Another Wave Of Democrats QUITTING Party And Plan To Vote Trump, Democrats REFUSE To Heed Warnings
In a full page ad in the New York Times, Pro Life Democrats warned the democratic party they were alienating voters and would lose to Trump.In an article called Letters from the Politically Homeless, Bridget Phetasy explained how she read through hundreds of emails from people who felt abandoned by their parties.While there are many conservatives who will refuse to vote republican this time around and will support Biden, it seems most people are going from Democrat to Deplorable and will vote Trump.BLM Leftist riots, covid hypocrisy, and life vs choice seem to be huge factors in why this is happening.Democrats have been warned and just keep doubling down.
Support the show (http://timcast.com/donate)
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
In 2018, a man named Jack Murphy published a book called Democrat to Deplorable.
He had traveled around the country speaking to people who voted for Trump, but previously had voted Democrat to better understand why they made the switch.
I mean, the media was telling us Trump was evil.
He was the worst.
He was a racist.
Yet people still wanted to vote for the man.
All in all, around 9 million or so people ended up switching and voting for Donald Trump.
And what made that happen?
Well, a lot of reasons.
And it seems like we're seeing a lot of similar reasons happen now.
It looks like another wave of Democrats will reject the party and switch voting for Donald Trump in the upcoming election.
And it may lead to a landslide.
Now I know, you may be saying, Tim, the polls do not show this.
That's ridiculous.
And yes, maybe that's the case.
Maybe it's wishful thinking.
Maybe the media is completely right and everybody just hates Donald Trump.
But the signs are right in front of us.
Numerous stories have emerged talking about Democrats quitting the party, Democrats registering as Republicans, or how about that time when all of these C-SPAN callers kept flooding the lines saying they were Democrats but Democrat no more and would be voting for Republicans.
Recently, Democrats for Life took out a full-page ad in the New York Times, saying, We cannot make the same mistakes as we did in 2016.
New York Times today, Dems for Life and more than 100 current and former elected Democrats
urge Joe Biden and the Democratic Party to moderate its positions on abortion.
We cannot make the same mistakes as we did in 2016.
They know the Democrats lost tons of votes because they're moving way too far left on
the issue of abortion.
And it's not just this issue.
The issue of violence is a huge factor.
In fact, for someone like me, I said earlier this year I wasn't going to vote for the president, but then the riots happened and safety comes first.
I started thinking about my family.
I started thinking about the riots in Chicago, and I said, Trump needs to win.
We need to see some kind of justice.
And now we're seeing morality policing, where the police will arrest people for defending their own homes and businesses.
This cannot be allowed to continue.
In a recent opinion piece by Bridget Phetasy, a political commentator and just general personality, she wrote about letters from the politically homeless, people who feel like they've been left behind.
And Trump supporters, you better pay attention, because there are conservatives who refuse to vote for Donald Trump, certainly one of his weaknesses.
But it seems like, and according to Bridget and in my personal opinion, way more people are abandoning the Democrats in favor of Donald Trump.
So I want to go over why.
I'm going to read to you what Democrats for Life have to say.
In fact, Democrats may not want to admit it, but a large portion of the Democratic Party is pro-Life.
And that means many others in the party are moderate when it comes to the issue of abortion.
They're abandoning this, and that's going to drive people straight into the arms of Donald Trump.
In Bridget Phetasy's article, she mentions a quote from one man who said, the far left is basically a right-wing recruiting machine, and I have been warning about this over and over again.
So I'll show you some of the context, and I'll show you how the media is attacking third parties in a desperate bid.
I should say the Democrats on the left, the establishment.
They're attacking third party votes.
There's nowhere to go.
You might be saying, I don't want to vote for any of them.
Oh, but they're attacking the Green Party now!
I'm sorry, it really feels like we're being backed into a corner, and the only option is Donald Trump.
Let me show you some of the opinions from people who are saying they're planning on switching parties, because it looks like another wave is coming, and it will be bigger than the last.
Before we get started, however, head over to TimCast.com slash donate.
If you'd like to support my work, there are many ways you can give.
And there's a P.O.
box if you want to send me some stuff.
But the best thing you can do is share this article.
Share this video.
It's not an article.
I don't have a big marketing department or anything.
I just rely on word of mouth.
So if you think this is a good video and that people should hear what I have to say, please consider sharing it.
Because if everybody who watched shared, this video would be bigger than CNN.
Like that.
Also, don't forget to like, subscribe, hit the notification bell.
And let me start with this first story about pro-life Democrats.
Many of you watching may be pro-choice.
In fact, I am.
But I also recognize that many people think there's a reasonable position to take on the issue of abortion that's not just completely, you know, no restrictions at all or no chance at all.
I think there's a middle ground.
And I think Democrats want this, too.
And there are pro-life Democrats who actually agree with Republicans.
They are being cut off completely.
You gotta imagine, a large portion of these Democrats are gonna vote for Trump.
Here's the story.
Pro-life Democrats appeal to Biden, Democratic Party, to change stance on abortion or risk losing voters, from CBN News.
They say, Democrats for Life of America is urging the Biden campaign and the Democratic Party to adjust their position on abortion to retain more pro-life voters.
The organization sent a firm message to Democrats through a notice in the New York Times this weekend, highlighting three main concerns.
Democratic leaders supporting extreme abortion policies, like later-term abortions.
Pro-life Democratic voters switching parties over the difference.
A betrayal of Democratic Party values.
What's really crazy to me about this is how many people that are Democrats endorsed this message and are pro-life.
I can't believe any pro-life Democrats still exist.
The party's gone so far left.
I think you're talking to a brick wall.
They're not going to change their position.
They're chasing after a nebulous far-left mirage they see on Twitter.
It doesn't exist, and it doesn't represent America.
But the Democratic Party is obsessed with the media, and the media is leading them astray.
CBN reports the letter was endorsed by more than 100 current and former Democratic politicians to include four governors and lieutenant governors, including the current governor of Louisiana, John Bel Edwards, nine members of Congress, including Colin Peterson, who won his primary this week.
I'll stop there.
I mean, it's amazing to see that the Democrats still have some more conservative members because we need unity in this country.
But I'm not entirely convinced that dude can win right now, especially for Republican runs with basically the same positions.
We saw what happened when the moderate Democrats won.
They gave everything to Nancy Pelosi and went nuts, impeaching Trump, failing, getting nothing done.
Why would we want more of that?
Why would anyone, especially a pro-life Democrat, They say 9 members of Congress.
We read that.
56 state legislators, including Deborah Fallella, deputy majority leader in Rhode Island, 32 local officials, 6 Democratic nominees.
Many more told DFLA they supported the letter but couldn't publicize it because they fear the power of Planned Parenthood and narrow pro-choice America within the Democratic Party.
In 2016, Hillary Clinton and the Democratic Party lost to Donald Trump because they failed to take moderate and pro-life voters seriously, they declared.
Our party has traditionally been very tolerant and welcoming of diverse views.
Yet it has pushed away Americans who are with us on so many issues but share a strong conviction on abortion.
This is just one swing issue, and I don't want to bury you in this, because I'm sure there's a lot of people who say, yeah, yeah, yeah, you know what?
Good riddance.
I'm sure there are many Democrats who are pro-choice saying, we don't want him.
Well, you're going to lose.
I personally am pro-choice.
I had a really great conversation with Glenn Beck on his podcast about the differences, and we smiled, shook hands, and said, I guess we just, we can't agree.
But we did agree that we're all Americans and we're going to fight together.
We're going to live together and learn how to solve these problems.
And guess what?
Sometimes you lose.
Sometimes you win.
At the end of the day, we're just trying to figure out how to work together.
That's been lost in the modern left.
They don't care.
They would reject all the pro-life Democrats.
I won't.
I'll sit down and we'll have a conversation and say, where can we agree?
What can we do?
I know it's really, really difficult.
I'm sure there's already people who are mad at me for saying I'm pro-choice.
I get it.
It's a seriously enraging issue for everybody.
But I think what the right has right now, what Trump has right now, a discussion.
That's it.
You can talk to me.
I'll listen.
I will absolutely have a conversation.
And you know what?
I might lose.
I respect that.
I'll play by the rules, same as the right has agreed to.
But the modern Democrats are changing the rules.
They're cheating.
And people are getting fed up.
Before I get into the article from Budget Phetasy, which is amazing by the way, I want to show you a couple things.
The 2020 voter registration race from Axios notes, they say that Democrats are registering new voters in key battlegrounds, but a lot, a lot of it, here's a quote, but a lot of it has to do with voters switching, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, let me start over.
The voter registration gap between Democrats and Republicans has narrowed in some of these key states, according to Trump Victory and Axios's review of those state records.
What this means is, Republicans are gaining on Democrats.
The gap is shrinking because Republicans are getting closer, they say.
A lot of it has to do with voters switching parties or dropping out of the electorate.
Not necessarily a surge of new voters registering as Republican, nor indicating new Trump voters.
According to Dave Wasserman of the Cook Political Report, Democrats are still registering more new voters than Republicans in many key states.
What this story notes is that there are Democrats dropping out.
There are Democrats switching parties.
You see, when you talk about Republicans registering new voters, many people assume it's people who never voted before.
And that's true.
Trump did that in 2016.
But right now, it seems like they're pulling Democrat voters from the party, and they're becoming Republicans, or quitting the Democratic Party outright.
The Democrats, however, in many states, are registering entirely new people.
It's a huge advantage for them.
But we're not talking about people becoming Democrats, which, again, is an advantage for them, and Trump supporters better pay attention.
We're talking about Democrats rejecting the party and switching.
We have this story from Politico.
I want to be in the Trump party.
GOP rides voter registration surge in key state.
Since 2016, Republicans had netted nearly seven times as many registered voters in Pennsylvania as Democrats.
Another example that in some very, very important key battleground states, Trump is absolutely winning.
But I bring you now to the article from Bridget Phetasy letters from the politically homeless.
She said almost every Democrat voting for Trump has a story about being ostracized, shamed or losing a friend.
The reason why I think this story is important is because it's also a warning to Trump voters.
There are conservatives who will not vote for Trump, and you need to pay attention and understand why if you really want to maximize your potential and win.
I'll tell you this, Trump supporters, the Democrats aren't listening at all.
No matter how many times we seem to scream in their faces, stop doing this, please stop, they don't listen.
Do you think they're going to listen to pro-life Democrats saying, please stop doing this?
Of course not.
Guess what?
Donald Trump is.
Republicans are.
I've had more conversations with conservatives who have said they'd be willing to compromise than any leftist.
The left just says, get out, bigot, et cetera, et cetera.
There's no real compromise.
They want more.
They want more.
You say, how about, you know, we can't do Medicare for all.
How about a public option?
They say, no!
Universal health care.
We say, okay, so we'll do, you know, we'll do Medicare for all, but we'll still have private insurance.
No.
They say abolish private health care.
I say you're pulling too hard.
There's no compromise at all.
No discussion.
I will not jump off a cliff for your dreams, your ideals.
I don't know if they'll work.
Moderation.
The Republicans and the Trump supporters are saying, okay, let's talk.
And now all of a sudden you have former liberals, Democrats going deplorable because the Republicans are saying, we're willing to negotiate with you.
That's all we ask for.
That's all we need.
And I say, okay, I can sit down with Catholic conservatives and say, we really disagree on these issues, but I'm really glad that we can sit here and laugh and have a discussion and not beat each other's throats, even though we really see the world in a different way.
Well, here's the article from Bridget Phetasy, and again, a warning to Trump supporters.
She says, Americans aren't just fleeing liberal strongholds like California, Chicago, and New York in droves.
We are moving politically, too. As I often find myself caught in the crossfire of the culture wars,
I also find myself at the crossroads of this migration.
Since my last column headlined, Why I Won't Vote, I've received hundreds of emails from
others who feel politically homeless.
I've also heard from many who have voted Democrat or Republican their entire lives and for the first time in 2020 will vote for the opposite party.
Lifetime conservatives are voting for Biden.
Independents are being radicalized to vote red or blue.
People who didn't vote for Donald Trump in 2016 are enthusiastically voting for him now.
The best part is, it seems like Bridget's conclusion is that Trump is going to landslide.
Even though there are Republicans, lifetime conservatives, switching and voting for Biden, not nearly enough.
And I think that's the important factor.
But keep in mind, this could be confirmation bias.
It could be an illusion.
If Trump supporters get complacent and think they're winning this massive silent majority and walk-away campaign, you know, bursting at the seams, Well, that's when you lose.
Never underestimate your opponent.
And that's the problem Democrats are currently making.
Democrats refuse to negotiate and accept the fact that they are driving people away in droves.
