Dr. Fauci Touts NY As Model Of "Success" As Democrat Policy Literally DESTROYS The City, People FLEE
Andrew Cuomo and Bill Deblasio are taking heat from former governor George Pataki who says New York is going to die unless some real change occurs but Fauci praises NY as the model of successDemocrats in NYC have cost thousands of lives notably when Cuomo put sick patients inside nursing homes. An estimated 6,500 lost their lives because of this. Now former Republican governor Pataki is threatening to run in 2022 to save the state.#Democrats#Trump#Republicans
Support the show (http://timcast.com/donate)
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
New York City has been ravaged by the coronavirus, once the epicenter of the pandemic here in the United States.
It's also been ravaged by rioting, police demoralization leading to more crime, and an erosion of its tax base due to both the riots and COVID.
So it's particularly surprising to me when I see Dr. Anthony Fauci hold up New York as a model for fighting coronavirus, saying they did it correctly.
Wow!
They did it correctly.
Did you know that Governor Cuomo put sick people into nursing homes, literally infecting them with COVID, getting them killed?
This story is from ProPublica, not a right-wing outlet, relatively anti-Donald Trump, pointing out that they don't know.
They say, the Cuomo administration hasn't said which nursing homes were infected with COVID after its order sent positive patients into them.
That was doing it right?
Absolutely incredible.
The city is dying, and in large part because of the failures of Bill de Blasio and Governor Cuomo.
The economy has taken a major hit.
There's a massive exodus.
Landlords are desperately trying to find renters, but people are fleeing the city like crazy, while shootings are on the rise.
And you want to come to me?
And say that's exactly how you do it right.
I'm sorry, man.
Anthony Fauci, in my opinion, has lost all credibility.
Now, I know for a long time people really liked the guy, and so did I. I was singing his praises.
But now I don't know what to say.
The dude said in the past not to wear a mask.
Well, now we know you need to be wearing a mask.
But as I always say when it comes to matters of, you know, medical issues, talk to your doctor.
Don't take advice from me or Trump or Fauci or anybody.
Talk to your doctors.
Your doctors know best.
Everybody wants to tell you what is the right way to do it.
What I can say is surprising and definitely wrong is to hold up New York as doing it right.
They were the epicenter.
In fact, in my opinion, the only reason things are starting to normalize in the state is because they just let the virus run rampant and rip through nursing homes and people died.
And now they are reaping the truly horrifying benefits, I mean that sarcastically, Of, well, the economic damage of the coronavirus, followed by their inability to lead in general, which brings me to just New York City in general.
Former Governor George Pataki said the city is going to die.
It's partly because of COVID and partly because of the riots.
But one of the reasons, in my opinion, I believe, that police are being defunded is that the failure to get a hold over COVID resulted in an erosion of the tax base, along with the riots.
These things, man.
Look, I'm going to be fair.
It was a really tough position.
I'm not going to pretend like I could do better than Cuomo or Bill de Blasio.
I think at the very least, you don't send COVID-positive patients into nursing homes.
That seems to make a lot of sense.
But the real issue here is that no one should be praising New York City for what they've done.
And to me, it's absolutely insane that Dr. Fauci would do so.
In a recent interview on Fox News, Trump said he likes Fauci, he talks to him at great length, but Fauci's a bit of an alarmist, and he's flip-flopped a bit.
So, you know, what are you gonna say, right?
For me, I'll tell you what I'm gonna say.
The dude, in my opinion, doesn't have much credibility, if any at all.
Because of his flip-flopping and now because he's praising New York City.
I'm going to walk you through exactly what's going on in New York.
A bit surface level, to be fair.
But I'm going to call out Fauci directly for saying no, no, no, for saying this and say, no, please don't do what New York did.
Other states are doing much, much better.
Some states are now encountering an escalation in COVID cases and stuff like this.
But I got to tell you, man, this is just wrong to say.
And I'm going to show you ProPublica.
Let's get started and see what Fauci had to say.
But before we do, head over to TimCast.com slash Donut if you'd like to support my work.
There's many ways you can support me, but the best thing you can do, actually subscribe.
I think it's kind of strange I have to say this, but I've actually been looking at the analytics and realized, like, half of the people who watch my videos aren't even subscribed to this channel, so...
Please consider subscribing so that you can get more content from me.
And hit the like button because apparently it does help.
But let's read the news.
CNBC says Fauci holds up New York as model for fighting coronavirus.
Quote, they did it correctly.
I'm going to go ahead and say, no, they didn't.
But let's read.
White House Health Advisor Anthony Fauci has praised New York for its handling of the coronavirus pandemic, saying the state responded correctly to bring its outbreak under control.
We know that when you do it properly, you bring down those cases.
We have done it.
We have done it in New York, Fauci said in an interview with PBS NewsHour that aired Friday evening.
New York got hit worse than any place in the world, and they did it correctly by doing things that you're talking about," he continued.
New York was once the epicenter of the outbreak in the U.S., with more than 10,000 new cases a day during its peak outbreak in April.
The state has dramatically reduced daily new infections to 776 as of Thursday.
176 as of Thursday.
Now, Fauci has said it was hit worse than any place in the world.
And you think they did a good job when they sent sick people into nursing homes?
You realize a lot of people lost their lives because of that?
Couldn't you have put sick people, I don't know, in the makeshift Javits Center Hospital which never reached capacity?
Absolutely absurd.
I'm telling you, man, I've been following this stuff.
First and foremost, I care very little about this.
You know why?
Because we've seen shoulder-to-shoulder protests of Black Lives Matter for the past several months.
I'm sorry, you're not going to convince me that has no effect on this.
I will tell you, however, take it seriously and talk to your doctor.
I'm not here to give anybody medical advice.
I think your doctor knows best, and I defer to your doctor.
But I certainly feel as though Dr. Fauci just basically waits two days and then regurgitates whatever it is the media said.
And I'm going to show you Trump's response.
They say in CNBC, New York is one of nine U.S.
states that has the virus under control, according to the Tracking Project COVID Act Now.
Less than 1% of New Yorkers tested for the virus were positive Thursday, down from a high of more than 40%.
Governor Andrew Cuomo instituted some of the strictest reopening requirements in the country, insisting that stay-at-home orders remain in place and many businesses remain closed far longer than states that are now seeing surges, such as Texas and Florida.
More than 400,000 New Yorkers have been infected with the virus since it began, so we get this.
Listen.
I believe there's a right way.
I believe there's a wrong way.
I don't know exactly what those ways are, and I would never want to be in politics for this reason.
Look, I get it.
It was tough.
I think Cuomo and de Blasio made some serious mistakes.
I seriously question the judgment of Bill de Blasio because he says, we can't have large gatherings.
Then when asked, what about Black Lives Matter protests?
He goes, oh, well, obviously that's okay.
No, pick one.
Either we don't gather or we do.
But if you're gonna have serious problems in New York, and Fauci's gonna say they did it right, let's stop for a second.
Dr. Fauci is saying they did it right.
What, by allowing massive protests throughout the city?
No, man, they didn't do it right.
By putting people in nursing homes?
No, they didn't do it right.
I know other states are now seeing problems, but this to me is just bonkers.
The Cuomo administration hasn't said which nursing homes were infected with COVID after its order sent positive patients into them.
Dozens of New York nursing homes didn't see their first COVID-19 case until sick patients were sent there, many under Andrew Cuomo's state policy.
To date, 6% of the state's nursing homes population, or roughly 6,500 residents, have died.
I'm trying not to get mad on this one, man.
How dare you, Anthony Fauci, prop up this state after what they did?
And they weren't the only ones.
This is pro publica.
They are not right-wing.
Not by a long shot.
6,500 people lost their lives under the failed leadership of Cuomo.
Call him out for it.
I'm not going to pretend it's easy to do this job, but spare me going on TV.
Fauci.
Nah, I'm sorry, man.
No, I'm gonna say it.
He's lost all credibility with me right now because of this.
I will say it again.
I get it's a hard job, but this is beyond disgusting.
Now, it's not just... Don't take my opinion for it, okay?
You can ignore me.
New York is going to die.
Ex-Governor George Pataki says Big Apple is in jeopardy.
Brands de Blasio a disaster and slams Cuomo's handling of COVID-19 as he reveals he might run against the governor like when he stopped his father Mario.
This gives me hope.
Look, I'll tell you what, man.
I don't know a whole lot about George Pataki.
I can tell you right now that Cuomo, he's got some good things going for him, sure, I guess.
I know it's a hard job, but not now.
Now it's time for potentially somebody else.
And George Pataki sees it.
Check this out.
Former New York Governor George Pataki expressed concern for the future of the Big Apple, declaring Mayor Bill de Blasio a disaster, as he also decried the state's handling of the coronavirus.
The three-term Republican governor, 75, has been out of politics for more than a decade, but was contemplating the possibility of running against Andrew Cuomo in 2022, according to the New York Post.
You never say never, he said.
Pataki notably stopped Cuomo's father, Mario Cuomo, from winning a fourth term.
For the first time ever, I fear for the future of New York City.
The de Blasio administration has been a disaster, and New York has been hit by just decision after decision that really jeopardize its future.
It's not just City Hall, but Albany too, Pateki said.
This cannot be allowed to continue on New York, or New York City is going to die.
Please, Fauci, explain to me what they did right?
What they're doing well?
Because a former governor is coming out and saying, no way, this state is on the verge of death.
Yeah, they did it right.
Is that what you want for the rest of this country?
No, I think the reality is that while Dr. Fauci is certainly an expert on certain medical issues, he has no idea what he's talking about when it comes to the economy and making a system function properly.
You have to realize that telling someone the science of containing COVID is very different from executing plans practically.
How do you deal with the economy?
With rent?
With utilities?
With the citizens?
With public activities?
With police?
With EMS?
You can come to me and say it transmits because it's on a surface and it's a virus.
Here's how it works.
I get it.
Let me deal with how to make things run properly.
If Fauci wants to come out and praise this state, He clearly has no idea.
In fact, I would say he's... Heaven forbid that man ever become a governor.
President Pataki, who was governor during 9-11, vocalized his disdain for bail reform and rent reform.
He did, however, voice support for law enforcement and denounce what he perceived as a demonization of police.
So many people are going to lose their lives needlessly because of the demonization of the police and the decriminalization of acts where people should be arrested and put away as opposed to turned loose on the street.
The former governor claimed that the recent policies enforced by Democrats would not have as much an effect on those with money and power.
Now listen, this is what you get from Pataki.
He does go on to say, he declined to endorse Trump, but he said if the election were held today, Trump would lose.
That's what he said.
I want to show you what's going on in New York City.
And I want to give you, how about the New York Times?
No better source than, say, the New York Times, right?
A million jobs lost.
A heart attack for the NYC economy.
While the national jobless rate has rebounded as many states started to reopen, New Yorkers continue to lose jobs and seek benefits.
Let me break it down for you, Dr. Fauci.
This state was the epicenter in the U.S.
with more deaths than anywhere else in the country.
They put sick people in nursing homes and 6,500 people died.
The economy was completely gutted and has still not recovered.
Why would you claim this is doing it right?
