Democrats Run War Games Where They Predict They'll Push For Secession And Civil War
If Trump Wins. John Podesta played the role of Biden along with many other high ranking officials, professors, and former politicians in a war game around the November 2020 election.In the games every scenario predicted street clashes and rioting. Only one scenario had Trump winning but it was the most alarming.In the event Trump actually won the Democrats and never trumpers were shocked that John Podesta as Joe Biden refused to concede.He states that Democrats would not let him concede this election and therefore called on swing states to defy the vote and send in pro Biden electors to the electoral college and called on the west coast states to secede unless they got reforms they wanted.
Support the show (http://timcast.com/donate)
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
More details are emerging about a secretive war game played out by establishment politicians.
And while the Boston Globe calls this a bipartisan group, it was basically resistance, never Trump or Republican refugees who abandoned the party because they hate Trump, teaming up with Democrats to discuss what would happen in this upcoming election.
All of the scenarios ended in street violence, and there is a very serious concern this could lead to a civil war.
Now, I know many people like to make the joke about Tim Pool talking about this, but I would like to introduce you to a man named John Podesta.
You may know him, and he worked on the Hillary Clinton campaign.
He partook in these war games along with many other establishment politicians and politicos.
He specifically outlines how, if he were Biden, in this war game, he would encourage a West Coast secession in the event that Donald Trump actually wins in a contested election.
In fact, they even suggest in the war game that certain swing states neglect the vote and send in pro-Biden electoral voters.
If Trump then tries to assume office, arguing fraud, He would then encourage the West Coast to secede from the Union.
This is not necessarily a prediction of what will come, but it's certain scenarios played out based on how these politicians and former governors expect things to go.
So I'll tell you this.
If there was anyone, any people who knew what to expect, I'd argue it's the establishment politicians.
If they're saying straight up, the Democratic Party will not concede under any circumstances, in all scenarios, street violence, and in the worst case scenario, would actually call for There's another story, however, that's also very interesting alongside this.
It's by Ben Smith of the New York Times, isn't it?
who would be doing it. It's John Podesta himself who would be saying time to secede from the union.
Defy the electoral college. Send in who you want. There's another story, however, that's also very
interesting alongside this. It's by Ben Smith of the New York Times in it. He talks about how
members of the media are in near panic because they have no idea how any of these state election
boards are going to be counting ballots.
Some of these media personalities and media types are saying, don't worry, we'll handle it.
But he says in a column for the New York Times, many are in near panic.
They don't even know how this is going to function.
And when they call saying, how do we count ballots?
They say, we don't know.
It's going to be widespread mail-in voting, and no one's going to know exactly what the numbers are.
No one is going to know who won, and we have a ton of evidence suggesting this.
Worse still, Ben Smith notes for the New York Times that the media acts as a de facto election commission.
You know, most other countries, when they have an election, the election commissions will announce what percentage of votes went to which candidate.
In the U.S., it's actually the media who does this, which brings up another concern I have.
What if the media just lies?
What if they falsely report Joe Biden won?
What if the media falsely reports Joe Biden won?
And then Donald Trump says, that's not true.
The data shows I did.
And then they go, oh, no, Trump's trying to steal the election.
What will we do, Biden?
And Biden, being a member of the Obama administration, then decides it's time to send in faithless electors to vote for me anyway.
And then encourages the West Coast to secede.
It may sound impractical.
It may sound implausible.
But come on, baby, it's 2020.
Anything could happen at this point, right?
But let me just tell you this.
The Boston Globe, they are telling you at the highest level of the Democratic Party, this is what they are suggesting in their war game prediction scenario.
Let's read the story and see exactly what they're talking about with this strange war game.
But I also want to add, before we get started, Donald Trump's approval rating is going way up.
And we'll check all that data too, because this matters.
If Trump wins in a landslide, they'll have no choice but to accept it.
And that may be a scenario they did not predict.
Before we get started, head over to TimCast.com slash Donut if you'd like to support my work.
There's many ways you can give.
I got a P.O.
box if you want to send stuff.
The best thing you can do, subscribe to this channel.
About half the people who watch my videos aren't actually subscribed.
If you want to maximize the likelihood that you will be informed of my videos, hit the subscribe button, hit the like button, hit the notification bell, and if you really want to, share the video.
If you think I do a good job, let's read the story.
The Boston Globe reported a bipartisan group secretly gathered to game out a contested Trump-Biden election.
It wasn't pretty.
Now, news of this war game actually came out a little while ago, but more details are emerging, and this is where it gets scary.
They say the group, which included Democrats and Republicans, gathered to game out possible results of the November election, grappling with questions that seem less far-fetched by the day.
What if President Trump refuses to concede a loss, as he publicly hinted recently he might do?
How far would he go to preserve his power, and what if Democrats refuse to give in?
All of our scenarios ended in both street-level violence and political impasse, said Rosa Brooks, a Georgetown law professor and former Defense Department official who co-organized the group known as the Transition Integrity Project.
She described what they found in bleak terms.
The law is essentially It's almost helpless against a president who's willing to ignore it.
Now, everybody involved in this seems to hate Trump.
But I think one thing needs to be stressed before we move on.
These are professors, former government officials, Democrat and Republican politicians, former governors, the highest ranking you could get, saying all scenarios ended in street violence and political impasse.
Keep that in mind.
Using a role-playing game that is a fixture of military and national security planning, the group envisioned a dark 11 weeks between Election Day and Inauguration Day, one in which Trump and his Republican allies used every apparatus of government—the Postal Service, state lawmakers, the Justice Department, federal agents, and the military—to hold onto power, and Democrats took to the courts and the streets to try to stop it.
If it sounds paranoid and outlandish, a war room of seasoned politicos and constitutional experts playing a Washington version of Dungeons and Dragons in which the future of the Republic hangs in balance, they get it.
But as they finalize a report on what they learned and begin briefing elected officials and others, they insist their warning is serious.
A close election this fall is likely to be contested, and there are few guardrails to stop a constitutional crisis, particularly if Trump flexes the considerable tools at his disposal to give himself an advantage.
He doesn't have to win the election, said Nils Gilman, a historian who leads research at a think tank called the Berggruen Institute and was an organizer of the exercise.
He just has to create a plausible narrative that he didn't lose.
The very existence of a group like this one, which was formed late last year, underscores the extent of fear in Washington's political circles and beyond, that Trump will take the same hammer he has used to fracture the norms of executive governance over the past three years and upend the nation's delicate tradition of orderly political transitions of power by refusing to concede if he loses.
You want to know what freaks me out about this?
It wasn't Trump and the Republicans who used a hammer to destroy the norms and refused to concede the election.
It was the Democrats who did that, and they still keep doing it.
In fact, this war game is exactly the same strategy.
They keep telling us that there's no evidence of fraud in mail-in voting or impropriety.
They keep telling us Trump is the crook and the criminal.
Yet every single step of the way, it's been them who has refused.
They've refused to concede the election.
They've pulled out every stop.
And now they're arguing this.
But the media, they'll keep saying Trump says without evidence, yet at the same time we have older stories and even current stories telling us the election is already botched.
So here's the only conclusion I can draw.
If they refuse to concede 2016, if the entire step of the way, if after, you know, year after year, they keep saying Trump is illegitimate, Trump is illegitimate, throwing scandal after scandal, refusing to acknowledge.
We have evidence, real hard evidence, of voter fraud.
Several people have been indicted.
I think now we're at, what, 12 people nationwide in major stories, and probably more.
I'm talking about schemes directly involved in manipulating ballots.
We have evidence of absentee ballots coming back broken, of the post office losing ballots, and a margin of error, or I should say a loss of ballot rate of two to three percent.
The evidence exists, yet they keep saying it's Trump who will contest this.
You know what I think's going to happen?
At least for right now, things could change.
Trump will contest what's going to happen because there's ample evidence of voter fraud and just impropriety.
There's ample evidence of absentee ballots and mail-in ballots not being counted for Seemingly dubious reasons.
20% of the vote in Patterson, New Jersey.
So yeah, it seems like Trump is being set up to fail no matter what he does.
That's the game.
If the vote is messed up because of mail-in voting, they're saying right now, if Trump does anything other than just say, I quit, he is trying to steal the election and he's crooked and corrupt.
That's what they're saying.
Let's read on.
They say, quote, I think mail-in voting is going to rig the election.
I really do, Trump told Chris Wallace.
When asked if he would accept the results of the election, he said, I'll have to see.
Former Vice President Joe Biden, the presumptive nominee, has taken to issuing foreboding warnings of his own.
The president is going to try to indirectly steal the election by arguing that mail-in ballots don't work.
They're not real.
They're not fair, he said at a fundraiser on Thursday night.
He has also mused publicly about Trump having to be escorted forcibly, if need be, from the White House.
That happened in one of the four scenarios the Transition Integrity Project gamed out, according to summaries of the exercise provided to the Boston Globe.
But constitutional experts and the gameplay was less focused on the possibility of a cinematic militarized intervention on Inauguration Day, which is a possibility many still consider remote.
Then the room the Constitution appears to leave for a disastrous and difficult transition if the incumbent does not accept a loss.
How well is our constitutional legal system designed to deal with an incumbent president who insists that he won an election but for the presence of fraud?
Said Lawrence Douglas, a professor at Amherst College, who has written a book on what would happen if Trump took such a stand.
And I think the rather unfortunate answer is our system is not well designed at all to deal with that problem.
said Douglas, who was not involved in the game.
Brooks got the seed of the idea for the Transition Integrity Project after a dinner where a federal judge and corporate lawyer each told her they were convinced the military or Secret Service would have to escort Trump out of office if he lost the election and would not concede.
Brooks wasn't so sure.
They go on to explain that she decided to convene this game.
But let's move on.
They say, the game was elaborate.
The participants took on the roles of the Trump campaign, the Biden campaign, relevant government officials, and the media, generally.
Democrats played Democrats and Republicans played Republicans, and used a ten-sided die to determine whether a team succeeded in its attempted moves.
The games are not meant to be predictive, rather they are supposed to give people a sense of possible consequences.
Each scenario involved a different election outcome.
An unclear result on Election Day that looked increasingly like a Biden win.
As more ballots were counted, a clear Biden win in the popular vote and the Electoral College.
An Electoral College win for Trump, with Biden winning the popular vote by five points.
And a narrow Electoral College and popular vote victory for Biden.
It appears they only have one scenario in which Trump actually wins.
In the scenarios, the team playing the Trump campaign often questioned the legitimacy of the mail-in ballots, which often boosted Biden as they came in, shutting down post offices, pursuing litigation, and using right-wing media to amplify narratives about a stolen election.
To some participants, the game was a stark reminder of the power of incumbency.
In multiple scenarios, officials on both sides homed in on narrowly decided swing states
with divided governments, such Wisconsin, Michigan, and North Carolina, hoping to persuade
officials there to essentially send two different results to Congress.
If a state's election is disputed, a legislature controlled by one party and the governor of
another, each could send competing slates of electors backing their party's candidates.
Both sides turned out massive street protests that Trump sought to control.
In one scenario, he invoked the Insurrection Act, which allows the president to use military forces to quell unrest.
The scenario that began with a narrow Biden win ended with Trump refusing to leave the White House, burning government documents, and having to be escorted out by the Secret Service.
The scenario that produced the most contentious dynamics, however, was the one in which Trump won the Electoral College and thus the election.
But Biden won the popular vote by five points.
