White House Siege Protests Planned Before And After Election Fueled By Democrats Unhinged Theories
One is a far left 50 day 'siege' from September 17th to November 3rd and others plan to go on after the election.All of this is being fueled by unhinged theories from far leftists and Democrats that Trump and republicans are cheating to steal the election. Videos have surfaced of mail drop boxes being removed and one celebrity leftist even claimed that Trump supporters are stealing USPS trucks to stop the election.None of this is true however and its all playing into these fringe theories from Democrats that will likely spark riots and unrest. We have already seen mass unrest across the country but the paranoid delusions of mainstream leftists going unchallenged is making it all get worse.The more unhinged they get though the more likely a Trump landslide is coming
Support the show (http://timcast.com/donate)
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Recently, Adbusters, the organization that put out the first call for Occupy Wall Street, announced the White House siege, where they say that for 50 days they will lay siege to the White House.
However, they do state several times it will be a non-violent protest.
You may have heard the news because some people have been pushing this around, and I'll give you the quick context, you know, in this segment.
But there is another update.
You see, more groups are planning more mass protests while the White House siege is supposed to end on election night.
Some have called for an extended protest from election night into January, essentially across the country.
And other organizations, such as Shutdown DC, are also planning unrest.
And right now, hashtag General Strike is trending in the U.S.
With some politicians straight up saying there will be mass civil unrest.
But why is this?
Certainly, if we're going to have a clean and fair election, nobody should have anything to protest about.
I mean, well, to be fair, even if your guy loses, you can still, you know, Even if your guy loses, you can still protest the other side because you have grievances.
But why mass sustained protest?
Why would this be any different?
And the reason many are calling for sustained protest has a lot to do with mail-in voting and an unhinged conspiracy theory from the left that Donald Trump and the Republicans are purposefully kneecapping the post office because they're trying to cheat.
In fact, some people are pushing fringe conspiracy ideas that mailboxes are being stolen.
OK, mailboxes are being moved or removed, but there's real logical reasons for this.
I kid you not, some have even said that Trump supporters are literally stealing United Postal Service mail trucks.
I'm not kidding.
And this leads to the potential for chaos and violence because the media, social media companies entertain unhinged conspiracies.
Absolutely unhinged.
Now, of course, over on the right, if you're a Trump supporter, they will mock and belittle you.
They will ban everything you have to say as unhinged.
But their insane conspiracy meme posts and nonsense goes unchecked, driving people to the point where they plan mass civil unrest around a fake idea.
The post office is doing bad because of COVID.
But the post office has been doing bad for quite some time because it doesn't actually... You know what some have said?
Some have said it's a blockbuster company in a Netflix world.
Most mail apparently, or a good portion of it, is just junk mail now.
Nobody uses it.
We don't need to send letters.
We use the internet.
Our communication is digital now.
So it's becoming harder and harder for the post office to sustain itself while people are expanding across this country and more postal destinations are emerging.
Because of routine postal work changes, there is now a fringe theory that Trump's doing, and he's doing it on purpose, and now they're all screaming, aha, he's doing it on purpose to harm mail-in voting because he's going to steal the election.
So the result is?
Prepare for mass civil unrest.
I kid you not.
Well, let's start from the beginning.
We'll start with the White House siege, just to give you a general idea of what the actual, you know, general protest idea is.
But I want to show you what people are saying and the plans for why they want extended civil unrest after Election Day.
Before we get started, head over to TimCast.com slash Donut if you'd like to support my work.
There is a P.O.
box where you can send me stuff, but the best thing you can do, actually, subscribe to this channel.
Many people who watch aren't actually subscribed.
If you want to make sure that you get my videos every day at 4 p.m., hit the subscribe button, the like button, and the notification bell.
And if you really want to help, share this video, because that's the best marketing anybody could ever ask for.
So here's the first quick context for those that may not have seen this.
White House Siege Tactical Briefing Number One from AdBusters.
I've had a lot of people ask me if this was real.
I did cover it on my TimCast News channel, but I want to do an extended look at the, you know, what the evolution of this is and why.
But yes, it is in fact real.
AdBusters is famous for putting out a call for Occupy Wall Street, September 7th, 20... I'm sorry, September 17th, 2011.
And that's when everything at Occupy kicked off, and Ed Buster's really helped boost it.
They say, all right, all you activists, it's been nine years since we've had a political earthquake of Occupy Wall Street laying siege to NYC's Zuccotti Park and inspiring thousands of similar protests around the world.
They say the Occupy anniversary arrives September 17, 2020, and it may be the perfect day to trigger another global Big Bang moment, a massive collective action of the sweetest kind of disobedience.
The why hardly needs recitation, because for these nine years, the shadows have only grown longer.
Now, interestingly, a lot of the complaints they have as to why they want to protest have to do with the Obama administration, for which they are now trying to get re-elected, I guess?
It's the weird thing.
I can't understand about this.
When the first Occupy protest was launched, it was about the Obama administration's failures.
And now you have Joe Biden trying to get back in, and they're gonna Help him?
I find it actually kind of weird.
They say, we will lay siege to the White House and we will sustain it for exactly 50 days.
This is the White House siege.
They do go on to iterate several times.
It is a non-violent protest.
They say, what is our one demand?
We want to collaborate with you, brainstorm tactics with you, spark a revolution with you.
We need your voice of wisdom, yada yada.
They don't actually have any demands.
I guess revolution, nothing less, is something they've been saying.
Now, of course, many of you may have seen this news already, but I bring you now to this tweet from Zach Walls.
Zach Walls is an Iowa senator.
He has his pronouns in his account.
Advocate and small business owner.
And he says, Here's my read of the situation.
Would appreciate any and all feedback.
And he gives us this chart of what Trump is doing and what you can do about it.
And this is where we start to see the spark of more, or at least a hint, there will be more mass civil unrest coming.
He says Trump's strategy.
Break the postal service.
Convince his supporters voting in person is safe.
Be slightly ahead on election night because of huge numbers of Dems.
Because huge numbers of Democrats do the safe and right thing and vote by mail.
Declare victory with a huge number of mail in ballots yet to be counted and aggressively contest the results.
Yell voter fraud over and over as more ballots come in for Biden and it becomes clear Biden won.
Count on complete obedience from the GOP officials to make this a polarized political issue.
Put pressure on GOP-controlled state legislatures to certify electoral college delegates based on election night totals rather than final totals.
Eight, win the electoral college.
Now, what can you do?
He tells everyone to volunteer for Biden.
He says, vote early in person or cast absentee ballot at the very earliest.
He says, if you are not an elevated COVID risk, sign up to be an election worker.
Four, be prepared to take to the streets in November and for extended protests to last through January, potentially during a second or third COVID wave.
Ensure your family and close friends are registered to vote.
And so, you know, he says, be sure to support Democrats and go to Biden's website.
But I saw this and the prepare for mass civil unrest kind of caught my eye. Why?
Well, we've been hearing it a lot, like the White House siege,
and we've actually heard it straight from the likes of Andrew Yang himself.
He said, if our government doesn't get its act together, a general strike and mass unrest are around the corner.
Congress, Mitch McConnell, do your job.
I'm sure you will hear the same thing from the people you represent.
Now, this is about a general strike, which has a lot of different reasons behind it.
But part of it has to do with COVID relief, eviction relief, things like this.
And a lot of it has to do with mail-in voting.
Now, Andrew Yang was a bit vague on what his calls were, but it is trending and we are seeing a lot of people That are, you know, trying to organize a general strike.
I would just like to point out something, you know, kind of silly there with a call for a general strike right now.
I understand a lot of people are preparing for mass civil unrest, but a general strike, for those that aren't familiar, is when everybody just stops working, right?
Everybody goes on strike.
I guess the main problem is, you got a lot of unemployment right now, and people are applying for jobs like crazy.
So, if you have a job, and you think you're gonna go on strike, and walk out, just keep in mind, there's a line of people out the door desperate for that job, and the moment you walk out, they'll just say, next, and the next person will come in and take your job in two seconds.
But hey, by all means, you wanna have a general strike, you do your thing, I'm all about peaceful protest, I just think now is not really the time for a strike.
I mean, if people want to protest, I get protest.
Well, check this out.
There's another website that is planning election night unrest in DC.
I say unrest because, you know, they say protests, but we know what these things typically involve, who they encourage.
And one of the interesting things from a group called Shut Down DC Is that they say we're getting ready for an election meltdown this fall, are you?
Last night, constitutional law scholar Lawrence Douglas joined shut down D.C.
via Zoom.
Talk about his new book.
Will he go?
Trump and the looming election meltdown and shut down.
D.C.
has actually brought up quite a bit.
The post office problems and the conspiracies about mail trucks being, I don't know, I guess stolen.
Deliver democracy.
Protect the U.S.
Postal Service.
This is a big reason for why people are preparing some kind of unrest.
Now, it's not just the only conspiracy.
There are many.
Here's one that's really fun.
Trump may use DHS stormtroopers to stop people from voting.
Okay.
Why is this entertained?
Why are unhinged conspiracies allowed to flourish on the left about Trump's doing things he's never done?
Here's what they did.
They claimed Trump was sending in a bunch of federal storm troopers, Gestapo, secret police.
Never happened.
There were federal forces bolstered at the courthouse in Portland, that's about it.
They didn't come out in Seattle, the only other place law enforcement was actually sent.
Around the rest of the country, there was Operation Legend, which was, you know, essentially investigators doing desk work.
But they try to make everyone believe that unmarked, unidentified, you know, Gestapo or whatever are marching through the streets, snatching people up and throwing them in unmarked vehicles, and it's all just, it's lies, manipulation, It's just not true.
In Portland, there were two instances where federal officers, who had badge numbers and had police written on their chests and on their arms, detained two people for questioning.
That was about it.
And because of that, a federal judge ruled there was no widespread abuse.
And look, the presumption is there was probable cause to detain them, and the police were clearly identifiable, but the media went nuts And at the same time, they claim it's the right who are the conspiracy theorists.
No, the real issue is that the left won't keep their conspiracies in check.
Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, they allow all of this because approved sources believe crazy things.
Yeah, well, now they've won up themselves.
I love this.
Take a look at this.
This person tweeted, WTF at—this has got 744 retweets, mind you—unbelievable!
Mailbox being removed in Portland and Eugene.
This should be illegal.
Please vote no matter how difficult it may be for you.
Just do it.
Biden-Harris 2020 to save America.
Here's a good one.
Jamie Lee Curtis floats conspiracy theory that Trump supporters are stealing mail trucks to win the election.
Yes, I kid you not.
She said, I swear, in broad daylight, the driver of the red truck had a red cap on with white letters.
Conspiracy?
Outright attempt at stealing the election by denying access of the USPS?
Let's not let it happen!
It's crazy.
Look at this one.
This one's got 1,200 retweets.
Has anyone else seen or confirmed USPS removing mailboxes in Portland this week?
This pic from an observer in Northeast Portland via FB.
When I first saw these photos, I just busted out laughing.
