Leftists DESTROY Washington Statue, Democrats Want Jefferson Removed In NYC, History Is Being Erased
Trump was right and the media was wrong, as per usual.Trump warned in 2017 Jefferson and Washington could be next and he was right. But we are not just talking about the far left tearing down statues Democrats in NYC want Thomas Jefferson removed from city hall.Mainstream Democrats are not just passively watching they are actively engaging in the removal of our history in support of a fringe ideology that is creeping ever more into the mainstream.And where are Republicans? Doing nothing, saying nothingDemocrats in California have just voted to repeal civil rights law that would prohibit discrimination in a move so shocking I still don't understand how this is possible. Some Republicans have spoken up but where is our leadership? Why won't our politicians stand up and call this out?#FarLeft#Democrats#Trump
Support the show (http://timcast.com/donate)
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Donald Trump's supposed whataboutism, in fact, proven correct.
In 2017, he was asked about the taking down of certain Confederate statues.
And he said, what's next?
George Washington?
Thomas Jefferson?
And in a single cry, the media all said, whataboutism?
Taking down Confederate statues has nothing to do with the Founding Fathers.
We're not going to take them down.
I mean, not necessarily, right?
And here we are.
The image displayed on your screen, for those that are watching, is George Washington.
A statue of him, at least.
Torn down, vandalized, with graffiti all over him.
Someone wrote 1619 on the statue they destroyed.
Now, for those that for some reason aren't aware, maybe you're not from this country, George Washington may be one of the most important Founding Fathers.
He was the first President of the United States.
Personally, I think when they tore down Thomas Jefferson, that was a bit more shocking.
But let me tell you, people tearing down statues could be random acts of violence.
Whatever is going on is much deeper than that.
The 1619 spray-painted on that statue was a reference to the New York Times' 1619 Project, which claims the United States was a slavocracy and the Revolutionary War was fought to save slavery.
This is just not true.
The 1619 Project is being widely disputed, yet still the New York Times claims it's all true, huh?
And this ideology infects the minds of certain people who go around and destroy images, statues, things that honor our founding fathers.
This is an attack at the core of what this country is.
And I think it's rather terrifying.
But what's more terrifying is that in New York City, they're calling for Jefferson to be removed from the city council.
Actually taking down the statues, removing paintings and other images that represent the history of our country.
History that wasn't always perfect.
You may not think you're involved.
But the war is happening, and right now it's mostly ideological.
There have been bouts of physical conflict, and typically when it involves regular people, things don't go too well for the leftist ideologues.
But the media has been just two steps behind the entire time.
Every single time one of these ideologues takes an extremist action, the media pretends like it'll just end here, that's it.
But it just keeps getting worse.
And now we're seeing two sets of laws.
There's inequality under the law.
That if you want to go to church, you can't do it.
New York says no.
That Donald Trump wants to hold a rally in Tulsa.
And they argue that he can't do it because people will get sick.
And they've actually declared a civil emergency to try and stop Donald Trump's rally.
Yet at the same time in New York City, Black Lives Matter protests go unabated.
The city just ignores this.
Andrew Cuomo himself said he would not allow a large political rally to occur in his state.
Donald Trump wouldn't be allowed to do it.
Yet the same time only a few days earlier.
Thousands of people held a large political rally.
So why is it allowed?
Because there is a war going on.
You're just probably not involved.
While you sit around and watch videos like this, and I sit around complaining about it, they're destroying images of our founding fathers.
They are tearing at the core of what this country is.
They are changing history, as you can see with the 1619 written on the statue.
And I can imagine this will only end up with a massive civil conflict of some sort in the physical space.
While this is all happening, where are the Republican politicians to actually stand up and do something about it?
Apparently nowhere to be found.
In fact, many conservative commentators are freaking out, to say the least, complaining that Republicans have done nothing to condemn this.
I'm just going to tell you right now.
Let me just express the absurdity Of all of us sitting here, not a peep from a politician to condemn the destruction of our earliest presidents, the founding fathers, the drafter of the Declaration of Independence, the people who set forth this great nation.
They're being destroyed.
And Democrats in New York City are agreeing with it and calling for more.
And Republicans are doing nothing.
So I don't know what's going to happen.
I'll tell you what.
But I can certainly imagine there are a lot of people who love waving that American flag who are not going to sit around for it.
And I can only imagine things will get worse from here.
People aren't speaking up.
And because they're not, people are getting fired from their jobs and we are entering now a very, very dark reality.
There's a man in Atlanta.
Who was doing his job as a cop, and a tragedy unfolded.
The person he was trying to arrest, a man named Rayshard Brooks, resisted, stole a taser, fired it at him, and in self-defense, he fired back, and Rayshard lost his life.
It is a horrifying story, and we wish it didn't happen.
The mother of the police officer has just been fired.
We are entering straight up Soviet territory where the family members must be punished because of where our culture is going.
So what will happen?
Will people now stand up and defend Donald Trump in the face of all this?
I honestly don't know.
I've seen some people say that Trump must be reelected at all costs because the alternative is worse.
But I'm seeing many conservatives and Trump supporters say Trump is too weak and he's not getting the job done.
So what's the alternative?
That's it?
The war is lost?
The fringe authoritarian left takes over, punishes family members, destroys statues, erases our history?
And now I bring you to the absolute worst thing I have heard.
Tucker Carlson mentioned this the other night.
Democrats in California Have approved a measure to revoke civil rights legislation in California to allow discrimination based on race, sex, color, ethnicity, and national origin.
I'm not exaggerating when I say this.
It's done.
Now the California Senate has to approve of it, and it may actually get ratified, I believe, this coming November.
But this would now allow discrimination based on race to re-emerge in this country.
So it's all being torn apart.
Will American patriots stand up and defend the progress of our nation and its founders?
Maybe.
Maybe not.
Maybe regular Americans will just sit back and watch it all happen, and then it just happens.
Or maybe it'll get to the point where people finally snap.
I honestly don't know.
Well, let's do this.
Opening rant done.
Let's take a look at what's going on with this story.
Before we do, head over to timcast.com slash donate if you'd like to support my work.
There's many ways you can give.
There is a P.O.
box if you'd like to send things to me.
But the most important thing you can do is just share this video.
Maybe there are still people in this country who care about the founders of this country.
I know I do.
They, easy way to put it, set forth this great nation.
There's a lot of things wrong with America.
We've fixed many of those problems and we can continue to fix them to this day.
To destroy images of our founding fathers is nightmarish.
They want to erase our culture.
And they're erasing civil rights.
I'm not exaggerating when I say this.
I won't even waste your time.
They've quite literally proposed a ballot measure to repeal a law which prohibits the state considering race, sex, color, ethnicity, and national origin in the operation of public employment, education, and public contracting.
They are literally striking through a provision that says they shall not discriminate.
I'll try and tell you why to the best of my abilities, to break down their logic here.
But it's nightmarish to me, okay?
So if you think this stuff is important, please consider sharing this so people can maybe hear it.
Now if you just want to watch, hit the subscribe button, the like button, the notification bell.
Let's read the news.
George Washington statue toppled by protesters in Portland, Oregon.
I mean, that's really the news.
They say it's about racial justice, George Washington was a slave owner, and mind you, he was not the most progressive of people.
Not even for his time.
Thomas Jefferson was, and they were both slave owners.
Many other Founding Fathers were.
In fact, many of these Founding Fathers, to the best of our understanding, opposed slavery and worked towards ending it.
But at the time, it was different, and various countries had very horrible things.
I will not look back on that history of, you know, our history in that regard, with anything but disdain and horror That it could have been.
But I can look at the things they set forth and where we've come to this day.
It took a long time to get these civil rights.
And we've accomplished it.
But it's Democrats in New York City who want to destroy the Statue of Jefferson, remove it.
And it's Democrats in California who want to revoke civil rights legislation.
So I don't know what else to tell you.
I'm looking at the Founding Fathers who helped create a framework for a country that guaranteed rights for all.
Not initially, but it eventually happened.
And maybe not soon enough.
Definitely not soon enough.
But we made it.
And we need to keep fighting to make sure it gets better.
And now we're witnessing people who want to make sure it gets worse.
And they want to erase the people who made that all possible.
I want to bring you back in time to 2017.
Donald Trump was right.
I know many people don't want to hear it.
They called it a slippery slope or whataboutism, but he was completely correct.
Here's the quote.
He said, so this week it's Robert E. Lee.
I noticed that Stonewall Jackson's coming down.
I wonder, is it George Washington next week?
And is it Thomas Jefferson the week after?
You know, you really do have to ask yourself, where does it stop?
Jefferson was a major slave owner.
Are we going to take down his statue?
The answer was yes.
They literally did.
Protesters pulled down Thomas Jefferson in front of a Portland high school.
Now I understand these are just two statues out of many across the country.
But it's beginning.
A couple schools in Berkeley are renaming their schools from Washington and Jefferson to something else.
Here's what they said.
They said he used his standard rhetorical technique, whataboutism.
They asked, so what about them?
Must they all go?
Not necessarily, because they're not all the same, NPR said in 2017.
Now three years on, no, they must go.
It's not just some random protesters tearing this stuff down.
Democrats in the New York City Council called for Thomas Jefferson to be removed.
New York City?
This is not the West Coast.
This is not the fringe crazies.
This is one of our biggest cities, saying they want to remove the image of Jefferson, the principal author of the Declaration of Independence.
This country, everything they claim about it in the 1619 Project, was a remnant of the British colonies and other colonies of other European powers.
And there was a change in the idea as to how this country should be run, that we should not bend the knee to a monarch, that we should be free to govern ourselves because we were all created equal.
Unfortunately, this idea was a bit ahead of the market.
To put it lightly, people at that time still had extremely prejudicial views.
Extremely, to say the least.
And atrocities were rampant around the world.
Yet they had an idea that all people, all people, were created equal.
Now they said all men, mind you.
But you can argue the semantics of it.
Everyone was equal because they were endowed with God-given inalienable rights.
Now, it wasn't perfect because people were still enslaved, and we recognize how horrifying that was.
And today is Juneteenth.
It's a holiday recognizing the ending, the end of these atrocities.
I will 100% say the entire institution, from its inception until its destruction, and even to this day where it exists in other countries like Libya, it is an atrocity.
Individuals are free.
I believe 100% in liberty.
And I will absolutely criticize all of the Founding Fathers for their being slave owners.
But we have to look back and make sure that we don't throw out all of the good simply because of the bad.
Now, there are some people in history who had some good but overwhelmingly bad.
And I think, for the most part, we can throw that out.
Because these are people who are not creating a better world.
They're making the world worse.
The argument for Thomas Jefferson and George Washington is that although they did horrible things, they were making the world better.
And from their ideas, we moved towards freedom, and liberty for all, and civil rights, and the right to vote, and women's suffrage.
And today, we continue to expand these rights.
Why, in fact, just recently the Supreme Court ruled That you cannot discriminate against someone in employment on the basis of their gender identity or orientation.
We continue to make strides that progressives should be proud of.
Instead, they want to erase the men who helped make that possible.
That, to me, is nightmarish and Orwellian.
The 1619 Project, which you saw spray-painted on the statue, is widely disputed.
And even if it isn't, we can criticize the horrors of slavery, absolutely.
Listen, I've had a conversation with people about this a long time, over a long period
of time, for a long time, particularly during Occupy Wall Street.
And I thought it was interesting because there's a good reason why I love this country and
believe in liberty.
And it's also become a meme when I mention that I'm a second-generation mixed-race individual.