They failed every step of the way.
Complete failure.
And even George Pataki says the state is going to die.
And it's not just this.
Hey, there's more.
How about that?
The Real Deal reports.
There's an exodus from New York City, but can it last?
Buyers and renters flock to vacation haunts and suburbs, but doubts of an enduring revival remain.
Will there be a revival?
I don't know.
I mentioned this a couple times.
I was perusing good old Zillow.com.
You may be familiar.
You go there, you can look for properties for rent and for sale.
And I checked New York City proper.
For the last month, I found that there are about 7,600 properties put up for sale.
In the two months prior, only around 5,000 or so between the two.
Meaning the total in the past 90 days was over 12,000.
If we do some basic math, it looks like there has been a massive spike, potentially triple the amount of properties being listed in one month in the past month.
To be fair, a lot of this has to do with the Black Lives Matter riots, which not a whole lot to do with COVID.
But they do overlap in some ways.
You see, when the riots started, we are already strained for resources around the country because the tax base has been eroding since nobody is working.
It's how tax bases work.
When you do trade, when you pay employees, money goes to the government to pay for bonuses, salaries, overtime, etc.
When people stopped working and New York shut everything down, which just they did everything poorly, I might add, again for the 50 billionth time, the taxes started to dry up.
In a state that was already in a crisis because their tax base had already been eroded and they were in desperate need of new employees.
Hey, thank AOC for that one by chasing out Amazon and taking away potentially 25 to 40,000 good-paying jobs and a lot of taxes for the city and the state.
They were already hurting.
Then some decisions were made, the riots ran wild, and some crazy videos emerged, the police were fighting with people, and it all leads to the collapse of New York.
We should be propping this place up.
Now is it fair to say that COVID is responsible for the riots?
Not technically, but some would say.
You take away everyone's jobs because of COVID.
You lock them in their homes.
I mean that figuratively.
But yeah, with a stay-home order.
And now you've got pent-up rage.
Desperate and angry people.
So when you put all that in the powder keg and then light the spark, people burst out on the streets and they go nuts.
I think it's fair to say a lot of the rage behind the riots was partly due to this pent-up anger of being locked up for so long due to COVID.
So yeah, they did everything poorly.
Everything poorly.
And they still continue to do it poorly.
Record number of NYC landlords dole out discounts as demand falls.
Remote working opportunities may lead to future price cuts in the Big Apple.
It is all just coming down in New York City.
So please, stop pretending like this is the place we want to be.
Now, in an interview with Chris Wallace over at Fox, Trump said Fauci is a little bit of an alarmist.
But Trump is still singing the praises of Fauci, saying that he talks to him, you know, he's not perfect.
And I'll say, within reason, I think it's fair, and if Trump trusts the guy and they're willing to talk things through, then Fauci's not the worst of the worst.
The problem I see, however, is that Fauci just says whatever the TV says.
It seems like he's not even looking at any actual secret government documents, let alone any just literal forms from his own department.
It seems like he watches TV, and then two days later says, oh yeah, that's what they said on TV.
That's why he's always flip-flopping.
Well, let's see how Donald Trump handled it.
President Trump on Sunday said the nation's top infectious disease expert, Anthony Fauci, is, quote, a little bit of an alarmist, but denied the White House is running a campaign against him amid rising coronavirus cases in a number of states.
Trump made the remark after Chris Wallace, host of Fox News Sunday, asked the president to respond to White House Deputy Chief of Staff Communications Dan Scavino.
He made a post referring to Fauci as an alarmist leaker.
Well, I don't know that he's a leaker.
He's a little bit of an alarmist.
He said that's OK.
A little bit, a little bit of an alarmist.
Trump said he had a good relationship with Fauci, but he also pointed out that the doctor has been wrong about aspects of the crisis, noting that at one point he was not recommending that people wear masks.
Dr. Fauci at the beginning said, this will pass.
Don't worry about it.
This will pass.
He was wrong.
Trump said after saying he has a great relationship with him.
Dr. Fauci said, don't ban China.
Don't ban China.
I did.
He then admitted I was right.
When Wallace asked why on earth would your administration be involved in a campaign at this point to discredit Fauci, Trump immediately said, because we're not.
Dr. Fauci's made some mistakes, but I have a very good, I spoke to him yesterday at length.
I have a very good relationship with Dr. Fauci.
Fauci has criticized what he has seen as White House attacks against him, saying he doesn't understand why they are happening and arguing that it is harmful to Trump.
Ultimately, it hurts the president to do that, Fauci said in an interview with The Atlantic earlier this week.
When the staff lets out something like that and the entire scientific and press community push back on it, it ultimately hurts the president.
White House Trade Advisor Peter Navarro wrote an op-ed in USA Today saying Fauci is wrong about everything he's interacted with him about.
Trump responded that Navarro shouldn't be doing that.
Navarro shouldn't be doing this, but let's be real, man.
There's a viral video because back earlier this year Fauci made a ton of mistakes.
We all did.
Nancy Pelosi was wrong.
Trump was wrong.
Fauci was wrong.
But Fauci is supposed to be the expert on this.
We can look to the politicians like Cuomo and say he was wrong.
We can look to Trump and say he was wrong for sure.
We can look at all the governors and say they're all wrong.
We can say everybody's wrong.
But Fauci is supposed to be the one we're trusting.
When he gets it wrong over and over again, at a certain point, we say, sorry, bro, you were wrong.
There's the door.
That's not what's happening, though.
People seem to still defend the guy.
There's a viral video where he says, don't buy a mask, it's not gonna protect you, things like that.
No, no, no, that's absurd.
You should definitely be wearing a mask.
And it's funny to me that early on, the Trump supporters were the ones saying, wear a mask, are you nuts?
Ultimately, I'll just stop right there again and say, I refer you to your own doctor.
Ask your doctor what you should do and what makes sense, and try your best to follow, you know, safe practices.
YouTube is a scary beast, okay?
I have no idea when they're gonna, you know, give my channel the axe or whatever.
That's why I just say, I defer to the doctors, man.
You do what the doctors say.
But the news has pointed it out.
Trump has pointed it out.
Fauci early on gave conflicting advice.
He said we don't need a travel ban with Europe, we don't need a travel ban with China.
I know he said something about China.
I believe he mentioned a travel ban wouldn't be effective.
Trump did it anyway.
Then Fauci came out later and said, you know what, actually it may have saved a ton of lives.
So yes, there you go.
The man has been wrong.
I got no personal beef, but if he can't do the job, what am I supposed to expect?
So I don't listen to him anymore.
I personally, I don't.
But I do defer to, say, like the CDC and, you know, within reason, I'll just put it this way, local doctors.
I think we've got, we do have some problems with COVID.
I think we are seeing some states see an uptick and I think we need to be vigilant and take it seriously.
But let's be real, a lot of states are reopening.
I think New York made a ton of mistakes.
I mean, I think some states made some mistakes.
I think there's really weird things going on with record keeping.
You know, they were reporting that now Trump wants to bypass the CDC and have the data go straight to the White House or something to that effect.
And there's a lot of weird videos popping up.
It's a tough subject to actually get into.
Ultimately, what I can comment on more definitively is that New York is not in good shape.
We should not be propping them up, especially when the NYPD commissioner bashes city leaders as cowards in police brass meeting.
They are failing at every possible measure to be leaders.
Yep.
What are you going to say?
What do you do?
New York is not the place that we should be looking up to right now.
We are going through a very serious crisis economically.
Things seem to be improving in some regards.
The stock market seems to be doing really well, which is kind of strange, but hey, I think it's because most people are expecting that things are going to rebound and it's going to get a lot better relatively soon.
I don't know for sure.
I don't know what exactly you can expect.
But it's not just about New York City.
It's not just about Fauci.
It's about the fact that these are extremely crazy times.
I really am just over the whole COVID conversation.
You know, I defer to Bill Burr, who appeared on the Joe Rogan podcast, and he put it perfectly.
He's like, I'm not gonna do this.
I'm not gonna sit here with no medical degree, talking to you with no medical degree about, you know, what we should be doing.
I turn the news on, see what the latest guidelines and advice are, and, you know, they tell me, well, we're wearing masks now?
Okay, I'm gonna wear a mask.
I got no problem wearing a mask.
I think most people should.
I actually got a... I don't know if I can say the name now.
I don't know if they changed the name.
It's a football team from Washington, D.C.
I have a mask with the old logos.
I bought it because I thought they were going to get rid of it, and sure enough, they did.
But anyway, man, look.
We need to get the economy back on track.
I don't trust Joe Biden to do that properly.
But ultimately, I just don't know.
We've got like three months or so, just over three months until the election.
And all of this is going to play a very important role in our understanding of what we need to do to make things better.
The last thing I think anyone should be doing is looking up to Cuomo or Bill de Blasio.
Yet for some reason, say on CNN, what do we hear?
You did it!
You did it, Andrew!
You know, Chris Cuomo praising his brother, saying he did it right, when even ProPublica would point out the horrific nightmare that was his policy and his plans.
Very early on, it was the administration in New York saying no to lockdowns.
When Bill de Blasio came out early and said, let's lock down, it was actually Cuomo who said no.
And here we are, with a devastated economy, with riots ongoing now in some parts of the country for 52 days, we need a very serious and responsible I mean, we need smart leadership.
I'm not gonna pretend like I could do a better job, but I can tell you certainly they're not doing a good job.
But what we're seeing in response to a lot of this, with defunding of the police, is demands from activists to refund the police, to bring money back in.
It's not just this activist Beverly Beattie, who you may have heard about.
I'm sorry, is it Bevelyn Beattie?
Maybe, did I get it wrong?
It's not just her, it's other community leaders in New York saying that we need to bring back the police.
Right, because the leadership has done a poor job, and that includes Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.
And I'll tell you this, I think they're going to get re-elected.
I think even if George Pataki comes out and says he's going to step in and try and save New York from themselves, they'll get re-elected partly because the Fed for too long has bailed them out.
They need to vote for their politicians.
Their politicians will carry out what they think is right.
And if it works, it does.
If it doesn't, it doesn't.
And so far, I think we can see it doesn't.
But if people don't want to learn, and they don't want to change up who they're going to vote for, then they're going to keep getting the same thing over and over again.
How do you fix that?
I guess you need an educated and informed population.
Probably some good journalism, which apparently doesn't exist.
But I'll leave it there.
You get the point?
Next segment will be coming up at 6 p.m.
over at youtube.com slash TimCastNews, and I will see you all then.
Last night saw the 52nd consecutive night of rioting in Portland, and Antifa set fire to the Portland Police Association building.
My understanding is that's basically the police union for Portland.
Surprisingly, this time, it was the Portland police who declared a riot after fires were set and fences were moved.
Now, with all of this going on, Day 52, and, you know, a fire set at the police association building, who do you think the media blames for all of this?
Of course you already know.
You figured it out, didn't you?
They blame the federal officers.
They blame the police.
Well, maybe not police, but the federal police.
The New York Times writes this.
Federal officers deployed in Portland didn't have proper training, DHS memo said.
