Democrat MELTDOWN Over Supreme Court Gets WORSE, Pelosi Entertains Impeachment As Way To Stop Trump
The democrats are so desperate that they have proposed radical changes and even refused to take impeachment off the table.When asked about impeaching Trump or Bill Barr Nancy Pelosi said that she had many options and was not taking any "arrows out of the quiver"Other Democrats like Chuck Schumer said that "nothing is off the table"We know nothing is off the table since they lied and smeared Kavanaugh.Trump and the Republicans wonThey have the right to choose a new SCOTUS judge and Democrats are vowing to burn it all down to reverse the wins from the right.
Support the show (http://timcast.com/donate)
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
I recall 2016 when Donald Trump won and there was a collective screech from many on the
left as they wailed and cried and panicked over the election of Donald Trump.
They said our rights will be eroded.
He is a fascist and authoritarian.
He's a racist and big and all the worst things in the world.
And it turned out none of those things were true and none of those things happened.
But they're still using the exact same excuses in order to push through the same exact demands for power.
And now we're seeing it.
Ruth Bader Ginsburg has passed with respect.
She was a tremendous woman who led an amazing life and made many accomplishments.
Though I may disagree with some of her rulings and agree with many of them, I think we can all recognize the service.
But now Democrats are saying nothing is off the table.
Nothing.
If Republicans replace Ruth Bader Ginsburg before January, Nothing is off the table.
In fact, in an interview, Nancy Pelosi was asked whether or not she would consider impeachment to jam up any potential nomination process, and she refused to rule it out.
Now, I gotta admit, it's kind of slimy when a journalist goes like, well, I know no one brought this up, but what about impeachment?
But the fact that Nancy Pelosi didn't just immediately scoff and say, oh, come on, No, because she's probably considering it.
She said, I have many arrows in my quiver for which we have not drawn.
And then she had a weird pause.
It's kind of a crazy thing.
Anyway, the point is, everything's been on the table from the get-go.
The Democrats have literally, they accused Brett Kavanaugh of going to parties where men would drug women and they would line up outside the room taking turns abusing this woman.
What do you mean nothing's off the table?
It never was and we all know it.
You people went nuts.
Because that day, 2016, when Donald Trump got elected, especially on Inauguration Day, something broke.
Their minds shattered.
And I got to say, I think it's because the media kept telling them, here's the truth.
Here's the facts.
Here's the proof.
Trump can't win.
Trump can't win.
Hillary will.
And then when they got proven wrong, their worldview exploded in front of them.
And they need to go through a collective therapy session to figure out what's gone wrong since then.
Because coming out now and threatening the American people with violating process, norms, and procedure because you want power is insane.
I'll tell you how this country works.
We vote for representatives.
They go and they make decisions.
And guess what?
Trump won and the Republicans won the Senate.
You know what that means?
It means you don't get to cry that now certain rulings will be made by a conservative Supreme Court.
People voted and they're saying the Republicans are hypocrites who only believe in raw political power.
And the Democrats aren't?
I'll tell you what.
As I see stories like this about, you know, the Democrats' Armageddon option.
That's what they're calling it.
It sounds like we are in a cold civil war.
Two factions fighting over control of one government.
And look, I don't think it's the Republicans that are causing the problems.
I really don't.
They won fair and square.
They have the power, they have the right, and they're going to do it.
Do I trust that they'll maintain their principles?
Most Republicans?
No!
Absolutely not.
So it's easy for them to take the high road when they're in fact winning.
I also don't think Trump is a real Republican.
I think he's an insurgent who came in.
He's a right-wing populist.
But what are we seeing now?
The left is concerned they're going to lose some key positions, some key rulings.
Roe v. Wade, for instance.
Well, if people voted for Republicans, that's what happens.
And now they're scared that November 3rd, if Trump wins or if they don't get their nominee, if Trump gets his nominee, then they're really going to lose out for a generation or whatever.
Look, man, Trump and the Republicans won.
You have to accept that.
The Democrats won't, however.
And that's the important point when they talk about Armageddon.
I know Axios may be trying to exaggerate or be facetious, but I think we really are looking at a political Armageddon.
If the Democrats can't accept for four years that the Republicans won over and over again, well, then we don't have a functioning constitutional republic with democratically elected representatives.
What we have are two factions fighting for control.
And that's it.
And like I said, man, I don't blame the Republicans for this because they're doing their thing.
The Democrats, however, refuse to accept any of the rules.
So what are they saying?
Well, they're going to pack the courts.
We're going to just totally upend the Supreme Court because we lost.
We're going to override the will of the voters.
We're going to change the entire election process because we want power.
Well, you didn't win the power.
The American people didn't choose you.
So what they're saying right now is we don't care.
We will take it by any means necessary.
Now, it's the activists, for the most part, that are saying that, but I think you know where this goes.
Let's take a look at the Democrats' Armageddon option and what Nancy Pelosi would say.
Impeachment?
Really?
Now, I'll point the finger at the media on this one, but come on, Nancy, disavow this stuff.
Before we get started, head over to TimCast.com slash donate if you would like to support my work.
There are many ways you can give.
I got a P.O.
box if you want to send me some stuff.
But the best thing you can do, share this video.
I do not have a large marketing department.
I rely on word of mouth.
If you think I do a good job, seriously, sharing this video, if everybody who watches this video shared it, I'd be bigger than CNN in a week.
No joke, because it's hundreds of thousands of people who tune in.
Every single one of those shares translates again.
If you think these kinds of conversations are important and people need to hear it, then I rely on you.
It's up to you.
And don't forget to like, subscribe, hit the notification bell.
Nancy Pelosi refuses to rule out using impeachment as a way to tie up the Senate floor as she accuses Donald Trump of using Supreme Court vacancy to try to crush the Affordable Care Act.
I saw that and I said, so what?
So what?
Okay, listen.
I have my opinions.
I like the idea of covering pre-existing conditions.
I like the idea of a public option.
I also like the idea that sometimes I don't win.
You know why?
Because we're a collaborative community.
If people go out and vote and I lose, I go, well, you can't win them all.
Some days I do videos and I work really hard on them and I think it's a really important subject and then nobody wants to watch it.
And I say to myself, well, you know, sometimes you lose.
You can't win them all.
Now I know a lot of people are saying, but the Affordable Care Act, people's rights and all that, you know, listen, you are not the arbiters of morality.
You do not control the world.
This system we have is delicate.
It functions properly because sometimes you lose and sometimes you win.
You need to recognize that.
That if the Affordable Care Act gets removed by the Supreme Court, it's because people voted for this.
They voted for these politicians, the politicians made the decisions, and that's what you get.
And if you don't like it, Go out and vote for someone else.
So that's the best answer.
But what are we getting instead?
Potential impeachment?
What other absurdities does Nancy Pelosi have in her quiver?
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Sunday refused to rule out pushing forward a privileged impeachment resolution that would have the effect of eating up Senate floor time and potentially stalling a Supreme Court nomination.
We have our options.
We have arrows in our quiver that I'm not about to discuss right now.
But the fact is, we have a big challenge in our country, she told ABC's this week when asked about the prospect.
This president has threatened to not even accept the results of the election, Pelosi continued.
Oh, oh no, Trump threatened not to accept the results of the election.
I seem to recall a political party that still hasn't accepted the results of the election.
That's kind of the point of everything I said up until this point.
The Democrats haven't accepted it.
I did.
And I didn't vote for the Republicans.
I'm just like, well, you know, there you go.
Let's learn to survive.
Maybe it's because I'm kind of in the middle.
I don't see the Republicans winning as all that bad.
It's not that big of a difference.
But look, right now, if the Democrats won, it would be a huge swing to the far left.
And that freaks me out, I gotta admit.
Host George Stephanopoulos had asked the Speaker about impeaching either Trump or Attorney General Bill Barr as part of a strategy to slow the nomination, with Senate Democrats holding little leverage to act on their own, and President Donald Trump saying he will nominate a successor to Ruth Bader Ginsburg this week following Ginsburg's death Friday.
You know, I saw a video of Mitch McConnell from 2013, and it was when they got rid of the... I think the video was about, you used to need 60 votes to confirm a Supreme Court justice, and he said something like, maybe this wasn't it, but they changed the rules to simple majority, and Mitch McConnell said, you will regret this day, and sooner than you think.
And here we are.
Look, the Democrats changed the rules because they want to win.
The Republicans, you can call them hypocrites all day and night.
Everybody just wants to win.
Now, I happen to think the Republicans actually have an argument.
I think the argument is the Senate majority was strengthened in 2018, and Trump is the president.
They want his agenda to be fulfilled.
That wasn't true with Obama.
In Obama's last two years, we saw a Republican Senate come in.
And they said we were voted because people didn't like what the president was doing.
And that's excellent.
That's actually checks and balances.
And so be it.
And guess what happened?
Were the American people upset with the Republicans?
No.
Were Democrats?
Of course.
In 2016, When the next wave of seats, you know, when seats started popping up for Republican senators, did they get voted out?
In fact, they maintained their majority in 2018.
They strengthened their majority.
Actually, I'm not sure if anybody had any, if anybody had anything up in 2016, any senators.
The point I'm trying to make is, where's the comeuppance?
Where are the American people saying, well, we didn't like what the Republicans did with Obama?
No, it's just the Democrats.
Regular people probably didn't care.
They were probably like, no, we don't want... They probably didn't want Obama to get this stuff through.
Anyway, Pelosi said the vacancy would galvanize supporters and told Americans, you can vote, you can get out the vote.
Yes, she's correct.
And I respect that.
She repeated her veiled threat when Stephanopoulos asked her.
But to be clear, you're not taking any arrows out of your quiver.
You're not ruling anything out.
Good morning.
Sunday morning, she responded, smiling.
We have a responsibility.
We take an oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.
I don't know what that good morning... You gotta watch it.
Because that clip from her when she's like, good morning, Sunday morning... I mean, that seemed like... I'm not gonna say anything because I know I'll get a lot of flack for it, but it seemed like some kind of mental episode.
She like just stopped.
She froze.
You know, maybe I should just say it seemed like a potential seizure.
And then she just froze up.
Good morning, Sunday morning.
And it's like, uh, what?
I don't like playing on mental health stuff, but I got to point it out because it literally happened and I'm reading the quote.
You see, one thing I've talked about with Joe Biden and many other Democrats, well, mostly Joe Biden.
Is that the press, they don't give you the context of what really happened.
They'll just finish the sentence for you.
This makes it sound like she was slyly going, good morning, Sunday morning, we have a responsibility.
But this was not an answer to the question and it seems very strange.
She said, we have a responsibility to meet the needs of the American people.
When we weigh the equities, protecting our democracy requires us to use every arrow in our quiver.
Well, what will that be?
Armageddon!
So it comes.
From Axios, Democrats' Armageddon strategy.