My family had to fight for civil rights and flee over the laws that existed.
And mind you, there's a reason why my ancestors fled the countries they came from.
I'm part Korean, and atrocities were committed well into World War II, and I'm not going to get into the details of it.
So yes, I completely understand civil rights.
And even upon making it to this country, my family was still subjected to horrifying laws that I think are disgusting.
And guess what?
We won!
We won!
Man, America is awesome!
We stood up for what we believed in, and because of it, because of the actions of my grandparents and my parents, I got to grow up in a free country, where I've been able to succeed.
And I look back at all those really awful things, and I think, I won.
We all did.
And we're getting better and better every day.
Please don't erase our history.
There's a reason why my ancestors dreamed of coming to this country, facing all of the horrifying things that happened where they came from.
They said, with a glimmer of hope in their eyes, we will one day make it to America, where we can be free.
And they did.
And I wonder what my great-grandparents would think if they saw where I was today, and the rest of my extended family members, many of whom I don't even know.
I'm sure they'd be very proud that they made it to a country, whether successful or not, they made it to a country that fought for freedom.
And they'd probably be shocked to see, you know, Loving v. Virginia or the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
Which brings me now to what I consider to be another atrocity.
And I mean this.
California Repeal Proposition 209 Affirmative Action Amendment.
What does that title mean?
Affirmative Action Amendment?
I honestly don't know.
I have no idea what that means.
Why is Affirmative Action in the title of this bill?
Seems to me like a Trojan horse.
Because when I try explaining to people why this scares me, they just say, but Affirmative Action is a good thing.
Affirmative Action is a good thing.
Tell that to all of the poor Asian kids who grew up in the ghetto who are being told they can't go to a college because of the way they look.
No.
It's not a good thing.
There are some good things about it, for sure.
I mean that.
But for the most part, I think it's institutional racism.
But look at the language of this bill.
This proposal to repeal Proposition 209 has nothing to do with affirmative action.
Though the media would tell you otherwise, I just don't see it.
Maybe they're going to propose a new bit of legislation to fix what they're destroying, but I really don't see it.
The measure would repeal Section 31 of Article 1 of the California Constitution.
The following struck-through text would be repealed.
Let me read you the principle provision that says the state shall not discriminate against
or grant preferential treatment to any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color,
ethnicity, or national origin in the operation of public employment, public education, or public
contracting. They then go on to make more legalese statements, but let me just tell you what this is.
Nowhere in this measure does it mention anything about affirmative action.
It doesn't say the changes would remove this section but then also grant the ability to.
The section doesn't amend this... I'm sorry, the provision doesn't amend this section to simply say you can't discriminate on the basis of these characteristics except for universities.
It literally just says that they will not discriminate against someone on the basis of race and they're removing it.
That's it.
That is it.
So I'll tell you what's happened so far when I saw this.
This was passed, I believe, by the Democrats in California on June 10th by a vote of 60 to 14.
It must now pass the State Legislature, pass the State Assembly, and it may actually be ratified, I believe, in November.
It was passed on June 10th.
I contacted several of my progressive friends, and I sent them this from Ballotpedia, explaining exactly what it is.
Some of them couldn't understand it at all.
And they just said, but affirmative action is a good thing.
And I said, where in this does it mention they are doing this for affirmative action?
Where in this do they amend the law to add a provision allowing them to admit students to universities on the basis of certain characteristics?
It doesn't.
It literally just removes California's civil rights legislation.
And the response I got from many of my progressive friends was, I don't understand.
This doesn't make sense.
This seems weird.
You're right.
It does seem weird, doesn't it?
Too many of the people that I know who are progressive don't know what's going on.
They have told me repeatedly, no one's going to tear down Washington or Jefferson.
And then it happened.
They told me repeatedly.
Listen, listen, no one's gonna... These people aren't gonna actually start discriminating against people, they're just trying to, you know, even the playing field... Now California's actually trying to repeal civil rights legislation.
They told me that wouldn't happen.
They told me nobody would ban art, they just wanted to ban hate speech.
Now they're literally banning art, movies... I mean, just generally art in all its forms.
Cards from the Magic the Gathering card game, which I've been playing since I was a kid, have been deemed racist and must be removed.
They're putting tags in front of movies saying this movie is racist.
They told me banning hate speech just meant stopping the nasty, evil white supremacists.
And now, here we are.
They said it was a slippery slope.
And now, I am quite literally looking at legislation that has passed in California, not completely, just the Assembly, That would allow them the right to discriminate on the basis of race, sex, national origin, etc.
They told me none of this would happen.
Well, here we go.
Here it is.
Let me tell you about what we're facing.
They're destroying our founding fathers, they're repealing civil rights legislation, and they're doing it under the guise of civil rights.
That's the scariest thing to me.
There was a Republican named Steve King, and he was considered to be white nationalist and racist, and he lost his primary.
I believe he did.
But he was kicked off of every committee by every Republican.
They rejected him.
So here's what I see.
I have political disagreements on certain issues pertaining to taxes and, you know, pro-life versus choice, but these are conversations over morals and ethics.
I have an agreement with conservatives on the issues of civil rights.
The left today has become overtly identitarian.
They keep claiming they're not racist, but what do I hear?
When I go to Trump rallies, I don't hear any racism.
I don't.
I've been to a ton of them.
I don't agree with Trump's attitude, behavior, or some of his policies.
When I go to protests from the left, what do I hear?
I hear tons of racial slurs.
Not an exaggeration.
In Oregon, far-left activists were screaming racial slurs at police and ICE agents.
Just recently, at one of the Black Lives Matter protests, when a young woman was being arrested, in the video you can hear some of the activists being arrested screaming racial slurs at the police.
That's what I hear from them.
They claim to be anti-racist, but it's, in my opinion, the perfect cover to then repeal civil rights legislation.
Maybe I'm getting this wrong.
Hey, I can't believe it.
I gotta be honest, I really can't believe it.
I have read through this, I have looked it up, and I can't understand how this is supposed to be a good thing or in any way helps affirmative action.
They just put it in the title, and all of a sudden now I see the left supporting it.
That's their argument.
The comments about repealing the civil rights legislation is mostly about affirmative action.
So again, maybe I'm getting it wrong, because I gotta be honest, I really can't believe that's what's happening, but that's what appears to be happening.
And it wasn't supposed to be happening.
But let me show you how far this really goes.
Andrew Cuomo was asked, would he allow a large political rally in New York, to which he said no.
Anderson Cooper said, in reference to Donald Trump's Tulsa rally, would you allow a large political rally in New York in these circumstances, in this time?
And Cuomo said, no, no, look, the president's position all along has been a political position.
His position was yada yada.
Cuomo said, no, he wouldn't allow Trump to have this kind of rally.
Let me show you an image.
Historical.
Historic marches in Boston and NYC say black trans lives matter.
And they definitely do.
I 100% respect the protests.
My issue is not with the protesters at all.
I think people standing up for what they believe in is a powerful and important thing, so my respect to all the protesters.
I wish more people would stand up for what they believed in.
Destroying statues is not a protest.
That's violent insurrection.
That's vandalism and property destruction.
Andrew Cuomo saying he will enforce laws against Trump but not against these protesters has nothing to do with these protesters and everything to do with Andrew Cuomo, a Democrat who views the law as something he can use for his political ends, his political tribe.
And that's what's happening.
You see, these protests have happened across the country.
And now, when Donald Trump wants to have a rally, at a time when they're saying these protests are a good thing, in fact, these governors are going out and marching, Tulsa mayor declares civil emergency ahead of Trump rally.
Stragglers face arrest.
It's not an exaggeration.
Curfew in effect for downtown Tulsa.
They've kicked everybody out.
They told them they couldn't be there, they'd be arrested, and guess what?
These Trump supporters got up and walked away.
Calmly and easily.
And that's why I fear for what's to come next.
You know, when I try talking to people about these issues, particularly white progressives, they don't understand the concerns I would have coming from a family where I got to grow up hearing stories about how they had to flee like a dozen different states when people found out that they were actually in a mixed-race relationship, which was illegal.
I got to grow up hearing about that, and I got to grow up thinking to myself, man, isn't it cool that, you know, we're headed towards this beautiful future?
I'm a big fan of Star Trek, and Star Trek, the original show, was one of the first to show an interracial kiss.
So, I grew up hearing these great things we've done, and how great everything is getting.
I grew up having to hear about some bad things that our founding fathers were involved in, of course, because we've evolved and we've learned from these mistakes.
But I got to hear about the ideas they had and how brilliant they were, and how they created one of the freest and greatest nations on the planet.
And now I get to sit here and watch as those stories I was told start to become reality again.
The horrifying stories about racial pretext for law.
The California Democrats are starting to make a reality again.
And the horror stories that I was told from when I was growing up that didn't really matter to me because I grew up in a free country, so it didn't really mean anything.
I'm now worried I'll get to experience that.
The sad things.
The things that I figured, you know, look.
I imagined my great-grandparents being very proud from where they came from to where I am today.
And now I can only imagine what they'd be thinking if they were here, worried that they wouldn't actually have provided me a better future.
That all the fighting they did wasn't enough.
And that's what I'm watching happening.
So I'll tell you what I see.
I see Trump supporters show up for a rally.
800,000 plus nearly a million tickets.
And then when the police come and say, curfew, go or else, they say, you got it, buddy, and they walk away.
They won't stand up for their ideas.
They won't stand up in the face of tens of thousands of people protesting for their ideology and being allowed to do it.
They won't plant themselves like a tree and say, no, you move.
Marvel apparently apologized because they showed a still from a video game where Captain America... There was a statue of Captain America.
And he was the one in the comic who said, no, you move.
These protesters refused to back down.
There was a man who worked for Taco Bell who was wearing a Black Lives Matter mask and they told him he couldn't wear it, so he refused.
He got fired.
He stood up for himself.
And now the company has backed down and said you can wear these masks.
Trump supporters were told to clear out or face arrest and they cleared out and said okay.
They're tearing down statues of George Washington and Thomas Jefferson.
Where are the Republicans to stand up and defend this?
I don't know.
Where are the Republicans in New York?
I guess they don't exist.
Now the Democrats are calling for Jefferson to be removed.
So that's what worries me.
That's what I'm worried about.
I'm worried that the horror stories of the past are coming back.
That the far left is getting their wish.
That they're probably not even really far left, I don't know what they are, but they're absolutely identitarian.
I'm worried when I see friends of mine from several years now posting overt white identitarian content, and I'm not talking about right-wing, I'm talking about the far left.
I'm talking about people that I've known for a long time, who have become overtly identitarian.
They're making posts now, in the name of social justice, advising their white identity groups what to do.
And that is scary.
It's all the same thing to me.
And I'm worried about what the future has to hold.
What California is doing, repealing the civil rights legislation, will likely pass through.
And to be honest, there are many other states that already allow this.
And we've already seen several universities win the right to discriminate on the basis of race.
But this bill in California is talking about the state itself.
So what's to stop these groups now from discriminating on the basis of race?
It's a world I don't want to live in.
And we're gonna get to.
Because in the end, what do we get?
I don't know.
For the most part, people just don't.
They back down.
I'm really surprised, to say the least, when I saw a video of all the Trump supporters clearing out.
Because I think about the protesters who yelled at the cops and fought with them, and the cops retreated, and now they control a six-block radius in Seattle.
And then I see Trump supporters show up, and the cops walk up and say, time to go, and they say, you got it, buddy!
And they walk right away.
And they claim nothing.
Trump will lose.
Because there's no one really standing up for anything.