So I think, personally, based on my experience and my opinions, the Republicans are winning.
They're absolutely winning.
Donald Trump will win.
I don't like the Republican Party.
I don't like the Democratic Party.
But Donald Trump is something different.
And there is a new wave of populist right-wing individuals entering Congress and there now.
And I actually respect them for their populist positions on many issues.
Anti-war?
Free speech?
I'll take what I can get.
If the Democrats have gone insane, sorry.
Bridget writes, I even heard from a guy who hasn't voted since Nader, but is coming out to support Trump.
Many who identify as politically homeless are opting to vote third party or, like me, not to vote in the presidential category at all.
She says, allow me to clarify something I should have made clear in my previous column.
I will be voting down ballot.
She says, I recognize the limitations of anecdotal evidence.
But reading hundreds of emails, one starts to see patterns.
My overall gut instinct, from everything I'm hearing, is that I won't be at all surprised if Trump wins in a landslide.
And that the only person who can beat Donald J. Trump is Donald J. Trump.
And this is where you've got good news for Democrats and Republicans.
Now, look.
Bridget's saying that she thinks Trump's, she wouldn't be surprised if Trump wins in a landslide.
I completely agree.
But that the only person who can beat Trump is Trump, that's also true too.
And it's a weakness for Republicans and it's a weakness for Trump.
And that's why Democrats don't care about Biden.
It's for Trump or against Trump.
It is a referendum on Trump right now.
The craziest thing to me about this is that the people who hate Trump, hate him so much they would watch this country burn to the ground for hatred of one man.
Donald Trump is not the government.
Donald Trump is not our country.
He is one person.
One.
We have a Congress, we have a Senate, we have a Supreme Court.
Yes, Donald Trump can appoint people.
He appointed Kavanaugh.
But Kavanaugh and Gorsuch, who have been appointed by Trump, have not always agreed with him.
Do not destroy the United States of America because you hate one man.
Joe Biden is also one man.
But Joe Biden is incapable of flying this plane.
He's incapable of steering this ship.
I could be wrong.
You see, many of these Democrats feel the same way about Trump, but I think they're incorrect.
Bridget writes, The first trend I noticed is that it appears the mainstream media massively overplayed their hand and red-pilled a large portion of blue America.
Over and over again, I hear the same story.
People were locked up for months on end.
They socially distanced and gave up working in order to flatten the curve.
They missed funerals, weddings, graduations, schools, and seeing loved ones die.
Then came the protests in response to police brutality.
And for a moment, it seemed like America was united against the police.
But then, epidemiologists came out in support of thousands of people gathering.
It's only natural that folks sitting at home started to question the information they were receiving.
And then came the riots.
Undecided independents, many of whom were leaning toward Biden, cite the riots as having cemented their decision to vote for Trump, and I will tell you, that's my story.
And then Trump came out and got these historic peace agreements, and I'm very much a fan of those as well.
My friends, my family members, they all tell me the riots scared them, and they were shocked to see exactly what Bridget just pointed out.
How many times did you hear, make sure you wear your mask, otherwise you're killing grandma, shut down your business, shut down your life, go broke, go on unemployment, and too bad, we're not going to pass COVID legislation to give you relief unless we get a restriction, unless we take away voter integrity.
Nancy Pelosi wanting to do away with voter signature verification and wanting to ban voter ID.
What does that have to do with the fact that we're suffering?
It feels like coercion.
You're threatening us.
We destroyed your jobs.
We destroyed your business.
And if you want a semblance of what you once had, we'll sprinkle crumbs on you as long as the Republicans give us what we want and alter the election in favor of us.
What?
They said COVID is dangerous.
Then Dr. Fauci and Dr. Birx came out and said, you can vote in person.
Just wear a mask.
What?
You mean all that was for nothing?
I'll clarify.
Nancy Pelosi didn't want to literally just abolish voter signature verification.
They want to do this new rule where people counting votes can't reject it if the signatures don't match.
So your mail-in ballot gets sent in.
They look at it and they say, John Smith voted for Biden.
Then they look at the voter registration for John Smith and the signature doesn't match.
What do they do?
They can't reject it.
It has to be able to go back to the voter to correct.
Meaning, it'll jam up the election for weeks.
And if they can't reject it, many of them might just say, eh, whatever, it's fine, I'll just accept it.
This resulted, and among other policy changes in Pennsylvania, I believe, of around one in four election officials resigning, saying, we have no idea what's going on.
Why?
They told us that Black Lives Matter was okay.
Go ahead and protest without a mask.
It's fine.
Social distancing doesn't matter.
Just go protest.
Then when right-wing groups came out to protest, they said, you're killing grandma.
How insane is this?
I believe it.
I believe it's a huge issue.
For me, the riots, the danger.
Now Joe Biden's coming out and saying, gun control, we're going to ban weapons of war, blah, blah, blah.
And I'm like, are you nuts?
Your campaign staff donated to bail these people out.
Kamala Harris solicited donations to bail these people out.
I had to go and buy guns for the first time in my life, and I didn't want to do that.
Now I'm a gun guy.
Look at that.
And then you have the nerve to come out and say you want to take my guns away from me?
These people are romping around city streets destroying everything.
The police are being defunded and now you've driven me to buy guns and you want to take them from me?
You are insane.
Absolutely insane.
Maybe we'll lose.
Maybe Trump won't win.
I have no idea.
But I'm sick and tired of all of this insanity.
I am not pro-life.
I was never pro-gun.
I didn't want to have to vote for Trump, but now I feel like I have no choice.
It almost feels like everything the Democrats are doing is on purpose!
I moved far away.
I'm actually really happy with it, to be completely honest.
I'm in the middle of nowhere, there's like not even a road to my house, and I got mountains and sun and nature, and there's like deer running around.
You know, strangely relaxing.
So I'm kind of happy it happened, because it's great to be out in the middle of nowhere, you can be noisy.
But I left these cities because the riots are getting bad, and they're not doing anything about it.
In fact, the only person who seems to be trying is Trump and Bill Barr, the DHS.
At the local level, they're doing nothing.
Last night in Portland, check this out.
Vandalism?
No arrests, as protests continue in Portland.
No arrests.
Are you kidding me?
For a while, we had calm.
And it's because, in my opinion, partly due to the fact that Trump made some moves.
The feds deputized Oregon State Police, I've said it a billion times, so forgive me, but it's important context.
And then many of these organizers disappeared.
So when the left came and attacked an ICE facility, they rioted.
They got swept up instantly.
The feds aren't having it.
So then they moved to downtown Portland once again, where the feds don't have jurisdiction.
And there it is.
No arrests.
These people have lost it.
And I'm looking at Trump saying, you do your thing, because the Democrats are nowhere to be found.
Bridget goes on.
She says, for many former Democrats, the mostly peaceful protests were the pivotal moment that they abandoned the mainstream media and started seeking out other perspectives.
They began listening to independent journalists and, more importantly, seeking out the source material itself.
One man wrote, quote, I started to notice how a lot of what Trump would say the media would take out of context or frame in a negative way.
I felt like I'd been lied to for almost four years.
We shouldn't underestimate either the effect of what I call micro-cancellations.
These are the small fallings out that have happened in friend groups, social circles, and families across America in the wake of 2016.
Almost every Democrat who is voting for Trump has a personal story about being ostracized, shamed, or losing a close friend or family member over politics.
I thought perhaps after Hillary's loss, the left would learn that bullying people, tone-policing, and punishing people for wrong-think only turns people off.
Oh, how wrong I was.
In fact, the left reinforced its bubble, doubling down on calling everyone a bigot who didn't agree with it or dared to question its logic, facts, or opinions, and kicked anyone right of Bernie out of the party.
The woke purity tests went mainstream.
Out of a desire to go viral or appear virtuous on social media, fellow citizens are snitching on one another and publicly humiliating each other.
Rejection is a powerful motivator, and it's staggering to conceive of how many potential allies the left has managed to alienate in four years.
So common is this story that it feels self-destructive.
As writer Mitchell Sunderland said to me recently, they are a right-wing recruiting machine.
Bridget says this is why, despite his personality flaws, many believe Trump is still the lesser of two evils.
The thing Trump has going against him is himself.
He is incapable of rising to the occasion.
He can't transcend his baser instincts because that's exactly who he is.
One conservative voting for Biden said something that stuck with me.
He explained that he couldn't vote for Trump and look in the mirror and pretend that character matters.
In many ways, Trump is a blacklight, revealing the human excrement that stains all our institutions, our politicians, our media, and our souls.
He's revealed what's always been there, we just couldn't see it.
Trump doesn't inspire us to strive for our ideals.
He instead gives everyone permission to be the worst version of themselves.
Even people holding their noses and voting for Trump, because they like what he's done on paper, express disgust and exhaustion with his constant drama, bullying, hypocrisy, blatant lying, cozying up to QAnon, and a-kissing of dictators.
They describe him as a bad and selfish person, and the biggest piece of ass ever.
Trump supporters heed this warning.
I've heard the exact same thing and you've heard it from me.
I said earlier I wouldn't vote for him but the riots really were, you know, a kick in the gut.
Now I feel like I have no choice.
Many others feel the same way.
What may possibly be the best quote, summarizing exactly how many people feel.
Quote, I'm voting for the most corrupt self-serving politician I've ever seen, because the other side won't stand up against violence, Marxism, and race-baiting.
I feel like I'm drowning, and in order to keep from going under, I've had to throw my arms around a giant floating turd.
I respect that statement.
I do.
I do disagree, however.
They say that Trump is kissing up to dictators.
I don't agree with that.
I believe Trump is desperately trying to build better relations, and unfortunately, sometimes that's what happens.
It often plays out poorly for us.
I don't know if Trump is the right man to solve this problem, but I can tell you this, as someone who understands a little bit about the divide between North and South Korea, seeing Donald Trump cross the DMZ into North Korea with no security, with Kim Jong-un, wasn't kissing up to a dictator.
It was a powerful sign of trust and peace, and that's what needs to happen.
You may disagree with a lot of what Trump says and does.
And I get it.
I think they kind of nail it.
There's a lot of people who feel that way.
That in order to stop from drowning, you're grabbing onto a giant floating turd.
But I don't think Trump is all that bad.
In fact, I think he's done pretty well in the past several months.
These peace agreements are very important to me and the way I see the world.
Withdrawing troops is also very important.
Pushing back on critical race theory is extremely important.
And shutting down the riots is all extremely important.
Donald Trump has favored school choice as well.
And I got to say, you know what?
I'm going to take some losses on this one, but I'm actually okay with it.
I'm not voting for Trump as the lesser of two evils.
He released his second term agenda and actually said, you know what?
I do like it.
Why?
Because there's more alongside Trump that's populist than conservative.
There are many issues that I think transcend typical wedge issues.
I may lose out on the pro-choice versus pro-life argument, but I don't think I'm the arbiter of morality.
And if people choose to support Trump in that regard, then so be it.
But the Democrats are the other extreme, and that's why the pro-life Democrats are calling them out.
I can't vote for that at all!
At least the Republicans are negotiating.
Talk about insane.
Now Bridget mentions, some people may choose to vote third party, but I got bad news for you.
Here's a story from the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.
Green Party's legal team has ties to GOP and also represents counties that don't want party added to the ballot.
Why not?
Why can't we have more than two parties?
Who are, what is this?
I'm sick of it.
The media's attack now on third parties is absurd.
You want to vote Libertarian, Green Party, whatever, go do it.
Do it with my blessing.
It is a bigger slight to our founding fathers and our country to vote for the lesser of two evils than it is to vote third party.
You vote for who you believe in, and you will never waste your vote.
If you believe the Green Party is the right choice, you must vote for them.
If you believe Joe Jorgensen and the Libertarian Party is the right choice, you must vote for her.
Voting for Trump out of fear of Biden is wrong, and voting for Biden out of fear of Trump is also wrong.
For me, I'm going to take the win with Trump.
I lean favorably towards him on many things he's improved upon.
As Bridget mentions in her article, there are people who don't like his behavior.
But I've seen his behavior improve quite substantially in the past year.
I'd give him, you know, on a scale of 1 to 100, I'm leaning around high 50% in terms of my personal favorability.
High 50%!
It's the peace agreements.
You cannot take those away from me or Trump.
I am not kidding.
I can deal with Trump being a turd and all these other things, but if he's negotiating serious Middle Eastern peace agreements, then so be it.
That's what we need.
If he's withdrawing our troops, we need this.
And if he's pushing back on the riots and critical race theory, what more can you ask for?
I'm sure there's a lot of people who think the issue of choice versus life is paramount, and that's very important to me as well, but not nearly as important as world peace.
So many Democrats are leaving the party.