It literally is a photo of a truck picking up mailboxes and taking them away.
And they're acting like it's a grand conspiracy to steal the election.
Do you know that we're in a pandemic?
I don't know if we're still in a pandemic, because I don't know when they decide it's not a pandemic anymore.
But look, there's a COVID crisis.
Mail is down, okay?
Now, I want to make sure it's clear.
U.S.
Postal Service confirms it has removed mailboxes in Portland and Eugene.
The agency says mailboxes will only be removed from clusters where multiple boxes are stationed together.
But what none of these people do is explain to you why they're being removed.
It's to help the post- It is to help the post office.
It is to help them.
It is to bolster mail-in voting.
These people have lost it.
Removing the mailboxes, I know, bear with me, helps ensure That your vote will be counted and it will all go swimmingly.
They don't report that, though.
They just report that they're taking the mailboxes.
Yes, on the surface it might seem like my mailbox is gone.
How will I cast my ballot?
Let me give you the reality.
Although, I'm sorry, I gotta say it.
It's unchecked.
Poor, fake news that is driving calls for unrest and civil disturbance and what's going to lead to rioting.
This idea that Trump is sending in stormtroopers, that Trump is...
Stealing mailboxes.
Trump supporters are stealing mail trucks.
Let me break it down for you very simply.
Partly because of COVID, revenues for the post office are going down.
Because people aren't actually sending mail right now, you have a bunch of empty mailboxes.
And so postal post office workers driving on their little trucks have to drive to a substantial amount of mailboxes that are empty.
Get it?
People don't send mail.
People haven't been sending mail in a long time.
Junk mail is going down.
So why would you have a postal worker drive to, say, 30 locations to pick up one letter here or there when clusters can be centered around single mailboxes?
Now, it is unfortunate.
It's true.
And I think this is a real consideration that people might not know where the mailboxes are now.
That is an issue.
But to assume that because of that it's a grand conspiracy to snatch up mailboxes while ignoring the fact the post office is being hurt by COVID, to me it's nuts.
Here's what I think the real issue is.
They waste a ton of gas and carbon emissions.
They're making carbon, but they waste a ton of gas and energy driving around to mailboxes to pick up very little or no mail.
Imagine if the post office worker could save hours and centralize all of the mail by having fewer mailboxes when there's fewer people using them.
They don't talk about that though.
But there is a real simple reason why we are seeing this.
But of course, they just say Donald Trump is trying to steal the election!
Oh heavens!
We must make sure we go out and march from November to January.
We got a lot of bad news as it pertains to mail-in voting.
Delays, the system is broken, and it is not because of Donald Trump.
It's because of the Democrats.
And now they want Trump to dump, they want, you know, Trump to sign off on this, they want Republicans to agree to this, to dump a ton of money into the post office to save it.
But the real issue is that there's a pandemic!
Donald Trump is trying to steal an election.
They say the Postal Service is grinding to a halt in all of these cities.
Yeah, it's grinding to a halt because look at this.
Pieces of mail handled each year dropping dramatically.
Delivery points going up.
It is becoming more expensive to run and it isn't generating enough revenue.
Here we have an opinion piece from the editorial board of the Wall Street Journal.
The post office's problem isn't Trump.
Democrats cry sabotage but mail volume is way down and the USPS is losing billions of dollars.
And that's what really makes me angry.
Why is it that a US postal truck was in a flatbed trailer being hauled away and there was a man driving it who was wearing a red cap with white letters?
I don't know.
It broke down.
Seriously?
And Jamie Lee Curtis is spreading unhinged conspiracies.
And is anybody saying the freaky post office conspiracy on the left?
Nope.
The media allows all of these unhinged leftists to say crazy things about Russia and other stupid nonsense.
And it is leading to people who say we must protest and shut everything down.
Not the sole reason, okay?
Obviously.
People want to protest Trump.
That's what I said earlier on.
Just because their candidate loses, you know, doesn't mean they... Or I think it's silly to frame it that way.
The point is, they're gonna go out and protest.
They don't like Trump.
They're gonna protest.
And they're gonna try and make up reasons for it.
This is one of the big reasons.
Claiming that Trump is stealing the election.
The Post Office's problem, they say.
Two months into his new job, Postmaster General Louis DeJoy is being keelhauled by Democrats for alleged sabotage of the U.S.
Postal Service.
Nearly 200 House Democrats signed a letter this week accusing him of acting to accelerate the crisis at the USPS.
Apparently, they missed the Post Office's new release last Friday, when it reported losing another $2.2 billion last quarter.
Congress has only itself to blame for the mess.
That red ink is no fluke of circumstance.
The post office is meant to be self-sufficient, but it hasn't broken even for years.
Total losses since 2007 run to $78 billion according to a May report by the Government Accountability Office, which said the USPS's current business model is not financially sustainable.
It's a blockbuster service in a Netflix world.
Overall mail volume peaked in 2006 at 213 billion pieces.
As of last year, it was down 33%.
More than half of what remains is marketing mail.
Maybe you noticed while searching for a birthday card amid the real estate flyers, over the same period however, the number of delivery points served by the USPS increased by 9%, from 146 to 160 million.
There are more addresses than ever, but less mail than any time since 1985.
It's similar on the retail side.
Customer visits fell from 1.06 billion in 2010 to 812 million last year, down 23%.
million in 2010 to $812 million last year, down 23%.
Yet total retail offices dropped 4% to 34,613.
The USPS's package delivery business is growing, but it can't make up the difference.
A misalignment like this wouldn't last in a private business.
But the Postal Service answers to politicians.
The USPS is a monopoly on letter service.
Plus, exclusive access to your mailbox.
That comes with a universal service obligation.
A promise to carry a letter anywhere for the flat price of a $0.55 stamp.
The USPS says its longest route is in Sydney, Montana, where a carrier goes 191 miles a day to hit 272 mailboxes.
In Supai, Arizona, mules take mail down an 8-mile path.
Mules!
To the base of the Grand Canyon.
If you want to watch a congressman flip out, suggest closing a rural post office in his district.
The USPS's workforce, more than 600,000 people, is organized by seven different unions, which make their influence felt.
The sorry result is that Congress has continued to mandate six-day service, quashing a USPS attempt in 2013 to save $2 billion a year by stopping Saturday delivery for regular mail, but not packages.
As if they weren't enough, the USPS's price increase on letters and junk mail are generally capped at the rate of inflation.
The Postal Service has billions in assets for retiree health care, but it's barred from investing them except in U.S.
Treasuries.
Progressives and unions complain that the USPS was ordered to set aside money to pre-fund benefits, a stipulation not applied to other entities, but that hasn't prevented a retirement crisis, and the Post Office has missed billions of these payments.
Not only that, but check this out.
Pennsylvania asks court to extend mail-in voting deadlines.
I think we're going to see mass civil unrest.
We're entering 76 or whatever days in Portland.
It's uncontrollable.
The state police in Oregon say they are unable to police anymore because the DA won't prosecute.
The only option for protecting the courthouse now is Donald Trump sending in the feds.
Maybe that's the trap.
Maybe the goal of all of this is to invoke mass civil unrest, and they're doing it in multiple ways.
They won't prosecute the looters and the rioters.
That way they're ready and able, no matter what happens.
They force Trump to send in his federal officers.
They then can claim Trump is using DHS stormtroopers to stop people from voting.
They have a guaranteed riot.
They blame Trump stormtroopers.
And then they blame all of the problems of the post office on Trump so they can claim conspiracy.
Thus, when they show up in the streets, they will say Donald Trump stole the election and now he won't leave.
There it is.
Francis Fox Piven and Deepak Bhargava write for The Intercept.
What if Trump won't leave?
Trump is prepared to do whatever it takes to keep power.
Can he be stopped?
And of course, they reference voting absentee and mail-in ballots.
And this is their big play.
Mail-in ballots is going to be, mail-in voting will be the catalyst to claim Donald Trump cheated.
Well, look man, mail-in voting is all broken and busted up.
And it seems like perhaps it was all on purpose.
Trump is determined to rig this election, defraud voters, and thwart the will of the people.
Maybe, you know, look, maybe it's a little bit much for me to connect all of the unrest calls with just mail-in voting, but that's the big push right now.
People are calling for a general strike.
They're calling for a White House siege.
They're calling to shut down D.C.
They're calling for extended protests from November through January.
They want deadlines extended.
Marco Rubio wrote that we should extend the deadline for, you know, counting the ballots and all that stuff.
And all of this seems to line up with accusing Trump of stealing the election.
That way there will be civil unrest.
The current civil unrest pushes the narrative that Trump's stormtroopers are marching around when they're not.
They're not.
And if Trump sends them out in Portland, he can then take, he can push back and he can say straight up, I had no choice, because the Democrats failed.
But maybe it won't matter.
While it could be good for Trump to say, the Democrats failed and I have to send out the troops in Portland, they don't care.
They don't care if people think they were right or wrong.
They just want to make sure they have the narrative about Trump's stormtroopers intimidating peaceful protesters.
They want you to believe this narrative that Donald Trump is a dictator.
He's abusing federal authority.
He's going to send out stormtroopers, cheat the election, and then challenge everyone.
You know, challenge every vote count.
In reality, maybe there is going to be widespread voter problems.
Maybe there will be mail-in voting problems.
There already are.
Maybe there really are going to be rioters going out and rioting, and they're calling for it.
And they're using this partially as a pretext.
And then they're going to use all of this chaos to claim that they didn't really lose.
Trump didn't really win.
Trump is just a despot dictator who is silencing the electorate and using his stormtroopers to stop the vote.
I don't know what's gonna happen.
Everything's a bit crazy, to say the least.
But I think it's probable, I believe, that because people like you watch videos like this, maybe it's just not working.
And I said this the other day, I really feel, I said this earlier, we might actually see a Reagan-style Trump landslide.
All of this is just too much, isn't it?
Isn't it crazy?
Oh, a White House siege for 50 days?
Don't you think people are gonna be freaked out by that?
And then they'll rally in the streets and they'll demand Donald Trump win.
I think the Democrats' best opportunity for winning was a stoic, rational, moderate approach.
Instead, what did we get?
Unhinged insanity and rioting?
Why would people support that?
Will that play?
No.
I think what's happening is they've panicked, and now they're running in circles, desperately trying to figure out what to do, but they have no plan, and the panicking is only making things worse.
They've burst into flames, and instead of hitting the ground and rolling to put the fire out, they're frantically just patting themselves and running in circles.
And while there may be some, you know, this could be a pretext for this mass protest that's supposed to happen, mass unrest, I think a lot of people are just gonna be like, you know, you gotta vote for Trump, you know what I mean?
You hear stories like this, you watch videos like this, you share videos like this, and people are gonna start to realize you're not getting law and order with the far left and with the Democrats.
And they're planning more, and they're pushing these insane theories about post boxes being stolen to deprive people of their right to vote.
It's actually making it easier.
No weird polling places, I know.
That's a detriment, it is.