And that means in the end, so will I. I guess you can say I should be doing more.
Fair.
Because what do any of these real civil libertarians do other than talk about it?
I don't know what else you can do.
All I'm really saying is you speak up, to be honest.
Maybe that's it.
Talk about it.
Because when this guy got fired from his job at Taco Bell, he refused to back down.
And they're apparently offering him his job back.
You don't have to do what the left does.
I actually would recommend against it.
The violence and destruction is horrifying and wrong.
But we see what happens in New Mexico when a guy shows up to defend the statue.
They threaten him, they beat him, they pull out weapons.
And then he's forced to defend himself, and he gets arrested for it.
The trends, I think, are fairly obvious.
And because of these trends, I think, we're headed towards dark times.
I'm not confident things will work out well.
Maybe the regular people, like we saw in Philadelphia, who stood up and defended the statue of Christopher Columbus, you know, will come out and they'll make a stand against this.
But I don't think so.
I think these smaller communities will just say, stay out of my town and leave me alone.
And at a federal level, our major corporations, our major politicians will just bend the knee and accept all of this.
And what happens when we erase people like Thomas Jefferson, a person who wrote extensively about defending freedom and liberty?
You get rid of him, you're not going to have any heroes to look up to who wanted to defend freedom and liberty.
They're going to be replaced with other people who believe in authoritarianism and identitarianism and racial pretext in law.
There you go.
Those are the horrors that I think we are nearing.
I guess we'll just carry on like we normally do, and like I always say, we'll just see what happens.
But I don't know.
Sometimes I have hope, sometimes I don't.
It kind of changes based on the news.
But I just watched them tear down a statue of George Washington.
And you'd think that once they did that, every single politician, from Democrat to Republican to the President, would issue a public statement condemning this action.
But they said nothing.
Have any of them said anything about Jefferson?
Maybe.
But it's not in the news.
The news doesn't care.
They'll defend these people.
The only person I heard talk about California trying to repeal civil rights legislation was Tucker Carlson.
Where is the rest of our media?
Nowhere to be found.
Well, I hope you're in for a wild ride, because I think we're in for it.
The next segment's coming up at 6 p.m.
at youtube.com slash timcastnews.
It is a different channel, and I'll see you all then.
Twitter's days may be numbered, or probably not, they're a massive multi-billion dollar corporation, but the latest controversy involving Donald Trump and memes is funny, sad, and interesting.
Notably, Jim Acosta is shocked Because apparently in a gag video, he sees himself, and there's a label from CNN, and he's like, wait a minute, I never did this stand-up, because apparently, Jimmy Acosta isn't smart enough to realize what a gag video is.
He literally responded to a meme tweet saying, but I never did a stand-up, this is 1984, this is fake news.
I hate to be the bearer of bad news, friends, but we really do live in a country full of really dumb people.
And there are a lot of really dumb people who are marching blindly right off a cliff.
So let me give you the breakdown of this story.
Trump posted a couple meme videos.
The first was quite hilarious.
I mean, they're actually both fairly interesting.
In the first, it's from Carpe Dongtum, a master memesmith.
You see this CNN logo and it says, breaking news, terrified toddler runs from racist baby.
It then says, racist baby, probably a Trump voter.
But then they say what really happened.
And then it shows the little boy, the two little boys of different races running and hugging each other.
And it's a joke.
It's a famous viral video and the kids got candy and they run away together and they giggle and they laugh.
The joke is that CNN is manipulating you by using framing devices.
This has been a long-time thing.
This is a joke meant to exemplify a feeling many people have when they watch CNN and they say, you selectively edited that clip, or you're lying, and CNN does this all the time.
Mind you, Don Lemon once asked his panel on CNN whether or not the missing Malaysian airline was swallowed by a black hole.
There's no reason to ask that question.
There's no reason to ask that question to someone who has no idea what science is or has any knowledge of anything, not fifth grade general science knowledge.
Yet, here we are.
This is what CNN does.
Now, I think it's funny.
You can tell why CNN jumps on this.
And the story we have now apparently is they've issued a rebuttal!
To Donald Trump's meme!
Because we live in the stupidest of times.
But there's a reason why I bring up Don Lemon and the airline thing.
CNN is pathetic.
Their desperate attempts for ratings result in insane psychobabble like, I know it's preposterous, but, you know, a black hole!
Could a plane swallow it?
And the woman goes, oh yeah, you know, even a small black hole would swallow the whole universe!
I love bringing that up.
Because it's the perfect example of how desperate for attention CNN is.
They're not giving you the news.
That's why they did a whole Sasquatch alien segment or whatever that weird nonsense was.
Conspiracy, Bermuda Triangle.
It was meant to ancient aliens you into watching.
Now they have Donald Trump, the Trump bump.
That means no matter what Trump does, they have to be shocked!
Oh, a harumph!
How dare he!
How dare Donald Trump post a joke, making fun of us!
CNN's actually threatened to dox regular people, like publish their private information, simply because they shared memes.
They want the attention.
But I want to show you the second meme, and then we'll come back to this one.
The second meme is this.
It's not really a meme, it's like a campaign video.
And it's an Uber driver driving a woman.
I'll give you the quick gist of it.
And he drops her off.
She goes inside.
And then she hears a noise.
She comes outside and sees the car driving, like, speeding away, as a man in a MAGA hat yells, Go!
Go!
Keep going!
Keep going!
And then she makes a post on YouTube about her racist MAGA neighbor, and then everyone's like, This is Trump's fault.
This is Trump's America.
And then you see this clip from Jim Acosta, and he's like, It's only a matter of time before this happened.
And there's a thing underneath that says, like, you know, racist Trump supporter, whatever.
But then it turns out, the real clip is after the Uber driver drops the woman off, he gets stuck in some ice, and the MAGA guy, the Trump supporter, hears it, puts on his jacket, puts on his hat, runs out, and helps push the car out of the ice patch so that he can keep driving.
And then he's pushing, and then the car finally gets out, and he goes, go, go, go, keep going, keep going!
And that's it.
That was the gag.
These two videos are meant to describe something.
They're meant to exemplify how the media lies.
How people lie, how they misframe things to trick you.
The first one about the toddlers is how CNN will purposely take footage and then only cut one section so that you aren't getting the truth.
Then they can argue, but it is a real video.
The second one is about how people on social media will do this.
And that creates this twisted perception of what Trump does and who he is.
And I'm not saying that to claim that Trump is perfect.
Far from it.
But certainly, so much of what my friends think about Trump is absolute fake news.
I mean, most of you are probably already aware.
That's why you watch content like mine.
But there's the very fine people hoax, where they argue, Joe Biden, for instance, launches a campaign, a presidential campaign, Taking Donald Trump out of context and clipping two different things together to change what he was saying.
And the verified people hoax references where they claim Trump called, you know, neo-Nazis verified people, which he did not do.
He said they should be condemned totally.
I bring you now to Mr. Jim Acosta's shock and outrage.
He responds to the president like, you know what, man?
It's gotta be on purpose, right?
Jim can't be that dumb.
He says, And here's the image.
Trump's fault?
of 1984.
This Trump tweet is not only bizarre, it's bogus.
I never did a live shot on this, so obviously the chyron is a fake.
And here's the image.
Trump's fault?
White man in MAGA hat attacks black Uber driver.
We know.
Wow.
Do people really not know?
People think it's real.
We often see satirical articles fact-checked by Snopes.
This is like a notorious problem.
There was one that took the image of Nancy Pelosi tearing up Trump's speech, and they had her tearing up the Bible, and the joke was that Trump held up the Bible outside of a church, and so then Nancy Pelosi tore it up, and you know, it was a gag.
Snopes fact-checked it.
Snopes likes to fact-check jokes.
What does that say about the modern left?
I'm sorry, man.
If Trump supporters understand what a joke is, and that this text is not CNN's typical text, and Jim Acosta, in this clip, it's just a few generic one-liners where he's like, it was only a matter of time before he saw something like this.
Something like that.
Yes, because he didn't actually ever talk about this.
It's a joke.
They're trying to exemplify a problem.
It's kind of weird, because I think when you grow up on the internet, I'm used to seeing video edits like this.
I mean, there are a bunch of left-wing individuals that do exactly this, and the media never freaks out.
They don't make a big deal out of it.
What's the- I'm not going to name that guy, but there's a guy who's notorious for making these weird edits.
I guess he got outed as a predator or something, which is completely likely.
I mean, surprise, surprise.
But he used to make a bunch of video edits about right-wing personalities, all taken out of context.
Very, very fake, but very different.
You see, when left-wing personalities literally take Trump out of context and mash two sentences together, and they've done the same thing to me, it's kosher.
Totally fine!
That's just, that's just, you know, highlighting important things.
And then if you literally make a gag video, which is very clearly not real and edited, they'll say it's fake news.
They'll all freak out.
Jim Acosta will say, straight out of 1984, man, I gotta tell you, man, I think these people are genuinely evil people.
And it's a really difficult thing to say.
And I think it's got really dangerous connotations, like, if these people truly are evil, and that's the kind of talk that can lead to serious conflict.
The belief that the other side truly is evil, but it's as best I can do.
Now look, the left likes to say the same thing about Trump supporters, that they're evil, mindless, brainwashed cultists.
And I gotta be honest, many of them are fairly mindless, to be completely honest.
I see a lot of people posting memes and I'm like, that's ridiculous.
But let's talk about the core.
Of the individuals.
Let's talk about the core of the actual, you know, Trump voter base.
Regular people.
People who voted for Obama.
63 plus million people.
And people smart enough to discern between what is real and what isn't.
People like Jim Acosta, I would say is evil because I don't think he's that stupid.
And maybe this is just me overestimating him, right?
I don't think he's stupid enough to realize they actually tried tricking people into thinking he was talking about this.
It's a gag.
It's just an edit.
It's just supposed to be funny.
And like I said, when left-wing personalities do this, nobody cares.
But here we have Jim Acosta thinking that they actually are trying to mislead people with a video that is very clearly an edit with actors!
Does he really think that this woman, check this out, in her house, watching Covington on the TV, Does Jim Acosta think that they followed a random woman into her home to film her as she did this?
No, it's a skit!
It is a skit, dude!
Does Jim Acosta really think the average person can't tell the difference between a skit and, like, actual footage?
I'm gonna go ahead and bet Jim Acosta knows full well what he's doing.
He's grifting.
He's doing this to feign shock and outrage so he gets retweets and gets followers.
These people know that they can do... It's what's called being a Trump reply guy.
And you'll see them.
I have... I don't know if I have it pulled up, but I have some blocked.
That typically whenever you pull up a Donald Trump tweet...
There's one person, a couple people who are always the highest ranking responses to Trump.
These are the Trump reply guys.
Jim Acosta is doing this.
They gain a ton of followers.
A lot of these people who follow Trump follow him out of hate.
And then they go to the tweet, they see Jim Acosta, they see a couple of these other guys, and they just chuckle to themselves.
They don't actually know or care about anything.
They just want a reason to hate.
They have hate in their hearts, and they need something to point it at.
Maybe it's from a lack of purpose, I don't know.
But, Jim Acosta, I think, does it for money.
I mean, he wrote a book, he tried selling it, it was a stupid book.
I mean, I didn't read it.
But it was called, like, Enemy of the People, and apparently didn't do that well at all.
But I'm sure he made money off of it.
And that's why he's doing this.
Because these people...
They don't care about community.
They don't care about protecting important things.
They don't care about sanctity.
Something you should check out, right, and I think that really can help draw a distinction between the two factions in the culture war, is Jonathan Haidt's research on moral foundations.
