a lot of traction, and we'll see what people think.
Joshua says the ongoing chaotic mismanagement of the coronavirus crisis would seem to jeopardize President Trump's re-election prospects.
However, an analysis of the Electoral College vote puts Trump in a favorable re-election position.
My projection gives Trump 249 and Joe Biden 248 electoral votes.
Three states, Arizona, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin are toss-up states.
Trump won all three in 2016, and he has a good chance to win these states again in 2020.
Several factors work in Trump's favor.
First, former Vice President Joe Biden's debating and campaigning performances have ranged from inarticulate to incoherent.
Hear, hear!
Also, his expressions and tone of speech focus on the past and do not resonate with younger voters.
Second, despite an endorsement from Bernie Sanders, the especially fervent Sanders supporters will not vote for Biden.
They're driven by issues and ideology, not loyalty to Sanders personally.
They see Biden as no different from Trump.
Another part of a corrupt establishment that has fought change and fostered inequality.
In fact, Sanders, by pushing Biden to embrace his leftist socialist agenda, drives moderate voters away from the Biden camp.
Ding, ding, ding.
I'll tell you what, if you put this in front of me and told me I said this a year ago, I'd be like, sounds about right.
Or a month ago because the endorsement didn't happen.
I'd be like, sounds like something I would say.
Third, the actions of the vice president's son, Hunter Biden, will continue to haunt the Biden campaign.
His acceptance of a lucrative board of directors, which is in a Ukrainian utility company without any evident qualification, and various business relationships with China while his father was vice president was a gross ethical lapse and miscalculation.
This is why I'm going to stop.
I'm going to stop you here, buddy.
Josh, I'm going to stop you here.
This is why I think they're going to swap him out, man.
He's got too many liabilities and he can't think straight.
They're going to claim, oh, look, you know, Don Lemon called him out and he did these things with this woman, Tara Reid, and now we got to bring in somebody else.
I don't know who it'll be.
Maybe it won't happen, but I think it's a good out for the Democrats.
Here we go.
It is apparent, even to the most loyal Biden supporters, that the main reason for Hunter's selection was an attempt to curry favor with the Vice President.
There is no evidence this ever occurred, but the impropriety of Hunter's behavior is clear.
The Trump campaign has already and will continue to hammer away at the Hunter Biden issue, keeping in mind Hunter Biden has business dealings with China.
China.
Donald Trump's gonna go after it.
Fourth, Trump maintains the loyalty of his base, and then some.
The New York Times said in August his base was bigger, his favorability is better, his approval rating is up.
the white working class and non-college educated evangelical Christians,
and social and cultural conservatives. His support among white voters is especially
strong in Midwestern, Southwestern, Western, and Southern battleground and competitive states.
Further, polling shows a consistently high level of support among traditional Republicans.
Most of his supporters see criticism of Trump's handling of the virus crisis as part of a
continuing media and partisan effort to hurt the president.
Yes, that's true though.
I did not vote for this man.
I do not like the way he acts.
I did not pick him.
He is not my first choice.
But it is a fact.
The scandal after scandal.
We got Russiagate.
Russiagate 2, Ukrainian boogaloo.
And Russiagate 3, Trump's big trouble with little China.
Well, that one fell apart right away because Politico had to retract it, but we know the media is just going after him.
It's lie, lie, lie, lie, lie.
If you don't like the man, give me an argument.
I got one for you.
He fired 59 Tomahawk missiles at Syria.
He sold weapons to Saudi Arabia.
These things are very obvious to people and, you know, like, they just never bring up foreign policy.
You know why?
Because the Democrats love the same trash.
They want to see us overseas blowing up kids, same as anybody else.
Now, to be fair, while Donald Trump has, according to many reports, upped the drone strikes in certain regions, he's actually not gotten us involved in as much military conflict as Obama did so far.
You can argue he's more aggressive with the drone strikes and stuff like that, but has he entered us into any conflicts?
In fact, he's leaving Syria.
And they yelled at him for it!
Now, let's see if he gets the troops out of Afghanistan.
Let's see if these things, you know, start calming down.
Donald Trump has had some net positives in foreign policy.
Gotta hand it to him.
I think it's funny when I say this, people are like, Tim clearly doesn't understand foreign policy.
Oh, shut up!
Some dude, middle-aged dude in America, who's never traveled anywhere, telling me, look, I'm not gonna pretend like I'm an expert on this stuff.
I'm not gonna claim I am, but I'll tell you what, bro, I've been to dozens of these countries and witnessed this stuff on the ground.
So yes, when Donald Trump does things, I'm like, I actually understand the context around this.
Okay, I like that.
That's not bad.
And I can clearly call him out.
But I'll tell you what.
None of that matters.
Because they're not even arguing the bad thing Trump's doing.
They're just saying he's the bad man.
Like, they're saying everything is bad.
Okay, I'll tell you what.
Go to a regular American voter and say, Here's why you should vote for Joe Biden and don't use the words Trump or Donald Trump.
Don't talk about the presidency.
Talk about what Biden does, what he's going to do, and try that.
There's a bunch of things you can bring up to make Trump look legitimately bad.
I know a lot of Trump supporters might not agree because they like the things he does, but there are moderate Americans and leftists who might hear about some of his foreign policy plays.