Rather than tamping down persistent protest in Portland, Oregon, a militarized police presence from federal officers seems to have re-energized them.
That's right.
Now they're going to try and squeeze in the blame on the federal officers to whatever extent they can.
And they can.
But I got a bunch of videos for you.
I've got tweets and videos from Andy Ngo showing that, yeah, Antifa is going to this building, smashing out windows, and yelling at and taunting officers, trying to burn the thing down.
There's videos of them throwing explosives at it.
And you know what?
I'm sorry, everybody.
I am so sick and tired of this.
It's almost like...
I don't know.
It's almost boring.
We know.
Great.
Yeah, Antifa's doing it again.
The media's doing it again.
It's the same thing every single day.
Does anybody really care anymore?
Perhaps.
Perhaps.
But let's read this news and then we'll talk about what's going on.
Fox News reports, Portland police declare riot after fire set fences moved.
The mayor said the federal presence in the city was exacerbating a tense situation and he has told them to depart.
All right.
All right.
I'm sorry.
We're going to play a game here.
I'm talking to a friend who also is a friend of mine who's adamant that the riots are actually the fault of the police.
That's right.
The people showing up, the peaceful protesters, they're not the ones starting all of this.
And you know my response to that is, yes, I'm sure that the federal officers are going door to door and just randomly pepper spraying people and triggering this violent outburst.
No.
Antifa and the far left are going to the federal courthouse, attacking it, tearing down fences, and then when the police respond, they start yelling, help, help, I'm being repressed, and their allies and media say, these nasty federal officers are making everything worse!
So, how are we supposed to deal with this?
My bigger concern is if they're telling the Feds to depart, at what point does Portland actually go after the Feds?
We'll see.
They're already suing them.
Fox News reports.
Protesters broke into a building.
Hold on, this sentence makes literally no sense.
Fox News.
Protesters broke into a building.
What?
Do you mean rioters broke into a building?
Rioters broke into a building, set it on fire, and started dumpster- and started dump- it already- All of Portland right now is a dumpster fire.
Anyway, I'm sorry.
They say protesters broke into a building, set it on fire, and started dumpster fires late Saturday night in Oregon's largest city, police said, as demonstrations that have been taking place since the death of George Floyd intensified for another night in Portland.
I can't take it.
I can't do it.
Even Fox News playing this game.
I'm sorry.
If the police literally declare a riot, you don't write protesters!
What are you doing, Fox?
The fire at the Portland Police Association building was put out a short time later.
Portland Police said on Twitter, the department declared the gathering a riot and began working to clear the downtown area.
Tear gas was deployed, according to pictures and video from the scene.
Fencing that had been placed around the federal courthouse had also been removed by protesters and made into barricades, police tweeted.
All right.
Did the police literally say?
No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no.
Portland Police said people have broken into the Portland Police Association.
Officers were able to put it out.
The PPA office, they said people.
They didn't say protesters, they said people.
You know what?
People make sense.
You can call them people, they are people.
I prefer violent rioter.
So I'll defer to the acting secretary of the Department of Homeland Security when he called them violent, though he called them anarchists and I don't think that's necessarily fair.
It is true some of these people refer to themselves as anarchists only because they've never read a book.
I go off on this all the time.
has decried the demonstrations and Homeland Security Secretary Chad Wolf
blasted the protesters as lawless anarchists in a visit to the city on Thursday. I also
believe Chad Wolf should read up on anarchists. I go off on this all the time, but let me tell you,
man, I view this as almost a defense of these people.
They are not anarchists.
They are revolutionary communists.
And I'm not saying that because I'm trying to dig them or smear them.
They are literally revolutionary communists, okay?
There's literally a group called Revolutionary Communism that helps organize a lot of these events.
I don't know specifically about Portland.
And Antifa, historically, was a paramilitary wing of the Communist Party of Germany.
So they're flying the flag, a Communist flag.
It's that simple.
Before the aggressive language and action from federal officers, the unrest had frustrated Mayor Ted Wheeler and all other local authorities, who had sent a small cadre of violent activists.
Activists?
Violent activists?
Come on, man.
Look, I used to do activism.
You wanna know what activism was?
It was when I would go on the street and be like, howdy ma'am, would you like to save the trees?
That's activism.
What this is, is violent insurrection.
Insurgency.
If the feds are launching a counter-insurgency program, as the nation said they were, then you call this an insurgency.
How about that?
Violent activists were drowning out the message of peaceful protesters in the city.
But Wheeler said the federal presence in the city is now exacerbating a tense situation, and has told them to depart.
Look at this picture.
You see the barricades all ripped down, the building just riddled with graffiti?
Are you implying that the federal officers walked out and started spray painting all this?
And they're like, hey man, what are you doing?
And the feds start beating people?
No.
Antifa and the other far leftists have been attacking the courthouse.
I've got receipts, man.
I'm going to show you this stuff.
Wheeler said the federal president is making it worse.
Keep your troops in your own building or have them leave our city, Wheeler said Friday.
Listen, we can have a discussion about effective strategy and PR and marketing and all that, but I don't think, I think it is fair to state that the federal law enforcement officers might actually
need to come out of the building, I don't know, maybe to stop people from destroying it. I
wonder if they think these federal officers have magic powers and that when Antifa is outside smashing
the walls with hammers and spray painting the feds from inside the building can just
go woo and then knock the Antifa back.
No, you can't.
You sure that they don't have magic?
You mean they have to actually go outside and push the rioters back?
Oh, that explains it.
Oregon Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum late Friday sued Homeland Security and the Marshals Service in federal court.
The complaint said that unidentified federal agents have grabbed people off Portland streets without warning or explanation, without a warrant, and without providing any way to determine who is directing this action.
Congratulations!
That's a lawsuit you're going to lose in two seconds.
Why?
Because the police were identified.
Not only were they wearing police on their uniforms, which I understand isn't necessarily enough, they were wearing Homeland Security patches.
So I'll tell you what.
You can complain that the individual officers don't have badge numbers, and I don't like that.
You should be able to provide at least a badge number so you can say, this is the person who did this.
We need accountability.
Now they're not going to know which officer that is.
That's fair.
But to act like you didn't know they were police is patently absurd.
They knew exactly who these people were.
They were even brought to the courthouse.
I love this idea that the left seems to have.
That like, when you're getting arrested, the cops have to tell you literally everything.
Because apparently, they don't know how the law works and they've never been arrested.
The cops don't.
I've been arrested.
The cops walk up, they cuff you, you shut up, and you have no idea what's going on.
Then they yell things like, I have not been read my rights.
They don't have to read you your rights.
That is not a gift to you, it is a gift to them.
They read you your rights when they need something.
That's how it works.
If they don't plan on investigating you for some kind of, you know, larger crime, conspiracy or something, they'll just arrest you.
And that's it.
And you don't get an explanation, and you don't get a phone call, they process you, and then you either go before a judge to get bailed out, to get a bond, or they I-bond you in Illinois, it's like they'll just release you to your own recognizance or whatever it's called.
But these leftists watch too many movies, man!
I mean, to that extent, too, a lot of lawmakers base all their laws on movies as well.
They have no idea how the world actually works.
They say Rosenblum said she was seeking a temporary restraining order to immediately stop federal authorities from unlawfully detaining Oregonians.
The administration has enlisted federal agents, including the U.S.
Marshals Special Operations Group and an elite U.S.
Customs and Border Protection team based on the U.S.-Mexico border, to protect federal property.
But Oregon Public Broadcasting reported this week that some agents had been driving around in unmarked vans and snatching protesters, snatching protesters from the streets not near federal property, without identifying themselves.
Okay.
Police don't need to.
They don't have to walk up to you and go, howdy ma'am, my name is Officer... Smith.
I'm gonna be placing you under arrest specifically because we noticed you were part of a violent riot.
If you would come this way into this vehicle, which was rented from Enterprise, we'll be bringing you to a disclosed location, the Federal Courthouse.
Please inform all your friends.
They don't have to do that.
That's ridiculous.
What's really going on is that the federal officers have the option of engaging in a street battle with Antifa, which they complain about.
They say, you're making it worse by doing this, or they can just wait and then go out and make arrests.
And that makes the most sense.
House Speaker Pelosi.
Oh, this is fantastic.
Pelosi tweeted some stupid... You know what, man?
I'm sorry.
I don't know what's going on with these people, but I just can't take it.
Pelosi's like, Trump stormtroopers, where were you when they were tearing down statues, burning churches, beheading statues of Jesus Christ?
I thought Nancy Pelosi was Christian.
I guess not.
Because these things are happening.
And she says nothing.
But heaven forbid law enforcement is actually going to arrest violent rioters who are showing up to the courthouse.
Let me make one thing clear.
You can argue that the first, you know, instigation of the riot came when an officer made an arrest or something.
Do you think they arbitrarily just come out and engage in these activities?
No.
These people are showing up to the courthouse.
This is what you need to understand.
When it came to these Trump rallies, where the fights were breaking out, Antifa is coming to right-wing events and attacking people.
And then they complain, oh, the violent right-wing is coming to the city and they're attacking people.
Look at these videos, like, dude, dude, dude.
If you don't go there, nothing happens.
So if Antifa and far leftists want to go to the federal courthouse and then it creates an opening where someone acts a fool, don't be surprised when federal law enforcement actually comes out and enforces the law.
You can't then complain that they're an occupying army when you engaged them.
But of course, it's not about telling the truth.
It's about Nancy Pelosi just trying to earn points so that she can get elected.
And all of this is about marketing.
Because what do we see now?
I tweeted something.
I tweeted this out the other day.
I said, what do you call it?
When you have 50 nights of violent rioting by black-clad groups attacking a federal courthouse, local law enforcement is standing down, and the state is actually suing in defense of these black-clad groups.
You know, they're basically going up against the federal government.
That's what I said.
And I got all these lefties being like, so you're saying you like it when Gestapo unmarked police snatch people off the street?
And I just thought it was hilarious, because it's a perfect example of the Twitter meme.
The Twitter meme is that you could post something like pancakes, and then people start screaming, why do you hate waffles?
The point is, I asked, what do you call it when this happens?
I didn't say, yippee, hooray, vehicles are pulling up and arresting people.
I didn't mention it at all.
I asked, what do you call it, the general idea is, what do you call it when the state of Oregon is suing the federal government while insurgent groups are attacking the federal government and local police aren't stopping it?
To me, I consider it something like the state of Oregon essentially issuing a letter of mark to Antifa to commit violence on their behalf against Trump's administration, the DHS, and these federal officers, and that way they can claim, we had nothing to do with it, they were just peaceful protesters.
That way, I'm going to be careful with my language because some people posted some incendiary stuff, but that way they can cause damage and go up against the Fed without having their name on it.
Because if the Portland police actually tried to kick federal officers out, then I think you can call it a civil war or something.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and U.S.
Rep Earl Blumenauer issued a joint statement, quote, We live in a democracy, not a banana republic.
We will not tolerate the use of Oregonians, Washingtonians, or any other Americans as props in President Trump's political games.
The House is committed to moving swiftly to curb these egregious abuses of power immediately.
Thank you.
They're finally going to stop Antifa from oppressing people's rights, attacking people in the street, And attacking public property.