And he said that, according to his research, liberals only follow, I believe, the care, harm, and fairness moral foundations, whereas conservatives and moderates follow all five.
There may be six now because they added liberty, I believe, because libertarians just are exclusively about liberty.
It's kind of funny.
But conservatives believe in sanctity and they believe in loyalty, authority, etc.
And so these other foundations show you that the conservative mindset also considers fairness, equality, justice, care.
But it also has concerns about sanctity and authority.
And the reason for this, I believe, I could be wrong, I don't want to misquote him, but it's that conservatives are said to seek to preserve the system that helped them survive and succeed in the first place, whereas liberals are not concerned essentially about the system itself or the past, just about the immediate perception of fairness or care or harm, right?
And that's why we get what we get.
So it's possible to not be a conservative.
You can be a moderate, but as long... And you could be a liberal too, for sure.
It's possible to lean left on certain issues, but still care about sanctity, care about authority.
And caring about authority doesn't mean authoritarianism.
It means that you understand why we have authority, which is why I say I'm on the left-libertarian spectrum.
I'm very, very libertarian in many different aspects.
But realistically, I consider myself to be liberal in terms of policy, simply because I do understand the need for authority.
I just think it should be limited.
Now, I don't mean liberal in the colloquial sense of, like, the liberals versus the conservatives.
I mean the true sense of the word liberal, like social or classical liberal.
I lean on the social liberal spectrum, and many of the people you'll find on intellectual dark web are classical liberals.
Some are progressives, actually.
So here's the way I see it.
I think because of my family history, I know full well the importance of preserving this system.
And things are starting to get really, really freaky and scary.
I'm going to cover this more in depth in a later segment.
If you're listening on the podcast, you probably already heard it.
But Democrats are actually trying to repeal the Civil Rights Act in California.
This is not an exaggeration.
I am not being hyperbolic.
They have literally proposed a constitutional amendment in California that would strike through the language in, it's called Prop 209, that says that you cannot use race, gender, sex, national origin, color, or ethnicity in determining, you can't consider those things for hiring or public education or things like that.
They've masked it by saying it's about affirmative action.
But make no mistake, if they wanted to actually put a bill forward about affirmative action, they could have just said, you know, we amend this to say, in this capacity, these things are okay.
No, they're trying to repeal, straight up, the Civil Rights Act.
I looked how far we've come, the battle over civil rights, things that allowed my family to survive, and I say, as much as I care about justice and fairness, I also recognize the importance of this country and this country's ideals surviving.
So that makes me socially liberal, but I understand the importance of America.
These people don't.
They don't care.
Their mindset is built upon, it'll be fine, you'll survive, so what, you'll get by.
And yeah, you can get by, but do you want to get by like they do in China, where they eat gutter oil out of the sewers?
Where they get welded into their homes?
I don't think that's something you want to live with.
Or more importantly, no, not everyone will get by.
There's going to be...
They're gonna try to repeal the Civil Rights Act in California.
It's absolutely amazing.
Now, I say Civil Rights Act colloquially.
It's called something else.
It's called Proposition 209.
But it's incredible that we've come this far.
That they're considering themselves to be anti-racist when they're overtly trying to repeal civil rights legislation.
That's how insane things have gotten.
And it's emboldened by people who don't care.
People like Jim Acosta.
They come in with this very obvious nonsense.
1984.
Please, dude.
This guy's out of his mind.
I think you get the point in that regard.
There is a light at the end of the tunnel, perhaps.
Twitter labeled Donald Trump's tweet, Manipulated Media.
The one where the little kids are running.
Yes, it's manipulated media.
Every single edit, basically, is manipulated in some way.
You edit.
Documentaries are manipulated.
Like, straight up.
And documentaries literally edit out of context.
This is a fact.
Most people don't know this, but in the internet world, we do long-form conversations.
I think one of the reasons people like, you know, videos like what I'm doing now is, I literally, I'm just talking.
There's no jump, there's no edit.
I used to do that, like, two years ago.
I stopped doing it, and things have actually, you know, I've done better and better, because it's just, we'll just talk about it, right?
The podcast I do, TeamCastIRL, many other top podcasts, free-form conversation.
It's raw.
It's authentic.
And what that means is you know you're actually getting a good thought process on what's happening, right?
And when it comes to interviews, people are getting a fair shot to actually explain themselves and not be taken out of context.
Documentaries literally condense things and take things out of context.
So here's the potentially good news.
In response to this nonsense, Brad Parscale stepped things up, saying, hey Twitter, your days are numbered, with a link to Parlay.
Parlay is mostly a conservative version of Twitter.
There are many different versions of Twitter, but you'll notice something right when I click over here.
What is this?
Miss Laura Loomer!
Laura Loomer, as you know, is banned from basically every social media platform.
She's here on Parlay, and she has, I think, nearly like 200,000 followers.
People are coming to Parlay, and I have said this for a long time.
Trump could snap his fingers and end all of this social media censorship overnight.
All he has to do is post to Parlay.
All he has to do is post to Gab or to Minds or put a video on BitChute.
Any one of these things would work.
No, I'm not advocating for any of these platforms.
I'm telling you that if, now as Brad Parscale is saying, Parley, you know what's going to happen?
If Trump starts posting to Parley, the media will be forced to cover it.
And that would give massive promotion to any one of these platforms.
He could post on Mines instead of Facebook.
Parler is more like a Twitter.
Mines is more like a Facebook.
Mines has got a video function as well.
I like the platform.
Know the founders, full disclosure.
And if Trump used any one of them, there would be a massive influx of users overnight who want to follow the president.
Journalists would have to sign up to follow the president.
And if they want to report on what he's saying, they gotta sign up.
That would break Twitter's stranglehold and their manipulation of the press.
It would force real competition.
Why isn't he doing it?
This is one of the problems I have with Trump, okay?
And a lot of people have been saying it.
I said, what do the Republicans do?
Respect the president to Donald Trump for the great economy.
I think that was fantastic.
There's some foreign policy things I'm critical of.
But I sit back and say, for the past several years, we have seen Twitter, Facebook, YouTube suppress and suppress and ban and censor nonstop.
And at any point, Trump, with his 100 million or whatever, 70 million, 80 million followers, could have just been like, follow me on Parlay, and boom!
This platform would become worth a billion dollars overnight, and that would be real market competition for Twitter.
And Trump could still post to Twitter, but he could post certain exclusive things to any one of his other platforms, forcing journalists to, boom, plaster it all over the news.
But he doesn't do it.
He doesn't do it.
And I don't know why.
Because Dan Scavino and Brad Parscale are smart dudes.
Okay, okay.
To be fair, here's Brad Parscale now doing it.
And I mean it, man.
Scavino, I believe he runs Trump social media.
Brad Parscale is a campaign manager.
These guys are smart.
Smart, smart guys who have been very, very successful in working on the internet.
Maybe it was strategic.
Wait till the very last minute.
But I'll tell you what.
Whatever.
If they do it, I will be very surprised.
If Trump actually hops on board, I should say.
Brad Parscale just posted saying, your days are numbered.
His top post from 9 hours ago says, if anyone argues why Parley, here it is.
And then he shows an image where Twitter says manipulated media on a meme.
He's got 715 comments, 1.9k likes, looks like almost 5,000 upvotes.
I'm not entirely sure how Parley works in that capacity.
But I'm going to start using it, mainly because Brad Parscale just posted to it, and this post seems to be unique to Parler.
So it's spelled Parler, for those that don't know.
You know, I guess people aren't going to understand the French pronunciation.
People don't speak French, but it's P-A-R-L-E-R.
There are a lot of other platforms.
You'll find my videos appear on BitChute automatically.
This is what we need.
Market competition.
So, all that needs to happen right now.
Because you can see, look, you got Dan Bongino, you got Eric Trump, you got Rudy Giuliani, you got Rand Paul.
Hey, people are jumping over!
This could be the push to break censorship that needs to happen.
All you gotta do is get real Donald Trump to start posting on Parlay or, again, any other platform, and then the media will have to cover it.
They absolutely will.
And think about this.
Think about all the Trump reply guys who try to build a career like Jim Acosta off just simply replying to the president.
They're going to have to join Parlay, too, to reply to the president.
And guess what?
The leadership of this platform Presumably isn't going to be censoring conservatives.
So how about the president actually try something?
We get some fairness in media.
Well, Brad Parscale says their days are numbered.
I hope he's certainly now asking the president to bring about some market competition in social media.
That would be nice.
But I guess we can only wait and see.
So I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up at 1 p.m.
on this channel, and I will see you all then.
I think it's fair to say that right now police officers in this country are under extreme stress.
Everyone's accusing them of all being evil, even though the majority of interactions are mostly fine, and even though we can have some complaints and call for reform, you've got people outright saying, ACAB, which I'll just paraphrase in a family-friendly version, All Cops Are Bad, though they use a different B word, if you know what I mean.
Well, following this, we've seen massive calls for police reform.
We've seen calls for defunding the police, abolishing the police, and now we're seeing police react.
Just a couple days ago, following the announcement that a police officer in Atlanta, Garrett Rolfe, would be charged with felony murder, Many police officers stopped answering calls.
Many of them called out wouldn't come to work.
And now we're seeing the next step of this.
The NYPD may go on strike on July 4th so city can have its quote independence from cops as tension builds between law enforcement and protesters.
Yeah, people will start to see what life is like when the police aren't really there.
It's unfortunate that we're experiencing this kind of social media delirium.
Racism is on the decline.
Violent crime, on the decline.
Police brutality, as far as I can tell, all of these things are on the decline.
However, Social media exposes us to more of this information, so even though things are getting better, people see it more, assume it's getting worse.
The NYPD Police Union made a statement, I think last week or so, saying that out of 375 million interactions, there have been very few instances, negative encounters, overwhelmingly positive for the most part.
And people don't recognize this.
Why?
Well, when somebody gets, you know, stopped by a cop, asked some questions, and then a wave and a carry-on, I would call that a positive interaction.
If somebody gets stopped by a cop because they're a suspect, it could be negative to some people, but if the cops ultimately, you know, walk away, it's a positive interaction.
And if the cops actually stop a cop, I'm sorry, stop a criminal, and do everything right, that's probably a positive interaction.
Now, there are some negative ones, notably in New York, stop and frisk.
But people don't see any of these things, right?
There used to be a ton of videos that people complained about that were pro-cop propaganda.
Cop saving a baby, or performing CPR, doing the Heimlich Maneuver.
Yeah, because these things happen, too.
They're not newsworthy, though.
Cop Saves Life is expected.
So nobody shares those videos.
Now Cop Takes Life, those videos are shocking.
Everybody wants to share these videos, and then people get a skewed view of what's really going on.
I'll tell you what, man.
A lot of what I understand about cop jobs is it's administrative, boring nonsense.
A lot of sitting around and waiting.
And people assume it's one extreme end or another.
Some people probably assume that the police, or even the military, is going to be like an action movie.
Running and jumping, putting the sword in your mouth, and exploding building.
You have the left believing the cops are literally sitting around laughing about how they can violate people's rights and things like that.
No, look, bad people exist.
Sometimes there's action-packed moments.
But life is just much more boring than that.
The reality is, police handle a lot of administrative disputes, property disputes.
They assist when an ambulance comes out.
A lot of it is not really positive or negative.
But we don't see it.
So out of the hundreds of millions, what do you get?
Shock content.
Well, now the police may go on strike.