I think we are going to see another massive wave who are already telling us they plan to vote for Donald Trump coming in November 3rd.
Does that guarantee a Trump landslide?
I don't necessarily think so.
Bridget may be just seeing confirmation bias.
The people leaving are angry, upset, they're speaking out.
But I will tell you this, that could be the silent majority speaking up.
Trump voters, they're vocal.
The Trump base, they're vocal.
They wave the flag, they yell, Trump, Trump, Trump.
MAGA.
It's easier for them.
But there are Democrats who are scared to speak up, but they're not scared to email in private someone they trust, someone like Bridget.
Maybe she's getting an actual sampling of people who say, enough.
I guess only time will tell, and we can only hope that there's no cheating involved, and we will see, as always, how it plays out in November.
I'm gonna leave it there.
The next segment is coming up at 6pm over at youtube.com slash timcastnews.
It is a different channel, and I will see you all then.
Jake Gardner, a 38 year old Trump supporter, has died by what appears to be a suicide.
I've been following this story and you've probably seen it.
He was an Omaha bar owner, 38 years old.
He seemed to be a good guy, respected freedom of speech, respected the rights of protesters.
He's seen on video talking about at the Women's March, how these leftist activists have a right to express themselves.
Well, he was involved in a fatal shooting.
You see, outside of his bar in Omaha, there were several rioters, there were a lot of rioters, going around smashing up windows.
At a certain point, his father came outside of the bar and was confronting some men that, I believe, were involved in a lot of the rioting.
At some point, he shoved one of the guys.
Someone then runs up and decks him, just runs up full speed, knocks him down, he goes flying, slams into the ground.
At this moment, Jake Gardner runs over to see what's happening.
There are two different videos that have been released of this, and I will tell you right now, it was 100% self-defense.
But let me give you the quick gist, not to bury the lead.
You see, Jake Gardner was armed.
He defended himself from three different people, gave them ample warning, and tried retreating.
They attacked him.
One of these individuals died.
Initially, the prosecutor said it was self-defense.
It's clear.
You watch on video.
He says, stop, stop, and he tries retreating.
And only after he's attacked does he fire, killing a man.
But it's more complicated than that.
There are several videos of this.
Well, the Black Lives Matter mob demanded that this white supremacist, they said, face justice.
What justice?
He was attacked.
He was attacked.
It's on video.
He was just a small business owner.
Then he got indicted.
Manslaughter, you know, use of a firearm while committing a felony, terroristic threats, none of which was true.
He was supposed to turn himself in.
Instead, it appears that he died from a self-inflicted gunshot wound on the day he was supposed to turn himself in.
And he was about 20 miles outside of Portland, which has many people confused as to why he was there.
There's a lot of reasons why he may have been there.
I'm not going to speculate.
But there are a lot of people who believe it wasn't a suicide.
At this point, I have no reason to believe otherwise.
To me, it sounds like a story of What happens when an individual knows he's facing up against the morality police?
He's facing up against a system that will do everything in their power to crush an innocent man.
You have no right to defend yourself.
And I will tell you, it seems obvious that it's come to this point.
Let me break down exactly what happened in finer detail, now that you have some of the baser details.
See, in the video, somebody filmed with their cell phone, and they posted it, I think on Snapchat or something, maybe TikTok, I have no idea.
They said, I think I just caught a murder.
Maybe Instagram?
Honestly, I don't know what platform it was.
You see, these men, who decked Gardner's father, Jake Gardner then approaches them.
They start saying things, exchanging words.
He starts backing away, saying something to the effect of, stay away from me, I'm warning you, I'm warning you.
He then pulls up his shirt and reveals he's got a gun.
He starts backing away when the two men jump him, knocking him onto the ground into what appears to be a puddle in the street.
He then, I believe at that point, he pulls out his gun and he fires two warning shots.
The two men then get up and flee.
Jake Gardner is seen on video at this point staggered on the ground on all fours struggling to get up when James Scurlock jumps on top of him from behind and puts him in a chokehold.
Gardner then takes the gun over his shoulder and fires, hitting Scurlock in the clavicle.
This is beyond clear-cut self-defense.
Jake Gardner was on the ground, staggered after being attacked and was struggling to get up in this puddle, when a man jumped on his back and began choking him.
You don't remember they said, you might remember they said, I can't breathe, you can't do choke holds, you can't do choke holds, well they can apparently, they're allowed to do choke holds.
And when this guy defended himself, after giving all these people ample warning, after firing warning shots, after saying don't do it, and after being knocked on the ground, you could not give me a more clear-cut self-defense.
And now this man has died.
And I know a lot of people are saying he should have fought to the bitter end, he should have stood up, he should have turned himself in, he should have won in court.
Yeah.
I think so.
But I empathize.
I'm saddened to hear that he felt there was no way out.
And the scary thing is, why did he feel that way?
Why did he feel this way?
I gotta give you the context.
I wanna make sure I read you the news before I just keep prattling on about, you know, contact, like, just principles.
Let me give you the full details.
MSN has just the base details.
They say Jake Gardner, accused of manslaughter for the shooting death of James Scurlock this summer, has died by suicide, according to Gardner's attorney, Stu Dornan.
Well, from Omaha.com, we have a loaded, biased, and rather frightening article.
It gives us the details, but the way it frames things.
Jake Gardner, shook up by indictment in James Scurlock's death, kills himself.
Omaha reports the surreal and sordid ordeal involving a white Omaha bar owner and a young black Omaha man ended Sunday with a staggering development.
Jake Gardner, awaiting arrest after a grand jury in Omaha indicted him last week, shot himself outside a medical clinic in suburban Portland, Oregon.
Two law enforcement officials told the World Herald.
Police in Hillsboro, Oregon found the 38-year-old former Marine dead from a self-inflicted gunshot wound about 12.20 p.m.
Gardner's attorneys, Stu Dornan and Tom Monahan, said Gardner shot himself on the day he had said he would surrender in connection with manslaughter and three other felony charges stemming from the May 30th confrontation that led to the death of 22-year-old James Scurlock.
Now both men are dead by the same hand.
That is despicable.
That is absolutely despicable.
They released the video months ago.
You might not want to watch it.
I mean, it shows death.
But this guy, Jay Gardner, he didn't try to kill anybody.
In fact, I don't even think he wanted this guy to get hurt.
I was reading one report that when he found out Scurlock had died, he was devastated.
He had just killed a man.
He's just a small business owner in Omaha, man!
That's crazy.
It's just a small business owner and you see what they do to him.
And this is what I've been warning about, man.
They're going to show up where you live.
They're going to show up where you work.
They're going to destroy what you love and say you have insurance.
When you don't.
You can't afford to have your business destroyed.
You can't afford to have everything you love, the sentimental value of your life, the objects, maybe your mom made you a painting, things like that.
Those can never be replaced.
You can't just burn people's lives down, the blood, sweat, and tears.
And then when they attack you, and you beg them, no!
You tell them, stop!
And they attack you.
And even after these two guys attacked him, he didn't shoot them.
He gave warning shots.
Scurlock attacks him, and then he's the one who has to go to prison.
Jake Gardner, the man who was attacked by the rioters, he's the one who has to be arrested.
We can't function this way.
If people don't feel that they're secure in their belongings and their person, it's one of the... You know, let me stop there.
I've covered riots, I've covered unrest, and I've covered revolution.
I was in Egypt during the second revolution, and there was something that people were telling me.
There were three components to what would create a revolution.
The first?
A lack of access to food.
If people can't eat because the cost of food is too high and they can't get it, they're going to revolt.
Why?
Because if you don't eat, you die.
The next is shelter.
People need a place to live.
If all of these people are out in the streets with nowhere to go, then you create an opportunity for chaos and the undermining of the government.
Because you have aimless people, they can't work, they also can't eat, and they struggle.
But the last one was the most interesting.
It was security.
If people don't feel safe, they get agitated and anxious, and they finally snap.
And that's where we're headed.
Maybe on purpose.
How do you think people are going to start feeling when they realize, even if you defend yourself with your Second Amendment right to someone who very clearly on camera jumps you from behind and is choking you, he could have died.
And then you defend yourself.
They'll arrest you!
They arrested the McCloskeys.
We see what's going on.
And how long until people feel there is no security, there is no safety from the mob and the morality police?
How long until these people finally snap?
Now I think before anything happens, these people are going to go out and vote for Donald Trump.
You cannot live in a country where the mob is allowed to attack you, to beat you, to deck your father, and you can warn them over and over.
And then when you finally defend yourself, they say, you're under arrest.
We can't live that way.
I don't think people will take it.
Not in America.
Let's read a little bit more, they say.
Sunday, Dornan and Monaghan blamed Gardner's apparent suicide in a cocktail of behavioral health problems stemming from head trauma he experienced during military service.
The belief that people were out to kill him and an incessant rush to judgment by social media jockeys.
People were out to kill him.
They were.
We've heard what they said in Kenosha.
You take one of ours, we take one of yours.
And this guy was getting... I think it's fair to point, say, you know, I'll say it's an assumption, but come on.
We know the veiled threats had been circulating.
We know that this guy had just killed a man that they said was just an innocent activist.
Violent, violent criminal.
And he thought people were out to kill him, and he finally just couldn't take the stress anymore.
I'm sad.
It's a sad story, man.
Military service.
We're talking about a former Marine, a veteran, who was defending his small business from rioters who gave them ample warning, and he was indicted.
The mob will come for you all the same.
Don't buy that lottery ticket.
You can cross your fingers and pray, but heaven forbid we end up in a government, with a government, with a system, that this becomes the norm.
It must be shut down and it must be stopped now.
Trump needs to do something.
The DOJ needs to come in.
I think we need to look at civil rights violations.
I don't know what the DOJ can do.
They say in their first public comments since May 30th, the Omaha attorneys, both former prosecutors, revealed that their client had suffered two traumatic brain injuries while serving two tours in Iraq, injuries that netted him Social Security disability payments.
They said the bar owner, who had posted on Facebook the weekend of May 30th that he was going downtown to pull a military-style firewatch, felt like he was in a war-like environment during the chaos that engulfed downtown Omaha that night.
Monahan alleged that after Gardner shot and killed Scurlock, people sent Gardner death threats on social media and by text to Gardner's personal cell phone, though Monahan later acknowledged that he didn't think the threats were credible enough to report to law enforcement.
Dornan and Douglas County Attorney Don Kline, who defeated Dornan in 2006 to become county attorney, Had made the right call in ruling Gardner's actions justified, Gardner had claimed that Scurlock had him in a chokehold and wouldn't let go, despite Gardner's repeated pleas to get off me.
At the end of the 18-second struggle, Gardner switched the gun to his left hand and fired over his shoulder, killing Scurlock.
Grand jurors, under the guidance of a special prosecutor, ruled out self-defense as a justification.
Bottom line.
Dorden and Monaghan said, Gardner had lost his bars, a landlord ended his lease after the shooting, his home, his livelihood, and he was about to lose his freedom.
And in behavioral health concerns, Dorden said, GoFundMe was set up for his defense.
GoFundMe took it down.
I hope you realize what's going on.
The institutions are against you, small business owner.
fully expected him to turn himself in Sunday night, Monahan said Gardner did not leave a suicide note.
A GoFundMe was set up for his defense. GoFundMe took it down.
I hope you realize what's going on. The institutions are against you, small business owner. You, Iraq War veteran.
They are against you.
The rioters will be allowed to destroy what you love, and you will not have any chance to protect, defend, or even rebuild.
Welcome to morality policing.
The landlord terminates your bar.
Why?
I don't want the rioters coming back.
F you.
You go rot.
A lack of community.
A lack of principle.
And I hope no business ever uses that building again.
The landlord, how despicable.
Absolutely disgusting.
To bend and cower in fear of the mob, you are spineless and pathetic.
This poor guy, man.
Quote, I had the opportunity to talk with Mr. Gardner before his return, and he was really shook up, Dornan said.
The grand jury indictment was a shock to him.
It was a shock to us.
It was a shock to many people.
Justin Wayne, an attorney for Scurlock's family, said it wouldn't be appropriate to comment so soon after Gardner's death.
The Scurlocks, including Scurlock's father, were processing what the death meant for their quest for justice, Wayne said.
Justice.
Disgusting.
Scurlock attacked a man who was on his knees from behind in a chokehold and wouldn't let go.
Why?
What was he thinking?
He attacked somebody, this is what happened.
Let me jump over to the Gateway Pundit.
You know, I'm really not a fan of the Gateway Pundit, but once again, as I always say, this comes from Cassandra Fairbanks, who I know and trust, and more so, this article highlights some comments made by the far left.
Cassandra writes, Trashy Nebraska Senator Megan Hunt admits Jake Gardner persecution was mob rule, continues to smear him after his suicide.