But it's going to make sure that the post office can continue functioning, and can actually reach those mailboxes and get your vote in on time.
But of course, everything's a conspiracy with these people, and the media won't call them out, and neither will social media.
But hey, I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up at 6 p.m.
over at youtube.com slash TimCastNews.
Thanks for hanging out, and I will see you all next time.
Yesterday, when I covered the nightly riots in Portland, I said that Trump was definitively correct.
Why?
Because the rioters had returned en masse to the federal courthouse and the Justice Center, and I believe they were also rioting in front of a police precinct.
And the police couldn't get control of it.
Well, now, I gotta say, Trump was absolutely correct about basically everything.
The state police are retreating.
They're giving up, and they're returning to regular assignments.
Now, why were the state police brought in?
Well, they said, over and over again, and you've heard it, that the feds were causing the violence, that Trump's secret police, blah, blah, blah.
So Trump, the DHS, they're like, okay, here's what we'll do.
We'll keep the DHS law enforcement in the courthouse if you can keep your streets safe and stop the rioters.
And then something interesting happened.
The Multnomah County District Attorney straight up said, we're not going to prosecute these people.
So the Oregon State Police, who are supposed to be now filling in for the feds, are like, if we arrest them and you let them go, what are we doing out here?
So they left!
I don't know what's going to happen now, but Trump's, I guess the DHS is going to have to come back and this is, I gotta say, this is everything Trump could have wished for.
You could not have played out a more perfect scenario for Donald Trump.
You know why?
He did get bad press when it came to the federal law enforcement that were guarding the federal courthouse.
It happened.
They went for it.
Now, what is the media going to say?
I'm sorry, man, the narrative is fractured.
You can't keep playing these games assuming everyone, you know, you can fool some of the people, you know, all the time and all the people some of the time, but you can't fool all the people all the time.
And that's what's happening right now.
You're going to start seeing people say, hey, wait a minute.
You mean they're still rioting in mass in front of the courthouse?
I thought Trump withdrew the feds.
Oh!
That was such a big mistake on the part of the media.
It will backfire and blow up in their face.
What's that?
You said the feds withdrew.
Why are there still riots?
Why are the police retreating?
The reality was the feds never withdrew.
They're still in the courthouse.
But maybe, you know, Trump could probably have the DHS just stand down and be like, no, no, let him go for it.
Let him romp about and burn.
Because now he's going to be like, but you asked me to withdraw.
You said it was my fault.
They have set themselves up to fail, and it is disastrous.
Now look, I'm laughing, I know, but the destruction in Portland has gone too far.
Local businesses downtown are saying there's no business, the cities are crumbling, it's happening everywhere.
And this is what you get.
I gotta say it under Democratic leadership, because there are very few big cities run by Republicans, and the few top cities that are, aren't having this.
At least as far as I can tell.
San Diego seems to be fine, their mayor is a Republican.
You look at a lot of other Republican cities and states, you don't see this.
Now, of course, many of the larger cities do tend to be Democrat, and that doesn't absolve them of responsibility.
Maybe there's something about their leadership that's causing these kinds of problems.
I think it's fair to say 100% that's true.
And I'll tell you exactly what it is.
First of all, the feds were defending the courthouse.
Well, the media and the politicians all lied.
The state police defending the courthouse.
But the Democrats said, you know, we don't intervene, we don't make arrests, and now we release.
So the cops are like, OK, I'm done.
What am I supposed to do?
They're going to keep coming back out every single night.
You just release them with no charges.
The police in Portland, not just the state police, are saying straight up, we only arrest people after they commit a crime.
And the DA's like, well, you know, the chaos of the moment.
That's actually what he said.
It was the chaos of a protest environment.
My response is there is no chaos at a protest environment.
I mean, sure, maybe in the big march with everyone waving their little flags, you might drop your phone and then you can't find out where it went because everyone's walking and someone steps on it.
That's chaos.
But when we're talking about someone assaulting an officer and then being released?
No, no, that's a riot.
Okay?
It's a riot when you do this.
Check this out.
Let's read the news here.
I just want to say, straight up, Trump has been handed A golden ticket on this one.
Absolutely.
Now Kayleigh McEnany, Trump, anybody else can come out and be like, what's going on in Portland?
You know, they complain about our Homeland Security police officers defending a courthouse.
The ACLU has called for disbanding the DHS.
But the riots and violence persist worse than ever.
And the state police have to retreat?
That's a golden ticket for Trump, man.
Let's read.
And mind you, Oregon Live is biased in favor of these people.
They say, Oregon State Police on Thursday pulled out the approximately 100 troopers helping both federal officers and Portland Police in responding to nightly protests in the city that have often ended in confrontations with demonstrators.
Violent rioters.
Oh, that's right.
Demonstrators.
Could you imagine if the state police were actually standing there and a bunch of people were demonstrating with signs and the cops were like, oh no, we can't handle the violence of people waving little flags and cheering.
That's not what's happening.
The police have no problem waving and smiling when someone bullhorns.
The police do have a problem when bricks get thrown at their heads.
State police committed to two weeks, and that two weeks ended today, said spokesman Captain Timothy R. Fox.
We're in a county that's not going to prosecute this criminal behavior.
There it is.
You reap what you sow, residents of Portland.
I know, I know, I have sympathy for the people there who are worried about what's going on, but listen.
This is a wake-up call to everybody else.
You get what you vote for.
You get what you ask for.
And if you lay back and you ignore what's going on, this is what happens.
The extremists, the zealots, start voting for their extremist zealot politicians while you sit back in your comfort.
And then all of a sudden, there's violent riots going on for like, what is it, 76 nights now?
Depending on who's count, some people say it's even higher.
76 or so?
I don't even... I lost count, honestly.
And it's because the prosecutor was like, yeah, cut them loose.
Let them bust stuff up more.
We don't care.
And now the cops are like, we're out.
Bye-bye.
So who's gonna defend anybody now?
You got violent rioters rampaging through residential neighborhoods.
It's not an exaggeration.
Oregon Live even wrote about it.
Neighbors, neighborhoods, are starting to get angry because these people are going to their neighborhoods with bullhorns, chanting things in bullhorns like, no justice, no sleep, at like three in the morning.
Ah, too bad.
You get what you vote for, Portland.
It was a pointed reference, when he said they're not going to prosecute, to Tuesday's announcement by new Multnomah County District Attorney, Mike Schmidt, that his office won't pursue many of the charges against demonstrators.
Demonstrators!
Look at this!
Including disorderly conduct, interfering with a police officer, and even riot in some circumstances.
Okay, hold on!
You called them demonstrators and then literally say they're charged with riot.
Can you, can you, we are truly living in some like bizarro nightmare world.
How long does Oregon Live and any other outlet think they're gonna get away with talking like this?
Regular people are gonna be like, wait, wait, wait, hold on, hold on.
Demonstrations?
Why are they arresting demonstrators at first?
Many people probably heard.
Demonstrators got arrested.
And they thought in their mind, people singing Kumbaya and waving their hands.
And they were like, what's happening?
Trump's secret police.
Then they heard, the demonstrators were throwing bricks and smashing windows and beating each other up.
Some dude got stabbed.
No joke.
And now they're like, wait, wait, wait, wait.
Demonstrators?
Charged with riot?
Yeah, that's where we're at.
The troopers will return to their regular assignments elsewhere in the Willamette Valley, along the coast and in southern and eastern Oregon, where police staffing already is limited, Fox said.
The Oregon State Police is continually reassessing our resources and the needs of our partner agencies, and at this time, we are inclined to move those resources back to counties where prosecution of criminal conduct is still a priority.
Sometimes you have a negative experience with cops.
But come on, man.
These guys came out here to stop violent rioters.
I want to repeat something I tweeted and I said in another video.
What bootlicking is not?
Asking officers to end violent riots.
What bootlicking is?
Businesses getting repeatedly smashed up, then still saying they support Black Lives Matter.
These Black Lives Matter riots are going nuts.
I'm sorry, man.
It's mostly in Portland, I get it.
But we saw Richmond the other day.
Chicago had mass looting and then protests.
It's gonna keep happening.
So long as these district attorneys and prosecutors keep saying, nope, We're not gonna prosecute.
Now I feel bad for the cops.
They're like, you mean I win?
It's almost like this.
You ever play a video game, and you get like really far in it, and you forget, and you don't save, and then like the game crashes, or you die, and then you're like, you gotta start over, and like all that progress is lost?
I don't know if that problem still exists for the most part.
I mean, actually it could, with a lot of games.
And then you just like put the controller down, you're like, I don't even want to play right now.
Like all of my progress is gone?
Nah, okay, whatever, I'm out.
Or, you know, it's something like that.
The cops come in, they're like, we're making arrests, we're stopping the violent criminals.
Finally.
And then the DA's just like, free to go.
And they show up the next day and you're like, everything we did yesterday?
Some officer had a severe injury to his hand.
They said it was a severe injury.
I hope he's gonna be okay.
But that sounds like he may lose the use of a hand, perhaps?
A severe injury?
I wonder what that entails.
Officers have been burned.
One officer got whiplash in a concussion because of a giant rock.
It was a massive rock.
Hit him in the head.
And all of that for what?
For nothing?
I feel bad, man.
They say state police were sent to Portland on July 30th under an agreement between Governor Kate Brown and the U.S.
Department of Homeland Security to try to curtail the clashes throughout the month between federal officers and some protesters.
There was no clashes, you know, between protesters who were singing Kumbaya.
And they're not literally singing Kumbaya, you get the point.
It was a riot.
They say outside the courthouse, officers fired tear gas and impact munitions at the crowds after some people lobbed commercial fireworks, glass bottles, paint-filled balloons, and other objects at them over the fortified fence or tried to damage the fence of the building.
They tore the fence down several times.
It's unclear what the department will mean.
At the federal courthouse.
We'll meet at the federal courthouse as the city enters the 78th night of consecutive demonstrations against police brutality and systemic racism since the... This is... I'm sorry.
I'm not playing your stupid game, OregonLive.
They're not protesting for anything.
They're just out smashing and they're getting away with it.
There is no message and Black Lives Matter leaders and NAACP leaders have straight up said, what are they doing?
We don't even know what they're doing or why they're doing it.
What are they protesting for?
Literally, we had an activist the other day say, I don't, what do they want?
We're getting the things we want.
What do they want?
They just want to riot.
But the media covers for them by saying it's the noble, you know, protest movement to end racism.
No, it isn't.
Shut up.
They say U.S.
Department of Justice Attorney Jordan von Boeckern wrote in a legal brief filed Wednesday that the Federal Protective Service will begin to release the DHS component law enforcement personnel who are currently assigned to protecting the courthouse and other federal buildings when Homeland Security leadership determines that the security of federal facilities in Portland is no longer at risk.
The Trump administration sent special tactical agents and other officers from homeland security agencies to Portland after people targeted the courthouse and shattered its glass front doors in early July, broke windows and covered it in graffiti, set fires, cut their way inside, and it was after they broke into the courthouse on the 39th night of rioting that the DHS actually deployed tactical forces.