Furious Democrats are considering total war, profound changes to two branches of government, and even adding stars to the flag if Republicans jam through a Supreme Court nominee, then lose control of the Senate.
This is insanity.
I won't stand for this.
Okay, when you lose, you lose.
Think about it this way.
You're playing a game of soccer with your friend, and you keep winning.
And so your friend says, no, you, you, you, there's a new rule.
You can't actually kick the ball twice.
You are, you can't kick it twice.
In fact, you have to pass it.
And then it's like, what do you're changing the rules because you're losing.
Look how far the Democrats are willing to go.
Now you may not be decided.
You may be a Democrat or whatever.
I know a lot of people I've talked to who watch say they're undecided or they can't vote for Trump.
Let me ask you this.
Would you really want to give the rulebook to these people so they can rewrite everything so they don't lose again?
That's ridiculous.
Now, I know the Republicans win with the Electoral College and the Democrats are upset because it's not the majority.
You know, it's 2% below the majority, but these are the rules.
Changing the rules, nah, it doesn't work that way.
And I do not want to play a game with someone who's willing to change the rules in that way.
That goes for Republicans too.
I don't like them either.
But right now, they're not in the wrong.
Here we go.
On the table, adding Supreme Court justices, eliminating the Senate 60 vote threshold to end filibusters, and statehood for D.C.
and Puerto Rico.
If he holds a vote in 2020, we pack the court in 2021, Rep.
Joe Kennedy of Massachusetts tweeted.
And then how long until we get the state of Jefferson?
You know about that?
Up in Northern California, Oregon, Idaho, they want to fracture off part of Oregon, make a new state.
How long?
Until greater Idaho exists next to North Jefferson, or the state of Jefferson.
If you want to make two new states, okay, add four more Democratic senators, then that's because you're losing!
And I don't want to play with people who are losers who change the rules.
Democrats are enraged by GOP hypocrisy, Axios reports, of rushing through a new justice for President Trump after stalling Obama's final nominee.
But they're lying.
They're lying.
I will fully admit, I was wrong about this.
A couple years ago, I said, I don't like the games they play.
You know, Mitch McConnell was jamming up Merrick Garland.
And I will say this.
I think the Republicans have the real argument.
Merrick Garland seemed like a really good dude.
He was a moderate.
In fact, my understanding is that some people said Obama would never even choose a moderate like Merrick Garland, and then Obama did, and they're like, well, we're not going to confirm him anyway.
So it is what it is.
I think the argument makes sense.
I personally would have been like, just do your job, you know.
But I guess one could argue the Senate's job was to be a check on Obama.
And in the end, it didn't even matter.
You know why?
Because I do not expect Democrats or Republicans to do anything other than fight for their power.
Now, I think they're fighting for what they believe is right.
I believe everyone does.
But this is different.
You know, playing within the rules, I accept.
This is something different.
Dems aren't optimistic about blocking the nominee.
But they have many ways of retaliating if they win Senate control, and are licking their chops about real movement on ideas that have been pushed futilely for decades.
For instance, the Constitution doesn't fix the number of justices, which could be changed by an act of Congress and the President's signature, according to the National Constitution Center.
They'd have to win the presidency, and the House and the Senate.
And if they get all of it, that's what they'll do.
You want to play these games?
Okay.
Let's say we get the Trump landslide, red wave, the House flips back, the Senate flips back.
We're talking Reagan era, sweep 49 states.
And then Trump says, we're going to add five justices, four justices, all conservatives, crushing any semblance of progressivism, leftism or liberalism in the court.
Is that what you want?
Because you're telling them you will do it.
Why won't they if they win?
You think about what they're saying right now.
If we win and you do that, if you do this and then we win, we're going to break all the rules and we're going to change everything.
Thanks for the idea, guys.
Then why shouldn't the Republicans?
These people don't think at all!
You know what, man?
They really, really don't.
They mentioned on ABC how Pelosi was asked about impeachment.
And she says, well, we have our options.
Again, look, it's really dumb that Stephanopoulos was like, and what about, you know, firing a machine gun to the air and screaming wildly?
You can ask him a million questions.
I do think Pelosi should have said, oh, please, come on.
That's a little over the top, isn't it?
But she won't, because nothing's stopping the Democrats from just losing their minds.
They say Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer sat on a call with his caucus yesterday after a moment of silence for Justice Ginsburg.
He said what?
Whatever.
If Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and Senate Republicans move forward with this, then nothing is off the table for next year.
Let's unpack what that means.
The most controversial of the proposed changes would be adding two more justices to the court.
That is insane.
At the funeral in July for John Lewis, Obama called the filibuster rule, which requires a 60-vote supermajority instead of a simple majority to advance legislation, a Jim Crow relic.
Trying to turn the federal district into a state would be a constitutional thicket.
But Democrats are talking anew about pushing statehood for D.C.
and Puerto Rico, capturing the anything-goes spirit among Democrats amid the court fight.
I actually heard a lawyer talk about this, saying, That the federal government needs their own jurisdiction so that they're not playing favorites to states or under the jurisdiction of a state.
The federal government needs to be independent, thus we have Washington D.C.
And I said, oh wow, that actually makes a lot of sense.
If they were inside, you know, if it was literally under the jurisdiction of a state, if D.C.
becomes a state, then D.C.
as a state has jurisdiction over federal actions.
That seems like a bad idea.
The federal government needs to be an independent entity upon itself.
That sort of blankets over the rest of us.
They say the big picture.
Many Democrats see the GOP success at filling the federal judiciary with conservatives after Clinton's popular vote win.
A sign the machine of democracy is itself broken and they view these structural changes as fixes.
Well, they're not.
They're cheating and they can't stop crying about it.
You know why they won the popular vote?
California.
California.
If people move out of California, maybe then they could actually win the electoral college the way things are supposed to be.
Maybe if they actually tried to win people over in, I don't know, Wyoming or Montana or Arkansas or any one of these states, they would actually win.
But they don't.
You see, they're urban ideologues.
They live in their cities, and they have a very urban, simplified worldview.
Instead of going and talking to people in rural areas and saying, what can we do better?
They say, I don't care about those people.
I don't want their votes.
Just change the rules so we win.
You're supposed to fight for the votes.
The left says, but because of the Electoral College, our votes don't count.
Your vote is by state.
The states vote for the president.
It's the federal government.
It's how it's supposed to work.
In fact, one of the more interesting ideas I've heard recently was Ben Sasse apparently wants senators to be appointed by state legislature and I say, that's it.
That is brilliant.
You know why?
Do you even know who your state reps are?
Do you know who your state representatives are?
You probably don't.
Most people don't.
Yet they're making rules for your state.
Laws.
What if, in order to get your politician, you at the local level had to actually vote for your local reps, and your local reps then chose some senators to go to the federal government and have a conversation about how things work?
Sounds like a good idea.
I don't know if it's a perfect idea, but it sounds like a good idea.
I'll tell you what.
There's a big problem we're facing right now.
As most of you know, I'm pretty liberal.
I get angry emails all the time from... Look, I really do.
From, like, staunch conservatives saying, like, you're so liberal and you need to... Yeah, yeah, yeah.
I understand.
I understand.
Look, I get it.
I'm pretty liberal on a lot of issues.
I am not a far-left wingnut.
But I'll tell you what.
Our reality is fractured.
It is shattered.
Okay?
So we can sit back and watch the Democrats say they're going to burn everything to the ground unless they get their way.
And that's terrifying.
But the Democrats don't see it because they live in magical bubble world.
I believe we're on the right side.
I believe we're on the side of reality.
And the reason I believe that is that I actually go out to different... I've been across the country.
I've talked to a lot of people from across the country.
I've had a lot of surprising conversations.
Well, I do think there are a lot of urban liberals who hate Trump.
I don't think they actually know anything.
Even my progressive friends who I talked to, I was talking to a progressive friend recently, didn't know anything about what happened with Kyle Rittenhouse.
Got all the details wrong, all the facts wrong, and I was like, dude, I will send you sources.
Didn't know anything about the weird critical race theory whiteness stuff, and I'm like, dude, let me send you some sources.
If they're not reading this stuff, then what information are they getting?
Memes.
Memes!
That's what they're sharing!
And I see these posts all the time and I'm like, that's not true!
You're making that up!
Somebody made it up, and they know it works.
I love this narrative that the right is inundated by fake news, when they're actually not.
There are too many sources on the right now.
There are many people on the right who are inundated by fake news, and believe it.
Most people, however, regular Trump supporters, regular conservatives, moderates, and even the disaffected liberals and the walkaway liberals who are now whatever you want to call them, You know, I don't think everyone from WalkAway is conservative, but many have walked away from the Democratic Party.
Many of them, regular people, and they can see where the fake news is coming from.
And this is the coalition we're looking at right now.
A real coalition of regular people saying, I just want the Democrats to stop.
Take a look at this story.
This is from the New York Post.
Majority of Americans want Senate to move on Supreme Court decision.
Poll.
Okay, okay, so let's take that into consideration.
According to the New York Post, most Americans want the Senate to move on Supreme Court decision.
What does that mean?
Most Americans, regardless of whether they are Republican or Democrat, believe the Senate should move forward with confirmation hearings for a Supreme Court justice this year.
Okay, easy enough.
If that's what the people want, if that's what the majority of voters say, Trump should not nominate a Supreme Court justice.
Okay, wait, wait a minute.
What's going on?
From the Hill, a new poll says, from the same day actually, published on the same day, the polls are taken at different times, that most people don't want Trump to nominate a Supreme Court justice.
Okay, so let me get this straight.
You don't want Trump to nominate anybody, but you do think the Senate should confirm somebody.
Okay, you know what, man?
I don't even know what's going on in this country anymore, to be completely honest.
And I'm being a bit facetious.
What I mean by that is in terms of the media.
Obviously, I read the news all day every day.
I have a decent idea of what people are saying is happening and what we see in videos.
But here's what I often say.
You know, on my other channel, youtube.com slash TimCastNews, I talk more about, like, things that happen.
This channel is more about, like, political analysis and opinion, with some big news stories, if it really does dominate the cycle.
And I often talk about Antifa, the riots, Black Lives Matter, Proud Boys and stuff, and clashes.
There's videos of this.
I can watch the videos.
I say, here's a video I watched.
I watched all these videos, here are the facts.
It's called journalism.
You know, when it comes to politics, however, the polls, you can find a poll for anything.
You look at, you know, the Trump RealClearPolitics average, and it says, today, you've got, I think, like, Reuters, like, Trump minus eight, yesterday, recipes, and Trump plus seven.
So which one is it?
Whichever one fits your confirmation bias.
So which is it?
Well, I'll tell you what.
The left are gonna share the story where they're like, most people say Trump shouldn't even nominate somebody.
Conservatives are going to share the one from the New York Post saying, most people think they should nominate, they should confirm, you know, so you know what?
All that matters, I guess, is you go vote.
You get everybody you know to vote.
You gotta do it because the left is right about one thing.