Well, I will say it is a little bit loaded.
The Nebraska Senator said it was the community action that got Gardner indicted.
An innocent man who was defending himself, he got indicted.
Now I'll tell you this, he may have won.
A jury may have said this was clearly self-defense, but he was going to get locked up.
He was getting death threats.
Would he have even fared well in jail?
I'm not confident.
His life had been taken from him.
Some people ask, why was he in Portland?
He had lost his bar.
He had lost his life.
He had lost everything.
So, he took off.
I mean, that makes sense, right?
Maybe they have the details, I don't know for sure, but that sounds like it makes sense.
This guy had everything taken away from him, and they're gloating.
We're in trouble, man.
We're in serious trouble.
This is not justice.
This is identitarian morality policing.
That James Scurlock is somehow innocent because of what?
The color of his skin?
James Scurlock was a black man and Jake Gardner was a white guy?
Is that what this is really about?
Because we have stories... I grew up in Chicago.
I mean, it's been a joke.
Family Guy made a joke about it.
It's a joke on sitcoms and comedy shows all the time that nobody cares about black-on-black crime.
So what was the real driving force behind this?
I think it was political.
I think Jake Gardner was a non-combatant, as it were.
He was not a belligerent in the culture war conflict and the Cold Civil War.
But Scurlock was.
Scurlock was essentially a Black Lives Matter rioter.
I don't know if he actually rioted.
What I should say is that he was an activist for Black Lives Matter.
Therefore, you come after us and we will destroy you.
How can our system of justice function if people know that's the case?
There is a church, a cathedral, as it were, and these people are untouchable.
You get attacked, you better just sit down and take it.
Senator Megan Hunt said the indictment of Jake Gardner would never have happened without the community of the people who stood up for justice and demanded action from city officials.
Jake Gardner is gone, but the white supremacist attitudes that emboldened him are still with us today.
These people are sick.
Sick, sick people.
I hope you realize what comes next, because I have been warning over and over again, and I am not I'm not making things up.
I'm going to tell you what people think when they see a story like this.
I don't even need to say it.
You know, this woman gloating over the death of a small business owner in a rock war vet, former Marine, 38 years old, saw his father attacked, was attacked.
And this, this is what they say in the response.
He was a white supremacist.
They just keep saying it over and over and over again.
When will this stop?
I am angrier with this story than I have been in a really long time.
I am angry.
I am going to stop myself from saying something I will regret.
I hope the violence stops.
We need the DOJ to shut this down.
I'm sick of it.
Do something.
These prosecutors, the DA, these people need to have civil rights charges filed against them.
Something needs to happen.
We as Americans cannot live in a world where the police won't help you, and then you get a Kenosha situation.
And then when you protect yourself, like in both situations, they come for you, and no one will protect you.
The McCloskey's still facing felony charges for defending their home when these extremists burst onto their property.
Heaven forbid they find their way to your house.
And they eventually will.
They're not going to stop.
If these people take control of the federal government, that will be the end.
And then what?
I joke sometimes, but I'll tell you.
When I talk about morality policing, people don't take it seriously.
I'm sure a lot do.
But you need to understand what this looks like.
We see it around the world.
I've seen it.
I'll tell you what.
I was in Egypt.
I mentioned this.
Egyptians weren't allowed to go in the casino at the hotel.
They weren't allowed to eat certain foods the hotel had.
They have laws, morality laws, that would make no sense to an American.
I get it, you go to Egypt, you follow Egypt's rules, like, you know.
Non-citizens, tourists, were allowed to do these things.
Is that the kind of country you want to live in?
Do you want to live in a country where they say straight up, you are not allowed to defend yourself in your own home?
A lot of states already say that.
You know, I left New Jersey partially because I was told, I'm not 100% on the rules, that if someone comes to try and break into your house, you have to retreat.
And you know what the problem with that is?
Retreat to where?
To where?
If I'm in my home, where do I go if someone breaks in?
And what if there's other people I live with and people I care about?
If someone breaks in armed, I have to retreat?
Yeah.
I was told, uh, when I looked at the details, there was a semi-castle doctrine state, and what that means is you have to retreat, and only when you are backed into a corner are you allowed to use adequate force, which will be determined at a later date.
How do I know what I'm allowed to do?
How do I know the extent, you know, We can't live that way.
We can't be secure in our own homes.
We can't be secure in our businesses.
I'm going to warn you now.
If Joe Biden takes the federal government and the DOJ is switched out with a Democratic establishment Department of Justice and the Senate flips, you will see these people be given everything on a silver platter.
And they will come to your house and tell you, What you must do next.
And you will bow to the cathedral.
You will bow to the morality police.
You will be walking down the street and they'll say, Dreadlocks!
That's cultural appropriation!
And you'll be fined or arrested.
That's how morality police work.
That's how they do it in Iran, for instance.
And we see all the women who take their hijab off and they get arrested for it.
They get arrested.
Don't believe me?
Don't think it can happen here?
Well, you're wrong.
I've warned several times about what was going to happen, and I have not been wrong about it.
Sure, I was wrong about who was going to win in 2018 in the midterms.
I think people were hoping that a vote for the Democrats would return them to normalcy.
When these 31 different districts flipped from Trump to the Democrats, they probably thought, if we just get in these moderates and end this bickering and this fighting, things can go back to normal.
No.
You made it worse.
I hope you're proud of yourself.
I'm not trying to be mean, but the people in these districts who decided to vote for these moderate Democrats, who emboldened the House to impeach Trump and do nothing but scream about the Orange Man over and over again.
You made it worse!
There's only one option now.
This cannot be allowed to continue.
These people must be removed from office.
Vote November 3rd, because your way of life, your actual life, your friends and your family, they all depend on this.
I think it's funny they're saying the same thing.
They're saying the same thing.
But they're not telling you the truth.
They don't care about your rights.
They don't care about civil rights.
They are trying to repeal the civil rights legislation in California.
The Democrats already voted to do it.
Look it up.
Prop 209.
And don't go to one of these garbage propagandistic sites.
Read the actual bill itself.
It strikes out the non-discrimination language from the California Constitution.
They are lying.
They took away Jake Gardner's right to protect himself, his friends, and his family.
And they would lock him up in prison because he dared oppose the cathedral.
Do not give these people power.
What has Trump done?
What has Trump done?
Some clever things.
You know, deputizing OSP was smart, but the riots have kicked up a little bit.
We'll see if they can shut it down.
What will the DOJ do to end this?
There's more breaking news.
The DOJ has announced three Anarchic jurisdictions.
I'll call it that.
Portland, Seattle, and New York City.
The official announcement from the DOJ.
But I'm going to do more on this in a bit.
So stick around.
Because the next segment is coming up at 1pm on this channel.
And I'm going to tell you man, listen.
I mean this 100%.
First, let me just say I'm deeply saddened and shocked by this guy's death.
James Scurlock shouldn't have died.
I'm not happy that he died.
Jake wasn't happy that he died.
It's sad.
It's messed up.
But you can't attack somebody.
You can't attack somebody who's given you ample warning.
So I'm sad to see this happen.
Former Marine, veteran, just trying to live his life and own a bar, and they took everything from him.
Everything from him.
I left New Jersey.
I am so far out in the middle of nowhere, I can't even get deliveries, apparently.
I'm trying to get a delivery here, and I'm getting phone calls saying they couldn't find where you lived, and I'm like, well, maybe that's a good thing.
Maybe that's a good thing, because even when I give them my address, they're like, I got no idea how to get there.
No roads!
I don't want to be anywhere near these cities.
I do not want to be in a position where I have to defend myself from these lunatics, and then they come for me.
No, I will leave.
I will leave, but I will vote.
We'll absolutely vote.
And, uh, it's not gonna be Democrat.
This needs to stop.
And the only way to stop it is to give Trump and the Republicans literally everything.
I mean everything.
Give them the Supreme Court, give them the House, give them the Senate, and give them the presidency, and tell these people no.
I know what that means for a lot of my policy positions.
I'm not a fan of every Republican position.
I'm rather socially liberal.
I'm rather left-leaning as an independent.
But this comes first.
What happens when they come for my family?
What happens when I hear the rioters have shown up where my mom lives?
And they did!
What am I supposed to do?
What happens if they break into her home?
What happens if they break into anyone's home?
And you can't do anything about it because they'll arrest you!
The mob is being granted impunity!
They've been going around destroying things for months!
And where is the justice?
The DOJ needs to step in and get it done.
But I'll tell you what.
Even if they don't, I'll tell you what.
Bill Barr is infinitely better than anyone who could be appointed by feckless, spineless coward Joe Biden.
So we have to do what we have to get the Republicans in.
I didn't really believe it would be this bad a long time ago.
You know, two years ago, I said, we'll get to a point where the violence in the streets will be so bad, people will beg for the Republicans to come in and bring law enforcement, law and order.
I said, people are going to beg for it.
I didn't think it would come to the point where our own system of justice in these jurisdictions would bend over backwards for the mob and start locking up innocent people and destroying the lives of innocent people.
But we're there.
We are there.
And the media, a part of the cathedral, as it were, will lie and tell you Jake Gardner was a white supremacist so they can destroy everything you hold dear and there's nothing you can do to stop it.
I am going to be voting for all the Republicans.
I tell you this right now.
I'm going to leave it there.
Next segment's coming up at 1 p.m.
Rest in peace, Jake Gardner, and I will see you all in the next segment.
The DOJ has made their official announcement.
New York City, Portland, Seattle are anarchist jurisdictions, as per Donald Trump's previous memorandum, where he sought to strip funding away from several jurisdictions that were allowing far-left riots to persist.
In a statement from the DOJ, they say, The Department of Justice identifies New York City, Portland, and Seattle as jurisdictions permitting violence and destruction of property.
Identification is response to presidential memorandum reviewing federal funding to state and local governments that are permitting anarchy, violence, and destruction in American cities.
I would like to just stop for a moment.
And, um, highlight the phrase.
Anarchist jurisdiction.
I love the combination of words.
It does make sense.
But, like, on its own, in a vacuum, it doesn't.
If you were to, like, look at a swath of land out in the wilderness and say, that's anarchist jurisdiction, you're saying there's nothing there.
But it does make sense in the context of, if there's, like, a city, which has clear dividing lines, and they are allowing lawlessness, chaos, and looting, then I think we understand the gist of what it means to say anarchist jurisdiction.
Meaning, it is a specific area isolated from other areas, basically an island unto itself of crime being permitted.
The DOJ says, The U.S. Department of Justice today identified the
following three jurisdictions that have permitted violence and destruction of property to persist
and have refused to undertake reasonable measures to counteract criminal activities.
New York City, Portland, Seattle.
Wow, they keep saying the same thing over and over again.
The Department of Justice is continuing to work to identify jurisdictions that meet the
criteria set out in the President's Memorandum and will periodically update the list of selected
jurisdictions as required therein.
The list was published on DOJ's website today in response to President Trump's memorandum
on September 2nd, 2020, entitled, Memorandum on Reviewing Funding to State and Local
Government Recipients that are Permitting Anarchy, Violence, and Destruction in American Cities.
When state and local leaders impede their own law enforcement officers and agencies from doing their jobs, it endangers innocent citizens who deserve to be protected, including those who are trying to peacefully assemble in protest, said Attorney General William P. Barr.
We cannot allow federal tax dollars to be wasted when the safety of the citizenry hangs in the balance.
It is my hope that the cities identified by the Department of Justice today will reverse course and become serious about performing the basic function of government and start protecting their own citizens.
Criteria for evaluating each city is below.
So they give us their list now, which says, whether a jurisdiction forbids the police force from intervening to restore order amid widespread or sustained violence or destruction.
I think all three of those cities, you can check off that box.
Whether a jurisdiction has withdrawn law enforcement protection from a geographical area or structure that law enforcement officers are lawfully entitled to
access, but have been officially prevented from accessing or permitted to access only in
exceptional circumstances, except when law enforcement officers are briefly withheld
as a tactical decision intended to resolve safe, safely and expeditiously a specific and
ongoing unlawful incident, posing an imminent threat to safety of individuals or law
enforcement officers.
I'm going to stop right there. I'm just going to say, it sounds like they looked at what these
cities had in common and then just wrote up a list.
Here's what they're doing.
It doesn't seem like they made the list and then asked whether the cities fit these things, because these cities are the criteria for the comments made by the president in the first place.
And there it is!
It doesn't matter if Bill Barr says it is so, it is so.
Now, of course, they've identified a pattern between many of these cities, and I think it's fair.
sorry, 129 different cities.