Under Brown's agreement, state police took over primary law enforcement responsibility for the property around and within the temporary fence line around the federal courthouse.
State police also said they would respond to crimes directed at the courthouse on the nearby Edith Green Weddell Wyatt Federal Building.
Federal officers have mostly stayed inside the courthouse.
One state police took over control of the front portico of the courthouse.
One state police took over the front portico of the courthouse and generally stayed out of sight.
A group of protesters turned attention to Portland precincts in Northeast and Southeast Portland.
And the police union headquarters in North Portland.
They're admitting it.
There was never peace.
They were just looking for a fight.
And when they couldn't get it from the feds, they went and tried to burn down other buildings.
Yes, literally what happened.
And when they couldn't get the fight from the Portland police, they went to residential neighborhoods.
No justice, no sleep.
And then they came back to the courthouse once again, looking for a fight.
State police came out, overwhelmed.
They can't prosecute these criminals.
So they said, we over it.
We done.
State police helped Portland police disperse crowds in those locations after people threw objects and set fires at the police union office.
And some tried to barricade a front door to the East Precinct.
Yeah.
And the mayor said that these Black Lives Matter, you know, extremists were trying to murder the police because they blocked the exits of the police building and tried to set fire to the building.
He called it attempted murder.
And you can't arrest these people.
I'm sorry.
I'm sorry.
You can arrest them.
You can't prosecute these people, man.
Dude, don't vote for these people anymore, man.
Oregon State Police Superintendent Travis Hampton was in Portland every night of the two weeks that troopers were assigned to Portland.
He was the commander in charge of the troopers on the ground and believed his presence was important if he's going to put his troopers in harm's way.
Check this out.
State police released this photo of a rock that struck a trooper's helmet, causing a concussion during Wednesday night's protests.
You kidding me?
Protests?
They whipped a giant rock at one of the cops' heads and gave him a concussion and you're
calling it a protest?
Man, these people are nuts.
Clashes returned to the city's downtown late Wednesday, when some people gathered on the streets outside the federal courthouse and Multnomah County Justice Center.
After about 90 minutes of speeches on the steps of the Justice Center by black community representatives, a crowd of a couple hundred assembled outside the federal courthouse.
A short time later, several people began lobbing fireworks and bottles over the courthouse fence, and Portland police advanced on demonstrators.
Amazing!
They literally are like, people started throwing explosives and bottles, but they were just demonstrating.
Using tear gas to move them away, after declaring unlawful assemblies and a riot.
They literally declared a riot, and Oregon Live is still so pathetic!
It's so pathetic.
You know, you try so hard to defend these lunatics, Oregon Live.
It is sad.
Sad.
A state trooper took a rock to the helmet during the confrontation and suffered a concussion.
Hampton said later Thursday that the agency was honored to be assigned by the governor to help with security for the federal courthouse, but the movement of about 100 troopers from all over the state to Portland came at the cost to rural communities.
Hampton praised his troopers.
Policing large crowd events that routinely turn violent is one of the most challenging aspects of law enforcement.
But our troopers met the challenge nightly with our colleagues at the Portland Police Bureau and Multnomah County Sheriff's Office.
Our trooper sustained frequent injury and handled the most difficult of circumstances with restraint and professionalism in service to the citizens and visitors of Portland.
He said he would continue to assess subsequent resource demands with Portland Police Chief Chuck Lovell.
Van Bokern, the Justice Department lawyer, wrote in court papers that federal officers' engagement with protesters had diminished to practically nothing in the past two weeks.
Whether that will change will be closely watched now that state police buffer is gone.
State police also had served as the liaison between Portland Police and Federal Protective Service after the Portland City Council prohibited local police from communicating.
This is so insane!
They want it to happen.
I'm sorry, man.
The Democrats are doing this on purpose.
You cannot convince me otherwise at this point.
They straight up said not to prosecute.
That was on purpose.
They straight up said to the police, do not coordinate with the feds.
That was intentional.
It's like they want the riots, they want the looting and burning.
I don't understand it because it's going to help Trump.
Trump said suburban housewives are going to vote for him because they want security and safety.
So what do you think happens when these fringe lunatics march through the neighborhood chanting, no justice, no sleep?
It's like they're doing everything in their power to make sure everybody votes for Donald Trump.
Or it's just that they are completely inept and they have this dainty, hippie view of, if we just let the children tire themselves out, eventually it'll go away.
It's actually what they said.
They actually, several of them have argued, you gotta, you gotta let them relax and get bored and disperse.
It's like, that's true to a certain extent.
That's true of some protesters, but not when you're on night 76 of rioting. At this point, your only option is for
prosecution of the extremists.
You can let them protest, but the people who are throwing explosives, who are agitating,
you arrest. And then what you do is you say, you know, we will not tolerate violent rioting. And,
you know, these people are besmirching the good name of the of the protesters.
So we're going to arrest them. I'll tell you what, man.
I think it's fair to say, early on, you can try to make sure you don't escalate tensions.
And if you've got a protest starting, you stand back and you make sure not to escalate.
But come on, man.
At the 39th night of riding, I can understand why the feds came in.
But now we're on night 76 and you still can't prosecute?
That's insane.
We fully support the peaceful protest.
It's just when it turns to violence, and now, without the support of the Multnomah County D.A., that puts our officers nightly at risk, said Tanya Henderson, president of the Oregon State Police Officers Association, a union of about 820 members that includes troopers, dispatchers, forensic and evidence technicians, and fleet managers.
Schmidt announced Tuesday that the District Attorney's Office won't pursue charges of interfering with police, disorderly conduct, criminal trespass, escape, or harassment if the allegations don't involve deliberate property damage, theft, or force against another person or threats of force stemming from protests.
The office also won't prosecute people on a riot accusation alone.
Prosecutors will proceed with a riot case only if it includes an accompanying allegation of specific property damage or use of force.
Absolutely stunning.
They also said, even if they assault a peace officer, they'll consider the heat of the moment, the chaos of a protest environment.
Okay, if a cop is gonna arrest somebody in a riot, then I can understand, you know, there may need to be more evidence.
So sure, I mean, look, freedom over security.
At a certain point, when you have a large group of people that are coordinated, they're acting in concert, they're wearing the same clothes, they share the same goals.
At a certain point, you can say, they're acting as a gang, I guess?
Their plans are relatively obvious?
You can't prosecute these people?
Apparently not.
So I'll tell you what.
Will it get worse?
Of course it will get worse!
Look at this.
I love this one.
Governor Kate Brown.
I'm appalled by the callous actions of the Trump administration yesterday in Bend to target... Bend, Oregon, let's see... to target immigrant communities and forcefully disperse a crowd of concerned community members and clergy who for hours held the line against injustice.
Shut up, you pathetic, insufferable, and incompetent politician.
I'm sick of this, okay?
I'm sorry.
To come out and complain that yesterday, or the day before, ICE agents were transporting criminals and people tried to stop it, you're calling that holding the line against injustice?
Just enough.
Enough, you know?
We can see the videos with our own eyes and the media is doing everything in their power to try and act like it's not happening.
Now that the feds have withdrawn, Portland is mostly peaceful.
I love it.
Mostly peaceful.
I love it.
Largely peaceful, they say.
How absolutely ridiculous.
The politicians and the leaders of the state and city are complete and utter failures.
And it's not about whether or not the police should arrest or the prosecutors should prosecute.
It's about the fact that take everything away and you've got 76 nights of violent riots and they cannot stop it.
Well, that's on them.
And you know what?
Maybe the people of Portland need to have a wake-up call.
Maybe 76 nights will be enough for them to say, I'm going to vote for a different political party.
Because these people are incompetent.
Or they're willfully allowing this to happen.
Now that's Portland for you.
I'll tell you what.
It's going to be real interesting to see what happens now because it was a couple hundred people at the federal courthouse doing the same thing they've always done.
No feds.
What's the narrative now for the national level Democrats and these pundits to say that it was Trump's Gestapo?
And what happens now when they say, please, Trump, come back?
What happens now when the feds do come out and they say Trump's secret police are back and Trump simply says, well, the police pulled out.
They're not, they're not, they're not prosecuting anybody.
So we had no choice.
There's no police here.
What do you think is going to, what do you think regular voters are going to hear when they hear the state police are retreating?
The Portland police can't, can't stop this.
They've been barred from communicating with the feds.
And the only one who's standing up to the violent crime is Donald Trump.
These Democrats have lost their minds.
Next segment's coming up at 1 p.m.
on this channel.
Thanks for hanging out, and I will see you all then.
Is New York in play for 2020?
Donald Trump seems to think so.
Trump says high taxes and a spike in crime rates could help him win New York in the 2020 election as he vows to solve all of the many problems in the city.
I think we are at a point where Donald Trump is correct, and a Republican may very well win in New York State for the first time since Ronald Reagan.
And what's really interesting is that I said this yesterday on my main channel, history, or not yesterday, I believe the day before.
History is repeating itself.
I think it is entirely possible that we may be looking at a Mondale-Reagan type scenario where Trump landslides 49 states.
Now, this segment isn't all about Donald Trump winning the election.
It's about the collapse of New York City.
What I find absolutely fascinating is that all of these big cities just crumble before our eyes.
Right now, trending on Twitter, General Strike.
Seriously.
And Donald Trump steps up and says, I think I can win New York.
And I think he's right.
I do.
I think people might finally wake up to the failures of their democratic leaders.
I have had conversations with pretty far-left individuals.
I'll tell you what, man.
Listen.
You've got liberals, conservatives in this country.
I think most liberals kind of are chilling, not really paying attention.
To be fair, I think that's the case.
Progressives are very active.
You got the far left, also very active.
But there are some pretty far left liberal types.
And what I mean is, they're not far left in the sense that they're socialists, but they're like Bernie Sanders supporters, who have always been kind of liberal.
And I had a conversation, and they told me on the phone, they said, Democrats, man.
These Democrat-run cities.
And I'm like, yeah.
Yeah, I've been watching the news.
I see it.
They're doing everything wrong.
Donald Trump may very well landslide.
It could be 60% of the vote.
Now, if we look at the polls, There's good reason to believe, if we trust the polls, that he's not going to win.
But when we look at the cities, and we look at what's actually happening in these places, I think you'd be nuts to think Joe Biden would win in these places.
Look at this.
A record high of 13,000 apartments are empty in Manhattan, the most in 14 years, as rent prices plummet and supply goes through the roof, with thousands fleeing New York amid ongoing COVID-19 nightmare.
It's not just COVID, it's rioting!
Did you guys see the video from the other night where there's random people just in the street with bullhorns blocking cars?
There's no one stopping them.
It is devolving into literally escape from New York and people are desperate to do so.
Show me every stupid poll in the country saying Biden, Kamala, whatever.
And I'm sitting here going like, yeah, but when you look in these cities, You see what these residents are going through?
I don't buy it.
I really don't, man.