The federal courthouse is owned by the public.
Oh, I'm kidding.
And you knew that.
No, they're not.
They're going to ignore the far left.
They're going to tell you Antifa doesn't exist.
Even after 52 nights, even after you literally have people flying a flag that says Antifa and has the strikethrough, it's the three arrows, You literally have these people brandishing these symbols.
Yes, it exists.
Yes, it is a lucid ideology.
Yes, these people organize and are funded and coordinate with each other and they have the tattoos and the flags.
That's what Antifa is.
But they want to pretend like it doesn't exist.
Let me show you some clips from good old Twitter.
This is from Andy Ngo, and it depicts an individual wearing a helmet, wearing all black.
They're standing atop the barricades they tore down and pressed up against the federal courthouse to barricade people inside, and then started taunting officers on the inside, Andy Ngo says.
Antifa seek violent confrontation with law enforcement.
When they get it, biased media and politicians say police incited violence.
After trying to smash their way inside Portland Federal Courthouse, they call for officers to come out.
They want the propaganda.
And this is why I've said the federal officers and agents need to not take the bait.
That means, listen, there is a tactical conundrum.
Do you just let Antifa destroy the building?
No, of course not.
But to a certain degree, you have to make sure you're not being baited by them.
I've seen this happen, right?
There's a very famous video from Occupy Wall Street, you'll probably find it, where what the activists publish is an officer in a white shirt swinging his baton wildly and hitting rioters, is a fair thing to say.
This video goes out, and they're like, look, man, the officers are just randomly beating people, and people are getting hit, getting hit.
The full video shows the officers standing there calmly.
The rioters start shaking the barricades, and then someone pops the hat off the head of the officer, who doesn't immediately start swinging.
He uses his baton as a guard, like holding it up, then starts pushing, and when they keep shoving back, then he starts swinging.
They want to trick.
Or force these police officers and these federal agents to start defending themselves, start trying to take control of the situation, so that they can scream into the microphone, help, help, I'm being repressed.
And then what does the media do?
They love it!
The New York Times blames the federal officers.
They say they're making everything worse.
If the feds did nothing, I'd be willing to bet the courthouse would be burned down.
But I'll tell you what.
Antifa doesn't actually want the courthouse to be burned down, at least in my opinion.
They want to start fires and create enough damage to where they can claim they're peaceful.
I've talked about this, man.
You gotta understand.
One of the tactics of Antifa is a blunt attack.
If you go out and you start, you know, actually seriously injuring people in some capacity, the media will have no choice but to be like, 13 people are dead.
They know that they are fighting an ideological war.
This is guerrilla information warfare.
They need you to believe they are the victims, the peaceful protesters having their rights violated, proving how awful this country is.
So what do they do?
They use a blunted attack, okay?
They'll use bricks or hammers, literally blunt objects, to injure, but not seriously maim or kill.
That way, when the police say something like, this guy tried bashing me over the head with a hammer, which literally happened, and they start using tear gas, the only videos you'll see will be people crying and going, oh, why are they gassing us?
Oh, help us, please!
And it works.
The media then runs, goes nuts with it.
And you'll see now like 15 million videos and these far-left activists are laughing.
Gotcha.
It works.
They know what they're doing.
The best thing we can do, the best thing you can do, share videos like this.
Let me show you some more.
Andy No says, at the Antifa violent protest.
Andy, Andy, Andy.
Protest?
No, no, no, no, no, no.
Andy.
Riot.
It reminds me of, uh, uh, this, this reminds me of, I don't know if you guys have seen, um, what's, what's the latest?
Dead Men Tell No Tales.
Uh, the Pirates of the Caribbean movie, where Salazar, who is this, like, undead pirate, uh, pirate, he's talking to Barbossa, who's, you know, you guys, I don't know if you know who the characters are, but anyway, it's really funny, because Barbossa's like, I hear tales of a Spaniard who killed many a man, and he goes, no no no no no, not men!
Pirates.
That's what this reminds me of.
No, no, no, no, no, no.
Not protesters.
Rioters.
Or you can play that, or you can say, no, no, no, no, not protesters.
Communists.
But anyway, anyway, sorry, I kid, I kid.
This video shows someone firing a BB gun at a camera trying to take it out.
Why a BB gun?
Like I said, they blunt their attacks.
They use low tier attacks to disable because they're fighting an information war.
Trump and the DHS would be wise to understand what their tactics are all about.
They're not literally trying to tear a building down.
They know they can't do it.
They'd love to.
If the Feds left, oh yeah, they'd ransack the whole thing.
Like they did in the Chaz.
Or at least, like they've tried, like they did, I'm sorry, not Chaz, in Minnesota.
In Chaz, the whole thing got boarded up, and then they seized this whole territory.
What they would love is for the police and the Feds to leave so they can set up their own Chaz.
This is basically how all this began.
They were trying to set up their autonomous zone in downtown Portland.
They need you to leave.
In the meantime, though, they know that they can... They're waiting for that moment where someone comes out and, you know, you'll see... Here's what you'll see.
Some dude will throw a brick, and then immediately the camera will turn to like an old lady with a walker, and when the tear gas lands, that's all you get.
The media will be like, police fired tear gas at some old woman.
Why would they do this?
They cut out all the context.
It's exactly what they've been doing because they lie.
It's the game they play.
I got some more clips.
Check it out.
Antifa started fires in the streets, went into the police union hall and set it on fire.
This is Commissioner of Portland demanding that the Portland Police Bureau be handed over to her because they're acting out of control.
You see what they want?
They want the power.
They want the control.
Once the videos come out blaming the police and blaming the federal law enforcement, they'll then say, now give us control.
And that's what you gotta pay attention to, man.
In the Chazz, they said, these police are bad, they're killing innocent people.
Then as soon as the police pulled out, they formed their own security force, and they killed an unarmed 16-year-old black teenager who was driving a car, firing rifle rounds into the car, and then stripping the evidence after this kid died, seriously injuring his 14-year-old friend.
Where was the news?
Where were the Black Lives Matter protests?
Apparently, nowhere to be found.
So now what do we see in Portland?
When these people go out and commit all of this violence, they falsely frame it to accuse the police, and then they say, give us the authority, give us the power, heaven help us, if these people ever take control of an actual police force.
But I'll tell you what, man, it seems to be happening in Minnesota.
As they've now moved to disband their police and create a new community policing, and with all the morality policing rising up around the country, I would say it's only a matter of time.
Stick around.
Next segment is coming up at 1pm on this channel, and I will see you all then.
Among Trump's supporting conservatives, a new hero has emerged.
A woman who went in front of Trump Tower, where the Black Lives Matter mural is in New York City, and she splashed black paint on it, saying things like, Jesus Christ is his name.
She's wearing a shirt that says, Jesus Matters.
And she was arrested for this.
Many people on the right applauded the behavior because, well, it's non-violent civil disobedience.
And she's protesting in relatively, in a similar way that we've seen some of the left-wing activists protest.
But it proves a double standard.
Right now you get Antifa going around spray-painting monuments, spray-painting courthouses, and why aren't they being arrested?
Some people are.
But where's the media to run, you know, wall-to-wall coverage of the horrifying vandalism of a federal courthouse?
It shows you the media's double standard.
If you deface what they support ideologically, they're outraged by it, and it's a major news story that appears on multiple channels.
But if Antifa goes around spray-painting and, you know, painting ACAB everywhere and, you know, desecrating statues of, say, Jesus, where are the big, you know, breaking news stories about the defacement?
There's some, of course.
You know, I'm not going to pretend like the media doesn't cover these stories.
It's just, what do the pundits focus on?
What about mainstream news cycle personalities?
They don't talk about it.
But these stories seem to go far and wide.
Now, this woman, this new hero has a name.
Bevelyn Beatty.
You see, after she got arrested, as soon as she gets released, she went and did it again to several other Black Lives Matter murals.
Now listen, like I said, look, I'm not a fan of this behavior, okay?
I will not condemn or condone what she's doing for one reason.
While I typically would condemn the behavior of Antifa spray-painting and vandalizing property, I still think it's wrong.
However, She gets arrested for it, and it is non-violent civil disobedience.
She's not escalating to violence.
She did the pain.
She got arrested.
Okay, that I can respect.
And I can respect the same of the far left as well, within reason.
The bigger issue I take is that there's a media double standard.
Antifa's been doing this non-stop.
I mean, basically for years, and no one seems to care.
They can paint a message in the streets.
They can block it off.
They can put it in front of the Trump Tower.
They can spend taxpayer money supporting a political message.
And they can arrest those who dare oppose it.
So yes, Trump supporters are rather pleased with this woman.
And she has an interesting message.
Refund the police.
Now, I gotta be honest.
When I first heard the new slogan, refund the police, I thought to myself, I didn't know what it meant.
I mean this literally like, did the cop buy a cheeseburger that didn't have cheese on it?
She means the opposite of defund, refund like give their money back whoa whoa whoa this lady this is interesting it must be a pretty interesting predicament to be a cop arresting a woman who is yelling we need the police we the police need funding bring our cops back
I'm sure the cops are conflicted.
But you know what?
They're good cops.
Think about it.
Here you can see on the screen is this activist woman being arrested for engaging in non-violent civil disobedience in support of the police, and the cop is arresting her, even though she's cheering for him.
It's kind of paradoxical, almost.
But it does make sense.
You know, you want police to be able to do their jobs, and this includes the job.
If she wants to deface a city-sanctioned mural on the street, you'll get arrested for it.
You know what?
I actually do agree with it.
But again, there's constraints.
It's not like I would agree with literally every instance of someone being arrested for protesting.
Of course not.
Excuse me.
But what we see here is somebody who engaged in a nonviolent act to spread a message, and it worked.
It got press attention.
She went out and she did it again.
She streamed it.
People are sharing the stories.
They're cheering for her now, but she didn't attack anybody.
Okay?
And they cleaned it up.
Now, one of the problems I have with the destruction of statues is that it goes a bit beyond just splashing paint.
Okay?
If you graffiti something, I'll complain about it.
The same as I've criticized the people splashing paint.
I did.
Okay?
We've had now, I think, three instances where this one mural's been defaced, and I said, every time, I don't agree with it.
I think the right thing you should do is sue the city and demand you get to put All Lives Matter on the other side.
Why not?
They can't block you from expressing your political opinion if they get to express theirs.
That, I think, is the bigger message.
I don't like the idea of people vandalizing with spray paint and stuff like that, but look.
Antifa destroys statues, chucks them in the river.
That's ridiculous.
You can't repair these things, okay?
That's destroying something.
Not just vandals, but it's beyond that.
It's destruction of history.
It's an affront to everything we believe in when they tear down, say, Frederick Douglass.
The paint she splashed, they easily painted over it.
So it's hard to know exactly where the line is, to be fair and reasonable.
But I've always been someone who's been a big fan of non-violent civil disobedience.
If she splashes paint and they can spend, you know, some money to clean it up, then her message gets out and she gets arrested for it, right?
You want to block a roadway?
You get arrested for it.