We're going to be like, that's a bad thing.
100%.
Now, of course, here's the issue.
Hillary Clinton was worse than Trump on foreign policy.
Polling shows Biden ahead in the popular vote does not provide a nuanced analysis of the electorate.
Trump can again win the electoral college while not winning the popular vote.
Further, polls rarely distinguish between registered and likely voters.
Trump consistently does better among likely voters and among the high turnout 45 to 65 year old voters.
What can Biden do to reverse that rather bleak but realistic electoral picture?
He and the Democratic Party need to appeal to working-class and non-college-educated voters with a jobs and economic development program rooted in reestablishing our manufacturing base.
And this is my favorite part.
When these Reddit lefties like to mock me for being a high school dropout, do you not understand what you're missing from this picture?
That while I am not completely white, I am, in some regards, a non-college-educated, grew-up working-class, Moderate individual.
See, they don't seem to get it.
You grew up in a big city with, you know, decently well-off families, parents, progressives, you go to college, you got a certain worldview.
I don't have that worldview.
Has it ever occurred to you that my worldview is similar to working-class, non-college-educated individuals?
Gee, I wonder why that would be.
So when I come out and say, here's what I'm looking for, and you mock me, and you insult me, just know that you're looking at someone not completely like most of these people.
I've done a very different career track.
I work in media.
I'm not the same as the working class.
I grew up in many of these positions.
I've changed.
I don't want to pretend like I'm the same.
But just know there are people like me who are interested in voting for a Democrat.
And you do everything in your power to make sure that we don't.
And I'll tell you what, there are a lot of people who are much more ready than I am to vote for someone like Donald Trump.
Now I'll tell you what, I was a hardcore Never Trump-er a year ago.
You go look at my videos and I'm like, I will never vote for this man.
You are nuts.
Now I'm like, Joe Biden, wow!
I might have to vote for Donald Trump.
That's the reality of it.
Because you know what scares me more than anything else?
I can disagree with Trump on a lot of things, and I can really not like the way he acts.
That's a fact.
Look, I get it.
The guy's funny.
You gotta be nuts to not admit the guy's funny.
He's hilarious.
I don't necessarily think that's the right thing to have in, you know, the presidential office.
The left calls him a clown, and I'm like, you realize that's not necessarily an insult.
It's simultaneously a compliment.
Clowns are funny people that make people laugh and have a good time.
Not always.
I don't like clowns.
But you want to call him that because you think it's an insult, you got to recognize there's two sides to that coin.
Trump is a funny guy.
For me, I laugh.
I really do.
Because I got a sense of humor.
But I'm like, you know, I really would like something more serious.
But let's be real.
Joe Biden can't talk.
He can't formulate ideas.
You're not playing this game with me, dude.
If I'm looking at somebody who's disagreeable with a bad attitude, yeah, whatever.
I mean, I don't like it.
What do you want me to do about it?
Do I think Trump is going to fall asleep and then hit his hand on the nuke button?
No.
I think Trump might be sporadic and, you know, I don't know, irrational maybe sometimes, or impulsive.
That's true too.
But I don't think Trump's going to destroy the world.
I just think he's a guy and I roll my eyes at him.
That's about it.
I disagree with a lot of his policies, but these people coming out with these insane smears, you're nuts.
Joe Biden, on the other hand, is going to be sitting down with some dictator, and the guy's going to be like, Mr. Biden, we would like 20 nuclear weapons from the United States, and Biden's going to go, whatever you need, whatever you need.
And they'll be like, just sign this, Mr. Biden's going to go, oh yeah, he's going to sign something.
He's going to have no idea what's going on.
You want that kind of guy?
No, I'm sorry.
You are putting me in a corner, buddy.
So let me tell you something about these polls and what they're saying.
I've never wanted to vote for this man.
I laughed when he won.
You know why?
Because it was comeuppance of the Democratic Party.
I was a big fan of Bernie back in 2016.
Why?
Because Bernie was a leftist populist, talking about things that make sense.
Border security, getting rid of the free trade deals, helping working class people.
Then he went full on social justice and I was like, buh-bye.
He had a bunch of policies I didn't like.
But I thought, you know, at least he was a more serious guy than Donald Trump.
Now I'm looking at just the downward spiral, and it's like, you think I'd vote for Joe Biden?
You're out of your mind, man.
You're nuts.
Did you watch Joe Rogan?
You want to make fun of Joe Rogan?
These lefties in media, these subreddits and everything, they want to say, oh, Joe, he brings on these alt-righters, blah, blah, blah.
Joe doesn't know what he's talking about.
I don't care.
I don't care what you think.
Let me tell you something.
Joe has the biggest podcast in the world.
A lot of people listen to that, and they get their opinions developed from the information on those podcasts and the arguments made there.
If Joe, a famous comedian who's a very lefty dude, is saying, I can't vote for this man, take it seriously.
Ignore me.
Ignore me.
Take a look at what regular people are thinking.
Donald Trump's gonna win.
I don't know for sure.
I shouldn't say it like that.
A lot's changing.
A lot can change.
But I think there's some pitfalls for Republicans.
Mail-in voting being one of them.
Extended lockdowns.
But we'll see.
We'll see.
I think Trump... I'm still bullish on a Trump re-election.