I really don't buy it.
I just can't.
It defies logic.
It defies common sense.
You have to like Trump to recognize that people are suffering under de Blasio.
They're suffering under Cuomo.
And they're probably going to say, I'll take something else.
I want to read you that story about Trump.
And I want to read you about the collapse of these cities.
Look at this.
We got this one from the Daily Mail.
Man who lived in one of New York's homeless hotels says he understands why residents are furious at the influx of junkies and sidewalk camps to their neighborhoods because it has brought crazy to their front doors.
This is what I heard.
I was talking to a buddy in LA and he was like, I'm going to work and I see tent cities everywhere.
It's worse than it's ever been.
Yeah, man.
And now we're facing, what, 30 to 40 million evictions.
But you want to know what really, really drove that golden spike straight into the final rail of the Trump train for 2020?
I'll show you what it is.
I got this tweet here from Mr. Luke Rutkowski.
You may know him if we are changed.
He says, LOL.
Government is funny.
In the first tweet, the New York Post says, And here you can see this photograph of all of these people clustered together, all happy, painting their mural on the ground in defiance of the law on a taxpayer expense.
Sure.
Look at all these people standing around gathering for this Black Lives Matter mural that was put together improperly.
Now I'm going to show you what I think is the golden spike in the Trump train rail.
9-11 tribute in light memorial in NYC is cancelled amid COVID-19 concerns.
Excuse me?
Excuse me?
You shut down the 9-11 memorial?
Wow, man.
I need to channel my inner Greta Thunberg here.
How dare you?
How dare you?
Wow.
New York is dead.
It's dead, and it's not coming back.
I mean, come on, let's be real.
Maybe 20, 30 years, something can rise from the ashes of this once great city.
But how dare you?
Look, man, I didn't live in New York when it happened, but we as Americans were struck By what occurred on that day.
And we were told to never forget.
We were told, never forget.
You're shutting down the Tribute in Light Memorial?
This to me is insane.
But you can have mass gatherings of Black Lives Matter protests?
And it's fine?
Bill de Blasio defended their right to do it and it's fine?
And they shut down this?
Man, does that make me angry.
I tell you what.
And it's a weird kind of anger I feel.
Because it feels like someone reached into my chest and has just gripped my heart and they're laughing in my face as they did it.
We lost a lot of lives that day.
And they had the nerve to just shut it down because of COVID.
And you know what I hear from the left?
They say, well, because of COVID, you know, every day is like 9-11.
And I'm like, shut up.
Just no, absolutely not.
There's one thing.
When we go through a national crisis that's affected the world, when we have economic troubles, and we're trying our hardest, okay?
But how dare anybody say that you can shut this down and defend it in any way?
I'll tell you something.
I'm upset about what's going on with the economic shutdown, with the loss of life, with COVID and all this stuff.
Sure.
Of course.
And I also want to make sure that we respect and remember our history.
9-11?
You know that on 9-11, firefighters rushed into that building, those buildings, And they got crushed.
And their intention was to try and save someone else, and they lost their life because of it.
And that's what New York does.
This is what New York has become.
I remember reading a story a while ago about a 9-11 memorial that was vandalized by the far left.
You want to make me angry?
I'll tell you what makes me angry.
It's this.
Will Trump win New York?
I don't know.
But when I saw that, I'll tell you I'm really mad about it.
Because when you have... Look, there's a lot to talk about with police brutality and police reform.
And there is a day in our country's history where police officers ran towards a collapsing building as debris fell down from the sky.
And many of these people didn't just get sick and die.
They suffered for decades.
And John Stewart says Donald Trump was one of the few people who came to help them and he praised him for it and I respect that.
You do not besmirch those first responders.
So maybe Donald Trump will win in New York and maybe That's gonna be a big wake-up call for a lot of older people who are sitting there looking at this.
I hope Trump addresses it.
I hope he denounces it, and I hope he's angry, and I hope you're as angry as I am when I heard that.
Let me read the story and see what they think about Trump winning.
The Daily Mail says, President Donald Trump has said he will dedicate a good part of his re-election campaign to flipping New York, saying he'd use the reported rise in crime rates in NYC and a promise to lower the infamously high taxes to win over voters.
Crime in his native New York City has been on the rise amid the coronavirus pandemic, and Mayor Bill de Blasio has blamed the outbreak while officials have claimed the release of some inmates to decrease the spread of the virus has led to the spike.
I don't know.
I think they got a copy editing problem there.
He pledged to look at the state and local tax SALT deductions, which allow taxpayers in high-tax states such as California, New York, and Jersey to deduct local tax payments on their federal tax returns.
We're going to look into assault.
We're going to look into crime.
We're going to look into all these things and solve the problems of many problems that they have in New York.
Trump's Tax Cuts and Jobs Act put a $10,000 cap on itemized deductions claimed for property sales and income tax, but before 2018 there was no limit.
People who obtain 88% of those benefits earn over $100,000.
However, the standard deduction for single filers is $12,200, $2,200 more than the itemized maximum.
He says, I will bring down taxes and I'll make sure that New York City is a safe place.
This is a cherished diamond of this country and we can't let this happen to New York.
He added, Who can be happy if you live in Manhattan and your taxes are going through the roof and your quality of life is on the way down and they're defunding the police?
Trump didn't specify his plan to bring down crime in the Big Apple, but he has recently threatened to unleash federal troops on the streets after unrest surrounding protests against police brutality and racial injustice.
Saying, here's a quote, Over the last six months, what's happened is insane.
It's insane.
So we're going to try very hard to win New York, and that will be the first time since Ronald Reagan, he told the New York Post on Thursday.
Good?
Do it.
Bill de Blasio is a sick, disgusting individual.
I have had enough.
I'll try to keep it chill, but I am extremely angry about everything that he has done to this city.
I lived in New York for quite a while.
I am not from there.
And I ended up leaving because it was horribly mismanaged.
And there were so many problems.
I lived on a street.
I lived off of Myrtle and Nostrand in New York City.
And on this street, a black identity extremist walked up to a squad car with a with a latino and asian police officer and he executed them both and that was my street just look out the window just right one block down and i could see that i could see everything i did i i did you know when it happened i was i didn't notice until the helicopters and the police it was a block down and to be completely honest there are gunshots in that area relatively often that's new york man not the worst place but it's gotten so awful
When it was announced that Bill de Blasio didn't get permits for the Black Lives Matter mural in front of Trump Tower, when it came out that he was using 27 police officers to defend his ideological political slogan that he, through edict, decided to paint, I was livid, and I've been complaining about it ever since.
And now, to add insult to injury, To punch every single American in the stomach.
He says, we're fine with our mural.
We don't need your approval.
But your memorial, your lights?
We're shutting those off.
It's disgusting what this man has done to the city.
And Trump is absolutely correct.
So you know what?
Trump needs to do something, because no one else will.
People who are fleeing, I'll tell you what makes me think maybe he can't win.
The more conservative-leaning people have fled.
And many of them have fled to other states.
I mean, I left a while ago.
If I was there, I certainly would have, you know, voted for probably the Republican, you know, at this point.
It's probably what I'm doing now.
And it's because of this.
I'm gonna need... I'm gonna need anybody in New York to justify that.
I dare you.
You will not be able to do it.
You will not be able to ever justify shutting down the Lights Memorial.
I've been there.
You know, I've been there several times to the memorial.
And I've looked at the names.
And it's important.
Now, take a look at this story.
We're seeing, you know, mass exodus from the city.
And we've got the word of a guy who actually has experienced what's going on.
Check this out.
A homeless man who lived in one of New York City's hotels has spoken out to say he understands why residents are angry with a situation that is bringing craziness to their front doors.
Sal Solomon, who is in his 50s, was recently staying at a hotel near JFK Airport, which is among the 139 in New York City that are being used to shelter 13,000 homeless people.
He had been living in a shelter but was moved out along with thousands of others to try to prevent COVID-19 outbreaks.
Solomon became homeless after a stint in prison for stealing a car and after the breakdown of his marriage.
He is not offended by the NYC residents who are outraged by the influx of homeless on the streets, telling CBS News.
A part of me agrees with them.
Who wants craziness in front of your doorstep?
Help divert these funds that are going to these private companies that are just warehousing them and use those funds for qualified psychiatrists.
This is something a lot of people don't understand.
Homeless people aren't simply victims of capitalism, like the left would have you argue.
I've worked at a homeless shelter specifically.
I've dealt with this specifically.
I've worked at several non-profits.
And the issue really is, in many instances, mental health.
You have some people who cannot properly function.
I'm not saying this to be disrespectful.
They lack the mental clarity of mind.
For having a job, for paying bills, for maintaining property, and it's sad, and that's why I worked for a shelter.
We want to try and figure out how to help people to the best of our abilities.
Many of them do not want to be in shelters, many of them do not want apartments, and many of them do, and there are many homeless people who have just lost their job due to, you know, unfortunate circumstance.
In this instance, we have a man who committed a crime, went to prison, and now he's homeless.
It's one of the reasons why I think we need prison reform.
People should be able to come out and not be homeless.
I understand we have programs like this.
Maybe we can figure out a way to do things better.
And I'm always, whenever I say things like this, I'm saying, we just, we research it, we try and figure it out, and if it can't be done, well then maybe that's the reality, but we try, right?
It doesn't mean we do extreme things like abolish prisons or police, that's psychotic.
Take a look at this, homeless in NYC.
The Bell Nord, the Bella Claire, the Lucerne.
Look at all these hotels.
Some displaced people have been seen doing drugs, urinating, and catcalling in the streets, which are free from tourists, with a widespread travel ban due to COVID-19.
Some New Yorkers have blamed the rising crime rate on the homeless.
However, the mayor has blamed it on the coronavirus pandemic, and authorities have blamed it on the release of people from jail to help prevent the spread of COVID.
Mayor Bill de Blasio has moved 13,000 homeless people into hotels across the city to stop COVID-19 outbreaks and shelters.
A record high of 13,000 apartments are empty in Manhattan.
The most in 14 years.
Could there be a simple solution where the left is going to say, I know, put the homeless people in the empty buildings?
That's what Bill de Blasio said he's going to do.
They're going to buy up these buildings.
And so I wonder if this is on purpose.
I tell you what, when I saw that story about canceling the 9-11 tribute, I had to wonder if their goal is to actually help Donald Trump win by playing the villain.
Because how evil could you be?
How despicable could you be?
I did not think that my respect for Bill de Blasio could go lower than none.
But you better believe it's in the negatives.
It's just that bad.
And now we have a city in collapse, man.
New York City.
Trump called it a diamond.
Well now it's a pile of rubble.
You know what's really funny?
I saw this documentary before about Donald Trump and how he revived New York City in the 70s.
I believe it was the late 70s into the early 80s.
I'd have to rewatch it, but basically he created this desire.
He tried reversing the downward trend by creating this hip luxury tower.
And the idea was it will make rich people want to be here.
They want to be cool.
They want to be popular.
Everybody wants to know what's going on.