I got another funny story for you, because now surrounding jurisdictions in Atlanta are trying to poach the cops who want to leave the Atlanta PD.
And I find that one really hilarious.
We'll see how these cities work when they don't have cops.
Daily Mail reports the NYPD may go on strike, they say.
NYPD cops may go on strike on July 4th so the city can have its independence from them as tension continues to build between law enforcement and protesters in the Big Apple.
Messages have been circulating among law enforcement officers in New York encouraging them to call out sick en masse on Independence Day.
NYPD cops will strike on July 4th to let the city have their independence without cops, reads one of the text messages sent among cops, according to the New York Post.
The potential walkout comes as the NYPD has come under fire after some officers have been caught on camera violently attacking protesters, demanding an end to police brutality.
Yes.
We've seen them.
In one video, a woman is getting in the face of a cop, and he just shoves her down.
That cop apparently got in trouble.
I think he got charged with like assault or something.
Don't do it!
I get it, man.
Someone gets in your face.
Tact.
Strategy.
You gotta understand what's going on right now.
Now.
Whether or not he should be charged or will be convicted is an entirely different story.
But let's just be real, right?
Now is a time for police officers, especially at protests, to be mindful of these things.
But also to be real, this one video, man, it was one cop out of how many who were out marching in these protests?
A lot of these protesters complain that their rights are being violated because the cops are simply breaking up a protest.
I'm sorry, man, that's not always the case.
Okay?
If you have a large group of people, And one person starts breaking something.
What are they supposed to do?
Just say, well, this large group is providing cover for a violent rioter.
No, they're gonna have to come in and try and make the arrest.
But then everyone acts like it was a peaceful protester, and sometimes the police arrest the wrong people.
It is not an easy thing to figure these situations out, to be completely fair.
I've been arrested, and I've been released.
It happened in D.C.
when they just arrested the entire crowd, and they argue you can't do that, it's unconstitutional.
It's a good argument.
And there still is a challenge as to how police deal with riots if they can't just grab everyone.
That's a tactic the far left uses to exploit the police.
They all wear black hoodies and glasses so they look the exact same, so the cops can't arrest the perpetrator of the crime.
In which case, they tried charging the group with conspiracy and it didn't work.
So, maybe you just temporarily stop them, maybe you detain them, maybe you... I don't know how you deal with it, to be honest.
But what's the alternative?
Have people run around smashing things?
They say, New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio this week announced sweeping measures to make the NYPD more transparent, including the launch of a new disciplinary database, as calls are mounting for widespread police reform and the altogether defunding of the force.
Now, I think reform is legit.
I got respect for the job that police do.
I got respect for how difficult it must be, and a lot of the time, I know I mentioned a lot of it was probably boring, probably is, but you do end up with very serious circumstances, very dangerous situations, high tension, high stress moments.
I can respect how difficult it must be.
What people gotta realize, man, A lot of these people in cities... Yeah, you might be a good upstanding citizen, alright?
You might do your job, you go home, you watch TV, you mind your own business.
But these cops are getting phone calls always to the worst of the worst, okay?
Sometimes they might get a cat stuck in a tree, sure, fine.
But when people call the cops, it's because crazy people are doing crazy things.
And they have to respond to that.
So you gotta understand what they deal with all day, every day.
That's no excuse for them to violate the law or to violate someone's rights.
But you have to understand, when they're seeing you doing something, the best thing you can do, alright?
We have a process for this.
If you get jammed up by a cop, you just... Don't answer questions, okay?
You want to have your lawyer present.
You cooperate to the best of your abilities, but you don't have to consent to a search.
If you're being arrested or detained, you can ask, are you being detained?
There's a lot... Don't take my advice on this stuff.
Seriously, look it up.
But I'll tell you this.
I've been arrested several times.
And they were all bunk.
Like, I'm not somebody who does things worthy of arrest.
You know what I do?
I put my hands behind my back.
I keep my mouth shut.
And I go through the motions.
And guess what?
It sucks.
It really does.
Okay?
But there's administrative recourse for this.
If you start fighting and throwing things and screaming... Let me tell you a story, man.
In 2017, when Donald Trump was being inaugurated, there was a mass protest.
They arrested a bunch of people.
They surrounded, uh, all the cops surrounded this large group.
I was in it.
The first thing I did, I asked for a supervisor.
They said, you know, they ignored me.
I looked around and I saw a guy and I waved and I said, can I get a supervisor?
And they said, yeah.
They called the supervisor over.
I said, I just want to let you know I'm press.
And he says, don't care.
You're all being arrested.
And I was like, I'm not trying to tell you not to do it.
He came back, and I nodded to him and waved, and he nodded back, and he walked around.
This guy's name was Lieutenant Washington, I believe.
He came back over eventually, and he started, you know, pointing at people and then fanning them over, checking their credentials, and pulling them out of the group.
And then I looked at him and waved, and he looked at me, nodded, fanned me over, and he said, check his credentials.
A cop looked at my press cards and my IDs, and they said, all right, you're good, man.
Sorry about that.
And I was like, appreciate it.
I walked out.
That was it.
They told me, just keep going, you know, do my thing.
And I said, okay.
I walked away.
They had told me three times I'd been arrested.
I didn't yell.
I didn't scream.
I just said, you know, at one point when I was standing there, there were cops standing literally two feet from me, and I have a backpack.
And so, as I'm trying to take my shirt off, I said, I just said, as I'm putting my bag down, I'm like, just so you guys know, I'm just gonna put my jacket or my shirt into my backpack and take out my phone.
And then the cop nodded at me, and I'm like, we're good.
Because these cops are on edge.
They got a bunch of people all wearing black, they're throwing stuff, they got rocks and bottles.
So I'm like, I respect that, man.
I don't like that I'm being detained.
I think it's BS.
They told me I'm arrested.
But you know what I did?
I still made sure, like, you understand the circumstances you're in, why they're doing what they're doing, and you can navigate it properly.
So I inform the cops, like, I'm gonna put my bag down, I'm gonna go into my bag, and then I'm going to, you know, take my jacket out, just so you know what I'm doing.
I don't want them to think I'm gonna pull out a rock or something like that.
Who knows what they're thinking?
They're on edge, watching everybody, standing guard.
And I let them know I'm press, I'll be cool, I'll just be standing right here.
They nodded, they were like, cool, and then eventually I got let go.
But guess what?
In their protest was a bunch of other journalists who got arrested.
And boy were they angry that I and several others got released.
But you know what these other journalists were doing?
They were screaming at the top of their lungs in the face of a cop.
Because the cops are like, I don't know who this guy is or what he's screaming.
I don't want to hear it.
Meanwhile, the other journalists were standing off to the side, just like, whatever.
I don't know.
We don't know.
And the cops let us go.
Apparently, a news outlet called into the police department and said, you got a bunch of journalists.
I need you to let them out.
Some of them work for me.
And the cops were like, no problem.
We'll try and find them.
And then they started looking like, which one of you are journalists?
And we were all like, it's all us.
And they were like, we got you.
Sorry about that.
They didn't want to arbitrarily arrest us.
I have tremendous respect for Lieutenant Washington for getting me out.
And there were apologies and a wave like, carry on.
And some people shouldn't have been arrested.
Eventually, a lot of these people got let go.
It's a part of the process, man.
I think for the most part, only a few people pleaded guilty and got in trouble.
But now we're going to see this, right?
Because I'll tell you what.
I don't have a lot of... I'm not gonna pretend I like the NYPD, for the most part, right?
I'm not gonna pretend like I think they're all good people.
No, I've had nothing but bad encounters with the NYPD, except for a few handful of times.
There have been a few cops who have stopped me, shook my hand, said, I really respect what you do.
And I've talked to some NYPD cops who handle, you know, protests and stuff.
And I've had these conversations on more than one occasion where they've literally said, you know, we understand sometimes the cops can act a fool too, and we respect that you're just trying to let people know what's going on, even if it's our guys doing something wrong, we can respect that, because you're also making sure people know that sometimes these guys are doing something wrong.
And I'm like, that's all I'm saying, man.
I'm not here to say the cops are good guys, the protesters are good guys.
I'm here to say, straight up, the protester came over here, the cop grabbed him, I don't know why.
That protester, though, threw a rock, that cop freaked out, now the people are fighting.
And I've had a few cops say, you know, respect, you know, I appreciate it.
It's like, at least you're not making us look like villains, I guess, right?
But I've had tremendously negative interactions with police, especially at protests.
But if you don't understand what their job is, or what they're supposed to be doing, or why they have to do the things they do, then you'll invariably just claim they're all evil, the system is broken, they must be defunded, and you'll get this.
Let me read, because I can't believe we're 12 minutes in and I haven't even got to the text messages.
They say...
Multiple cops said they have been sent messages urging them to call out sick July 4th in retaliation for New Yorkers not honoring us, the Post reported.
Cops that say we can't strike because of the Taylor law, reads one of the messages.
The people and this city doesn't honor us, why honor them?
The message references the Taylor law, a New York state act, which makes work stoppages punishable with jail time and fines.
Let me tell you something.
If a cop goes on strike, you think another cop's gonna come and arrest them?
You're gonna have to bring in outside police.
If the NYPD decides they're gonna strike, invoke the Taylor Law all you want.
And then let me ask you if you think the cop who's on strike is gonna arrest the other cop who's on strike the moment the strike ends.
I really doubt it.
These people don't get it, man.
A lot of these people on the left seem to think that there is an invisible hand of the state that forces things to happen.
They don't understand that everything is built upon confidence and the will of the people.
If they came out right now and said, we want the police to do X, and not one cop did it, congratulations.
The law will not be enforced, period.
So you try to tell me you're gonna punish the police with arrest?
You're gonna need a cop to actually arrest the other cop.
What, are you gonna get a scab cop to show up?
I doubt it.
I really don't think it'll happen.
Maybe some.
But look, if we're going to complain about how the police are too loyal to each other for the most part, you think the cops are going to arrest each other?
I guess fine, bring in state troopers or something.
And then you think the state troopers are going to arrest the cops too?
I really don't buy it.
If your argument is that the police often aren't held accountable because they got each other's backs, why would you think they wouldn't be able to strike?
I'll tell you what, man.
We need police reform.
I do not like that the police have gotten away with certain things because they do get each other's back over the law in many circumstances.
But I also think you're insane if you think removing, abolishing, defunding, and demonizing the police is a good idea.
It's not a good idea.
Look, I'll tell you, like I said it again, I've been arrested.
You know what I do?
I keep my mouth shut.
I'm very apologetic, very respectful.
And you get through it.
You get through it, man.
I was arrested.
I was held for like eight hours for skateboarding once.
It was BS.
And I just did everything.
Kept my mouth shut.
They let me out.
And that was the end of it.
I went to court and the judge was furious.
And he's like, what is this?
And he threw it out right away.
I shouldn't have been arrested.
They wasted my time.
They took time from me I will never get back.
But I could have made it worse by fighting and resisting and saying, no, you're not allowed.
No.
The police in this country have certain leeways.
Certain leeway, right?
It's not malicious arrest or prosecution if they arrest you for something.
It's you go to court and you get it remedied.
It's a system we have.
It's not perfect, but it's really one of the best.
There's another message that says, it's calling for an independence day strike, but invoking the blue flu, saying they should all call in sick.
Police officers like you and me took an oath to protect strangers regardless of race, class, or gender.
Today, we are vilified and must stand as one.
I completely agree.
Absolutely 100%.
Listen.
I am all about police reform.
I can say it 50 million times.
And I still think the police should stand up for themselves and make sure that people realize that for all of the bad they complain about, there's so much good they do.