What needs to happen now is we need to see lawsuits popping up in all of these cities that have renamed streets and have painted these streets.
They renamed, I believe it's outside of Lafayette Park in Washington D.C., the street to Black Lives Matter Plaza.
Okay.
They painted in the street Black Lives Matter in D.C.
Judicial Watch, in a very, I think, astute, clever, and correct move, filed a suit saying they want to be able to write their message in the street.
Yeah, they should be able to.
That's fair, right?
But what about the renaming of the street?
If New York is going to rename five streets, one in each borough, Black Lives Matter, then when are they going to put the All Lives Matter streets up in New York City?
Perhaps someone should sue for that.
If you're going to do Black Lives Matter, then there's got to be a Blue Lives Matter and an All Lives Matter.
All right, well, let's read this story about Refund the Police, this woman, and I've got some video.
I don't know if I can show it, but I want to show you this article that goes over what she did, and I want to show you what people are saying over at thedonald.win, because this story specifically is about their support for this woman engaging in what amounts to, to be fair, vandalism.
I want to show you how they feel about it, and I believe, for the most part, they're cheering her on.
And I also want to make sure I point out there's a big difference between destroying a statue and splashing paint.
But the good argument is, and to be fair to people on the left, that it's a fine line, right?
It's a gray area.
We don't always agree on what is acceptable and what isn't.
You might see someone spray paint a statue and you get really, really angry about it.
You see her splash paint.
Will you be equally angry?
There's nuance to this.
They can easily paint over and recreate and repair the mural, so it's not that bad of permanent damage.
But if people keep spray painting, say, a statue, and they keep having to clean it off, it could erode or potentially damage the statue.
You get the point.
Let's read the story.
This is from News Channel 8 NBC.
Refund the police.
BLM painting outside Trump Tower defaced for third time.
A Black Lives Matter mural painted on the street in front of Trump's namesake tower has quickly become the target for vandalism, defaced with bucketfuls of paint three times in less than a week.
In the latest incident, two women were arrested around 3 p.m.
Saturday after police said they poured black paint on the block-long mural outside Trump Tower on Manhattan's Chic Fifth Avenue.
Bystander video showed police officers surrounding one of the women as she rubbed the paint on the mural's bright yellow letters and screamed, they don't care about black lives and refund the police.
One of the officers slipped on the paint and tumbled to the ground, sustaining injuries to his head and arm, police said.
He was listed in stable condition at Bellevue Hospital.
I hope he's okay, right?
I am no fan of people getting hurt.
There's questions about whether splashing paint is the right thing to do.
You know, people might get hurt.
The police department's spokesperson said the woman's name and information on possible charges against them weren't immediately available.
The city's largest police union, the Police Benevolent Association, tweeted, I agree with the cops on this one.
They shouldn't be painting the Black Lives Matter mural in the first place, and people shouldn't be splashing paint on top of it.
I think the appropriate thing is, I don't want to call it a tit-for-tat, but if they're going to write Black Lives Matter, then all lives matter.
They go on to mention that it happened less than 24 hours before some other incidents.
They found a group of people were splashing blue paint on the... They were wearing an All Lives Matter shirt, splashed blue paint on the Black Lives Matter mural.
This woman was wearing a cape.
It was a rainbow flag that said LGBT for Trump.
I believe that's what it said.
So here you have an LGBT for Trump woman And now a black female, supporter of Trump, I believe she's a Trump supporter, engaging in these actions, and I'll tell you a couple things.
To the protesters in Portland who went out in the initial Black Lives Matter protests, blocked a road, got on their stomachs, and put their hands behind their back, I have repeatedly said I respect this.
Blocking a road is an inconvenience to a lot of people, so long as emergency services can carry on.
There's a limit, but laying down in a road to protest, to get attention, I'm actually okay with.
You get arrested.
You get a citation.
It is illegal.
But we want to make sure that, you know, it's nonviolent civil disobedience.
It's been very effective.
It gets people's messages across without hurting people.
And we need to make sure that there is a line that doesn't get crossed.
But, if you don't allow some kind of disruption, you know, within reason, then people will get violent.
So it's like, it's trying to figure out that happy medium.
So for this, I got mad respect for this woman.
Engaging in a non-violent civil disobedience.
I hope that officer doesn't get hurt.
You know, he did get hurt, but I hope he's okay.
But now I want to bring you to the Gateway Pundit.
Now, admittedly, I am no fan of using the Gateway Pundit.
As you can see, they are not news-guarded.
They've put up a ton of bad stuff in the past.
But this article specifically comes from Cassandra Fairbanks, who I do trust.
And more importantly, it's just video of the incident.
So while I typically don't use Gateway, not trying to be necessarily disrespectful to Gateway, I'm very particular on my sources, however, this story is totally legit.
A bit opinionated, but that's the point.
Hero.
Bevelyn Beatty paints over two more Black Lives Matter murals hours after being released by the NYPD.
I'm sorry.
You know why this is really funny?
Bail reform.
For real.
This woman gets arrested.
It's a low-tier offense, like I mentioned, civil disobedience, right?
She gets released.
She goes right to it!
She goes right to it.
So what do you think the Trump supporters are saying over at the Donald?
They're saying exactly that.
This is the Donald.win, which is essentially the new version of the Donald Trump forum.
For those that aren't familiar, on Reddit, there used to be a subreddit, basically a forum, one of the largest, if not the largest gathering of Trump supporters called The Donald.
It got banned.
It got quarantined first, which basically means nobody could see the posts.
So they created their own website called The Donald.
Well, recently Reddit actually banned The Donald, even though it was inactive for four months, which proves, as far as I can tell, either they're engaging in retroactive enforcement or they're lying and trying to censor people because they created their own website.
But anyway, of course, they're cheering this on.
So I thought it'd be interesting to take a look at some of the comments from the Donald.
These are Trump's true supporters.
The first one is, the one time bail reform is lit.
I gotta be honest, when I saw that, I laughed a lot.
It's a good point!
For those that don't know, in New York City, they enacted this new law, bail reform, where for non-violent offenses, you can't be held on bail.
The idea is, if you get arrested, you're not proven guilty.
So the state can't require you to put up money to get out because that would essentially lock someone up who couldn't afford it, could destroy their life.
In principle, I actually really like bail reform, man.
Innocent until proven guilty.
It is better that ten guilty persons escape than one innocent person suffer.
Admittedly, it gets tough in New York because you got violent offenders being released and they shouldn't be.
But maybe the bigger issue is that people need to be able to defend themselves.
You know, it all works really well when you're responsible for yourself and your safety is your responsibility.
Then if someone gets released who is innocent, well, then we're not imprisoning the innocent.
And if someone is guilty, but they get released and they want to commit a crime, well, perhaps if people could defend themselves legally and responsibly, the crime wouldn't be as bad, or at least people had a chance to take responsibility for themselves.
This one says, Slaps Hood.
This bail elimination can fit so much civil disobedience in it.
Now, I'll tell you what.
They're laughing about it, but that also means the left can do the same thing.
Personally, I'm okay with this.
I am.
Look, man, civil disobedience is about just pushing that line a little bit, but not crossing into violent territory.
So you'll really annoy people.
I'm not a big fan of blocking streets and this kind of stuff.
I'm not a fan of splashing paint.
I don't think splashing paint on the mural is the right move, personally.
But I do believe people need an outlet for some kind of disruptive behavior.
You get arrested for it, as I've said.
The next person says, came here to say this.
This person says, end bail reform.
These evil white supremacist vandals cannot be allowed to roam the streets of NYC.
So here's the next post.
Here's the next post, quote, the police need our help.
They can't stand alone.
Don't just sit idly by, don't sit by idly and let your country go to the ground.
Bevelyn and her friend are standing in the, in the power and light of Christ,
especially as she's wearing a, you know, Jesus matters.
Here's another one.
God, I love this woman.
Bevelyn drive by Beatty.
I am not worthy to kiss her feet.
They really, really love this woman.
So we have these videos and there's a live stream of it over at the Gateway Pundit.
Basically they've got a, I believe it's some kind of like, it's not an SU.
It might be an SUV.
But in the back, they open up the back hatch, they open a bunch of paint cans, and they drive really slowly as two people in the back start pouring paint.
People get mad.
In one video, I believe it's this one down here, some dude almost like, he like, threatens to throw the can at her, and the dude filming is like, yo, my man, like, don't throw that can at that woman, man, don't do that, and the guy gets up in his face.
It's like, dude, dude, dude, you know, he's like, chill out, chill out, it's all for black lives, right?
So, people are getting really mad about this.
Here's why I don't agree with the splashing of the paint.
I believe there's probably, like, a better way to do it.
Maybe set up a soapbox.
Like, quite literally.
And start speaking about what it means, how you feel about it, what you want.
You want refund the police.
Demand the city.
Paint on the street.
Refund the police.
Or, um... Maybe there's a better way to describe what you want to happen, like... I don't know, because refund sounds weird.
But when you do this, I'll tell you what happens.
Painting Black Lives Matter in the street to an average person who's not political, they don't care.
They don't.
Conservatives probably get upset with it because it's a double standard and the city shouldn't be paying for political messages to paint this stuff.
And you'll make people really angry.
It's hard to have a real conversation with someone when they're screaming in your face.
So this to me seems like, while I can certainly agree, like I said, with nonviolence and disobedience, I think it's going to make people mad.
I think it's going to make the Black Lives Matter people angry and just generate animosity between different groups.
I do think, for the right, they are earning massive points politically when you see this.
Because what you're seeing here with Bevelyn Beattie, first and foremost, she is a black woman.
Does that matter when it comes to her politics?
It doesn't.
But what does matter is that she's literally a member of the community that the city claims to speak for.
That's more important.
I think what we've learned, if anything, from all of these riots and all these protests, is that Race means nothing in terms of what these protests are really about.
It's all about ideology.
When you see a black cop arresting a white Black Lives Matter protester, you know, you can be of any race and believe different things.
Let's read a little bit because we've got a statement here.
They say the woman moved the gates surrounding the mural, sat in the back of their open hatchback, and dumped black paint while the cars behind them were forced to drive through it, inadvertently helping them paint.
Quote, Bevelyn and Edmi are officially released from the NYPD.
They are doing wonderful and thank each and every one of you for your overwhelmingly incredible support and prayers.
BD said in a statement posted to Facebook approximately two hours before they began painting in Harlem.
Next, the woman stopped by the state-sanctioned vandalism in Brooklyn for another drive-by painting.
I know, I know.
Gateway Pundit is biased.
But these things really happen.
You wanna call it state sanctioned vandalism?
Cass, I think you're being silly.
But I certainly think people feel that way.
I think that's literally the feeling that people have when they see their streets get painted and defended with taxpayer dollars.
I gotta admit, I am deeply, deeply opposed to them painting these things in the street for one reason.
Because you've opened the door completely To any message being written in the street.
You can't deny it now.
That's it.
Anyone should be able to sue the city of New York and write anything, and I mean it.
Black Lives Matter is a political message.
What gives them the right to put a political message in the street?
You can call it vandalism if you feel that way.
I think, obviously, it's just morality policing, morality government, and I won't stand for it.