He wanted to make something with pizzazz.
Generate some buzz.
And it worked.
Rich people flooded into the city.
They wanted to be there.
They paid massive taxes and it helped the city clean up its act.
The tax base is gone now.
It's gone, and what's left is a mayor who's gleefully, you know, laughing about snatching up properties at discount prices.
Who's canceling a 9-11 memorial and painting his Black Lives Matter message.
If you believe, if, you know, I'll tell you this.
If it is true that Americans support Black Lives Matter more than they would support the 9-11 memorial, then so be it.
This country deserves everything that happens after this, because that is a step too far for me.
I mean, you can say Black Lives Matter because as a phrase, of course, it's true.
As an organization, we can criticize them, but I can recognize people might support it.
But if you as a mayor Are gonna pull a move like this and the people won't vote him out?
And the people of New York don't at least, you know, vote for anybody.
Anybody else.
Then I think it's lost already.
I think we're lost.
It's true there's a lot of young people.
who were born after 9-11, who are going to be voting.
I mean, many of them are 18, 19 years old.
Well, not 19 yet, but there are a lot who are able to vote now.
There are many who will be able to vote, and they weren't even alive when it happened.
More importantly, there's going to be a lot of people who were, you know, just kids, five,
six, seven years old, and don't really, you know, weren't old enough to comprehend the
full severity of it.
A certain age, you know, I remember when I was a little kid, and, you know, the Cold
War was going on, and it meant nothing to me.
And when I was a teenager, the Cold War being long over, it meant nothing to me.
But I was like, I think I was 14 when 9-11 happened.
And I woke up.
And I saw the panic and the fear and I watched this stuff happen.
And it's a scary moment in American history.
And now it's being forgotten by a mayor who wants to play politics.
Who wants to burn a city to the ground so he can buy up the buildings.
And he is spinning in the face of every good American.
Of every American.
Even the bad ones.
I shouldn't say every good American.
Every single American.
And you know what?
To people around the world, too.
Because there are many other people who donated to us, who mourned for us, and those people are being disparaged in this moment as well.
It wasn't just about us getting attacked.
It was also a tremendous moment where many people around the world came together and gave us support.
What a disgusting piece of human garbage.
And now the city is just crumbling.
And it makes me so angry, man.
Manhattan residential vacancy rate is just skyrocketing.
And I feel like it's on purpose, man.
I really do.
Because now as property value collapses... Like, why paint Black Lives Matter in front of Trump Tower?
Block off the road?
And put police there?
Devalue the building!
Interesting, huh?
It was a Trump Tower, they say.
Fact check me on this one.
A Trump Tower that helped revitalize the city.
And now it will be the destruction of that Trump Tower.
Along with many other things that result in the collapse of that city.
It's sad, it really is.
But, you know, across this country.
In Chicago, they have a presumption of dismissal, releasing riders.
Seattle, Portland, New York.
What a shame.
I think we might be seeing a 49 state landslide.
And if what Bill de Blasio did isn't enough for that, then maybe we don't, you know, then maybe we've already lost.
But I'll tell you this.
I want to thank Bill de Blasio.
I really do.
I want to thank him and the city for shutting that down.
To let me know, beyond a reasonable doubt, what these people stand for.
I hope it invigorates people and makes them now realize and stand up.
And it makes me actually, from the darkness, I believe, comes the light, comes the optimism.
Such a foolish thing to do.
And I hope, and I believe, that such an egregious action will really snap people to attention.
It may be a good thing.
It may be the final straw to wake up the silent majority and say, no.
So maybe it will be a Trump landslide.
And I find it funny to say that because, you know, Trump has not been my favorite guy for a long time.
And I give him credit.
I think he's improved and I can accept it.
Absolutely.
And now in the face of things like this, you know what?
Go for it.
Bring it on.
Someone's got to clean this up.
And I hope, you know, the garden of heroes Donald Trump has talked about.
I hope he does it.
And I hope Donald Trump Calls this out, and I hope he says, you know, we won't stand for it.
We need to have our memorial.
I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up at 4 p.m.
over at timcast.net.
Thanks for hanging out, and I'll see you all next time.
We got massive breaking news in the Durham investigation, Obamagate, whole craziness.
Somebody's pleading guilty.
Now, it seems like it's just going to be a low-level throw under the bus.
So some people are saying that This is Durham not delivering.
Bill Barr's not delivering.
While others say this is actually exactly what they were looking for.
Depends on what you want.
I know a lot of people want to see high-level arrests and indictments.
Right now, we're just getting a low-level arrest, and there's no allusion to any kind of grand conspiracy, but...
This guy altered some emails.
I want to make sure I get this one absolutely correct.
So we're going to read this story.
Donald Trump crows that corrupt FBI lawyer who altered CIA email used to get warrant to spy on Trump aid is pleading guilty in deal with AG Bill Barr's probe into Russia collusion investigators.
The Daily Mail says an FBI lawyer will plead guilty to making a false statement in the
first criminal case arising from U.S. Attorney John Durham's investigation into the probe
of ties between Russia and the 2016 campaign.
At the White House, Donald Trump crowed that a corrupt FBI lawyer in James Comey's Very
Corrupt FBI was expected to plead guilty.
That's just the beginning, I imagine, he said.
The fact is they spied on my campaign and they got caught.
The case does not, in fact, relate directly to spying on the Trump campaign.
Clinesmith is being charged in federal court in Washington and is expected to plead guilty to one count of making a false statement, his attorney, Justin Scherr, told the Associated Press.
Now doesn't this all seem a bit familiar?
They tried claiming the same thing about Michael Flynn, so my warning to all of you following the Russiagate-Obamagate craziness is do not get your hopes up.
I'm sorry, you know, I know a lot of people want to have their hopes up.
I'm not trying to be a Debbie Downer.
I'm just saying.
You don't want to make the same mistake all these leftists did when they started screaming like, the walls are closing in, we got him!
This guy did wrong.
He did.
He is now going to pay a penalty for doing so.
So I'm glad the Durham investigation is happening.
They caught some malfeasance.
And I'm happy with what it is.
You know, we'll take it from here.
I'm hoping, I'm hoping that John Durham actually goes after many of these criminals.
I'm concerned that he actually won't.
And that's just what you can expect.
A lot of people who are good at making predictions, who have been following the news, have straight up said that you can expect with the Durham investigation, there's going to be a bunch of low-level guys get thrown under the bus, men and women, you know, guys and gals, and it's not going to be Obama, it's not going to be high-level individuals.
Let's read more.
According to a criminal information filed in federal court in Washington, D.C.
on Friday, Clinesmith altered an email from another unnamed government agency, believed to be the CIA, to say that an unnamed individual, believed to be Carter Page, was not a source, even though an email from the other agency did not say that.
It is unclear if Clinesmith has flipped and will be a witness for the Durham probe in the future, or simply pleaded guilty to seek a lower sentence.
Guilty pleas in probes like Durham's are often in return for cooperation, as was the case in Robert Mueller's inquiry, and there it is.
Perhaps what's really happening right now Is that this man, Clinesmith, is agreeing to cooperate in exchange for a lesser charge.
unidentified
Keep- keep your- keep your- they said the same thing about Michael Flynn!
They're getting him and, you know, whatever, whatever, listen.
Maybe.
I think it all comes down to whether or not Donald Trump wins in November, if there's even going to be an election.
I think if Donald Trump loses, the Durham investigation will end.
And you know, it's interesting because it's almost a mirror image to what they're saying about Russiagate, that Trump brought in Bill Barr, Bill Barr shut it down, and now we'll never know the truth!
It was a cover-up, cover-up!
Maybe, maybe not.
I'm not into conspiracy theories.
My assumption is immediately going to be Bill Barr is a straight shooter and he came in and said, you know, we're good.
This shouldn't have happened.
And I think it's fair to say we've uncovered evidence now that shows Russiagate was bunk.
And this may actually be the real investigation.
Maybe these are the real criminals.
Evidence suggests this guy didn't just say a naughty word or misspeak.
He literally altered an email.
It's way different from what Michael Flynn was accused of.
And if he's now going to start squealing, this makes sense.
I don't know if we're going to see all of the indictments or charges or whatever else may come out of this before the election, but that's what's predicted.
Bill Barr said there would be a development today.
I did not think it would be a guilty plea.
But here we are, bigger than I expected.
And he said, the case is doing its thing, there's an election happening, there's no bearing on this.
They say, however, the information filed in court offers no indication of involvement in Clinesmith's crime by anyone else.
Maybe it's because Bill Barr's not stupid and he doesn't want to go out screaming, you know, collusion and conspiracy like all these leftists did.
Maybe he's good at doing his job and he's being chill about it and going where the evidence leads.
The Durham investigation, which is also examining the intelligence community's assessment about Russian election interference, has caused deep concern among Democrats who view it as a politically charged exercise meant to re-litigate an already closed investigation and fear criminal charges or public reports issued so close to the 2020 election could be timed to affect November's vote.
I wonder, were the Democrats saying anything about collusion in the last election?
Oh, they were?
Yeah, so no, I don't care, okay?
The investigation has proceeded alongside a parallel effort by Senate Republicans to discredit the Russia probe, and as Attorney General William Barr has escalated his own criticism of the FBI's probe.
Durham has not said who the probe is targeting, but Trump has made clear that he wants Comey, Barack Obama, and his other top intelligence officials charged, and has ranted they committed treason.
Barr foreshadowed the legal action in a Fox News Channel interview on Thursday night, in which he said there would be a development Friday, but that was not earth-shattering, but would be an indication that the investigation was moving along.
Justice Department policy directs prosecutors not to take investigative steps for the purpose of affecting an election and frowns upon taking public actions in the weeks before an election.
But Barr has said he did not feel constrained by that policy in part because the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, former Vice President Joe Biden, is not a target of Durham's investigation.
And Barr has signaled that he will look to make Durham's findings public before the election.
Sure.
But let's be real, man.
The previous administration, there were elements in these agencies that were doing wrong.
It may not hurt Biden to an extreme degree, like if he was targeted, it's certainly going to help Donald Trump.
Look, I'm all for justice.
And I think we've got evidence here of real wrongdoing.
And Russiagate melted my brain because it was fake news for years, shoveled on our throats by liars.
But come on, let's be honest.
This is of course going to benefit Trump for the election.
There's no silly games to play.
I know a lot of people want to, you know, be cheerleaders for their team and all that stuff, but let's be honest.
Look, if it helps Trump, it does.
I think Comey coming out and talking about emails helped Trump too, so it is what it is.
If you want to engage in dirty games and Bill Barr is doing an election, I'm not going to interpret this as some grand conspiracy that Bill Barr is holding this all for an October surprise.
I don't think Bill Barr would do that.
I don't have evidence to suggest he would.
I can only say this is what's happening.
Deal with it.
They did it to Trump with Russiagate.
You can't come out now cry and claim it's not fair when these are the rules that everyone played by in the past several years and they're being played by now.