I can sit here and complain every day about the bad things that I've had happen to me because of the police.
Breaking my door down, coming to my apartment, threatening me and my friends.
It was horrible.
Filed a complaint.
Nothing happened.
I don't like it.
I'm not going to condemn every single cop because of this.
And I have met more negative than positive interactions, but I've had a cop save me in the middle of a mugging.
It really happened.
I've had cops lie and pull me over for BS, and it's been really, really horrible.
But I still recognize, having cops on patrol, having there be order, is what you need the cops for, man.
So reform makes sense.
I really like the idea of a non-police first responder, or of some kind of civil guard, and that's actually being implemented in a lot of places.
I'm like, that's the right move!
It is still kind of the police.
So maybe what we need is a different division of police.
It's that simple.
NYPD does have the community response teams.
They're called community liaisons or something like that.
But maybe we need police who respond to low-level stuff and they just show up for administrative functions.
You got a homeless person who's sleeping and won't move.
It really is tough, I gotta be honest.
What people don't realize is that the NYPD's job is way different from a suburban police department, or even a smaller but still big city.
If there's a homeless guy, they say, well, we should have a social worker come and respond.
I agree.
I do.
But you gotta recognize, the social worker may not be able to remedy the situation, and you may still need a cop, and you may still need the use of force, like to physically pick someone up and remove them.
And therein lies the real challenge.
But maybe the first responder can be something, you know, non-law enforcement.
Something more social worker related or community related.
I respect that.
Here's what they say.
The message goes on to give instructions to officers to call in sick.
It tells them to first call their precinct and log a sick day.
The next step, if this is denied, is to call the main NYPD sick desk.
Finally, if that is also turned down, cops should show up for work and ask for an ambulance to take them home sick.
That is bold, man!
If you are held because of the blue flu, request a bus and go sick from command.
It is not clear if the messages of encouragement have been written by other NYPD cops, but Police Benevolent Association President Patrick Lynch told the Post that New York cops have reached the breaking point.
Over the past few weeks, we have been attacked in the streets, demonized in the media, and denigrated by practically every politician in the city.
Now we are facing the possibility of being arrested any time we go out to do our job.
The OIPD is facing scrutiny after footage of protests over Floyd's death was shown multiple incidents of them violently responding to demonstrators.
And they shouldn't do it.
They absolutely should not do it.
But maybe you need the full context.
In one video, a woman is screaming in a cop's face, he shoves her back really hard, she falls over.
Well, she shouldn't have been in his face, and to be honest, he should not have shoved her.
You gotta be... If you're a cop, you have to be... Man, I don't wanna say necessarily held to a higher standard, I do think so, but what I mean is you gotta be vigilant, you gotta be strong, you gotta have that mental fortitude, you gotta resist the provocation.
They're trying to provoke you to get that video clip.
They want you to be the villain.
You got one video of a cop drawing his actual live ammo firearm at a crowd and they all break up.
What the activist didn't show you is that just before that, someone drew some kind of club and bashed a cop over the head with it.
Fortunately, he was wearing a helmet.
In the face of lethal force, the cop drew his lethal force and told him to back off.
But the activists are provoking you on purpose, the extremists, the rioters, to get that clip.
They did it during Occupy.
There was a viral video that they made where a cop is swinging his baton, wildly beating people with it.
What they don't show you is the full clip, where a group of activists start shaking the barricades and pushing the cop back until he finally takes his baton, using it horizontally, and pushes them.
And then, once they keep hitting him, start swinging with it.
They won't give you the full context.
They want you to get back to that corner to give them that viral moment.
The reality is, many of these circumstances are conflict between two groups.
But we ask the police to be out there.
The protesters have a First Amendment right to protest peaceably, not to violently attack cops, to throw things at them, to shove them.
The cops should respect the rights.
They shouldn't be knocking people over.
But that woman shouldn't be getting in his face.
All I can really tell you is, guess what?
It's complicated.
You love to hear it, don't you?
But it really is.
Now, if you think you're gonna demonize only the cops and ignore the violence of the rioters and the protesters, you're in for a shock and a surprise.
When on July 4th, these cops say, we're sick.
Let's see how New York wants to deal with this problem.
You know, there used to be moderates in this country, I guess.
They still kind of exist, but the left today is extremist.
I don't see the Democrats coming out.
They're calling for reform, which is good, but they're still playing into the narrative that the cops are bad.
Donald Trump played it the other way, saying, yes, we need reform, but we absolutely need to defend our law enforcement.
Well, people don't realize that these bad cops they complain about typically are in big cities.
And most people in this country like their cops.
I know I do.
Maybe it's because I'm in a suburb.
I moved here on purpose because the city was bad.
And even moving into a smaller town on the outskirts of the New York metro, I had better cops.
And I would see them fairly often.
How's it going, buddy?
They're like, hey, how's it going?
But inside New York, where you got this big city, things are rough.
Chicago's the same way.
Move out to a suburb, things get better.
Maybe that's, you know, the ideal, like Ocasio-Cortez said.
But I'll tell you what, man.
The reason the police work better in the suburbs, in my opinion?
Small town.
We know them!
They're responsible to us the same way we are to them, and we rely on them to keep us safe.
And for the most part, in these smaller towns, we're not stealing from each other.
But when they are, the cops are gonna show up.
So...
Man, where I live, it's fine.
Everything's fine.
We don't have police brutality.
We don't have anything like that.
I can walk right up to the police department and, how's it going, buddy?
I guess when you're in New York and you have tens of thousands, you don't know who these people are.
They don't know who you are and they got to deal with very, very, you know, rough circumstances.
It makes things tense, to say the least, so we'll see what happens when the blue flu kicks off.
I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up at 4 p.m.
at timcast.net.
Check it out. It is my main channel and I will see you all then.
Thanks for watching.
Now, I'm reticent to say riot for the most part because there has been some violence.
For the most part, it's been kind of just unrest.
I don't want to make it seem like people are roaming around destroying things like they were, you know, a couple weeks ago when CNN's front lobby got completely destroyed.
However, CNN Has built the wall.
Ladies and gentlemen, what you see on your screen is CNN's wall.
I'm kidding, by the way, but CNN has put up a fence outside of its headquarters after the building was attacked during the riots in Atlanta a few weeks ago.
I just think it's kind of funny and everyone's pointing out that CNN has to put up barriers around its building while they simultaneously praise all of the protests.
It seems just absolutely hypocritical.
So the first thing I want to do is give you a little bit of context about what's going on right now in Atlanta, but the main, main segment.
I just gotta do it.
I gotta, I gotta do it.
Jim Acosta and Kayleigh McEnany clash over Trump exploiting two toddlers with doctored video.
Doesn't that make you fake news?
This is just a perfect storm of stupidity.
And Kayleigh McEnany, once again, absolutely just knocks down Jim Acosta and CNN.
Let's talk about the hypocrisy we have here.
So first, this is ralliers participating in a one-race march in Atlanta on Juneteenth.
So Juneteenth is today.
Today celebrates the day where the last slaves were officially freed, although the official emancipation was a few years earlier.
The story, as I'm now learning, Is that the union had to send soldiers to Texas to force, because like two and a half years later, the slave owners still didn't release them.
So that's what you have today.
Now it's becoming much more prominent because of Black Lives Matter.
Today was typically a holiday that was mostly known by the black community in the United States.
Most Americans, and this is true, don't know what it is.
And now it's becoming substantially more prominent.
There are calls now to make it a national holiday, and I gotta admit, I'm totally down for it, right?
I mean, the way I see it is, if we're gonna celebrate freedom, the Constitution, life, liberties, the pursuit of happiness, we celebrate it for all peoples.
So I think, you know what, man?
We got Juneteenth, then a couple weeks later we got the Fourth of July.
I'm all about that independence.
Now, mind you, I'm not gonna assert, you know, whether it should or shouldn't be.
I don't think it's necessarily up to me because it's mostly prominent in the black community.
So, you know, we'll see how things play out.
But I think it's cool, man.
I think this idea that, you know, we finally got true freedom.
And I gotta be fair, like, I don't think we actually had true freedom for a long time, even after independence.
But I'm cool with it.
But let's do this.
This is just some of the context about...
I gotta do it.
I gotta drag CNN this one.
Listen.
Ralliers participating in Atlanta for a Juneteenth celebration.
And what did CNN do?
They put up barriers?
I gotta say, I find it kind of offensive, okay?
I didn't want to go there, but we're gonna go there.
CNN.
I understand that angry rioters showed up and trashed your lobby, so you're a little worried.
But can I just point out that it's Juneteenth and there's a rally in a park?
And I don't know what you're thinking here, CNN, with what do you think these people are going to do?
But sure, I think that reflects more on what CNN is.
They want to praise protests.
Then when they get attacked, they assume the worst about a rally in a park.
Now, for sure, there are still people marching around in the streets and doing their thing.
But come on, CNN.
Okay, fine.
You know what?
CNN has every right to put up a fence to protect their building.
I get it.
But I think it just reflects on how they view the community.
You know?
They got attacked by a bunch of rioters.
It wasn't Juneteenth.
It was something else.
So, whatever, man.
But now let's talk about their hypocrisy.
And Kayleigh McEnany, once again, I can't believe it, but I'll tell you what, man.
Every single time we see the fake news people get smacked down by Kayleigh McEnany, I feel like it's just... You know, it really is worth bringing up because...
You know, look, we had Sarah Huckabee Sanders, bless her heart.
Sean Spicer, hey, there you go, you know, good job, guy.
And that's about all I can say about him, right?
Press secretaries who sat there, answered questions, got caught up sometimes.
Kayleigh McEnany has just routinely smacked down fake news for their hypocrisy, their double standards, and she doesn't take the business from people like Jim Acosta.
So the reason this one is actually really interesting Is that, she straight up says to Jim, this is not a cable news segment, you have to let me answer your question.
And that was like a smackdown, because we know that Jim Acosta and CNN, this is all a game to them.
And that's why I wanted to bring up the wall portion of it, and what's going on in Atlanta.
To them, it's all a segment.
It's all, what press can we get?
How can we spin this and make it reality TV?
So here's what Mediaite reports.
And mind you, Mediaite's fairly lefty.
Let's see what they say.
Jim Acosta went back and forth with White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany over President Donald Trump's two doctored videos calling CNN fake news from Thursday night.
At one point, Acosta asked, is it OK to exploit two toddlers?
And doesn't that make you fake news?
The most absurd and disgusting question.
Are you kidding me?
Exploit two toddlers.
It was a carpe donctum video for the first, you know, firstly.
And no, it's just a video of two kids exploiting them.
What a moron.
Last night, the president tweeted out some fake news, some fake videos, one of which was labeled manipulated media by Twitter, Acosta said.
Why is the president sharing fake videos on Twitter?
Why is the president sharing fake videos on Twitter about two toddlers who are obviously showing a lot of love for one another?
It seems as though he is exploiting children to make some sort of point.
Why was he sharing fake videos?
He was making a point about CNN specifically, McEnany responded.
A point that CNN has regularly taken him out of context.
Jim Acosta's literally doing that right now.
That in 2019, CNN misleadingly aired a viewpoint to falsely accuse the Covington Boys of being students in MAGA gear harassing a Native American elder.
In 2019, CNN misleadingly aired a viewpoint to falsely accuse the Covington Boys of being
students in MAGA gear harassing a Native American elder.
I'm sorry, that's mediaite, just not writing properly.
It put really grave consequences for their future.
Here's Costa.