Whether a jurisdiction unreasonably refuses to accept offers of law enforcement assistance
from the federal government, any other related factors, the attorney general deems appropriate.
And there it is.
It doesn't matter if Bill Barr says it is so, it is so.
Now, of course, they've identified a pattern between many of these cities, and I think it's fair.
Now look, whether or not they should have their funding stripped, it's not up to me.
I'm not the guy who's going to come out here and tell you, you know, how the government should be run or funded.
I'll just tell you this.
Donald Trump won an election.
Donald Trump has then said, we're going to take funding away if you don't enforce the law.
Earlier, I did a segment about a man named Jake Gardner, who took his own life recently in a shocking and tragic story.
And the left is gloating and laughing and calling this guy a white supremacist.
And the lies are insane.
Absolutely insane.
And I'll tell you what, man.
I recorded this segment.
And I said, Trump must do something!
Something must be done.
Well, something's being done.
Taking funding away.
And you know, they're gonna complain, they're gonna spit and yowl, and they're gonna say, it's not fair, you can't take our funding from us, we'll sue.
Funding allows the machine to work.
It is lubricant for the gears.
Now, they run the machine, they do the labor, the people in these states.
But without funding, then the machine grinds to a halt.
I wouldn't necessarily equate it to, like, fuel, but kind of.
Without money, they can't operate.
They can't oppress innocent people who are defending themselves.
They can't target small business owners and destroy their lives.
Now, I think Trump needs to do more.
I don't know what this will do other than make things worse, to be completely honest.
It's what I refer to as like a Chinese finger trap problem.
You know, you stick your fingers in the trap, you can't pull out the harder you pull.
You gotta push in.
It's counterintuitive.
But taking away federal funding from these cities is just going to result in a further defunded police force.
However, I think Trump is pulling what's called a big ask.
You may be familiar with this.
He basically says, here's how it works.
You go up to somebody and you say, you know, you go to McDonald's and they'll say, how much do you want to work here?
You give them a ridiculous number.
I want 30 bucks an hour to run the cash, the cash register.
You ask for something huge so you can walk people back to where you actually want to be.
A good example of Trump's big ask is Trump coming out and saying, I'm going to build a big, beautiful wall 30 feet high from sea to shining sea.
He does that thing with his hands.
It's really funny.
And what did we get?
Select bollard fencing in key areas where illegal immigration was a problem.
So once they all freak out like, whoa, whoa, a 30-foot concrete wall, are you nuts?
That's too expensive.
Trump takes the loss of only getting his select bollard fencing, which dramatically reduces smuggling, crime, trafficking, etc.
That's what the big ask is.
So my prediction on this is, and we'll look at these individual cities and see what's going to happen, my prediction is that they are going to fold.
They're going to fold.
They're going to say, Trump, tell us what you want us to do.
Please, we need that sweet, sweet money.
You know, if they can't gain power from it, and if it weakens them, they're not going to want to do it.
I think I know how these politicians work.
So Trump says, carrot or stick, you let me know.
I'm going to take away your funding because of this.
They're going to come crawling back and say, wait, wait, wait, don't.
Trump's going to say, well, you know, they started doing what they were supposed to do, so we're not going to take their funding away.
I think that may be the effort.
The only problem COVID has decimated, absolutely decimated the tax base for these cities.
So they don't have money.
They're getting more money taken from them.
It's going to make everything worse in these cities.
That's rough.
What do you do?
You know, I don't like the idea of overt defunding because these cities need to function.
But if they're dysfunctional and it's not the federal government's fault and it's not our fault and we don't live there, why are we paying for it as a nation?
Federal funding going to these dysfunctional cities encourages the dysfunction.
They will never fix it if they keep getting an influx of cash.
Trump may be doing the right thing.
I don't know for sure.
I'm not here to be an arbiter of morality or a fiscal manager in any capacity.
I'm just telling you what I think we may end up seeing.
It's entirely possible that taking the funds away just makes life worse in these cities.
Crime may skyrocket.
It may hinder the police's ability to do their job.
And this is part of why Joe Biden is saying Trump wants to defund the police.
It's not necessarily untrue, taking away federal grants from any of these jurisdictions.
The problem is, if I give you a hundred bucks, and I say, I'm gonna give you a hundred bucks, and then I want you to, you know, sweep up the trash, and then you don't sweep up the trash, I'm going to say, give me my hundred dollars back.
In fact, I'm gonna say, next time, I'm gonna pay you after you do the job.
If the feds are giving money to these cities for policing and they're not policing, then why is any money being given to them?
And therein lies the problem.
Joe Biden is being a bit disingenuous when he says Trump wants to defund the police.
No, there is just money sitting there doing nothing.
And he's saying, if you're not going to take it, I'm going to take it.
What's the point?
And to be fair, Joe Biden definitely walked back his comments on defunding the police and is calling for more funds for police.
That needs to be clear.
Take a look at what's going on in New York City.
So we got the three cities, we got their criteria.
The DOJ says of New York City, shootings have been on the rise since looting and protests began on or about May 28th.
For July 2020, shootings increased from 88 to 244.
Over July 2019, it's a 177% increase.
In August 2020, shootings increased from 91 to 242, a 166% increase.
While the city faced increased unrest, gun violence, and property damage, the New York City Council cut $1 billion from NYPD's FY21 budget.
The budget resulted in the cancellation of the new police recruiting class, cuts to overtime spending, and the transfer of certain police functions, including school safety, out of the MIPD.
Meanwhile, the Manhattan and Brooklyn District Attorneys have declined to prosecute charges of disorderly conduct and unlawful assembly arising from the protests.
And the District Attorneys in Queens and the Bronx have declined to prosecute other protest-related charges.
Both Mayor de Blasio and Governor Cuomo have forcefully rejected Federal law enforcement support.
So good!
Bring it on!
And I'm not the only one who thinks so!
I bring you to the new and wonderful painting!
For the New York Post, massive F. Cuomo and de Blasio mural painted on Brooklyn Street.
All right.
I'll take it.
You know, hey, look, we can argue about whether or not the government should be funding Black Lives Matter murals splattered all over the streets and cities around the country.
We may argue.
The left may say, we refuse to allow a MAGA 2020 painting on the street.
Harumph, we say.
And then we'll say, then why do you get to paint Black Lives Matter?
It's unfair.
But when you paint this, I think we all just stop and go, alright, this one I'm good with.
I don't know who paid for it, clearly not the city, but I'm pretty confident left and right will come together holding hands and singing songs under a rainbow for this one.
Maybe this is the unifying message we needed all along.
Not Black Lives Matter.
I understand that some people really like it.
Not Blue Lives Matter.
Because I understand that some people really like that, too.
What can we all come together and support?
F. Cuomo and de Blasio.
Hear, hear.
I love how the left was calling for Mayor Ted Wheeler of Portland to resign.
And I'm like, yes!
Absolutely!
Get rid of that guy!
The left and the right both think he's bad.
The only problem is what comes next.
I think we can agree that Cuomo and de Blasio are trash.
For a lot of reasons, Cuomo put sick COVID patients in nursing homes, killing lots of people.
That dude is sick.
And he wasn't the only one.
de Blasio.
de Blasio is trash as well.
His wife's got like a multi-million dollar staff while he's contemplating, well, the city might have to lay off EMTs and stuff like that.
Just get out, you know, it's emergency service personnel.
Just get out of here, dude.
I don't like any of these guys.
I don't think the leftists do either.
But what comes next?
You get rid of Ted Wheeler, who comes next?
As much as I might say it's funny to get rid of Ted Wheeler, he is, you know, it reminds me of, like, remember in Spider-Man, the movie, when, like, Tobey Maguire is in front of the train, and he's holding the webs, and, like, he's trying to stop the train, and he's like, aaaah, and he's, like, screaming?
Not to give any, like, strong credit to Ted Wheeler, but who comes next is the mayor who self-describes as Antifa.
So they want him to resign so that she can come in and win, and then the city will be ruled by extremist communists.
I don't think that's a good idea.
As much as Ted Wheeler is absolute trash at his job and has no idea what he's doing, and not to equate him with Spider-Man, but you get the point.
He's screaming like, ah, and being crushed by the train that is the far-left extremism rising in Portland.
And the only difference between him and Spider-Man is that Spider-Man actually stopped the train.
This guy won't.
This guy is just going like, oh no, and he's going to get knocked right out of the way, and he's going to lose.
So no, he's not that much like Spider-Man.
So while we can all agree, F. Cuomo and de Blasio, then let's take a look at Portland, Oregon.
They say, over in Portland, this month, Portland marked 100 consecutive nights of protests marked by vandalism, chaos, and even killing.
Those bent on violence regularly started fires, threw projectiles at law enforcement officers, and destroyed property.
Numerous law enforcement officers, among others, suffered injury.
Shootings increased by more than 140% in June and July compared to last year.
In the midst of this violence, the Portland City Council cut $15 million from the Police Bureau, eliminating 84 positions.
Crucially, the cuts included the Gun Violence Reduction Team, which investigates shooting, and several positions from the Police Team that responds to emergency incidents.
In August, Portland Mayor Wheeler sent a letter to President Trump expressly rejecting the administration's offer of federal law enforcement to stop the violent protests.
Why are we giving them money if they don't use it?
And what are they doing with that money?
We give them, what, what do we give?
Millions and millions of dollars in federal funding?
And then what?
They just use it for other things?
Been there, done that.
I've seen exactly how that plays out.
I remember when I was a kid, all the kids in the community wanted a skate park, so we all came together, high-fived, and it was actually one kid who raised a bunch of money.
And then what did the city do?
The local park district built a garbage gutter trash park that nobody wanted to actually use because it was, like, trash.
But we saw that beautiful landscaping.
Now that's just, I guess, a young person's conspiracy theory.
Where did our skate park money go and why did you plant new flowers?
Maybe we were wrong.
Maybe they just sat on the money, but I'm kinda convinced they took the budget and said, the skate park's cheap, let's use the money for whatever we want.
Well, over in Seattle, they say.
For nearly a month, starting in June, the city of Seattle permitted anarchists and activists to seize six square blocks of Capitol Hill.
Call it the Chas.
Law enforcement and firefighters were precluded from entering the territory.
The Seattle Police Department was ordered to abandon their precinct.
Person-related crime in the CHOP increased 525%!
That's crazy, man.
And, uh, wow.
They say it includes Mayor Durkin's own count, two additional homicides, six robberies, and 16 additional aggravated assaults.
The chop was allowed to stand for nearly a month, during which time two teenagers were shot and killed in the zone.
The Seattle City Council, Mayor Durkin, and Washington Governor Jay Inslee publicly rejected federal involvement in law enforcement activities within the city of Seattle.
Why are we giving them money if they're not going to use it?
If they're not going to enforce the law?
I don't think we should give them money.
But I'd like to take you now into a portal.
Before us is the Looking Glass.
And when we look into it, the world is inverted.
What do you think we would see as we enter in and pass through?
A mirror world, as it were.
Ah, yes.
The mirror world.
The Intercept has a story.
I don't know if I have it pulled up.
Where they talk about DA Mike Schmidt in Portland.
And this is kind of like a mirror reality story that I was really, really interested in.
They frame it as though the DA is trying to stop overly aggressive police in Portland.
unidentified
Police who are arresting people who are peaceful protesters.
You know, I think it's really funny, because I do like a lot of what Glenn Greenwald has to say, but he's really created an outlet that just engages in more Trump derangement syndrome.
We've seen the videos.
What do we get?
People throwing firebombs?
Mortars going off?
No, look, man, I'm sorry.
We know what's going on in Portland, okay?
Here's from Katu2.
U.S.
Department of Justice identifies Portland as jurisdiction permitting violence.
We've seen the photos.
We've seen the videos.
They're burning trash.
They're attacking people.
It was a hundred plus days.
Guess what?
Were there some peaceful protesters who got arrested?
Yes.
Should they have their charges dropped?
Some of them, yes.
All of them, no.
Charges are not... You're not presumed to be guilty.
When the DA says you are being charged with this crime, you go and stand trial.
It is not the position of the state to just say, we're ignoring the crime.
If the police arrest you, and they say, I accuse you of obstructing a roadway.
You've not been convicted of obstructing a roadway.
You go to court, you say, I want a jury trial.
They'll roll their eyes and say, case dismissed.
Why?
Nobody wants to spend time going over a jury trial because they claimed you blocked a roadway.
Nobody.
They're hoping you just plead guilty.
The DA letting these people go is subverting the rule of law.
You get arrested.
You are accused.
The DA says, here are the charges, here's the evidence.
Your defense says, here's the evidence.
You request a jury trial.
Some places, I don't know how it works, but you can request a judge to preside over your trial and ultimately make the decision.
Or you can plead guilty.