If criminal charges are coming up, I believe it will help Trump.
But you know what?
In my opinion, good.
I think it should.
We're now learning that there's malfeasance in the investigation.
Then Trump deserves to be exonerated, period.
And if it happens just before election, well, all the better, isn't it?
It'll play a role.
And maybe it should play a role.
Because if Trump was innocent and was falsely accused for years, the American people have a right to know this.
And now we're learning.
They say Clinesmith was referred for potential prosecution by the department's inspector general's office, which conducted its own review of the Russia investigation.
That review found that the Russia probe was opened for a legitimate reason and did not find proof of political bias.
But it also concluded that the FBI made significant errors and omissions as it applied for secret national security warrants to eavesdrop on former Trump campaign advisor Carter Page.
Specifically, the Inspector General accused Clinesmith, though not by name, of altering an email about Page to say that he was not a source for another government agency.
Page has said he was a source for the CIA.
The Justice Department relied on that assertion as it submitted a third and final renewal application in 2017 to eavesdrop on Page under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.
Wait a minute!
Would this criminal prosecution undermine the previous statement that there were errors but no wrongdoing?
Yes.
Interesting.
I think we're going to see a lot more.
I think this will lead to more indictments.
Now, mind you, Michael Flynn is battling to have all these charges dropped because it turns out they were bunk charges.
I mean, I'm sorry.
The evidence suggests the FBI was trying to get him to lose his job.
That makes no sense.
Maybe I'm wrong about some of these things, for sure.
And I don't want to play the same stupid game the left played.
So I'll tell you this.
I don't know what's coming.
Bill Barr says there's going to be more before the election.
We've got this.
This guy actually altered a document that's very different from speaking to somebody and them claiming they want to get you to lose your job or whatever.
We'll see how this plays out.
But I think Barr is on the level.
I think Barr is methodical, professional, calm, collected.
He's a good dude.
I probably disagree with Bill Barr on certain issues.
I think it's fair to say.
A lot of these old-school Republican guys I probably don't get along with.
But, you know, look, man.
There was a time in this country where liberals and conservatives agreed, for the most part, on law and order, law enforcement.
And it's kind of drifting away, I guess.
I mean, we're now facing, you know, liberals and conservatives are kind of uniting under this one banner, with liberals kind of rolling their eyes and agreeing to vote for Trump.
Because the left has gone truly insane.
From scandal after scandal, weird conspiracies, unhinged theories, and now rioting and stuff, maybe this is what we need.
The story wraps up by saying Barr stepped in to dismiss the criminal case against former Trump Administration National Security Advisor Michael Flynn, even though Flynn pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI, and Barr overruled prosecutors to seek a lighter prison term for Trump confidant Roger Stone, the Republican president commuted Stone's sentence last month.
I think Bill Barr's on the level.
I think, you know, he says he didn't know Trump before all this, and I believe him.
But we'll see, man.
I don't like people just blindly supporting something or assuming one side's better than the other.
The evidence must speak for itself.
We'll see how this plays out.
I got a couple more segments coming up in a few minutes, and I will see you all shortly.
The left is outraged because we have a return of some kind of what they're calling birtherism.
Believe it or not, Apparently people are challenging the eligibility of Kamala Harris, and it's actually a really interesting point.
You see, the clause in the Constitution about birthright citizenship specifically says that not only must you be born here, a naturalized citizen, but you must be subject to the jurisdiction thereof.
The argument they're presenting is basically that Kamala Harris was born to two non-citizens here as temporary workers, and therefore, she was not subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S.
She was subject to the jurisdiction of India and Jamaica, and therefore, they argue, she's not a citizen.
I think it's silly.
I think it's dumb.
I really do.
I'm sorry, man.
Look, I get it.
We're not going to go back in time.
How old is Kamala Harris?
Is she in her 50s or something?
Are we going to be like, now she's no longer a citizen?
They're actually saying she might not even be eligible to be a senator.
You know, these are real questions.
They are.
And the left hates them.
They call it racism and other stupid nonsense.
Look, if it's true, it's true.
It is what it is.
I personally don't care for this kind of stuff.
But it's Newsweek publishing this.
I kid you not.
Newsweek, a mainstream left-leaning publication, has run this op-ed from a professor of law, some questions for Kamala Harris about eligibility.
Wow!
So look, this is not... You want to get mad at somebody, you get mad at the mainstream media.
And therefore, I think it's worth talking about.
Let's read.
They say...
Oh, they put an editor's note in.
It's great.
Editor's note.
Some readers reacted strongly to this essay, seeing it as an attempt to ignite a racist conspiracy theory.
This is entirely inaccurate, as this note explains.
What is this note?
They put up another editor's note on birtherism.
OK, OK, we'll come to this in a second.
They say, the fact that Senator Kamala Harris has just been named the vice presidential running mate for presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden.
He's still presumptive.
What do you mean he's presumptive?
He just picked a VP.
He's the nominee, okay?
Come on.
They say.
The 12th Amendment provides that no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice President of the United States.
And Article 2 of the Constitution specifies that no person except a natural-born citizen shall be eligible to the office of President.
Her father was, and is, a Jamaican national.
Her mother was from India, and neither was a naturalized U.S.
citizen at the time of Harris' birth in 1964.
That, according to these commentators, makes her not a natural-born citizen, and therefore ineligible for the office of the President, and hence ineligible for the office of the Vice President.
Nonsense runs the counter-commentary, indeed.
Politifact rated the claim of ineligibility as pants-on-fire false.
Snopes rated it simply false.
And from the other side of the political spectrum, Conservative Daily News likewise rated it false.
All three, and numerous others, simply assert that Harris is eligible because she was born in Oakland, and is therefore a natural-born citizen from location of birth.
The 14th Amendment says so, they all claim, and the Supreme Court so held in the 1898 case, U.S.
v. Wong Kim Ark.
And now they shatter that narrative with a powerful argument.
They basically say that, specifically pertaining to Wong Kim Ark, these were permanent residents.
A permanent resident is subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S., and therefore their children would be as well.
Kamala Harris doesn't fit the bill.
They say.
But those claims are erroneous, at least as the Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment was originally understood.
An error to which even my good friend, renowned UCLA School of Law professor Eugene Volokh, has fallen prey.
The language of Article 2 is that one must be a natural-born citizen.
The original Constitution did not define citizenship, but the 14th Amendment does.
And it provides that, quote, "...all persons born in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof are citizens.
Those who claim that birth alone is sufficient overlook to the second phrase, The person must also be subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S.
And that meant subject to the complete jurisdiction, not merely a partial jurisdiction, such as that which applies to anyone temporarily sojourning in the United States, whether lawfully or unlawfully.
Such was the view of those who authored the 14th Amendment Citizenship Clause.
Of the Supreme Court of the United States in the 1872 Slaughterhouse Cases and the 1884
case of Elk v. Wilkins, of Thomas Cooley, the leading constitutional treaties writer
of the day, and of the State Department which in the 1880s issued directives to U.S. embassies
to that effect, the Supreme Court's subsequent decision in Wong Kim Ark is not to the contrary.
That issue, there was a child born to Chinese immigrants who had become lawful permanent
residents in the U.S.
Domiciled was the legally significant word used by the court.
But that was the extent of the court's holding, as opposed to broader language that was dicta,
Indeed, the Supreme Court has never held that anyone born on U.S.
soil, no matter what the circumstances of the parents is, is automatically a citizen.
Granted, our government's view of the Constitution's citizenship mandate has morphed over the decades to what is now an absolute birth on the soil no matter what the circumstances view.
But that morphing does not appear to have begun until the late 1960s, after Kamala Harris's birth in 1964.
The children born on U.S.
soil to guest workers from Mexico during the roaring 1920s were not viewed as citizens, for example.
When in the wake of the Great Depression, their families were repatriated to Mexico.
Nor were the children born on U.S.
soil to guest workers in the Bracero Program in the 1950s and early 1960s deemed citizens when that program ended.
And their families emigrated back to their home countries.
So before we cavalierly accept Senator Harris's eligibility for the office of Vice President, we should ask her a few questions about the status of her parents at the time of her birth.
This is really, really fascinating to see coming from Newsweek, and of course, there's a major backlash slamming them over this.
They basically go on to say that her parents were temporary workers.
It's a big argument that's been put forth many times.
For instance, if someone is brought here, you know, if someone flies here for a diplomatic mission, we don't consider their kids to be citizens.
They're subject to the jurisdiction of their home countries.
We now do have this phenomenon where if you're born here, you're a citizen.
And this creates some kind of tourism program where pregnant women come visit the U.S., give birth in the U.S., so their kids can have citizenship.
But this is a gaping hole in national security.
I mean, this doesn't seem to make sense.
You can't just fly here.
I mean, at the time when we were starting to implement a lot of these programs and these ideas, we didn't have planes.
So it didn't make sense that someone would try to come here just to have a kid.
And even if they did, they didn't consider that kid to be a citizen because they weren't born of parents who are citizens or of parents who are under the jurisdiction of the country.
It's an interesting argument.
I don't know what to say to it.
Apparently, however, they've been forced to address it.
Editor's note.
Eastman's Newsweek column has nothing to do with racist birtherism.
Ah, here comes the defense.
Some of our readers have retched strongly to the op-ed we published by Dr. John Eastman, assuming it to be an attempt to ignite a racist conspiracy theory around Kamala Harris's candidacy.
Dr. Eastman was focusing on a long-standing, somewhat arcane legal debate about the precise meaning of the phrase, subject to the jurisdiction thereof.
No, I'm sorry, Newsweek, you don't get to walk it back.
You literally ran an article saying she's not eligible.
Look, They say, were Harris's parents lawful permanent residents at the time of her birth?
If so, then under the actual holding of Wong Kim Ark, she should be deemed a citizen.
That is, a natural-born citizen.
Or, were they instead, as seems to be the case, merely temporary visitors?
Perhaps on student visas issued pursuant to Section 101.15.F of Title I of the 1952 Immigration Act.
If the latter were indeed the case, Then, derivatively from her parents, Harris was not subject to the complete jurisdiction of the U.S.
at birth, but instead owed her allegiance to a foreign power or powers, Jamaica, in the case of her father and India, in the case of her mother, and was therefore not entitled to birthright citizenship under the 14th Amendment as originally understood.
Increasingly, this recitation of the original meaning of the 14th Amendment Citizenship Clause might also call into question Harris's eligibility for her current position as a United States Senator.
I think if somebody wants to bring up a legal argument and they're a law professor and they've got a sound reason to do so, that's fine.
But to now panic and come out with this article?
I'm sorry, man.
I find it hilarious.
Newsweek, you published an op-ed by a guy who brought up legitimate points.
They have an update.
The biographical note has been updated to include that Eastman ran for attorney general in the Republican primary in 2010.
He was defeated by Cooley, who was then defeated by Harris.
Interesting.
Dr. Eastman is the Henry Salvatore Professor of Law and Community Service at former Dean at Chapman University Fowler School of Law.