Like, personally, I stand opposed to it.
Or I will stand opposed to it, sure.
Could you imagine now that they've opened the door to streets being public forums?
What someone could write?
Oh, I mean some spicy, spicy stuff.
Because you should theoretically be able to write anything you want, so long as it's legal.
You could write, I don't know, the Declaration of Independence, the full thing, and paint on a street, and they can't tell you no.
How long were these streets shut down while they painted?
Well, then you demand equal access under the law.
Now, what happens if literal and overt white supremacists show up and say, now it's our turn to write our message, and you can't stop us?
What happens when someone sues to get big yellow 14 words schlopped right onto 6th Avenue?
Avenue of the Americas, right there.
How about right in Times Square?
How can you argue they can't put it in Times Square?
Maybe they'll argue, well, these streets are okay.
All right.
Well, then when are these murals up?
And when do we get to put our message up?
You have opened the door.
Every single city who's done this now has a First Amendment argument for writing anything.
And I mean, you can get edgy.
What about Trump 2020?
Why not?
But I gotta tell you, look, we're seeing Judicial Watch file this lawsuit.
Another man in D.C.
has filed a lawsuit.
I gotta wonder.
I wonder why they're painting over the Black Lives Matter mural instead of writing murals wherever they want.
I mean, she could theoretically go out and go to the next block and write Jesus Matters, and if they try and stop her, she can file a lawsuit and she would likely win.
Okay, I'm not a lawyer, all right?
But I'd imagine, how are you going to justify state-sanctioned murals and then arrest someone else when they're doing literally the same thing?
That would be a clear and obvious bias, and you know what?
Bill de Blasio, you have done this.
Mayor Bowser of D.C., you have done this in every single city.
We've seen people be called vandals for doing this.
It's not going to stop here.
More and more people are going to come out.
But I disagree.
I think, as I've stated, you know what I would personally agree with?
Go out and write your own mural.
Make your own mural.
Do you need permits, whatever, probably?
But what are they going to do?
They'll probably try and stop you because we've already seen morality policing, but until then, I think we're going to see more and more people stand up for themselves in this way, and I'll put it this way.
On principle, I'm not a fan.
However, I'm not going to stand in their way if the police are not going to stand in the way of Antifa spray-painting ACAB everywhere.
Okay?
If they're going to get arrested for it, well then, you know, there you go.
They got arrested for it.
If Antifa is going to spend 52 nights in Portland spray-painting nonsense all over our federal courthouse, and then they're going to condemn the feds for trying to defend it, why do you expect me to stand in the way of this woman?
No.
I'll hold her to the same standard you do, right?
I'd like it if we all had better standards, but I'm not going to start with her.
I'm going to start with Antifa.
You start holding Antifa accountable, then I'll come back out and say, okay, now she should stop.
Until then, well, you open the door, and there must be equality under the law.
I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up at 4 p.m.
over at timcast.net, and I will see you then.
A couple was placed under house arrest after one of the individuals tested positive for COVID, and they were forced now to wear ankle bracelets.
They're under house arrest.
This is one of the freakiest stories I have ever seen related to COVID.
They have committed no crimes.
Why are they being put under house arrest?
You want to know why this story is particularly scary?
Because of something that's been going around quite a bit.
You see, there have been memes.
They're not memes, but they're screenshots of social media posts where people claim they never got tested, but were informed that they were positive.
Now, these stories are really difficult to confirm, and I'm not inclined to actually believe them, but we do get close so far.
Check out this story.
Mount Juliet Man says even with no test, he's informed he is COVID-19 positive by state.
Now stop!
Not confirmation, okay?
They investigated.
They found out this guy did receive a call from the state.
And this guy is now claiming he never got tested, but they're saying he's positive.
May or may not be true.
We would need harder evidence.
But this is from News for Nashville, NBC.
I tell you, this is a certified, verifiably good news.
Okay, YouTube.
It is a well... It is a capable and credible journalistic news outlet.
The reason I say this is that all of this content runs dangerously close to getting banned.
But it's important we talk about.
This guy's making a claim.
Maybe it's not true.
They investigated.
He did receive the phone calls.
We'll come to the story in a second.
But think about what that would mean.
What if you received a phone call telling you that you were positive for COVID even though you've never been tested and have no idea what they're talking about?
And then this happens.
They come and place you under house arrest.
Take a look at this story from ABC 13.
A Kentucky couple is under house arrest after one of them tested positive for coronavirus and refused to sign self-quarantine papers.
Elizabeth Linscott got tested for COVID-19 because she was planning to go visit her parents.
My grandparents wanted to see me.
So, just to make sure that, you know, if I tested negative, that they would be okay, everything would be fine.
After testing positive, but without showing any symptoms, Lynn Scott said the health department contacted her requesting she sign documents.
I agreed to comply to call the health department if I was to go.
I was to call the health department if I was to leave my house for any reason, but she chose not to sign.
I had gotten a message from them, a text message that stated, because of your refusal to sign, this is going to be escalated and law enforcement will be involved.
Later that week, The county sheriff greeted Lynn Scott's husband, Isaiah, at their front door.
I open up the door, and there's like eight different people, five different cars, and I'm like, what the heck's going on?
This guy's in a suit with a mask.
It's the health department guy, and they have three papers for us, for me, her, and my daughter.
The couple was ordered to wear ankle monitors.
If they travel more than 200 feet, law enforcement will be notified.
The couple said they never denied self-quarantining.
They just didn't agree with the wording of the documents.
And that's exactly what the director of the public health department told the judge.
That I was refusing to self-quarantine because of this.
And I'm like, that's not the case at all.
I never said that.
Lin Scott said even without the ankle monitor, she had planned to be cautious.
And if she needed the medical care, she would have let healthcare workers know she was infected with the virus.
Well, there you can see, in this still from the interview from ABC 13, they're lifting up their feet showing that they are wearing ankle monitors.
There it is.
If you test positive, they will put you under house arrest.
You know, there was a time when we had in this country this really great piece of paper.
Well, several pieces of paper.
It was called the Constitution.
And it said that they'll make no law, you know... Well, you know what the Constitution is.
I'm not gonna... Let's stop being funny.
Yeah, we don't have that anymore, man.
It's Swiss cheese.
It is absolutely Swiss cheese.
These people, you want to talk about the wife being positive, the husband may or may not be positive.
He didn't get tested, doesn't matter.
He's in the house, presumed case.
How much you want to bet that they took these people and they actually listed them as confirmed cases?
I'd be willing to bet that too.
Which brings me to the next story.
Even with no test, He's informed he's positive.
So what happens if they show up to his house, and they got an ankle bracelet, and they're like, we're quarantining you.
He's like, I never got tested.
And they're like, we don't care.
Check this out.
Brock Balow expected the first call.
After all, his co-worker had tested positive for COVID-19, so he expected a call from a contact tracer.
He didn't anticipate, however, what the tracer would tell him.
She specifically said, I'm looking at it right here.
You tested positive.
This is a follow-up call to see how your symptoms are.
There was just one major problem.
Because he hadn't experienced any symptoms, Baloo hadn't been tested yet.
Is it possible you misheard her?
Ask News 4.
I'm 100% sure.
That's what she said.
She was looking right at it.
She told me I'm in the system, looking right at it, and that you're showing positive.
Then, two more days with calls, all from tracers asking about his symptoms.
The tracer said, I'm still seeing that you're positive.
Courtesy call, checking your symptoms.
Ballews Shared with News 4 investigates the three phone numbers that contacted him, and all of them come from workers with the state health department.
Ballos said he's concerned that if he's incorrectly identified as positive in the state system, how accurate are the numbers that are released daily?
I said I don't know what's going on, but it's wrong.
I'm just another number when I'm not.
A spokeswoman for the state's Department of Health confirmed they are investigating and wrote, I can also tell you there is no concern with our count of cases in regard to our reporting of those who test positive.
Those entries are based on lab results, not on information provided from the monitoring team.
Ballew said he'd been told by the state's health department that a third-party contractor made the calls to him, and they're now investigating to find out what happened.
News 4 Investigates says that they will follow up.
Perhaps they are correct.
This is not confirmation, but perhaps.
It was a third party who made a mistake.
Maybe he's not really in the system.
Maybe when it comes to official documentation of who is positive, they need lab results, and this is just a probable case.
Perhaps it could be.
The third-party contractors know that his co-workers were infected and got tested.
So they listed him in the contact tracing program, not for positive, but because of a probable case.
And these third-party people got it wrong.
I don't know for sure.
But if the data can be wrong, and maybe it is, maybe it isn't, because again, it's not confirmed, how scary is it that they put angle bracelets on people for testing positive?
Welcome to the brave new world, man.
You know, several months ago, I was concerned about if they started locking down states, because they were talking about it.
They were talking about quarantining some states.
Border checkpoints were being put up between states, and these things started to get really scary.
I don't know how many of you said to yourselves, it can't happen here, but I'll tell you what, if you thought it couldn't happen here, you were wrong!
Literally put an ankle bracelet on people because one person tested positive.
And where do we go from here?
Some people have speculated that right now they're saying, no mask, no service.
You gotta wear your mask.
Well, listen, I got no problem wearing a mask.
Some people are concerned, next they're gonna say, no vaccine, no service.
To be fair, I personally also have no problem getting vaccinated.
I really don't think there's a grand conspiracy or anything like that.
I do think there is a lot of human error.
That's what freaks me out.
I do think there is legal authoritarianism.
Look, everybody's rushing to get vaccines out, and I'll tell you this completely honestly.
You don't got to agree with me, but If they come with a vaccine, I'm not gonna run out the front door like some people would and line up first in line to get the vaccine.
I'll wait a little bit, and then probably end up getting the vaccine.
I'll tell you why.
Look.
New York City's COVID-19 contact tracing will ask about outdoor dining, not protests.
A lot of people think there's some shenanigans afoot.
I do believe, within reason, yes.
They should be asking about protests.
I think you're nuts if you think protests aren't contributing to this.
But I also don't believe there's a grand conspiracy, man.
Let's be real.
Look, I think Cuomo put sick people in nursing homes and killed people because he's a moron.
But I think if there really was some grand conspiracy, they wouldn't have, you know, the evil cabal wouldn't make New York City the epicenter.
New York City failed.
It makes Democrats look bad.
Not a conspiracy, just human error.
That's what scares me.
So I'll tell you this.
I'll wear a mask.
You know why?
Wearing a mask does nothing to me.
I know some people have talked about oxygen concentration and stuff.
I don't think it's a big deal.
I'm not super worried about it.
When I go out, if I'm walking down the sidewalk or to my car or something, I don't wear a mask.
If I'm going into a public area, I'm gonna be around people, I'll put the mask on.
Why?
It just doesn't matter to me.
I mean, maybe that's just me because I'm in the suburbs and I'm not around a lot of people anyway, but that's just me.
When it comes to the vaccine, I do have concerns that they're rushing these things and humans make mistakes.
When it comes to contact tracing, I have concerns that humans are political and they'll avoid certain things that don't look bad.
When it comes to enforcement, I'm concerned that authoritarians will slap ankle braces on people.