And then they'll give you like a reduced sentence.
It's called the trial tax.
Or the jury tax, depending on who you're talking to.
The general idea is that if you go to trial, they're gonna try and give you a harsher penalty.
Or, the inverse, they say is, if you accept responsibility, we'll reduce the penalty.
I think it's more of a coercive move by the government.
I'm no fan.
But look, you get arrested, you're not guilty.
The DA should absolutely be prosecuting these charges, and then most of them will probably get off with a slap on the wrist.
That's the way it's supposed to work.
But when the DA explicitly says we're not going to do it, don't be surprised then when the DOJ comes in and says, we are going to take away your funding.
Because, like I said, why should we fund what It's actually not defunding them.
You know what I mean? Like you don't pay people to do nothing.
They're supposed to be doing something with the money.
I think it's funny that Joe Biden equates this to defunding the police.
It's like, well listen, it's actually not defunding them.
And I'll explain why.
Joe Biden says Donald Trump taking funds away is defunding the police.
However, if the police are funded to the tune of, in New York City, $6 billion, and they cut $1 billion off the NYPD budget, there is a gap of a billion dollars.
So that's about, you know, what is it, like 17% of their budget, I believe.
If Donald Trump then said, okay, if you're going to remove 17% of your police force, defunded, firing these people, Well, then we'll cut down the funds as well, right?
It's not defunding the police if the funds don't go anywhere because you're not enforcing the law.
It's not defunding the police if you're removing funds and cutting down your own police force.
Actually, it would make a whole lot of sense if Trump cut down in the exact same way that these jurisdictions were cutting down.
Now, I think, however, this ultimately may result in, like, a total suspension of federal funds.
Maybe a bit extreme.
Maybe.
And that's why I said in the beginning, I think this could ultimately result in worse things for these cities, that honestly, I don't want to see happen.
But here is the hard question.
Hard question that needs to be asked.
If Donald Trump takes these funds from these cities, and it results in people getting hurt or losing their lives, I don't want to see that happen.
And I think if these cities need the funds to do that, then it needs to happen.
The problem is, if they're not protecting people, then what, what really, you know, what do you do to stop this?
The cities are dysfunctional.
Completely.
They're a hodgepodge mess.
The mob is dictating what to do.
I'll tell you what I want to see.
How about Bill Barr?
I want you to go to Omaha.
I want you to go, I want you to go to Omaha, Nebraska and say, you charged a man Jake Gardner, who is defending himself clearly on camera.
That is lawlessness.
That is absolute lawlessness.
You did not charge the criminals who attacked him and fled, did you?
What happened to those guys?
Maybe, I don't know.
But Jake Gardner got charged.
He lost his business, he lost his life, he lost everything.
And then he took his life.
And I think this is the opportunity to go and make right, right.
Dysfunctional cities cannot be allowed to just be broken and fester.
Eventually you gotta go in and try and fix the machine.
If you've got a car that's breaking down, and you just keep saying, just keep using it, just keep using it, eventually you're gonna be like, dude, I'll put it this way.
Let's say you keep filling up the tank and driving and smoke keeps bursting out and it keeps backfiring and spewing fire.
You can't drive that, actually.
You can get in trouble, you get pulled over.
Fire, boom, out of the tailpipe or whatever.
I don't know, I'm not a car guy.
You get the point.
Eventually you gotta stop and say, maybe you should stop driving this thing until you get it fixed.
And then you have the people saying, no, we must fuel the vehicle.
Whoa, whoa, whoa.
We're gonna stop putting fuel in it until you fix it because there's smoke spewing from it.
In fact, you gotta go get emissions testing, right?
I'll use that as the analogy.
New York, Portland, Seattle, and many other cities are constantly backfiring.
Pop!
Gunshots!
Good example of bangs.
Eventually gotta say, hey, if we keep putting fuel into this, this backfiring is gonna keep- it's hurting people.
And then people- they're gonna say, yeah, but if we can't use the car, we can't- well, I'll tell you what, man.
At a certain point, you need to shut it down.
And that looks like- it looks like that's what the DOJ is doing.
These cities need to- need to figure out how to solve their problems.
And they can't just allow these things to happen, because giving into the mob is no solution.
So, I'll leave it there.
We'll see how this plays out.
Of course, the left is screeching, saying, what's even happening?
None of this is ridiculous.
They're just trying to take our funds away.
Blah, blah, blah.
Whatever, man.
When you win an election, you get to do it.
That's it.
Seriously, Trump's president.
I don't know if it's right or wrong.
I don't know if it'll work out or not.
I just say, it's a thing that happened.
Okay?
I'm not gonna be able to calculate all the outcomes of this kind of maneuver.
I'll tell you this, though.
I like that Trump and the DOJ are taking action against the rioters.
So I'll accept it.
We'll see how it plays out in November if the voters come out in force.
But I'll tell you what, New York, Seattle, and Portland, they go blue anyway.
As if Trump cares about losing their vote.
It's a problem.
It is.
Trump should be fighting for the votes of everybody.
And I don't mean to put that just on Trump.
I mean every president.
They only care about the areas they think they can win.
It's time to change that.
It's time to start advocating for what we believe in and working for everybody.
Maybe this is a start.
I don't know.
But I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up at youtube.com slash timcast.
It is my main channel.
It's a different channel.
That'll be at 4 p.m.
Thanks so much for hanging out, and I will see you all then.
You know, I try not to drag people over their age, or I try not to insult people and be that bombastic.
I gotta say, though, it really does seem like Nancy Pelosi's brain broke on live television from the Daily Mail.
Bizarre moment Nancy Pelosi blurts out good morning Sunday morning after being asked about impeaching Trump over Supreme Court vote during ABC interview.
There's also another story about Joe Biden.
Now, I could lead with Joe Biden, but come on, how many videos have you seen of Joe Biden saying nonsensical things?
But once again, another story.
Joe Biden apparently said 200 million people were going to die by the time he finished speaking.
It's like...
What?
I don't even know what you mean.
What did you mean to say?
What number of people?
200 people would have died by the time he finished talking?
She was asked by George Stephanopoulos, would you consider impeaching?
Something to that effect.
And she goes, Good morning.
Sunday morning.
We have an obligation, blah, blah, blah.
And it's like, look, a lot of people tried playing it off, like maybe Nancy Pelosi is
just, you know, rejecting his question like, good morning.
Like, no, no, no, no, no.
That makes literally no sense.
If Nancy Pelosi wanted to reject the question, she'd simply say, listen, we we've got a lot
of things on the table.
We'll leave it at that.
Instead, she broke.
I'm going to read you the story, and then I'm going to tell you what I think happened, because I think it may have been a medical episode, and I want to explain something to people they don't know about.
I'm going to talk about seizures.
I'm not a doctor, but I did attend once.
One time, yeah, so I'm an expert.
No, I'm not an expert.
But I just remember going to a special event, a fundraiser for people with epilepsy.
And I'll tell you what I think happened.
And it may be not my place to say something like this, but come on, man.
At the end of the day, whatever you think about Pelosi, she's 80 years old.
Should we put a cap?
Like maybe 70?
After 70, you just don't run for office anymore?
I don't know.
I guess the problem with that is that people are going to live longer and longer and be capable longer and longer.
But at a certain point, what do we do when people aren't capable?
Here's the story from the Daily Mail.
They say, Nancy Pelosi appeared to lose her train of thought and randomly blurted out good morning Sunday morning during an interview on ABC this week.
Host George Stephanopoulos had asked the House Speaker about a possibility of a second attempt at impeaching Trump in the coming months.
Now they say that she lost her train of thought.
If you've watched the TimCast IRL podcast, I periodically lose my train of thought.
It happens to everybody.
You'll start saying something, and then you'll try and qualify, and then you're like, wait, now I'm talking, what was I talking about again?
I forget, it happens to the best of us.
But you don't randomly blurt out crazy words.
You don't start talking and say, listen, I'm gonna tell you about, you know, why Donald Trump got elected, but you gotta understand, see, Democrats were, wait, wait, wait, I was just talking, good morning, Sunday morning.
It's like, wait, what?
No, no, you'd say, wait, what was I talking about?
Instead of responding to the anchor's question, Pelosi came out with this random phrase before laughing and then continuing while avoiding answering the question.
Stephanopoulos asked, to be clear, you're not taking any arrows out of your quiver.
You're not ruling anything out.
And Pelosi replied, good morning, Sunday morning.
We have a responsibility.
We took an oath.
Okay, I'm going to stop right there.
Some people think what may have happened was the prompter she was reading reset.
And so that would mean that she's fed questions and is just reading a script.
I don't know if I believe that because Nancy Pelosi was doing just a live, you know, piece to camera.
These happen all the time.
You walk into the camera, they ask you a question, you give an answer.
So the idea would be, while she was giving her scripted response, the prompter reset and it said, good morning, Sunday morning, and she didn't realize.
Some people suggested maybe she got a cue in an earpiece saying, wait, we're going to start this segment over, implying the segment was recorded or something.
I don't buy it.
It makes no sense.
I don't think she was reading a prompter and it was a live shot.
Why would she do this?
Unless, of course, She had a seizure.
I know, I know, a lot of people are saying, she did not have a seizure, she didn't start spazzing and flipping out and shaking on the ground.
These are people who don't understand what seizures actually look like.
I'm not a doctor.
I don't know everything there is to know about epilepsy.
But I do know people who have kids with epilepsy, and I actually went to a fundraiser to educate people and inform them on seizures.
I'm not saying I truly 100% believe she had a seizure.
And I gotta be honest, I kind of hate doing these kinds of things where it's like, oh, you know, Hillary Clinton was sick or whatever.
But I thought it was a good opportunity to explain simple seizures, maybe something like a petite mall seizure or what most people know about like a grand mall seizure.
When people think of seizures, they reenact things from movies where they're like, waaah, and they're like flailing their arms, and they're like bobbing up and down.
But that's not what a seizure looks like.
I know because I've witnessed people who have hit their head skateboarding get seizures before.
I also had a friend whose father had epilepsy, and I've also, like I mentioned, gone to a seminar to be educated properly.
There can be a bunch of different kinds of seizures, and again, not an expert, but I can tell you this.
A lot of these activists in Portland were faking seizures, where they were, like, wailing their arms around.
The seizures that I've seen, and what I've been told, and again, not an expert, so correct me if I'm wrong, your muscles kind of lock up, and so they go rigid, and they're, like, you know, stiff, and can't move, and shaking, and there is twitching.
There's also something called the petit mal seizure, where you'll notice they might start blinking or shaking.
One of the things I was told at a seminar for people with epilepsy, it was a fundraiser trying to raise awareness, was that sometimes when people have seizures, they just appear to blank out.
And this is, I believe it's called a petit mal, again, I'll say it a million times, not an expert, but what I see with Nancy Pelosi is that she may have had a seizure.
The reason why I take this so seriously and why I'm willing to talk about it, where I normally wouldn't want to bring up someone else's health, is that What I was told, there are often times where someone with epilepsy will be talking, and they'll just sort of stare off into space, and then reset.
And they'll start talking again, as if nothing happened, and you're like, wait, what just happened?
Like, what was that?
Because they don't realize the person just had a seizure, because they think seizures are like flailing around and shaking.
I don't know if Pelosi had a seizure.
I don't think that's the case necessarily.
I'm just saying, the first thing that came to mind was that.
What I can say is, outside of any kind of, you know, armchair medical diagnosis from random internet complainers like myself that are worth nothing, mind you, I'm well aware, I'm very aware of my lack of expertise on any of these issues.
So my opinion means relatively nothing.
Look, Nancy Pelosi's 80, alright?
And Joe Biden is very old as well.
Joe Biden makes another gaffe by saying 200 million Americans, or two-thirds of the U.S.
population, have died of COVID, instead of almost 200,000.
That's not what he said, though.
Do they have the actual quote here?
Here's what he said.
It's estimated that 200 million people have died probably by the time I finish this talk.
That's not what I heard.
Maybe I'm wrong.
I thought he said, we'll die, but maybe that's the case.
So, sure, maybe it's just a gaffe.
But now they're trying to say that his stutter is coming back, and he's always had a stutter, and I'm like, no, no, no, come on, man.
Don't play these games with us.
We know what's going on.
Both of these people, Nancy Pelosi, Joe Biden, they're really, really old.
And so is Donald Trump, for that matter, and Trump makes mistakes.
Trump recently called Mars, NARS.
I thought it was funny, though, because, listen, sometimes you gaffe.
That's normal.
Trump sometimes gaffes.
So he said, astronaut to Mars.
But we slip up like that.
Everybody does.
I don't see that and say, oh no, Trump's slipping.