Biden's team retracted his concession, fueled by Democrats angry at losing yet another election despite capturing the popular vote, as happened in 2000 and 2016.
In the mock election, Trump sought to divide Democrats at one point, giving an interview to The Intercept, a left-leaning news outlet, saying Senator Bernie Sanders would have won if Democrats had nominated him.
Meanwhile, Biden's team sought to encourage large Western states to secede unless pro-democracy reforms were made.
The scenario seemed highly far-fetched, but envisioned a situation in which both sides may have incentives to contest the election.
There was a narrative among activists in both parties that the loss must be illegitimate.
According to the Constitution, the presidency ends at noon on January 20th, at which point the newly inaugurated president becomes the commander-in-chief.
The games ultimately were designed to explore how difficult it could be to get there.
Biden's team had suggested that, and this is run by Podesta, mind you, that Wisconsin, and I believe Michigan, send pro-Biden electors to vote on behalf of Biden.
Otherwise, they would have the West Coast to cede.
Now, here's where it gets even more troubling to me.
Whether or not those war games are true, we won't know.
But I must, must stress, we are not talking about some neckbeard D&D kids playing in their basement.
We're talking about high-ranking professors, like prominent professors, high-ranking government officials, former governors, sitting around discussing what they think will happen based on their experience with John Podesta, pretending to be Joe Biden, saying, here's what's going to happen, here's what I think will happen, and here's what we'll do.
Now, for all we know, the polls are wrong, and their scenarios are wrong, and their games are predicting nonsense because they think Trump's really going to lose and it's going to be a close election.
For all we know, Trump actually does really, really well, and the silent majority rises up.
But in an article for the New York Times, in a column, Ben Smith says how the media could get the election story wrong.
He does reference these war games in this story.
But one thing that I find truly terrifying is this paragraph right in the beginning.
Ben Smith says, I spoke last week to executives, TV hosts, and election analysts across leading American newsrooms, and I was struck by the blithe confidence among some top managers and hosts who generally said they've handled complicated elections before and can do so again.
And I was alarmed by the near panic among some of the people paying the closest attention, the analysts and producers trying and often failing to get answers from state election officials about how and when they will count the ballots and report results.
The nerds are freaking out, said Brandon Finnegan, the founder of Decision Desk HQ, which delivers election results to media outlets.
I don't think it's penetrated enough in the average viewer's mind that there might not be an election night.
The unusual razzmatazz of a panel sitting around discussing election results.
That's dead, he said.
Now here's the big problem.
I like Ben Smith.
I think it is a good job.
But he repeatedly says in this story that Trump will will levy false claims about fraud.
He says Trump era political crisis, blah, blah, blah.
President Trump last Thursday again sought to call mail-in voting into question with false claims about fraud.
False claims?
Ben, why would you say false claims?
Patterson, New Jersey disqualified 20% of the vote.
Four people got indicted on fraud charges over this.
There was recently some nonsense going on in L.A.
where somebody was trying to get votes from homeless people.
Two people so far indicted in Pennsylvania.
Voter fraud's very real.
It's not about whether or not it's widespread.
It's about whether or not there is a potential for voter fraud.
And I, I, I, I, you know what?
I defer you to your own publication, which I've cited over and over again.
Error and fraud at issue as absentee voting rises, October 6, 2012, where they say, yet votes cast by mail are less likely to be counted, more likely to be compromised, and more likely to be contested than those cast in voting booths, statistics show.
Election officials reject almost 2% of ballots cast by mail, double the rate for in-person voting.
So why would he say false claims?
What's false about them?
Trump speculating?
Giving his opinion?
Saying, based on the news, I think it's possible?
Trump specifically referenced Patterson in the past.
Why would the New York Times, why would Ben Smith say false?
Oh.
The media narrative already exists.
No matter what Trump says, it will be a lie to seize power.
Even if there is fraud, they have already set up the narrative that It's not real.
It can't be real.
What really scares me about this narrative is what he says about election commissions.
He talks about 2000 with, you know, Fox falsely calling it for George W. Bush, or getting it wrong, I should say, and then Al Gore pulling his concession.
It goes to the courts.
Ultimately, George Bush wins.
But he mentions that You know, other countries have commissions.
We don't.
We have news media that actually runs the numbers.
Here's what he says.
The American media plays a bizarrely outsized role in American elections, occupying the place of most countries' national election commissions.
Here, the media actually assembles the results from 50 states, tabulates them, and declares a victor.
And we can't really help ourselves.
The media establishes the narrative to explain what happened.
That task was almost memorably mishandled in 2000.
When he mentions Gore and Bush.
The flashy graphics and sober, confident hosts embody a long tradition of television flimflam.
When CBS invented the election night tradition of dramatic vote projections and official call-ins in 1952, it outfitted its set with blinking Remington Rand Univac computer.
The blinking device made for good show, but the computer was a prop of fake, as the historian Jill Lepore noted in her podcast, The Last Archive.
The TV presentation is always slick, but the underpinnings of county-by-county electoral systems are baroque and antiquated, and the pandemic means more people will vote by mail this year in states with little experience processing these votes.
There's a lot of planning for the whiz-bang graphics, and not enough planning for avoiding undermining trust in the American electoral system.
That is the most important point right there.
Now, he does go on to talk about the war games, but let me just lay it out for you.
CNN comes out and you get Wolf Blitzer saying, Michigan was just called for Joe Biden with, you know, three, a three percentage point lead.
And then we actually see the numbers are wrong.
Well, CNN's got the story wrong before, or maybe they have a vested political interest in making sure it seems to the public that Biden won.
Maybe not.
Maybe I'll just get it wrong.
The Trump administration comes out, the GOP, and they say, this is not true.
Take a look at the data.
They say, right-wing media, here they come again.
Republicans don't want to accept that our fair and balanced, honest mainstream news is correct.
That's why they mentioned in the war games that Trump would use right-wing media to amplify claims that something was wrong, that there was fraud or otherwise.
No matter what evidence comes out, even when they themselves report on it, the narrative remains strong.
Trump is wrong.
Why the botched NYC primary has become the November nightmare.
From the New York Times, nearly six weeks later, two congressional races remain undecided and officials are trading blame over the mishandling of tens of thousands of mail-in ballots.
We know mail-in ballot, mail-in voting is botched.
We know it's broken.
We know they disqualified a large percentage of the vote.
We know that with only a couple percentage margin for error or disqualification rate, We're talking about millions of votes.
And this could mean Donald Trump loses due to impropriety.
And that means when even the media themselves says in a New York Times report it's botched, they will claim Trump is wrong.
He's lying.
It's false.
So what happens on election night?
Probably nothing, because we won't be able to declare who actually won.
We won't know.
What happens?
It may go to December 14th, according to some scholars, that on the 14th, the Supreme Court shuts it down, and then it goes to the House, where Republicans control the number of delegations.
Not members of Congress, but state delegations, in which case Donald Trump would win.
Unless, yes, so that would seem to be the case.
Well, what happens if the media narrative is twisted, the left-wing media and the mainstream media is saying Trump lost, but real evidence comes out?
I'd like to make a prediction.
I'm not going to act like my prediction is 100%, but I'll tell you this.
I think it's entirely likely that you will hear from me at some point after the election Where I'm saying something like, here's your certified proof, here's the evidence of mail-in voter fraud.
Look, they found a box of ballots and then burned it, or something like that.
Hey look, they found all these ballots, they were disqualified, they were all for Trump.
I will likely come out and say, here's the proof, and then they will go, right-wing media amplifying claims for Trump, which are just false.
Why?
Why do I think that'll happen?
Because it's literally happening right now.
I'm showing you a story from the New York Times.
Proof that they botched the New York City primary.
They don't know who won.
Ballots are being disqualified.
Yet at the same time, Ben Smith for the New York Times asserts the opposite.
That Trump's claims about impropriety with mail-in voting, inaccuracy, are false.
And there it is.
The narrative will emerge.
The political agenda will be clear.
Biden won.
And anyone who dare oppose us is lying to you.
No matter how much evidence we produce, no matter how much evidence the media actually publishes, it won't matter.
I don't know exactly if Trump will win in a landslide.
The war games seem to be predicated upon the assumption that it will be a close race, and that Biden will end up winning in the popular vote.
Maybe.
But I gotta tell you man, Trump's rebounding.
Rasmussen has Trump up 4 points, that's a massive gain, with 1500 likely voters.
Now I don't like using one poll.
I will point out Rasmussen nailed it in 2016.
They have a weighted polling system that seems to accurately represent Republicans, Democrats, and Independents relative to other polling institutions.
But I'll tell you this to be fair.
The only thing that matters to me is the aggregate.
And a lot of these polls are wrong.
I've tried understanding them.
I kid you not.
I've gone to some of these polls and I've been like, wait, what?
That makes no sense.
We use a weighted algorithm where we disqualify certain people.
Some groups are random.
And I'm just like, okay, you're basically telling us here's what you think's happening.
It's your opinion.
These could all be wrong.
even Rasmussen.
In the aggregate, we can see Trump took a hard dip.
He did not fall to the worst he's ever been.
And right now he seems to be at 43.7, which is a consistent average for the Trump presidency.
It may be that Trump is really on track to win.
When you consider when you consider the silent majority and the Cato Institute poll showing
that 62% of Americans are scared to express themselves.
When you when you talk about the idea of the secret Trump voter, maybe Trump really will
just landslide.
Maybe he'll landslide on election night, and then as mail-in ballots come in, it'll be just enough to squeak Biden by, and Trump will contest it.
They'll say he's trying to steal an election.
It'll go to the Supreme Court, who knows what'll happen, but there will be violence.
There will be violence.
That's, to me, a guarantee.
Take a look at this story from The Examiner.
Third poll shows close race.
Biden 50%, Trump 46, but 53% think Trump will win.
It's from a few days ago.
I wonder why it is that so many people, most people, think Trump will win.
In one poll it was because of something called Trump's secret voters.
If they come out and on election night, it is so far in favor of Donald Trump, everything I've told you will be wrong and completely meaningless.
So keep that in mind.
It may be another 49 state landslide for Trump, in which case no amount of mail-in ballots will matter if Trump gets 537 or 36 or even 538 every single electoral vote.
It's happened in the past that some Republicans, it's Nixon and Reagan, I believe, swept 49 states.
If that happens, and it's possible, then there's nothing the Democrats can do.
Trump will have won.
I do not, I personally do not see a possibility where Biden gets a 49 state landslide.
It just doesn't seem to make sense.
But who knows?
In the end, it looks like we may see a narrow Trump electoral victory, based on the current data we have.
Based on my personal feeling, my gut feeling, I wouldn't be surprised at all if Trump had a 49-state landslide, especially considering what happened in the UK in December.
I believe that regular people are fed up with the left, they're tired of the extremism, and this is the one thing they think they can do safely to push back.
You see, people are scared to speak up.
If they speak out against this, they'll lose their jobs, they'll be attacked.
In Louisville, I covered this story the other day.
Black Lives Matter activists are extorting local businesses and all but one rejected it and stood up for themselves.
I can't imagine the other businesses are happy being forced to pay money to this racket.
But, in secret, they can cast a ballot and no one will know it was them.
And then when Trump wins in a landslide, they'll come out and say, wow, how could this have happened?
I'm so confused.
And maybe that will be their one chance at pushing back.
But if it doesn't happen, then these people will live under the boot of these extortionists and the far left.
Hopefully it doesn't come to that, but even if it comes down to a narrow Biden victory, I think it's entirely possible these war games will actually play out the way they've explained it.