They've said that Joe Biden absolutely must landslide so there can be no question.
Same is true for Trump.
Trump must landslide.
Now they're trying to game it.
They're saying even if Trump landslides on November 3rd, he didn't really win.
We can't continue to function this way.
The media is cheating.
Social media is cheating.
These leftists don't care to play fair.
They just want power, and that means that the last people who should be allowed to have them.
When the Republicans play the same game, I'll slam them right in just the same way.
As of right now, the Republicans aren't changing the rules.
They won.
That's it.
Now you can call them hypocrites.
That's fine.
They still won.
To talk about impeachment, overhauling all these things, they've lost it, man.
They've lost it.
But I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up at 6 p.m.
over at youtube.com slash timcastnews, my other channel.
And I'll see you all then.
The rioting is back on in Portland, though it seems like the numbers may be a bit smaller.
They're, they're definitely back.
So hopefully the feds, Trump, Portland, whoever gets back to what they were doing and shut it down ASAP.
However, last night it appears there were no arrests.
There was also another major protest in New York City with nearly 100 people getting arrested.
Now, Fox News says nearly 100.
The exact number is 86.
And this was actually over ice and a story about forced hysterectomy.
This is a crazy story.
But it's not a story I'm leading with because the protests have happened.
We'll go through them.
The big news, in my opinion, is that Antifa got tricked by the Proud Boys into showing up in Philadelphia, acting a fool, And attacking regular people.
I wonder what the Proud Boys' plan was with announcing these events, saying they're gonna- I mean, maybe they're gonna go to Portland, I don't know for sure at this point, but I can tell you this.
The Proud Boys said they would be in Philadelphia.
Antifa began to panic.
They announced a counter-demonstration.
They showed up for the counter-demonstration.
No Proud Boys showed up.
So they started attacking each other.
They started attacking women.
And they started attacking journalists.
I gotta say, as far as politics go, this was actually clever.
You know, I've often talked about how, you know, the Proud Boys want to go to Portland, and I think it's a huge mistake.
Because Andy was going to show up, fight people, and the media is going to make the Proud Boys look like the aggressors.
Now, there's some arguments from the left where they'll say, well, then why are they coming to our town?
And they have a First Amendment right to do so.
So, you don't have a First Amendment right, or any right at all, to attack people.
But the media's on their side.
The media likes to claim that Antifa are just anti-fascists who are trying to fight the evil bigots.
So it doesn't matter.
You could be a bad person, but you still have a right to walk around saying things.
Antifa would attack them, the media would frame it as bad for Trump, and they would try and scare people blaming Trump.
Right now, Trump's major advantage in the election, it's the rioting.
And Trump needs to stop it.
So we've seen, uh, the day before when the riots started back up in Portland, the feds came in and it was, it was heavy handed, like 11 arrests, dense smoke.
They flanked around from behind Antifa and, and arrested them before they even realized what was going on.
They need to make sure they do the same to send the message that under Donald Trump, the rioters will be shut down.
And under Joe Biden, that won't be the case.
But this is why it's so dangerous if a bunch of right-wing groups ready and itching for a fight show up to various cities and start doing it.
And that's why I think this story is the most important.
The Proud Boys, man, they pulled a fast one on Antifa.
By claiming they were coming out, Antifa showed up in mass numbers, and now Antifa looks crazy.
But guess what?
Is the media going to talk about Antifa attacking regular people?
Of course they don't.
Brandon Strzok of the WalkAway campaign?
Got physically attacked like twice in the past couple of weeks by Black Lives Matter activists.
Where was the media?
In fact, he even pointed out one day, one of the times he was attacked, when they were chasing after him, screaming, shoving, and attacking him, saying crazy slurs against him and his friends.
Media was right there watching it happen.
They don't care.
They're not going to report it.
They're not on your side.
Look, You know, I wonder how much of this is driven by people who all feel the same way, like this is bad, but don't want to stick their neck out because they're spineless losers.
So you end up with people working for like a local news affiliate saying, I know the rioting and attacking people while screaming homophobic slurs is bad, but heavens, you know, I'm not going to be the one to say it.
Think about how crazy that is and how beneficial that is to actual racists.
And bigots scaring regular people so that they don't speak up.
And these videos are nuts.
So what do we end up getting in Philadelphia?
Well, the reason why I think it's significant for all those reasons, you know, I mentioned, but also they attacked a woman and they attacked one of their own dudes.
I mentioned this briefly yesterday in one of my shorter segments, but they literally chased down one of their own Antifa dudes thinking he was like a proud boy or a Nazi and started attacking him, smashing up his windows and he had to leave.
And you know what?
I bet a lot of people were like, now you know what it feels like!
Reminds me of, uh, that scene in, uh, what was it?
Thor Ragnarok?
You know what I'm talking about?
Where Loki is watching Hulk fight Thor, and then the Hulk slams Thor on the ground, and then Loki's like, now you know what it feels like!
And they're like, huh?
Yeah, anyway, pop culture reference.
Remember pop culture before the world fell apart?
Remember when there were movies?
I remember those days.
Now it's all politics.
Here's a story from the post-millennial.
But I also want to mention, before we get into this, a big element of what I want to talk about tonight.
This morning, I'm tired, man.
We worked all night.
One of the things I want to talk about.
There's a video from Andy Ngo.
And I believe it's from Portland, we'll look at it, where they force these guys in a truck to raise the fist and say, Black Lives Matter.
And the guys are confused, like, okay.
And they still smash up the truck because these people don't care.
What they really want is for you to suffer.
They want you to feel pain because they're lunatics.
They're crazy, unhinged people.
So they need an excuse.
They'll say, raise your fist, say Black Lives Matter, and you're like, okay, no, it's not enough!
And then they smash the windows out of the vehicle.
Psychopaths, man.
We'll get to that.
Antifa show up for non-existent Proud Boys rally in Philadelphia.
Attack media instead.
And these media people, this is why they won't speak up.
Because they know they get physically attacked, and they don't want to, so they hide.
Please, Antifa, they say, please, we'll beg you!
And they just get smacked around because they're pathetic, spineless, crybaby losers.
From the Postmillennial Day, right?
Protesters gathered on Saturday when there was an expected Proud Boys rally in West Philadelphia's Clark Park.
When the Proud Boys did not materialize, protesters attacked independent journalists James Klug and Lisa Reynolds Barbunas.
Barbunas was attacked, her hair pulled.
This video went viral because some anti-foot dude snuck up behind a woman who wasn't doing anything and just pulled her hair!
I was thinking about this the other day, like, where's this dude's dad?
You know, it reminds me of the song 21st Century Digital Boy by Bad Religion, about my dad being a lazy middle-class intellectual or whatever.
It's one of the lyrics.
And I'm just thinking, like, how many of these people grew up in the suburbs, and their dad is, like, an out-of-shape, you know, middle manager at a paper company, and he has, like, accounting, and he's like, well, son, sometimes you have to pull a woman's hair to send them a what-no.
But I'll tell you what he didn't do.
He didn't say, son, don't hit a woman.
I mean, look, if you want to have equality, I guess, sure.
Maybe that's what Antifa's all about.
But you don't see Antifa going and picking fights and pulling the hair of dudes.
You know why?
Because they know they'll get stomped out.
So they go after people that they think they can attack and get away with it.
How, how, what?
This is just, it's just so ridiculous.
Kluge was chased from the park.
So this is a dude who's just filming.
Plans for the counter-protest began when a post appeared on Facebook stating that there would be a Proud Boys rally.
This led to the farmers market shutting down, but the Proud Boys did not arrive to Clark Park.
Belly of the Beast 2020 Philadelphia Proud Boys joined the Philadelphia Proud Boys and other patriots in the Belly of the Beast to demand an end to Antifa terrorism, calling all patriots.
Here's what I find funny about this flyer.
You'd think some people would have shown up for it, but the Proud Boys didn't.
So there was not like a single errant Trump supporter who was like, I'm gonna show up because I heard it was happening.
They didn't show up.
It was just Antifa attacking regular people.
As the day and time arrived, no Proud Boys were reported to have shown up, but there were protesters and media present.
The Postmillennial was on the scene in Philadelphia's Clark Park and saw James Kluge and Lisa Reynolds Barbunas targeted by Antifa activists.
So this is the flyer that Antifa put out saying, Proud Boy fascists are coming.
and interviews has a pro- wow, guys, Post Maloneal, copy editor, what is this?
Shocking footage depicts Antifa harassing Klug, even demanding obscene favors from him. What?
Antifa pulled Barbunas' hair as she attempted to escape the mob.
Klug attempts to escape in his car. This is not correct at all.
This, this article is, is really, really bad.
Okay, this article is really, really poorly written.
The dude who was, uh, chased to his car was not, car was not Klug.
This, this is one of the, wow, I'm, I'm... Post-Millennial, you gotta fix this article.
It's, it's, it's gutter trash.
So anyway, let me show you what's going on with the actual, uh, riots over in Portland.
Now, it, it is true what the Proud Boys did, not showing up, but that article was gutter, so for that I apologize.
But what happened in Portland is an important reminder that these people don't care about their cause.
They don't care about what you do.
They will come for you and they will smash things up.
And if you think you can keep your head down or pretend to support them, it won't work.
They eat their own.
We know they eat their own.
Andino tweets, BLM Antifa in Portland took over the street outside the Central Police Precinct after smashing up businesses.
They've blocked the road for hours.
They make the passenger of this car give the Black Power salute and chant Black Lives Matter.
The truck was smashed up later.
Didn't matter.
In this video you can see them saying, say it, say it!
And the guy's like, I said it, and they're like, I didn't hear you, say it again!
And he's like, okay, and he says it again.
Doesn't matter.
They're gonna come for you and they're gonna smash things up.
And so look, I gotta be honest, you can always just jump over to Andy Ngo's Twitter account and see exactly what went down last night.
He says, not a single arrest overnight, 19 to 20 of September in Portland, as a large mob of BLM Antifa marched through downtown, smashing up businesses.
They then held a street dance party in front of Central Precinct to celebrate how there were no cops.
No cops.
No arrests.
What's going on?
When it came to the ICE facility, They got crushed, and maybe they realized, you know what?
They're gonna get away with whatever they want if they go after Portland PD because Portland PD under Ted Wheeler has been completely incapable of getting anything done.
And I don't blame them, you know, specifically.
I know they want to do their jobs, but the DA won't arrest any of them.
That's why I think when the feds went in, a lot of these people just were gone.
Well, I don't know who these people are.
Maybe they're the same people.
Maybe Trump really didn't, you know, get it to stop.
Maybe it really was the wildfires.
Seems to me that a lot of it still was the feds.
We know for a fact that the FBI is charging many of these Antifa people.
But the protests continue over at Mitch McConnell's house.
So just, we'll do a general protest riot update we got for you.
Protesters rally outside Mitch McConnell's Louisville home in wake of Ruth Bader Ginsburg death.