He is also the 2020-21 Visitor Scholar in Conservative Thought and Policy at the Benson Center for the Study of Western Civilization.
University of Colorado Boulder.
Dr. Eastman is also a senior fellow at the Claremont Institute and founding director of the Institute's Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence.
Eastman ran and they had this... Okay, okay, listen.
You made your point.
He says, I have no doubt that the significant challenge to Harris's constitutional eligibility to the second highest office in the land will be dismissed out of hand as so much antiquated constitutional tripe.
But the concerns about divided allegiance that led our nation's founders to include the natural born citizen requirement for the office of president and commander in chief remain important indeed.
With persistent threats from Russia, China, and others to our sovereignty and electoral process, those concerns are perhaps even more important today.
It would be an inauspicious start for any campaign for the highest offices in the land to ignore the Constitution's eligibility requirements.
How else could we possibly expect the candidates, if elected, to honor their oaths, to faithfully execute the office of the President of the U.S., and to the best of their ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States?
So, uh, I think we get what he's trying to say.
And I think they've presented his credentials.
We have a problem in this country with people refusing to talk about important issues because they don't want to be smeared for being racist.
Sorry, you gave me this guy's credentials.
I hear what he has to say.
I guess we'll see how it goes.
You don't get to walk it back now and panic because you've sparked what you're calling racist birtherism.
If someone isn't a citizen, well, then there you go.
What do you want me to say about it?
Hey, I'll tell you what, man.
I think a lot of this is always silly.
I really do.
But this is a guy of merit presenting an argument.
Instead of calling it racist, counter the argument.
If not, well, I don't know what you expect from me, but I'm reading Newsweek here.
It's a mainstream media publication.
I got another segment coming up in a few minutes.
Stick around and I will see you all shortly.
There is no news in this country anymore.
It's becoming increasingly difficult to actually figure out what's going on because our media systems are completely broken.
This one's really simple.
The New York Times called Trump, Drumpf.
I kid you not.
And this wasn't just an accident.
In the initial publication of this article about Yale and the Justice Department, they called Donald Trump, Trump.
Some, for some reason, someone at the New York Times went in and altered to say, Drumpf.
And then everyone started noticing, and the New York Times then panicked and changed it back.
Gee, I wonder who at the New York Times did that.
And that is a major strike to the credibility of the paper.
It's not just that.
In today's final segment here on the Standard Timcast Show, we'll be doing the IRL podcast later, I want to talk to you about our broken media, and I have an excellent tweet by Michael Tracy.
I think Michael Tracy did a great job.
I think we probably disagree on a couple things, but we find ourselves in similar positions sometimes, and I respect his work.
He tweeted this.
The fundamental lack of curiosity about these ongoing riots on the part of national media and politicians is nuts.
Downtown Chicago is partially shut down as we speak.
Shouldn't the country have a better collective understanding of WTF is going on?
Yes, Michael, you are correct, but I'm sorry.
The New York Times is too concerned with literally writing the Drumpf administration in their stupid articles.
They're too busy complaining about Donald Drumpf.
Oh, you got him!
That's it!
Trump will never recover from being called Drumpf again.
Amazing.
I wonder how this happened.
You know, I tell you this, man.
When the Covington kids sued all these media outlets, amazing.
They settled.
They're starting to settle.
You know why?
Because they don't want it to go to Discovery.
You know what Discovery is?
It's when they get access to communications between individuals to determine whether or not they were intending to defame or libel the Covington kids.
So, basically, if someone sues someone else for libel or defamation, slander, whatever, they can then say, You know, if the judge agrees, the case will move forward.
We want to file a motion for discovery.
I'm not a lawyer, so I could probably get my terms wrong, but basically then, they have to give over communications pertaining to certain conversations or whatever is requested, if the judge grants it.
You then will see the private communications of these individuals.
If they accidentally call Trump Drumpf, what do you think is going on behind the scenes of the New York Times?
Why should I trust their framing of anything if they don't like the president and we know it?
But did we really need them to come out and say Drumpf for us to realize the media is fake news?
There are local outlets around this country that do a good job.
There's a big story about a little boy named Cannon Hinnant.
His life was taken from him, and mainstream major news outlets didn't cover the story, and that sparked a lot of outrage among mostly conservatives.
I hate to say it, but it's true.
It was mostly conservatives.
Now, I think the main reason the story wasn't being covered is there's a bias.
These news outlets know what will butter their bread.
They know what they need to say in order to get traffic, and it's not going to be about a little boy who was killed by an adult black male.
This is a joke that is made in mainstream television.
There's an episode of Family Guy where Peter Griffin accidentally shoots Cleveland's son, Cleveland being black.
When Cleveland finally realizes that Peter Griffin isn't such a bad guy, he takes the blame and says, actually it was me, and then all of a sudden every journalist is gone.
That's the point.
The media doesn't care.
They don't care about these things.
They care about making their money and playing to biases.
And so this, this was the New York Times seeing their mask slip.
But I bring you now to the next story.
Do you regret at all the lying you've done?
At all the lying you've done, a reporter's blunt question to Trump goes unanswered.
It wasn't a question.
It was just some grandstanding BS for fake reporters to waste our time with a stupid question.
Does Trump lie?
Yes, he does.
They all do.
Who doesn't?
It's PR.
Am I gonna sit here and be like, I can't believe Trump's a liar.
Are you nuts?
Come on.
How many lies do we get from Obama?
You know, the main reason why we have more lies from Trump is because he talks all the time.
The other issue is that Trump is wrong a lot of the time.
Not always.
I'm not saying most of the time.
I'm just saying there are frequent periods where Trump is wrong.
Does it mean he lied?
No.
Lie is you asserting intent.
And if I can't prove the intent, I'm not going to call Trump a liar.
I'm going to say he was wrong.
Fact check.
What should journalists be doing when they're sitting down at a press briefing with the president?
Asking for clarification.
That's simple.
And many of the press, many in the press corps actually do this, and to them, my respect.
Trump will say, we've signed an executive order and we're going to be getting $400 checks to everybody in this country on unemployment.
And then someone says, do you have a time frame for when this will be implemented?
A clarification.
I know you said you're going to be issuing checks.
Do you know when they'll be?
You didn't say.
The president can then say, and he did very quickly.
We're trying to move as quickly as possible.
Very, very quickly.
You know, very fast.
It's not a good answer, and there may not be a good answer.
Trump could say, we're planning to have a peace agreement in the Middle East, and you'll say, that's a very broad statement, would you be able to clarify which countries?
And then he says, United Arab Emirates and Israel, and then he doesn't announce it.
Instead, what do we get?
This.
Proving everyone's point, proving Trump right.
This is a major problem in this country.
Recently today, recently, I believe it was today.
A woman in the press corps asked Trump about him supporting a certain Republican who had said some positive things about the QAnon people or whatever.
I don't know the exact question.
The woman said something about listening to them.
This woman in the press corps asked Trump, you know, should we agree with the statement?
And Trump gave a passive, like, I don't think he really understood what she said and just said, she's great.
I hope she wins.
She's doing great.
So, you know, absolutely.
And that was a journalist asking a question In the press corps, that, I actually think, was a fairly good question.
And I don't think Trump really understood, and he didn't really get to the core of it.
But then, all of these other people will jump up and screech and waste our time.
I honestly think it's kind of a waste of time to even ask about the Q stuff to the President.
I guess it's fine to bring up, but I think it's being overhyped by the media in the first place.
But you could have journalists bring something up, I don't care, and the President can answer.
What was this?
What was this guy doing?
I'll tell you what's gonna happen.
Trump answered kind of in a blah kind of way to the question about Q. I think a lot of people are going to take that as an affirmative response because it kind of was.
The media is then going to hoot and holler and spread it around and this is proof.
Donald Trump is being proven right in real time.
He calls these people fake news and then they do this.
The Washington Post actually wrote an article about it.
Look at this.
For more than half an hour on Thursday, President Trump sounded familiar themes at his coronavirus briefing.
Blasting presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden.
Arguing at the rapidly spreading viruses being effectively managed, and questioning the security of voting by mail.
Then he called on S.V.
Date, Huffington Post's White House correspondent.
Mr. President, after three and a half years, do you regret at all, all the lying you've done to the American people?
Trump looked confused.
What, he asked?
All the lying, all the dishonesties.
That who has done, Trump said?
You have done.
Trump paused, and then called on another reporter.
You know what he did here?
It's not journalism.
Journalism is dead.
I want you to answer a question for me.
When did you stop beating your wife?
Right.
When did you stop wetting your pants in public?
It's a loaded question.
The question assumes a fact.
Do you regret all the lying you've done?
What is Trump supposed to say to that?
I don't regret it.
I do regret it.
What lying?
What are you talking about?
It's not a real question.
This was performative garbage, and it's what we've been seeing too much from the press in this country, because they are money-hungry grifters.
You know what I do?
I have thoughts and opinions.
It is stressful sometimes to do this kind of work, to work all day, but I'm passionate about speaking my mind.
Yes, some people have said, Tim Pool has some kind of disorder where he's compelled to speak non-stop.
Sure, call it whatever you want.
Look man, if people want to insult me and criticize me and say there's things wrong with me, sure, whatever man, I'll tell you what I do.
I turn the camera on and I rant.
When I look at what the press are supposed to do, they're supposed to help us understand the world around us.
They're not doing that.
Right now, in Chicago, they're quite literally shutting down part of the city.
Why?
Well, we know why.
Because of the ongoing riots and looting.
And because they have no control over it, so they've raised all the bridges, trapping people.
Isn't that crazy?
Now, both sides of the river, it's a peninsula.
to a certain point. So you can go around and find another bridge, sure. Maybe own a boat and you can
hop, you know, go swimming or something. You probably actually could go in the lake and just
swim your way through, although it might be really dangerous. You probably don't want to do something
like that. Anyway, the city's being shut down and I think people need to know why. And Michael Tracy
nailed it. The lack of curiosity.
But I will add a bit to what Michael Tracy is saying.
And say, it's not just a lack of curiosity.
It's a lack of, am I gonna make money?
A lucrative incentive for these people who don't actually care about helping people understand the world.
They care about a grandstanding snooty moment.
Do you regret lying, Trump?
What does that do for anybody?
It's the stupidest question in the world.
It's not even a real question.
So we can sit back and hear about the New York Times complaining about the DRUMPF administration.
I just want to make sure you recognize this is real.
It's right here.
Look at this.
They say the Yale University campus in New Haven, Connecticut, Yale is the second Ivy League school the DRUMPF administration has confronted over its admission policies.
Andrew Sullivan for the New York Times.
Why did it say DRUMPF?
I don't think Andrew Sullivan wrote DRUMPF.
I saw this on the New York Times website.
I archived it.
And I tweeted about it.
We don't have news in this country anymore.
Whatever it is they're doing, they're wearing a mask.
The New York Times, they've gutted it.
It's a skin suit.
And they've draped it over their bodies.
And they're walking around saying, we're the real news.