A West Coast secession.
That'll be interesting.
I'll leave it there.
Next videos will be coming up at 6 p.m.
over at youtube.com slash TimCastNews.
Thanks for hanging out, and I will see you all then.
We have an update on the story about Black Lives Matter extorting small businesses.
If you've been following the story, I covered it on my main channel over at TimCast.net yesterday.
Check out that channel, subscribe if you haven't.
A group of Black Lives Matter... I don't know what you want to call them.
Mobsters?
Have been showing up to local businesses in Louisville, giving them this ridiculous contract that literally demands you buy from us.
It literally says you have to buy from certain businesses or donate 1.5% of your net sales to an approved non-profit.
And if you don't, you will face repercussions of non-compliance.
That's what they call it.
When they showed up to a Cuban immigrant's business and told him, put the sign in your window, put up a message of support, if you know what's good for you.
They literally said, put the sign in the window, otherwise we're gonna F with you.
When the dude said no, somebody smashed a potted plant.
One of his plants in front of his restaurants.
Doesn't that sound a little bit like mafia tactics?
Well, that's literally how he described it.
The update now.
Is it that Cuban community in Louisville rallied outside the building saying no and it turns out this dude who runs this business came to the US on a raft at 18 from Cuba and the best part is they held up signs saying we left Cuba because of socialism.
Be careful what you wish for it.
I'm sorry.
I'm sorry.
It is no longer.
Antifa tactics.
It is no longer Antifa violence.
In Portland, they're flying the flag, Black Lives Matter.
In Louisville, as they go around threatening businesses, give us your money, you buy from us, or smash.
That's all in the name of Black Lives Matter.
When people talk about Antifa violence, this was a couple years ago and people were flying the flag of Antifa.
Now they claim Antifa doesn't exist.
I'll tell you what does exist.
The global Black Lives Matter movement.
They accept donations and there are people literally going around saying they are with the organization and I have the contract.
So I want to read you the story.
How the Cubans are responding saying, F you to socialism.
I want to show you this right here.
I'm going to read through the contract.
They're forcing people to sign, giving up money, or facing repercussions of non-compliance.
And then I'll talk to you about some big updates because...
There will be a congressional hearing on Antifa violence.
Now, here's the thing.
That's why I say, I'm sorry, man.
It's not Antifa anymore.
No, they found a rallying cry better, more powerful, and more mainstream, and that's Black Lives Matter.
And that's unfortunate, because I look to some, you know, certain individuals, high-profile individuals, who talk about police brutality, and I respect what they have to say.
Dave Chappelle, for instance.
You talk about police brutality, and I'm like, right on, let's solve this problem, right?
I don't think the problem is nearly widespread as they try to convince you.
I don't think it's as bad as they say it is, but it's bad nonetheless.
So I'm willing to say, okay man, yeah, yeah, yeah.
Let's figure out police reform, whatever we need to do.
The only issue?
The far left, Marxists, extremists, former Antifa, have found a mainstream path towards pushing forward their ridiculous ideas.
They want these businesses in Louisville to all write messages or statements of support and put it in their business, and put the contracts in their windows, or else.
Well, this Cuban immigrant has said no.
This story is crazy.
We are not an enemy of the black community Cubans rally to support Nulu businesses.
They say more than 100 members of Louisville's Cuban community gathered at La Bodeguita de Mima at, you know, there's the address, Sunday to rally in support of the immigrant-owned restaurant.
The rally came after a controversial letter from Black Lives Matter protesters laid out demands that aim to improve diversity in NuLu, which is known for its locally owned shops and restaurants.
You see, this I can't stand.
It aims to improve diversity.
That would be like when the mob showed up and smashed your window.
It's just a group of young men aiming to provide better security for the area, aiming to protect local businesses.
Shut up.
They're not trying to improve diversity.
They're shaking businesses down and demanding money.
Call it what it is.
Fernando Martinez, a partner of the Olay Restaurant Group, publicly denounced the letter's demands on Facebook, calling them mafia tactics, used to intimidate business owners.
Bravo, good sir.
I'll give you a figurative standing ovation.
On Thursday, a small group of protesters gathered outside his restaurant, La Bodeguida de Mima, in protest.
For about 10 minutes on Sunday, Martinez gave a passionate speech to the crowd, with his mother and relatives standing alongside him.
La Bodeguida is open to everybody, Martinez said.
If you're gay, this is your home.
If you're black, this is your home.
If you're white, this is your home.
If you're human, this is your home.
Hey, hey, hey, whoa, whoa.
What about cats or dogs?
Come on.
You gotta be more inclusive to other species.
The thing I'm joking, there are people who call it speciesism.
I'm not kidding.
He also condemned the criticism his business had received over diversity concerns.
He said, he says that he's got black family members, his family is black, his son is gay, he's the proud father of a gay son, and he's gonna fight for him against anybody, but we all know how statements like that play out when you, so, it's not, look man, I can respect his defiance, but I don't think this is going to stop Antifa, Black Lives Matter, from going up and smashing more of his property.
They may back down because how bad this looks.
But, you know, let me read a little bit more, then I've got to talk to you about this problem.
Take a look at these photos.
It says, we left Cuba because of socialism. Be careful what you wish for.
Some of the demands requested by Black Lives Matter protesters
included that NULU businesses adequately represent the Black population by having a
minimum of 23% Black staff, purchasing a minimum of 23% inventory from Black retailers, or donating
1.5% of net sales to local Black nonprofits or organizations, and requiring diversity and
inclusion training for all staff members on a biannual basis. Come to our church meeting,
hold church seminars, or else, and don't forget to tithe.
That's what they're saying.
It's sad that we have to justify who we are as people.
We need to come together as a community.
We are not an enemy of the black community.
We are all people, and we come in all colors.
No police or counter-protesters were present, though Sadiqa Reynolds, a president and CEO of the Louisville Urban League, voiced her displeasure on Facebook and announced that she will no longer go to El Taco Luchador and La Bodeguita de Mima, two restaurants that Martinez owns.
Martinez!
Came to this country on a raft at 18.
Wow!
Where did he land?
Where did he go?
That's amazing.
That's amazing.
How has he made it and become so successful that he owns multiple restaurants?
Wow!
It's almost like the American dream is real.
And that's why people so desperately want to come here.
He now owns more than... I don't know how many restaurants he owns, but they're calling it The Group.
The Olay Restaurant Group.
Wow.
I'm impressed.
This guy's got multiple businesses.
Hard-working dude.
So here's a quote.
That's what she said.
said, rather than respond to demands tendered, even in the negative, and defer me as aware
of the pain our people in, instead he chooses to highlight what he believes is his superiority.
I'm not sure why any human other than a racist would choose this time to tell us how little
our lives matter.
You know what?
I'm going to refrain from getting extremely angry at that obvious attempt at baiting and
manipulation.
They're feigning the victim to try and garner sympathy.
It's not going to work.
Unfortunately for these people who try to use identity politics, a Cuban immigrant who had less than you did and succeeded is no oppressor.
Sorry.
He's an employer, he's got family, and he's an immigrant.
So who are you to call him a racist?
Several members of the Louisville Revolutionary Black Panther Party attended the rally, with General Ahamara Brewster speaking to the crowd in support of the Cuban community.
Some people sat on the steps of La Bodeguita de Mima and held signs that said, we left Cuba because of socialism.
Be careful what you wish for.
Luis David Fuentes with El Cantubano, a publication for the Latin community of Kentucky, spoke before Martinez, noting that he and the Cuban community as a minority group and as immigrants have fallen in love with the city and nation and chose Louisville in which to pursue the American dream.
Although our community has achieved great success in the city, we continue to miss our homeland, our neighbors, we grew up in, and our families we left behind.
We did not want to leave all of those, but we had to.
We had to escape the socialist government that took away our grandparents' private businesses in 1959 and continue to restrict our civil rights and our political rights today.
Do not let the socialists win.
It is a Trojan horse for authoritarianism and extremism, and that's what they are doing right now.
Fuentes went on to say, many have risked their lives to pursue freedom, respect, and prosperity.
I want to show you this contract.
This is the contract that they sent forward.
But I want to tell you about the problem we are facing that goes well beyond this one incident.
A problem that I am just so sick of.
When I see my friends protesting for Black Lives Matter, by all means, protest peacefully.
But you have to understand what is being done in your name and what you are contributing to at this point.
I was talking to a friend of mine.
And I said, do you know that right now a group has gone to a dozen plus small businesses and said, give us what we want, money or else?
Did you know that?
Did you know that there have been several instances of people being shot, beaten, and that in the George Floyd riots, 30 people died?
And so I was asked, if there really is a silent majority, why don't they become vocal?
Why don't they speak up?
Why don't they get involved and engage?
And I said, because they're scared.
They know they'll lose their jobs.
Or they're worried they'll lose their jobs.
Actually, I'm not convinced everyone would.
I think if everybody stood up and said no, nobody would lose their jobs.
But so long as people don't organize, they don't protest, they don't form petitions, they don't, you know, do any of these things, then yeah, they will act as individuals and be scared.
More importantly.
Have you turned on the TV lately?
What do you see?
You see Black Lives Matter and all these major publications.
You see every major league sport kneeling.
You see them putting up big 200-foot billboards that say Black Lives Matter.
And people are scared to say anything out, to speak out against it in any capacity.
Now there are some good things to be said, but of course there are.
Nothing is purely wrong.
Calling out police brutality is great.
The idea that black lives matter, of course that's true.
And I think it doesn't need to be said, but if you want to say it, I will stand there with you and I will say, agreed, 100%.
I'm sorry you feel that you had to express this, but I understand how you feel and I understand why you feel this way.
However, in the name of this group, we have seen violent assault, we have seen death, 30 plus dead in these riots.
We have seen people physically attacked, beaten, while people yell, Black Lives Matter.
I am not exaggerating.
So what do you think happens when these videos come out of Karen's?
And some of them aren't even necessarily Karen's, but they still get their lives destroyed.
What do you think people are going to say when they lose their jobs for speaking out?
Or when they're physically assaulted?
They're going to say, I'm too scared to do anything about it.
Because all over the TV they're saying, do it or else.
Everybody supports it.
You don't want to be opposed to what everybody supports, do you?
So what happens?
When they give out this psychotic contract, all of these businesses, guess what?
They said yes.
Pathetic.
Absolutely pathetic.
Now listen.
I can sympathize.
You got a mafia shakedown.
You got a religious cult showing up, threatening to smash up your property and destroy your life unless you bend the knee.
You don't want to be called a racist, do you?
They're trying to call the Cuban immigrant a racist.
They're literally calling him racist.
So, of course, a dozen or so businesses complied, signed the contract.
Good on Martinez for saying no and standing defiant.
I'm going to be following the story, making sure that, you know, everything goes well and I'll have updates.
Take a look at this contract.
First, I don't care to read too much about their stupid social justice screed, your gentrification, you know, single-handedly progressing the gentrification of black neighborhoods with your businesses.
They mention that gentrification is a sugar-coating, an oppressive system that targeted black folks for 400 years.
We are here today to demand representation over tokenism.
You know what, man?
No.
You can't go to a Cuban immigrant and claim gentrification is hurting you.
How did this guy come from literally nothing?
And I mean it, literally nothing.
You can't point the finger at him and act like he's doing anything to oppress anybody.
He's just succeeding.
This is socialism.
It's cutting off the tall grass.
They use the social justice narrative to garner sympathy from well-to-do liberals.
Take a look at this.