But how about if Joe Biden does it 50 times?
How about if they stop allowing Joe Biden to do press events because they're concerned it's going to keep happening?
And that's true.
There was this big news cycle where they talked about Joe Biden, what is it called?
Sunsetting?
That Joe Biden, when it gets late, he starts losing energy and his brain starts, you know, kind of slowing down.
And then he starts gaffing like crazy.
Nancy Pelosi seems to be in a similar position.
She just had this weird Brain malfunction, I guess?
I don't think she was making a point, and Hillary Clinton did the same thing.
Too many of our politicians are elderly.
It's crazy to me.
What position?
Do teachers retire before this?
You know what I mean?
Like, there are teachers who like, they'll be in their late 50s and they'll be like, time to retire.
But politicians into their 80s?
70s?
Look, even Trump is old.
You know, Trump got elected, I think Trump got elected when he was 69.
And then he turned 70.
And apparently, I think that's the case, I could be wrong.
But no one's ever been elected after 70 because it's just like too old.
Well now we got Joe Biden and Trump.
Maybe that's a change.
Trump's being re-elected so that I get.
But should there be a limit on how old someone can be if they run for office?
Maybe if like you run for re-election and you're past a certain age, it's fine.
Maybe not.
Because then we just keep Nancy Pelosi and Joe Biden in for 50 years.
Now Pelosi's been in for, I think, like, you know, 20 or something years.
I don't know how long she's been in.
Something like that.
And Joe Biden's been in for, I think, 47 years.
I'm sick of it.
Donald Trump's been in for just about three and a half, almost four years.
I do think it's funny how they blame him for everything, and the dude's barely been a politician.
But more importantly, Trump led his life, then he ran, then he won.
You can't blame him for all these problems, but I do think it's kind of absurd that we defer to the older generation, to the boomers and the, what is it, the greatest generation, I think?
I think, uh, what is, what is Biden?
Is he, is he after boomer?
I don't know.
It kind of blurs together at a certain point.
I don't want to be ageist and claim that just because someone's old, they can't do the job.
But what happens when they are old and they can't do the job?
I mean, look, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, if she passed away, but we have a bunch of Supreme Court justices.
All of these politicians are old!
What job do we have old people do?
Politics?
Why does that make sense?
I guess you can say they apply their lived experience to help the system run properly, and maybe that makes sense.
Maybe, you know, it's true that young people don't understand how the system works fully, but why should I assume that the elderly people we keep electing or appointing have the perspicacity and the mental acuity to be in office?
And why is it that younger people aren't running?
It's time to step up, millennials!
Come on, you're in your late 30s now!
I think that somewhere, I don't know, mid-30s?
Whatever.
I'm in my mid-30s, I'm a millennial.
It's time people start running for office.
I look, you know, it's not for me.
I would never want to be in the position.
And I know it's really difficult.
Maybe that's why many people don't want to do it.
But what are we going to do instead?
We keep electing the same people.
Now we've got a cultural problem beyond this.
How does Nancy Pelosi keep getting re-elected?
That is just absolutely insane.
I don't know.
I don't know how you break that cycle.
But maybe something needs to be done.
Either way, these people are unwell.
I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up in a few minutes, and I will see you all shortly.
The dam is set to break, my friends, from the Daily Mail.
Names of every passenger to have flown on Jeffrey Epstein's aircraft to be revealed, sparking panic among the pedo's wealthy friends.
Well, we are soon going to learn many names of people who flew on a plane for which they probably regret doing.
And I think we gotta point something out.
Innocent until proven guilty, okay?
Just because someone flew on his plane doesn't mean they knew exactly what he was doing, but I think it's worth bringing them in for questioning.
And maybe not even that much, like interviewing them.
What did you know?
What did you do?
Why did you do it?
I'm sure there are a lot of people who didn't realize what they're getting into.
You know, Donald Trump is in photos with Epstein.
Donald Trump has had him at resorts.
And I truly believe Trump just didn't really know or care.
Another rich guy.
And I've heard stories like that.
Like, what do you do when you meet a rich person?
They're like, ooh, this is this rich guy.
He's worth like half a billion dollars.
He's got a private jet.
And you know, he wants to go party in this, you know, this place.
You're like, hey, sounds good.
And then before you know it, you're on this horrifying place.
What do you do about it?
Look, I'll tell you what, man.
I've heard stories from people how they've been invited onto private jets and private islands, and they don't think twice.
They're like, woohoo!
And then they go and do it.
And boy, did some people probably make a mistake with this guy.
I'll tell you what, though.
I bet there's gonna be a lot of people who are guilty as well, but we gotta make sure we're thorough and rigorous in our investigation to figure out who these people are, what they were doing, why they were doing it, and make sure, you know, innocent people don't get convicted of crimes they didn't commit, and the guilty parties reveal everything they know about all of them, and then we arrest and round all of them up and put them in a teeny tiny box forever.
You know what I mean.
I mean, some people call for the death penalty for these people.
Depends on the severity of their crimes, for sure.
The Daily Mail reports the Attorney General in the U.S.
Virgin Islands, where the billionaire had a home and is said to have carried out many of his horrific crimes, has demanded to see the logs which document the passengers on his aircraft.
The logs on his four helicopters and three planes span from 1998 until his suicide in prison last year.
Attorney General Denise George has filed a lawsuit against his estate alleging 22 accounts, including human trafficking, aggravated rape, child abuse, neglect, forced labor, and prostitution.
Ms.
George is also requesting to see any complaints or reports of potentially suspicious conduct, as well as personal notes made by the pilots.
The subpoena demands the names and details of anyone who worked for the pilots, interacted with Epstein and passengers, and passengers who traveled with him.
Pilot David Rogers had previously revealed logs from 2009 which showed Prince Andrew, Bill Clinton, Kevin Spacey, and Naomi Campbell were among those who flew in his jet.
It is not suggested they were aware of any wrongdoings by Epstein.
A source said, the records that have been subpoenaed will make the ones Rogers provided look like a post-it note.
There is a panic among many of the rich and famous.
Lawyers for the victims said the logs released in 09 did not include the flights of Chief Pilot Larry Visocki, who had flown Epstein for more than 25 years.
It comes as a celebrity chef has been quizzed by detectives 20 years after he worked for Epstein, prompting renewed calls for Prince Andrew to speak to the FBI.
Andrew Perry Lang, 51, opened the Barbacoa restaurant with Jamie Oliver in London in 2010, and worked for Jeffrey Epstein between 1999 and 2003.
He is now fully cooperating with the FBI investigation into allegations of abuse by depraved billionaire Epstein, reported the Daily Mirror.
Attorney Eric Fidali representing the victims heaped pressure on Prince Andrew who has been accused of stonewalling detectives.
Now I'm going to highlight another article real quick.
And I want to make sure I preface this by saying I am not implying a grand conspiracy.
In fact, I'm going to highlight this to kind of push back on the conspiracy claims.
But I caught something interesting.
Bill Clinton was on the island, or I'm sorry, I'm sorry.
Well, that was according to a witness statement.
But Bill Clinton flew on the plane, and you had many other high-profile celebrities and Democrat donors who have been connected to, you know, Epstein and other individuals as such.
So when I saw this story, I also saw this and thought it was interesting.
From Bloomberg.
Trump says he could close Biden's money lead in one day on phone.
It turns out, Joe Biden has more money than Donald Trump, they say.
Interesting.
Well, you can't individually make a million-dollar donation.
There's a cap of $2,800, and so rich people can't necessarily fund either of these campaigns.
Starting Sunday, they had $466 million on hand, and Trump had $325 million.
Interesting.
Well, you can't individually make a million dollar donation.
There's a cap of $2,800.
And so rich people can't necessarily fund either of these campaigns.
But there's a point I want to make to kind of push back on some of the conspiracy theories
that have emerged around, like Epstein.
We know Epstein was sick for the most part.
I mean, he is not going to stand trial because he's dead.
That justice was taken away from us and all his victims.
But we do have his confidant, Maxwell.
And people believe that she's singing like a canary?
Is that the phrase?
I don't know.
She's singing to the FBI and telling them everything.
But I sort of thought something.
If you were one of these people that was in on the club with someone like Epstein, then you certainly don't want anyone finding out you were in those logs, and you'd probably donate to the party that is more likely to be connected in some capacity.
I'll put it this way.
I have no reason to believe that a vote for Joe Biden will somehow stop the investigation in Epstein, but I do think it's fair to say that this was going on under the nose of Democrats for a long time.
In fact, Bill Clinton was like, friends with the guy, I guess.
So there's probably—well, I think it's fair to say there's more connection between Democrats and Epstein than there is Trump and Epstein.
I do not believe there's a grand conspiracy with Satanists or any of this weird cabal stuff.
What I think it is, is that powerful people turned a blind eye and allowed a depraved lunatic to do his thing.
And he apparently had been arrested before, and they didn't stop him then.
And we had witness statements, so we knew he's been doing this.
Donald Trump has Bill Barr.
Bill Barr is seemingly going after Maxwell.
And so I'm sure there's going to be a lot of rich people.
It's not so much about they did anything wrong or were involved in a conspiracy.
I think many of them probably weren't.
They just don't want their names released and want favorable parties to protect them.
If someone like Bill Clinton was named in these logs, what do you think is going to come out with Bill Clinton in the next set of logs?
In which case, they're probably going to ask for favors within their own party.
Again, I don't think there's any grand conspiracy.
I think it just so happens that Epstein was doing his conspiracy, like we know this with Maxwell and the abuse allegations, not a political grand cabalist thing, just a depraved lunatic who had power and was able to do it.
And he had friends in the Democratic Party.
He probably had friends in the Republican Party as well, but it's certainly not Donald Trump, because Trump is the outsider.
Now cue all the people claiming it's a conspiracy.
I'm just pointing out the dude was tied to establishment UK politics and Democrat politics.
The story goes on to say, Mr. Fidali said,
We certainly hope that this may inspire other witnesses to come forward and help shed some light on Epstein's dark
scheme.
American Mr. Perry Lang catered for the Duke of York 60 and flew with him in a private jet on two occasions,
once in February 1999 and in May 2000.
Sources told the newspaper, Perry Lang holds information on what took place.
They will get as much detail as possible that will shape any interview they may one day have with the Duke.
Mr. Perry Lang, who has been described as a decent man by victims, came forward after Virginia Giuffre, 37, wrote to ask him to be the hero.
His lawyer, Lawrence Lusberg, confirmed the chef was helping the FBI.
Mr. Perry Lang himself added, We have absolutely always been available to the attorneys representing the victims.
He previously denied being aware of any depraved behavior during his four-year term as Epstein's chef.
Epstein66 killed himself while awaiting trial in a cell for underage trafficking last year.
I'm gonna stop right there and say, I don't think anybody believes that.
Like, even Trump and Bill Barr mentioned, like, we don't know what happened.
I wonder how it really happened.
I will also add, major, major failure on the part of Bill Barr, yeah?
I don't think, you know, the left was arguing that Bill Barr was in on it.
No, I don't think that's the case, but I think Bill Barr let his guard down, and they did not realize what they had, and now Epstein is gone.
And there have been some people who have claimed that Epstein could not have possibly killed himself.
Notably, this famous Uh, I don't know.
Forensic analysis?
I don't know the guy's actual title.
But, uh, you know, autopsy guy.
I'll call it that, because I'm not a medical expert, so I'm not going to pretend to be the expert.
But a guy who was known for his forensic analysis said, based on what he saw, Epstein could not have done this to himself.
So then you get Trump and Barr saying, you know, we don't know what happened.
Trump said he wishes that Maxwell woman well, and they're like, how dare you?
Why would you say this?
And he's like, because her boyfriend just died.
I wish her well.
I went, yeah, I get that.
He wants her to live.
He also doesn't want to appear like he's biased against her.
And then they could try and claim that the government had, you know, was determining guilt before anything was proven.
I think it's fair to say this late, this Maxwell lady is probably squealing like a pig.
That's a better one.
Squealing like a pig, telling everything.
They're going to say the accuser spoke out in a documentary series surviving Jeffrey Epstein, claiming she met the royal in London, describing him as an abuser and not the prince from the fairy tale stories you read.
Dufresne, who says she was trafficked by Epstein, alleges the Duke had sex with her on three occasions, including when she was 17, still a minor under U.S.
law.
Andrew has categorically denied he has had any form of sexual contact with Jufre.
Maxwell is awaiting trial in the U.S.
after being charged with procuring teenage girls for Epstein.
So this is a rough story, man.
YouTube's probably gonna knock this one down, but I gotta bring it up.
We gotta talk about it.
This list is going to drop.
Every passenger who has flown on this aircraft to be revealed.