The reason I highlight this story is because these people went into a CVS and started smashing things up.
Well, they started damaging the window.
At 2.45 p.m.
a woman got arrested.
Check this out.
Louisville Metro police officers arrested one protester as she attempted to remove her car from the CVS parking lot.
An officer on the scene said the department had planned to tow the woman's vehicle because she was not patronizing the business.
And after the woman went inside the store to purchase a six-pack of beer so that her car would not be towed, the officer arrested her on charges of disorderly conduct and an improper parking violation, according to a video from Courier-Journal reporter Hayes Gardner.
He says, one woman has been arrested at the CVS one block from McConnell's house.
She parked at the CVS but was not a customer, and police told her they would tow her car.
She tried to buy something and then move her car, but police didn't allow that.
Following the arrest, several protesters entered the CVS where they chanted in the store.
One kicked a glass door, damaging it.
Officers entered the store and asked everyone who was not shopping to leave.
Shortly after, members of the LMPD's special response team arrived to clear the scene.
Along with the story of the truck getting smashed up, Some lady was trying to use the parking lot at a CVS.
I really don't care.
Should they have removed her?
Whatever.
I don't know.
Maybe not.
But what gives these people the sense of entitlement?
I honestly don't know.
I mentioned that guy pulling Lisa Reynolds Barbunas' hair.
Maybe no dad.
Maybe a bad father.
I think bad parents across the board, of course.
But come on, man.
Is a dad going to teach his kid, first of all, don't attack people, don't attack people from behind, and don't attack women?
I guess if he's all about that equality and he thinks, you know, biological sex doesn't exist, then he probably doesn't see a difference and has no problem attacking women.
There you go.
I guess regular Americans, on the other hand, would probably be not too happy with the idea that they go around doing this.
But then they're gonna go to CVS and they keep harassing CVS for some reason.
They did this in DC.
Some dudes were shoplifting just the other day.
His story broke.
Some dudes were shoplifting.
And when the store manager stopped them and the cops came, he didn't even press charge.
He said, to put the stuff back, you guys can leave.
You can't come back.
Protesters showed up and blocked the store.
Caused all sorts of trouble in DC.
We also had a protest that went down in New York City.
And this one's interesting to me because...
Almost 100 people get arrested.
So this is a mass arrest for New York.
This is kind of a big deal.
And it's over this story about ICE giving forced hysterectomies.
I've looked into it a little bit.
I probably should look into it a lot more.
But what I've seen so far is people saying, once again, it's one of these stories that's not necessarily widely confirmed or substantiated.
And so I haven't been able to actually dig into it.
But people are still coming out in the streets and protesting this.
They want to abolish ICE.
Fox News reports.
Police arrested 86 people at tense Abolish ICE demonstrations in Times Square and near NYPD headquarters in Manhattan Saturday.
Videos from the scene show police scuffling with protesters demonstrating against recent reports that Immigration and Customs Enforcement performed unneeded hysterectomies on immigrant women detained in an ICE facility in Georgia.
One protester in Times Square, Isabella Leyva, wrote on Twitter that officers began making arrests as protesters stepped off the sidewalk and into the street.
Video from the scene showed police arresting several demonstrators as they sat in the street, and I'll tell you right away, if it's true that ICE was performing unneeded hysterectomies, that's psychotic, and that is horrifying.
Abolishing ICE, no, but arrest those people, that's what nightmares are made of.
I'm not entirely sure it's true, and again, that's mostly because I have to dig more into these stories, but I always try to be really, really careful with this stuff, man, because You know, unfortunately, the media's lost so much credibility, so unless I can see a video of it, there's not much I can go on.
So you want to know why I'm talking about Antifa?
You want to know why I'm talking about what happened in Philadelphia with this fake Proud Boys thing?
Well, the post-millennial story was just trash and was completely wrong, and so I shouldn't have used that as a source.
That's my mistake.
I do know sources that were specifically on the ground that had... I've confirmed it, essentially.
I've talked to people who were involved and said, yes, it was a fake staged event, These people who got attacked, went to their car, that was all wrong.
The person who got attacked and went to their car was Antifa.
But I can see these videos of this.
I can see videos of protesters getting arrested.
I can tell you exactly what they're doing and give you my thoughts on it.
When it comes to what's going on with ICE in a faraway facility where there's no journalists, I can't.
And the problem is there are no journalists.
So what should I do?
Well, I'll tell you what I'm doing.
I'm currently in a new building, and we're going to be hiring real journalists, and we're going to have them actually do fact checking and verification.
And if these news outlets won't provide information to corroborate, we will not say they did.
So if a news organization says an anonymous source claimed this, We'll say, what can you provide us to prove you actually have a source and the story is true?
Otherwise, we're going to mark it unsubstantiated.
And we'll say, though their source may be legitimate and they're under no obligation to share their sources, we understand this, we were not able to independently confirm their story is true.
A layer on top of a layer.
So look, these protesters came out, they got arrested, right?
It is what it is.
But we do need real journalists, so we can understand what's really going on.
The media got attacked in Philadelphia.
Are they going to report that Antifa are violent and lunatics?
Nope!
Probably not.
They're gonna ignore it.
You know why?
Because Antifa will show up to their house.
Antifa will do to them what they did to Andy Ngo.
But Andy Ngo is not a coward, so he doesn't stop.
Now granted, he's not on the ground, and that's because they'll actually stop him physically, like, you know, they beat the crap out of him.
But he keeps doing work to the best of his abilities, and now he's probably more effective in gaining even more followers.
Now he's aggregating all this information, he's calling the police departments.
That's real journalism, and boy do they hate him for it.
How dare he publicize that people got arrested?
Look, people are innocent until proven guilty.
But at least he's covering it.
So good for him.
But we need a lot more journalists who are actually going to do real work.
Otherwise, what we get are media who are too scared.
You know, there's a meme.
You know the Doge meme of the super ripped dog and then the little sad whiny dog?
And the ripped dog says something and the whiny dog says something pathetic?
There's this meme where the ripped dog is a journalist in the 1920s.
And they're wearing the hat, the rimmed hat or whatever with the press thing in it.
And they're like, the mafia may come and kill me, but this story must get told.
And then the whiny little dog says, a person called me a mean word on Twitter.
It's worse than that.
Journalists today aren't just the ones complaining about mean words on Twitter.
The actual journalists, reporters, who work for these local news outlets are like, I'm not getting involved in a fight with Antiva.
unidentified
I'm not gonna stick my neck out and complain about them.
And because we don't have a media willing to stand up to the leftist mob, both in the streets and in our cultural institutions, everything just keeps pushing further and further left to absurdity.
I think they exist.
absurdity. Like watching the Democrat debates when they're like, no borders, decriminalized
border crossings, moratorium on deportations, health care for noncitizens. Like, dude, you're
insane. Where's regular America to stand up to this stuff?
I think they exist. I think one of the problems we have is that too many people are spineless.
You know, we'll see how things play out. But based on what has been going down in the past
few days, I really do feel like if, if the Democrats don't cheat, Trump's going to landslide
It's starting to feel like 2016 all over again.
I mean, we've had glimpses of it, right?
But I look at what's going on with the riots, the sentiment I see, the Trump flags.
Nah, I'm sorry, man.
It really does seem like we are headed for a 2016 Redux.
Now, look, the media's pulling out all the stops, and they're smearing Trump, and they're lying, and the polls say Biden's winning.
And at a certain point, I said to myself, you know what?
You know what?
These regular people, they already know the orange man is bad because you told them a million times.
So what effect will it really have saying it 50 billion times now?
I'm not entirely convinced it will, but because the election is coming up in like 44 days or whatever, this is the time when they really want to shock the psyche of the average American.
So, the best thing you can do is let people know about what's going on with these riots.
And call it out.
So they really know what's happening in our streets.
And what may happen if Joe Biden wins.
But I'll tell you this.
Violence is inevitable.
It is.
November 3rd, there will not be results.
Trump will probably landslide and they'll say he didn't win.
And if Trump tries to say he does, we'll ban him.
Whatever.
It's a Sunday morning, I'm tired, so forgive me.
You know, the post-millennial source.
Really, guys, fix it.
But I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up at 1pm on this channel.
I'll probably be- We were up all night because we're trying to build this studio out, so I'll see you all at 1 on this channel.
Again, thanks for hanging out.
From the Gateway Pundit, Black Lives Matter activist wearing Justice for Breonna Taylor shirt walked into a Louisville bar and murdered three people.
I have been digging into this story trying to figure out who this guy was, why he did this, and was this political?
And of course, I have no idea.
I can't find anything.
We don't know this man's motive.
What we do know is this happened.
Now I'll say a few things.
There's an image on the Gateway Pundit showing him wearing some kind of t-shirt.
I don't know if that's a Breonna Taylor t-shirt.
I've looked it up.
I couldn't verify that.
I've seen people sharing the image saying the same thing.
I couldn't verify it.
I have no idea where that image comes from.
I have no idea if that image is even this guy.
And it's been very, very difficult.
So I've also noticed a couple other stories.
There's another story in Philadelphia about a police cruiser that was torched.
A couple people were arrested.
And there seems to be a reluctance among the media to talk about what this is, who this guy was, why he did it, and why other people may be torching police vehicles.
So I don't know what the guy's motive was.
I don't know what any of their motives are.
But I thought about it for a second and I said, if it was a white dude, Who walked into a restaurant and just shot three people, two black people and a white person.
They would dig into this person's past.
They would find out literally everything there is to know about him.
And if there was anything in any way conservative, you know it would be the headline.
I think about that dude who in Ohio went to the bar and he had, I guess he had a handgun with like a large magazine drum of like a hundred rounds or something like that.
And he shot a bunch of people.
And they said he wasn't Antifa, even though he was literally Antifa, pro-Antifa all over the place.
And so this bias seems really obvious.
The media doesn't want to admit that there are extremists on the left taking certain actions.
Now, I think we need to be careful, and that's why I want to do the segment.
Look, I see this story, and my first reaction is, could this be a Black Lives Matter activist saying something like, it's time to go to war, and then going and targeting white people?
Well, apparently one of the guys he killed was black.
A lot of people are sharing the story saying that he walked in and killed three white people.
I don't think that's the case, and the Gateway Pundit doesn't even say that either.
One of the guys was black.
In which case, was this just a guy who happened to be a Black Lives Matter activist and supporter of Brenna Taylor?
Who had other reasons for killing somebody?
I mean, I'm not saying they're good reasons.
I think killing people, it's wrong, period.
So we don't know why this guy did this.
And the same thing is true for what we saw with the arson along the West Coast.
And, you know, I'll mention a little bit about what happened with Joe Rogan because this is important stuff as it pertains to us, you know, as people in the media and people who share this content.
If we don't know the motives, we have to be careful not to claim it.
Otherwise, we are just engaging in escalation.
So you may have seen Joe Rogan.