Here are the demands.
I showed these the other day.
They said, for business owners and non-profits, our demands are as follows.
Businesses will adequately represent the black population of Louisville by having a minimum of 23% black staff, including management, in front of house positions and maintain commitment and accountability to increase that number.
Retail locations will include a minimum 23% inventory for black retailers or make a recurring monthly donation of 1.5% net sales to non-profits.
I guess?
I don't know why it's cut off.
There's a weird cut off here.
But according to the official story, I actually have the list here on the other page.
They say to a local black nonprofit or organization.
Well, let's go back to the contract.
I don't know why it's broken up like that.
Business owners will require diversity, equity, and inclusion training for their staffs to be conducted by any one of the blanks.
Oh, they redacted it.
On the attached list.
Interesting.
Training will be conducted thereafter on a biannual basis.
Customize your own display of the one attached in a visible location within your business to increase awareness and show support for the reparations movement.
Non-profits in the NuLu district will submit to a voluntary external audit of their board of trustees and take necessary steps to twenty... Look at this!
Look at this!
We demand you submit to a voluntary audit!
We demand you submit to a voluntary external audit.
I love the language games they play.
Here's the best part.
They're going to say, I, as a business owner in the gentrified NULU business district, understand that gentrification targets poor and disadvantaged communities of color, and as such, I acknowledge, I'm not going to read any of this, but the statement saying, I must, I do, I will, etc.
I acknowledge, I acknowledge, I am therefore, Okay, so here's the actual demands.
To correct the lack of representation, here's what I commit to doing.
And then they have the correct demands without the weird gap.
Here's my favorite part.
There's actually a little bit more.
They say education.
Knowledge is crucial to efforts to correct the systems of oppression upheld by white-owned businesses.
White-owned?
The Cuban immigrants?
Spare me your BS.
Repercussions of non-compliance.
We demand you submit to an external audit.
Give up your money you buy from us from now on, you hear?
Or you're given 1.5% of your revenue to the businesses we choose.
And here are your repercussions for not submitting to our demands voluntarily.
What is this?
Reduction in racial index score bias report to the Better Business Bureau.
Yeah, okay.
Social media blast.
Notification via all social media platforms for non-compliance.
Cancel culture.
Boycott.
Public boycott coordinated through social media and mail announcements of your NULU establishment and any other business ventures owned by you.
Protest.
Visible, media-covered demonstration sit-in outside your establishment.
Invasive reclamation.
Placement of booths tables outside your establishment where competing black proprietors will offer items comparable to those offered by you.
And then you have to sign your name and say that you see and support their community.
What does this sound like to you?
You better stand up against this now.
I said this was going to happen.
I think it's funny, I do, that people are like, they make memes about, you know, when I say, here's what I see coming next.
You know what, man?
Yeah.
I've been doing this job for quite some time, you know.
I've been doing news, commentary's been the past few years, analysis.
I was doing field reporting for, you know, since 2011.
And I remember talking to this journalism professor who said that I have the unfortunate privilege of being a head of the market.
I don't know why, don't ask me, but perhaps it's because I'm good at making calculations or whatever.
I've successfully been ahead of the market in many, many ways.
I was doing, you know, mobile live streaming before many other companies were, and to this day, many still don't even do it, but it's widespread.
It's ubiquitous now among most protests, and a lot of people just know how to do it.
It's like a common thing.
I had weird little gadgets and really low resolution.
But I could just tell, like, here's what needs to be done, this is not going to work, and here's what I see happening.
The things I saw in the news industry and the collapse are one of the reasons that I didn't want to be there anymore, because they wouldn't listen when I kept saying, here's what I have to adapt.
Since I've been doing this, specifically political commentary, I've been tracking the chaos in the streets, the fighting, and I've been talking about what happens next.
And I've had so many people say, you're exaggerating, you're pessimistic, you're, come on man, you're getting too down, you're looking at this too negatively, you need to be more hopeful.
It's not about hope.
It's not about negativity.
It's about practicality.
It's about realism.
It's about calculation.
It's about me saying, when they first go around smashing windows, except for those who had their signs in their windows, when they go around now threatening people to comply, now they're demanding money, where do you think this goes next?
They're showing up to the homes of the Seattle police chief They're showing up to the homes of politicians.
I said that would happen, too.
I don't think I can predict everything in the world.
It just so happens to be that these things are not hard to predict.
You know why?
It's not that difficult to say, oh, hey, a large mob is marching through residential neighborhoods.
How long until they walk up to someone's door?
Then they did.
The Seattle City Council, the mayor of Oakland, Tucker Carlson.
Then they showed up to the home of the SPD chief.
How long after they demand that the police be abolished will we see overt chaos, conflict, and I don't know, mass shootings?
Something no one's ever seen before.
Right now in Portland, as they're calling for defunding the police and the riots continue, two arrests made after unlawful assembly, someone threw a glass jar filled with paint which struck a cop in the head.
He fortunately was wearing a helmet.
We now see this.
What was the shooting about?
I have no idea.
It might not be related to politics at all, but I'll tell you what happens when you have no police, no one finds out who did this, and it gets worse.
And it'll happen again.
before. What was the shooting about? I have no idea. It might not be related to politics at all,
but I'll tell you what happens when you have no police. No one finds out who did this,
and it gets worse and it'll happen again. Well, I'll tell you what.
There is going to be a hearing in front of Congress.
So here's my advice.
If what I'm saying reaches the ears of any one of these people, Ken Cuccinelli of the DHS, the U.S.
Attorney for the Northern District of Texas, journalist Andy Ngo, Director and Senior Analyst for Homeland Security, George Washington University Law Professor Jonathan Turley, Brennan Center, a fellow, Michael German, President and CEO of the Urban League of Portland, Nkenge Harman Johnson, It's not just Antifa.
They are flying the banner of Black Lives Matter overtly.
Say it.
Call it out.
Because we're seeing sports leagues fly their flags, wear their shirts, etc.
So let me tell you what is being empowered and done in their name.
These ridiculous threats of violence, threats of cancel culture, vandalism of property, and extortion.
Okay?
Now you might say, Tim, it is but an isolated incident what you are referencing with this.
It won't be.
It won't be soon.
It's just beginning.
And again, I have the privilege of being a head of the market on this one.
Now, of course, this is reported by the Courier Journal.
It's happening.
I just read the news.
It's not a profound thing to do.
But as for most people, they're not going to hear about these tactics right when they happen.
It's going to be a lag period before people start realizing it and typically it requires getting worse.
So what you got to do is you got to call it out and nip it in the bud before it gets worse.
Otherwise, it'll be bad.
Because if this keeps happening and businesses are already complying, I tell you this, the only reason we know about this story is because the business owner said no and posted about it.
What about all the businesses in any other part of the country who just said yes and gave in?
What about the businesses in Berkeley or in the Bay Area or in Portland who put up signs saying, please don't hurt us?
What about the signs in the small town?
Journalist Michael Tracy has photos of these, he covered it when he traveled the country, that say, please don't hurt us, we support Black Lives Matter.
How much will be too much?
And when will this stop?
Only when people call it out.
So to those testifying, make sure You don't just regurgitate and reiterate the narrative of the past.
Whatever the far-left extremists are, whatever group they are in, whatever, they've adopted a new name and it's Black Lives Matter.
Go watch the Portland riots and see what's written on their shirts.
Go look at the flyers they put up at the courthouse.
Black Lives Matter.
And guess what?
They'll say, well, well, you know, we, uh, it's a big organization.
Okay, then how hard will it be for the Black Lives Matter global movement to issue a statement denouncing this in Louisville?
Denouncing the extremist tactics in Portland?
After they do that, fine.
Okay?
Fine.
But until then, this is done in your name by local activists that wear your shirts, fly your flag, and what's going on in Portland needs to stop.
Now, to be fair, the rioting last night, I'm not sure if there was rioting, very, very calm for the most part.
I believe there were still fires, so I guess you can call it rioting, but a much smaller crowd.
Maybe it will die out, maybe not.
They're showing up to people's homes.
They're going to businesses.
What will stop this?
Honestly, I don't know, but I do know you can at least start speaking up now.
Call this out before they come to your house, and then no one will be there to speak up for you.
Call it out now when they're targeting Cuban immigrants, because if you don't do it now, they will come for you eventually.
Stop thinking.
You can duck your head and avoid this.
You can't.
You need to say something.
I'm sick of people saying, I can't speak up about this.
Let me tell you something real quick.
Let me tell you something.
I was putting on an event, and we had our venue threatened by extremists.
One of the backup venues we had assured us that we would be fine to hold our event at their location.
And then every staff member threatened to quit on the spot.
They would walk away from their jobs if they dared host Daryl Davis.
Why?
I have no idea.
They hate the guy, I guess.
It's not about Daryl, to be honest.
It's about our list of speakers.
They said, oh no, Count Dankula and Sargon.
But that's not the point.
The point is, all of the staff members at this company who said, we'll quit on the spot.
We will quit on the spot.
And what do I hear from everyone else?
I can't lose my job.
I can't risk it.
I understand there's this privilege among these young leftists.
They have no families.
They have nothing to worry about.
That's a fact.
But if you think keeping your mouth shut will keep you safe, you are naive and you are wrong.
And you should learn to read a history book.
Because they will come for you the same as everybody else.
They're showing up to people's homes.
They're going to residential neighborhoods.
They are threatening businesses and demanding cash.
And if you don't stand up, there will be no one to stand up for you.
I'll see you all in the next segment coming up on this channel at 1 p.m.
Thanks for hanging out.
A couple of nights ago, while the police in Portland were dealing with a bunch of raucous rioters marching through residential neighborhoods and fighting with police, somebody fired 150 bullets at eight apartments, seven cars, and one woman got shot.
We don't exactly know why.
And maybe this isn't an instance of far-left violence or anything like that, but it does show you what happens when our police resources are restrained.
Now, this video is not about what happened in Portland.
You saw the title.
It's something else.
It's about this.
Chicago Dunkin Donuts worker is fired and arrested after Illinois state trooper finds large, thick piece of mucus floating in his coffee.
I know it's disgusting.
I apologize for this.
But this is what happens when police are constantly under threat, preoccupied, or they're completely demoralized.
I mean, what happened in Portland?
And this is just one story I wanted to go through in terms of a longer list of violent crime and harm perpetrated by far leftists and Black Lives Matter activists.
They say that, you know, there's a lot of these stories about police having their food tampered with.
Some of them are fake.
Some of them are real.
We have another one.
People absolutely are targeting police officers.
And I think this will lead to very serious problems.
But ultimately what I want to get to is a list of graphs put together by, this is Zach Goldberg.
And what he finds is things like this.
How often do you secretly wish for bad things to happen to those who disagree with you politically?
And white liberals are twice as high as conservatives and four times as high as moderates.
That's right.
It is the left that is wishing you harm secretly, and I have a bunch of other graphs from Zach I want to show you, where it stands to reason you are more likely to face some kind of low-level violence from the left, but worse still.
In the George Floyd riots, 30 people have died, 26 to gunshot wounds.
So why is it that the media still persists in their narrative of Antifa not being a real thing?
Why is it that Democrats are ignoring stories like this?
Okay, fine.
Some people have said to me, Tim, I don't care about harassment.
I don't care if someone spat in someone's coffee.
Well, I'm going to show you this story just because it's really messed up.
But I ultimately want to talk about the harm caused by the left, how it's ignored by people, and then I want to do something very simple.
I'm going to say this right now.
26 people.