I think it's scarier than you realize.
You know, this is why I really hate conspiracy theories, because I think that they actually lend to a safer worldview.
Trust me.
If there really was a group of people orchestrating everything, that means there's control.
And control means you don't have to worry to a certain degree.
Now, they may have, you know, criminal plans or have this evil cabal.
But listen, people want to believe that someone's in control because, in my opinion, it's safer.
Reality is scarier.
People have no idea what they're doing.
New York is a disaster.
They're desperately begging for money.
There's riots and crime is skyrocketing.
It's not a conspiracy.
It's failure.
And that's what's really scary.
It's worse.
I'm not gonna pretend like there's someone in control of things because that's like this idea that someone could stop it.
It reminds me of Wonder Woman, if you've seen the movie.
I know it may be a silly analogy, but hear me out.
In Wonder Woman, she believes if she just finishes, if she defeats Ares, the God of War, then war stops.
And Chris Pine, I believe Chris Pine's the name, the actor says, it's not, that doesn't work that way.
Even if you get rid of the God of War, war will still happen.
Why?
Because no one is in control.
Now listen, you got a lot of people trying, and you got a lot of people getting things wrong.
Least of all, Dr. Fauci, that guy was wrong a lot!
But I don't think it's a grand conspiracy.
The guy's name probably ended up in the database in that other story, Mount Juliet, because somebody made a huge mistake.
They put ankle bracelets on these people because they personally don't care about your rights.
And in New York, they're not going to check on protests because political reasons.
But if it really was some grand scheme, New York wouldn't have been the epicenter, no.
So I'll tell you what'll happen.
For me.
They'll come out with the vaccine, I'll sit back and wait a little bit, see the news, see where they're sending it off to, who's getting it, and then at some point I probably would get it, but I'm not super worried.
Look, I've traveled the world.
I've gotten tons of vaccinations.
I'm fine.
I don't know, maybe when I turn 50, I'll mutate into some kind of strange, disfigured creature, whatever.
I think it's fine.
I think it's all silly.
But I'm not gonna be the guinea pig, I'll tell you that.
I'll wait and see how things roll out, and that'll probably be it.
But I do think there's reasons to be concerned, because we need to make sure we're correcting for human error.
So, I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up in a few minutes, and I will see you all shortly.
My friends, I bring you hope that in the midst of all of this morality policing, where protesters and rioters are getting released without charge, and people who are trying to defend themselves are getting arrested or called vandals, we have some good news.
Missouri governor says he'd pardon St.
Louis couple if they are charged for brandishing guns at protesters.
Thank you, Missouri governor.
You can criticize them for their improper use of weapons, but they were on their own property.
A large mob of people came onto their private property, threatened them.
Listen, let's have a conversation about threatening someone.
You don't need to walk up to someone and scream, I'm coming for you, I'll get you, or whatever threat.
You can literally just illegally enter their property and they can feel threatened and then want to defend themselves.
This dude, his name's Mark McCloskey, had his rifle seized by the cops.
Now, I've criticized them extensively for defending the police.
Nah, the cops violated your rights.
Don't play these games.
But I'm glad to see the governor is standing up for him.
But we also have Josh Hawley himself.
Seeks DOJ probe of St.
Louis case on couple wielding guns at protesters.
Hawley said any criminal prosecution against McCloskey family is legally unsound.
Excellent.
Now you got people standing up for these two citizens, and it is optimism all the way.
You wanted good news?
You like good news?
So often, news is just bad news.
This is good news!
Good news, everybody.
Maybe it's not so bad.
While we're seeing the rise of morality policing, we're seeing 52 nights of riots in Portland, the media blaming Trump and the feds.
It's not all bad.
Some people are standing up for citizens who would defend themselves.
They didn't shoot anybody.
They were on their own property.
Let me explain it very simply.
The McCloskeys didn't take their guns, leave their property, go and track down Black Lives Matter, and then wave guns in their face.
They're at their house eating dinner on their patio.
They were in the defensive position.
Let's read this story from the Hill.
Missouri Governor Mike Parson, a Republican, suggested on Friday that he was prepared to pardon a St.
Louis couple if charges were filed against them for brandishing firearms at a group of protesters outside their home.
Speaking on the Mark Cox Morning Show in St.
Louis, Parson was asked about the investigation Circuit County Kim Gardner launched into Mark and Patricia McCloskey.
The two were seen in widely shared video.
We know what happened.
The McCloskeys claimed in a police report that they felt threatened by the demonstrators and feared they would assault them or destroy their property.
But Gardner said that she would look into the events, noting that Noting at the outset of her probe that we will not tolerate the use of force against those exercising their First Amendment rights.
Well, they didn't use any force, so congratulations.
Marc Parson, good man.
Well, I don't know anything about the guy.
Maybe he's not a good person, but at least here he's on the right.
what they legally should do.
A mob does not have the right to charge your property.
They had every right to protect themselves.
Here, here, good sir.
Mark Parson, good man.
Well, I don't know anything about the guy.
Maybe he's not a good person, but at least here he's on the right, he's saying the right
thing so I'll agree with him.
Asked whether he would consider a pardon if charges were filed, Parson said, I think that's
exactly what would happen.
You're here.
Right now, that's what I feel.
You don't know until you hear all the facts, but right now, if this is all about going after them for doing a lawful act, then yeah.
If that scenario ever happened, I don't think they're going to spend any time in jail.
We will not allow law-abiding citizens to be targeted for exercising their constitutional rights, Parson added in a tweet.
Linking to his comments.
The McCloskeys first gained widespread attention in late June after video captured the two pointing firearms at protesters who had been marching past their residence on the way to the home of St.
Louis Mayor Lida Crewson to demand she resign after she read aloud activists' personal information on a livestream.
The couple told St.
Louis police that the protesters trespassed on a private street and that they were in fear for their lives.
A protest leader has disputed their claims, saying that the gate to the street was open and that demonstrators were peaceful.
Gardner's investigation of the events has attracted intense criticism from Republican officials, including Josh Hawley and President Trump.
In an interview last week, Trump claimed the investigation was a disgrace and that the couple had the right to protect their property.
Parsons also noted that he discussed the matter with Trump.
And the next point they bring up is Josh Hawley.
See, Josh Hawley actually stood up a few days ago to defend the McCloskeys.
According to Fox News, they say, Missouri GOP Senator Josh Hawley on Thursday claimed the St.
Louis Circuit Attorney's Office is improperly targeting the couple who wielded guns at protesters in their gated community last month and requested the Justice Department open an investigation into the case.
In a letter to Attorney General Bill Barr, Hawley called for a federal civil rights probe into St.
Louis Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner's investigation into the McCloskey family for using firearms to defend themselves and their property against protesters, saying, quote, I gotta say, man, there are very few people who have actually actively stood up for the American people in many ways, and Josh Hawley is one of them.
Not just on this issue, but on the issue of freedom of speech and constitutional rights.
Hawley wrote to Barr on Thursday. I got to say, man, there are very few people who have actually
actively stood up for the American people in many ways. And Josh Hawley is one of them,
not just on this issue, but on the issue of freedom of speech and constitutional rights.
Hawley is fairly active.
Look man, how many politicians can you name that have come out and defended individuals' civil liberties?
I mean, very few.
Often you'll hear about people talking about broad policy positions and ideas, the right to do this, the right to do that, but will they actively call out injustice targeting people?
Very few, to be honest.
Josh Hawley is actually doing that.
He says, There is no question under Missouri law that McCloskey's had the right to own and use their firearms to protect themselves from threatened violence, and that any criminal prosecution of these actions is legally unsound.
The only possible motivation for the investigation, then, is a politically motivated attempt to punish this family for exercising their Second Amendment rights.
I think it has more to do with defying a Black Lives Matter protest.
You see, in New York, Bill de Blasio was asked about, you know, public gatherings.
I assure you there are probably dozens of stories across this country, because it's a massive country of hundreds of millions of people, where someone pulled out a weapon to defend themselves and nobody cares.
We don't hear about it because it wasn't Black Lives Matter.
It's a newsworthy subject.
These people came out to defend themselves.
I'm pretty sure there's going to be a story about, like, Idaho or something, and someone came on someone's property, pulled out a weapon, and nobody will care.
It might make local news, it probably wouldn't even do that.
It probably happens every single day, and nobody cares.
Somebody walks on someone's property, they have some words with each other, and then one person says, you know, I'm armed and get off my property, and they do.
Here in St.
Louis, however, you had a very large protest group, and the videos went viral, and thus, they went and targeted the family.
They say Hawley's attempted intervention comes after police served a search warrant at the McCloskey's home, in the upscale Central West End neighborhood of St.
Louis, in the same area where the city's Democratic mayor lives.
Take a look at this image.
I'm sorry, I gotta do this.
I'm not happy with it.
They took the McCloskey's rifle.
The cops violated their Second Amendment rights.
Josh Hawley points it out.
The governor points it out.
And these cops, with a smile on their face, of course I'm exaggerating, just came and took it.
Just came and took their weapon.
They did nothing illegal.
Why?
And why don't the McCloskeys call them out?
Well, they didn't want to be there.
No, I'm sorry, man.
Saying you're just following orders is no excuse for violating someone's rights.
I get it.
They didn't haul off the McCloskeys to jail or anything, but they took their weapon and they have a right to bear that weapon.
But the police will just do it.
Same thing in New York City.
They mentioned what happened, you know, the protesters came, police seized the rifle that Mark was holding in the now-viral video of the incident, while a handgun that Patricia was holding was turned over to the St.
Louis police Saturday by the couple's attorney.
The handgun has been in Watkins' possession as evidence that it was inoperable when she pointed it at protesters in defense of themselves and their home at the time.
I don't think that matters, honestly, though, whether it's operable or inoperable.
It might.
Earlier this week, Mike Parson said he spoke with President Trump on the matter, and that we talked about.
This is optimism.
I'm sorry.
This is an optimistic story.
It's a positive story.
You should leave this feeling better about everything that's going on.
I have been very concerned with the morality policing that we've seen, or I should say, it is disconcerting to see the morality policing, people getting cut loose.
In Portland, a dude who bragged about committing arson let go.
People who defend themselves are the ones who get in trouble.
That's scary reality, man.
I've talked to people about it, and I've said, look at these stories, man.
They're coming after these people if you defend yourself.
Well, that's crazy.
Because what?
Are you supposed to just lie back and let the mob trash your house, burn it down, and kill you?
No.
We need to stand up for our rights.
We need to speak up.
The McCloskeys need to speak louder, but good on Josh Hawley and good on the governor for standing up for them.
That, I think, is fantastic.
But look man, around the country there are bad things happening.
There will be people who will have your back if you do the right thing and call out injustice and a violation of civil rights.
But if you do nothing, the future will just get worse.
And it'll get worse for your family, it'll get worse for your friends, but worst of all, it'll get worse for your kids.
So think about what you're leaving behind.
The far left has an advantage and many of these people just don't have kids, okay?
But if you do, you definitely need to speak up.
Because if you don't, you know what's going to happen.
The mob will eventually show up for you.
No amount of putting your head down will keep you safe.