So you're saying it's OK to exploit two toddler hugging?
Wow, mediaite, what is this?
To exploit a toddler hugging one another to make some sort of political point?
Acosta shot back.
As you know, the president has described two members of the press as fake news during the course of this administration.
When you share a vague video like that, doesn't that make you fake news?
McKennedy said, I think the president was making a satirical point that was quite funny if you go and actually watch the video.
The point was, it was a play on CNN reportedly taking the repeatedly, uh, taking the, what is this article?
I apologize, my friends.
I apologize for trying to use media as a source.
But I'll tell you what, they're a pretty lefty publication, and I'm sorry.
This thing is so riddled with textual errors, I'm surprised.
Now, you may have heard one of my catchphrases, get a copy editor.
I say it all the time.
But this is impressively bad.
I don't even know, when you share a vague vide like that, a video, doesn't that make you fake news?
Wow.
I think the president was making a satirical point that was quite funny, if you go and actually watch the video.
The point was, it was a play on CNN reportedly taking the repeatedly taking him out of context.
What?
All right.
You know what?
All right, I'm going to be fair on this.
I used mediaite, but I think what we've gotten here is an excellent, excellent point about the fake news.
It's a rush to crank out garbage content.
It's a rush to jump the gun, make assumptions about people.
So did I. And I thought it'd be fun to talk about because it's absurd on its face.
In their rush, they produced some mangled garbled trash.
I have no idea what they're talking about.
What is it?
Acosta went on to list the instances of Trump enacting policy against certain races and ethnicities.
That is an absurd attempt to justify the misleading headlines that are regularly on your network, McKennedy said.
I was just walking and watching CNN as they applauded the rallies in the streets.
As Acosta went to interrupt her, McKennedy said, you've got to let me finish, this isn't a cable news segment.
That I really appreciate.
So you know what?
Right now.
Jim Acosta is going after Trump for what's obviously satire.
Mediaite, in their rush to put out this article, clearly wrote a bunch of mangled garbage, and sure, whatever.
You know what, man?
It's an indictment on the mainstream media.
I really do think the whole system is crumbling around us.
The New York Times puts out fake news.
Mediaite can't even write a coherent sentence.
I mean, I'll take some of the blame here, too.
I saw something funny and I pulled up an article thinking I could talk about it, and instead I get this mangled garbage, and now here I am making a video where I can barely read what they're saying.
You know what, man?
I try my best, I really do.
These are shorter segments, so I'll be fair and I'll criticize myself, but I think the whole media ecosystem is just in a tailspin.
And when that happens, you end up with no shared worldview.
So now you have people like Acosta.
I think this guy's full of it.
I think he's a liar.
I think CNN is full of it.
And I know you know that.
Now there are people who watch them and think they're legit.
But if you thought Trump was trying to put out an actual clip that made people think CNN was reporting on these toddlers, you are insane.
It was very clearly a joke.
And let me just wrap this up by highlighting the point of my utter disdain for CNN.
Look, you wanna put up barriers, that's fine.
You wanna build a wall around your headquarters, I totally get it.
But stop defending the protesters if that's the case.
I find it completely reprehensible that they're gonna be like, it's peaceful protests, what's the problem?
Build a wall around our building, guys, we don't want damage.
You can sit there and praise the protests that are destroying property around the country, and then you put up a barricade, and here's the best part.
The protest's happening right now in Atlanta.
Maybe they'll get violent.
Okay, fine.
But what we're seeing is a Juneteenth celebration.
What is CNN saying about the community that is going out to a park for a rally?
Sure, CNN.
I don't believe they actually care about any of this, and I don't think you do either, and I don't think most people do.
But a lot of people do just blindly watch this stuff.
And there you go.
I think most people know CNN's full of it and just trying to get ratings.
But I'll leave it there.
I got a couple more segments coming up in a few minutes, and I will see you all shortly.
A civil emergency has been declared in Tulsa because Donald Trump is holding a rally.
That's about it.
Okay, a little more complicated than that, but I really do think the reason they're doing this is because, and I mentioned this a little bit in my main channel segment, go to TimCast.net if you haven't seen it.
It's a different YouTube channel.
I think they're doing this because they're trying to shut down Trump's rallies and they need an excuse to do it.
How much you want to bet it's supposed to be tomorrow, they pull off something ridiculous and just be like, you know, the protesters and the threat of violence and the riots we've seen, we can't do the event.
Trump, you can't have your rally.
They have tried everything to stop him.
Now, here we are.
They're straight up saying that there's a potential for extreme violence, so they're in a state of civil emergency.
You know what?
The first thing I want to mention, because I did mention this in my main channel segment, when the cops came out and said, curfew, you can't wait outside, a bunch of people left.
And I was rather disgusted to see this.
Because Antifa shows up, and they fight with cops, and the cops say, go home, and they say no, and the cops back off and they take the city.
Trump supporters can't even sit in a line.
I get it.
It's a fundamental worldview difference.
The cops are respectable and they ask you, hey, we got a curfew because of COVID.
Can you go home?
And they do it.
But that's why you lose.
Because the left isn't playing fair.
And now they're declaring an emergency.
And I think they might try and use this to shut the rally down.
We'll see how things play out.
Let's read the story and see what's going on.
They say Donald Trump threatens harsh treatment for protesters, lowlifes, and agitators who want to disrupt his Tulsa rally as city declares civil emergency out of fears of extremely violent protests.
Here's what Trump said.
said. Any protesters, anarchists, agitators, looters or low lives who are going to Oklahoma,
please understand you will not be treated like you have been in New York, Seattle or Minneapolis.
It will be a much different scene. President Trump wrote on Twitter. The president didn't
specify how it would be different and how he knew that would happen. But he had criticized
officials in New York, Seattle and Minneapolis for not using the National Guard or other means to
quell the Black Lives Matter protests that sprung up in the wake of the George Floyd's death.
Let me stop you right there, Daily Mail.
No, he was talking about the riots.
He put out a video defending the protests.
Everybody did.
The rioters were a different question.
His tweet came on Juneteenth, the date that celebrates the end of slavery.
So there's the photo, blah, blah, blah.
The president's vow came as Tulsa's mayor declared a civil emergency.
Mayor G.T.
Bynum, a Republican, cited recent civil unrest and the expectation that more than 100,000 people, a combination of Trump supporters and protesters, will swarm the downtown area as the reason for his civil emergency declaration.
It's the latest hurdle for Trump as he attempts to return to the campaign trail.
Additionally, the operators of the BOK Center asked the campaign for a written plan on how they will deal with the threat of the coronavirus, and the Oklahoma Supreme Court will rule on Friday whether attendees must wear masks.
The mayor's order places a federal exclusion zone for a six-block radius near the BOK Center and includes a curfew.
I have received information from the Tulsa Police Department and other law enforcement agencies that shows that individuals from organized groups who have been involved in destructive and violent behavior in other states are planning to travel to the city of Tulsa for purposes of causing unrest in and around the rally, Bynum wrote in the executive order.
These groups in other states have engaged in extremely violent and destructive behavior, including arson and malicious injury to both public and private property, he noted.
The order includes a 10 p.m.
curfew that went into effect on Thursday, but makes an exception for Saturday's rally, saying it will be implemented when the MAGA event is over.
The curfew forbids people from loitering in the six-block area around the arena and bans Molotov cocktails.
I'm sorry.
Wait, hold on.
Let me walk that back.
They ban Molotov cocktails.
Are you trying to imply they were legal in the first place?
I don't think they are.
Along with other combustible, flammable, or explosive liquids.
Supporters have already lined up outside the BOK Center for the event, with some camping out overnight.
And protesters have also appeared on the scene.
Trump also bragged on Twitter Friday, big crowds and lines already forming in Tulsa.
My campaign hasn't started yet.
It starts on Saturday night in Oklahoma.
Trump's rally, his first since March, has been deeply problematic ever since it was announced on
June 10th.
The original date of Friday, June 19th, was switched to Saturday after an uproar about the clash with Juneteenth, the annual celebration marking the end of slavery.
Now, I think that's respectable, and it's kind of strange.
They attacked Trump for having the event on Juneteenth, which was today, and then he changed it out of respect, and they still attacked him for it!
You know, because you can't win, man.
You just can't do it.
They say additionally, the state of Oklahoma and the city of Tulsa have seen an increase in coronavirus infections since the reopening process began.
Oklahoma is in phase three of its reopening, one of the few states that far along in the process.
That was one of the reasons the Trump campaign tapped Tulsa for the rally location.
And you know what they're trying to say on the left?
Trump chose Tulsa because of the Tulsa massacre, and he chose Juneteenth to rub it in their faces.
That, to me, is just insane.
He tried having the rally, I think, in like North Carolina or some other states, and they kept saying that there were strict restrictions because of COVID.
So they found Tulsa where they could actually do it.
It's really that simple.
They're constantly trying to claim that every single thing Trump does is rooted in some kind of mystical dog whistle.
And it's just so tiring, man, to be completely honest.
The BOK Center said its employees will be tested for the coronavirus and provided with personal protective equipment.
The arena will be cleaned and disinfected repeatedly throughout the event, and 400 hand sanitizer stations will be placed around it.
The Trump campaign has said precautionary measures will be taken, including temperature checks and providing attendees with masks and hand sanitizer.
The campaign, however, said they would not require the masks to be worn.
Now, here's what's funny.
We learned recently that asymptomatic carriers cannot transmit the virus, yet they still claim Trump shouldn't have the rally.
They're doing temperature checks.
What's the problem?
The problem is they're throwing roadblocks in Trump's way, and they're trying as many as they can.
It's not going to stop him.
Unless you get the convention center to shut him down, it's going to happen.
Trump's not going to back down.
The media tries to say these things.
Maybe they're just trying to earn some kind of, you know, accumulative points.
About how bad Trump is.
Oh, he's not doing this, he's not doing that.
At the same time, they're promoting their own protests and rallies.
It's just, frankly, absurd.
They say the BOK Center is encouraging masks to be worn, and on Friday, the Oklahoma Supreme Court will rule on the issue.
A group of Tulsa attorneys requested a hearing to impose a temporary emergency injunction, stopping the rally this week.
But a Tulsa judge denied the effort on Tuesday.
The matter was appealed to the Oklahoma Supreme Court, which will rule Friday on whether attendees must follow CDC guidelines on social distancing and wearing face masks.
It'll be interesting, but I can't imagine they'll rule that people have to do it.
I guess we'll see.
I got a bunch of photos.
They say here's the exclusion zone, the area where you can't have Molotov cocktails.
So if someone right now showed up with Molotov cocktails, that would be okay?
I kind of think if you're walking around with a bottle full of kerosene and it's on fire, someone's going to stop you, be it a cop or anyone else who doesn't want you to throw it.
That to me seems insane.
Oklahoma set a new state record for COVID.
Yeah, well, sure.
I don't care about the COVID stuff.
I think it's fake.
I think what they're trying to levy against Trump is fake.
Not the COVID itself, right?
Although that'll probably be taken out of context.
What I'm saying is, you can't champion all these people rioting and protesting or whatever.
Not rioting, but protesting.
And then argue that Trump's rally is somehow different when he's doing temperature checks.
So the outrage is fake.
Check this out.
In now deleted tweet, Vanity Fair reporter suggests Trump supporters will show up to Tulsa rally in KKK robes because they just can't help themselves.
That's what they're saying.
Who's this guy?
Joe Hagan.
I think what he's saying is better costumes.
Oh, because Trump said it'll be a much different scene.
Well, apparently the guy deleted it because you know what, man?