26 people have died to gunshot wounds in the George Floyd riots.
According to the Washington Post, 13 unarmed black men were killed last year by police.
We now have twice as many people shot and killed by the rioters than we do by police last year.
What does that mean?
Well, let's read this story, because this is the news, and then I'll show you the data on how the left is actually more likely to be mentally ill And more likely to actually wish harm on people.
Now, I don't want to pretend like every leftist is this way.
It's just a higher density.
And this is why we see stories like this.
A Chicago Dunkin' Donuts employee was arrested and faces charges for allegedly spitting into an Illinois State Trooper's coffee.
Illinois State Police said Vincent J. Sesler of Chicago was arrested and charged Friday with disorderly conduct, reckless conduct, and battery to a peace officer following an incident which occurred the previous night.
Police said that the unarmed Illinois State Trooper had gone to the Dunkin' Donuts Thursday at about 10.20pm to buy a large cup of black coffee.
That was when he saw a large, thick piece of mucus floating in his coffee, police said.
During the investigation, the mucus was confirmed to be saliva.
Sesler, an employee of the Dunkin' Donuts, was arrested Friday at 12.49 p.m.
According to a social media post, a friend of the trooper said he had been in uniform at the time of the incident and was using his marked police vehicle.
The post also stated that surveillance video from the Dunkin' Donuts captured an employee spitting into the cup before pouring the trooper's coffee.
Neither the trooper nor his agency or the employee was identified in the post, although the Dunkin' Donuts was listed by an address.
Illinois State Police Director Brendan F. Kelly said in a statement that the incident is outrageous and disgusting.
The men and women of the Illinois State Police put their heart and soul into protecting the lives and rights of all people in this state every day, Kelly said.
They deserve better than this insulting and dangerous treatment.
Illinois State Police will not be going to that particular Dunkin' Donuts for food and drink anymore out of safety concerns.
A Dunkin' Donuts spokesperson said in a statement obtained by NBC5 Chicago that Sessler was fired after the investigation into the incident.
The type of behavior reported to us is inconsistent with the brand's values, the spokesperson said, adding that the franchise owner of the location where the incident occurred said he took immediate action to investigate the matter and terminated the individual responsible for this reprehensible behavior.
The spokesperson also noted that Duncan has a deep appreciation for police officers who work tirelessly to keep our communities safe, and the franchise owner has reached out directly to the officer to apologize for the experience.
This is... kind of a stupid story, I have to admit.
But it's one of the latest in ongoing harassment against police officers, and more typically, by the left against their perceived enemies.
Let's- let's skip the harassment narrative.
I just wanted to show you that.
Let's skip the harassment narrative, let's talk about the actual death.
In the United States, as of July 5th, at least 30 people have died during the protests with 26 due to gunshot wounds.
The media enjoys its narrative of peaceful protests.
Last night in Portland, it was mostly peaceful.
Relatively few people actually showed up.
However, in Seattle, they marched to the Seattle police chief's house.
And they've been doing this for quite some time.
Going to politicians or public officials' houses.
In Louisville, they are extorting local businesses.
And we can see here now, 26 people were shot and killed.
30 people ultimately died.
That's why it's funny when I see these media pieces where you have these leftists saying, see riots work.
There's a video going around from Seattle of one of these, you know, prominent anti- I'm sorry, I believe it's Portland.
Prominent Antifa affiliated individuals who keeps getting bailed out after getting arrested saying, see, they only listen to us when we burn things.
They're listening to us now.
Ultimately, the hysteria leads to people doing dumb things like spitting in someone's coffee or just generally getting violent.
I showed you the Portland thing just because it's the point about demoralization and the police being strained.
And I'm showing you this now to point out something that I think is missing from the media narrative, and this is what I often get from the left.
I was talking to a progressive friend of mine the other day who said, Tim, people are dying.
I don't care about someone having their coffee spat in.
And I said, okay, how about the dude who got beaten outside of a liquor store by someone screaming Black Lives Matter?
What about the businesses that are being extorted?
What about the cop who got ambushed, got shot in the head, maybe paralyzed for life?
What about these stories?
What about all the people who are being filmed and harassed?
What about the video of the woman?
A guy runs up to her and says he's with Black Lives Matter and demands she get on her knees and apologize.
And she does.
People are scared.
They're being threatened.
They're being harassed.
People are spitting in their food.
They're getting kicked out of restaurants.
And they're afraid they'll lose their jobs.
And then I'm told, but harassment and assault, Tim, people are dying.
And I say, what about the 26 people, twice as many, who were killed, who were shot in these riots?
What about those people?
Now that you realize because of these protests and riots, people are being harassed and murdered, will you now go outside and wave a sign saying, tell Black Lives Matter to stop killing people?
The answer, of course, was no.
And I wonder why.
I wonder why.
And then I saw this post.
From Zack Goldberg.
How often do you secretly wish for bad things to happen to those who disagree with you politically?
Now, here's the important part.
White moderates, over 80%, say never or rarely.
White conservatives say never or rarely.
We do not wish for bad things to happen to those who we disagree with.
Among white liberals, only 65% said never or rarely.
And in fact, 20% said all the time.
And just about 15% said sometimes.
Among white moderates just a little bit under 15% said sometimes, but only around 5% said often.
And among conservatives around 8% said often, and about 7 or so percent said sometimes.
That's right.
White liberals, 20% of them, That's insane.
That is a large group of people.
This survey was, this is the ANES 2020 pilot survey, April 10th to 18th.
This is before George Floyd.
This is before all the rioting.
But when you have 20% of the left, which probably includes a decent amount of the 65 million people who vote for Hillary Clinton, we're talking about tens of millions of people.
And then you take about 20%, so maybe 10 plus million people who all the time, or often, are wishing for bad things to happen to those they disagree with.
Well, Zach has more.
He says, given that times change, do you think it is appropriate or inappropriate to judge people's past actions and comments by today's moral standards?
Once again, conservatives say it is inappropriate.
About 50% say it's inappropriate.
About 25% say it's appropriate and just under 25% say neither appropriate or inappropriate.
I guess it doesn't matter.
It's inverted among liberals.
Just under 50% think it is appropriate to judge people by past actions based on today's moral standards.
Now this one's not so clear-cut.
This graph, you know, it's an opinion, I suppose.
Well, I'll tell you what.
Among moderates, they believe it's neither inappropriate or appropriate.
That sounds about right.
However, moderates are the least likely to think it's appropriate to do so, and They're actually a little bit higher than liberals to say it is inappropriate to do so.
Sounds like many moderates are, you know, undecided, because it's a moralistic question.
But I'll tell you where I stand.
It's inappropriate.
When times change, and then people change, you give them a chance to change.
You can't retroactively apply moral standards and rules, because then you'd be telling people, it's okay to do a thing, and then a day later, arrest them, they did this thing.
It doesn't work that way.
The next day you say, you can't do this anymore, they say, okay, I won't.
But the left not only is wishing for bad things on other people, they want them held to previous standards.
We're building to something.
You see where I'm going?
Now, we're not just talking about people the left disagrees with.
We're talking about people the left disagrees with based on things they did a long time ago, and now you get cancel culture.
But of course, there's more.
Also from Zack Goldberg.
How well do the following statements fit with your own views?
There should be zero tolerance for offensive remarks.
If you make such a comment, you should be fired.
White conservatives say not well at all, and white moderates mostly not well at all.
But among liberals, it's split between not well and very and extremely well.
They want harm on you.
They're often wishing for these things.
They think you should be judged by things you did a long time ago based on standards today.
And don't forget they're constantly changing those standards.
They are.
What was bigoted a year ago is now completely out of the question today.
And it only gets worse.
How well do the following statements fit with your own views?
It is often unfair to make victims testify in front of those who have hurt them.
And of course, white liberals, 40%, say that fits their views.
I'm sorry.
We have a right to confront our accusers, right?
There's a reason why it's in the Constitution.
So let me now tell you how everything is being structured.
They want to abolish the police.
They are wishing harm.
Not every single one of them, but a lot of them.
Are more likely to wish harm.
More likely to hold you to previous standards.
Less likely to give you the opportunity to confront your accusers.
More likely to demand you be stripped of your resources and fired.
Here's another one.
Please indicate whether you have ever done or not done each of the following.
Tried to shame someone on Facebook or Twitter for making offensive remarks.
White conservatives around 15%, moderates around 10%, and white liberals just over 25%.
Now there's an important thing to say here.
It's not absolute.
These are the important things you need to realize when it comes to what's going on with violence, spitting, or tampering with someone's food, licking ice cream.
Remember that?
When the woman licked the ice cream and put it back?
They don't care about you.
Well, she got in trouble for that.
The point is, everybody can do these things, right?
Criticize someone to their face for making racist or sexist comments, white liberals, around 55% have done so, 40% of moderates, and around just under 40% of conservatives.
Yes, everybody will criticize you for being racist, and a lot of people will.
But the left will try and shame you or go after you on social media.
Let's get to the interesting portions.
Here's another one.
Percent, very or extremely serious.
Some complain that too many people are easily offended these days and too quick to police what others say.
They refer to this as political correctness.
In your view, how serious of a problem is political correctness?
Conservatives, 60% say it's very serious and liberals actually take it more seriously than moderates do.
That's what I find truly interesting.
Some complain that too many people make offensive comments these days when they should know better.
In your view, how serious of a problem is people saying offensive things when they should know better?
Conservatives around 30% and liberals around 50%.
All of this builds to a narrative.
The left thinks you should already know without being educated.
They tell you it's not my job to educate you.
They'll say it to your face.
They'll come for you online.
They'll try to get you fired.
And they're always wishing bad things or often wishing bad things on you.
They're holding everyone to an impossible standard.
And if you don't just know what they know, they'll attack you.
They'll physically attack you.
They'll hurt you.
Some people will die.
And then when you come out and say, 26 people are dead, you know what they'll say to you?
So what?
That's about what I get.
I'm not going to protest for them.
Nope, I won't do it.
I haven't gotten any one of my lefty friends to acknowledge that twice as many people have died in the riots and agree to hold up a sign saying, end the riots.
Anything, anything, really.
I said, how about end the riot, end the violence.
You know, everybody calm down.
No, I'm going to protest for Black Lives Matter.
I'm going to hold up my sign.
26 people, twice as many dead.
What about this guy getting his food tampered with?
What about the gunshots in Portland because police racehorses are strained?
What about the 30 dead?
It's not even just 26, it's 26 shot.
And they say, but Tim, people are dying.
I ask them, how many?
How many people have died?
Do you know?
Can you name them?
Of course they can't.
It's political tribalism.
So not only do they not even have the moral high ground, they're going to hold you to things that you don't... to standards you don't even know about.
And I think it's all easily explained, to be honest.
Depression stress index scores among white respondents.
Very liberal rates at .43 a z-score.
So I'm not necessarily sure what their metrics are for what the z-score means, but I can tell you Somewhat closer to liberals has a .05.
Neither.
Negative .18.
Somewhat closer to liberals.
What does this mean?
Somewhat closer to liberals?
And very conservative.
I think they got that wrong?
Whatever.
Conservatives have a lower depression and stress index than very liberals.
I think this means somewhat closer to conservatives, but it was labeled incorrectly.
The point is, whatever it is, conservatives are less likely to be depressed.
And now for the kicker.
Has a doctor or other healthcare provider ever told you that you have a mental health condition?
Percent, yes.
Among white liberals, 38%.
Among liberals, 26.
Among moderates, 19.5.