On his podcast, he said something about, they arrested some, he was like, you got these crazy people, I'm paraphrasing, you know, setting fires and stuff like that.
And he's like, you got these crazy people, they're setting these fires, and they even arrested some people, you know, some leftist activists, for actually setting these fires.
Well, he got called out for it, and then in response to that, Joe did a correction where he said, I saw one thing where a guy set a fire somewhere else, and the other stuff wasn't true, making it seem like there's no arson at all.
And therein lies the problem of trying to break down what this is and why it's happening.
So the dude who got arrested at the Portland fire, not Portland, but the Oregon fires, we don't know why he started the fire.
We do know that one guy was a Black Lives Matter activist.
Maybe that has nothing to do with him starting a fire.
This guy right here, who walked in and murdered three people, I'll tell you this.
I've looked at some of the details.
I've looked into who this guy is.
Definitely a Black Lives Matter activist.
That's why I wouldn't be surprised if he actually was wearing a Justice for Brennan Taylor t-shirt.
His motive in killing three people?
Honestly, no idea!
For all we know, it wasn't a random act.
For all we know, these dudes were, you know, I don't know, stealing from him, or these dudes were like neighbors across the street, and they kept playing loud music and partying and all that.
We have no idea.
And we jump the gun.
Everybody wants to make it political.
And at the same time, like I mentioned with the Joe Rogan scenario, you go the other way and say, it's not political at all.
You don't know this.
Let me show you this story.
And I'm trying to explain what I mean about just like, look, I'll tell you what's really frustrating is that I spent, uh, it is tiring.
Doing all of the digging and the verification and the fact-checking.
And look, I don't care if people want to say I'm not a journalist, but I tell you, I just put several hours into trying to figure out who this guy was and looking at his history, and I think it's fair to say this dude is a Black Lives Matter activist.
He is, right?
Here's the story from WDRB.com.
Bungalow Joe's owner in disbelief after three men killed in totally random shooting at restaurant.
Totally random, they say?
What are you talking about?
You don't know this?
It could be a targeted killing.
Why are they including totally random?
That's what makes it weird to me.
We know the guys at Black Lives Matter activists.
The first thing they do is they run out, they wave their arms.
You don't, it's like you're trying to make sure we don't think it was a targeted killing based on something to do with Black Lives Matter.
Which I don't think, I'm not saying it was.
They say this, Joe Bishop was still in disbelief the day after three customers were killed in a shooting at his restaurant, Bungalow Joe's Bar and Grill.
Quote, I didn't think I'd be scrubbing blood off my patio on a Saturday morning, Bishop told WDRB News.
I thought I was getting ready for everybody to watch the ball game.
Bishop said he had just gone to sleep when he got a call around 11.15 p.m.
Friday from one of his managers about a shooting at a restaurant.
When he got to the scene, one of the victims had been rushed to the hospital, and two others were lying on the patio.
According to Bishop, it was a normal Friday night at Bungalow Joe's when a man walked up to the restaurant and shot three customers, all men who were sitting in the patio area at point-blank range.
Nobody had ever seen this guy before, Bishop said, referring to the shooter.
It was a totally random act.
And just because this one guy who manages the business doesn't know what these guys' relationships was or were, it was a totally random act.
Now maybe...
These three guys who got shot didn't know each other.
Sure.
But here, look what he says.
The men did not exchange words at any point in time before the shooting, according to Bishop.
Quote, social media is full of people saying this happened and that happened and wanted
to get political with it.
There was nothing political about what happened.
He added.
How do you know?
How do you know?
I take you now to Philadelphia.
Two arrested for Philadelphia police car arson in West Philly.
Police say not related to previous car fires.
What was the motivation for people to light a police car on fire?
I know we're just making assumptions.
Maybe that one particular cop owed the guys money?
I don't know.
I think it's fair to say the motivation likely has to do with the four months or whatever, or non-stop.
Yeah, now we're on four months of anti-police rhetoric, demoralization, fighting, riots, unrest.
So why would a man, a Black Lives Matter activist, walk up to a group of people sitting around and shoot them?
There's a lot of reasons.
In fact, there's an infinite amount of reasons.
I could say, he was joining a gang, and the gang said, you gotta do this to get in the gang.
Sometimes they do that.
It was a random hit, and someone, let's say one of the guy's wives was like, I want you to take him out, and make sure you kill his other people, so it looks like it's random.
Sure.
Or, he's a Black Lives Matter activist, he's been racialized, his worldview has been radicalized into a racialized worldview, And he went up, and he was targeting the white people.
He ended up killing the black dude too.
I don't think that necessarily makes sense either, but I find it so weird that you have an immediate jumping of the gun from mainstream press saying, it's not political!
Everybody stop!
It's not!
And then you have people on the right saying, like, look at this story, look what this guy did.
Trying to make it seem like we know for sure.
I guess all I can say is, there's two big problems I see here.
There's the bias, that everybody's gonna try and assert, you know, this proves what we've been saying all along, you need to look at this story, talk about this story.
And I guess the other issue is the media wouldn't tell us even if they knew.
Why is it that they pull up this quote where the guy immediately says, it's not political?
Well, hold on, man.
Hold on a second.
If you just ran the story saying three people shot in random killing at a restaurant in Louisville, that would be the end of it and no one would ask any questions.
The only reason they're saying it's random and it's not political is because people have reason to believe it is.
Because this guy is a Black Lives Matter activist.
So they're jumping on top to try and shut down any conversation before they've done any groundwork.
I have been googling.
I have been pulling up my databases.
I use several fact-checking and background-checking databases on individuals to figure out who they are.
I think this guy is a Black Lives Matter activist.
That's pretty obvious.
And again, I don't know where that photo comes from.
But it just strikes me as odd that they're going to immediately come out and say it's not political.
Because then you're going to get people believing it is.
They say Louisville Metro police officers responded to the bar located on Buella Church Road around 11.30 p.m.
Two of the men who were shot, Torian Jermaine Hudson, 26, and William Scott Smallwood, 48, were pronounced dead at the scene, according to the Jefferson County Coroner's Office.
The other victim, Stephen Matthew Head, 24, died from his injuries at University Hospital.
Michael E. Rhines Jr.
This is where it gets really weird.
Check this out.
Michael E. Rimes, Jr., 33, was arrested just after midnight Saturday after police found him crawling in brush near the restaurant, according to Rimes' arrest report.
Police said Rimes' clothing matched the clothing of the suspect caught on video and that he had a handgun loaded with several rounds that were manufactured by the same company that made the shell casings found at the scene.
Rimes faces three counts of murder and is scheduled to be arraigned in court Monday.
His bond was set at $2 million, according to the Louisville Metro Corrections online booking log.
Why?
Why, Bishop asked.
I mean, I could understand if there's an altercation, but why?
I don't know, and neither do you.
Neither does anyone else.
Why was this guy hiding in the bushes?
You'd think he'd shoot him and run.
The story is just weird.
I tell you, man, it's probably as simple as a crazy guy did a crazy thing.
Just because he happens to be a Black Lives Matter activist doesn't mean that motivated the killing.
But I will say, I'm getting worried.
I'm getting angry.
I'm getting really angry at all of this.
I will stress for the 50 millionth time before we move on to where we get to the important conversation.
We don't know what his motive was.
We don't.
But I will tell you this, you irresponsible and psychotic people in media, propping this stuff up, calling for more.
I am sick and tired of hearing about people being killed.
And I hope this wasn't a political killing of some sort.
Because you've got to understand, there are going to be people who are going to say something like, you killed two of ours, we killed two of yours, or something to that effect.
Because I have seen the aftermath of this in front of my own home in New York City.
Most of you know, I talked about it in several podcasts, several different episodes.
I lived on that street where the two cops got assassinated.
Burn Congress down.
Former CNN host, prominent writers, and professor all urge a violent response if Ruth Bader Ginsburg's Supreme Court replacement is voted in before the election.
CNN.
Reza Aslan.
This guy is one of the most despicable and evil people I have ever seen on the internet.
I've ever seen in my life.
And you know what?
It's funny because I know a bunch of people know this guy.
And I can't believe what has happened to people I have once considered my friends.
But we are crossing the line, man.
This kind of talk from people like him results in people losing their lives.
This guy has called for violence.
This guy is... Burn the entire thing down.
Ah, I get it.
It's vague.
It's not specific enough.
It could be figurative.
Why do we allow this to exist in our society?
Two things.
High-profile celebrities and personalities calling for violence, encouraging violence, and then a spineless media that won't do the groundwork to figure out why someone may have been motivated to commit some killing.
You know, I can just see it.
You get some, uh, right-wing guy and they'll claim, you know, well, he was a right-wing guy, so it was clearly about his politics.
Then you quite literally get this dude in Portland, this Michael Reinold guy who executed a Trump supporter.
And, and where, where, where's the, where's the press?
No, they just say, you know, oh yeah, well, well, I'll be honest.
They had a hard time disavowing that or hiding from it.
That was reality.
But the media absolutely works in defense of Black Lives Matter and leftist politics.
They don't want to speak up.
They don't want to stand out.
And this allows... Look at this guy.
We're shutting the country down if Trump and McConnell try to ram through an appointee before the election.
That's fine.
We're gonna shut it down.
That's fine.
He's not really saying anything.
But the F no, burn it all down.
The burn the country down.
The threats of violence.
If you can't shut it down, burn it down.
And then you had, you know, Donald Trump being sent poison just the other day.
There have been some crazy right-wing dudes.
Some really crazy far-right whatever you want to call them dudes.
But I'm sick of this.
I'm sick of it at this point.
They say far-right, but the far-right has very little to do with Trump supporters and the regular right.
Because you've got these people they call far-right who quite literally support economic policy from Bernie Sanders.
It's a game.
It's a manipulation.
They will tell you, if it's right, it's bad.
Therefore, Trump supporters are right, and so are all the other bad people.
Therefore, all of the bad people are right-wing, period.
Like, they're the same thing.
I've often talked about the problem with trying to discuss, like trying to break down what is far right and what is far left.
And you know why you can't do it?
Because the left, it's easy.
When I say far left, you got people who are quite literally socialist and they're quite literally leftist-identitarian.
The SJWs all share their unified, stupid worldview.
On the right, they don't.
There is no the right.
I don't even know how to describe the right.
Is it Trump supporters?
Is it never-Trump-er conservatives?
Is it extremist ultra-nationalists who think the wife should be in the kitchen and they march around with guns?
These things don't overlap.
Traditional conservatives do not believe the same insane ultra... Like, listen.
You take any one of these people who went on a mass shooting spree.
You're not going to find an agreement between them and Trump supporters.
But you take these far leftists who are throwing bricks and you put them next to Ocasio-Cortez and they're going to agree on almost everything.
So listen, man.
That's the game they play in the media.
So what's really frustrating to me here, I see this story about this guy, and they don't tell us anything.