I'll shout it out to Brett Weinstein.
He made this point on Twitter recently.
He made it on the Joe Rogan podcast.
What we're basically seeing is people gradually giving more and more concessions to certain views.
It's the radicalization process.
They'll tweet something they know is not necessarily true, but they write it, and they post it, and it slowly radicalizes them.
They give gradual concessions.
Well, Trump is racist.
Well, I guess Trump is really racist.
Well, Trump is probably the worst racist.
He's absolutely the worst racist.
He's worse than some historical racists, and he's worse than Hitler.
That's the gradual radicalization process.
Well, I'm glad this guy deleted the stupid Klan tweet.
But I highlight it just because, you know, what I see with this story, what I see with what's going on with the Tulsa rally, Trump's gonna have a rally, man.
He's had tons of rallies.
Some have been worse.
Trump's had worse things.
He's certainly walked things back.
But now, their rhetoric is increasingly getting unhinged and insane.
If we know asymptomatic carriers can't transmit this, then what's the problem?
Why are you protesting?
They're protesting because they have nothing to do because of the lockdown, because of the riots, and because the media keeps radicalizing people by saying insane things about Trump.
Let me tell you something.
Most of these people, Who protest Trump are regular people, but they have Trump derangement syndrome.
A small contingent are organizers, Antifa, who are conscious of what's going on, who exploit the situation for personal gain.
On the right, I'm sorry, they're not racists.
They're not Nazis.
It's just ridiculous.
It's just not the case.
They're regular conservatives and Trump supporters.
Most people are regular people, but the challenge is they're becoming radicalized with stupid tweets like this.
with calls of, you know, a civil emergency and there's going to be violence.
People are being radicalized.
I really do blame the media's desperate attempt to just generate as much traffic as possible.
Nazis here and there, everyone's a Nazi.
They're saying they want to label the Klan a terrorist organization.
It barely exists, man.
And they argue, but so does Antifa.
Sure, but I don't see people in Klan robes showing up to Trump rallies throwing firebombs.
So I don't care if you want to label them, you know, but do it, fine, whatever, then do Antifa too.
But that's, that's, that's the game.
That's what they do.
Everything is a tit-for-tat and a gradual extremist approach.
So as Trump proposes policies that Democrats have long since championed, the left increasingly calls them far-right Nazi proposals.
And now triangles are racist and milk is racist and frogs are racist and this is it.
Regular symbols become racist because they have to label everything the most extreme because they themselves are becoming radicalized.
When in reality a lot of what Trump does is similar to what Democrats have done in the past.
So There's a civil emergency in place, and tomorrow is going to be the rally.
I think we may see some protests.
I think we may see some serious violence.
This is the first Trump rally in a long time, but let's see if the Tulsa police can handle it.
I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up in a few minutes, and I will see you all shortly.
Proving that we have truly entered some kind of satirical comedy universe, I have a story about a tweet which has garnered 38,300 retweets.
And that's the only reason that I am actually going to be talking about these tweets.
You see, this is the story of an anti-Trump far-left professor in Oakland.
Reportedly, according to the thread here on Twitter, Who refuses to call a foreign student by their real name.
I believe it's a Vietnamese student.
You see, this Vietnamese student's name... I'm going to pronounce this in a way that YouTube will allow me, and it may be incorrect, is... Phúc Bùi.
I believe that's the... I'm trying to pronounce it properly.
You know I'm not good at pronouncing names.
Now apparently this professor is upset, and doesn't want to say it, because it sounds too much like the F word and boy, you know, F boy.
And now there's 40,000 retweets on this.
Okay.
I may get demonetized for this, but do you remember the Austin Powers movie?
Was it the first one?
I can't remember.
Where he meets the two Asian women, Fooka Yu and Fooka Mi.
I am not saying this to deride the individual who is Vietnamese who actually has this name.
I'm pointing out that this is a real story, and it's very similar to a satirical movie from the early 2000s.
That's what I'm trying to say.
But you know what, man?
Look, I gotta tell you.
I actually don't like that the professor is refusing to say the name.
I think you'll roll with it, man.
If it's someone's name, you don't say it.
Just because you don't like those words, it's their literal name.
Let's talk about pronouns for a second.
I don't want to read you this email, okay?
Pronouns are different.
Forcing someone to say something.
For the most part, I'm cool with calling whatever pronouns.
I have no problem.
But it's the made-up ones and telling someone you have to say a word.
That's a little different.
This is a person's actual given name.
They didn't make anything up.
That's the name they have.
And this professor is saying, I won't call you this.
They call the person P. And they got upset by it.
Let's just read the story.
Read the tweets.
Carly tweeted, Laney College professor Matthew Hubbard is asking a Vietnamese student to anglicize her name to accommodate him.
And that's true!
Check this out.
Matthew Hubbard says, could you anglicize your name?
Phuc Bui sounds like an insult in English.
Hello, Professor Hubbard.
Your request for me to anglicize my name feels discriminatory, and I will move forward with filing a complaint with the Title IX office if you cannot refer to me by my given birth name.
And that's Phuc Bui Diem Nguyen.
I believe I'm pronouncing it right.
I could be wrong.
Now, he calls this individual P. Nguyen.
I believe it's a female.
I don't know if this story is true, to be honest, but the tweet has 40,000 retweets, so I figured, you know what, it's Friday, alright, it's the last segment of the day, this thing's getting too much attention, let's talk about it.
Because apparently there's an update from Laney College in Oakland that says, You know, I'm aware of the allegations of racist and xenophobia.
Okay, this is the perfect storm of absurdity.
I'm sorry, it is.
It's a leftist anti-Trump professor in Oakland who's refusing to adhere to social justice norms, to use the name Fookboy.
And because of that, now he's being investigated by his college.
I tell you what, I am hoping this is a hoax.
What is this?
Update from Fook.
Went viral on Twitter and Lainey released a statement.
Thank you for helping me blow this up and all of you for fighting for me. I really appreciate it.
I'm gonna meet with Laney president tomorrow to discuss what happened and I'll let you know what happens after that.
I am also finishing up my written complaint and I am about to send it to them."
So there's other emails where he basically says that your name sounds too much like an insult in English
and that he refuses to say it.
I'll tell you what, man.
This guy, Matthew... So this is a Twitter account.
It may not be real, but this is the name, Matthew Hubbard.
They're claiming this is the guy, Professor Hubbard.
The Twitter account is anti-fascist.
This is... I'm sorry, is this a hoax?
Am I being hoaxed right now?
Because I could be being hoaxed, okay?
This can't be real, can it?
An anti-fascist Oakland professor who draft an apology because Donald Trump won, calling him a career criminal, is now being dragged for refusing to adhere to a woke narrative and saying a certain person's name.
2020 in a nutshell, man.
That's why I'm gonna be very, very careful and say right now, these all may be fake accounts.
Perhaps this whole thing is just not real.
This guy's got a bunch of tweets, though.
Let's see some of his tweets.
He says, my advice, and it's worth something, if some silly thing is retweeted into your timeline multiple times, do not join into the conversation.
Someone is collecting the data of how it became viral, and they aren't your friends.
Think of this as social media distancing.
I'm gonna stop right there.
Is it possible This guy, and what's going on right now, is actually an experiment in social media virality.
Because think about it, I see this story, I see 40,000 retweets, he's literally tweeted this just 10 days ago, and now all of a sudden a progressive anti-fascist guy is refusing to say a name?
Makes you wonder, doesn't it?
I can't allege a conspiracy, because I'll tell you what, sometimes truth is stranger than fiction, and we're actually in this world where we have this nonsense.
Listen, I want to be careful about insulting someone based on their name if it really is Phuc Bui.
I'm probably pronouncing it wrong, but that's the best way I can pronounce it.
Because it really is sounding a whole lot like, I don't know, like a bit from Austin Powers.
And if I am saying that, then am I really deriding this person based on their culture?
I don't want to do that, I really don't.
But this guy is telling you that someone is tracking it on how it became viral, and it's his pinned tweet.
I think this anti-fascist professor might actually be engaging in some kind of viral tracking, manipulation, social experiment.
I really do mean it.
Look at the responses.
Don't spread viral content.
Someone is tracking how it moves.
That's literally what's happening involving him.
Could it be that we just live in this weird mirror bizarro world?
Or could it be all a part of this game he's engaged in?
I honestly don't know!
Check this out.
I want to show you... This is the link in his profile.
It says, my apology.
December 2nd, 2016.
The 2016 presidential race.
Tracking Clinton, Trump, and the Senate race.
I'm not gonna actually read it.
But he's apparently written an apology about Donald Trump.
I wasn't trying to keep people calm.
I was trying to get it right.
I failed massively.
I am deeply sorry.
I have always distrusted pundits.
What is this?
Did I have any doubts?
I guess I'm gonna assume he's apologizing about Trump winning, I guess.
Whatever.
But this to me is just... Is this really the world we live in?
I'm gonna default to I think it's a social experiment for his university.
But let's entertain for just one second this is real and what this means.
2020 has been a heck of a year, huh?
We've had an impeachment that failed.
We've had a pandemic that's still apparently going on amid widespread massive protests where one governor says you can't protest and no rallies for Trump but he's gonna allow protests.
A mayor who says no one's allowed to protest but then the protests break out and he says everything's fine.
Now we're seeing an occupation in Seattle, a new country being born within our own borders.
I swear.
I swear.
You know what?
Here's how I view it.
I mean this jokingly, by the way.
But the simulation has gone awry.
Everything's falling apart, right?
The simulation is broken.
No.
No, I say.
The simulation is, in fact, not broken.
I often think about this.
When you play a video game, you know, The Last of Us 2, that's big right now.
Let's think about The Last of Us 1.
When you start the game, there's the storyline.
There's some backstory.
But you don't play the game as the main character, I think his name is Joel, in his formative years working as an insurance salesman or whatever he did.
I don't remember.
I don't know his story.
I don't play the game.
The point is, when you actually enter into one of these video games, You are in the fray, and the backstory is probably boring and irrelevant, and they passively tell it to you, and that's why it's not part of the game.
So here's the joke I'm going to make to you.
We are literally looking at a story about a professor in Oakland who's anti-fascist, who apologized for Trump, who's refusing to use the name Fukui, and is now going viral and people are coming after him, while he's arguing don't spread viral content ten days ago because people are tracking it.
What is real life anymore?
I just don't know.
So I'll tell you this.
The simulation is not broken.
You see, everything up until 2020 was just our backstory.
That was it.
Your normal boring life, waking up, going to school, coming home, getting your job at McDonald's, and then going home to play video games.
That was just all backstory.
The real fun begins now.
And see, now we're in the actual game.
The storyline has just kicked off, and all of this weird nonsense that we're experiencing is just the actual game itself.
Because the game has to be interesting, right?
See, the simulation didn't break.
It's operating exactly as intended.
The entertainment for some seven-year-old kid who got a new virtual reality console, and we're all just ancillary characters in an ongoing story about the weird world of Donald Trump.
Now, I'm kidding, of course.
I don't actually think we're in a simulation.
I think the idea is funny.
But I couldn't help it when I saw this story.
All of these pieces lining up perfectly... I'm sorry, this has to be the most perfect story, which is why I believe it's fake.
That's why I think this guy is playing games.
But what if he isn't?
What if... Look, they're really posting on Instagram.
It's really going viral.
You know what?
It's gotta be fake.
It absolutely must be fake.
That's the only way I can really put it, so... I'm gonna leave it at that.
But why don't you go read it for yourself, and you can tell me what you think.