Conservatives, 11.2.
And very conservative, 14.8.
it's 19.5, conservative's 11.2 and very conservative 14.8.
Interesting.
There's a lot we can kind of take away from this data here.
This is from the Pew American Trends panel, wave 64 from March 19th to 24th.
The fact that we can see very conservatives are more likely than conservatives to have been diagnosed, but liberals are substantially more likely.
The first thing we can say is maybe conservatives don't go to doctors for mental health issues.
That's possible.
But I don't think so.
I don't think that's necessarily the answer, because very conservatives are higher than conservatives, suggesting that they are going to doctors and talking about their mental health.
I think what we may be seeing is what's creating the divide in today's politics, and it's why you'll find someone who's a liberal like myself not aligning with the liberals of today.
It could be that I'm and I mean this with all due respect.
I have not been diagnosed with a mental health condition.
I am not depressed.
I am not stressed.
I believe in certain liberal policies, but there's many people on the left who are and I think what's happening is that the media When you get shock content, you have regular conservatives, less than half the amount of liberals, and a third, less than a third, almost a fourth of very liberals, about a fourth of the amount.
Conservatives are not being diagnosed with mental health conditions.
What I think is starting to happen is that as media shocks people, freaks them out, and they're being whipped up into a tizzy by these people in media, the liberals start coalescing around Insane narratives and what I call a paranoid delusional state where they believe insane conspiracy theories about like white supremacy around every corner, about everything being white supremacy, about history being fake.
Fringe conspiracy theories.
The Trump deploying federal agents across the country is just not true.
I mean, technically, but in the sense they were reporting it.
of unidentified, unmarked, military-style federal troops patrolling the streets
never happened. But they all believe it. Why? Well, many of them have mental health issues.
The interesting thing about conservatives, mind you, is that among conservatives, non-white and
white are diagnosed around the same rate. And among conservatives, non-white conservatives
are slightly higher. The interesting thing about liberals is that while non-white liberals are
diagnosed around 19%, white liberals overwhelmingly have mental health conditions.
I'm...
I can't tell you what's making it happen or why, but here's what I think.
It's not about liberals having mental health issues.
I don't.
I'm a liberal.
It's about people with mental health issues being pulled and manipulated for political gain by the left because they can't compete with people who are of sound mind.
Moderates, slightly more likely, around almost twice as likely as conservatives to be diagnosed with mental health conditions.
But now you can see what's happening with the very liberals.
Now you can see what's happening with the media.
And now I think you understand why we're seeing the right becoming the bigger tent.
It's not about whether or not you're liberal or conservative.
It's about whether or not you can understand the news, understand humor, irony, satire, etc.
I can tweet a joke and what happens?
The left takes it completely seriously.
We're seeing a rise in all of these what they call like neurodivergent identities.
Quite literally.
It is becoming, the culture war is becoming those of sound reasonable mind and those with mental health conditions.
I'm not saying that to disparage anyone.
I'm not saying that to disrespect anyone.
I'm saying that's literally what's happening.
So you get someone like me.
There was a joke that was published on Twitter recently.
Where it was some guy making a joke about a horrific tragedy in New Zealand.
And I thought the joke was fairly offensive, a tired racist trope, and I just didn't find it funny.
I thought the guy was using shock content to, you know, to get some laughs.
And you know what I did?
After I listened to it, I went, yeesh!
And then I just went about my day and ignored it.
I didn't threaten the man.
I didn't demand he be banned.
I didn't try to cancel him.
I didn't get angry.
I was just like, You know what?
Different strokes for different folks, right?
I don't find the joke funny at all, but apparently he's got a big audience, so whatever, man.
I'm out.
I don't like him?
I won't listen to him.
It's really that simple.
You're allowed to not like things.
That's what tolerance is.
I tolerate it.
I say, I know he's making a joke.
I get it.
I probably make jokes other people find offensive, so I'll leave him to his business, and his fans can appreciate his work, and I'll go do my thing.
What do we get from the left?
Well, partly due to the rise of mental illness, perhaps.
There's anger, rage, an inability to understand the humor, an inability to process it properly, and thus leads to them doing insane things for insane reasons.
Now I want to wrap this up back to, you know, the story we saw of the guy spitting in the coffee.
Why did this guy do it?
I'd have to imagine he has some kind of mental health issue for one simple reason.
If you were to think about what you were doing, why you were doing it, what your goal is, and why you would engage in this behavior, well, you'd stop and think, hey, this won't help.
It'll actually make things worse.
Why is it that rioters went out and attacked police for two months in Portland?
They didn't realize it helped Trump.
They're just unwell.
They're unstable.
They have mental health issues.
And these Antifa types, these extremists, use, you know, these kind of unwell people.
These are the people exploited by the far left.
This guy, Duncan Donuts, who got arrested for spitting in a cop's coffee, clearly didn't think about the results of his actions.
For one, it's going to make the cops look to be victims, which can benefit them in the public's view.
He's going to get arrested.
He's going to lose his job.
In no way did he benefit.
There was no success.
Nothing was done other than some weird emotional satisfaction for someone who is unhinged.
That's what we're seeing, and that's why we're going to see extreme violence.
Now, for these tragedies where, you know, what they call far-right have engaged in these activities, sure.
But this is about mental health, isn't it?
These extremists who go on these attacks are unwell.
When the guy in Dayton carried out a... enacted a mass tragedy, and he was Antifa, did the media say an Antifa guy did it?
They didn't!
They said, no, no, no, no political motive.
You see it?
The media is playing games.
They do this to attract those who can't think for themselves properly and exploit them for political gain.
That's what's been happening for a long time.
It has nothing to do with your politics.
It has everything to do with a political faction that wants power and will do anything to get it.
I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up at TimCast.net at 4pm.
Thanks for hanging out, and I will see you all then.
My friends, it has finally come to this.
1984, they often say, was not supposed to be a manual or guide, it was supposed to be a warning.
And I know the trope has kind of played out, but here we are, quite literally, the woke are arguing that 2 plus 2 does equal 5.
This is propaganda.
We were literally warned about this in 1984.
It was on purpose.
Saying that they're going to try and convince you of things that are not true, arguing they are true.
They want to undermine truth so you doubt yourself.
It's all about power.
Well, I didn't think I'd have to talk about it, but let's talk about it.
You see, Matt Taibbi, prominent journalist, liberal, says, I keep seeing references to 2 plus 2 equals 5.
Can someone explain this reference?
James Lindsay, who has been waging the war against 2 plus 2 equals 5, points out that he was explaining how the woke ideology would understand 2 plus 2 equals 4 to someone, made a humorous satire card, they tried to problematize me for it, and now they're defending 2 plus 2 equals 5, so I'll be wrong.
Take a look at this post from James Lindsay.
He made a fake post that says, And sure enough, people actually started to argue against it.
I'm going to break down for you why these people are lying.
James Lindsay does it to great detail, but I'll give you my take on it.
Ida Bay Wells, who wrote the 1619 Project, says, using Arabic numerals to try and make a point about white
Western superiority is just so damn classic.
And this guy says, emphatically cosign. He said, one plus one equals two is a hegemonic discourse,
and don't let anyone tell you otherwise. Here's my favorite.
This woman, Brittany Marshall, says, nope.
The idea of 2 plus 2 equaling 4 is cultural, and because of Western imperialism colonization, we think of it as the only way of knowing.
2 plus 2 equals 5.
The tomatoes have spoken.
Now we actually have a woke mathematician arguing about 2 plus 2 equaling 5 using semantics.
The first thing I want to show you is why this matters.
You see, if you look up on Wikipedia 2 plus 2 equals 5, what do you get?
Well, first of all, Soviet propaganda.
Now, Soviet propaganda wasn't trying to convince people that two and two together could ever equal five.
It was a point they were making about getting a five-year plan done in four years.
This was just like them saying, it's obviously wrong.
If we work together, we can get the five-year plan done faster.
It wasn't actually trying to convince people.
No, the actual issue was, lo and behold, the Nazis.
You see, George Orwell used the concept of 2 plus 2 equaling 5 in 1984 as a reference to Nazism, who didn't believe in the truth.
This is the point.
This is why I'm bringing this up.
They are unironically arguing that 2 plus 2 can in fact equal 5, and they're doing some nonsensical semantical argument.
They're doing it so that you question what is true.
Let me tell you something.
2 plus 2 equals 4.
Done.
There's no question about it.
The whole core of their argument is that if you qualify certain statements and expand the equation, you can forcefully argue how 2 plus 2 equals 5.
We'll get to that in a moment.
And I want to show you what this ultimately comes down to.
For some reason, This comes down to an argument about trans women.
I am not kidding.
But here's what you can read about 1984.
about 1984.
They say, Nazi theory indeed specifically denies that such a thing as
the truth exists.
The implied objective of the line of thought is a nightmare world in which the leader or
some ruling clique controls not only the future but the past.
If the leader says of such and such an event, it never happened, well, it never happened.
If he says that two and two are five, well, two and two are five.
This prospect frightens me more than bombs.
So this is what Orwell wrote six years before 1984.
In 1984, he writes, In the end, the party would announce that 2 and 2 made 5, and you would have to believe it.
It was inevitable that they should make that claim sooner or later.
The logic of their position demanded it.
Not merely the validity of experience, but the very existence of external reality was tacitly denied by their philosophy.
The hearsay, the heresy of heresies, was common sense.
And what was terrifying was not that they would kill you for thinking otherwise, but that they might be right.
For after all, how do we know that two and two make four?
Or that the force of gravity works?
Or that the past is unchangeable?
If both the past and the external world exist only in their mind, and if the mind itself is controllable, what then?
Well, let me tell you.
2 plus 2 equals 4.
Every single argument made by the woke left is basically saying that you can write a different equation which redefines certain terms, therefore it could equal 5.
It's nonsense, to put it mildly.
The argument that even this woke mathematician goes for is that you must define definitions themselves, he says.
A bizarre discussion is going on on Twitter at the moment concerning whether 2 plus 2 equals 5.
Apparently it's woke to try to undermine the truth we all know that 2 plus 2 equals 4.
As a mathematician who fondly imagines that he is towards the woke end of the spectrum, I feel I ought to comment.
So first, as many have pointed out, the truth of a mathematical sentence depends on the definitions involved and on the system to which that sentence belongs.
For example, there's a very important context, arithmetic base 2, in which the sentence 1 plus 1 equals 10 is true.
Secondly, which definitions and rules we adopt depends a lot on what we happen to find useful, either for the mathematical purposes or for the purposes of modeling the world.
Let me stop right there.
Who uses base-2?
Do our computers operate?
Well, technically, yeah.
Binary code.
But typically, it is understood within our culture, yes.
We understand the framework by which you are making a statement.
Now, you may argue, but Tim, that woman said it was cultural.
2 plus 2 as a language is cultural, but the concept that it defines is an absolute.
Okay, maybe I'm wrong and I don't know math all that well, but let me tell you something.
There will never be a circumstance, as far as we can tell, in which you have one apple, and then your friend has an apple, and then you push them together and BOOM!
There's three apples.
That's not gonna happen.
There's no circumstance in which you'll have two apples, and your friend has two apples, and they come together, and then, boop!
A fifth apple just appears.
That is not physical... a physical possibility.
Now, if we want to qualify that statement by saying, but perhaps there's quantum entanglement, and an intermentional rift opens up, and an apple flies through!
Sure, but you've just changed the equation.
I can't believe I have to argue that 2 plus 2 equals 5.