So there's going to be panic among wealthy people, and they're going to be begging for favors from anyone they can get.
In my personal opinion, Trump would not be willing to grant them.
Joe Biden?
Maybe.
I mean, creepy Uncle Joe?
I just think so.
But I don't think... I think many of these people take this conspiracy stuff way too far.
Okay, we know about Epstein.
But think about it.
Really, really powerful guy doing whatever he wants.
It's not a satanic cabal cult of weird people drinking blood or anything like that.
That's ridiculous.
We know that criminals exist.
We know that people like Epstein exist.
We've seen the allegations.
We've seen the testimony.
Unfortunately, he won't stand trial, but we'll see what happens with Maxwell.
The story may end up being very different than any of you realize, so don't jump the gun.
We'll see whose names pop up.
This should be interesting nonetheless, but I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up in a few minutes.
Stick around, and I will see you all shortly.
From digital music news, Spotify employees demanding direct editorial oversight over
Joe Rogan podcasts before they're published and immediately everyone laughs.
Joe Rogan says, no way, you're not going to be able to tell me what to do, who to host, never gonna happen.
And you know what?
That's true.
You're never going to force Joe Rogan to do something he doesn't want to do.
However, there is a major weak spot here for the Joe Rogan podcast, and it really comes down to whether or not Joe's contract is sound.
I believe that we may actually be moving in a dangerous direction for Joe's podcast, whether or not Joe cares is an entirely different conversation.
This is like the third or fourth time I've talked about Joe, and I think it's kind of weird because he's just a dude who does a show, but it's the biggest podcast in the world, and it really is one of the most important shows, and we may be looking at some potential bad news.
Now, obviously, full disclosure, I know and talk to Joe Rogan.
He's an awesome guy with an awesome show, and I wish him the best, and I, you know, we talk periodically, and the same is true for like, you know, periodically talk to Jack Dorsey and stuff like that, but Whether or not I know somebody, am friends with them, you know, I'm going to be completely honest and tell you exactly what I think.
And I think, based on my sheer ignorance, because I don't know what's in Joe's contract with Spotify, we may actually be looking at some serious damage coming towards the Joe Rogan experience, and it may lose a lot of that luster that made it great.
You may have seen the segment I did yesterday.
Joe Rogan apologized.
The apology was a huge mistake, in my opinion.
Joe had said something on his show that was mostly true.
He had said that there were people lighting fires in Portland.
He then said there have been, you know, leftists or activists, people, who have been arrested for this.
That's the mistake.
He used the plural referring to activists.
It was one leftist activist who got arrested, and there were several other people who were arrested for starting fires in the Portland area and up and down the West Coast.
It's a fact.
The left attacked Joe.
He apologized for it.
A lot of people said it was a classy move.
The only problem is Joe's correction was wrong.
He straight-up said people weren't—he said one guy got arrested, but it was somewhere else, and then, you know, people weren't arrested for starting fires.
That just made everything worse.
And it shows, for whatever the reason is, Joe caved to a fact standard that does not apply to the left itself.
If Joe Rogan is willing to make corrections at the behest of left-wing outrage, or corporate outrage, but not, but these other organizations don't do the same in the other direction, once again we are seeing the leftward lurch.
Does Joe have to apologize if he calls Kyle Rittenhouse a white supremacist?
No.
Who's gonna complain?
Well, to be honest though, Joe probably would say, that was a mistake, I didn't realize, because Joe has integrity.
But will he get the same flack?
Probably not.
Because the left is well organized, and this is how it works.
Let me tell you what my quick theory is as to why Joe apologized.
And then we'll read the story.
The left didn't attack Joe Rogan and demand he make any changes.
There was no demand over his editorial content.
They attacked Spotify, damaging Spotify's stock value.
Spotify then says to Joe, hey, look, man, they're attacking us.
You got this thing wrong.
Can you fix it?
Joe probably says, ah, dude, I'm sorry.
Yeah, I'll put an apology.
He wasn't forced to do it.
It's not, it wasn't because he did something wrong and he didn't have to say to these people, F off.
It was because they were attacking his friends and his partners.
You get it?
That licensing arrangement now means that Joe has created a new area of vulnerability.
The people he cares about and does business with.
You see, I think Joe Rogan is a good dude who cares about having integrity and being good to people.
If he did a deal with Spotify, and then something he did causes harm to them, he's gonna do the right thing because he's a good dude.
But like I said earlier, will we see Media Matters for America come out if Joe says something that hurts the right wing?
Of course not.
In which case, the pressure placed upon Spotify and Joe will only come from the left, or for the most part, from the left.
Of course Joe has seen flack from the right.
It's probably why I went on his show and challenged Jack Dorsey and Twitter.
Because people were like, yo, you were wrong.
And that's what happens when Joe is an independent podcast.
But now his show is licensed exclusively to Spotify.
And herein lies the big risk, in my opinion.
And I want to preface this by saying I got no idea what's in Joe Rogan's contract, and none of this may be apt, because maybe he's covered all his bases.
But I'll tell you what people are saying, and I'll tell you what I think.
In this story, they say, A group of Spotify staffers are now reportedly pushing to introduce direct editing oversight over the Joe Rogan experience before the episodes go live.
That includes content flags, trigger warnings, references to fact-checked information, or simply refusing to publish the episode at all.
The demands follow a string of controversial comments by Joe Rogan, who was lured to Spotify with a massive deal.
We get all this point, all this stuff.
Earlier this month, Digital Music News first reported multiple podcast episodes were missing following a migration to Spotify's platform.
That included shows like Alex Jones, Milo Yiannopoulos, Gavin McInnes, Charles C. Johnson, Molyneux, Owen Benjamin, people like that.
Okay, I'm gonna stop right there.
You get the point, right?
They've already removed Several episodes of The Joe Rogan Experience from Spotify.
But a lot of people were angry about this.
Like, why was my episode not appearing on Spotify?
Well, those episodes are going to be on YouTube forever.
And even though Joe is exclusively licensing the show to Spotify, his clips will still exist on YouTube as well.
So you can still find his episodes just piece by piece on the Joe Rogan Clip Channel.
But let's talk about what this means, if they've already removed episodes.
I bring you now to a tweet from James Lindsay.
James Lindsay, of course, has appeared on the Rogan Podcast and is very famous for, as a member of the Sokal Squared group, where they performed this hoax on academic institutions.
Basically, if there's anybody who knows anything about critical race theory, SJWs, James Lindsay is probably the foremost expert.
He says, in response to the article, lol, they don't know the first rule of Rogan.
Nobody tells Rogan what to do or how to do it.
I'm curious, and I don't know, but I'll mention.
But no one tells Spotify what they have to publish.
It would appear that Spotify chose not to publish several episodes.
Let's take that to its logical conclusion.
I'm curious, and I don't know, but I'll mention.
Potential pitfall.
Does Spotify have an obligation to air every single Joe Rogan Experience episode?
It would seem that the answer is no, because several episodes are missing.
So what happens if Joe says, you can't tell me what to do?
I'm going to upload my episodes and host whoever I want.
And then he has on Alex Jones.
Does Spotify have to air it on their platform?
I'd have to imagine the answer is no.
I mean, Joe said it's just a licensing deal, right?
Okay.
Does that mean they have to publish?
I personally would find it odd, considering the deals I've done with various networks, or I should say negotiated, because I always turn them down, for basically this reason.
You'll get a network saying, we're gonna publish your podcast, Tim.
Listen, I've been told this.
We're gonna publish your podcast, we're gonna make you all this money, we're gonna do these things.
And I always say no.
Because I say, do you have to publish my podcast?
Well, I mean, we want to to make, oh no no no no, question, if I upload a podcast, do you have, do you, do you, if I, if I record a podcast, do you have to publish it if you have exclusive rights for the podcast platforms?
Well, no, I mean, okay, wait, wait, let me stop you right there.
If I'm not the one who's publishing, because I license my content to you, what happens when you say, not this episode, but we appreciate it, here's your money?
I still get paid, but then my content doesn't appear.
In fact, this is called golden handcuffs.
It's similar to the golden handcuffs concept.
When I worked for ABC News Univision, I felt like I was placed in golden handcuffs.
They told me, we don't want to do those things, you can go ahead and do whatever you want, and we won't air it.
I got paid, I made content, and it's why a lot of the content went up on my personal YouTube channel, Golden Handcuffs.
We agree to support your work, help you produce these documentaries, send you traveling around the world to do your thing.
And then when I would come back and say, here's the doc, they would say, that's cool, put it on your channel, we're not gonna air it.
Now, I was lucky enough that that was the case, that I was able to still put it out.
But many of these contracts will say something to the effect of, you know, we have the sole right to publish.
Right to publish, not obligation to publish.
Now listen, do I think they're going to ever outright cancel a Rogan episode?
No.
But what did they say they wanted?
Trigger warnings?
Fact-checking?
Oh, there it is.
So what happens if Joe Rogan comes out now and accurately says, you know, I did this correction and I was wrong, turns out there was a ton of people arrested for arson, just only one guy was an activist.
What happens if they then say, fact-check, and link to bunk fact-checks?
Why not?
Why can't they?
Does Spotify have a specific arrangement saying that they can't show other episodes next to Joe Rogan?
I honestly don't think that would be the case.
But I could be wrong.
Listen.
Joe's a smart guy.
Alright?
I'm sure he has very expensive lawyers.
I'm sure they carved out exactly what's gonna happen and why.
And maybe the initial agreement said something about certain episodes not being ported over.
Or maybe Joe made a mistake.
I honestly don't know.
But I do think the only thing that matters is this.
When Joe was independent, YouTube was an attack vector.
The left could go after YouTube and they tried.
But YouTube is too big.
Spotify is an exclusive deal.
You see, YouTube could say, listen, look, you know, Joe says his thing, and if he violates the rules, we'll strike, you know, his channel, but we don't have a deal with him.
Like, we don't have an exclusive contract.
He just publishes here like anywhere else.
He's on iTunes, for instance.
So, I'll tell you the deal.
If your podcast is not exclusive and it's everywhere, well then if they go to YouTube, they gotta go to iTunes.
If they go to iTunes, they gotta go to Spotify.
So for me, if you want my content down because you disagree with it, you gotta go to every single network.
That makes it much harder because YouTube's gonna be like, we don't wanna lose out to iTunes.
If we take them down, and then YouTube doesn't, I'm sorry, if YouTube, and then iTunes doesn't, we lose out.
They win.
Our competition wins.
Joe went exclusive.
Now there's one attack vector, and it's Spotify.
Here's what I said.
In response to James Lindsay, PhilThatRemains replied, I hope you're right.
I said, leftists attack Spotify over forest fire comment.
Spotify says, damn, Joe, that was wrong, and they're attacking us.
Joe says, damn, sorry, I'll apologize.
Joe issues confusing and incorrect apology, making it worse, but appeasing the leftists.
Rinse and repeat.
I then said, no one tells Joe what to do, but he is licensing his show to them.
Is Spotify under an obligation to publish?
They already omitted several episodes.
Now Spotify employees could say, cut this section out.
It's just a licensing deal, right?
Spotify doesn't have to publish anything.
Now I'll tell you this, because of the clause that Joe has about his clip channel, or I should say, Joe said when he does a podcast, they're still going to make segments and put them on YouTube.
That probably says to me they can't alter episodes before they upload them.
So the episodes will probably be aired in full no matter what.
Unless, of course, Spotify has the ability to say, not this one.
It appears they already did.
Now, I don't know what the deal is between Joe and Spotify, but I'll tell you my concern is that the left will attack Spotify relentlessly.
This will hurt their bottom line, and there is no other competition to reap the benefits.
I guess theoretically, you know, maybe I'll tell you this.
Maybe Joe's whole gamble was Spotify offers him all this money, and then when they finally buckle under the pressure of the far left, the contract is severed, he goes independent again, and he keeps all the money!
I don't know, man.
I'll leave it with this.
Whatever Joe does, it's entirely up to him, and I don't care.
If you don't like the Joe Rogan podcast, or what it becomes, or what it is now, then don't listen to it.
I know a lot of people are concerned because there's something their love is maybe being taken away, but we're not even at that point yet.
It's important to call it out before it happens to make sure it doesn't, but listen, ultimately Joe's got his own life to live.
And I think a lot of people that are mad about this are more concerned about losing the culture war because Joe is so important to regular and moderate Americans.
That's fair.
But at the end of the day, Joe's gonna do what he wants to do.
And I respect his individuality, his choice to run a show, and look, I'm just speculating.
But the story's gonna keep coming out because we knew it was only a matter of time before they tried to shut him down.
And I think they will actually gain some leverage over him because they're organized, powerful, and Spotify will panic.