They omit stuff, and I'm sitting here trying to understand why this happened.
And what do they say?
It's not political.
It's just random.
Ignore it.
Ignore the fact that this guy's an activist.
Ignore the fact that locals are calling him out, saying he's wearing a shirt just as for Breonna Taylor.
Did this guy maybe think he had found the cops who killed her?
We don't know.
And that could be extreme.
For all I know, this dude saw those guys earlier in the day and they called him ugly.
But the problem is, we live in a world where the media doesn't do the fact-checking.
The journalists don't do the fact-checking, and they're not honest with us about what's really going on.
Instead of actually telling us why this may be viewed as a political act, they just say, it's not political and we're not going to tell you anything else about this.
We're not.
A GoFundMe has been created to help cover the victim's funeral expenses outside Bungalow Joe's on Saturday.
Members of the community created a memorial for the men, who Bishop said worked together.
One of the men was his manager's fiancé.
Smallwood was his dear friend.
That's sad, man.
Very first customer I had in the place, Bishop said of Smallwood, well-liked by everyone.
Didn't have an enemy in the world.
He was a regular.
He was a fixture here.
Every time you come up here, there was a good chance Scott was going to be there.
In all his years in business, Bishop said he had to call the police to Bungalow Joe's just one time.
He said the sign above the door best describes his restaurant, a family grill and pub.
They're my family, said my customers, my employers.
They're just all my family.
So why did it happen?
Why did this guy do it?
I don't know.
And I don't think we're gonna know.
Because if it turns out it really was some kind of deranged political motive, they're not gonna tell us.
The media will not report it, and they will withhold that.
I've told the story about my time working for ABC News Univision.
It was a company called Fusion.
Where they told me several times, side with the audience.
That's what they told me.
Remember, Tim, you gotta side with the audience.
And I said, what does that mean?
They said, well, our audience is progressive, so, you know, we're here to be on their side.
And I asked, does that mean if there is a factual news report that would offend our audience, we won't report it?
Yeah, I think that's fair.
That's what I was told.
And I was told this again in a room full of a ton of people as we were preparing to cover the conventions.
Yeah, that's fair.
You know what that means?
It means if a Trump supporter is walking down the street with a little flag, then some Antifa guy comes up to him and punches him in the face.
Well, Look, our audience is progressive.
They like Antifa.
If we report this, it'll make them angry.
So, so what happens when the Trump supporter gets up and shoves the guy to try and buy time to run away?
They take a picture of him shoving it and the headline changes.
Trump supporter shoves anti-fascist and that's it because you got to side with the audience.
And so I look at stories like this with this guy and what do I see?
Black Lives Matter activists, you know, we don't know why he did it.
And when the media finds out, they might say, ooh, you know, that's going to make a lot of people really angry.
We shouldn't, we shouldn't report this.
We shouldn't report it.
They probably won't.
And then what will happen?
The Gateway Pundit will.
Conservative outlets like the Daily Wire will.
Daily Caller will.
And regular people are going to say things like, the only way to actually know what's going on is to go to alternative media.
And that is what is fueling, at least in part, this divide in our understanding of the world.
Our worldviews are completely split.
And it's because we know we can't get the truth from traditional mainstream press because they will withhold things because they believe they're the arbiters of public knowledge and truth.
I don't believe that.
I believe the public has a right to know.
And that means sometimes bad things for the public.
It really does.
Because some things are kept secret for their own protection.
Like, you know, government secrets and stuff.
But sometimes, public right to know trumps security.
Freedom over security.
And that's one of the important issues.
Look, I just, I saw this story, man.
I see a lot of people talking about it.
That's not the biggest story in the world.
I just hope two things, okay?
Be calm and reasonable when talking about this because we don't know anything about it.
And that's unfortunate.
But I'll tell you this, if you go around saying he did it for political reasons or you think he did, and then it turns out he did know the guys and they owed him, you know, from stealing a bag of Cheetos or some stupid reason, then you're gonna be wrong and you can't jump the gun on this stuff.
So I think I have my solution.
I'm going to be hiring journalists.
And then when I see a story, I'm going to be like, dig everything up.
Let's figure out what this is all about.
And then maybe we'll actually get a better understanding.
But I'll tell you what, I did a ton of work.
I got a headache.
I've been digging and digging and digging.
I can't verify half this stuff.
A lot of phone calls got to be made to try and figure out what's going on.
And I've come up with very little.
I just wish the media would do a better job and they wouldn't allow these people to call for violence.
But I'll leave it there.
Next segment will be coming up at 4 p.m.
over at youtube.com slash TimCast.
It is a different channel.
Thank you all so much for hanging out, and I will see you all then.
Ruth Bader Ginsburg's dying wish not to have Donald Trump choose replacement.
Quote, my most fervent wish is that I will not be replaced until a new president is installed.
Ruth Bader Ginsburg told her granddaughter, Clara Spera, in the days before her death, NPR reported.
So let me get this straight, NPR.
You reported that someone told you that someone else said a thing on their deathbed.
Okay, not only is that not journalism, but the quote itself is one of the most pathetic attempts at manipulation I have ever seen.
Okay, you know what?
Maybe Ruth Bader Ginsburg was laying there and she's coughing and she looks to her granddaughter and says, my most fervent wish is that I will not be replaced until a new president is installed.
She maybe would have said it because she doesn't want Donald Trump to replace her.
But this is just... Look, I'm sorry, man.
It's possible, but the level of gullibility that the average person has to have to believe this is ridiculous.
I do not understand why so many people are acting like this is what she literally said.
It's too on the nose, man!
Chuck Schumer said something similar.
We should not decide until a new president is chosen.
What do you mean a new president?
2025?
Is that what you're saying?
Because Trump's gonna win, right?
Maybe he won't.
But what happens if Trump wins?
A new president is installed.
So that means literally not Trump.
Now, I know Trump mentioned it.
He said something like, he's like, I hope I am the next president.
It's like, no, Trump, you are the president.
You will technically be the next president, but not in this context.
Are people actually believing this is real?
Because I'm not playing this game.
Unless you show me a video of her actually saying this, I think you gotta be insane.
Well, here's the fun part.
Biden condemns Trump's push to nominate Ginsburg replacement as exercising raw political power.
Yes, that's how elections work.
Donald Trump is the president.
Thank you, Biden.
You figured it out.
After how long?
77 years?
You've been in government for 47.
I think you'd know this by now.
My favorite part about this is that he's critical of the Republicans who would not honor the dying wish of Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
Listen, I have nothing but respect and admiration for Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
I remember learning about her and her history and the things she did, fighting for women's rights and equal rights.
Incredible.
Respectable.
What I don't respect is the media who lies to push political, to push a political agenda or to help the Democrats.
So forgive me.
I don't know this Clara Sparrow woman, but I do know the media lies.
And this quote was like, you know what, man?
If you're going to manipulate somebody to try and get them to vote in your direction, you got to be a little bit more subtle than that, right?
You know what I'm saying?
This is like, this is...
Breaking news!
Raw Joe Biden.
You gotta be a little bit more subtle.
It could have been something like, you know, in her last few hours, she had a conversation with her daughter, and her granddaughter could have said, you know, we were really hoping that she would make it through the election and Joe Biden would be able to nominate someone to replace her, and she was really worried that if she didn't make it, you know, Donald Trump would select a replacement who would be more conservative.
Yeah, maybe that's all you had to say.
Maybe that's it.
Instead, we get this really, like, ham-fisted quote that's so on-the-nose.
Come on, man.
Look, the other day, you know, what was it, Colby Covington won against his opponent, and then he comes out, and he's in the MAGA flag, and Trump calls in, and the guy's name is Covington, and he's a Trump supporter, and it's like, all of these things happen.
Okay, so you know what?
Maybe Ruth Bader Ginsburg actually said this.
And you know it doesn't matter, because I'm going to tell you this.
Whoever is writing the current season of life on Earth, you gotta, guys, you gotta hire someone better than this, okay?
Because it's two on the nose, okay?
A Trump supporter named Covington winning MMA and getting a call from Trump.
Because the Covington kids, remember?
And no disrespect to Colby Covington, it was awesome.
His fight was amazing.
And it's rad that he won.
I'm just saying, it's like, is this real life?
Did Ruth Bader Ginsburg really say this?
It's just so silly.
Look at this.
Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden on Sunday said Senate Republicans should honor the dying wish of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and not vote on a nominee to fill the vacancy before the November presidential election.
Well, that's not what she said, Joe.
That's not what she said.
She said until there's a new president.
OK, so after Trump.
Here's a quote.
As a nation, we should heed her final call to us, not as a personal service to her, but as a service to the country, our country, at a crossroads.
Biden said during a speech in Philadelphia, there is so much at stake.
The former vice president said the choice of the nominee to replace Ginsburg, who died on Friday evening, should be left to whoever wins the November election.
No, it shouldn't.
No, it shouldn't.
I'm sorry.
Republicans won.
You can be hypocrites.
You can say whatever you want.
I don't care.
You're not in power.
You don't have the ability to make the nomination.
You can't confirm it.
We're done.
Conversation over.
But I do not understand who these people are who believe this stuff!
I'll show you something interesting.
Kimberly Strassel, excellent point.
She said, Democrats will take to every media outlet to claim it will be politically dangerous for GOP senators to move a nominee.
The exact opposite is true.
In 2018, four Democrat senators lost their seats for opposing Kavanaugh.
Heitkamp, Donnelly, McCaskill, and Nelson.
Republicans make you, Mark, you better get that job done.
We've already got what like Susan Collins and I think not who's the other Murkowski I think it was.
I probably got the names wrong.
But we already got a couple Republicans defecting saying they will not vote to confirm a nominee.
Well, then you can get primaried because the people are going to remember it.
The Republican voters, the independents who support them are going to say you had a chance To get the job done to get look, people don't like what the left is doing.
These people are insane.
And Joe Biden is off his rocker.
Yet still, yet still.
They play these games.
Just stand up for what you believe in, okay?
And maybe that's what they're doing, so fine.
You wanna stand up for this?
Trump War Room tweeted, Joe Biden, quote, it's estimated that 200 million people will die, probably by the time I finish this talk.
That's nearly two thirds of the US population, and we're contemplating voting for this guy?
Dude, I'll take the sassy hands guy who does the, you know, did you see the story about Trump?
Who believes this?
Why does anyone believe this?
It's crazy.
So Donald Trump apparently made a hourglass shape.
He didn't.
They're claiming in Newsweek that when Trump was talking about nominating a female Supreme Court justice, he went like this with his hands, you know, the curve thing, you know, like boobs and hips.
He did not.
He literally didn't.
But they just keep saying these things and people believe it.
Can you imagine having that kind of person, you know, being in control of our government?
Yeah, look, man, look.