I mean, I'm sorry, against!
You see what they're doing?
I can't believe I actually have to make a video arguing that 2 plus 2 equals 4 and that it is an absolute concept.
From this basic equation, you can argue, sure, language can be redefined, but the concept itself is sound.
This guy, be he woke or whatever, actually comes to make a very devastating point about the problems of woke math.
You see, it's not just about James Lindsay saying people are metaderm.
There's an argument going around.
People were saying that arguing that trans women are women was like saying 2 plus 2 equals 5.
I'm not saying that other people were saying that.
That's literally what other people are saying is the point I'm trying to get across.
So they started posting things like 2 plus 2 equals 4 to make a point about what is true and to defy the wokeness.
He then brings this up that a good portion of this argument comes from the idea that you could find a way to make 2 plus 2 equal 5.
Let me give you an example.
The one thing they love is that saying 2.4 in a closed system that rounds to the nearest whole would define 2.4 as 2.
Therefore, you could take 2.4 plus 2.4 and get 4.8, which in a closed system that rounds to the nearest whole would give you 5.
Therefore, 2 plus 2 equals 5.
But you realize how I have to describe that whole sentence to you?
It's because the equation itself is not 2 plus 2 equals 4, it's 2.4 2.4 equals 2, plus 2.4 equals 2, equals 4.8, which equals 5.
It's a nonsensical, overly complicated piece of garbage.
Anyway, I can't believe- You know what, man?
Do I even need to say it?
To regular human beings?
I guess I'm using that as a derogatory for people who are living in this fantasy world or who are trying to manipulate us through lies.
Ultimately, this mathematician Timothy Gowers comes to a very interesting point.
He says, I do admit to finding the highly charged nature of the debate concerning trans women difficult, because it goes so strongly against my mathematical habits.
One side says trans women are women, and the other side says trans women are not women, where a mathematician might say it is better to define a woman in a way that includes trans women, or is it better to define women in a way that excludes trans women?
But it seems that temporarily adopting a neutral linguistic stance in this debate is taken as entertaining the possibility that the other side has a point that's worth listening to, even if one ends up disagreeing with it, and that one must not do it.
Here's the ultimate point he makes.
The analogy is bad, is that out of the two sentences, 2 plus 2 equals 4 and 2 plus 2 equals 5, it's clear that the first is by far the more likely to be useful.
So by implicitly linking 2 plus 2 equals 4 to trans men and not women, And 2 plus 2 equals 5 if trans women are not women.
The suggestion is that it is far more natural and sensible to say that trans women are not women.
And that ridiculous mental contortions are needed if one wants to call them women.
But it isn't hard to use the word woman in that way and there's good reason to do so.
Okay, let me try and just break this down because this is going way longer than it needs to.
There are circumstances where you absolutely will refer to a trans woman as a woman.
That's a point many people are making.
But it's not useful to say 2 plus 2 equals 5 because you have to explain it with ridiculous mental contortions.
And that's the point.
What the woke people are trying to do with math makes literally no sense.
But let me just wrap this up.
First of all, wow, I had to do a segment talking about 2 plus 2 not equaling 5.
That's really how bad it's gotten.
The main point is that when it reaches the likes of Matt Taibbi and they're asking what is going on, you need to understand it is extremist, authoritarian, and dare I say Nazi propaganda being used by the far left.
They are using Nazi philosophy tactics to control you by telling you there is no truth.
There is a truth.
We've mapped it.
You can define the words differently, but the concept is sound.
Period.
If you want to redefine the concept in words, make the argument about words.
They've tried to redefine words, and they've succeeded in some areas.
Now they're trying to redefine math, so it makes no sense.
Because if only they know the true math, then no one else will be able to make the calculations needed to defeat them in the long run.
It's all about power.
I got a couple more segments coming up in a few minutes, and I will see you all shortly.
You know, I don't need to make this video.
I'm sure everybody saw this and went, yeah, we all knew this was gonna happen.
Ratings crash for NBA and Major League Baseball after protest-filled debuts.
Now, now, hold on!
It may be that the real reason nobody is watching these sports is because there's no audience, kind of boring or whatever.
Maybe it could be that people are just in a weird COVID space.
You know, the pandemic has shattered their minds and sports just won't help.
I disagree.
I think people wanted their sports back.
People desperately need an escape to all the nonsense.
And more importantly than that, golf is doing just fine.
And so, so you tell me.
You tell me.
But I've got other news.
You see, there's more evidence to suggest that getting woke will in fact make you go broke.
And I bring you over to Jonathan Isaac's jersey sales, which is second only to LeBron James.
And the reason for this?
He stood for the National Anthem and did not wear a Black Lives Matter sweater.
I'm impressed.
Rad dude.
Awesome.
His jerseys are selling like hotcakes.
But I got some bad news for Mr. Isaac.
He suffered an ACL injury.
It's a serious knee injury.
You can actually see in the image he's wearing a knee brace.
Man, this breaks my heart.
I hate to hear it.
I feel bad for anybody, man.
I've been skateboarding my whole life.
I know exactly what an ACL injury means.
This dude may be out.
We'll see.
It's really hard to recover from an ACL injury.
So I feel bad for this dude.
Especially after he stood for the national anthem and did something brave.
Standing up with all these people around him saying no.
And I'll tell you what else.
In the video, where he tries to go for a jump shot or I think a dunk or something.
I don't watch basketball, I don't know a lot about it.
He goes to jump.
You can see his knee give out and he falls down.
His teammates, who are wearing the Black Lives Matter sweaters, they rush over to him.
They're saying like, no, no shaking their heads.
Why?
Because you don't have to be a part of any of these ideologies to support him or oppose him.
You can be friends whether or not you stand or kneel.
That warms my heart.
But you know what?
I just want to make sure I get to that point and say, I wish Mr. Isaac a speedy recovery, man.
I'm tremendously impressed at his courage and standing up for what he believes in.
And this is incredible.
I'm glad to see his jersey sales are selling.
I hope he gets through this.
I hope he recovers.
I hope he gets back in the game.
He seems like a really good dude.
But let's talk about the NBA all together.
Ratings crash, according to Breitbart.
They say.
As the NBA and Major League Baseball return from their coronavirus-imposed hiatus, it appears TV viewers are not interested in what the increasingly woke leagues have to offer.
With both baseball and basketball draped in all sorts of Black Lives Matter and social justice symbolism for their opening games, a substantially smaller number of fans tuned in to the rest of the week's games.
I just want to point out, I said like a year or two ago, just wait until they come for Major League Sports with their wokeness, and then you will see a real get woke go broke.
According to Outkick.com, neither league did well.
As for the opening games, Outkick reported that the return of the NBA on TNT saw the following numbers.
Lakers Clippers 3.4 million, Pelicans Jazz 2.1 million.
ESPN's MLB return numbers were also underwhelming.
OutKick's Ryan Glass-Spiegel added more ratings numbers to Twitter.
He says, to be fair, since I compared MLB vs NBA returns night one, here is night two.
Showing.
I guess he's saying it's down 922,000.
Down a million.
Down 797.
NBA last night.
Or is he just saying those are the ratings?
I'm not entirely sure if that's a minus or a dash.
Because I used a colon for the last one.
The Athletics' Eric Strauss also noted the numbers continued to fall off for Major League Baseball.
So I think they're saying that they're seeing ratings drop off.
So Ethan Strauss says, Major League Baseball really fell off after opening day.
In general, both leagues aren't getting the audience one might expect from a nation that's been deprived of entertainment for months.
Let me tell you, Considering there's no movies.
Okay, you can't go to the movie theater, you can't go to the mall.
There's not a whole lot to do.
The numbers should be way up.
Let me tell you something.
Numbers on podcasts and digital content are skyrocketing.
My numbers have been going up decently well.
I'm not entirely sure if it has anything to do with COVID or anything like that.
Maybe.
When the initial pandemic started, my numbers actually slumped a little bit, so I'm not entirely sure.
Maybe it's that people are more into politics right now, because they need to know what's going on, and they don't have time for entertainment.
But I'll tell you this.
Content views, sports, should be way up.
And they're not.
They're actually down.
Which suggests they're doing worse than we realize.
For good measure, Strauss also pointed out that baseball can't blame the coronavirus.
The virus didn't stop people from watching Tom Brady golf with Tiger Woods and Phil Mickelson back in May.
He says you could chalk sagging interest up to pandemic conditions,
but 5.8 million tuned in to watch Tom Brady hit golf shots into the woods.
Indeed, the charity golf match earned TV record a record TV ratings in May.
Dubbed the Match 2, the game featured Tom Brady, Phil Mickelson, Peyton Manning, and Tiger Woods, peaked at an amazing 6.3 million viewers, and raised more than $20 million for charity.
You get all these famous, you know, celebrity athletes or whatever and they play a game and a lot of people tune in.
I think it is fair to say, I personally believe, if we're going to see Jonathan Isaac sell record amounts of jerseys, or not record, but massive amounts of jerseys, rivaling only LeBron James, look at this, top ball coverage says Jonathan Isaac's jersey sales have skyrocketed after he stood for the national anthem.
He is now number two in jersey sales among players, only behind LeBron James.
Bravo.
That says to me, the people who want the jerseys, the people who like the sports, don't like the weird, creepy politics.
Get woke, go broke.
And in this case, avoid woke, attract money, get not woke, and get rich, whatever.
No woke, get rich, sure.
No woke, no broke.
How about that one?
No, that doesn't really exemplify it, because the dude's actually making a ton of money.
It's not just that he's not broke, he's just, he's raking it in.
And Bravo, you know what this says to me?
Nobody launched a campaign as far as I'm, maybe they did, but I didn't see it.
I did not see any campaign where they were like, everybody go out and buy, you know, a boycott.
Everybody buy from Jonathan Isaac, buy his jerseys.
No, people just did it.
And what about Goya?
Remember that Magoya 2020?
Maga and Goya combined, Magoya?
When the CEO of Goya, which is a Hispanic food brand, came out and said that he liked Trump, then all of a sudden, Goya products started to fly off the shelves.
They started making a ton of money, and there was supposedly a boycott.
The boycott didn't actually do anything.
They sold great products.
Now we can see that when you stand up for this country, and you stand with Americans, you actually stand to profit.
But is this surprising to everybody?
I always want to point out when I do these, okay?
To be fair, Get Woke, Go Broke is not some kind of law in the sense that it always happens.
It's just a saying for when people do it.
It's entirely possible that the ratings drop-off has nothing to do with getting woke, but personally, I don't think so.
I think based on the jersey sales, I think based on the fact that people are bored and looking for an outlet, Nah, man.
People are tired of this.
They're absolutely tired of this.
Let me break it down for you, man, because I've experienced this.
When the wokeness started infecting industries, we first saw Gamergate, right?
And they were complaining about weird woke nonsense in their games, and they got called all the worst names in the book because of it.
It was isolated to the games industry, and now there is a trope about gamers being bigots when in reality they were just like, I just wanna fight a dragon, bro!
I wanna play a game where I pull out a sword and fight a dragon!
Why does the dragon gotta be preaching to me about weird political stuff?
Because it was a way for them to inject politics.
It was actually a way for the media to make money.
These news outlets needed something to write about, and RageBait worked.
They found their cause.
Well, I used to play a game called Magic the Gathering, a very popular card game, slowly started getting woke, recently banned a bunch of art.
They banned art.
Why?
Well, the art could possibly be racist.
Yeah.
Okay.
I'm not interested anymore.