They will come to your house, the same as they did to McCloskey's, who probably had no idea this was going to happen to them.
They were sitting on their patio having dinner.
They didn't think a mob was going to show up.
And then there it is.
I wonder how much they've spoken up.
I wonder if before this they called out the injustice they saw or if they just kept their heads down.
And now they find themselves in the fray.
Look, you could be the McCloskeys next.
The protest might come to your neighborhood.
I heard helicopters around my house last month.
The helicopters, they crossed the bridge, people were freaking out.
They shut the bridges down next time.
It may come to your neighborhood too.
And if you don't join, speak up, at least, in defense.
Well then, don't be surprised if no one speaks up for you.
But I'll wrap it up there and just say this.
This is good news, all right?
It's good news.
This is cause for optimism, so I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up in a few minutes, and I will see you all shortly.
We endured years of Russiagate nonsense, from the press and the lies, to the investigation, to the waste of money, and we are at risk for having it all over again.
You are being warned.
Now, I know most of you are probably, you know, considering voting or something, but let me tell you this.
Look at this, from Breitbart.
After Trump is gone, we will continue to investigate and expose what he did.
Aren't you excited for more of the same that we've had over not even three years, but now almost five years since 2015 when they've been accusing Trump of working with Russia and Russia trying to hack and blah, blah, blah.
It's coming, man.
I don't know what to expect come November.
I'm torn.
I'm absolutely torn.
Let me give you an optimistic view of things.
Let me be optimistic for a second.
Let's entertain the possibility that the far left is actually fringe.
And they are, according to many, many, many polls.
What if we're seeing people like Alex Jones, who's always been very much like, the government's coming to enslave you and take your income tax, now actually cheering for Donald Trump.
Liberals, like my buddy Adam, who's a hippie, vegan, skateboarder, who's now talking about how he's voting for Trump.
I thought about that the other night, because we do the TimCast IRL podcast, right?
It's live with me and my buddy Adam and Lydia, and we talk about cultural and political issues.
Well, Adam has been very much pro-Donald Trump for the past couple of weeks now.
I think so.
I don't know at what point he said, you know what?
Actually, I think it's been a couple months, actually.
And I thought about, how do you get a skateboarding, hippie, vegan guy to now, like, agree on leadership with Alex Jones, of all people?
It made me realize there is optimism, you know, within all of this.
There may be chaos come November.
If Trump loses, and many of you probably don't even want to vote for Trump, you're gonna get more of this just absolute insanity.
I've mentioned this a couple times in the past week, it's been in my mind.
Dave Rubin, a gay married man, sitting down with Orthodox Jewish man, Ben Shapiro, in complete disagreement over their worldviews and their lives, but as friends.
And I thought, perhaps the far left has united the two bigger factions of this country, you know, liberals and conservatives, and maybe there really is a silent majority.
According to the Hidden Tribes report, progressive activists are only 8%.
We can maybe argue it's a little bit more, a little bit less.
I think it's fair to say it's a little bit less.
Most people probably don't care for the protests.
They want peace.
Many people probably don't know about, you know, what the far left is doing and might just hate Donald Trump.
But maybe the coalition is bigger than we realize, because like I said, I'm seeing like Far-right libertarian types.
I mean far-right in the economic sense, the literal sense.
These are people who are like, almost end caps, praising Trump and being like, he's the best choice.
And I'm like, but you've always been very anti-government.
And now I've got some, like, let me tell you something.
There's a friend of mine who I met at a Black Lives Matter rally, no joke, years ago, now full on, full MAGA.
And I was seeing posts by this person and I was like, no way.
And so I started talking to them, and sure enough, they're like, yep, 100%.
So maybe, we can't see it, but there really is some kind of weird unity happening, and this is a good thing.
People who normally wouldn't come together have come together, and maybe in the end, Trump wins, and it actually helps heal the country.
I know it may seem strange, but I want to be a little bit optimistic.
I don't know what will happen.
But I will tell you one thing for myself.
I am very much, very close to just...
I want to say I'm leaning towards voting for Trump come November for one reason.
Afghanistan.
But there is another reason, too, and that's what's going on in China.
Now I'm actually starting to get worried about what happens if Trump loses.
The reason I'm not going to come out and just say straight up that I'm voting for Trump or anything like that is because a lot can change.
And, man, it is begrudgingly.
It's true, man, look.
The way I see it is Joe Biden will absolutely try and reinvigorate these deals with the Pacific countries like China, like the TPP.
Adam Schiff is going to send us through a whole bunch of stupid investigations because it's all he has, and I don't want any of this.
But while I understand Trump is a funny guy, he's an entertainer, he brought about a good economy, I wouldn't want to vote for him in any normal circumstance.
But you know what?
I've kind of resigned myself to this position where it's like, I don't want Biden.
You know why?
Afghanistan.
Did you know that in the past year, 10,000 civilians have died?
In the past 10 years, 100,000?
So when Donald Trump made these moves, I was like, you know what, man?
I just, I don't know what to say.
It seems like a real opportunity to have a president who's going to get us out of the Middle East.
And you know what?
I think I got to take it.
I think about what's going on in China.
And Donald Trump is calling out China.
And so is Bill Barr.
And man, look, listen.
Donald Trump has character issues I really don't like.
Cheating on his wife.
The way he talks.
The way he insults people.
I don't like him.
I think he's funny.
I get it.
But I'll tell you what, man.
I was thinking about Majid Nawaz.
And if you haven't been following him, he's on a hunger strike now.
Maybe day five or six.
To call out the Uyghur Muslim concentration camps.
And I thought about what we can do to stop it.
I don't think Joe Biden will stop it.
You know why?
Because he flew to China with his kid, and then his kid got this billion-dollar equity deal.
I think Joe Biden's in it for the money.
I think he'll go full TPP.
He'll ignore the atrocities of China.
And I think if Donald Trump gets elected, we're going to pull our troops out of the Middle East, and then maybe challenge China to some degree.
I am scared of a much larger war with China, to be honest.
But I don't know what the right move is.
All I know is we are sitting back while what's happening in China happens.
And what do we get from the Democrats?
The orange man is bad.
We must investigate Trump.
And so I was talking to my friend about this and I said, you know what?
I've really thought about it.
Who do you vote for right now?
Joe Biden, who's probably going to keep our troops in the Middle East.
Donald Trump, who's trying really hard to pull them out.
Well, when you say it like that, it's like, well, the only person you can vote for is Trump, right?
Okay, what about China?
Joe Biden, who brought his son to China for some deal, Or Trump, who, along with Bill Barr, called out China non-stop, especially over the past 10 years.
It really is Trump.
We can talk about domestic policy, but I'm sorry, man.
I'm not being given anything by the Democrats.
This is a story that Adam Schiff is going to send us through this nonsense again?
Nah, man.
But I'll tell you what.
I know I've brought it up a bit.
Three weeks after primary, New York officials still can't say who won key races.
I don't think we're gonna know who won.
I think whatever's going on, you've got a group of people that have no intention to do the right thing.
And I'm talking about the left.
To me, the right thing is bringing our troops home.
There's no question about it, man.
I looked up the UN stats and they're like 10,000 dead.
Now, it's not like the coalition soldiers and US soldiers are going around killing people all the time, but they are responsible due to the conflict for around, I believe, you could say between, I think a fair amount, maybe like 20% or so, because you have Afghan forces that are part of the coalition that are contributing to civilian death.
But I was thinking about this, you know, when I was talking to a friend who was talking about how Donald Trump is racist and Donald Trump is all that, blah, blah, blah.
And I said, I was thinking to myself, like, how many bodies of civilians are you willing to walk over to justify your hatred for Donald Trump?
How many?
Is 10,000 in the past year enough civilian dead that you can crawl over those bodies so that you can, after you walk past them all, you can then say, orange man bad?
I can't do it.
Trump may be crude, crass.
He may be angry.
He may be bad for this country.
But what does that mean?
He hasn't started any wars.
He's trying to pull our troops out of the Middle East.
And I thought about that and I'm like, would you be willing to recognize, well, let's say you think Trump really is as bad as he says he is, right?
That Trump is the Cheeto dictator and the federal forces are detaining people for 90 minutes and it's a violation of our constitutional rights.
Would you accept that if it meant that 10,000 civilians next year would not die?
I would.
Yeah, that's about it.
I don't know how you morally and ethically get around this conundrum.
Democrats and Republicans in Congress have blocked Donald Trump from pulling troops out of Afghanistan.
And if Biden wins, you know what we're going to get more of.
More war.
More war, more investigations, more fake news, more nonsense, more extraction of our jobs.
And for all of Donald Trump's faults, I go, ugh.
But I absolutely detest the establishment.
Let me say it one more time for you.
Here's what you can say to people.
Show them the story from Glenn Greenwald of The Intercept about how the warmongers of our establishment political parties are keeping our troops in the Middle East.
You know who actually stood up?
It's amazing.
Matt Gaetz and tweeting with Ro Khanna.
Democrat and Republican coming together to help Trump pull our troops out of the Middle East and I'm like, wow.
Matt Gaetz, Tulsi Gabbard, two people who said, bring our troops back.
Ro Khanna as well.
It was 11.
11 people in the house.
That's it.
And Donald Trump.
We have, what, 12 politicians.
Trump, as well as these 11 defectors who are like, get our troops home.
Here's what you say to people.
Many of you may hate Trump.
Many of you may not really care.
Many of you may think he's not that bad.
Many of you may kind of like him.
Many of you may love him.
All I can really say is, I'm leaning towards voting for the man for one reason that no one has ever been able to argue to me is wrong.
Afghanistan.
I had a friend tell me that they had read some Republican statement about why we need to be in Afghanistan and I was like, so what, you're a neocon now?
You went from being a liberal to a neocon because you hate Trump that much?
You would be willing to abandon the cause of anti-war because the orange man is bad?
Let's say all the things about him they've said are true.
Locking kids in cages.
Okay, well, they're not dead.
Like in Afghanistan.
Okay, well, you know, he's racist.
Sure.
And dead kids in Afghanistan.
Let's talk about China.
You know, we need someone to stand up to them.
But all I can really say is you can tell me everything in the world that's awful about Trump.
None of it is worse than 20 years in the Middle East that needs to come to an end.
There's my anti-war rant.
You may have heard them periodically because it's one of my most, like, one of the issues I'm most passionate about.
That I feel like everything we do in this country, almost all of these domestic policy arguments are stamp collecting compared to what's going on in the Middle East.
And not just there, but in other places.
How much energy, resources, time, energy, money, whatever.
is caused by us being over there.
It's wasted, I'm sorry.
It's wasted by being over there.
And you want to talk about all the things we can do in this country to make America great?
To make America better?
To improve upon whatever you want to call it?
For me, it all starts with getting our troops home.
They shouldn't be over there risking their lives.
They shouldn't be over there as a part of this war, and we shouldn't be spending money on it.
So tell me whatever you want at this point, but as soon as Trump made that move to get our troops back, I was like, wow.
Well, there you go.
Give me any answer.
Give me any point of why it's better we have Joe Biden to leave our troops in the Middle East.