I believe everybody deserves human rights, civil rights, but I also believe that, like, if there's, say, a doctor, and there's, like, a guy with a trench coat on, it's covered in, like, you know, just, like, food, mustard, and he's sitting there going, and then there's a guy who, like, has a heart attack, if the doctor says, okay, everybody, quick, I need help, we're gonna perform CPR, I'll be like, well, he's a doctor, And then if the crazy guy goes, no, give him cheese, cheese, I'd be like, I'm gonna listen to the doctor on this one.
So how is it that we come to this point where people on the left just blindly follow these lies?
And here's the point I'm making about the crazy doctor and the freaky guy covered in food who wants to give the heart attack victim cheese.
Do not elect the guy who wants to give a heart attack victim cheese.
Like, that guy voting?
Imagine it this way.
There's a doctor screaming, you have to give him CPR!
And the other crazy guy is going, oh no, give him cheese!
And I'm going, hmm, I'll think about it.
What should I do?
The people who would believe something psychotic like what Joe Biden just said, 200 million people will die by the time I finish this talk.
You mean talking for a couple of years or something?
200 million?
What?
It was like, how long were you speaking for?
20 minutes?
People hear this and they just believe it.
He said something before about this with, like, gun crime.
How is it that, you know, you're here, you're watching me talk, we're having a good time, we're laughing, haha, it's all funny, and there are people who read the news and they're like, wow, Ruth Bader Ginsburg said that, huh?
And it's like, dude, isn't that a little on the nose?
It's like, it's like, let me write down specifically exactly what needs to happen.
No nuance, just like, there you go.
My most fervent dying wish is that Donald Trump not replace me.
I guess maybe she said it, sure.
But I think she was a little bit more sophisticated than that, and would have had a more interesting thing to say.
But whatever, man.
I'll tell you what we're getting.
We're getting a country where a bunch of really dumb people vote.
And you know what's funny?
I know the left agrees it's a problem, but hey, that's the way it is, because I don't know what you do.
Like, people have a right to vote, you know?
So I guess the issue is, how do you educate people and provide them the information they need to actually, you know, to actually understand what's happening?
Well, I guess doing this.
But I guess I have a task for you then.
Maybe not this video, but share my videos in general if you think I do a good job.
I don't think I'm the smartest person in the world.
I don't think I have all the answers.
I don't think I always get it right.
I just try.
I try to point out absurdities.
I try to fact check things.
And I can tell you this, fact check, 200 million people are not going to die in the time that Joe Biden had a conversation because that's insane.
When CNN talked about black holes and swallowing airplanes, that's very easy to fact check that one.
And when it comes to Ruth Bader Ginsburg, she may have said this, I just don't believe it.
You gotta give me evidence.
So I guess the best thing we can do is share content, which is what we do.
Share my videos if you think I do a good job, and maybe that'll be the best we can do for now.
But stick around, I got a couple more segments in just a few minutes, and I will see you all shortly.
In my last segment, I was talking about fake news, the absurdity of what people in politics were saying, and there's something that I really need to talk about pertaining to an episode of the Joe Rogan podcast, his apology, and I haven't been able to do it because I've just been working, there's been a bunch of other stories, I've been meaning to talk about it, but we need to, we need to.
I think Joe Rogan's great, I think his podcast is awesome.
But he made a mistake.
You see, on his podcast, he said that apparently leftist activists had been arrested for starting fires up in Portland.
He then said, first, he says like a bunch of people were getting arrested for this.
And then he said something to the effect that they actually arrested leftist activists.
Let me show you this tweet from Alex Patterson.
He says, Joe Rogan lies to his millions of listeners that left-wing activists are starting forest fires in Oregon.
This dangerous claim has been completely debunked.
He then goes on to say Spotify signed an exclusive deal with Rogan for $100 million.
He hosts conspiracy theories and spews hateful anti-trans misinformation.
This guy Alex Patterson works for Media Matters for America.
Media Matters is a conspiracy theory organization that operates entirely in bad faith to smear political opponents of Democrats and their progressive agenda.
It's the easiest way to explain it.
For some reason, they're considered credible by NewsGuard, which is an absurdity, because they just literally make things up.
My favorite thing they've ever said about me was when I was literally reading the Star Tribune, the Minneapolis Star Tribune.
It said, it had a line, it said, it said, Ilhan Omar may have married her brother, and I was reading that, and they claimed I made it up, or something to that effect.
They were like, he pushed this wild conspiracy theory.
I'm like, it's in the video!
It's like, that's why I have the source all around me.
So here's how the game is played.
Joe Rogan did make a mistake.
He made a little mistake.
He said people were starting forest fires.
Okay, they're wildfires.
I know it's maybe nitpicking, but I guess they can get you if you make even the slightest mistake.
Yes, wildfires.
Wildfires are being set, not forest fires.
So that's a mistake.
Joe also said, like, something about activists getting arrested.
People getting arrested.
Well, people are getting arrested, but only activist has been arrested.
So this segment I'm doing, It's not so much about rehashing the wildfires thing, more so addressing how the media operates and how you get these lies from the likes of Media Matters.
So, first, this individual from Media Matters clearly does not like Joe Rogan.
Their job is literally to just watch every single thing that someone like Joe will do or I will do and then find any way to take something out of context and push bad faith in an effort to get them destroyed.
To destroy their careers?
Well, something interesting happened and a lot of people started to ask questions.
Joe Rogan issued an apology.
For what?
He made a passive, slight error about something he read?
He's not even a journalist.
Joe Rogan doesn't host a news segment.
He's just a podcast.
He's having a casual conversation.
Now, to be fair, you know, I think Joe Rogan did the right thing in issuing an apology.
The only problem is that his apology is wrong.
And that's why this needs to be brought up, because I've covered this extensively.
And another thing is too, I was like, I was wondering if Joe was going to issue another apology.
Probably not, but I think he might have to.
Otherwise, maybe this video will serve to do well enough to inform people of the mistake that he's made now.
You see, Joe Rogan wasn't that wrong.
The only mistake he made was the semantics argument about forest fire versus wildfire, because wildfire affects the brush.
And when he said activists, Instead of activist, we know for a fact there was one man named Jeff Accord.
He is a Black Lives Matter activist, a frequenter of defund the police protests, and he's been arrested at them before.
He was arrested for trying to start a fire.
We also know that there are many, many instances of arson affecting the West Coast.
Here's a story from Law & Crime.
Six men in Oregon charged for allegedly starting fires during wildfire season on purpose.
Joe Rogan is not incorrect in that capacity.
He just used the plural for activist instead of just saying one person.
And thus, what does Media Matters do?
Saying he lies.
He lies.
You see, what they're doing now is they're implying intent to deceive.
That's why I'm very careful about saying Donald Trump lies or he doesn't.
Because how do you prove someone lied to you?
To lie is to intentionally deceive someone.
You can be wrong.
Joe Rogan was wrong.
Joe Rogan's still wrong.
But the point is, it was an attack on Rogan which resulted in an apology, and Joe made a serious mistake.
Joe made a very serious mistake in believing that these people were operating in good faith.
Or maybe Joe bent the knee.
I don't necessarily believe Joe's the kind of guy who would give in and give into the social justice people in the far left, because he doesn't seem like the kind of guy who cares.
Also, I wonder, I mean, he's well off.
Is he really that worried?
I think the attempt at the apology was genuine.
Some people suggested that he was being forced to do it.
I don't think so, but I do think Joe has been duped, and now maybe he'll have to talk about this later on.
Joe tweeted, I effed up on the podcast with Douglas Murray and said that people got arrested lighting fires in Portland.
That turns out not to be true.
I was very irresponsible not looking into it before I repeated it.
I read one story about a guy getting arrested for lighting fires turned out to be true.
But the other S I read about people getting arrested for lighting fires in Portland was not true.
I repeated it without looking into it and it was a really effing stupid mistake that won't happen again.
I'm sorry.
I think the apology is well warranted.
Important.
If Joe makes a serious mistake about a very serious issue like claiming that activists are starting fires, that can be very troublesome, especially because law enforcement was saying stop spreading these rumors and Joe has the biggest podcast in the world.
With great power comes great responsibility, right?
At least Spider-Man's uncle seemed to think so.
But it's true, so I think Joe did the right thing.
The only problem is that Joe's apology went totally in the other direction, creating another problem.
He said, The other stuff I read about people getting arrested for lighting fires in Portland was not true.
I repeated it without looking into it.
It was really effing stupid.
Okay, well hold on.
In Portland.
Were these fires in Portland?
At least one.
And Andy Ngo points it out.
Breaking.
Portland police arrested a man today suspected of starting a brush fire using a Molotov cocktail.
Firefighters extinguished the grass fire before it could spread further.
Domingo Lopez Jr., 45, was arrested.
He was quickly released without bail.
Now we also have this.
And and you know, exclusive jet Thomas 36 has been arrested in Portland and charged with first
degree felony arson, felony unlawful use of a weapon, two counts of felony criminal mischief
and more. Law enforcement says Thomas tried to set a Northwest Portland hotel gas pipe on fire.
Now I know Joe said forest fires.
That could be the simple mistake he made.
They're not setting fires, they're not setting fires.
Here's the problem with playing the game with these people.
The reality is they are setting fires.
Not leftists, but people.
People are setting fires.
We need to know this.
Law enforcement needs to stop them, and we need to protect our communities.
Joe got duped by the Media Matters people or by whatever, into putting out, well, you know what?
I don't even want to put it that way.
I'll just point out that they operate in bad faith.
We then see other journalists chime in.
Molly Knight says, this is good.
Please apologize in your podcast as well so people hear it.
Conspiracy theories are the biggest current threat to our democracy.
Thank you.
Don't apologize to the mob.
You can see how things are getting just absolutely crazy.
Well, Joe also made a video apology to 3.2 million views.
That's bigger than some of Joe's podcasts, and it's a direct message.
Now, look, man.
If Joe doesn't say anything, it is what it is.
I'm not going to nitpick.
I'm not going to drag people and accuse anybody of lying.
I think Joe was sincere in trying to apologize.
I think, in my personal opinion, and maybe he already did this because it's been a few days, but I wanted to address this just to talk about the issue of fake news.
It would be very appropriate if Joe mentioned, look, there are people starting fires.
You know, they're not leftists, but there are people being arrested for arson, and we need to make sure everyone's aware of this.
Because if you put out a video to millions of people saying it's not true, nobody is doing this, now all you've done is You've gone in the other direction.
You've gone in the other direction.
And, uh, well, I think people have a right to know the truth.
So, it's a real challenge.
To what, uh, degree is Joe Rogan obligated to be a fact checker?
This is the craziest thing to me, but I think, like I said, with great power comes great responsibility, and now Joe's in this position where if he says something that's not true, and he did, And he went too far by saying there were leftist activists getting arrested for it.
That could help exacerbate these conspiracy theories.
Then maybe he does need to issue a correction, which he did do.
But this is a big challenge.
The challenge now is that Joe, his fact check, his correction, wasn't correct.
So what happens now?