I'm tired of it.
And now I can imagine many people who watch NBA, who watch basketball, who watch baseball, feel similarly.
I do not want to watch sports to watch politics.
I want to watch someone play a game.
I want to be impressed by feats of athleticism.
I want to be impressed by strategic moves in a strategy game.
I don't want to sit down, turn the TV on, and have them say, hey, by the way, did you know that this, you know, socialism and taxes and Black Lives Matter, and it's like, no, no, no, that's the stuff I see all the time.
That's why I lost my job.
That's why the rioters are running around.
I'm trying to escape all of that right now, not deal with more of it, and you plastered it on the floor of the NBA.
So look, they still get millions of views.
But, so do people on YouTube who, like, melt blocks of ice with molten metals and stuff.
So do people who crush candles under a hydraulic press.
So if their ratings are dropping, and people are going elsewhere for content, they're losing what made them... They're losing what made them wealthy!
Recently we had the WNBA actually walk out for the national anthem.
Now that is beyond absurd, so I'll tell you what.
Get woke, go, get woke, go woke, get woke, get woke, get broke, go, go broke, whatever, man.
I'm, I'm, I'm so tired of it.
They're going to keep doing it because they won't learn their lesson.
Maybe this, I don't know, whatever, man.
I'm not going to watch it.
Maybe you guys will watch it, whatever.
But to be fair, I didn't watch it in the first place.
I would watch it passively with friends when we were like hanging out because it was fun to have on in the background.
And maybe that's a good reason why the ratings have gone down.
We'll see.
I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up in just a few minutes and I will see you all shortly.
The Democrats are doing everything in their power to prevent a debate between Donald Trump and Joe Biden.
And I got to say to all those Trump supporters out there who kept saying, just wait until Trump debates Biden, it'll be over.
Joe Biden will lose.
Donald Trump will have a clear path towards victory.
Ah, ah, so naive.
So naive.
I'm so sorry you thought they would ever allow that.
They are hiding Joe Biden in the basement.
They don't want anyone to know he lacks the physical and mental abilities to stand up and debate Donald Trump.
So, of course, they're telling him don't do it.
Yeah, they're gonna clear the path for him.
It's not just the Democrats.
It's their allies in media.
Wait till you see this.
First, Joe Biden should not debate President Trump, Clinton's ex White House spokesman says.
Opinion from the New York Times.
Let's scrap the debates from the Washington Post.
It's time to rethink the debates.
They're archaic and they serve no purpose.
And supporters urge Joe Biden not to debate Trump.
Applaud hosts for canceling over COVID-19 concerns.
They will do everything in their power to prevent what would be one of the greatest political shows ever to air on television, and I am outraged!
I was greatly looking forward to this.
It was gonna be awesome!
Listen, man.
I have political, you know, differences and professional differences with President Trump.
That's been one of my biggest issues.
Now, over the past couple of years, I think he's in a better job and he's brought up some issues I'm concerned about and I care about.
He's trying to withdraw from the Middle East.
That's huge in my book.
I like the idea.
I'm not the expert.
I know a decent amount about, you know, the conflict over there.
I lean towards bring our troops home.
Donald Trump has got a bad attitude.
I do not believe he is of right professional character for the office of the presidency.
However, Joe Biden is substantially worse, and considering the encroachment of the intersectional left, it's like, okay, okay.
I see where this is going, and it's gotten insane with the Democrats arresting small business owners, so I'm absolutely leaning in to the Trump vote as of right now.
We'll see how things play out, but it's very likely sort of some dramatic change, which is also very likely.
But here's the point.
Even though I recognize that Donald Trump is not someone I would want to vote for in a normal circumstance, and this is probably true for a lot of people in most elections, to be fair, I will absolutely recognize and say with no problem that Donald Trump He's a comedian, man.
He knows how to make people laugh.
He knows how to play to a crowd, and he does a great job of it.
I have been to dozens of his rallies back in the 2015-16 cycle when I was covering many of them, and I saw the dude make the crowd laugh and roar and cheer.
He knows how to do it.
We saw in the presidential debates with Hillary Clinton, when... I think it was with Hillary, when he was calling... He's just saying things that were really funny.
I'll put it that way.
Could you imagine what it would be like with him going up against Biden?
Biden would forget where he was.
He'd stutter and stammer.
He'd spin around in circles.
Trump would crack back.
Trump would be doing like a play-by-play, be like, look, look, now Biden's spinning around.
He didn't know where he is.
Biden, Joe, you all right?
What's going on?
And people would be laughing like crazy.
That's why they can't allow it to happen.
Fox News reports.
Joe Lockhart, the former White House press secretary, penned an op-ed last week urging Joe Biden to skip debating President Trump prior to the November election.
Whatever you do, don't debate Trump, he wrote on CNN.
Trump has made more than 20,000 misleading or false statements.
Oh, is that why?
According to the Washington Post, it's a fool's errand to enter the ring with someone who can't follow the rules or the truth.
Biden will undoubtedly take heat from Republicans and the media for skipping the debates, but it's worth the risk as trying to debate someone incapable of telling the truth as an impossible contest to win.
Full stop!
That's what moderators are for, okay?
If you're worried about Trump lying, the moderators will call him a liar and protect Joe Biden, right?
That's not the issue, is it?
No, the real issue is that Trump would mop the floor.
I think it was Joe Rogan who said it'd be like watching Mike Tyson box a three-year-old.
It would be... This is why I'm upset.
Because it really would be one of the most epic, hilarious, and historical moments in presidential debates.
And I mean it.
Joe Biden's fake, tough demeanor.
Listen here!
You know, we gotta do the thing!
And you're like, wow, Joe, you really don't have it in you.
Not to be fair, I am upset.
I really do mean this.
I am upset what the Democrats are doing to Joe Biden.
The guy's clearly not all there, right?
They're using him as a throwaway candidate, in my opinion.
That's why they haven't yet picked a VP.
It's been delayed.
I mean, it should have been a month ago, at least, that they announced their VP pick.
But OK, fine.
COVID pushed everything back.
No, I think they expect Joe to lose.
I really do.
Now, they're going to talk about how he's winning, the media and the polls.
But listen, what you got to understand about the polls is that they use these weird predictive weight systems that are all different for each different organization.
And it says to me when I read this, I'm like, dude, all you really did was say, here's what I think is right.
That's it.
And your polls may be totally bunk because you just don't know.
You really don't.
And you can't reach Trump's base.
So you just do guesswork.
So anyway, we look at these polls.
It looks like Joe Biden is winning.
They throw up Joe Biden.
I don't think he's going to win at this point.
I'm not entirely sure.
No one knows what's going to happen, but I'll tell you this.
I think they're using him as a throwaway candidate because they know he's... That's why Joe Biden's not all with it and he's still there.
They don't want to waste any good potential candidates as a failed presidential, you know, for a failed presidential run.
Then, you know, they want them to come out swinging in 2024 with a better platform, a better pitch.
That's what they're going for with Joe Biden.
So I'm gonna miss this potential debate, but I'll make a few points about Trump, where I'm leaning in terms of voting and stuff like that.
Because of Trump's character, particularly, I wouldn't want to vote for him.
And I know a lot of people have said things to me like, what does his attitude have to do with whether or not he gets the job done?
And you might think it doesn't, and I can respect that.
I've talked to a lot of people who said, hey man, the economy is going really great.
I don't care what the guy says.
I don't care what his character is.
I don't care if he's a boastful braggart mocking the press, and he tweets up a storm.
If he gets the job done, he gets the job done.
Okay, I respect that.
I really do.
You know, practicality.
And I've made the point before.
If you had a busted pipe in your house, and there's water spraying everywhere, and you got one plumber who's sitting there complaining about the other plumber and won't do any work, the other plumber won't stop cussing, but he walks in and he fixed the pipe, well, I think you know who you gotta hire.
And that's the important point here.
That's the analogy I use.
I begged the Democrats to give me a viable candidate.
Somebody who is moderate.
Joe Biden, you can call him a moderate, but come on, he's crony establishment, Obama admin, all total BS, and the guy can't even think or talk straight.
Not, not a viable candidate.
And to be fair, at this point, I probably wouldn't even support a Democrat as it is for a lot of other reasons.
The expansion of intersectionality, the, you know, Democrats wholly adopting the fringe, racist, ridiculous cult religion.
Now, they may not entirely be doing it, but they're doing it too much, and it's spreading throughout the, you know, the Democrats.
And then I see the governor in New Jersey, I see the things these politicians are doing, and now I'm saying, enough.
Enough.
These people cannot be supported.
They're authoritarians, they're insane.
And for all of Trump's faults, for being a braggart, for being, you know, arrogant and narcissistic, and all these things you can call him, He's a nasty guy, but he gets the job done, right?
So here's the big problem for me.
Joe Biden, the party of Barack Obama, now we learn about all this Obamagate stuff, and we see what they're trying to do.
They're twisting the rules with mail-in voting, their allies in media are lying, and now they're trying to shield Joe Biden from scrutiny and criticism.
It is all a dirty game to try and win power.
That I will not stand for.
So I tell you this.
I absolutely will not be voting for Democrats.
Well, I say that with 99.9% certainty.
There's going to be some weird upset.
They're going to bring out somebody.
But I think the party has done too much nationwide at this point for me to consider giving them my vote.
Jeff Van Drew said it.
Democrats used to be moderate.
Not anymore.
They're socialists and they're far left.
So I'm out.
But I am not a conservative.
I won't vote for the Libertarian Party because Jo Jorgensen told everybody they must become ideologues for the Black Lives Matter movement, whether she realized it or not.
That's freaky.
Sorry, no Libertarian Party for me.
So you know what?
This is why I so often just don't vote.
I'm just so sick of all of the political fighting and bickering, but I will tell you one thing.
Whether you like Donald Trump as a person, whether you agree with him or not, he is NOT a Republican.
Sorry, that's a fact.
The Republicans are mostly trash.
The Democrats are mostly trash.
The Libertarian Party is wacky across the board.
Donald Trump is something else.
He's got a lot of problems, and I mean it.
I think he's bad, but he's certainly not that bad.
I think he could debate Joe Biden and be hilarious, but it's also, you gotta recognize, you know, my attitude when I talk about the chaos and everything, you might, you notice I laugh a lot, right?
Because what else can you do?
Do you want to be an angry, negative person just complaining all day?
Or do you want to roll with it, have a good time, and figure out the best thing that you can pull off?
So when I see stories about the crazy 60 days of rioting, and the mafia tactics used by BLM, you know what?
I get mad.
I do.
Because I'm like, leave these people alone.
But every so often when the chaos gets out of control, like, you know, they're gonna abolish the police in Seattle, I laugh about it.
I know it's bad.
And I'm laughing because what else can be done?
We can talk about it, we can mock it, we can ridicule it, we can show that we're stronger than it.
And I'll tell you this about Trump.
There are things that he does I don't like, but I will laugh about it.
I won't laugh about what Joe Biden is doing.
If he gets in, he's going to pull all of the old establishment BS.
He's going to put it back into play.
It's going to be war, war, war.
It's going to be extrajudicial assassinations.
It is going to be the Democratic Party establishment, the same as it's been.
And it's also the Republican establishment trying to regain control as well.
So no.
I would prefer it if the bull, Donald Trump, romped about the ivory tower a bit more and knocked out the establishment, and then maybe then the Democrats can reform into something that's not insane and overly woke, but I really doubt it.
In the end, we likely won't get a debate with Trump and Biden, but maybe.