Is a dude who does a podcast where he interviews people and hangs out obligated to hire fact-checkers?
That's kind of crazy, don't you think?
That would actually make Joe Rogan, like, if Joe's gotta now fact-check everything he does, he's gonna be the biggest news show in the world.
If they expect him to get everything right all the time, that's the case.
And this is one of the biggest challenges with signing a big deal and why I don't want to sign deals with anybody.
I'm gonna mind my own business and when it all comes crashing down around me, so what?
I'll go live down by the river.
In a van, no less.
But when you start doing deals with people, it's not so much about...
It's not so much about them forcing you to do things.
I don't think Spotify went to Joe and demanded that he apologize, but I do think that he's a bigger target now, and Spotify is a target now.
So Spotify may have asked him to apologize because they're taking heat for this, because the goal of Media Matters was to go after Spotify, you see?
Spotify signed a deal.
That was the plan.
They got Spotify to get hurt.
And Spotify probably said, yo, we can't have this, man.
So I don't know if you can fix this.
And maybe that was what happened.
I don't know.
But was it the right move?
I guess Joe's gonna have to hire some fact-checkers, man.
And I'm not kidding.
And I'll be honest, he can.
Like, it's not like he can't, he can definitely afford it.
The challenge, though, is, come on.
You're hanging out, you're having a conversation, you're gonna say some things that aren't true.
Like, we're not infallible.
Joe just sees things in the news like anybody else and shares them.
So what does he do?
Read from a prompter?
He can't do it.
They're trying to destroy the Rogan podcast.
People at Spotify are trying to destroy it, and this is one path towards doing it.
I don't know what to say to tell anybody, the big fans, what might happen, but they're coming for Joe.
Spotify is a potential weak point.
We'll see how that plays out.
I wonder if Joe will correct it on the show, or if he already did, but that's my two cents.
I'll leave it there.
I got one more segment coming up in a few minutes, and I will see you all shortly.
How is it that we are seeing polls showing 45% of queer men back Trump?
How is it that we see polls saying 33% of black likely voters support Donald Trump and that the Latino community is supporting Trump in record numbers as well?
But at the same time, white support for Trump is going down.
But what is this?
Trump's supposed to be this white supremacist, the left says, but he has all of these marginalized communities coming into his corner and supporting him.
Not the majority, mind you, but many of them.
I think people are waking up.
I think the red pill analogy, the walkaway campaign, quite literally walkaway.
I mean, Brandon Strzok, who founded the walkaway campaign, telling people to walk away from the Democrats.
I believe it's the Democrats.
He's saying walk away.
Well, he is also a gay man.
I think he's had some negative words about the concept of queer, like the phrase itself, but this is how Newsweek is phrasing it.
It's a really interesting story because I actually have the poll pulled up and they say it's quite different.
Here's the poll from Hornet.
They say Hornet asked 10,000 gay men to weigh in on the upcoming U.S.
election.
Donald Trump.
According to Newsweek, they say 1,200... Oh, okay, I'm sorry.
1,200 were in the United States.
So here's where it gets interesting.
They say...
A recent survey of 1,200 queer men in the United States found that 45% planned on voting for Republican President Donald Trump.
Comparatively, 51% said they would vote for Joe Biden.
The poll's results fall very close to recent national polling, showing 50% of voters supporting Biden and 43% supporting Trump.
The poll conducted by the queer men's social app Hornet actually asked 10,000 of its users worldwide about their preferred presidential candidate.
But while 66% of worldwide users supported Biden and 34% supported Trump, the percentages among US men were much closer.
And I know why that is.
It's actually very simple.
If you live in other parts of the world, you're not getting access to real information.
You're getting mainstream information.
You're getting the mainstream media.
So I've seen people talk about watching the news in Germany and in Europe, and they say they have no idea what's really happening because they'll go on YouTube and they'll find a video like mine and go, Whoa, what is this?
I know these videos, these tweets, we don't get these on our media.
So around the world, people are seeing nothing but negative, negative stories about Trump.
They say, of the 1,200 men living in the U.S., 49% said that they do not support Trump at all.
11% said they disagree with him on most issues.
9% said they agree with Trump on some issues and disagree with on others.
Only 27% of U.S.-based respondents said they either mostly or fully supported Trump.
However, 10% of the U.S.
men who said they do not support Trump at all said they will vote for him regardless.
And that's probably one of the most important points in this study.
You know, I've often thought about this.
It doesn't get brought up enough by the left or by anybody, really.
Trump's approval rating is 44.8 right now in the aggregate.
But what's his actual likely voter turnout going to be?
Because, I'll tell you this, I don't approve of some of the things Trump does.
The economy, however, yes.
So think about it this way.
Trump's approval rating on the economy, well that's really high.
It's way above.
People trust him on the economy more than they don't... They approve of him on the economy more than they disapprove, right?
So how is it then that overall job approval is low?
Well, because I think it's fair to point out Trump is far from perfect.
But he's the better choice on the economy.
It's the economy, stupid.
So how many people hate Trump?
I'm going to vote for him anyway.
How many people are going to vote against the far left?
Against Joe Biden?
Against leftist identitarianism?
I mean, I'll tell you this.
I'm voting against the riots.
That's a big issue.
I'm voting against the war.
I'm not voting for Trump so much.
I mean, I am.
But the bigger issue to me... We've got serious existential threats.
We got an opportunity now for peace in the Middle East?
I'm gonna take it.
We got an opportunity to bring our troops back from the Middle East?
I am gonna take it.
We have an opportunity to repair the economy and end the riots?
I am gonna take it.
And no, it doesn't mean I like Trump as a person.
Or as a professional.
They say when user responses were broken out continentally, the majority of queer men on every continent supported Biden more than Trump by margins of 54 to 25%.
Hornet users in every country except for two also supported Biden over Trump.
The only two countries to do so otherwise were Taiwan, where 47% support Biden and 51% supported Trump.
Yeah, it's because of China and Russia, where it was 38% for Biden and 58% for Trump.
Exit polls from the 2016 presidential elections found that at least 75% of LGBTQ voters supported Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton over Trump, a reported 14% favored Trump.
Soon after the 2016 election, NBC News interviewed some LGBTQ voters from that 14% contingent to find that most were more concerned about issues of gun rights, undocumented immigration, job creation, and stopping Islamic radicals more so I don't know if I believe any of that.
the LGBTQ community.
Though Trump was lauded by some Republicans for mentioning the LGBTQ community during
his speeches at the 2016 Republican National Convention, his administration has repeatedly
rolled back preexisting LGBTQ rights and written amicus briefs to the U S Supreme Court in
support of anti gay discrimination.
I don't know if I believe any of that.
I'll tell you one of the biggest problems is LGBTQ.
I a two a S P plus or whatever it is.
I'm not trying to say that to be mean.
I literally don't.
I think it's L-G-B-T-Q-I-A-A plus L-G-B-T-Q...
There's a two in there somewhere.
I don't know the number.
You see how hard it is to even figure it out?
Here's what happens.
At first, we had the LGBT community.
This was lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender.
And there were a lot of people.
I actually did fundraising on behalf of a non-profit for the Human Rights Campaign for basically fighting for gay rights, employment, non-discrimination, and things like that.
See, when it's very easily defined, you know what you're arguing for.
It's about, you know, fighting for who you love.
Now there's an interesting thing that happened with the lesbian community where they're talking about dropping the L or dropping the T. And the argument I heard was that transgender isn't about who you love, it's about who you are.
So it's something different.
Not that they don't deserve rights or anything like that, but that lesbian, gay, and bisexual are specifically about you choosing to love somebody, or not, I'm sorry, not choosing, but you, you know, loving somebody and then, you know, having your right to marry and be protected and not be discriminated against.
There were some concerns because there was, I was actually doing fundraising on behalf of the HRC.
And one of the concerns was that they weren't supporting the Trans Non-Discrimination Act.
So basically this bill was going to get passed that said lesbian, gay people, and bisexuals would be protected.
The trans community would not.
And a bunch of activist organizations got really mad and were demanding they go all the way.
So here's my point.
When you say these are the parameters, LGBTQ, we're like, okay, cool, yeah, we're all in favor of what they're saying.
Then you start adding a bunch of things to it, and all of a sudden now they're like, see, Donald Trump opposes this.
It's like, what if you added something to it that Trump opposes?
He doesn't oppose all of them, he opposes the specific things.
Like, LGBTQ, is Trump in favor of this?
I think not entirely.
I don't.
I don't believe Trump is entirely.
I believe he's in favor of LGB, but I don't believe that Trump goes towards trans rights.
And what, you know, the Q is the weird thing because I don't think it's easily defined, and that's kind of the point.
It's meant to not really be defined.
But while Donald Trump is not the most hardcore activist for LGBT rights, he's pretty good when it comes to the lesbian, gay, and bisexual community.
Although when it comes to the trans community, Trump obviously not so much.
He doesn't do the things they want him to do.
So they say that he's pushing anti-gay discrimination and things like that, and I'm not entirely convinced I believe it.
So I'll tell you this right now, I know what we're going to see.
Why is it that 45% of gay men, queer men, support Donald Trump?
I think it's because, well, as the left would say, they are now the privileged group.
They've won!
Now they like the status quo and they want to stay where they are.
Maybe that's a good argument for why they should go further, maybe it's not an argument at all.
The point is, people like what Trump is doing, whether he's for or against any of these things.
They like what Trump is doing.
The one thing I want to add to this, queer men, Well, according to, uh, I would imagine that this organization Hornet would probably define trans men as men.
So I'm wondering if they were included in this as well, and if that actually skewed it for or against Trump.
I have no idea.
I'd imagine, based on Trump's stances on transgender issues and gender issues, they're more likely to oppose Trump.
In which case, if they were included in this poll, then it actually skews low.
And Trump may actually have more than half of the queer male community, as opposed to just queer men in general, which could theoretically include trans men.
Look, I don't know exactly what this means.
It doesn't mean Trump's going to win, but it does show that I think Donald Trump has, he's got a lot of support from the supposed marginalized communities.
So how could he be this fascist despotic bigot when he's actually getting decent numbers from these groups?
The left just says they're internalizing white supremacy or misogyny or homophobia or all this other nonsense, and they take away the agency from the individuals.
And I personally, I think that's wrong.
I think if there is a gay, black, Latino, anybody, they come to me and they say they support Trump for this reason.
Now, to be completely honest, you know, the queer male community is not a particularly large voting block.
So it may not be the most important parameter in the world.
In fact, it may be, unfortunately, for Trump, negligible.
But I guess we can only just sit back and see how things play out as more and more marginalized communities start coming out in support of Donald Trump.
Coming out in more ways than that.
I think it's interesting when I hear these stories.
I'm pretty sure Brandon Stark talked about this, that he said it was easier to come out as gay than it was to come out as a Trump supporter.
And he gets physically attacked for being a Trump supporter, and that's not okay.
